Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

Frank Gilson · Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:33 pm Post subject: Contraction and just-out-of-range

Does anyone have prior experience with the following? Or, could you search these forums for possibly prior posts concerning the below?

Our situation:
A
A

BB

A is a 2E unit, 1E wide, which has completed its approach move at its exact charge reach from B, a 2E unit 2E wide.

A is 'straight on' and opposite B's left hand element.

B wants to now contract, so that if A were to move straight ahead, it would pass right by B (were it able to do so, other rules notwithstanding).

I would rule that if A is the nearest known enemy unit that B is getting farther away and thus cannot contract during Approach moves.

I would also rules that should B contract in a counter (or retirement), A is now out of charge reach and cannot declare a charge on B.

Also, should B contract A may now be out of close shooting range, or any shooting range, of B depending on the distance between them and A's missile weapon (should it have one).

Anybody recall any prior experience with this? ...or can anyone find a forum post herein about it?

Mark Stone · Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 11:25 pm Post subject:

I don't have my rules in front of me (I'll try and remember to check when I get home), but my recollection is that there is language in the rules that states that distance between two bodies is measured corner to corner from the nearest corners, in which case the move you describe is not getting farther away and does not alter shooting ranges. Charge eligibility I'm less clear on. One could argue that charge range requires edge to edge contact, where an edge is a line segment, not a point. In that case some sort of pivot would be required, meaning the unit is now out of charge range.

As a matter of habit I have always seen this played as maintaining distance and remaining withing shooting range. Not all of our habits are correct, however.

Frank Gilson · Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 11:53 pm Post subject: things that may apply

I'll list some things that may apply, in no particular order:
6.162 Charge Reach
"A body's charge reach is defined as its tactical move distance in the terrain between it an a potential target." then "Charge reach is measure to the point of first contact with the target body."

8.6 Shooting Ranges
"When adjudicating Shooting, ranges are measured form the front (rear for evaders, any for elements with a 360 degree arc) face of each shooting element to its priority target element's base."

And...that's all I can find. Neither of which really resolve my question here.

RaphaelC · Recruit Joined: 03 Sep 2013 Posts: 79

From 8-3 Shooting Arcs (P76) isn't unit B still considered to be in close range of unit A?

Raphael

Frank Gilson · Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:05 pm Post subject: still in arc, but

Unit B is still in Shooting Arc of A, because A gets to use a phantom element to the side to give Arc.

However, Shooting Arc has nothing to do with determining shooting range. And, you DO NOT get a phantom element to the side to determine range.

jamiepwhite · Recruit Joined: 21 Apr 2006 Posts: 213 Location: Florida

After the contraction of unit B, the front right corner of unit A would still be exactly the charge move distance away from the front left corner of the contracted unit B. So A charges normally, contacts corner to corner, and then is granted extra to movement to conform if possible.

Frank Gilson · Posted: Thu May 01, 2014 10:33 pm Post subject: that's one interp

That is one interpretation that could be issued with regard to this situation.

However, the rules do not specifically state this anywhere I can find.

It has to due with implicit assumptions about the width of lines and measurement.

You are assuming that a line, in fact, the line between unit B's elements, has zero width AND in fact that the touching corners of those two elements are, given the line between them has zero width, are in the same place.

However, on the tabletop, if you were to perform the contraction of B as I mention and then move A straight ahead, it never contacts B.

That's because the line between B's elements, in reality, has some width, however narrow.

Another valid interpretation exists...the one that uses a line with some width, however small, A cannot charge B, and B (if A the nearest within 240) cannot Approach to get farther away, and shooting range between them has gotten slightly longer.

Ed Kollmer · Centurion Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1018

Frank:
I have been thinking about this and reading the posts.
I think that there are really only two interpretations.
the ABSTRACT and ACTUAL.
In the first; the line has no width and the unit is in or it is not.
It is very simple.
The second is the line does have width and just by definition the unit must be out and the unit is out if the line has width or it is very IN.
Needless, this is abstract. Saying that, if the unit is at charge than it must be IN.