Multiple combat reforms

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is here! You can read all about it in the news.

  • Multiple combat reforms

    Hi all. I've experienced this several times now and can't seem to find the answer. If two units charge an enemy unit in the same facing they end up in based contact with each other due to maximising contact. If the enemy is destroyed outright or flees and both friendly units stay put how are they repositioned into a legal position ie 1" apart?

    Thanks in advance and apologies if I'm being dumb.
  • Ulthred wrote:

    If the enemy is destroyed outright or flees and both friendly units stay put how are they repositioned into a legal position ie 1" apart?
    This is covered by the Unit Spacing rule:

    <
    4.C Unit Spacing
    Normally all units must be separated from Impassable Terrain and from both friendly and enemy units by more than
    1″ (remember that distances between units are measured to and from their Boundary Rectangles).
    Certain types of movement allow a unit to come within 1″ of other units or Impassable Terrain. The most common
    types of movement are:
    - During an Advance Move, a March Move, or a Swift Reform, units may come up to 0.5″ of these elements but
    must be more than 1″ away at the end of the move.
    - During a Failed Charge Move or a Charge Move, units are allowed to come within 0.5″ of these elements,
    including base contact (they may however only move into base contact with an enemy unit that was the target
    of the charge). Once these units have moved within 1″ of these elements, they are allowed to remain there as
    long as they stay within 1″. As soon as they move further away, the usual restrictions regarding Unit Spacing
    apply again.

    >

    So it's perfectly fine to stay within the other friendly unit's 1" zone in your example. Both friendly units are in legal positions.
  • @Eisenheinrich are they able to reform to face any direction, so long as in the end they’re spaced one inch apart, even if it moves their centers further than one inch? Like even 3 inches?

    Or do they simply separate 1” apart, and can only either face their current direction, or the exact opposite (or face 90 degrees to their current direction if the unit is a perfect square)?
  • Marcos24 wrote:

    @Eisenheinrich are they able to reform to face any direction, so long as in the end they’re spaced one inch apart, even if it moves their centers further than one inch? Like even 3 inches?
    We're talking about a post-combat reform here, so the centre of the units cannot move at all. The units can freely reform as long as their centres stay in the same spot, they just cannot step on one another. And they don't have to be outside of 1" of the other unit after the reform, they can though (see the blue part in the rules quote above).


    Marcos24 wrote:

    Or do they simply separate 1” apart, and can only either face their current direction, or the exact opposite (or face 90 degrees to their current direction if the unit is a perfect square)?
    Now we're talking about post-combat pivots, right? You never slide the units just in order to create a 1" gap. They can always do a 180° pivot (since this does not change the boundary rectangle), and if they are square or wider than deep they can also do 90° pivots (or any pivot they like as long as one boundary does not end up inside the other unit's boundary).
  • I've run into this issue a lot playing KoE, often if I double charge a unit with two lances coming from the same direction, it is difficult to to re-position after combat ends, due to the weird dimensions of large knight lances. Generally, I'll have one lance overrun (if the combat is resolved during the charge or I break the unit) but most of the time, I am unable to reform either unit because even a small pivot off the center of the unit will result in one unit being inside of the other unit at the end of the movement. 90 degree reforms are not possible, as the 25 x 100 base size means a 3 model wide lance is unable to reform to the right or left without either moving its center or entering the footprint of the adjacent unit.

    While it is true that I can always perform a 180 degree turn, this maneuver is rarely useful.

    Most of the time I am forced to use the following movement phase to extricate my units from one another, due to not being able to pivot or reform directly out of combat.

    All this often results in me intentionally using single characters, thinner units or single charges supported by flank charges to avoid weirdness when reforming after combat.

    I realize these rules likely are intentional and designed to be a bit of a limiting factor to large knight and chariot buses, but in the event that that is not intended, I figured it should be mentioned.
  • @Gabado yes, that is exactly why I asked. That’s the same problem I have with double charging, which actually prevents me from multi charging many times for that very reason. I thought of it the same, but I was hoping I had been playing it wrong and could in fact move the center on a post-combat pivot

    @Eisenheinrich yes, sorry I was thinking about post combat pivots this whole time. Thank you for your answer
  • I hav lost so many units to this, it came up 3 times last night...

    Is there anyone that has any ideas to fix this or strategic advice to bypass it.
    These rules really mess up MSU lists and weaker armies that rely on multiple charges to break units.
    MSU experts @Herminard @SmithF
    EoS people @greentide @LostCause and @Fthunder
    and I still believe; Light infantry should fight and shoot in 3 ranks, Imperial Guards should have weaponmaster and both parent and support, and that halbardiers should wear heavy armor. For Sunna and the Emperor!!
  • Smythen wrote:

    I hav lost so many units to this, it came up 3 times last night...

