Slitherine

Quickly recovering and renouncing the prior post...

After checking the OP to make sure I remembered the angle correctly, IMO I have now gone over the Hammy's POV.

That is as long as DaveRs CV BG is facing the bowmen to the top of the diagram.

After the led element wheels to get parallel to the charge(position of the initial diagram), would it be within 1 MU of the top Bg of Bowmen? If so, it would have to halt (pg 67 2nd bullet) as it is not allowed to move at all - can not shift nor contract. If it started within 1 MU of the top BG of bow they would be able to move at all..

Madcam.

madcam2us wrote:Quickly recovering and renouncing the prior post...

After checking the OP to make sure I remembered the angle correctly, IMO I have now gone over the Hammy's POV.

That is as long as DaveRs CV BG is facing the bowmen to the top of the diagram.

After the led element wheels to get parallel to the charge(position of the initial diagram), would it be within 1 MU of the top Bg of Bowmen? If so, it would have to halt (pg 67 2nd bullet) as it is not allowed to move at all - can not shift nor contract. If it started within 1 MU of the top BG of bow they would be able to move at all..

Madcam.

Afraid you are way ahead of us . The rule you mention only kicks in "If the above would not allow all front rank bases to complete their evade move," and the rules issues will determine whether "the above" allows them to do so. If it turns out "not," we move on down the page to where you are.

A very lengthy stream so I may be missing something but a few comments:

1. You cannot wheel a single element. Wheeling is a concept specifically defined in general movement on page 43/44. You wheel the whole BG on one corner of the BG. That's it. In the aved section it say "it" can wheel and in the rpevious section the "it" is the BG. At first glnce this seems to be the missing bit of the debate as I see asingle base wheeled - or am I missing something in my skim read?

2. The only time you can have a kink is if you are in a single element column.

3. All bases must end up in a normal block if you are shifting sideways. So no kink is possible.

4. You can shift any base sideways up to 1 base width sidewayts to drop it behind other bases who can successfully complete their move. This is from it starting position not in addition to shfitong sideways. Generally one or the other will be best.

5. You must turn 90 or 180 if these get you closer to the line of charge - i.e. shorter distance to line up parallel, and then wheel from there.

6. If you are obstrcuted by enemy you stop at 1MU.

Looking at the original scenario Dave troops try to wheel onto the line and stop 1MU from the enemy blocking them as far as I can tell. Hope that helps but appreciate I am late joining the debate and may have missed something.

Si

shall wrote:A very lengthy stream so I may be missing something but a few comments:

1. You cannot wheel a single element. Wheeling is a concept specifically defined in general movement on page 43/44. You wheel the whole BG on one corner of the BG. That's it. In the aved section it say "it" can wheel and in the rpevious section the "it" is the BG. At first glnce this seems to be the missing bit of the debate as I see asingle base wheeled - or am I missing something in my skim read?

2. The only time you can have a kink is if you are in a single element column.

3. All bases must end up in a normal block if you are shifting sideways. So no kink is possible.

4. You can shift any base sideways up to 1 base width sidewayts to drop it behind other bases who can successfully complete their move. This is from it starting position not in addition to shfitong sideways. Generally one or the other will be best.

5. You must turn 90 or 180 if these get you closer to the line of charge - i.e. shorter distance to line up parallel, and then wheel from there.

6. If you are obstrcuted by enemy you stop at 1MU.

Looking at the original scenario Dave troops try to wheel onto the line and stop 1MU from the enemy blocking them as far as I can tell. Hope that helps but appreciate I am late joining the debate and may have missed something.

Si

Are you saying that a column cannot shift during its move, including evades and routs, if at any time during its move there is a kink in it?

And this has been agreed by all authors?

1. Dave was wheeling the front of a column, unless the whole column has to move at the same angle at the same time now.
2. Which they had turned 90 degrees into.
3. End in a block, or is this now during the move. An evader must end in side to side and corner to corner contact with another base of the same BG
4. So bases can only shift one base width from their starting position. So evaders that turn cannot, in most cases, shift.
5. Daves 90 turn did this.
6. Unless you can shift to avoid them.

Ok more interesting. The initial diagram looked like they were facing forwards and showed a single base wheeling and the photos didn't load for me so I was not sure what was below.

We are discussing a few things about kinked columns at present for a future FAQ, and maybe need to include something about this. These are all personal views at present as this isn't a specific one we have discussed.

