Page 2 of 2

Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:02 pm
by madaxeman
nikgaukroger wrote:
madaxeman wrote:
nikgaukroger wrote:And to answer your next question it is because a Battle Line is limited to moves under the Advances section of the movement table (its in the rules on the page next to said table) - and I can't think how you can get to where you did doing that :D
The three 2x2 blocks all wheel through 90 degrees, but still end up in contact with each other ?

Maybe I snuck in a cheeky contraction somewhere along the line too...
As each BG will have had to wheel separately to get where you got them they cannot have moved as a battle line - see page 30 and p75. The ending in contact is not relevant, it appears to be something you have invented as a criteria (in that they must be in contact throughout).

And any contraction takes you out of the Advances section which means it cannot be done by a Battle Line - see page 41.
aaah - its a subtle implied bit. "Battle lines are limited to moves from the advances section" - as in, a battle line makes a move, not the individual units within it. I get it now...

Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:48 am
by nikgaukroger
madaxeman wrote:
nikgaukroger wrote:
madaxeman wrote: The three 2x2 blocks all wheel through 90 degrees, but still end up in contact with each other ?

Maybe I snuck in a cheeky contraction somewhere along the line too...
As each BG will have had to wheel separately to get where you got them they cannot have moved as a battle line - see page 30 and p75. The ending in contact is not relevant, it appears to be something you have invented as a criteria (in that they must be in contact throughout).

And any contraction takes you out of the Advances section which means it cannot be done by a Battle Line - see page 41.
aaah - its a subtle implied bit. "Battle lines are limited to moves from the advances section" - as in, a battle line makes a move, not the individual units within it. I get it now...

Hardly implied IMO, quite clear - plus the definition of Battle Lines (P30 IIRC) helps.

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 5:51 pm
by ShrubMiK
I was thinking of this and smiling to myself whilst watching Mr. Porter explaining some subtle feature of the rules to his opponent this morning :D

Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:04 pm
by madaxeman
Hubcon III now posted

No clever manoeuvring here....

http://www.madaxeman.com/reports/Hubcon_2010_3.php

Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 7:06 am
by bertalucci
madaxeman wrote:Hubcon III now posted

No clever manoeuvring here....

http://www.madaxeman.com/reports/Hubcon_2010_3.php

Now thats the way I do it.
Mad rush - looks like the tactics are all on your side -bad dice - disaster

Game IV now posted

Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 6:20 pm
by madaxeman
Hubcon IV now posted, complete with a video report on the game featuring commentary from the Queen of England and History's Greatest Ever Genius

8)

Re: Hubcon

Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:06 pm
by david53
dave_r wrote:
I presume I am one of the Daves of Eastwick along with the other Dave R from Manchester...
Seems he's got us both wrong(if it is us) as, if we would bleat about anything especially not about Light Horse...

Re: Game IV now posted

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:04 am
by nikgaukroger
madaxeman wrote:Hubcon IV now posted, complete with a video report on the game featuring commentary from the Queen of England and History's Greatest Ever Genius

8)

Although there seems to be some confusion as to who the opposition were ...

Re: Game IV now posted

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:27 am
by madaxeman
nikgaukroger wrote:
madaxeman wrote:Hubcon IV now posted, complete with a video report on the game featuring commentary from the Queen of England and History's Greatest Ever Genius

8)

Although there seems to be some confusion as to who the opposition were ...
Aaah - I thought I'd tidied all those up.

It was actually E. Hungarians, but I'd put Byzantines in the first draft of the script

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 12:23 pm
by domblas
thx madaxeman for this report.
an addict

In search of Early Hungarians...

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:49 pm
by batesmotel
Tim,

I also don't see an 800 AP Early Hungarian list that appears to match these mythical Early Hungarian nee Byzantine opponents.

Chris

Re: In search of Early Hungarians...

Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:25 am
by philqw78
batesmotel wrote:Tim,

I also don't see an 800 AP Early Hungarian list that appears to match these mythical Early Hungarian nee Byzantine opponents.

Chris
Hmm, mythical armies, mythical battle reports, Elivis, Tim Porter. Sounds right to me

Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:50 pm
by madaxeman
I'm pretty sure they were Chris Johnston's Early Hungarians - however I think he gave me the printout of his army list rather than me writing it down.... and I lost it! If you look on the Roll of Honour it shows it was the army that placed 4th at Hubcon (thanks to the 16.4 : 8.6 victory I handed them in the last game!)

I've changed the reference on the last page too now.

I hoe you are all satisfied now :cry:

Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:59 pm
by nikgaukroger
madaxeman wrote: I hoe you are all satisfied now :cry:

Warfare reports?

:twisted:

Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2010 11:59 pm
by madaxeman
As its snowing/freezing and so I can't spray varnish or undercoat a load of 28mm TYW figures, or undercoat 15mm TYW Pike & Shotte, a Louis XVI French Army, some WW2 GI's and large number of 15mm Sarmatian lancers, thats probably what the Christmas break is for....