| Author | Topic |
|---|
EddieP
|
Junior Member
|
Posts: 13
Registered:
September 2004
|
 Infantry Assault
|
Mon, 28 March 2005 13:22
|
 |
1. Can I deliberately chose to play the Infantry Assault card on a section where I don't have any infantry units, so as to take advantage of "issue an order to 1 unit of your choice"?
2. In the St. Vith, Ardennes scenario, a special rule states that the hills toward St. Vith are imapassable. On the map, this translates to the fact that units coming in from St. Vith can't climb the hills. What about units coming in toward St. Vith? The confusdion is generated by the arrows on the map, which suggest that the hills are impassable from only one direction only.
Thanks for any answers.
|
|
|
The Old Soldier
|
Member
|
Posts: 51
Registered:
March 2005
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Mon, 28 March 2005 18:07
|
|
First off I'm no official rule guy, just a fan like yourself.
1. I'd say NO. If you have any Infantry on the board.
2. The arrows seem to just be pointing to what hills are impassible. So, I would say all sides of the hills shown are impassable in all directions.
Hope that helps, 
Sean
|
|
|
coyote58
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 2739
Registered:
December 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Tue, 29 March 2005 11:32
|
|
If i believe the answer on the french forum (in 1CC Stan in believe, in the name of tha army, the air and the navy...) the good answer have been given by old soldier for the St-Vith question, Those hills are compare to stone column, not suitable for walking, rolling or even climbing. So your infantry in forest really need the sandbag or they die on every flag. If it's begin to be hot there, go away, Someone told that the best defence is the attack...
But, i don't agree for the first question. If you decide to play one unit instead of a lot, why not. I hope that' for getting you out of a bad situation. If not, take appointment with a doctor quick...
If i read old soldier correctly, you can't if you have infantry on board. So, using same kind of logic, the sandbags card say "activate four units..." If i have only three infantry i can't play it ???
I think that someone can always play the bad side of one card, even if it seem stupid in most time.
(Please not that i don't have the card under my eyes. I don't remember the exact text of it, but it seem to me that it was "if you don't have any infantry", referring to ALL THE BOARD. If this is true, old soldier have the good answer: NO.)
PS: EdieP, please be patient with that card, it would be really helpful a few turn after...
|
|
|
EddieP
|
|
Junior Member
|
Posts: 13
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Wed, 30 March 2005 09:21
|
|
Thanks for the answer about St. Vith.
About Infantry Assault: it seems interesting to point out that there are three other cards reading: "If you do not command any ... units, issue an order to 1 unit of your choice." These cards are Behind Enemy Lines, Armor Assault and Artillery Bombard.
The key difference between them and Infantry Assault is that the latter card is section directed. So common sense (mine, at least) dictates that it can be indeed used to deliberately order an unit in a section with no infantry units (even though the other sections may have infantry units in them).
"So, using same kind of logic, the sandbags card say "activate four units..." If i have only three infantry i can't play it ???"
Along the same lines, I asked in this forum if Air Power can be used on a single isolated unit, as this isn't certainly a group (as stated on the card). The answer was yes, so along the same lines, I'd say you can order less units then a card states. Can you do this on purpose though?
|
|
|
coyote58
|
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 2739
Registered:
December 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Wed, 30 March 2005 10:56
|
|
Hello again EddieP !
For assault infantry, i look with more attention and believe in my last answer : you need to have no infantry on all the board to activate one unit of your choice. But that could be another way to play it if agreed by both players before the game.
For the last part of your message, i think you can always activate less units than the card say. But, i'm french speaker and i didn't exactly understand the meaning of your last sentence ("Can you do this on purpose though?"). I hope it won't make any difference to my message, as the text in french and english on the card could be a little different in interpretation.
Have a good game.
|
|
|
EddieP
|
|
Junior Member
|
Posts: 13
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Wed, 30 March 2005 17:17
|
|
But, i'm french speaker and i didn't exactly understand the meaning of your last sentence ("Can you do this on purpose though?").