If its a column facing right then my view of the rules as written is (separate question whether we should create an FAQ exception for it):

1. It has to wheel on the line of charge FIRST (and who do any turns if they made it easier to do so) - says so in that part on page 66. This is clear.
2. You do shifts THEREAFTER- see example diagrams in the back section of the book for clarification of this, where there are some shifts after turns etc. shown. You can certainly shift after a turn or wheel. So in this case the BG wheels onto line of charge by wheeling the font base and shifts are taken from there.
3. The maximum shift of any base to fall in behind is 1 sideways thereafter which is why in the example at the back of the book 4 LH can fold in behind 2 as the evade is based on the exact line of the middle file. Were it slightly either side only 1 file could fold onto the back to get away. This is clearly defined. However a column has no folding back to do, so this doen't matter here.
4. The maximum sideways shift is 1 base width but you have to end up in edge-to-edge and corner-to-corner contact with another base in the BG to take up this option. So having forced the column to kink by charging it from flank or rear it can't take up this option.
5. A kinked column, or column charged from flank or rear, will therefore be pretty tricky at times to get out of such a situation.
6. If a BG cannot complete and evade move by all the methods mentioned then move as far as they can and are likely to be caught. So in this case the distance evaded would be limited as without a shift it is forced into the enemy to the North.
7. So in this instance I think they are trapped as the rules are written unless we chose to make an exception for columns.
8. I wouldn't say we have a definitive view on exactly this situation, but in general we view columns as formation to be used well away from the enemy. So it being a bit difficult sits ok with me. I would have to check in with RBS and TS for their views.

Morale of story would seem to be - don't get charged in flank or rear in column or where you will be forced into one if you are going to have to rely on shifts to get out of trouble. Of course if there were no enemy there they would just run away on the line of charge without any shifts (keeping the same formation exactly).

Thoughts?

Si

Si, please bear in mind that the kinked column is not voluntary, but generated by strict application of the evade rules which require a turn (which in this position must be into a column) and a wheel (which must create a kink) to face in the direction of the charge. It so happens at that point that the evade path is partly blocked by enemy, at which point you get to the shift rules.

The kinked column can physically shift less than a base width all along the formation (as a matter of geometric necessity the shift must be the same along the whole column). Since it's a legal and indeed rules-generated formation, it's reasonable (but maybe wrong) to think it can shift in that formation.

But the issue is the wording you summarize as saying a shift must end in a block, where the wording is actually trickier. The rule does not require a block formation at all, but specifically says each base must be in edge and corner contact with another base of the BG, which does cover a kinked column provided the kink leaves as least 2 bases on each side of the kink.

So, by the rules as written:
- As shown it can't shift since a base is alone on one side of the kink.
- If the archers were a little further away and the 2nd base could make the wheel it could shift the half base width.
- If the archers were still further away and the 3rd but not 4th base could make the wheel it could not shift since 4th base is alone.
- If the 4th base could make the wheel they are all a block column again and can shift half a base width.

Obviously being able to evade or not based on kink location is very strange and not intended. I assume the rule was written this way because "in a legal formation" does not work when this rule is applied to routers.

To me, saying kinked columns can't shift, or even that they can't evade, is also bad as the tactic then is to find a charge direction that crumples anything a base width or less deep into a kinked column.

So that is what I see as the actual rules issue.

Incidentally, there is also a question as to whether "end" means at the end of the shift portion of the move or at the end of the evade move, which would probably be fixed if the language discussed above was fixed, and confusion (the rule is clearly written, but people are confused) over the breadth of the shifting restriction.

Glad you are taking a hand in this,

Mike

-------------
Protect the children! Ban kinky column photos!

Just to be sure about evade move in column.
Is the following example the correct way to make it ?

frederic wrote:Just to be sure about evade move in column.
Is the following example the correct way to make it ?

Not exactly.

The line (LH from the shape, and since Cav more than 4-wide can't evade) turns to its right, based on the right front corner of the group. The image appears to have it align on the left front corner.

Assuming the wheel is aligned with the actual direction of charge, the concept is OK but I think the graphic is off since front portion is not shown as wheeling on the pivot point, which is the front left corner of the BG when it formed column.

The rules disputes in this thread don't relate to your situation.

Cheers,

Mike

MikeK wrote:

frederic wrote:Just to be sure about evade move in column.
Is the following example the correct way to make it ?

Not exactly.

The line (LH from the shape, and since Cav more than 4-wide can't evade) turns to its right, based on the right front corner of the group. The image appears to have it align on the left front corner.

Assuming the wheel is aligned with the actual direction of charge, the concept is OK but I think the graphic is off since front portion is not shown as wheeling on the pivot point, which is the front left corner of the BG when it formed column.

The rules disputes in this thread don't relate to your situation.

Cheers,

Mike

Where is it written in the rule that a BG of Cav more than 4-wide can't evade ?

As I read in this thread that a kinking column can't shift, I want to discuss this point. The current thread is really long to follow and sometimes too complex for me (sorry I'm not english), so drawings will both help me to express my opinion and help everybody to correctly understood.

