hammy wrote:
My current take on these words is that the evaders make their move, their move can include a turn at the edge of the table and if that move is far enough to completely clear all the obstructing BGs then it is fine and appears on the edge of the table. If its move is not far enough to clear then it has to be placed 'beyond' the BGs it is bursting through. I think that as to the side of is not beyond that if the move is not long enough to fully clear obstructions down the table edge it has to go off table but if the move is long enough to clear then it is OK.
I can't see anything in the evade rules that prevents a turn when 'inside' an enemy BG but it would IMO be very hard to argue that ending up above or below as per the original diagram is 'beyond' and if you don't have enough move to clear then you must be placed 'beyond'
I still do not believe the rules ANYWHERE allow you to turn 90 degrees while entirely in another friendly BG. Hammy I think you have a typo in your 2nd paragraph as I don't think the rules allow you to be inside an enemy BG either.
To be clear on the table at the time. Because of the piled up BGs at the board edge there was NO ROOM for a base anywhere other than in the BGs being burst through. Had there been room then the whole turning would come into play.
In fact in the forced passing through section it is clear that BGs can't turn when interpentrated. So why would an exception suddenly come up?