Conforming question (with photo)

[larrydunn]

Hi, here's a photo of a situation that arose:



The unit with the desert bases is Nubian warriors who have attacked a BG of Red Ti subjects. As you can see the Red Ti were in a BL of three units when attacked -- I have crudely marked the image to show where the BG borders are in that BL.

Look closely and you will see that the very slight stepping forward that was done by the Nubians place them into an overhang position with the lefthand unit of Red Ti subjects, but not base contact. By a minor miracle the unit that was attacked managed to survive the impact phase in good morale, so now it's time for the Nubians to conform.

How do they do it? Do they slide to the right and now place themselves in base contact with the lefthand unit of Red Ti subjects, do they slide to their left so that they have an overlap against the unit they charged, or do they stay where they are, in stepped-forward formation? Thanks.

[SirGarnet]

Two things from looking at your photo.

In Impact each Nubian base obviously fought the opponent to its right front, and they are already each more lined up with the opponent to right front.

So they slide right to line up for melee.

I assume the base in the third rank of Nubians is a Commander, so there won't be any feeding troops into combat this phase.

Mike

[Dakadave]

So the other horde BG is pulled into the fight during Melee?

[SirGarnet]

The Impact was 5 bases wide so the BG to the right was already involved with 1 base in Impact. In melee, after conforming, they would get an overlap as well.

Mike

[larrydunn]

The Impact was 5 bases wide so the BG to the right was already involved with 1 base in Impact. In melee, after conforming, they would get an overlap as well.

Mike

Nope, that's the whole point. The unit to the right (of the Nubians) was not involved in the impact, as the Nubians had no bases in contact with it. The five front rank elements of Nubians were in contact with the four front rank elements of the Red Ti subjects, so each fought with four bases (eight dice). If the Nubian unit slides right, it will come into contact with the left Red ti unit (I mean, the one to the right in the photograph), which it was not in contact with in Impact. nothing I see in the conforming rules says that you can contact a new unit by conforming.

[SirGarnet]

Sorry, I didn't see you came in at a slight angle. Only 4 Impacts, but if my eyes are right then the minimum change in your BG to reform and conform is to line up to the right rather than the left.

Contacting the other Red BG is not a problem. They are already in close combat as overlaps if aligned on their friends, and this broadens the fight just like feeding troops into melee can do. The paragraph starting on p70 and ending on p71 notes that conforming may result in more enemy bases being contacted.

Mike

[larrydunn]

Contacting the other Red BG is not a problem. They are already in close combat as overlaps if aligned on their friends, and this broadens the fight just like feeding troops into melee can do.

Well, as of right now (Nubian Manouevre) the righthand Red Ti unit is not in the close combat as an overlap at all, as it's not in corner contact with the Nubians, nor are they in full side edge contact with a friendly unit that is in full edge contact with an enemy base. Also, even if they were, fighting only as an overlap is not the same as being engaged in close combat -- on page 50 it states that a unit that fought only as an overlap is free to move away, charge someone else, etc. So overlap fighting is not really the same as being locked in combat. Moving the Nubians into edge contact would lock the Red Ti unit into close combat and thus change their current status in a pretty serious way, so I need to be sure it's legal per the rules.

The paragraph starting on p70 and ending on p71 notes that conforming may result in more enemy bases being contacted.

That pertains to more bases in the BGs fighting, though. My central problem is that nothing in the conforming rules says you can drag a new enemy BG into the combat by the act of conforming with an existing enemy BG opponent. In fact, the other manuever rules give the circumstances under which you can contact an enemy BG during the Manouevre Phase, and this is not one of them. (Take a look at p. 75 in particular -- you can only contact an enemy BG in the manouevre phase if you move up to be in overlap position. This is not such a situation.)

I've actually become increasingly convinced that there are only two likely options here -- stay where they are, or shift left. I imagine that shifting left is the way to go as it does what it's supposed to do -- place the bases in full edge and corner contact. I think leaving them where they are is only required when that is not possible, and it is possible here, even though it moves the elements more than if they had shifted right. The problem with shifting right is that it places the Nubian unit in edge contact with a new enemy unit, which as far as I can see is not allowed during the manouevre phase. Would appreciate confirmation from someone on the FoG team though if you would. Thanks.

[SirGarnet]

The paragraph starting on p70 and ending on p71 notes that conforming may result in more enemy bases being contacted.

