Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...
Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
-
- Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
- Posts: 247
- Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:18 pm
Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...
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
Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...
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.
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
-
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
- Posts: 3057
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am
Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...
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.
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.
-
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
- Posts: 3057
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am
Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...
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 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
-
- Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
- Posts: 247
- Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:18 pm
Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...
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?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.
-
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
- Posts: 3057
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am
Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...
It's a quirk of the rules Chris. However, it quite rarely occurs in practice.ChrisTofalos wrote: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?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.
Re: Internal Overlaps (and conforming)...
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.
You could end up with ten dice against a bg two bases wide.
Evaluator of Supremacy