Providing overlap

A place to ask specific rules questions about TRIUMPH!
User avatar
Maerk
Levy
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 5:37 am
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Providing overlap

Postby Maerk » Thu Nov 02, 2017 1:06 pm

A question about providing overlaps:
Image

C attacks B in three different situations. In all three cases the question is: Does A provide an overlap to C?

The overlaps rule 65.2 says: "A stand overlaps an enemy stand by corner contact if all the following apply:
a. The overlapping stand is in front corner-to front corner contact with the friendly attacking stand.
b. The overlapping stand is also in corner-to corner contact with the enemy stand.
c. The overlapping stand is not in front contact with an enemy stand.
"

In all the cases above condition a. is violated, so - according to rule 65.2 - A does not overlap C, even though A is capable of fighting to its flank or rear.

Question 1: Is our application of the overlap ruling correct?
Question 2: What about changing the rule, so that A can provide an overlap in the cases 1 - 3 above? Since there are now close combats to the flank and to the rear of a stand, flank and rear edges can be fighting edges and should be able to provide an overlap.

Maerk
Last edited by Maerk on Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
David Schlanger
Grand Master WGC
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: Providing overlap

Postby David Schlanger » Thu Nov 02, 2017 2:36 pm

Hi Maerk, I can't see the image... can you try to repost it?

Thanks,
DS

User avatar
Maerk
Levy
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 5:37 am
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Providing overlap

Postby Maerk » Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:57 pm

always fiddling with these picture links .. now I hope it will work, see above.

User avatar
David Kuijt
Grand Master WGC
Posts: 575
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:44 pm
Location: MD suburbs of Washington DC

Re: Providing overlap

Postby David Kuijt » Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:17 pm

Maerk wrote:A question about providing overlaps:
Image

C attacks B in three different situations. In all three cases the question is: Does A provide an overlap to C?

The overlaps rule 65.2 says: "A stand overlaps an enemy stand by corner contact if all the following apply:
a. The overlapping stand is in front corner-to front corner contact with the friendly attacking stand.
b. The overlapping stand is also in corner-to corner contact with the enemy stand.
c. The overlapping stand is not in front contact with an enemy stand.
"

In all the cases above condition a. is violated, so - according to rule 65.2 - A does not overlap C, even though A is capable of fighting to its flank or rear.

Question 1: Is our application of the overlap ruling correct?
Question 2: What about changing the rule, so that A can provide an overlap in the cases 1 - 3 above? Since there are now close combats to the flank and to the rear of a stand, flank and rear edges can be fighting edges and should be able to provide an overlap.


As you say, no overlaps occur (exerted by A onto C) in any of the above.

We'd have to see compelling reasons to introduce "butt-overlaps", and I can't see any right now. Units have a facing for a reason, and the butt corner is much less combative than the front corner. In fact, there are fairly good reasons to believe that few or no combatants would even be in that space in the real world (although that's a can of worms that doesn't need to be opened).

The fact that flank and rear can be fighting edges doesn't mean that they are GOOD fighting edges -- they are demonstrably bad fighting edges where bad things happen to the unit that's facing the wrong way.
DK


Return to “Rules Questions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest