Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...

This forum is for any questions about the rules. Post here is you need feedback from the design team.

Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators

Post Reply
ChrisTofalos
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:18 pm

Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...

Post by ChrisTofalos »

Image

Internal Overlaps

I've heard the words 'internal overlap' bandied about on occasion but can't find the term used anywhere in the rules. In the diagram above, are HF A & D overlaps?

Conforming

If two bases are in frontal contact with two enemy bases is there ever an occasion where one side conforms to the other, leaving one base in contact and the other becoming an overlap? Note, I can see where 'moving the shortest distance' is used if, for example, one of the sides has three bases (in contact with two), but can't see any logical reason for a 2 v 2 combat being anything other than a straight 2 v 2 line-up.

Chris
dave_r
General - King Tiger
General - King Tiger
Posts: 3849
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...

Post by dave_r »

In the above, the Cavalry cannot conform, as it is not possible to fully conform to all bases in contact.

Bases eligible to fight as an overlaps are defined on page 74 - clearly HF A and D are eligible to fight as an overlap.

However, page 84 defines those bases that are able to fight in melee. One bullet point states "A battle group can only be overlapped by one file at each end of any of it's four edges, even if it is stepped forward". As the edge of the cavalry BG is bases Cav A and Cav D - those are the two edges that can be overlapped, therefore HF A and HF D are not eligible to fight.

That is what is meant by internal overlap - i.e. where an overlap has been "created" on a battle group. but not at the edge.
Evaluator of Supremacy
grahambriggs
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3057
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...

Post by grahambriggs »

Let's take overlap and conforming separately. Overlaps first of all. The definition of who can fight from an overlap position is perhaps the most important bit and is on Page 84. The first bullet tell you that A BG can only be overlapped at the end of its edges. i.e. that "internal overlaps"; that is bases that look like they are overlapping but are not at the end of an edge, do not count.

So, in your diagram, it depends very much on which bases of cavalry are in which BGs. Looking at the options.

1. Assume all 8 bases of cavalry are in one BG. In this case Cav A and Cav D are the end bases of the front edge. So the HF bases "outside" of them can contribute dice as overlaps. HF A and HF D are not overlapping the end of the front edge of the BG, and cannot contribute dice. The convention has grown up that these non fighting chaps are called "internal overlaps", but that isn't something in the rules.

2. Now for a different circumstance. Assume there are three cavalry BGs present: a BG of four bases in the centre (Cav B and C and the two bases behind them) and a two base BG of cav A and the base behind it, and another two base BG of Cav D and the base behind it.

Look at the central Cav BG. It's front edge is two bases wide. Thus in this instance the overlapping HF, A and D, can fight as overlaps. The difference being that they are overlaps at the end of the edge of the central Cav BG. The two base BGs will also have a fighting overlap against them.
grahambriggs
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3057
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...

Post by grahambriggs »

ChrisTofalos wrote: Conforming

If two bases are in frontal contact with two enemy bases is there ever an occasion where one side conforms to the other, leaving one base in contact and the other becoming an overlap? Note, I can see where 'moving the shortest distance' is used if, for example, one of the sides has three bases (in contact with two), but can't see any logical reason for a 2 v 2 combat being anything other than a straight 2 v 2 line-up.

Chris
Yes, and it is quite common. The conforming rules on P69 say you conform to enemy bases in contact, by the minimum possible movement. It also says that conforming usually means lining up in full front edge contact OR conforming to an overlap position. So, say a 2 wide BG has charged another of the same and hit both bases. If they are sufficiently offset it might well be that the minimum movement to conform leaves you with one base of each flush in contact and one base in overlap. Because the overlaps will fight in the melee phase, all the bases will fight.
ChrisTofalos
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:18 pm

Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...

Post by ChrisTofalos »

2. Now for a different circumstance. Assume there are three cavalry BGs present: a BG of four bases in the centre (Cav B and C and the two bases behind them) and a two base BG of cav A and the base behind it, and another two base BG of Cav D and the base behind it.
A bit puzzled by this, Graham, although I'm not disputing your interpretation. If the number of bases are the same and in identical positions, doesn't the fact that the numbers fighting varies depending on BG breakdown, suggest there's a flaw in the rules? Same number of bases involved, in the same positions: why the difference?
grahambriggs
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3057
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...

Post by grahambriggs »

ChrisTofalos wrote:
2. Now for a different circumstance. Assume there are three cavalry BGs present: a BG of four bases in the centre (Cav B and C and the two bases behind them) and a two base BG of cav A and the base behind it, and another two base BG of Cav D and the base behind it.
A bit puzzled by this, Graham, although I'm not disputing your interpretation. If the number of bases are the same and in identical positions, doesn't the fact that the numbers fighting varies depending on BG breakdown, suggest there's a flaw in the rules? Same number of bases involved, in the same positions: why the difference?
It's a quirk of the rules Chris. However, it quite rarely occurs in practice.
dave_r
General - King Tiger
General - King Tiger
Posts: 3849
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...

Post by dave_r »

It's essentially to stop players manufacturing overlaps because of stepping forward.

You could end up with ten dice against a bg two bases wide.
Evaluator of Supremacy
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”