Slitherine

philqw78 wrote:Since it is mimimum move, if it is less movement to comform by going left then left it would be. It looks like it would be less movement to go right to me. So then we need a rule on how the furthest move is measured. Currently the front right corner will move more in one circumstance than the other, and the front left will move less in that circumstance than the other. Oh what fun.

Ah, "conforming". Yes, what fun. Unless, of course, one is a non-conformist geometric shape of another sort.

I think the only way we get different movement distances is if you measure Straight line movement from Start point to End point.
If you Measure actual distance moved throughout the completion of the movement then the movement of both corners is the same and C is the Minimum movement.

I know of no other movement in FOG (off top of my head) that only concerns itself with start and end point. (I think this was an old DBx method)
Without an example of this being the "perfered" measurement method I would measure total distance moved by any point of the BG (through out the arc of the pivot and slide as this will keep all point the same)

At least now I see where you are coming up with your measurement.
Amazing how 2 people can see the same thing slightly different and lead to a completely opposing opinion.
Gino
SMAC

Just a quick note on the shortest move dilemma.

The rules do not say shortest move, they say, p.70, "pivot and/or slide bases by the minimum necessary".

If you measure direct corner to corner, you can argue that A to B is shorter, but the rules specify pivoting and sliding, in which case A to C is def. shorter.

The argument isn't really about that, it's about whether or not you're allowed to conform into an overlap position.

Over Lap being a legal melle posistion has not been in debate (that I have seen)
Just about everyone has agreed that over lap is a legal melle contact.
Gino
SMAC

kal5056 wrote:I think the only way we get different movement distances is if you measure Straight line movement from Start point to End point.
If you Measure actual distance moved throughout the completion of the movement then the movement of both corners is the same and C is the Minimum movement.

I know of no other movement in FOG (off top of my head) that only concerns itself with start and end point.

Wheeling.

philqw78 wrote:I would also say A to B and C to D, as its the minimum move.

I think this is probably correct.

I also think Peter's comment on what the rules actually say is important, and that worrying about what path the conforming element moves through is irrelevant and unnecessary.

I fail to see why it ever should be B. Can someone clarify this?
The corners of the charger would clearly move less to the left.

rpayne wrote:The rules do not say shortest move, they say, p.70, "pivot and/or slide bases by the minimum necessary".

If you measure direct corner to corner, you can argue that A to B is shorter, but the rules specify pivoting and sliding, in which case A to C is def. shorter.

That would be if the BG pivotted then slid. But it pivots and slides so B is still the minimum necessary.

The argument isn't really about that, it's about whether or not you're allowed to conform into an overlap position.

This is possible as it is still in contact

Mehrunes wrote:I fail to see why it ever should be B. Can someone clarify this?
The corners of the charger would clearly move less to the left.

Because the distance 1 to 2 is greater than the distance 1 to 3

So you are checking what is the least distance between two random points (you are referring to the left front corners and ignoring the right corners completely I assume?) other than checking which pivot and/or slide would be the minimum?
The pivot is always the same and the slide is obviously shorter to the left.

Simon (I know, I know...) made a good point that to act as an overlap against an enemy element it must be fighting frontally - therefore you must conform as per B

dave_r wrote:Simon (I know, I know...) made a good point that to act as an overlap against an enemy element it must be fighting frontally - therefore you must conform as per B

I don't think this has anything at all to do with this thread Dave.

To be overlapped a base must be fighting frontally.

Mehrunes wrote:So you are checking what is the least distance between two random points (you are referring to the left front corners and ignoring the right corners completely I assume?) other than checking which pivot and/or slide would be the minimum?
The pivot is always the same and the slide is obviously shorter to the left.

Try looking at the diagram above.
Point 1 is closer to point 3 than it is to point 2. How are these random?
Therefore if the BG pivots and slides at the same time it moves less to align point 1 with point 3.

