Auteur |
Message |
Andy Fyfe
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024 Messages: 80
|
Posté le: Ven Mai 31, 2024 11:31 am Sujet du message: Discovering an ambush |
|
Hi Guys,
On page 77 it states that an ambush is automatically revealed if an enemy unit approaches within one UD of the marker.
The rest of the rules are specific about the phrase 'within one UD' as meaning 'less than one UD' (for example in the ZoC definition).
So, does the discovering unit:
1. Stop at exactly 1 UD?
2. Stop at less than 1 UD (all the way to almost touching)?
This will obviously affect ZoC and placing other units if there are more than one element in the ambush.
I know you can interrupt movement to voluntarily place an ambush when the enemy gets within 4 UD but not for an unreliable / untested corp.
What are your thoughts? |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024 Messages: 80
|
Posté le: Ven Mai 31, 2024 11:50 am Sujet du message: |
|
I think that it should read - "..enemy units gets to one UD..".
The unit then stops at exactly one UD and the ambush is revealed and placed or is a fake.
If fake the discovering unit can continue moving.
This means that:
- No unit is in ZoC
- Units are in shooting range
- No issues with deploying the rest of the elements in the ambush |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Légat
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 500
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Ven Mai 31, 2024 2:48 pm Sujet du message: |
|
The rules mean exactly what they say - as soon as an enemy unit comes within (less than) 1 UD the ambush is revealed.
Whether or not ZoCs apply will depend on the units and terrain involved. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Ven Mai 31, 2024 4:38 pm Sujet du message: |
|
While I think AdlG has issues with clarity, this certainly isn't one of them.
The definition of ZoC on page 35 never uses the term "within" and takes pains to explain that at exactly 1UD, you are not in the ZoC.
"Within [an area or distance]" has a fixed definition in English, "not more than". So, yes, you get 1UD from the ambush marker and it is revealed.
This means you can put everyone in your ZoC when you resume moving after deployment of the ambush.
You are in shooting range just as you would be if you were inside of 1UD.
You will restrict ambush deployment if you approach at an angle.
Dernière édition par Neep le Sam Juin 01, 2024 4:57 pm; édité 1 fois |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024 Messages: 80
|
Posté le: Ven Mai 31, 2024 4:47 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Neep a écrit: | While I think AdlG has issues with clarity, this certainly isn't one of them.
The definition of ZoC on page 35 never uses the term "within" and takes pains to explain that at exactly 1UD, you are not in the ZoC.
"Within" has a fixed definition in English, "not more than". So, yes, you get 1UD from the ambush marker and it is revealed.
This means you can put everyone in your ZoC when you resume moving after deployment of the ambush.
You are in shooting range just as you would be if you were inside of 1UD.
You will restrict ambush deployment if you approach at an angle. |
So two different answers then.
Also - where does it say you can continue moving after the ambush is revealed to contain units?
The rules state you can continue moving if it is a fake ambush marker only. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Ven Mai 31, 2024 5:12 pm Sujet du message: |
|
It has been stated by a member of the rules committee that per the author, the line of page 77, " The enemy unit can continue its move but cannot charge the units that were in ambush" should apply to discovered ambushes as well as voluntarily revealed ambushes. ZoC restrictions would apply, of course.
Dernière édition par Neep le Ven Mai 31, 2024 10:55 pm; édité 2 fois |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669
|
Posté le: Ven Mai 31, 2024 6:52 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Neep a écrit: | It has been reported that the author intends the line of page 77, |
Where was this reported? |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
AlanCutner
Tribun
Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014 Messages: 747
Localisation: Scotland
|
Posté le: Sam Juin 01, 2024 2:20 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Neep a écrit: | "Within" has a fixed definition in English, "not more than". |
Unfortunately not the case. OED states 'within' can mean 'inside x', eg. inside 1UD. It can also mean 'not further than x', ie not further than 1UD. So dictionaries don't help. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Sam Juin 01, 2024 4:57 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Fixed it.  |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024 Messages: 80
|
Posté le: Mar Juin 04, 2024 12:21 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Neep a écrit: | Fixed it.  |
So the 'consensus' seems to be:
1. Stop at exactly 1 UD
2. Reveal ambush
3. Keep moving as required
Is that correct?
I think this needs to be added to the errata rather than just a 'member of the rules committee made a forum post in 2021'. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669
|
Posté le: Mar Juin 04, 2024 2:38 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Andy Fyfe a écrit: |
I think this needs to be added to the errata rather than just a 'member of the rules committee made a forum post in 2021'. |
I would fully expect rulings to be you must stop as umpires might as you say not accept the post as evidence. I will bring this to El Kreator's attention this summer. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
AlanCutner
Tribun
Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014 Messages: 747
Localisation: Scotland
|
Posté le: Mar Juin 04, 2024 3:32 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Hazelbark a écrit: | Andy Fyfe a écrit: |
I think this needs to be added to the errata rather than just a 'member of the rules committee made a forum post in 2021'. |
I would fully expect rulings to be you must stop as umpires might as you say not accept the post as evidence. I will bring this to El Kreator's attention this summer. |
Bit confused. Are you agreeing with Andy that units discovering ambush at 1UD can continue moving after deployment of ambush, or that they must stop moving? |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669
|
Posté le: Mer Juin 05, 2024 2:22 pm Sujet du message: |
|
AlanCutner a écrit: | Hazelbark a écrit: | Andy Fyfe a écrit: |
I think this needs to be added to the errata rather than just a 'member of the rules committee made a forum post in 2021'. |
I would fully expect rulings to be you must stop as umpires might as you say not accept the post as evidence. I will bring this to El Kreator's attention this summer. |
Bit confused. Are you agreeing with Andy that units discovering ambush at 1UD can continue moving after deployment of ambush, or that they must stop moving? |
I would rule based on my reading of the rules p 77 that only if its a fake ambush may you resume movement once stopped. But if indeed there is an intent to clarify that with an errata i would change once i knew the errata was coming. Until this thread i had not heard anything contrary was out there. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Mike Bennett
Légat
Inscrit le: 11 Nov 2017 Messages: 582
Localisation: Carnforth, Lancashire, UK
|
Posté le: Jeu Juin 06, 2024 7:32 am Sujet du message: |
|
Hazelbark a écrit: |
I would fully expect rulings to be you must stop as umpires might as you say not accept the post as evidence. I will bring this to El Kreator's attention this summer. |
IMHO it is not a case of not accepting. More fundamentally umpires may feal that it is wrong to impose a rule change on an unsuspecting player, or not even be aware of the change themselves. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
|