Slitherine

so, here's some tricksy play i've discovered is perfectly legal.

what we have here is my BG (the HF), and his BG (the two colours of LH). the LH are shooting at the two BG, as indicated by the arrows. note that the scales aren't exact. just enough for you to get the idea.



in the movement phase his orange LH turn 90 degrees on the corner indicated in red.




the BG then moves directly forward (the small blue arrow), and wheels, so that it's shooting is focussed on the other HF.





so how can he do this? because (p.74), he has "made a move that ends further away from the that enemy battle group", as indicated by the nearest point - the small blue arrow.

the fact that this is an obvious exploit of the intention of the rule (as indicated in the diagram on p.74) is beside the point. i suggested that this interpretation isn't the intention and received a thorough rules-lawyering!

so... it's legal. but isn't it just a bit cheesy?

No. The LH aren't going to just sit round for no effect.

anyone other than phil... ?

I may be getting typecast here

Yes, it is a legal move.

From looking at the diagram I suspect that the left hand HF would be able to move so as to prevent the LH from moving backwards in their next turn and the HF being shot at can probably move so that the LH won't be able to turn either. That to me seems to be a pretty bad place to be for the LH and I would think there is a decent chance that the end result will be a dead BG of LH in a couple of turns time.

In my experience trying to get tricksy with LH infront of heavy troops often ends in pain for the LH. Ganging up on the end of a line or around flanks etc. fine, odd angle within 2 MU not fine.

Quite. In this example what do the Light Horse do when the HF on the left form a single column and end up behind them blocking any evade and not allowing the LH to turn 90 degrees in their next movement phase on account of their not being room?

Answer - dead light horse. That is why it isn't cheesy, but stupid.

hammy wrote:Yes, it is a legal move.

From looking at the diagram I suspect that the left hand HF would be able to move so as to prevent the LH from moving backwards in their next turn and the HF being shot at can probably move so that the LH won't be able to turn either. That to me seems to be a pretty bad place to be for the LH and I would think there is a decent chance that the end result will be a dead BG of LH in a couple of turns time.

In my experience trying to get tricksy with LH infront of heavy troops often ends in pain for the LH. Ganging up on the end of a line or around flanks etc. fine, odd angle within 2 MU not fine.

the diagram is a little out of scale. the LH was wheeled further round, and little further to the right.

that said, getting around the preventing then moving is something i hadn't thought of, mostly being outraged at the time that the rules let players get away with this sort of bumpf.

that said, getting around the preventing then moving is something i hadn't thought of,

Always good to explore new opportunities.

As the other guys said - yes it is legal - but it should hurt them in the long run.

Another problem for the orange LH is that one of the HF blocks can now declare a flank charge on them and they no longer get the option of evading to their rear. Hence, the HF player can now to an extent tell the LH which direction to move in. Sound like a possible cohesion test on one HF vs maybe lots of trouble for the LH player.

i remembered why i wasn't moving forward in column.

10 BG of LH jav is not something an 8 of pikes wants to be approaching in a narrow frontage.