Slitherine

Thats the title of the rules section that Mr Ruddock says allows a player to do this
(Both BG are knights facing each other immediately after impact)
Expand from
__
__



To
__
__



Because the rules say he can expand a file at the start of movement in his turn, but don't specify where

So feeding more bases in does not actually need to feed more bases in

He also stated that some secret group that a going to write some more rules, or clarify them depending on your opinion, would all back him up. (I'm not talking about Rob here, he can't even keep his cross dressing secret)

Just a quick question Phil from the cross-dressing maestro........................

Why would he want to do this?

He could have a 6 dice against 4 dice melee by expanding on the other side but instead wants an even fight?

Is yours just a bad example?

I have had it done to me under different circumstances so the opponent can maintain an overlap when I expand in my turn.

Rob

I've never played it that way. I was under the impression that V1 said 'into an existing overlap' but I may be wrong. I can't find my rules (and haven't looked too hard) and don't have V2 so I'm pretty useless, but couldn't resist.

Rob wrote:Why

Because expanding into the correct position meant that after expanding further left in my turn when I beat him I would be pursuing into other enemy troops

Raven wrote:I've never played it that way

Nor has anybody else I've seen. The rules now (if they ever did) do not say into overlap. But it is the previous paragraph about adding to melee that makes this interpretation rubbish. That paragraph states expansion is to feed more bases into existing melee, the further bullet points, of which this is one, then say how it can be done

After many years of playing the rules people have started reading bits of them in isolation and applying just that bit. (See the not too previous thread about not being able to expand into contact whith a new BG that has not already fought melee)

I think that the situation where you can see it better is:





so when he goes:





the opponent can go:






But still is 2 dice down

titanu wrote:I think that the situation where you can see it better is:





so when he (illegally) goes:





the opponent can go:






But still is 2 dice down

This wasn't the situation anyway but is still wrong. The expansion does not feed bases into an existing melee.

philqw78 wrote:Thats the title of the rules section that Mr Ruddock says allows a player to do this
(Both BG are knights facing each other immediately after impact)
Expand from
__
__



To
__
__



Because the rules say he can expand a file at the start of movement in his turn, but don't specify where

So feeding more bases in does not actually need to feed more bases in

He also stated that some secret group that a going to write some more rules, or clarify them depending on your opinion, would all back him up. (I'm not talking about Rob here, he can't even keep his cross dressing secret)

Yes I play it this way. The Phasing player gets to expand. There is nothing that says they must do so to match an enemy overlap. You can expand it where you like.

Whenever opponent's query it, we read the rule - which just says I can expand out and doesn't say I have to on one side or the other. They then moan a bit, saying that the spirit of the rule is a spreading melee so that eventually everyone fights. Then they, grumbling, expand a file to the right to match my overlap. And then I point out that all my bases are now fighting and the melee has now spread.

philqw78 wrote:

titanu wrote:I think that the situation where you can see it better is:





so when he (illegally) goes:





the opponent can go:






But still is 2 dice down

This wasn't the situation anyway but is still wrong. The expansion does not feed bases into an existing melee.

All yellow is obliged to do is expand, if he wants to. There is no requirement to expand to an overlap position in the rules. And it seems to me that all the yellow bases are fighting at the end of the movement phase.

Balderdash. The expansion is to feed more bases into an existing melee. Thats what the rules say. Yellow's expansion does not feed more bases in.

And it seems to me that all the yellow bases are fighting at the end of the movement phase

Irrellevant, at the time of expansion they are nowhere near melee

You are reading the bullet that allows the expansion in isolation from the paragraph above.

Conceptually I agree with Phil. But I can see that the rules are not explicit enough to back him up. The argument that all the yellow bases end up in combat only holds in this example. If the enemy didn't have another base to expand, or chose not to expand, then yellow have expanded to a position where they won't fight - ie run away from combat.

However, until and unless there is a change in the wording of the rules this is what they allow.

Happy to be proven wrong, as it would mean the several times people have told me i can't do this and we walk through the mechanism I've been wrong.

All I'm saying is what the rule mechanism actually says. You seem to be arguing that it doesn't feel right?

There is a part of the mechanism that says the non active player can only match an existing overlap. Can you point me to the rule that says that the active player must match an existing overlap or create a new one?

Yes you can expand like that because the rules allow it.

The reason the rules allow it is the reason that Bob points out.

What you are saying Graham and Richard is that the action of feeding more bases into an existing melee does not actually have to feed more bases into an existing melee. Seems ridiculous that the mechanism should be called that.

But there you go. Something else to exploit

rbodleyscott wrote:Yes you can do that because the rules allow it.

The reason the rules allow it is the reason that Bob points out.

What is this reason. Bob gives an example, and what if green does not expand?

philqw78 wrote:

rbodleyscott wrote:Yes you can do that because the rules allow it.

The reason the rules allow it is the reason that Bob points out.

What is this reason. Bob gives an example, and what if green does not expand?

Then that is green's prerogative. However, if your interpretation was correct then green could expand on that side, but yellow couldn't, which is not what the rules intend (or say).

Anyway, I don't see any need to get into a further discussion on the matter.

1) The rules allow it.
2) That is what is intended. The alternative would have been to give the active player a second chance to expand after the passive (ooer missus) player has done his expansion, if he hasn't already. An unnecessary complication methinks.

It isn't an exploit, it is what is intended.

OK

I do not think that it really matters which way it is played but as others have said before it would be useful to have a forum/body who can collate and decide and more importantly publish those findings.
IMHO it should be a small and select group who have access to a non-reply section of the forum to publish their findings.
In the words of that nauseating meerkat 'simples'.

All I've got to say is

Ner ner ner ner, ne ner nerrr.

dave_r wrote:All I've got to say is

Ner ner ner ner, ne ner nerrr.

Shouldn't that be "ner ner ne ner nerr" ?

I can take being beaten by Dave's lucky dice, but to be beaten by his rules logic, I'm crushed.