Straight Line Movement

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

Post Reply
RandoSystem
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 2:47 am

Straight Line Movement

Post by RandoSystem »

Greetings All,
I’m a newcomer here. My daughter and I bought in last month and have played seven or so times - best set of WW2 skirmish rules I’ve seen!

Inevitably, rules questions come up fairly frequently in a game such as this, so I generally come here first.

In my digging, I often find out rules that I’ve missed apart from whatever I was initially looking for. Recently I came across discussion saying that you have to move your infantry in a straight line (turning at the start of any activation, and turning again after moving). In fact, this seems to be a pretty strong consensus on the forums.

A. Declare a target piece of terrain to move towards
B. Roll dice
C. Move maximum distance in a straight line - stopping early only if the terrain is reached.

That’s interesting, because that is not what I get when I read the movement section of the rules. Can anyone point me to the relevant sections?

Specifically, I couldn’t find a single sentence requiring me to move the max distance rolled. Neither could I find anything even suggesting movement in a straight line. Finally, I didn’t see anything about designating terrain and stopping upon reaching it.

Please help - I’m sincerely confused. Thanks!

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7711
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Straight Line Movement

Post by Truscott Trotter »

You are correct it is not in the rules as written - but the author clarified his intention on this point many years ago and added it to the FAQ p 13
Section 7: Infantry Movement
7.1 Basic Movement
Q: When you roll for movement, is the number of inches rolled the maximum that may be moved, or
is it the distance which MUST be moved?

A: It is normally the distance which you must move. However, there is an important exception to that
where you may specify that the unit is moving up to a specific recognisable point, such as a hedge or
the crest of the hill. In those situations, you can stop at that point. But if you are moving across open
ground then that is how far you must go

AND
Design insight: From a game design point of view, we tend to have far more control on our troops than
we would in reality. You as a wargamer may know precisely where you want your men to move to for
optimum effect, they do not have the same ‘helicopter vision’ appreciation of the battlefield and are,
consequently, less precise in their actions. Equally, when we tell our men to move, we cannot be sure
how quickly they will react and, just as importantly, how quickly the enemy will react. By using dice based
movement we introduce this uncertainty. But remember, with more than one dice rolled this is
not random, you can estimate how likely you are to move and then hope your men live up to your
expectations.

siggian
Posts: 894
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 3:22 am
Location: Abbotsford, British Columbia, Canada
Contact:

Re: Straight Line Movement

Post by siggian »

I allow curved movement to avoid obstacles, follow a path, or to keep out of the enemy's LOS. But the curved path must be declared and described before any dice are rolled for movement.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7711
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Straight Line Movement

Post by Truscott Trotter »

I also allow some blokes to rearrange themselves as the move to get a clear lane of fire as long as they all move the correct distance and some of them move in a the shortest route. Following path/road /riverbank etc is good though we do the same - declare before rolling dice.
if you roll short tough you go as far as you can you don't suddenly change your mind and go some other direction

RandoSystem
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 2:47 am

Re: Straight Line Movement

Post by RandoSystem »

Ah. I should have known it would be in an FAQ.
Those explanations make perfect sense of the reasoning behind it as well.

Thank you all for the quick responses, context, and optional modifications!

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7711
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Straight Line Movement

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Welcome aboard the latest eratta and FAQ is on the TFL blog , link on p4 of sticky thread named....CoC FAQ
Actually cant find it on the thread here the direct limk
http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=7135

Archdukek
Posts: 5182
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: Straight Line Movement

Post by Archdukek »

Actually for future reference, if you reread section 7.1 you will find it says that a player decides how fast he wishes a unit to move by selecting one of the options listed, namely tactical movement, normal movement or at the double. Each of those options then says “Move 2D6 inches” etc. that is a specific, albeit variable, amount.

Nowhere does it say that a unit may move up to 2 D6 inches or whatever. It’s just that as Wargamers we are conditioned to rules saying “up to” the movement distance and assume it applies here. In rarely does in most TFL rules, but inevitably the question comes up and requires the explanation given in the FAQ.

John

RandoSystem
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 2:47 am

Re: Straight Line Movement

Post by RandoSystem »

Thanks Archduke,
I thought that, but it also doesn’t say that you must move the full distance - which surely would have warranted the extra word in the rules for clarity. Even then,that still doesn’t address the Straight Line movement, or the stopping at terrain.

And without the straight line piece, it’s basically useless because I could zigzag as much as I needed in order to move the exact total distance I want.

Even the FAQ doesn’t address that piece perfectly (doesn’t mention straight line). But there’s no way we could argue that one must move the full distance based on the core rulebook alone.

It is much clearer now though. And I like the intended lack of control that it simulates.

Post Reply