If I play a card that reads "Order 4 units of your choice", can I chose to order less than 4 (weird situation to be sure, but it can happen)?
|
|
|
The Old Soldier
|
|
Member
|
Posts: 51
Registered:
March 2005
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Wed, 30 March 2005 17:42
|
|
Eddie, I do believe you are correct. Following the logic that if you have a section card that has no troops in it you could play the card, so to get a new card and end your turn. Then by the same logic, you could play this card on a section that has no infantry and use the alternate choice on the card.
Good call.
Sean
|
|
|
eric
Posts: 2475
Registered:
October 2002
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Wed, 30 March 2005 18:18
|
|
yes, you may (order less than 4 units). In effect, you are ordering the remaining units to sit tight and do nothin (though why you wouldn't want them to at least take a shot if they have the ennemy in sight is another matter  )
eric
|
|
|
Krieghund
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 147
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Wed, 30 March 2005 20:39
|
|
| The Old Soldier wrote on Wed, 30 March 2005 10:42 |
Eddie, I do believe you are correct. Following the logic that if you have a section card that has no troops in it you could play the card, so to get a new card and end your turn. Then by the same logic, you could play this card on a section that has no infantry and use the alternate choice on the card.
|
I have to disagree, Eddie and Sean. When you play a section-specific card in a section that has no troops, you are playing an unplayable card because it is specific to a single section - there are no units on the board (in that section) that satify the card. However, "Infantry Assault" allows you to pick a section, therefore it is only unplayable if you have no infantry units anywhere on the board at all, just as the card says.
|
|
|
The Old Soldier
|
|
Member
|
Posts: 51
Registered:
March 2005
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Thu, 31 March 2005 01:52
|
|
Sorry Kreighund, guess we will have to disagree. As gamers I think we tend to try to overreach and add to much to what is said on the cards in general.
Playing a command card on page 6 states:
At the start of your turn, play one command card from your hand. Place it face up in front of you, and read it aloud.
Command cards are normally used to order units to move and/or battle. The card you play will indicate which section(s) of the battlefield you may issue orders, and how many units you may order.
That is all that is said about using command cards. No where does it say you can't use a card that is not playable due to not having units to issue orders to. So, yes you can play such a card each turn and draw a new and hopefully better one. And since in the above case mentioned if you play a card that is section directed which said to order upto 4 infantry, but if you do not have any infantry then order one other unit of the players choice, it would clearly mean in that sector. So the card would work fine.
Sean
|
|
|
Krieghund
|
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 147
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Thu, 31 March 2005 04:50
|
|
|
Sean, I wasn't saying that you can't play an unplayable card and draw a new one - you obviously can. I was saying that you can't make a card that allows you to choose a section unplayable in its primary capacity, and thereby use it in its secondary capacity, by choosing a section that does not meet the conditions when there is another section that does.
|
|
|
The Old Soldier
|
|
Member
|
Posts: 51
Registered:
March 2005
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Thu, 31 March 2005 07:17
|
|
|
understood, but no where does it say I must play that card in a section that has the primary units. The card give you the choice of using it in any section, thus I should be able to play it in a section that doesn't have any infantry. As I say I disagree, I think your reading too much into that card.
|
|
|
coyote58
|
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 2739
Registered:
December 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Thu, 31 March 2005 10:50
|
|
OK, i'll try to close the subject.
I don't have any infantry on all the board, i can use "infantry assault" to activate one unit in one section of my choice. I believe we all agree on that.
With that card we can choose the section were tha assault is gonna be done if we have infantry. I believe we all agree on that.
I have infantry in right flank and center, but i need to move a tank on left flank to get me out of shit... I don't have activation card for left flank. I DON'T THINK I CAN CHOOSE ASSAULT INFANTRY IN LEFT FLANK TO USE THE LAST PART OF THE CARD... It kind of over reading between lines or something like that. Anyway. i think (and play this way) that activating one unit of your choice refer to the situation where YOU DON'T HAVE ANY INFANTRY ON ALL THE BOARD with this card.
Really funny to see how everyone play a little different. I miss having different partner to play, always have the same one yet (but i live with her so, it's great to play with girlfriend, all the others before hate to play wargame )
Have a good game !
|
|
|
1CC Stan
Posts: 4018
Registered:
May 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Thu, 31 March 2005 14:05
|
|
Hello Soldier,
I'am a Belgian French speaking player. I play, usually in French, with the French rules and cards, but also with Flemish or English speaking friends using the English rules and cards.
