Evade Distance?

[bbotus]

I still think you're trying to over analyse this.

Maybe. But I couldn't read through the rule and make everything come out logically. From all of your comments, which I very much appreciate, it appears that 2 or 6 would be a satisfactory interpretation of the rules; but I think everyone would like to see 3 as the actual rule (which is a rule change).

Seems right to me. But the'y' don't stop until next turn. They reform in the next manouvre phase.

I'm thinking they would reform the turn after they interpenetrate since reforming happens before any moves and they don't have any room to reform as yet. The farthest forward base will have to make one more move to allow room for the remaining bases to form on it.

[gozerius]

BGs completing an interpenetration reform at the end of their move.

[petedalby]

From all of your comments, which I very much appreciate, it appears that 2 or 6 would be a satisfactory interpretation of the rules; but I think everyone would like to see 3 as the actual rule (which is a rule change).

I'm hoping that V2 will adopt the wording from FoGR - which does away with all of this anyway.

[grahambriggs]

Seems right to me. But the'y' don't stop until next turn. They reform in the next manouvre phase.

I'm thinking they would reform the turn after they interpenetrate since reforming happens before any moves and they don't have any room to reform as yet. The farthest forward base will have to make one more move to allow room for the remaining bases to form on it.

I don't think so. They can reform in the next manouvre phase even if that's an enemy phase. The relevant rule is I think:

"It reforms into 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. The final position and formation of the reformed battle group must be as close as possible to its position and formation prior to reforming. Bases in contact with the front edge of enemy bases must remain in contact with the same enemy bases."

So the reform has to be level with blue base A in your diagram, and as close as possible to to position and formation prior to reforming. Hence, I think what will happen here is that in the enemy manouvre phase the blue BG will reform such that it is 3 wide, 2 deep with base A being the left rear corner.

[bbotus]

I don't think so. They can reform in the next manouvre phase even if that's an enemy phase. The relevant rule is I think:

We are both forgetting the rule that gozerius pointed out. 3rd bullet, Reforming, page 70: "A BG completing a previous partial interpenetration reforms at the end of its move."

I'm hoping that V2 will adopt the wording from FoGR - which does away with all of this anyway.

I don't collect in the Renaissance period. What does FoGR say about this?

[petedalby]

What does FoGR say about this?

Simply that either all bases go through, or none do. There are no partial interpenetrations.

[grahambriggs]

I don't think so. They can reform in the next manouvre phase even if that's an enemy phase. The relevant rule is I think:

We are both forgetting the rule that gozerius pointed out. 3rd bullet, Reforming, page 70: "A BG completing a previous partial interpenetration reforms at the end of its move."

Oh yes good point. "A battle group completing a previous partial interpenetration reforms at the end of its move". How odd that the word "move" is used there and not "manouvre phase". It surely can't mean "evade move" otherwise this whole mechanism of partial interpenetration would be irrelevant - the evading BG would reform before the charger moves. Though evades are certainly described as "evade moves" in the rules. Perhaps it means that in it's next manouvre phase it can move and then reform at the end?

In the beta test of v2 there were changes that the authors were trying out in this area, so hopefully it'll get sorted.

[bbotus]

How odd that the word "move" is used there and not "manouvre phase". It surely can't mean "evade move"

Now that's an interesting thought. So a unit makes a partial interpenetration and then is charged. It evades. Now it is no longer partially interpenetrated and its bases are separated. Does it reform immediately or wait until its own Manoeuver Phase? The rules say that disorder is ended as soon as bases clear disordering terrain. Would this be similar?

Can anyone see any problem with allowing the partial interpenetrator to form up immediately after an evade move? Or does it wait and form during its next Manoeuver Phase?

[Polkovnik]

But the word "previous" is significant here surely. It is referring to the next movement phase in which the partially interpenetrating BG can voluntarily move. It is then completing it's previous partial interpenetration. So it doesn't reform until it can actually complete the interpenetration move through the other BG. So if it evades and partially interpenetrates a friendly BG in the enemy impact phase, it does not reform until the end of its own next manouevre phase.

[bbotus]

So if it evades and partially interpenetrates a friendly BG in the enemy impact phase,

Agree there. But what if a unit partially interpenetrates during its Manoeuver Phase and then is charged and evades in the opponents Impact Phase before it has a chance to complete the interpenetration? Does it reform immediately after completing the evade move or wait for its next Maneouver Phase?

[Polkovnik]

Yes - if it clears the BG it was interpenetrating during the evade then it has completed its previous partial interpenetration so it reforms at the end of the evade move.

[dave_r]

So if it evades and partially interpenetrates a friendly BG in the enemy impact phase,

Agree there. But what if a unit partially interpenetrates during its Manoeuver Phase and then is charged and evades in the opponents Impact Phase before it has a chance to complete the interpenetration? Does it reform immediately after completing the evade move or wait for its next Maneouver Phase?

How can you evade in the Manoeuver phase?

[bbotus]

How can you evade in the Manoeuver phase?

It doesn't. Reread please. This specific question had the evade occurring in an Impact Phase.

[dave_r]

How can you evade in the Manoeuver phase?

It doesn't. Reread please. This specific question had the evade occurring in an Impact Phase.

In which case you can't get partial interpenetrations in the Maneouver phase - they only happen in an evade or pursuit.

[petedalby]

In which case you can't get partial interpenetrations in the Maneouver phase

Go on Dave, even though this thread is wandering off course, I'll bite - since when can't you have a partial interpentration in the maneouver phase?

Although why anyone would choose to do so if it puts them in charge reach....but lots of daft things happen in a game which don't make sense so why not.

[Polkovnik]

He's already said why -they only happen in an evade or pursuit (i.e. in an involuntary interpenetration).

[petedalby]

He's already said why -they only happen in an evade or pursuit (i.e. in an involuntary interpenetration).

I know I'm rusty at this but please give me the page reference where it says that?

My reading of Page 48 would suggest that a partial interpenetration is allowed during the movement phase. But as ever I stand to be corrected.

[dave_r]

He's already said why -they only happen in an evade or pursuit (i.e. in an involuntary interpenetration).

I know I'm rusty at this but please give me the page reference where it says that?

My reading of Page 48 would suggest that a partial interpenetration is allowed during the movement phase. But as ever I stand to be corrected.

Oops, I'm thinking of Light Foot.

[petedalby]

Oops, I'm thinking of Light Foot.

So - is that a full and abject apology Mr Ruddock?

But as I've posted already - all of this is redundant once we have V2.

[dave_r]

Oops, I'm thinking of Light Foot.

So - is that a full and abject apology Mr Ruddock?

But as I've posted already - all of this is redundant once we have V2.

No, whilst obviously, I was less than 100% correct, I was partially correct in a smaller subset of the whole potential interpenetrations question.

How do you know it'll be solved in v2 anyway?