Wheeling question

[Scrumpy]

In a game last night my opponent tried the following move to get on the flank of one of my bg's. The rest of us were not sure if it was legal or not, and would appreciate a clarification.

He claimed that by advancing 1" and wheeling 2" his other undrilled HF unit could go from the following

A
A
A
A

to

AAAA


To me this looked like a move & turn 90* march.

We ended up settling on a compromise of him having a kinked bg.

Cheers

[Polkovnik]

Presumably the BG was in column to start with, facing down the page. It then wheels to face left, still in column. This seems OK to me, but of course the BG will need to pass a CMT if it is within 6" of enemy.

[Polkovnik]

Actually thinking about it he couldn't do this with a 2" wheel as this isn't quite enough for a 40mm frontage base to wheel 90 degrees (as the DBM players here will know). He can still do this move, he just can't go forward a full inch first. (Using Pythagoras' - it takes 57mm of movement for a 40mm base to wheel 90 degrees)

[philqw78]

In both diagrams which direction is A facing?

[sagji]

A single element wide column can advance 1" and then wheel 2".
As it is a single element wide column it kinks at the point of wheel, and will have a bend at that point.
2" is not sufficient for a 90 degree turn - it is nearly 6mm short.

If it had been a 2 element wide column of cavalry it could have advanced 19mm and then wheeled 90 degrees. This is the same as if the BG had advanced 99mm and turned. Both are valid ways of getting to the same point.

Assumptions: 1MU is 1", base width 40mm.

[Polkovnik]

Do columns kink ? Where does it say that in the rules ?

[babyshark]

Do columns kink ? Where does it say that in the rules ?

Check p.134. I think it is also stated elsewhere, too.

Marc

[rtaylor]

In the situation it wasn't necessary to wheel a full 90 degrees to set up a flank charge. 2MU was enough.

Thanks for the answers, all.

In case you haven't guessed, I was Scrumpy's opponent. And my intended victim broke his opponent and pursued before I could make the flank charge. Die and learn.

[hammy]

In the situation it wasn't necessary to wheel a full 90 degrees to set up a flank charge. 2MU was enough.

Thanks for the answers, all.

In case you haven't guessed, I was Scrumpy's opponent. And my intended victim broke his opponent and pursued before I could make the flank charge. Die and learn.

It's always frustrating when things like that happen.

With hindsight you should have used your passed CMT to turn 90 and then wait for the pursuers to run across your front. Of course if you did that your other BG would not have broken

[Scrumpy]

Heck of a good game, Roger's Arab Conquest hordes took on my Indo-Greeks.

Was pleasing for me to discover that LS armed cavalry can sit uphill of La opponents, and get a net +1 poa in impact when charged. Not so pleasing for my opponent to discover though.

[daleivan]

Heck of a good game, Roger's Arab Conquest hordes took on my Indo-Greeks.

Was pleasing for me to discover that LS armed cavalry can sit uphill of La opponents, and get a net +1 poa in impact when charged. Not so pleasing for my opponent to discover though.

This is another example of why I've grown to appreciate mounted with light spear. The POA kind of sneaks up on you--if you can tie things POA-wise, you've got the bonus. Scrumpy that was cleverly done

One question--did your opponent decide to charge you, or did his LS cav do so without orders?

Cheers,

Dale

[expendablecinc]

You measure each base int eh group not just the front one so the rear base woudl be moving far greater than 2 inches in the wheel part of the group. There is a picture in the book that has multiple lines of movement indicating that the BG stops once any base in the group has moved its maximum distance.

Also keep in mind that the the max distance is also only as far as the slowest base in the group so you cant even have a mixed group or battle line of slow troops in the font with faster troops in the rear to increase the "swing range".

Your kinked solution in the case of a colum is the correct one as far as I can tell.

Anthony

[Scrumpy]

Heck of a good game, Roger's Arab Conquest hordes took on my Indo-Greeks.

Was pleasing for me to discover that LS armed cavalry can sit uphill of La opponents, and get a net +1 poa in impact when charged. Not so pleasing for my opponent to discover though.

This is another example of why I've grown to appreciate mounted with light spear. The POA kind of sneaks up on you--if you can tie things POA-wise, you've got the bonus. Scrumpy that was cleverly done

One question--did your opponent decide to charge you, or did his LS cav do so without orders?

Cheers,

Dale

My Cv was the LS armed ones. Roger's were Cv La, and he willingly charged into me.

[Polkovnik]

Polkovnik wrote:
Do columns kink ? Where does it say that in the rules ?



Check p.134. I think it is also stated elsewhere, too.

Marc

I'd not seen that one before. I checked last night and it's also mentioned under battle group permited formations - it's one of the exceptions to the normal permitted formation (rectangular, all bases in contact and facing same way).
It could do with being mentioned in the Movement Rules section as well, under a heading "Column of March".

[rtaylor]

This is another example of why I've grown to appreciate mounted with light spear. The POA kind of sneaks up on you--if you can tie things POA-wise, you've got the bonus. Scrumpy that was cleverly done

What really burns is that I blew out a BG of medium foot in the open with the same "sneaky" PoA several months ago. But did I remember that? NOOOooo!

[Scrumpy]

Not mine you didn't ! Were they Ethan's or Dan's ??

[rtaylor]

Not mine you didn't ! Were they Ethan's or Dan's ??

I don't remember whose, but it was neither of them.