Slitherine

bbotus wrote:BG in orb:
4 bases - 1 base fights (front rank only)
6 bases - 1.5 bases rounded up so 2 bases fight (1 front and 1 in 2nd rank)
8 bases - 2 bases fight.
10 bases - 2.25 bases so 3 fight (2 front and 1 in 2nd rank). Enemy have 2 bases to contact in front rank so they get 2 files or 4 dice vs 3 for orb.
12 bases - 3 bases fight.

But this is nothing like what the rules say.

Really enjoyed reading this. When I played last night I actually considered forming an orb as I was outflanked and had all sorts of nasties swarming towards me. It would not have saved my unit but it would have been given the chance to survive for a bit before the multiple units attacking from all directions wore it down - slowly.

Without checking the rules I think the equal number of bases fighting is the way, or should be the way, to play and would give the correct results for the formation. Perhaps looking for the most reasonable, simple answer is the way to go. After all, Edward the first & his knights couldn't break Wallace's boys so had break the formations up with archery first.

Good question though.

>If a BG reduces its frontage and can't be overlapped, wouldn't it make sense that the enemy could get less manpower in contact?

Again, this seems to be starting from an assumption of what you think the rules are designed to achieve (equal manpower fighting), and then arguing that something in the rules which doesn't achieve that end should therefore be interpreted as differently to what it actually says.

Although if I am being picky, I would point out that:

a) the enemy does get less manpower in contact (if you have reduced your frontage so that it is less than the enemy, by definition he will get less *in contact* than he would if you hadn't contracted your frontage).

b) assuming you meant less manpower fighting...he can still have less manpower fighting than he would have had if you hadn't gone into orb. regardless of whether or not you and he now have equal manpower fighting.

The devil is in the details, as rules writers inevitably find out sooner or later

philqw78 wrote:

bbotus wrote:BG in orb:
4 bases - 1 base fights (front rank only)
6 bases - 1.5 bases rounded up so 2 bases fight (1 front and 1 in 2nd rank)
8 bases - 2 bases fight.
10 bases - 2.25 bases so 3 fight (2 front and 1 in 2nd rank). Enemy have 2 bases to contact in front rank so they get 2 files or 4 dice vs 3 for orb.
12 bases - 3 bases fight.

But this is nothing like what the rules say.

Phil, I just reread this post. ????? Did I miss something or are we talking about different things? I took these calculations right off page 122 for the orb.

bbotus wrote:

philqw78 wrote:

bbotus wrote:BG in orb:
4 bases - 1 base fights (front rank only)
6 bases - 1.5 bases rounded up so 2 bases fight (1 front and 1 in 2nd rank)
8 bases - 2 bases fight.
10 bases - 2.25 bases so 3 fight (2 front and 1 in 2nd rank). Enemy have 2 bases to contact in front rank so they get 2 files or 4 dice vs 3 for orb.
12 bases - 3 bases fight.

But this is nothing like what the rules say.

Phil, I just reread this post. ????? Did I miss something or are we talking about different things? I took these calculations right off page 122 for the orb.

I think you're correct bbotus.

"Fights in any direction with one quarter of its bases rounded up. Half of these, rounded up, count as front rank bases."

It really could be quite mad

Four bases. 1 base, one quarter of 4, in each direction. Half of these, 2, count as front rank.

So for 5 bases, 2 bases fight in each direction ( one quarter of 5 rounded up), half of these (10 bases), 5, are in front rank.

I really think the authors confused it more by differentiating which rank they were in since ranks confer no positive or negative effect.

philqw78 wrote:"Fights in any direction with one quarter of its bases rounded up. Half of these, rounded up, count as front rank bases."

It really could be quite mad

Four bases. 1 base, one quarter of 4, in each direction. Half of these, 2, count as front rank.

So for 5 bases, 2 bases fight in each direction ( one quarter of 5 rounded up), half of these (10 bases), 5, are in front rank.

I really think the authors confused it more by differentiating which rank they were in since ranks confer no positive or negative effect.

Ranks do confer positive effect for spearmen, so it is vitally important.

Not in orb. Its just steady or not that affects their POA dependant upon if opponents use lance in impact and sword in melee.

But it does reduce the number of dice thrown at impact. Since the orb will have no POAs but the enemy might that could make a difference.

Interesting arithmetic Phil. Is half half of 5 really 10 or have you been at the Sanatogen and Vimto again?

grahambriggs wrote:But it does reduce the number of dice thrown at impact. Since the orb will have no POAs but the enemy might that could make a difference.

Interesting arithmetic Phil. Is half half of 5 really 10 or have you been at the Sanatogen and Vimto again?

Is Sanatogen alcoholic? I thought it was something that pregnant women take.

Although looking at Phil....

grahambriggs wrote:But it does reduce the number of dice thrown at impact. Since the orb will have no POAs but the enemy might that could make a difference.

Interesting arithmetic Phil. Is half half of 5 really 10 or have you been at the Sanatogen and Vimto again?

D'oh. Its the Vimto. A quarter of 5 rounded up is 2 fighting in each direction, and half of these 8 is 4 front rank and also therefroe 4 rear rank. I'll have to drink a different mixer.

I should have left this until tomorrow when its my birthday so I'm bound to get it right.

Interesting. I would have thought the math was.

5
1/4 rounded up =
2
half of these in front rannk =
1 is front and 1 is back in each direction.

Interesting. I would have thought the math was.

5
1/4 rounded up =
2
half of these in front rannk =
1 is front and 1 is back in each direction.

Yes, that's right and PHIL IS RIGHT this time. Two fighting in each direction is 2x4=8, which is what Phil said. You just have to reread it a few times.

Happy Birthday, Phil

None of this matters anyway because the authors can't agree on what Orb means either.

philqw78 wrote:None of this matters anyway because the authors can't agree on what Orb means either.

How do you know?

dave_r wrote:

philqw78 wrote:None of this matters anyway because the authors can't agree on what Orb means either.

How do you know?

I'm psychic, precognitive or telepathic. How do you think I found out?

philqw78 wrote:

dave_r wrote:

philqw78 wrote:None of this matters anyway because the authors can't agree on what Orb means either.

How do you know?

I'm psychic, precognitive or telepathic. How do you think I found out?

It being an internet forum I assumed you just made it up

I asked. They can't agree on what their rules mean.

philqw78 wrote:I asked. They can't agree on what their rules mean.

Ask them again next week. They'll have forgotten what they said before and give different conflicting answers

grahambriggs wrote:

philqw78 wrote:I asked. They can't agree on what their rules mean.

Ask them again next week. They'll have forgotten what they said before and give different conflicting answers

Do you mean that one of them will forget there hadn't been a concensus and decided that his only view was correct?