When I read this card one sentence at a time, in French or in English, that give the following procedure :
First I look for Infantry on the board.
If I have Infantry on more than one section I choose the section where to issue an order at all the Infantry.
If I have Infantry on only one section the choice is reduced to its simplest form : this one !
If I have no Infantry on the board I go immediately to the last paragraph and I issue an order to ONE unit of my choice anywhere on the board.
Reading cards and rules like flowchart, one sentence at a time, giving a logical answer when necessary is the best way to avoid problem.
So, in this case :
INFANTRY : Yes or No ?
Yes = Issue the order in one section and apply the next sentence.
No = go to the first applicable sentence (the last one) and issue an order to only one unit of your choice anywhere on the board !
Be sure that you are always allowed to play one card in your turn but that you are not forced to do something with your units before you draw a new card !
A+
|
|
|
Krieghund
|
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 147
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Thu, 31 March 2005 14:11
|
|
I agree, Coyote58.
Sean, I don't see how I am "reading too much into this card." The card says, "If you do not command any infantry units, issue an order to 1 unit of your choice." That seems pretty straightforward to me. It seems to me that interpretting it to say "If you do not command any infantry units in the section that you choose, issue an order to 1 unit of your choice" is actually "reading something more into it". 
But, at this point, I'll agree to disagree. 
|
|
|
The Old Soldier
|
|
Member
|
Posts: 51
Registered:
March 2005
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Thu, 31 March 2005 19:36
|
|
Well, we will have to agree the text on this card needs tightening.  The part I read is the first Primary instruction.
Issue an order to all infantry units in 1 sector.
so the way I see it is if I pick a sector without infantry in it the secondary use of the card would kick in.
But that is neither here nor there my friend. This one should definately go to the FAQ. 
|
|
|
Brummbar44
Posts: 1045
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Fri, 01 April 2005 02:39
|
|
It seems the problem here is in how Sean is selectively reading this particular card, just because it indicates 1 section.
That is the primary function of the card but you are obliged by the catch all at the end of "if you do not command any infantry units..." this is not applied to just that one section but rather applies to all sections.
Equallly, if you read the Dig-In card it has the same catch at the bottom. You wouldn't be able to for go digging in just to move one unit elsewhere... so why could you with the Infantry Assault card?
As long as you have infantry anywhere on the board you would be bound by this catch. Nothing official, just my opinion.
|
|
|
Gojira
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 165
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Fri, 01 April 2005 04:53
|
|
|
Brummbar is absolutely correct. If you have infantry units on the board, regardless of the section they are in, the card can only be used to activate those infantry units.
|
|
|
The Old Soldier
|
|
Member
|
Posts: 51
Registered:
March 2005
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Fri, 01 April 2005 08:00
|
|
You, guys may be right. I just want to point out the card needs a FAQ.
Both Infantry Assault and Armor Assault are the ONLY special cards with the requirement of playing it in ONE sector. I would have assumed that the text stating if you do not have any Infantry or Armor it was refering the THAT sector.
Otherwise I would think the card should say if you no infantry/armor in any sectors then order one unit of your choice.
But like I said, I'm not trying to cause trouble, just want to point out the cards are ambiguous. I would like to see a formal ruling on these to be added to the FAQ.
Sean
|
|
|
1CC Stan
Posts: 4018
Registered:
May 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Fri, 01 April 2005 08:11
|
|
Hello Soldier,
A message is send to Richard to ask a new FAQ and a difinitive position on the problem.
So wait and see !
