Slitherine

At BayFog we had the situation where a unit 3 bases wide charged into another unit also 3 bases wide. The charged unit had a friend at its side which WOULD have fought as an overlap in the melee phase. The charger was in three ranks and wanted to expand bases into the combat but with the 'overlapping' bases. If you read page 80 It says you are allowed to do this if:
The new enemy battle group was ALREADY fighting as an overlap.

So was the unit, in a position to be an overlap, 'already fighting' as only the impact phase had occurred.

This is permitted. A base in an overlap position is eligible to be expanded into. The bullet on page 80 is a prohibition from expanding into a battle group that is in corner contact, but not qualifying as an overlap.
Close combat exists from the point that impact combat is initiated. So even if the BG wasn't involved in the impact combat, once you conform into corner contact with it, if it is eligible to fight as an overlap, it is part of the combat.

This-





to





but not:
X
X
X
X
X
to
X
X
X
X

But the rule says the base expanded into must already have fought. It hasn't, it's eligible to in the future but hasn't already.

We've been playing it wrong for years.

philqw78 wrote:We've been playing it wrong for years.

Give back all your prize money!!!

philqw78 wrote:But the rule says the base expanded into must already have fought. It hasn't, it's eligible to in the future but hasn't already.

We've been playing it wrong for years.

_you_ have been playing it wrong for years. I've always played it that you are free to expand into contact. I believe the authors* even clarified this early doors.

* it may have been Terry...

The rule says the enemy must already be fighting as an overlap. It does not say must have already fought as an overlap. If you are in contact with enemy in a valid overlap position, you are fighting.

Close combat is a general term for impact and melee combat. Once such combat has been joined, battle groups are deemed to be in close combat until one side breaks off, breaks and routs, or is destroyed (or a battle group fighting only as an overlap moves away.

Section 13, The Combat Mechanism, page 96.

In this case the adjacent BG is drawn into the close combat the moment its corner comes in contact with the enemy, whether in the impact phase, or more likely, as a result of conforming in the maneuver phase, and is therefore an eligible target for feeding more bases into combat.

I believe the expansion is legal. How was it ruled?

Think about it this way
If you charge in and don't expand the overlap bg still gets the benefit of being in combat against shooting even if they have not actually thrown dice in the Melle phase yet. Perhaps that helps you clear it in your mind.

Gino
SMAC

This came up twice at Bayfog.

I ruled that the expansion was okay the first time but not sure if I was overturned. I think the game then ended amidst the discussions.

It also happened later in my game and it was ruled that I couldn't expand. I felt that it wasn't in the spirit of the game as potentially you could be in a position to be overlapped both sides with bases that could fight you in melee that you weren't allowed to respond too.

As usual depending which page of the rules you refer too you can come up with sound arguments for both stances.

Rob

There's no discussion here, use some common sense.

Yes the unit can expand.
The unit in overlap is fighting.

Anything else is a joke.

[quote="prb4"


Yes the unit can expand.
The unit in overlap is fighting.

Peter i tend to agree with you it is common sense to allow the BG to expand but the rules on page 80 states already fighting and as this was the impact phase it was not.
And this was a BG of LT Foot what was in the overlap position and if you are saying the BG can expand into the skirmish foot are they allowed to evade?? I would say you and most other players would say NO so to me you want to say something one way what the rules clearly say you can't but then let the LT foot get butchered.

Andy E

petedalby wrote:I believe the expansion is legal. How was it ruled?

Pete were it say its Legal?????

andy

Pete were it say its Legal?????

I was happy with the rules on Page 96 as quoted by Gozerius earlier in the thread.

ravenflight wrote:

philqw78 wrote:We've been playing it wrong for years.

Give back all your prize money!!!

Gladly, every last penny.
In fact I'm going to donate it all to the Sober History and Games Society

The rules don't clearly state at which stage the overlapping bases start 'fighting'. In the impact phase they don't seem to be reading that bit. By the melee phase they are. But it's not clear what the situation is in the movement phase.

But this is covered by the FAQ:

5. FEEDING MORE BASES INTO AN EXISTING MELEE
Can more bases be fed into a melee in the manoeuvre phase immediately following the initial impact combat?
Yes. The melee is deemed to exist immediately after resolution of the impact combat.Can a BG in close combat expand into contact with a new enemy BG?
Yes, but only if either of the following circumstances apply:
- The new enemy BG was already fighting it as an overlap.
- The contact does not result in the previously unengaged enemy BG entering close combat (with the expanding BG)
other than as an overlap.

So the melee exists immediately after resolution of the impact combat. So, before the movement phase, the melee exists. Then you get to the movement phase. The melee exists so the new BG is already fighting as an overlap, and you can expand into it.

Thanks Graham - a useful reminder that the V1 FAQs are sometimes still relevant and helpful.