Topic: "Haven't I seen you someplace before?""Yeah,that's why I don't go there anymore"

[Noght]

If one accepts that "the model can be in base contact with a different enemy at the end of the reform, if you wish" means what it apparently says, "sliding" is legal as long as it adheres to the given restrictions.
Given that the Erratum removed the centre point requirement without any replacement, RAW this particular slide seems to be legal.

One Knight has to remain in base contact with the Left most Horde model, the rest can be "reformed" to the Right of him.  See the exception.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

Only if you interpret "it cannot be used to get a model (friend or foe) out of base contact with the enemy it was in contact before the reform was made" as meaning "enemy model", not "enemy unit."
However, as The Peacemaker pointed out, then one creates a contradiction with "the model can be in base contact with a different enemy at the end of the reform, if you wish." How do you propose to resolve that contradiction?

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

Not sure if it will resolve the issue, but the French version says:

Cette reformation ne peut pas servir à sortir des figurines (amies ou ennemies) du contact avec l’ennemi si elles étaient au contact avant la reformation. Elles peuvent par contre se retrouves au contact d’autres figurines ennemies.

which translates into:

This reform cannot be used to get models (friend or foe) out of base contact with the enemy, if they were in contact before the reform. However, they can find themselves in contact with different enemy models. 

And this is the German version:

Sie darf nicht verwendet werden, um ein Modell (Freund oder Feind) aus dem Basekontakt mit gegnerischen Modellen zu bewegen, wenn es sich vor der Nahkampf-Neuformierung noch in Basekontakt befunden hat. Das Modell kann sich nach der Neuformierung allerdings durchaus mit einem anderen Modell in Basekontakt befinden, wenn du dies bevorzugst.

It cannot be used to get a model (friend or foe) out of base contact with enemy models, if it still was in base contact before the combat reform. However, the model can after the reform definitely be in base contact with a different enemy model, if you prefer. 

(Italics mine)

The way it is written all seems to indicate: a friendly model that was in base contact with an enemy model before the combat reform must still be in contact with an enemy model after the combat reform, but that enemy model does not need to be the same.

[zifnab0]

One Knight has to remain in base contact with the Left most Horde model, the rest can be "reformed" to the Right of him.  See the exception.

Are you saying a model may not move out of base contact during a combat reform?  Can I not reform from a horde to a bus?

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

Any model that was in base contact with an enemy model must remain in contact with an enemy model (though not necessarily the same one). So, unless some models of the rank/file in contact with the enemy were out of combat, you cannot combat reform into a bus.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

OK, so sliding is legal.

I find myself in this situation: my knights (K1) are in combat with a horde (H1).  A valuable unit (U1) is sitting off to the side.  If the horde flees, I would like to overrun and contact U1.



Can I "slide" my knights, maintaining contact with the enemy, so that a pursuit roll will engage U1, as follows:

Noght was quite correct to say this is illegal, but I misunderstood him and it just dawned on me what he actually meant:

A combat reform cannot be used to get a model (friend or foe) out of base contact with the enemy it was in contact before the reform was made. While a model may be in btb with a different model than before, all the models that were in combat before still need to be in combat afterwards. Here the enemy model that was in combat before the reform is no longer in combat after the reform, and the reform is therefore illegal.

[The Peacemaker]

Hmm its starting to make a little more sense.
So any model that is in enemy contact must still be in enemy contact after the reform.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

Yes. that applies to both your and your opponent's models. But they can be in contact with a different model, as long as the models that were in enemy contact before the reform are also in enemy contact after the reform.

So, to stick with zifnab0's example, the maximum you could "slide" during the combat reform would be like this:

  KKKKK
EEEEEEEEEE

because one of the knights needs to be in btb with the enemy model that had been in btb contact before the reform.
Obviously, you do not need to "slide" that much, if you do not want to.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

Are you saying a model may not move out of base contact during a combat reform?  Can I not reform from a horde to a bus?

To elaborate a bit:

Situation 1
       
     XXXXXXXXX
     EEEEEEEEEE
     
Here neither side can reform into a bus.

