Turn 90 or 180 and advance

[IanP]

Hi all.

This may have been covered before, but I couldn't find anything in a search of previous posts.
I'm still new to the game so this may be basic but:

"Turn 90 deg with a simple advance before or after".

Does the whole of the advance have to occur prior to, or subsequent to the turn? Or can you split the advance, part before and part after? I supose if you split it, it technically becomes two advances, even if you don't exceed the max move for the troop type.

Thanks.

[nikgaukroger]

All before or all after.

[KiwiWarlord]

I have a column of Cav 1 base wide x 4 bases deep, throw & pass a CMT, advance 5 Mus and turn 90 degrees.
Question : what formation is the BG in ?

Same question for a BG of LF archers 1 x 8 bases deep ?

Thanks
Brian

[Robert241167]

Hi Warlord

They would be just wide enough after the turn so that they would cover more than their original depth before the turn. The remaining bases would fill in behind.

Sorry for not being more specific with reference to the book but just setting off to work.

Rob

[hammy]

The cavalry would be 3 wide with 1 base in the rear rank.

A column of light foot turns into a 2 deep line.

[KiwiWarlord]

Thanks for that.
Cav 3 in front rank, 1 in the rear rank
LF 4 in each rank.
Cheers

[peterrjohnston]

The cavalry would be 3 wide with 1 base in the rear rank.

A column of light foot turns into a 2 deep line.

So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.

[paulcummins]

but is part of the way the rules work

[nikgaukroger]

Never seen it played any other way - can something that slightly restricts the flexibility of Cv be such a terrible thing?

[david53]

The cavalry would be 3 wide with 1 base in the rear rank.

A column of light foot turns into a 2 deep line.

So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.

Have I missed something here

A Cavalry BG in line passes CMT then either moves five MU or turns 90 degress and then moves 5 MU weres this extra turn back happens?

[philqw78]

Have I missed something here

A Cavalry BG in line passes CMT then either moves five MU or turns 90 degress and then moves 5 MU weres this extra turn back happens?

The second move Dave

add your own D'oh if you want

[peterrjohnston]

Never seen it played any other way - can something that slightly restricts the flexibility of Cv be such a terrible thing?

It's all mounted on 3 cm deep bases obviously, just not cavalry, although LH have more options. However, chariots obviously have some innate ability to turn back into formation better - do they use handbrake turns perhaps? Even elephants can do it "properly", albeit somewhat slowly.

Seriously, it's a surprise to me because one would expect the turn back formation to be the same, not an artefact of the rules and base depths, so I hadn't really considered you end up with this frankly dumb 3 by 1 formation. The idea that mounted lead off to column to the side, then turn back to face from column, but in a mess unless riding a chariot or an elephant, is, well, like I said, ridiculous.

[babyshark]

Have I missed something here

A Cavalry BG in line passes CMT then either moves five MU or turns 90 degress and then moves 5 MU weres this extra turn back happens?

The second move Dave

add your own D'oh if you want

To be clear, that second move happens next turn. The second move in the same turn must come from the "advances" list.

Marc

[philqw78]

To be clear, that second move happens next turn. The second move in the same turn must come from the "advances" list.

Marc

Just trying to add to Dave's confusion. You spoiled my fun.

[kal5056]

The cavalry would be 3 wide with 1 base in the rear rank.

A column of light foot turns into a 2 deep line.

So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.

This is one of tghe key ways to combat a shooty cav army because when they turn back (out of the line into the 3 + 1 formation) they can not evade that turn util the expand in thier next movement phase. If this were not the case they could keep slipping to your side as well as thier rear to avoid contact. This would lead to even more chasing of the little Bastiches around the table.

Please don't advocate anything that makes Cav more slippery.
Gino
SMAC

[kevinj]

So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.

And if it turns 90 degrees again it's 2 wide and 2 deep!

[Intothevalley]

So a BG of 4 mounted in line, turns 90 to column, moves, then turns back 90 to face in line, but now in a 3 by 1 formation... well, technically correct, but ridiculous... and not something I'd want to enforce on an opponent.

And if it turns 90 degrees again it's 2 wide and 2 deep!

So if a BG of cavalry kept on turning to infinity, would it end up as a black hole?

[ShrubMiK]

Quite likely )

fopr some reason, though, I'm more reminded of those little "glider" shapes that flit across the screen in the old life game: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life

Okay, not quite the same shape, but similar behaviour!

[david53]

To be clear, that second move happens next turn. The second move in the same turn must come from the "advances" list.

Marc

Just trying to add to Dave's confusion. You spoiled my fun.

There was me all confused until now, you Phil are nothing short off a bounder and a cad sir?

Methinks you need a good whipping

[Ghaznavid]

Never seen it played any other way - can something that slightly restricts the flexibility of Cv be such a terrible thing?

It's all mounted on 3 cm deep bases obviously, just not cavalry, although LH have more options. However, chariots obviously have some innate ability to turn back into formation better - do they use handbrake turns perhaps? Even elephants can do it "properly", albeit somewhat slowly.

Seriously, it's a surprise to me because one would expect the turn back formation to be the same, not an artefact of the rules and base depths, so I hadn't really considered you end up with this frankly dumb 3 by 1 formation. The idea that mounted lead off to column to the side, then turn back to face from column, but in a mess unless riding a chariot or an elephant, is, well, like I said, ridiculous.

I've to agree, while we play it as written it's somewhat odd that Chariots are more manoeuvrable then Cv. I'm therefore continually tempted to base my Cv on slightly deeper (i.e. square) bases and claim I also play another system with them were this is required if someone objects.