PDA

View Full Version : Flank Bonuses and Combat Reforming



g0ddy
07-02-2011, 23:47
Hello all,

Had a bizarre situation come up over the weekend.

See Image Below.

Figure One : Spearmen are charged by trolls. Combat Ensues, Spearmen are steadfast and hold. Large Unit of Archers Flank Trolls, combat ensues, Trolls Hold.

Figure Two : Marauders Flank Trolls, Remaining Spearmen are Killed and Archers Hold.

Figure Three : Archers have preformed a combat reform and are facing north towards the Marauders. Trolls fail to reform and are facing South still... the flanks of the archer unit and the troll unit are touching eachother. Griffon has flanked the Marauders.

Question : In figure 3 do the Trolls count as flanking the Archer Unit there by effectively canceling out the valid flank the Griffon has on the marauders?

Has something else illegal happened - perhaps the archers cant reform exposing their flank to the trolls?

Disclaimer : the exact casualties caused and turn sequences are approximate but the intent of what is happening is the same.

~ Zilla

b4z
08-02-2011, 00:21
Page 55. Last Paragraph
"If a unit is engaged to more than one facing (say to the front and one flank), it cannot make combat reforms"

You could have combat reformed the Archers AFTER the first combat round with the Trolls [in preparation to be charged by the Marauders]... but before the Marauders actually hit your FLANK.

But you could not have combat reformed the Archers AFTER the Mauraders hit your FLANK because of the Rulebook statement above.

It's not entirely clear what happened in which order...

g0ddy
08-02-2011, 00:41
Interesting - see I had that thought as I was typing the post up... rather than during our game.

But it sounds like you can still end up in the final situation with flanks touching flanks - any thoughts on that aspect of it?

This all happened in a massive combined combat.. that spanned most of the game.. and involved the majority of both our 2500 pt armies...

~ Zilla

b4z
08-02-2011, 00:49
Page 53. First Paragraph.
"Therefore, if your unit is fighting the enemy in its flank, it recieves +1 combat result"

The above does not stipulate that your FRONT facing has to be in the enemy's FLANK in order to gain this combat bonus... just that your unit "is fighting the enemy in its flank" [and fighting means directing attacks against i would assume?]

So...

The Griffon is "fighting the enemy [Marauders] in its flank" +1
The Trolls are "fighting the enemy [Archers] in [their] flank" +1 [regardless of the fact they are themselves fighting to their flank, due to failed combat reforms]
The Archers are "fighting the enemy [Trolls] in [their] flank" +1 [regardless of the fact they are themselves fighting to their flank, due to chosen combat reform]

So you end up at a situation where the HE player gains +1 for Flank bonus, because the other two cancel each other out.
[Although there is room for argument about restrictions being maxed out for +1 Flank, +2 Rear etc. regardless of how many units you actually have in the Flank/Rear, and this could change that calculation/negation process above]

Trains_Get_Robbed
08-02-2011, 06:02
Shouldn't that all be moot though, as the first diagram has the archers in the front arc of the Trolls? Therefore, resulting in a frontal charge?

b4z
08-02-2011, 12:44
No, If i have understood this correctly, the diagrams show in the following chronological order:

1. The 4 Trolls charge the FRONT facing of the 20 Spearmen.
The Charge is completed. Combat ensues. 10 Spearmen are killed. 1 Troll is killed.
Spearmen have 1 more rank than the Trolls, Spearmen hold on their steadfast roll.

3. The 30 Archers charge the FLANK facing of the [remaining 3] Trolls. .
The Charge is completed. Combat ensues. 10 Spearmen are Killed. 2 Archers are Killed. 1 Troll is wounded.
Trolls lose the combat. Trolls Hold, but fail to Combat Reform on their modified Leadership.
Archers Combat Reform successfully to face the obvious incoming Charge by the 20 Marauders.

5. 20 Marauders charge the FRONT of the Archers. Charge is completed.
Combat ensues. Archers and Trolls both stay.

6. Prince on Griffon charge the Flank of the Marauders. 6 Marauders are killed. 6 Archers are killed.

----------

The OP question is basically:

If TWO units that are IN COMBAT with each other are both fighting each other to their respective FLANK, then do both benefit from the +1 combat resolution or do neither benefit.

A simple example, with diagram is as follows:

1. Unit B charges Unit A in the FLANK
2. Unit B wins the combat
3. Unit B decides to Combat Reform so that its FLANK is now facing Unit A's Flank [for a tactical reason] and its FRONT is facing a probable charge by another enemy unit.
Q. Who now recieves the Flank Bonus? Both or Neither?

_______Rear__Front_______
Flank__[xxAxx][xxBxx]__Flank
Flank__[xxxxx][xxxxx]__Flank
_______Front__Rear_______


It's a good question actually, and revolves around the criteria for Flank Bonus.

Page 53. First Paragraph.
"Therefore, if your unit is fighting the enemy in its flank, it recieves +1 combat result"

----------

EDIT: having investigated a bit further...

