Impact Phase: Whoe Gets to Fight

vamrat · Post by **vamrat** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:20 pm

A friend of mine and I were having a discussion last night about the impact phase. When the units slam into one another:

Do they meet stand for stand?

OOO
OOO
XXXX
XXXX

The Os represent my Spartans and the Xs are his Hastati/Principes. In Impact, will there be three OOOs facing four XXXXs or will only three XXXs get to fight?

In the next situation, my Spartans are two wide three deep and his romani are the same as above, thus:

OO
OO
OO
XXXX
XXXX

In that situation, how many Xs get to fight against the Os?

He was also asking if the Xs can loop around the O's, thus creating:

_OO
_OO
XOOX
XXXX
X __X

Is such a move allowable? (EDIT: the lines are there just to make the Xs and Os hold formation.)

Thanks in advance, and hopefully my diagrams aren't too confusing.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:26 pm

At impact the number of bases fighting is the lower of the number of bases each side has in combat. See P91 for the full detail.

It is possible for a larger BG to get more bases fighting at impact if the charge is at an angle and some bases step forwards into the edge of the second rank of the smaller formation. This will mean more dice are rolled but both sides will still fight with the same number of bases. It is impossible to get an impact where one side has more bases fighting than the other. This was a deliberate design decision to eliminate some of the more cheesy charges seen in other rulesets.

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:26 pm

Impact is always an equal number of bases per player.

So in your first example it would be 3 bases vs 3, or 6 dice each. After impact you align and the Romans would have an overlap in the melee.

In example 2 it would be 2 bases vs 2 bases, so 4 dice each. After impact the Romans have a double overlap but the Spartans can match one of those.

The 3rd example is illegal.

Hope that helps

Pete

vamrat · Post by **vamrat** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:36 pm

OK, so #3 is Illegal, like I though it would be.

When the units overlap in the melee phase, whould it be done like so:

XOOO
XOOO
_XXX
_XXX

With the two rear Spartans coming down to hold the two Romans on the side, and the two left side Romans moving arouns the Flank?

Sorry for my ignorance, we read through the chapters in the book last night, but neither of us felt fully clarified.

Thanks again for the quick responses.

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm

You need to read the section at the fnt about legal formations. In a simple charge like this, the BG's hold their rectangular formation.

00
00
XXX
XXX

The X's on the right fight as overlaps, but are not physically moved around.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:50 pm

I have been looking at the geometry of stepping forwards and getting 3 bases contacting 3 bases when a large BG charges a 2 base wide one.

It seems that the only way to get a 3 base on 3 impact is for the wider BG to be at least 4 bases wide.

That way you can have an impact like this:

In this diagram the blue BG has charged at an angle, hit the corner of the orange BG and all the other files have stepped forwards. The end result is that 4 bases of the blue BG are in combat with 3 bases of the orange one. The blue player gets to choose which bases of his count as fighting but as it is all one BG it is very unlikely that it will make any difference.

The orange player fights with 3 bases, the base at the back of the left hand column fights with the same POA as the front rank.

Once the impact is over the blue BG will conform (if possible) and the melee will be fought with the blue BG having overlaps on both sides of the orange one.

Hope that helps

willb · Post by **willb** » Fri May 01, 2009 3:02 am

In case there is any question about how the formation would be in Hammy's example after conforming, the blue stands would be in a rectangular formation with all the front rank stands aligned with the front of the orange stands. None of the blue stands would be behind the flank of the orange stands.

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Fri May 01, 2009 11:42 am

I have been looking at the geometry of stepping forwards

You need to get out more Hammy

Pete

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Fri May 01, 2009 6:20 pm

willb wrote:In case there is any question about how the formation would be in Hammy's example after conforming, the blue stands would be in a rectangular formation with all the front rank stands aligned with the front of the orange stands. None of the blue stands would be behind the flank of the orange stands.

exactly

gozerius · Post by **gozerius** » Fri May 01, 2009 8:40 pm

In case there is any question about how the formation would be in Hammy's example after conforming, the blue stands would be in a rectangular formation with all the front rank stands aligned with the front of the orange stands. None of the blue stands would be behind the flank of the orange stands.

This is incorrect.

The bases would pivot and slide the minimum necessary to line up in either a full front to front contact or a valid overlap position. The bases on the left would pivot to line up with their side edge touching the side edge of the enemy formation. They would not slide either forward or back because partial side edge contact it sufficient to qualify for an overlap. The next two files would pivot and slide to line up on the front two bases of the enemy and the last base would pivot and slide into overlap on the righthand side of the enemy BG in full side edge contact with the friendly bases to its left. See the diagram "Front and Flank Conform" on page 72.

It will remain in this offset formation until the combat is resolved* because when reforming the BG reforms level with the forwardmost bases of the battlegroup.

*Assuming it is not forced to turn bases due to enemy contact on its flanks.

SirGarnet · Post by **SirGarnet** » Sat May 02, 2009 2:02 am

gozerius wrote:See the diagram "Front and Flank Conform" on page 72.

It will remain in this offset formation until the combat is resolved* because when reforming the BG reforms level with the forwardmost bases of the battlegroup.

That is illustrating a conform, not a reform.

A reform is into "normal formation"so it must end up with an even front, not pushed forward at the end. The "furthest forward base" language is an issue.

gozerius · Post by **gozerius** » Sat May 02, 2009 9:10 pm

Page 72 illustrates the correct procedure to CONFORM when a BG is in contact with the front and flank of the enemy. The base which contacted the flank conforms to an overlap by the shortest move possible. In this case a simple pivot to be in side edge to side edge contact.
When REFORMING the bases are reformed "into a normal formation facing the direction previously faced by any of its bases (player's choice) and level with the furthest forward base in that direction." (Page 70)
In this case the furthest forward base will be the stepped forward base in overlap.

doctormm · Post by **doctormm** » Sun May 03, 2009 7:56 pm

gozerius wrote:Page 72 illustrates the correct procedure to CONFORM when a BG is in contact with the front and flank of the enemy. The base which contacted the flank conforms to an overlap by the shortest move possible. In this case a simple pivot to be in side edge to side edge contact.
When REFORMING the bases are reformed "into a normal formation facing the direction previously faced by any of its bases (player's choice) and level with the furthest forward base in that direction." (Page 70)
In this case the furthest forward base will be the stepped forward base in overlap.

So then if the enemy unit routs, these overlapping stands will get a "head start" on their pursuit move? The pursuit rules only require that you remain in contact to kill a stand, the side edge contact that might occur still counts, right?

gozerius · Post by **gozerius** » Mon May 04, 2009 11:30 pm

A pursuit is not a voluntary move so being in a stepped forward formation does not prevent you from pursuing.