Situation 2:
     
XXXXXXXXXX
            EEEEEEEEEE
     
Both sides could combat reform into a bus. However, if both want to combat reform after a Break Test, the first one to reform could bring more models into btb and thus effectively prevent his opponent to reform into a bus. 

[Noght]

Bingo.  You can always reform to bring more models into contact, risking more attacks.  You aren't allowed to reform out of contact to reduce the number of attackers.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

To clarify (or perhaps to state the obvious): in the example above, the first to reform can reform into a bus and still bring more models in btb contact, preventing his opponent to reform into a bus.

This would already suffice:

XXXXX
XXXXX
EEEEEEEEEE

Red: the models in btb before the reform; Green: additional models in btb after the reform.

If he wants to change ranks, the enemy can now only reform into 6x4.

[Lord Solar Plexus]

I already quoted the actual rule on BRB p. 14:

That's nice but all that repetition is unnecessary. I have a BRB myself. It's also not pertinent since nobody disagrees that you can completely rearrange to change facing. 

Change is not the same as no change I'm afraid. That is fundamental logic, Fidelis: Ens est et non ens non est, since you're so fond of Latin net phrases. You want that in Greek too perhaps? You cannot change facing by staying still.

I'm snipping yet another superfluous and redundant quote, as even multiple repetitions are not an argument. 

Perhaps you could point me to where the BRB says in the rules you can do A, B, C, period. The examples given in the figures on p. 14 are just that: examples of what you can do (as the accompanying text itself says), not of what you must do.

Perhaps you could point me to where the BRB calls them examples. Please substantiate this simple claim, I'm not seeing it.

Nowhere does the BRB allow you to slide, ie. moving the unit as is sideways in the very same formation. The term is not used anywhere, and the procedures outlined can only lead to an extension or contraction (or a change of facing, which is irrelevant here) of a unit. You could not pick up a monster or other single model and place it on the other side of its enemy, for example - it cannot de- or increase its ranks.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

I already quoted the actual rule on BRB p. 14:

That's nice but all that repetition is unnecessary. I have a BRB myself. It's also not pertinent since nobody disagrees that you can completely rearrange to change facing. 

Change is not the same as no change I'm afraid. That is fundamental logic, Fidelis: Ens est et non ens non est, since you're so fond of Latin net phrases. You want that in Greek too perhaps? You cannot change facing by staying still.

I'm snipping yet another superfluous and redundant quote, as even multiple repetitions are not an argument.

Yes, I know you do not like me quoting the rules, as they do not support your claims.

Perhaps you could point me to where the BRB says in the rules you can do A, B, C, period. The examples given in the figures on p. 14 are just that: examples of what you can do (as the accompanying text itself says), not of what you must do.

Perhaps you could point me to where the BRB calls them examples. Please substantiate this simple claim, I'm not seeing it.

Allow me to draw your attention to page IX:

"To clarify rules along the way you will find both illustrative diagrams and helpful side notes with practical advice scattered throughout the section."

In no way these diagrams somehow replace or limit the actual written rules. Not that the diagrams on p. 14 are in fact illustrating combat reform - they are illustrating a standard reform, where the centre point of the unit must remain in the same place. A severe limitation, which the combat reform expressis verbis does not have.

Nowhere does the BRB allow you to slide, ie. moving the unit as is sideways in the very same formation. The term is not used anywhere, and the procedures outlined can only lead to an extension or contraction (or a change of facing, which is irrelevant here) of a unit. You could not pick up a monster or other single model and place it on the other side of its enemy, for example - it cannot de- or increase its ranks.

You may have noticed that I usually write "slide", because it is indeed not a term used in the BRB. It is, however, the application of the actual rules for combat reform. There is nothing in the written rules that says a combat reform must (as opposed to can) include a change of facing and/or increasing/decreasing your ranks. You only conclude that from the diagrams - which are illustrations of the rules, not the actual rules, and not even illustrations of combat reform at that.

To quote someone :

Arguing that "must" means "may chose" and "confer the ability" means "not use the ability" is splitting words and mincing hairs to make any veteran rules lawyer proud.

It also works for "can" and "must".