Frederic, sorry, I'm sloppy and tired - tangential point that 6 Cav is too unwieldy to get in and out of one deep fast enough to take for anevading role.

There wasn't a shift in your diagram so didn't mention that. It's not clear what the rule on kinking columns will be is since apparently the intent and the letter of the rules are in conflict. The rules language as I described imposes inconsistent restrictions on a kinked column shifting, making it very fiddly at best.

So here is a new drawing, that I've adjust according to Mike advices.
But I put a wood in the evade path.

According to what I've read in this discussion, a kinking column couldn't shift.
So how to manage the evade move this time ?
In this situation, it looks completely stupid to me that the column couldn't shift simply because it's not a straight column.

Fred:

Your drawing has a flaw in part two: the right flank of the mounted formation stays still, and becomes the new front of the formation. So your mounted blocks in 1 and 2 should be aligned at the top of the diagram, not the bottom in front of the enemy.

In your complete example, I don't see any issue with shifting to avoid the wood, and, since the kinked column is explicitly allowed as a legal formation in the rules, I would not have raised any objection if this had come up in a game.

I would have probably allowed the original poster's attempt to sweep around the end of my Bow formation - he will almost certainly be caught before he can get clear, even if the VMD go against the chargers.

Johno

johno wrote:Fred:

Your drawing has a flaw in part two: the right flank of the mounted formation stays still, and becomes the new front of the formation. So your mounted blocks in 1 and 2 should be aligned at the top of the diagram, not the bottom in front of the enemy.

Not if they are charged like that...

My own take would be that a kinked column cannot shift, so if you need the shift (such as Frederic's woods example) you have to move through the obstruction. The other option would be to turn and wheel as a line, till you cannot move due to obstructions (though this time you can shift and pile up). As for the original question, they will be caught, as they will stop 1 MU from the enemy, unless the HF gets a 1 or 2 on VMD. I also think the turning makes they win 4 cm, so it might be enough to get out of reach.

So, if you consider you may get on column, rout paths are even more necessary.

José

I personally spoke to every member of the Muppetumvirate over the course of the weekend. Nobody could give me a firm answer of a potential solution. I guess we will have to watch this space when the FAQ's are published regarding kinked columns.

Si, please bear in mind that the kinked column is not voluntary, but generated by strict application of the evade rules which require a turn (which in this position must be into a column) and a wheel (which must create a kink) to face in the direction of the charge. It so happens at that point that the evade path is partly blocked by enemy, at which point you get to the shift rules.

Understood and relevant of course.

But the issue is the wording you summarize as saying a shift must end in a block, where the wording is actually trickier. The rule does not require a block formation at all, but specifically says each base must be in edge and corner contact with another base of the BG, which does cover a kinked column provided the kink leaves as least 2 bases on each side of the kink.

It is more interesting that I first thought and we need as authors to go back to our intent and desires on this one. The exact words were not written with kinked columns in mind.

Obviously being able to evade or not based on kink location is very strange and not intended. I assume the rule was written this way because "in a legal formation" does not work when this rule is applied to routers.

A correct assumption

To me, saying kinked columns can't shift, or even that they can't evade, is also bad as the tactic then is to find a charge direction that crumples anything a base width or less deep into a kinked column.

We need to go back to our broader intent. In general: 1) we want columns to be vulnerable when close to enemy and 2) we don't really want so odd artificial method blocking evades (especially if you don't start in that formation). I think we will need to kick around a bit more and make an official amendment to it. There are a few options Richard and i kicked around at warfare. Leave it with us.

Si

Mike

But the issue is the wording you summarize as saying a shift must end in a block, where the wording is actually trickier. The rule does not require a block formation at all, but specifically says each base must be in edge and corner contact with another base of the BG, which does cover a kinked column provided the kink leaves as least 2 bases on each side of the kink.
It is more interesting that I first thought and we need as authors to go back to our intent and desires on this one. The exact words were not written with kinked columns in mind.

This is similar to the DBM wording problem with groups, which defines a group as having each element in edge to edge and corner to corner contact with another element in the group. According to that wording you could deploy elements in pairs with space inbetween the pairs and move them all for one pip.

Of course, no one played it that way but I did have it in my back pocket for the more argumentative opponents

And as with the DBM version Graham, our intent certainly wasn't that!

Si

grahambriggs wrote:This is similar to the DBM wording problem with groups, which defines a group as having each element in edge to edge and corner to corner contact with another element in the group. According to that wording you could deploy elements in pairs with space inbetween the pairs and move them all for one pip.

Of course, no one played it that way but I did have it in my back pocket for the more argumentative opponents

Difference being in DBM that was the definition of a group. In this case a kinked column is a legal (in this case the mandated) formation, it's where the kink is that is affected.