Page 1 of 2
Turn 90 or 180 and advance
Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:37 pm
by IanP
Hi all.
This may have been covered before, but I couldn't find anything in a search of previous posts.
I'm still new to the game so this may be basic but:
"Turn 90 deg with a simple advance before or after".
Does the whole of the advance have to occur prior to, or subsequent to the turn? Or can you split the advance, part before and part after? I supose if you split it, it technically becomes two advances, even if you don't exceed the max move for the troop type.
Thanks.
Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:59 pm
by nikgaukroger
All before or all after.
1 wide column 4 bases deep turns 90 degrees
Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:44 am
by KiwiWarlord
I have a column of Cav 1 base wide x 4 bases deep, throw & pass a CMT, advance 5 Mus and turn 90 degrees.
Question : what formation is the BG in ?
Same question for a BG of LF archers 1 x 8 bases deep ?
Thanks
Brian
Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:01 am
by Robert241167
Hi Warlord
They would be just wide enough after the turn so that they would cover more than their original depth before the turn. The remaining bases would fill in behind.
Sorry for not being more specific with reference to the book but just setting off to work.
Rob
Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:04 am
by hammy
The cavalry would be 3 wide with 1 base in the rear rank.
A column of light foot turns into a 2 deep line.
Column turning 90 degrees
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:41 am
by KiwiWarlord
Thanks for that.
Cav 3 in front rank, 1 in the rear rank
LF 4 in each rank.
Cheers
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:18 pm
by peterrjohnston
hammy wrote:The cavalry would be 3 wide with 1 base in the rear rank.
A column of light foot turns into a 2 deep line.
So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:22 pm
by paulcummins
but is part of the way the rules work
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:13 pm
by nikgaukroger
Never seen it played any other way - can something that slightly restricts the flexibility of Cv be such a terrible thing?
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:19 pm
by david53
peterrjohnston wrote:hammy wrote:The cavalry would be 3 wide with 1 base in the rear rank.
A column of light foot turns into a 2 deep line.
So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.
Have I missed something here
A Cavalry BG in line passes CMT then either moves five MU or turns 90 degress and then moves 5 MU weres this extra turn back happens?
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:44 pm
by philqw78
david53 wrote:Have I missed something here
A Cavalry BG in line passes CMT then either moves five MU or turns 90 degress and then moves 5 MU weres this extra turn back happens?
The second move Dave
add your own D'oh if you want
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:06 pm
by peterrjohnston
nikgaukroger wrote:Never seen it played any other way - can something that slightly restricts the flexibility of Cv be such a terrible thing?
It's all mounted on 3 cm deep bases obviously, just not cavalry, although LH have more options. However, chariots obviously have some innate ability to turn back into formation better - do they use handbrake turns perhaps? Even elephants can do it "properly", albeit somewhat slowly.
Seriously, it's a surprise to me because one would expect the turn back formation to be the same, not an artefact of the rules and base depths, so I hadn't really considered you end up with this frankly dumb 3 by 1 formation. The idea that mounted lead off to column to the side, then turn back to face from column, but in a mess unless riding a chariot or an elephant, is, well, like I said, ridiculous.
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:17 pm
by babyshark
philqw78 wrote:david53 wrote:Have I missed something here
A Cavalry BG in line passes CMT then either moves five MU or turns 90 degress and then moves 5 MU weres this extra turn back happens?
The second move Dave
add your own D'oh if you want
To be clear, that second move happens next turn. The second move in the same turn must come from the "advances" list.
Marc
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:24 pm
by philqw78
babyshark wrote:To be clear, that second move happens next turn. The second move in the same turn must come from the "advances" list.
Marc
Just trying to add to Dave's confusion. You spoiled my fun.
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 11:10 pm
by kal5056
peterrjohnston wrote:hammy wrote:The cavalry would be 3 wide with 1 base in the rear rank.
A column of light foot turns into a 2 deep line.
So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.
This is one of tghe key ways to combat a shooty cav army because when they turn back (out of the line into the 3 + 1 formation) they can not evade that turn util the expand in thier next movement phase. If this were not the case they could keep slipping to your side as well as thier rear to avoid contact. This would lead to even more chasing of the little Bastiches around the table.
Please don't advocate anything that makes Cav more slippery.
Gino
SMAC
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 7:37 am
by kevinj
So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.
And if it turns 90 degrees again it's 2 wide and 2 deep!
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:25 am
by Intothevalley
kevinj wrote:So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.
And if it turns 90 degrees again it's 2 wide and 2 deep!
So if a BG of cavalry kept on turning to infinity, would it end up as a black hole?
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:25 am
by ShrubMiK
Quite likely )
fopr some reason, though, I'm more reminded of those little "glider" shapes that flit across the screen in the old life game:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life
Okay, not quite the same shape, but similar behaviour!
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:55 am
by david53
philqw78 wrote:babyshark wrote:To be clear, that second move happens next turn. The second move in the same turn must come from the "advances" list.
Marc
Just trying to add to Dave's confusion. You spoiled my fun.
There was me all confused until now, you Phil are nothing short off a bounder and a cad sir?
Methinks you need a good whipping

Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:00 pm
by Ghaznavid
peterrjohnston wrote:nikgaukroger wrote:Never seen it played any other way - can something that slightly restricts the flexibility of Cv be such a terrible thing?
It's all mounted on 3 cm deep bases obviously, just not cavalry, although LH have more options. However, chariots obviously have some innate ability to turn back into formation better - do they use handbrake turns perhaps? Even elephants can do it "properly", albeit somewhat slowly.
Seriously, it's a surprise to me because one would expect the turn back formation to be the same, not an artefact of the rules and base depths, so I hadn't really considered you end up with this frankly dumb 3 by 1 formation. The idea that mounted lead off to column to the side, then turn back to face from column, but in a mess unless riding a chariot or an elephant, is, well, like I said, ridiculous.
I've to agree, while we play it as written it's somewhat odd that Chariots are more manoeuvrable then Cv. I'm therefore continually tempted to base my Cv on slightly deeper (i.e. square) bases and claim I also play another system with them were this is required if someone objects.
