Width of broken BG

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 7:20 pm

This may have a very simple answer, but i ask anyway.

A BG fighting in 2 direction. The 4 bases of the BG in question are below. Assume enemy bases in frontal contact to the 3 stands.

_ |
_ _

Now the BG breaks. It will flee away which is a 45 degree angle from its foes.

Does it move to a 3 base wide position because it had 3 bases in contact? I think so. But it looks odd as the 3 base widths are wider (straight line) than that "L" the unit was fighting in and the angle of the charge and enemy units means the unit "appears" to expand. It also means measuring is different to figuring out where bases go.

Or because before turning to face the flank attack it was two base width does it flee as two base widths?

Now after you determine how wide it is, that will be effected by the base shifts and drop backs, etc.

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:38 pm

My practice has been to keep the 2 x 2 formation facing along and the 45 degree angle line, two bases each side of the line. The distance is measured from the corner of the position (bottom right in your diagram) to the nearest point of the routing BG. The rest of the rear edge will be closer to the enemy, but it seems reasonable that none of it should be further than the VMD.

I cannot see another way. Effectively if pursuers and routers move the same distance they are still in contact and facing the correct direction.

babyshark · Post by **babyshark** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 2:27 am

rogerg wrote:My practice has been to keep the 2 x 2 formation facing along and the 45 degree angle line, two bases each side of the line. The distance is measured from the corner of the position (bottom right in your diagram) to the nearest point of the routing BG. The rest of the rear edge will be closer to the enemy, but it seems reasonable that none of it should be further than the VMD.

I cannot see another way. Effectively if pursuers and routers move the same distance they are still in contact and facing the correct direction.

How would you deal with a six or eight (or other) base BG?

Marc

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:39 am

I would maintain the original frontage. The centre of the BG would end along a line 45 degrees from where the approximate centre was bfore the break. I appreciate this is not an exact science, but when this type of break happens it is usually all over for the losers anyway.

The only issue that needs to be dealt with is avoiding friends. We have resolved this by projecting the position of the base along the 45 degree path of their rout, without changing their angle. I.e imagine the base sliding along the path in the same orientation. If a base width move sideways to this path doesn't clear the friends, then it bursts through them.

lawrenceg · Post by **lawrenceg** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:06 am

I would:

1 establish the direction of rout
2 reform
3 possibly turn 90 or 180
4 wheel to face in the direction of rout

i.e. use the mechanisms in "General movement rules"

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:22 am

Lawrence, thats shocking - using the rules for guidance

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:59 pm

I agree with both Roger and Lawrence - they both achieve the same end result.

Pete

babyshark · Post by **babyshark** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:45 pm

rogerg wrote:The only issue that needs to be dealt with is avoiding friends. We have resolved this by projecting the position of the base along the 45 degree path of their rout, without changing their angle. I.e imagine the base sliding along the path in the same orientation. If a base width move sideways to this path doesn't clear the friends, then it bursts through them.

An interesting solution, and a useful one. But as it is based on common sense, not the rules, there may be other useful methods out there. Why not have the routing BG wheel? This would make them "wider" from the standpoint of friends who want to be avoided and therefore more of a problem to their own side.

Marc

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:53 pm

I submit that it is based on the rules. Lawrence notes the points. I was just describing the way I apply them. The rules specify the direction. They also specify that a base cannot make an avoiding shift more than a base or it has to burst through friends. The only tricky bit is getting the reforming and the turning done. There may be possiblilites of rigging the reforming to get a bit extra on the shift. I haven't really looked too deeply into it because it has never been a major issue in a game I have played or umpired.

The bes advice is that if a unit is getting hit from two sides, get the friendly units well out of the way before it breaks!

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 9:09 pm

lawrenceg wrote:I would:

1 establish the direction of rout
2 reform
3 possibly turn 90 or 180
4 wheel to face in the direction of rout

i.e. use the mechanisms in "General movement rules"

1 OK
2 While fighting in two directions? You don't really reform per rules while in contact do you except for stepped forward sliding back.
3 I could see this as entirely consistent with the turning, but you would have to require it to be like the board edge the cloest to the final direction. which may be in rules, need to check.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 9:13 pm

rogerg wrote:I submit that it is based on the rules. Lawrence notes the points. I was just describing the way I apply them. The rules specify the direction. They also specify that a base cannot make an avoiding shift more than a base or it has to burst through friends. The only tricky bit is getting the reforming and the turning done. There may be possiblilites of rigging the reforming to get a bit extra on the shift. I haven't really looked too deeply into it because it has never been a major issue in a game I have played or umpired.

Interesting. I find it common. The idea that an end of the main fighting line of one side or the other is pinched with supporting BGs on the un-flanked side is pretty common.

The bes advice is that if a unit is getting hit from two sides, get the friendly units well out of the way before it breaks!

Yes that is nice and clever. Do you plan to always let your opponent do this? Naturally not. Still I shall study with precision the suggetion it is all in the rules and be prepared to be enlightened. It has happened before.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 9:17 pm

rogerg wrote:My practice has been to keep the 2 x 2 formation facing

But the formation is not a 2x2 because it is fighting in two directions. I would accept that for the purposes of flee that could be a rule, but is it one already?

lawrenceg · Post by **lawrenceg** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:50 pm

hazelbark wrote:
lawrenceg wrote:I would:

1 establish the direction of rout
2 reform
3 possibly turn 90 or 180
4 wheel to face in the direction of rout

i.e. use the mechanisms in "General movement rules"
1 OK
2 While fighting in two directions? You don't really reform per rules while in contact do you except for stepped forward sliding back.

Normally not, but as I understand it you can't move unless you reform. Alternatively, I think if you apply the prescriptions for turns you will find the BG automatically ends up in a legal formation

3 I could see this as entirely consistent with the turning, but you would have to require it to be like the board edge the cloest to the final direction. which may be in rules, need to check.

It's not covered in the rules for routs, so IMO you have a choice. You just have to do something that can reasonably e construed as directly away from the enemy.