Conformation

[philqw78]

No you wont, you'll step forwards into the other

[ravenflight]

Are you on drugs Dave? I'm talking about a microscopic wheel. So Microscopic that you would need an electron microscope to see the gap between the right hand edges... but it would be there.

My point being that one of the design tenants of FoG has been avoidance of gamey crap and the lack of advantage in geometric ploys.

I am NOT talking about the diagram with the archers knights and elephants, I'm talking about the one that is 'at the bottom of page 4'.

They (presumably started parallel to one another... what if the active player WANTED to conform the other way because he's a gamey shit. All he has to do is the most minor of wheels... so minor you can't see it... but it's still there... 'and now I conform the other direction'.

With a microscopic wheel you'll only contact one base which makes it illegal.

Ok, you ARE on drugs. I'll leave this chat to people who can be bothered explaining it to you.

The solution the BHGS has, creates a situation where you can do geometric ploys which goes against the tenants of the FOG rule systems.

Fine if people want to play that way, but the above (in bold) is true.

Personally, I think it's an error, and as such needs to be repaired.

[grahambriggs]

Ok, you ARE on drugs. I'll leave this chat to people who can be bothered explaining it to you.

The solution the BHGS has, creates a situation where you can do geometric ploys which goes against the tenants of the FOG rule systems.

Fine if people want to play that way, but the above (in bold) is true.

Personally, I think it's an error, and as such needs to be repaired.

Ravenflight, a microscopic wheel won't affect the end result. You'll hit the same two bases with front corners, then conform to exactly the same position as hitting full on. That's because you do the mininum shift etc to conform to the bases hit/OVERLAP POSITION. To change that such that you would conform to the front of both bases, rather than one base and the overlap position, would need a large wheel.

[philqw78]

This needs to be shown in the document then.

Once I get home I will post a diagram

[philqw78]

So which way do these conform

I would play:
A and B go to the right as we look at it, C goes slightly right and D goes slightly left. A, C and D are not ending in front edge contact with the base they contacted but are conforming by shortest possible

[ravenflight]

So which way do these conform

I would play:
A and B go to the right as we look at it, C goes slightly right and D goes slightly left. A, C and D are not ending in front edge contact with the base they contacted but are conforming by shortest possible

More to this, what if the red in A&B was two units. Does the unit on the left hand side 'break contact' to 'conform' by the shortest amount'?

That's ok if they do, but that doesn't appear to be what was discussed earlier with mr elephant, archer & knight.

[dave_r]

So which way do these conform

I would play:
A and B go to the right as we look at it, C goes slightly right and D goes slightly left. A, C and D are not ending in front edge contact with the base they contacted but are conforming by shortest possible

Perhaps if you read the rules and clarifications then that would be a good first step?

[dave_r]

So which way do these conform

I would play:
A and B go to the right as we look at it, C goes slightly right and D goes slightly left. A, C and D are not ending in front edge contact with the base they contacted but are conforming by shortest possible

More to this, what if the red in A&B was two units. Does the unit on the left hand side 'break contact' to 'conform' by the shortest amount'?

That's ok if they do, but that doesn't appear to be what was discussed earlier with mr elephant, archer & knight.

We weren't attempting to create a "what if?" document. We explained the rules as they are written and took logical conclusions from them. One of the authors agreed with our conclusions. Don't blame us because you don't like what is written, we've just clarified how it will be umpired. What people want is confirmation of how a certain situation will be ruled.

[dave_r]

Ok, you ARE on drugs. I'll leave this chat to people who can be bothered explaining it to you.

The solution the BHGS has, creates a situation where you can do geometric ploys which goes against the tenants of the FOG rule systems.

Fine if people want to play that way, but the above (in bold) is true.

Personally, I think it's an error, and as such needs to be repaired.

Can you show me where it states that geometric ploys are against the tenants of the FoG system please?

And just to clarify - we are not the BHGS, we are simply the guys who do the umpiring. We are frequently thanked by all and sundry for this pleasant task, which normally disrupts our games (and our opponents) so we are attempting to clarify the difficult points so other gamers are less likely to have an argument.

We've discussed this all internally and off line and the conclusions we've drawn are the ones that will be ruled in tournaments we umpire.

[philqw78]

Perhaps if you read the rules and clarifications then that would be a good first step?

I did, they and Graham's clarification above did not help.

[petedalby]

The solution the BHGS has, creates a situation where you can do geometric ploys which goes against the tenants of the FOG rule systems.

I'm really struggling to understand the point you are making.

The rules clearly allow a wheel as part of a charge subject to certain restrictions. If I have 2 base wide BG opposite another 2 base wide BG I have 3 choices. I can charge straight ahead and there will be no conforming - which is what most players would elect to do. Or I can wheel to the right and the conform will result in 1 base in contact and another in overlap. Or I can wheel to the left and achieve the same result with the overlap on the other side.

That has been the case in V1 and V2 and there is nothing in the clarifications that changes that.

But please re-read the clarifications.

