| Author | Topic |
|---|
Nightrain
Posts: 424
Registered:
October 2008
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Sat, 31 October 2009 17:45
 
|
 |
|
it's not the dice that i whine but your aircraft carries a big atomic bomb which is illegal in M44 lol
|
|
|
Sgt Storm
Posts: 685
Registered:
December 2006
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Sun, 01 November 2009 23:48
|
|
|
Seriously though, the problem with Air Power (by itself, not with air rules) is it favors the Allies (since they get 2 dice). I understand the historical significance (somewhat), but that should not matter in a command card. That is, all command cards should be evenly weighted to each side. Special rules (e.g., Blitz Rules) then can skew the results one way or the other as appropriate.
|
|
|
Nightrain
Posts: 424
Registered:
October 2008
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Mon, 02 November 2009 04:26
|
|
i also felt the same
that's why the air rules that overrides the previous air power is one great way to balance the game 
|
|
|
OldBloodandGuts
Posts: 298
Registered:
May 2007
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Mon, 02 November 2009 15:32
|
|
|
When I write early war scenarios, I often have a special instruction to "invert" the Air Power card (Axis roll two and Allies roll only one), since the Luftwaffe was so dominant in North Africa and Russia early in the war.
|
|
|
PanzerRunes
Posts: 228
Registered:
January 2007
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 06:15
|
|
| Steve Nightrain wrote on Sun, 01 November 2009 19:26 |
that's why the air rules that overrides the previous air power is one great way to balance the game
|
True Air Rules do balance the game but my impression is that the Air Rules are flawed and go against some fairly conventional logic... I know it is a game and abstracts many concepts in favor of simplicity and ease of play but the Air Rules just feel like two left shoes... Which isn't bad if you have two left feet.
I rarely use air rules because of this.
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6059
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 06:21
|
|
| PanzerRunes wrote on Mon, 02 November 2009 21:15 |
Which isn't bad if you have two left feet.
I rarely use air rules because of this.
|
You don't play with the Air Rules because you have 2 left feet?! 
|
|
|
PanzerRunes
Posts: 228
Registered:
January 2007
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 06:29
|
|
And thumbs...  ... But my kids still call me dad... I am known as the strange parent who keeps walking in circles while mumbling.
But yes I think the Air Rules are broken... Now back to the on-going debate regarding the BEL card...
|
|
|
GreatDane
Posts: 755
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:BEL of St. Richard's :)
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 11:12
|
|
| ad79 wrote on Tue, 27 October 2009 23:31 |
So if I move 3 hexes with BEL, end on a road hex, battle and then move again.
If all my remaining moves is now on a road, am I alloved to move four hexes?
|
No. The card instructs you to ignore movement restrictions.
Although the term 'restiction' is never defined, I am pretty certain it covers bonusses as well as limitations.
|
|
|
Vulch
Posts: 404
Registered:
May 2009
|
|
Re:BEL of St. Richard's :)
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 12:08
|
|
| GreatDane wrote on Tue, 03 November 2009 10:12 |
| ad79 wrote on Tue, 27 October 2009 23:31 |
So if I move 3 hexes with BEL, end on a road hex, battle and then move again.
If all my remaining moves is now on a road, am I alloved to move four hexes?
|
No. The card instructs you to ignore movement restrictions.
Although the term 'restiction' is never defined, I am pretty certain it covers bonusses as well as limitations.
|
The word restriction is defined in the English language?
Restriction: something that restricts; a restrictive condition or regulation; limitation.
An extra move is not a restriction.
|
|
|
sam1812
Posts: 1901
Registered:
August 2006
|
|
Re:BEL of St. Richard's :)
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 14:41
|
|
As the FAQ says, "basically, an Infantry unit is allowed to go anywhere it could legally go in 6 one-hex movements" (with an optional battle after the first 3 movements). (Roads don't give a bonus. Steep hills count as single hexes. Impassable terrain is impassable.)
http://www.daysofwonder.com/en/msg/?th=17900&start=0 See page 28 for full details.
|
|
|
Vulch
Posts: 404
Registered:
May 2009
|
|
|
gheintze
Posts: 859
Registered:
August 2004
|
|
Re:BEL of St. Richard's :)
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 16:08
|
|
| Vulch wrote on Tue, 03 November 2009 09:00 |
A. Yes, and then it can take its remaining 3 hexes of movement. This effectively could allow an Infantry unit to move 7 total hexes.
There goes the 6 hex and no more theory!
|
If restrictions aren't counted than neither are bonuses, they are both exceptions to the movement rules. Since BEL is ignoring the movement rules the bonuses would not be taken into account either.
And the answer you post refers to taking ground -- which is an action outside of the movement rules -- so your quote and the resulting conclusion are a bit misleading.