Because the Archers are in the flank of the Trolls they get +1 Flank Bonus
Because the Trolls are in the flank of the Archers they get +1 Flank Bonus
BUT Because the Griffon is in the flank of the Marauders [a separate unit] he gets his own +1 Flank Bonus

So the first and second bonuses cancel each other out. But the Griffon provides the +1.

And this is all because of the following:

Multiple Combats, Page 59
"Bonuses for flank and rear attacks can only be earned [u]once per unit attacked in the flank or rear"

a18no
08-02-2011, 14:47
I'm not sure, but I think that a flanked unit, can't give a flank bonus. Could be a old rule (7th), but I'm pretty sure it's still there.

By doing that, having 2 unit flanking each other would result in a 0 bonus for each part (even if +1 for each side would result in the same thing ;))

The important point would be that IF the archer were facing the ogre (flanking them), they won't get the bonus since the marauders are flanking them, but the marauders won't gain their bonus since the griffon is flanking them...

I need to search for the rule though

b4z
09-02-2011, 21:19
Cannot find anything in the rulebook that backs up your above claim.

T10
10-02-2011, 10:55
The rule book doesn't say anything about changing the facing of the unit with the combat reform. The normal reform maneuver is partly about changing the direction your unit is facing.

Turning to expose your flank to an enemy unit does not seem like something the models would be happy about doing, but I can't see that it breaks any rules.

-T10

Mr_Rose
12-02-2011, 01:29
Shouldn't that all be moot though, as the first diagram has the archers in the front arc of the Trolls? Therefore, resulting in a frontal charge?
This is slightly tangential to the main point of this thread but:
Assuming the diagrams are to scale and accurately represent the spatial arrangements, no - the archers get a flank charge because the majority of their front rank is in the flank arc of the trolls, per p.21 of the BRB.


N.B. This is one of the more subtle changes from 7e when, IIRC, the majority of the entire unit had to be in the flank, not just the front rank (i.e. the ones that can see what's going on).

Chris_
12-02-2011, 02:15
Remember that for the combat reform the archers do to be legal they have to rank up at least 4 deep after, since there was already 4 archers in b2b with the trolls before making the reform. (this is regarding the example b4z gave in post #6 as it is a bit different than OP's situation)

As for the question that OP posed I see it like this, both the Trolls and the Archers get +1 Flank Bonus for fighting to each others flanks, the griffon however will also score another +1 for being in the Marauders flank. So in total +2 for the Spearmen/Archers/Griffon side and +1 for Chaos. (only including flank bonuses)
Everything you, the OP, have done seems legal.

WightKing
15-02-2011, 09:44
a humble opinion on this
i do not thing that the combat reform includes presenting a different
"unit side" to an enemy- (although i admit that was my first guess when i first read the rules).i think you are only allowed to do this is to turn to face a flank/rear charger and not to "stare"/'stalk" for "incoming",AND "loading" your unit with negative combat mod/rs ON PURPOSE (even knowing that are unbreakable or so)
a host of problems arise by doing so:
1.unengaged characters (by choise) would now find themselves in the new front rank(archers waiting the marauders -instead of waiting combat to do so).
2.engaged command models (with trolls) that must be in front rank can not do so(so you have a unit that faces "north" and sb/mus/champion "west"...
(errata conclusion: a model can be unengaged by combat reform only to engage another even of a different unit. ie: )
-if they were unengaged though they could do it- but you have to arange this beforehand and it seems "to deep" to be in the spirit of the rules.

..............and what lies ahead only tzeench knows....



hope i helped a litlle

although if you know FOR SURE that such a combat reform (archers) is allowed then i'm deeply sorry for those rule writters in GW they didn't clarify this importand twist/rule of the game.

thanks for your time /sorry about any errors i might have done.:

found rulebook errata

"Reforming From Victory
Change the first sentence of the second paragraph to “A
combat reform is essentially a standard reform (page 14), save
for the fact that the centre point of the reformed unit does not
have to stay in the same place.”
Change “[...]is one special restriction[...]” to “[...]are two
special restrictions[...]” and change “[...]was made[...]” to
“[...]was made, and the unit may not reform in such a way as
to contact a different facing on any enemy unit it is in contact"

WightKing
15-02-2011, 13:15
No, If i have understood this correctly, the diagrams show in the following chronological order:

1. The 4 Trolls charge the FRONT facing of the 20 Spearmen.
The Charge is completed. Combat ensues. 10 Spearmen are killed. 1 Troll is killed.
Spearmen have 1 more rank than the Trolls, Spearmen hold on their steadfast roll.

3. The 30 Archers charge the FLANK facing of the [remaining 3] Trolls. .
The Charge is completed. Combat ensues. 10 Spearmen are Killed. 2 Archers are Killed. 1 Troll is wounded.
Trolls lose the combat. Trolls Hold, but fail to Combat Reform on their modified Leadership.
Archers Combat Reform successfully to face the obvious incoming Charge by the 20 Marauders.

5. 20 Marauders charge the FRONT of the Archers. Charge is completed.
Combat ensues. Archers and Trolls both stay.

