Kinked Columns v2

[dave_r]

What happens when a kinked column turns 180 degrees? Does it reform on the rear edge and remove the kink or does it keep the kink?

If you turn 90 degrees you lose the kink, but its not clear what happens when turning 180.

My opponent didn't take more than 40 photos, so at least one of these should be able to show this clearly

[titanu]

So if we have:


Do this:

Or this:

[grahambriggs]

Hmm. Doesn't the rule say that the kink remains unitl all bases pass the point of the kink? If you turn around they are not going to do that.

[philqw78]

So they cannot turn until they pass the point of kink.

[ShrubMiK]

It sounds reasonable that there should be some restriction on freedom of movement until the kink is cleared.

However it would also seem reasonable that every man should be able to turn 180, and you have a kinked column still but facing the other way.

Clearing the kink by turning 90 I'm not sure about...first thought is that it is unreasonable, but second thought is that a 90 degree turn is never just a case of each man turning 90 degree, and if it is assumed there is always a certain amount of people scurrying about like headless chickens to assume their new place in the formation it doesn't really matter if they are scurrying from a kinky place.

Not something I recall seeing anything about in the rulebook as yet, will have to go away and read a bit more carefully!

[titanu]

However it would also seem reasonable that every man should be able to turn 180, and you have a kinked column still but facing the other way.

Yes but this does NOT happen as the old front rank now becomes the new front rank etc. See example where the legionaries become the new front rank and the LF bows that were the 'rear' now jump back to rank 3.

[ShrubMiK]

Ah - yes, good point!

[batesmotel]

As an ancillary question, do kinked columns get to automatically reform?

Under Battle Group Formations (p. 4-2), columns are listed as one of the exception cases from normal rectangular formations. There is no mention of reforming for columns.

Under Reforming (p. 10-1):

If, as a consequence of previous events, (other than forming orb or depicting adverse cohesion states), a battle group is no longer in normal formation, it can reform in either side's maneuver phase.

So, it seems like a kinked column can reform. As a further question, since a BG reforming can reform "facing the direction faced by any of its bases (player's choice)", would this allow the column in the photos in this thread to reform as a column facing either toward the Norht or to the SouthWest (with North at the top of the photo)?

As a further corollary, would a column that ended with 2 90 degree kinks have the option to reform facing in any of 3 possible directions?

Chris

p.s. I still think the rules would have been better without the inclusion of kinked columns altogether, but since they are still included, the rules really do need to address all the idiosyncracies they cause,

[dave_r]

p.s. I still think the rules would have been better without the inclusion of kinked columns altogether, but since they are still included, the rules really do need to address all the idiosyncracies they cause,

Exactly. I argued against Kinked Columns in the beta test. Now that they can't charge, they are quite important whereas before it really didn't make a massive amount of difference, so people were not that bothered.

It would be nice to get an informed opinion of this or something added to the FAQ's / errata.

[nikgaukroger]

There is no intention that kinked columns can reform. As to date it has hardly been a frequently asked question it has not been FAQed.

[dave_r]

There is no intention that kinked columns can reform. As to date it has hardly been a frequently asked question it has not been FAQed.

So what happens when a kinked column turns 180 degrees then?

[iversonjm]

There is no intention that kinked columns can reform. As to date it has hardly been a frequently asked question it has not been FAQed.

Oh G*D not this sillyness again. What other possible reason could there be to adding kinked columns to the list of non-normal formations on p.23 of the v. 2 rules than to confirm that they can reform?

Unless v.2 defines the term "normal formation" differently from v.1/p.23 somewhere that I haven't found, no FAQ answer is necessary, as the rules as written on p. 76 specifically allow reformation.

[nikgaukroger]

Oh G*D not this sillyness again. What other possible reason could there be to adding kinked columns to the list of non-normal formations on p.23 of the v. 2 rules than to confirm that they can reform?

The list of exceptions to the general rule on formations is there to explain that they are allowed rather than being linked to reforming - you will note that cases 2 and 3 mention reforming whilst the others do not and in the case of 5, Orb, you cannot reform out of it.

BTW I should have said "IIRC there is no intention that kinked columns can reform." - what I posted sounds too definite and I am not 100% certain in all honesty and Richard may well contradict me. Apologies for the omission of "IIRC"

[nikgaukroger]

So what happens when a kinked column turns 180 degrees then?

It follows the rules for turning 180 degrees

[philqw78]

They cannot turn until they pass the kink

[iversonjm]

The list of exceptions to the general rule on formations is there to explain that they are allowed rather than being linked to reforming - you will note that cases 2 and 3 mention reforming whilst the others do not and in the case of 5, Orb, you cannot reform out of it.

P. 76 contradicts this interpretation. It states, explicitly, that the only non-normal (which has always meant non-rectangular) formations that cannot reform are "Orb[s] and [those] depicting adverse cohesion states." As a kinked column is neither of these, it can reform by the letter of the rules. Also, although the p.23 cases 2 & 3 mention reforming, case 4 (stepped forward files from expansion) does not, but one can reform to get out of it once a fight is over. It would seem to follow that of mention reforming in the p. 23 examples isn't dispositive of a formation's ability to do so.

Btw, if the p.23 exceptions don't define non-normal formations, then we are left with no definition for a "normal formation."

[nikgaukroger]

Btw, if the p.23 exceptions don't define non-normal formations, then we are left with no definition for a "normal formation."

Not that anyone has claimed there is no such definition - it clearly does as it lists formations that are allowed as exceptions to the rectangular one.

Take your point on the later page. As for the issue I'll await Richard's view as he will have a better knowledge of the intention than I, and then perhaps a clarification/FAQ may be necessary.

[iversonjm]

Btw, if the p.23 exceptions don't define non-normal formations, then we are left with no definition for a "normal formation."

Not that anyone has claimed there is no such definition - it clearly does as it lists formations that are allowed as exceptions to the rectangular one.

I agree with you on the definition, however people have in past debates claimed that the p.23 exceptions don't equate with non-"normal" formations for purposes of reforming.

[iversonjm]

They cannot turn until they pass the kink

Why?

And if so, can they expand before they pass the kink? Why is expanding treated differently from turning?

And if it can't expand, doesn't that mean that a unit in kinked column can be taken out of the game by planting a unit of skirmishers in front of them so they can't advance?

[gozerius]

A kinked column cannot reform because it is specifically listed as an exception to the normal rule on maintaining a rectangular formation. Since a player is permitted to voluntarily create a kinked column, he can't then uncreate it by reforming. Also, were a kinked column allowed to reform, it could only reform on its front rank base, because all other bases are behind it, regardless of which direction they are facing, even if you have wheeled the column 180 degrees, which requires 2 moves to accomplish. The reform rule is not there to permit crack the whip formation changes for columns. On the other hand, Battle wagons are only ever treated as a column if on a road. Does this mean that the entire 4 base deep file wheels off the front corner of the lead base?