    Is there anyone that has any ideas to fix this or strategic advice to bypass it.
    These rules really mess up MSU lists and weaker armies that rely on multiple charges to break units.
    MSU experts @Herminard @SmithF
    EoS people @greentide @LostCause and @Fthunder

    The ruleschange of "friends lets friends pass" on combat overruns was the best I managed to sneak under the radar while I were still in a seat of power.

    I belive it is quite as much a bias in the game towards MSU or RnF Grunts in general - as it has anything to do with coming up with solutions to fix it.

    (Just consider the consequences of board edge rail roading, post combat unit clustering, radical change to the significance of scoring et al - the people playing high mobility units do not wish to play in an unengaging manner - they just understand that the rules give them very few benefits to the multiple drawbacks they have to swallow to play MSU / RnF Grunts)

    I have postulated arguments on this to Pascal and @DanT and I find we align on the topic - though I may approach the topic a tad more firebrand than most :)
    Make T9A armies clash again! #BringBackBattlelines

    Hermund Vigerust Endressòn Furu - Savage Sage of the Norse
    Faux-pro player and ETC vagabond.
    Enjoys the company of deluded nerds and women of unquestionably low morale.

    For questions of tactics, The Savage Arts of Playtrolling
  • gridica wrote:

    @Eisenheinrich is the rule regarding pursuing units and the ability to ignore friendly units involved in the same combat (13.H.c Pursuit Distance and Pursuing Units, pg57) related in any way to post combat piviots?
    No
    Rules Questions?

    ETC 2016 - Referee
    ETC 2017 Warm-up Herford - Head Judge
    ETC 2017 Salamanca - Head Judge
    ETC 2018 - Team Sweden - Ogre Khans (ETC HYPE - CLICK ME!)
  • gridica wrote:

    so then any piviot between to units in square formation (exact square boundary rectangle) would not be posible as the boundaries would begin to overlap as soon as you start turning.
    Is that correct?
    Nope ;) :
    <
    10.E Pivots and Wheels
    When a unit Pivots (a move mostly used by single model units), mark the Centre of the unit. Remove the unit from
    the Battlefield, and then place it back on the Battlefield
    again facing any direction with its Centre in the same place
    as before (following the Unit Spacing rule).
    >
  • Smythen wrote:

    s there anyone that has any ideas to fix this or strategic advice to bypass it.
    These rules really mess up MSU lists and weaker armies that rely on multiple charges to break units.
    I find that it's not that bad as long as you take it into account when charging/aligning units.

    For example, two units frontally charging a bigger unit in Line formation rarely have to be in btb with one another. They can spread a bit apart, and still be maximized, it's just that we push them together to form a "neat" fighting line.

    If you keep that extra inch apart, you get a lot more leeway when reforming. Another option is to send one of the units overrunning/pursuing, creating some space for post combat pivots.

    I don't know if it's a feature or a bug, but it forces some careful thinking about how you charge and how you align multiple units in combats.
  • Eisenheinrich wrote:

    gridica wrote:

    so then any piviot between to units in square formation (exact square boundary rectangle) would not be posible as the boundaries would begin to overlap as soon as you start turning.
    Is that correct?
    Nope ;) :<
    10.E Pivots and Wheels
    When a unit Pivots (a move mostly used by single model units), mark the Centre of the unit. Remove the unit from
    the Battlefield, and then place it back on the Battlefield
    again facing any direction with its Centre in the same place
    as before (following the Unit Spacing rule).
    >
    and is a Post-combat pivot move (13.H.e Post-Combat Pivot) made using those same rules as a pivot in the movement phase?
  • SmithF wrote:

    Smythen wrote:

    s there anyone that has any ideas to fix this or strategic advice to bypass it.
    These rules really mess up MSU lists and weaker armies that rely on multiple charges to break units.
    I find that it's not that bad as long as you take it into account when charging/aligning units.
    For example, two units frontally charging a bigger unit in Line formation rarely have to be in btb with one another. They can spread a bit apart, and still be maximized, it's just that we push them together to form a "neat" fighting line.

    If you keep that extra inch apart, you get a lot more leeway when reforming. Another option is to send one of the units overrunning/pursuing, creating some space for post combat pivots.

    I don't know if it's a feature or a bug, but it forces some careful thinking about how you charge and how you align multiple units in combats.
    I find it hard to do unless the units are really small.
    The big problem comes when flanking with a unit that is wider than the target is long, thus overlapping the front. It creates a clusterF of a reform.
    But thx for the advice on overrunning one unit out. This speaks for the MSU aproach as all units will be expendable.
    and I still believe; Light infantry should fight and shoot in 3 ranks, Imperial Guards should have weaponmaster and both parent and support, and that halbardiers should wear heavy armor. For Sunna and the Emperor!!