Later Carthaginians v Polybian Romans

[Antigonos]

Posted an illustrated report on what was just a friendly in-house game on me blog at:

http://cameronian-onlyagame.blogspot.com/

I would greatly appreciate it gentlemen if you could let me have your opinions on what I think are 'questionable' moves at the end. Perhaps it was just too good to be true! :D

[John Meunier]

Assuming move distances were legal, I believe the issue is going to be whether the Ps made a legal contact.

No problem at all with the Ax move - if it had the movement.

[Spencer]

It all looks legal and proper, assuming that the move distances were measured correctly.
It is very hard to tell from photo's but it looks like the general recoiled more than one base depth from the flank contact with the Carthage spear.
It also appears that the Aux had just enough move (3") to make the spin and contact the General in the rear. If the general had not recoiled that close to the Aux it may have saved him.

[David Kuijt]

Actually, it looks like the Roman General closing the door was illegal, the bound before. If the earlier picture was the bound before, as it seems to be represented in the text, then the Roman CvGen could not close the door, because (as clearly shown in the image) his right rear corner ended up in bad going. So his move would be 200p, and he exceeded that in getting to the flank-attack position.

[Xavi]

I agree with DK.

Also, the Ps made an illegal contact, since he aligned his front lkeft corner with the right REAR corner of the general. Still, given the situation the Ps ciould have charged legally and then the Ax could have located himself so that when the general turned to face the ps it would end with its door closed. Same result since both are a +2 vs mounted. And legal :)

Coo, report BTW. Nicely done :)

Cheers,

Xavi

[Antigonos]

Thanks guys. Obviously need to keep a cooler head in the heat of battle to maintain precision in the movement. The obvious one I missed was the point raised by DK, the General ends up with a shorter move due to bad going, Doh!

The photos may well have been out. Now I know that if the time and date is not set on the camera, it doesn't necessarily save the shots in the right order, a certain amount of guesswork is needed.

More attention paid in the next fight.

[Spencer]

I've never seen that Psiloi move called illegal before. The general turns to face the Aux since it contacted first. The ps is in legal contact at the end of the move phase when the general turns to face.
Good eyes on that general's corner in the rough in bound 21 David.
It isn't a pure closing the door move since the general did not start in a flanking position.

[Xavi]

The move must be legal when it is made. At least this is how we play it.

Xavi

[John Meunier]

The Cv does not turn until the end of (maybe even technically after) the move phase.

So, the psiloi move must be legal when made - not after the Cv turn.

[David Kuijt]

I've never seen that Psiloi move called illegal before. The general turns to face the Aux since it contacted first. The ps is in legal contact at the end of the move phase when the general turns to face.

As others mention, the move isn't legal when made.

With that said, it is a bit picky to argue that, and I wouldn't bother if I was the one getting hosed. Or if I did mention it, I would show the enemy how to do the legal way of doing it with the same pips and result (in this case, as Xavi pointed out, hitting the Cav with the Ps in the flank, and putting the Aux in a position such that the Cav would be flanked when it turns).

But there are several cases where allowing illegal moves (moves not legal when made, in terms of contact with enemy but not with enemy front corner) causes serious bogosity, and so there is no easy fix right now.


Good eyes on that general's corner in the rough in bound 21 David.


That's why they pay me the big bucks. Hey, wait... DOH!

[Spencer]

The move must be legal when it is made. At least this is how we play it.

Xavi

Duly noted and placed into my sieve of a memory bank.

Thanks Xavi, John and David for the clarification.

[Antigonos]

Please dispel a bee from my bonnet.

The rules say that a '...tactical move by a single element can be in any directions,...'. So, should an element of non-close formation infantry, e.g. Ax, Ps, Wb find themselves with an enemy behind them; is it not sufficient for them to simply turn round without the need to pivot?

To me this would count as a tactical move costing a PIP, the player simply picking the element up and placing it back where it was, facing in the opposite direction. Much simpler and I would hazard as being within the capabilities of the troop type; more complex manoevres I reckon would have been beyond their competency, inviting disaster in the face of the enemy. :)

[Xavi]

Making that move cost 200-ish paces. You must measure from the original position of the corners of the element until their final ñposition. Tjhat means that each corner basically move all along the diagonal defined by the corners of the element itself. That is quite A LOT of movement in DBA terms! :) So yes, you can do it and yes, it counts as a tactical move costing 1 PIP (2 if you out of general range or you are a Hd or hellie etc etc...)

Cheers,

Xavi

[John Meunier]

Much simpler and I would hazard as being within the capabilities of the troop type; more complex manoevres I reckon would have been beyond their competency, inviting disaster in the face of the enemy. :)

Yes, more than an about face probably would be byond the capability of many of the formations represented by DBA, but the rules - for simplicity and playability sake - are not restricted by such concerns.

I've fiddled around with a variant that restricts single element moves much more, but do not play enough to give it a proper test.