A+
|
|
|
Gojira
|
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 165
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Fri, 01 April 2005 14:24
|
|
|
I guess this goes back to people reading more into the card then it says, which seems to be what you are doing. If you have infantry on the board, then you command infantry, regardless of the section they are in. Therefore, the card cannot be played to activate a non-infantry unit in a section just because you have no infantry there, assuming you have infantry elsewhere on the board. To assume that it acts as a section card in all respects is reading something into the card that isn't there.
|
|
|
klz_fc
|
Junior Member
|
Posts: 16
Registered:
January 2005
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Fri, 01 April 2005 16:56
|
|
It's interesting that players can read such different conclusions based on the ambiguities of the text. I've read and re-read the card and looked at the FAQ and assumed the same as Old Soldier. What makes this even more strange is that the cards were created in English first then translated (unless I'm incorrectly remembering things I've read about the game).
I believe you can use the card in a section with no infantry and use the secondary effect regardless of having infantry in other sections. It would make the card more flexible and give options to a player who finds themselves unable to command any units on one side of the board.
At the same time, I can see the tactical uses of either interpretation. The alternative view where you must use it could mean that the player should make an all out assault and try to take out squads in hopes of weakening the opponent more and to gain medals in this way, or to at least hope to get flags to force the opposing squads back. Using a card to do nothing seems unfair, but as noted before, the most memorable games often come from winning (or coming close) under dire circumstances, and thematically, this interpretation might be the correct one since so many scenarios make it very unfair to the Axis player, who generally will be trying to take advantage of defensive moves and who will want to stay in place.
Let's hope Mr. Borg gets an answer to us soon. And let's hope this covers Infantry Assault, Armor Assault and Dig In since these are the cards noted with ambiguous wording.
|
|
|
Brummbar44
Posts: 1045
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Fri, 01 April 2005 19:19
|
|
| The Old Soldier wrote on Thu, 31 March 2005 22:00 |
Both Infantry Assault and Armor Assault are the ONLY special cards with the requirement of playing it in ONE sector. I would have assumed that the text stating if you do not have any Infantry or Armor it was refering the THAT sector.
|
Actually, only the Infantry Assualt in this case specifies the sector, the Armor allows for any 4 armor units and is not sector specific.
| The Old Soldier wrote on Thu, 31 March 2005 22:00 |
Otherwise I would think the card should say if you no infantry/armor in any sectors then order one unit of your choice.
|
In essence it does. "If you do not have ANY infantry units" This automatically makes it a blanket statement for all sectors. This can be verified through the other cards that contain the same statement (ie. Artillery Bombard, Armor Assault, etc..).
Just because you don't have Artillery in one sector doesn't mean you can use this card to move a unit in that sector and ignore your artillery in another sector.
Otherwise, by your logic, you are saying exactly that, that this end statement may now be intrepreted in a sector by sector basis, yet the Infantry Assault card is the only one that could even remotely be interpreted this way.
However, I do agree with you. Should any rule or card give rise to confusion on it's meaning it should be addressed in the FAQs if nothing more than to prevent questions from arising again and again in the forums. You have, in my opinion raised a very relevant question. Thanks.
|
|
|
EddieP
|
|
Junior Member
|
Posts: 13
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Fri, 01 April 2005 20:47
|
|
Thanks everybody for your input.
My own view is that the ambiguity arises because Infantry Assault specifies ordering units in a section. I think it was a text slip-up, so the card should be played exactly like Armor Assault and Artillery Bombard, meaning that you can order an unit of your choice only if you have no infantry units available on the board. So a revised text or a FAQ clarification should patch this up.
|
|
|
Gojira
|
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 165
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Sat, 02 April 2005 21:11
|
|
|
Spoke with Richard at our game this morning and confirmed that the card may not be played to order non-infantry units if you command any infantry units anywhere on the board.
|
|
|
The Old Soldier
|
|
Member
|
Posts: 51
Registered:
March 2005
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Sun, 03 April 2005 02:15
|
|
|
Fine by me, now put it in the FAQ, and everything will be cool.
|
|
|
coyote58
|
|
Senior Member
|
Posts: 2739
Registered:
December 2004
|
|
Re:Infantry Assault
|
Tue, 05 April 2005 14:22
|
|
So...
The subject is close ?
Really ?
No one add nothing to this ?
...
Yes
Youppi 
Cool really cool 
It's finish
Don't wanna see any other message, OK, or i'll get mad  (don't know yet how to get mad on a forum but i'll try...)
Have nices games, every one of you
|
|
|