If you must pivot then slide there would be a lot of times when conforms were impossible, like this below. If you pivot then slide you cannot conform. (imagine the contact by the angled BG is central with both bases. I rushed this)

But pivoting and sliding at the same time you can.

Mehrunes wrote:So you are checking what is the least distance between two random points (you are referring to the left front corners and ignoring the right corners completely I assume?) other than checking which pivot and/or slide would be the minimum?
The pivot is always the same and the slide is obviously shorter to the left.

And, if I understand you correctly, I am ignoring the right front corner of the charger. This is because every other corner moves further to align to your preferrred position 'C', whereas to align to my preferred position, 'B', every other corner moves less.

philqw78 wrote:

dave_r wrote:Simon (I know, I know...) made a good point that to act as an overlap against an enemy element it must be fighting frontally - therefore you must conform as per B

I don't think this has anything at all to do with this thread Dave.

To be overlapped a base must be fighting frontally.

It has relevance because of what is written in the rules!!!

i.e. on page 70 - "conforming usually means lining up each base in full front edge to front edge contact with an enemy base, or conforming to an overlap position"

Since you can't conform to an overlap if the base isn't fighting frontally then from the Diagram's you must conform to outcome B.

It doesn't say "conform frontally to the base you contacted on impact" dave, it just says conform to AN enemy base.

The way it reads to me, as long as at least 1 base is contacting frontally to any of the bases that were contacted prior to the conform, any other bases can be in overlap position. That makes sense, since if nothing was in contact frontally, there wouldn't be an overlap combat.

Anyway, we've had this argument to death on the other forum already. Was just posting here because Dan wanted an official ruling from the writers.

rpayne wrote:It doesn't say "conform frontally to the base you contacted on impact" dave, it just says conform to AN enemy base.

The way it reads to me, as long as at least 1 base is contacting frontally to any of the bases that were contacted prior to the conform, any other bases can be in overlap position. That makes sense, since if nothing was in contact frontally, there wouldn't be an overlap combat.

Anyway, we've had this argument to death on the other forum already. Was just posting here because Dan wanted an official ruling from the writers.

The rules state how you conform, i.e. full front edge to front edge contact. The option to move to an overlap isn't there because you can't act as an overlap as you can't act as an overlap to an element that isn't fighting to it's front.

If you continue to ignore that then there is little point in continuing.

dave_r wrote: If you continue to ignore that then there is little point in continuing.

Dave, what you are quoting is about overlapping. An enemy base must be fighting frontally to allow an overlap. It does have an effect on conforming, but not in this situation, as you could not conform with no frontal contact, into overlap.

If the charger above had contacted with only its right hand front file against the enemy right hand front file and its shortest move (pivot and slide) to conform was to the left, moving it into only corner to corner contact, then this would apply.

That entire argument stems from a reading of the "or conforming to an overlap position (see below)" line as meaning conforming to an overlap can only happen in the see below clause. This doesn't make any sense, because the see below clause does not cover something that happens all the time. If you have a base which did not add dice on impact, where does it conform?

Say you have an impact in which a 4 base unit is charged by a 6 base unit. Only 4 bases of the 6 base unit can line up frontally, 2 will be forced to fight as an overlap. However, if you read the "(see below)" to mean that conforming to an overlap position is ONLY possible under the see below clause, then the 6 base unit cannot conform at all, because the 2 bases that did not contact enemy on impact can only conform to an overlap if they were in contact with the enemies flank. In that situation the 2 bases are required to conform, because the rules specify that the active player's entire battlegroup must conform. However, they would not be able to do so, and as a result would not move at all.

This is way too literal a reading, to the point of taking the entire thing out of context.

philqw78 wrote:

dave_r wrote: If you continue to ignore that then there is little point in continuing.

Dave, what you are quoting is about overlapping. An enemy base must be fighting frontally to allow an overlap. It does have an effect on conforming, but not in this situation, as you could not conform with no frontal contact, into overlap.

Once again Phil is correct - Dave, you are mis-applying the rules in this situation I'm afraid.