Movement near the edge of a woods.

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

donglewwe
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:10 pm

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by donglewwe » Sat Jun 22, 2019 2:11 pm

"...he has to move what is rolled and move the whole 5" "

Just to be clear: The player has the option of declaring the final position to be a specific terrain feature - in this case, the hedge - so that the troops would not be forced to cross it into the field beyond just because a '5' was rolled when only a '4' (eg) was needed.

Archdukek
Posts: 4612
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by Archdukek » Sat Jun 22, 2019 2:55 pm

The player has to state where he is moving to before any dice are rolled, not afterwards. He can say that he is stopping at the hedge and will stop there and not go beyond it, but he cannot say he will stop at some specific distance from the hedge. He cannot use the hedge to define another point in the field he wants to move to.

The 2" zone near a high dense hedge was initially created by Rich after discussion as an easy means of distinguishing when figures were close enough to be considered as having adopted firing positions and therefore visible to their opponents and able to see them in turn. You could agree to allow troops to remain hidden closer to a hedge but they would have to move to take up position if anyone approached the hedge from the other side and thus risk triggering Overwatch fire while reducing the effectiveness of their own fire.

By the way a ploughed field would normally only count as Broken Ground preventing a unit moving At the Double, not lose 1" of movement that's for Heavy Going (Section7.2).

John

User avatar
JOHN BOND 001
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 11:58 am

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by JOHN BOND 001 » Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:02 pm

Thank you all, for your input. :)
Archdukek said :By the way a ploughed field would normally only count as Broken Ground preventing a unit moving At the Double, not lose 1" of movement that's for Heavy Going (Section7.2).
Thanks John I was factoring in the 1 point of Shock the US team had :)

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 6510
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by Truscott Trotter » Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:17 pm

Just as an aside we were playtesting a Polish list with 15 man single team squads and although they took a fair bit of punishment we soon realised that having 7 or 8 shock on a single team meant they were pretty ineffective at moving or shooting.

User avatar
oozeboss
Posts: 736
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 5:25 am
Location: In the Shadow of the Temple of Mir-Anda, Sydney, Australia

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by oozeboss » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:04 am

I also agree with Munin's reply much earlier in this thread.

Defining an actual physical feature is logical, but nobody's ever been ordered to diddley-bop along to within 10 cms of where the bad guys can actually see you (in our game, this is the whole point of going Tactical, innitt?). And I hate with a passion the whole "stay out of sight" gamesmanship ploy, as it's simply not based in anything vaguely resembling reality.
"We are all worms.
But I do believe that I am a glow-worm."

Winston Churchill

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 6510
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by Truscott Trotter » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:08 am

the whole "stay out of sight" gamesmanship ploy, as it's simply not based in anything vaguely resembling reality.

I can assure you when coming home late from the pub the "stay out of sight" ploy is a good one! :D

User avatar
oozeboss
Posts: 736
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 5:25 am
Location: In the Shadow of the Temple of Mir-Anda, Sydney, Australia

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by oozeboss » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:10 am

But is it, as Dennis Cometti would have said (while commentating AFL on Australian TV), "Centimeter perfect, Bruce"?
"We are all worms.
But I do believe that I am a glow-worm."

Winston Churchill

Tomm
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2019 8:58 pm

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by Tomm » Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:04 pm

I suppose one could instruct the troops to "advance until you can just see out of the forest.". But I'd probably only allow it with a 1d6 movement, where they're taking their time and being cautious.

Archdukek
Posts: 4612
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by Archdukek » Sun Jun 23, 2019 8:44 pm

Tomm wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:04 pm
I suppose one could instruct the troops to "advance until you can just see out of the forest.". But I'd probably only allow it with a 1d6 movement, where they're taking their time and being cautious.
No you can't do that under the rules. You can only declare the intention to stop at a specific recognisable point which in this case would be the wood edge, not some arbitrary and subjective point within the wood. However, there is nothing to stop a player declaring he is moving Tactically, rolling 1D6 and gaining an additional level of cover, representing the kind of cautious approach you are describing.

Besides if the troops can see out of the forest or wood then they can be seen by those outside looking in.

John

User avatar
MLB
Posts: 731
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:57 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Movement near the edge of a woods.

Post by MLB » Sun Jun 23, 2019 10:49 pm

Tomm wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:04 pm
I suppose one could instruct the troops to "advance until you can just see out of the forest.". But I'd probably only allow it with a 1d6 movement, where they're taking their time and being cautious.
That is fraught with opportunity for misinterpretation. What does ‘just see out’ really mean? Until you see daylight? until you can see 50-100m away? It is really a very vague command, so much so in fact I’d argue it’s not really a command at all, more a suggestion. The root of the issue is that the gamer can see so much more and wants to have his cake and eat it which is exactly why the rules don’t allow it. Much like a player who wants to put his SL safe behind a high wall but have him ‘attached’ to a unit in the open for command purposes, but who then complains about the rules that allow the SL to still be considered a target.
The Tactical Painter https://thetacticalpainter.blogspot.com
Painting little soldiers for tactical battles on the table top

Post Reply