Geoff
|
|
|
Vulch
Posts: 404
Registered:
May 2009
|
|
Re:BEL of St. Richard's :)
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 16:33
|
|
| gheintze wrote on Tue, 03 November 2009 15:08 |
| Vulch wrote on Tue, 03 November 2009 09:00 |
A. Yes, and then it can take its remaining 3 hexes of movement. This effectively could allow an Infantry unit to move 7 total hexes.
There goes the 6 hex and no more theory!
|
If restrictions aren't counted than neither are bonuses, they are both exceptions to the movement rules. Since BEL is ignoring the movement rules the bonuses would not be taken into account either.
And the answer you post refers to taking ground -- which is an action outside of the movement rules -- so your quote and the resulting conclusion are a bit misleading.
Geoff
|
Not misleading, I was just demonstrating that you can move more than 6 hexes in certain circumstances.
Your position that "exceptions" to the movement rule do not apply is misleading, since that is not what the card says. The card only says "restrictions" do not apply. A bonus is not a restriction, its simple English.
|
|
|
ad79
Posts: 772
Registered:
September 2007
|
|
Re:BEL of St. Richard's :)
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 17:33
|
|
So the question of the Extra move on the BEL has followers on both sides, and I don't think an agreement can be made unless Richard or DOW steps in to resolve the issue.
And just to add some fuel to the flame.
If an extra move is allowed on the last 3 hex move on road it should also be possible on the 3 hex move before the attack.
Example.
I am on a road, plays BEL, moves my infantry 3 hexes + 1 for road bonus, attacks and eliminates unit on adjacent road hex, takes ground, moves remaining 3 hexes + 1 road bonus.
Can you, Richard or any DOW staffers, give us an official answer if this 9 hex move is a legal action?
|
|
|
gheintze
Posts: 859
Registered:
August 2004
|
|
|
Krieghund
Posts: 147
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 19:35
|
|
Take two:
"The effects of terrain on movement are ignored, except for impassable terrain."
|
|
|
Timmuilwijk
Posts: 164
Registered:
March 2009
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 22:10
|
|
Indeed a very heated discussion, but both sides bring in good arguments, but what does the card say, no restrictions, and what does the FAQ say? (somebody?)
We need an answer from DoW on this one, but I think that 7 hexes (6 movement + 1 take ground) is correct but partially probably, if starting from road hex moving, ending up after battle on road hex and moving again...
Tim
|
|
|
Sgt Storm
Posts: 685
Registered:
December 2006
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Tue, 03 November 2009 22:46
|
|
While it is fun to argue about the same thing over and over...
The card answers the question already. It says "Unit may move up to 3 hexes". So it cannot move more than 3 hexes (in each half). Case closed.
This card is already powerful enough. It does not need terrain benefits.
|
|
|
sam1812
Posts: 1901
Registered:
August 2006
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Wed, 04 November 2009 02:57
|
|
| Timmuilwijk wrote on Tue, 03 November 2009 16:10 |
Indeed a very heated discussion, but both sides bring in good arguments, but what does the card say, no restrictions, and what does the FAQ say? (somebody?)
We need an answer from DoW on this one, but I think that 7 hexes (6 movement + 1 take ground) is correct but partially probably, if starting from road hex moving, ending up after battle on road hex and moving again...
|
There has been an official ruling that an infantry can take ground after a successful close combat in BEL, before doing its second movement. The question is explicitly asked and answered on page 28 of the FAQ (4th question): "Yes, and then it can take its remaining 3 hexes of mocement. This effectively could allow an infantry unit to move 7 total hexes."
|
|
|
Vulch
Posts: 404
Registered:
May 2009
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Wed, 04 November 2009 11:21
|
|
| Sgt Storm wrote on Tue, 03 November 2009 21:46 |
While it is fun to argue about the same thing over and over...
The card answers the question already. It says "Unit may move up to 3 hexes". So it cannot move more than 3 hexes (in each half). Case closed.
|
I could equally argue that the standard armour card says 0-3 and battle. So it cannot move more than 3 hexes. Case closed.
There are always additions and exceptions.
Richard Borg always says (and has said on this very forum) if you take the words on the cards literally you wont go wrong.
Taking the BEL card literally, only "restrictions" are ignored. Any other rules still apply. Case Closed!.........and I am sat on the lid.
|
|
|
tank commander
Posts: 1785
Registered:
October 2004
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Wed, 04 November 2009 11:48
|
|
I believe that the question of a if a BEL ordered unit could benefit from the road bonus was asked before before AND officially answered and that answer was "no".
|
|
|
tank commander
Posts: 1785
Registered:
October 2004
|
|
|
Timmuilwijk
Posts: 164
Registered:
March 2009
|
|
Re:Question to Dow: Revised behind enemy lines
|
Wed, 04 November 2009 18:45
|
|
Those Japs are always unlucky, the marines can even order one more BEL inf with the cards while (most of the time) the Japs cannot move more than one hex between caves....the poor bastards, I think that is why they lost the war 
Tim
|
|
|