That pertains to more bases in the BGs fighting, though. My central problem is that nothing in the conforming rules says you can drag a new enemy BG into the combat by the act of conforming with an existing enemy BG opponent.

I just disagree -- I don't think it needs to say more than conforming with "enemy bases" to cover any bases of the enemy available. Also, I don't think you can extrapolate from rules relating to movement in the later Red Ti manoeuvre phase to Nubian conforming in the Nubian manoeuvre phase.

[nikgaukroger]

Conform right IMO - the fact it'll mean they are then overlapped as well is, IMO, not an issue. Basically I agree with MikeK

[Jason_Langlois]

I'd agree with MikeK as well, for as little as that counts.

The conforming rules say you must[emphasis original] pivot and/or slide bases by the minimum necessary to conform to enemy bases in contact. The exceptions don't include "bringing new enemy into contact", and in fact, state explicitly that in some cases conforming can bring additional enemy bases into contact.

From your photo, the minimum slide would be to the right, and so bring the other forces into the combat.

[larrydunn]

I just disagree -- I don't think it needs to say more than conforming with "enemy bases" to cover any bases of the enemy available. Also, I don't think you can extrapolate from rules relating to movement in the later Red Ti manoeuvre phase to Nubian conforming in the Nubian manoeuvre phase.

I'm still from Missouri on this. The rules always tell you specifically when you can engage an enemy unit in close combat. They don't say anything about it here. The fact that additional enemy bases could be contacted by a conform does not necessarily mean that new BGs can be attacked by the unit.

If this were allowed it could lead to gaming the system. You could launch charges that only contacted one unit in the impact phase, but then, if that unit still stood firm instead of buckling under the charge, you could suck the nearby unit into the resulting melee combat too.

And it could lead to Skirmishers attacking non-skirmishers without having to take a CMT. For instance, change my scenario around a bit. Imagine the Nubian Warriors, and the unit they first contacted, are Light Foot. That would mean that the conform allows my LF to melee the second enemy unit, now contacted by conforming, without a CMT. Same applies to other troops who need to pass a CMT. This would mean you could now using conforming to put LF into full edge contact with an (otherwise prohibited) enemy BG without having to pass the CMT.

Actually the same question applies to feeding more bases into a melee -- can an expansion on an existing combat drag nearby units in? I'm completely happy to do it however it was meant to be done, but IMO the overall scheme of the rules suggests to me that conforming (and feeding more bases in) is not a way to expand the combat to new enemy units.

[rogerg]

The only way a nearby BG can be 'sucked in' during conforming is if it is lined up in an overlap position. In any other circumstances the bases conforming could not conform fully so would not conform. In most circumstances the owners want them to be 'sucked in' to the melee to get the overlaps. As noted, this would be a way to drag skirmishers into a melee and prevent them evading. It does beg questions about why the skirmishers are there in the first place. In any case, the situation is so easy to avoid by offsetting the BG that it is not likely to happen to anyone twice.

[SirGarnet]

If this were allowed it could lead to gaming the system. You could launch charges that only contacted one unit in the impact phase, but then, if that unit still stood firm instead of buckling under the charge, you could suck the nearby unit into the resulting melee combat too.

Yes, if the other BG is lined up as part of the same battleline in overlap.

And it could lead to Skirmishers attacking non-skirmishers without having to take a CMT. For instance, change my scenario around a bit. Imagine the Nubian Warriors, and the unit they first contacted, are Light Foot. That would mean that the conform allows my LF to melee the second enemy unit, now contacted by conforming, without a CMT. Same applies to other troops who need to pass a CMT. This would mean you could now using conforming to put LF into full edge contact with an (otherwise prohibited) enemy BG without having to pass the CMT.

Yes, you are right. The Skirmishers needa CMT to charge, not to enter Melee other ways. Page 76-78 gives soem other ways troops get into Melee without a charge.

Actually the same question applies to feeding more bases into a melee -- can an expansion on an existing combat drag nearby units in?

Yes, we do that too.

I look at the thrust of the rules as getting troops into the fight and having combats spread. I would agree that the editorial goal of reducing verbiage can conflict with what would be helpful surplus or redundant language that really nails down an issue.

[larrydunn]

I can see why you play it the way you do, and I agree that on some points it makes sense. For me, there are some issues with doing it that way -- IMO it's not a matter of surplus language that's missing, it's making an intuition about something that's otherwise always closely described. Until there's a clarification, I guess different people can play it differently. I do appreciate your picking up the issue and taking a look at it though.