Reaction to flank charge

[RogerGreenwood]

The rules allow a variety of base sizes so this sort of issue is not unexpected. I would like to have rules cut and dried on these but sometimes you have to just agree to let your opponent assume his basing is different.
In this case I would be happy to let the artillery turn as if the base was deeper. After all, he is either losing 10mm of range or getting the supporting infantry 10mm closer to your guns .

[viperofmilan]

I'm sorry, but I still just do not see it. The deployed artillery is a long, thin line of guns. Exactly how does this reorient itself 90 degrees to bring any appreciable fire to bear on a charging enemy unit without becoming inextricably intermixed with the supporting line of infantry. I would argue it cannot. Same reasoning, and same results apply to the infantry in line in this example. I just do not see any justification for allowing these kind of higgledy-piggledy maneuvers and interpenetrations in the RAW. In fact, they appear to be explicitly prohibited on p. 37. If anyone can cite chapter and verse to the contrary, please do.

[RogerGreenwood]

I tend to agree that artillery changing its orientation looks a bit dubious.
To some extent I believe this is related to the alternate move system and the relatively large movement distances. I can rationalise it so some extent in that the opposing sides would be visible to each other for some time and the gunners would presumably be repositioning guns during this period.
I would, however, very happily see a rule change where reorientation was removed from the options in response to a charge.

[Viking709]

Roger I don’t know why but after reading your post I realized that standard basing is 30x30 and as we use 40mm width but only 30mm depth but should consider it 40mm deep so a reorient of artillery would not interpenetrate the unit behind

[zeitoun]

hi Viperofmilan,

just to be sure about interpenetration , do you allow this situation ? We currently have a discussion about this issue and we want to understand your point of vue .

wheel.jpg (14.33 Kio) Vu 9055 fois

Regards
Olivier M

[RogerGreenwood]

This was an issue in the DBMM rule set. It was solved by the rule stating something like: "It is always permitted for one corner only of a base to pass through another base during a move."
(Credit the great author Phil Barker with this one.)

[viperofmilan]

If I understand your diagram, what you are illustrating is a wheel and not a reorientation which is defined as a "spin" on the unit's center. I don't know that this has come up yet in one of our games, but I suspect we would be ok with this as the unit is not ending it's move in the middle of another unit. In the reorientation examples originally presented, the reorienting unit ends it's move occupying the same space as another unit. I would never allow this.

[zeitoun]

I agree with you. If the unit doesn't overlap another at the end of the move it's ok.

But , ( because with me there is always a "But" )

for the artillery ( And only for it , not for the infantry unit in the previous diagram) i don't see what is wrong. The artillery, made an "reorientation" and at the end it doesn't overlap the infantry.
If the infantry made also a reorientation , i agree these two units overlap each other. So No . For the artillery only , no issue.

[RogerGreenwood]

We seem to be agreed on what should work. I have some sympathy for the author. Writing clear rules for 'passage of lines' is not an easy task.
When units retreat through others and generals are in the way, I just move the general. If another unit is there I keep moving the retreating unit until there is space for it. Neither of these quite common events are really covered by the rules. It would be nice to have these issues addressed.
I don't want to complain too much though. The BE system is a very nice rule set.

[viperofmilan]

I generally agree with you Roger. Walt and I have played it from the beginning that a unit failing a morale test and falling back 2 UD passes through any friendly unit within 2 UD of it's rear. A careful reading of the rules seems to indicate that this is not correct as unit movement rates are never to be exceeded (p. 35, How to move, 5th bullet) and units must be able to move clear of any unit passed through (p. 37, Passage of Lines, 3rd bullet). Would be very nice to know what Herve intended.