6. Prince on Griffon charge the Flank of the Marauders. 6 Marauders are killed. 6 Archers are killed.

----------

The OP question is basically:

If TWO units that are IN COMBAT with each other are both fighting each other to their respective FLANK, then do both benefit from the +1 combat resolution or do neither benefit.

A simple example, with diagram is as follows:

1. Unit B charges Unit A in the FLANK
2. Unit B wins the combat
3. Unit B decides to Combat Reform so that its FLANK is now facing Unit A's Flank [for a tactical reason] and its FRONT is facing a probable charge by another enemy unit.
Q. Who now recieves the Flank Bonus? Both or Neither?

_______Rear__Front_______
Flank__[xxAxx][xxBxx]__Flank
Flank__[xxxxx][xxxxx]__Flank
_______Front__Rear_______


It's a good question actually, and revolves around the criteria for Flank Bonus.

Page 53. First Paragraph.
"Therefore, if your unit is fighting the enemy in its flank, it recieves +1 combat result"

----------

EDIT: having investigated a bit further...

Because the Archers are in the flank of the Trolls they get +1 Flank Bonus
Because the Trolls are in the flank of the Archers they get +1 Flank Bonus
BUT Because the Griffon is in the flank of the Marauders [a separate unit] he gets his own +1 Flank Bonus

So the first and second bonuses cancel each other out. But the Griffon provides the +1.

And this is all because of the following:

Multiple Combats, Page 59
"Bonuses for flank and rear attacks can only be earned [u]once per unit attacked in the flank or rear"

"Reforming From Victory
Change the first sentence of the second paragraph to A
combat reform is essentially a standard reform (page 14), save
for the fact that the centre point of the reformed unit does not
have to stay in the same place.
Change [...]is one special restriction[...] to [...]are two
special restrictions[...] and change [...]was made[...] to
[...]was made, and the unit may not reform in such a way as
to contact a different facing on any enemy unit it is in contact"

ithink this means that archers can not reform so that to face the coming charge of the marauders.:)

Lord Solar Plexus
15-02-2011, 13:27
You've lost me there. What makes you think they cannot reform? They won't contact a different facing of an enemy unit.

Glen_Savet
15-02-2011, 14:34
"Reforming From Victory
Change the first sentence of the second paragraph to “A
combat reform is essentially a standard reform (page 14), save
for the fact that the centre point of the reformed unit does not
have to stay in the same place.”
Change “[...]is one special restriction[...]” to “[...]are two
special restrictions[...]” and change “[...]was made[...]” to
“[...]was made, and the unit may not reform in such a way as
to contact a different facing on any enemy unit it is in contact"

ithink this means that archers can not reform so that to face the coming charge of the marauders.:)

It means they can't reform from the flank of the trolls into the rear of the trolls. They are still able to give their own flank to whomever they wish.

WightKing
15-02-2011, 14:42
You've lost me there. What makes you think they cannot reform? They won't contact a different facing of an enemy unit.

not "of" an enemy- as you said-,it says "on" an enemy.
the facing belongs to the unit that reforms.
that's what i get out from the translation.

if you could contact a different facing "of" an enemy that could mean that you could place your unit into the side(flank) after reforming,which doesn't appear as a legal reform i recon.

WightKing
15-02-2011, 14:52
It means they can't reform from the flank of the trolls into the rear of the trolls. They are still able to give their own flank to whomever they wish.

i agree to the first sentence.but for the second i believe there some things you are not allowed to do (like not getting the battle standard reroll if it so suits my plans).
will the unit be willing to lose any rank bonus and suffer -1 to cr?
i'm not so sure that this kind of choice was part of the rules design strategic depth aspect.

Glen_Savet
15-02-2011, 18:43
I believe it was intended. Perhaps you have a single troll in the front of your unit, and you know that you will be charged by 25 marauders in the flank. Why would you not want to turn to face the marauders?

WightKing
16-02-2011, 10:36
I believe it was intended. Perhaps you have a single troll in the front of your unit, and you know that you will be charged by 25 marauders in the flank. Why would you not want to turn to face the marauders?

because it has nothing to do with what we want but with how they want the reform to work.
the whole reforming article, and the spirit of the rules in it, show that it was designed to allow a unit out of a disandvantageous -(hope this word exists)-
situation and not for us to create one for any reason.

otherwise why to disallow the move when engaged from 2 sides, when almost the same combat situation would arise when you reform as you say and get charged next turn?-(deny opponent bonuses you didn't forsaw out of sequense).
i think because they want the units front rank to be always in contact with the enemy you are fighting at the moment and only to reform so to face one.

anyway as for me and my gaming party it doesn't feel right deep inside to our gaming consious /ethics to abuse the spirit (and meaning) of a rule for our private gains.

i thank all of you who with your contribution to our talk help to improve/understand the rules and the spirit they cover although the spirit is sometimes possesed with buggy swarms.;)

narrativium
16-02-2011, 12:25
The archers can't change facing. They're attacking a unit to the front; to change facing would take supporting models out of combat.

Masque
17-02-2011, 01:13
The archers can't change facing. They're attacking a unit to the front; to change facing would take supporting models out of combat.

There is nothing preventing you from reforming in a way that lets less models make supporting attacks.