Slitherine

Page 119. In the example 'Troops eligible to fight in melee' file 'X' "can fight as an overlap". However Page 112 final bullet states "A file that can contribute to close combat to its front ... by creating a Point of Advantage (PoA) or denying the enemy a PoA, cannot fight as an overlap". As file 'X' is part of giving protection to the musketeer files adjacent to 'X', by a strict reading they can't be fighting as overlap (unless overlap does not count as 'close combat to its front'). I believe that the intent is that they can count as overlap and I have always played, and seen it played, that way but I realise it could be read that they don't.

Except, as I see it, X is not able to "contribute to close combat to its front." So it is eligible to fight as an overlap.

B

Thanks, that it good. I hope you are right (for the game's sake)

However I have looked and can't see where that phrase is defined (I have a vague recollection of reading it but can't pin it down). Do you have any pointers?

I don't think I have ever seen 'close combat to front' defined. It seems fairly clear.

I believe unless you are in front base to base contact with an enemy base you are not in melee, so standing beside a base that is in base contact with an enemy base allows you to become an overlap.
I am pretty sure the only restrictions are are you adding POA's or dice to the combat, if you are you can't count as an overlap. I don't think giving protection would exclude you from being an overlap.

deadtorius wrote:I believe unless you are in front base to base contact with an enemy base you are not in melee, so standing beside a base that is in base contact with an enemy base allows you to become an overlap.
I am pretty sure the only restrictions are are you adding POA's or dice to the combat, if you are you can't count as an overlap. I don't think giving protection would exclude you from being an overlap.

Of course it doesn't. Tim is just being Tim, and has been out-rule-lawyered by Blathergut.

Richard

As written it does, sadly. I hoped that somewhere 'close combat to front' was defined to remove my concern. However now you have confirmed that my reading is wrong I will continue to play it they way it is confirmed in this thread.

timmy1 wrote:As written it does, sadly.

Well we will have to agree to disagree on that point. However, as your reading appears to be in a minority of one, I don't think we really have an issue here.