They have been published for the benefit of, and at the request of, many UK competition players, to clarify what for many players are ambiguous situations. You do not have to be bound by them - you can play the game any way you like. But if you play at a BHGS event you now know how they will be ruled and we hope that other UK and International events will also adopt them because they have been approved as being sensible by one of the original authors.

[lawrenceg]

So which way do these conform

I would play:
A and B go to the right as we look at it, C goes slightly right and D goes slightly left. A, C and D are not ending in front edge contact with the base they contacted but are conforming by shortest possible

from the clarifications document:

In our view, the over-riding principle is that bases should conform to the enemy bases in contact at impact or over to an overlap position at the end of the enemy BG.

If you conform bases to the bases in contact you get:
A goes left
B goes right as a red base is in contact with two green bases and this is the minimum distance to conform to one of them.
C goes left
D goes right

[philqw78]

Thank you
But its not what Graham said or Pete above for scenario A

[dave_r]

Thank you
But its not what Graham said or Pete above for scenario A

I don't think so - neither Pete nor Graham has commented specifically on the wheel part. They've only commented on the straight-forward charge I think.

[gozerius]

FOG is dead.
I'm moving on.

Good day, gentlemen.

Greg Boeser

[philqw78]

Some guys have put in a lot of work to try and sort out the few things that occasionally cause disagreement. We may not agree. At least they have tried. The Majority is good. This is the only bit I find awkward. Its not worth throwing your toys out of the pram for
Though perhaps Dave should have his toys taken off him some times

[shadowdragon]

We can all get on our high horses every now and then...when our point of view becomes THE point of view. Fortunately, only toy soldiers are involved here. For that we can be thankful.

I learned something from this thread...so thanks to everyone and, in particular, to lawrence for the last piece of info that made sense of the diagrams on pages 93, 97 & 99 (v2), which I now see are consistent with the written rules, while admittedly not obviously so. I agree with the authors of the clarification linked by Phil that this is what the rules say. One may like it or not. All rules must make compromises, it's up to each person as to which compromises are acceptable and which are not.

To reiterate....according to my understanding:

1) The active player's bases in contact with enemy bases after their impact phase must conform to the bases they have contacted. (Interpretation of "must pivot and/or slide bases by the minimum necessary to conform to the enemy bases in contact".)

2) Conforming means to be in full front edge to front edge contact or to an overlap position to one of the contacted enemy bases. Noting that an overlap position means in corner or side edge contact with an enemy base that is in contact with an friendly base to its front. In the OP if the knight base in contact with the elephant base shifts to face the leftmost archer base it is not in an overlap position against the elephant as the elephant would have no one to its front; and, as well, a base can't be in an overlap position it's already fighting an enemy base to its front. So conforming to an overlap position is only possible if the enemy base in question has a friendly base in front edge contact and the overlapping base is not also fighting to its front.

3) Remaining bases in the BG close up to maintain continuity.

4) Where there is choice in conforming, the choice (e.g., if two bases have contacted the same enemy base or a base has contacted two enemy bases) the result is restricted to the choice with minimum distance. Here's where the diagrams come in and lawrence's clarification. Take the diagram on page 93. The right front cavalry base is in contact with the flank and centre enemy bases while the left front cavalry base is only in contact with the flank enemy base. There are two choices - (a) as shown with the right cavalry base vs the flank enemy base and the left cavalry base in an overlap position vs the same enemy base and (b) right cavalry base vs the centre enemy base and the left cavalry base vs the flank enemy base. Both are valid in the sense that each cavalry base is in a conforming position vs the enemy base it contacted. However, (a) has the shorter move so the centre enemy base ends up with no cavalry base to its front. Noting that the rules do not say that every enemy base contacted will end up with a base to its front, but often that will be the case. Thanks, lawrence.

That's how I understand it.

[petedalby]

FOG is dead.
I'm moving on.

Sadly in the States that does appear to the situation.

I agree with the authors of the clarification linked by Phil that this is what the rules say. One may like it or not. All rules must make compromises, it's up to each person as to which compromises are acceptable and which are not.

Thank you.

And yes, I believe you have produced an excellent summary of the situation as we understand it too.

[philqw78]

I thought the solution was that A woiuld go right, which is not what Lawrence said.

[prb4]

First, I would like to say that I think the clarifications are great, they seem sensible. Thanks for all the work.

On the particular issue of conforming I have read the new clarifications several times and they are NOT clear to me.
The key line from the clarifications is:
"In our view, the over-riding principle is that bases should conform to the enemy bases in contact at impact or over to an overlap position at the end of the enemy BG."

This line gives a choice in some situations.
1. Do the bases conform to those in contact at impact?
2. Or do they conform to an overlap position?

In Phil's example A.
1. The red bases conform to the left as we look at it.
2. The red bases conform to the right as we look at it.

In example B the red bases conform to the right, because clauses 1 and 2 are both satisfied so that is simple.

I will say again I think the new clarifications document is excellent.
However it would be a great help if this section could get a few more words added to finally clarify what is intended in these situations?

My question would also be, in example A, does it matter if the two green bases are from different BG's?

Peter