Lateral movement
-
- Chef de bataillon
- Messages : 384
- Enregistré le : ven. 29 nov. 2019 20:55
Lateral movement
Page 37 "... a lateral move without advancing or changing face".
Does this allow a unit to move laterally for less than its full move and THEN use the remainder of its move to advance?
Does this allow a unit to move laterally for less than its full move and THEN use the remainder of its move to advance?
Re: Lateral movement
Nope. without advancing, so no advance. The lateral move is a complete move, since it's a 1/4 turn, move and 1/4 turn again.
If you want to advance forward, it's an oblique move ( § precedent)
If you want to advance forward, it's an oblique move ( § precedent)
Re: Lateral movement
HI all,
i disagree, it's possible to make half lateral move , and move forward after. It's not very optimized but seems good for me.
For example: a french colonne, just behind an occupied building.
The colonne move laterally 2 UD ( counted as 4 UD ) to avoid the building , then move 2 UD forward.
With an oblique move, it will be impossible to pass partially trough the building.
Regards
Olivier M
i disagree, it's possible to make half lateral move , and move forward after. It's not very optimized but seems good for me.
For example: a french colonne, just behind an occupied building.
The colonne move laterally 2 UD ( counted as 4 UD ) to avoid the building , then move 2 UD forward.
With an oblique move, it will be impossible to pass partially trough the building.
Regards
Olivier M
Cordialement
Olivier M
Olivier M
-
- Chef de bataillon
- Messages : 384
- Enregistré le : ven. 29 nov. 2019 20:55
Re: Lateral movement
This was the argument my opponent used. How do you account for the "without advancing" part of the lateral move?
Re: Lateral movement
That's the point with the oblique move : you consider this is a diagonal move and not a lateral+ advance move.
What bothers me is the specification of "sans avancer ni changer d'orientation" and the fact that you can't do it at tactical distance of the enemy.
What bothers me is the specification of "sans avancer ni changer d'orientation" and the fact that you can't do it at tactical distance of the enemy.
Re: Lateral movement
Hi Roger, sorry for the delay.RogerGreenwood a écrit : ↑jeu. 6 mai 2021 17:08This was the argument my opponent used. How do you account for the "without advancing" part of the lateral move?
P 35 "How to move". bullet 3.
It's possible to combine different kind of move.
So First , i make a lateral move, then i move forward.
It's better to move with a oblique move , you can do what you want.
But when i make a Lateral move, it's impossible during this part of the movement to advance , or change formation. But for the other part (2UD remaining) you can make a wheel, or a oblique move etc.... or an advance.
Regards
Cordialement
Olivier M
Olivier M
-
- Chef de bataillon
- Messages : 384
- Enregistré le : ven. 29 nov. 2019 20:55
Re: Lateral movement
I am convinced. Maybe it is the translation to English. I think the rules could have expressed this better.
Easy for me to say of course. I appreciate that getting the precise meaning across is not so easy for the author.
Thanks for your input.
Easy for me to say of course. I appreciate that getting the precise meaning across is not so easy for the author.
Thanks for your input.