cheesy rule

[marioslaz]

You can get really abusive with this. Both the LH and the Cav can get a 9MU move. As they interpenetrate each other consecutively.

LH anc Cav cannot interpenetrate each other. They can only interpenetrate LF.

[marioslaz]

I make a simple diagram to show how much nasty could be this tactic. I think we can call it "Space Warp Tactic"



Red is friendly LF, green your Cav BG which use Space Warp and yellow an enemy BG. In diagram I used a LF BG in 6, but it works even better with a BG in 8. Of course I will never use it. I don't know if you can prevent it with a change in rules, but I have a simplest idea: if someone use this in a tournament you let him do, but then his name will be published in this forum and he will be banned from all tournament for one year.

[david53]

I make a simple diagram to show how much nasty could be this tactic. I think we can call it "Space Warp Tactic"



Red is friendly LF, green your Cav BG which use Space Warp and yellow an enemy BG. In diagram I used a LF BG in 6, but it works even better with a BG in 8. Of course I will never use it. I don't know if you can prevent it with a change in rules, but I have a simplest idea: if someone use this in a tournament you let him do, but then his name will be published in this forum and he will be banned from all tournament for one year.

Understand what your saying but how can someone be banned for using the rules as they stand.
Dave

[marioslaz]

Understand what your saying but how can someone be banned for using the rules as they stand.
Dave

Because nobody can write a ruleset which prevent all cheesy tactics. So, instead to write hundred of amendments to stop nasty behaviours, you write a style handbook for player. Wargamers who don't adhere to this handbook are banned from major tournaments. This also is valid for unhistorical change of formation which have the only reason to modify chances of impact/melee. IMO this is the only way to resolve cheesy play in historical wargame. Otherwise, rules change would be only a cat and mouse play as doping in sport disciplines.

[madaxeman]

I think it would be better if only LH armies were banned from doing this.

[Blathergut]

[quote="marioslaz"][quote="Blathergut"][quote="marioslaz"]Well,
Perhaps someone remember I found a way to improve chance of success when you fight spear/pike against impact foot. ...You can contract the front of a 6 bases' BG of spear drilled on 2 rows to a column when you are near enemy impact foot. If you do it when you move your BG within 6 MU from your enemy, it will be very difficult for him to use counter measure, like to bring shooting troops in fire range to your spear BG. Of course you cannot use this tactic if your opponent have a screen of skirmishers ahead of impact foot...


Ya, I remember this. If you just hit with the column, you only count 3 bases for testing...I found it caused more tests ...also useful in terrain restricting dice...come in with two MF 4 or 6pak columns and don't lose any dice.

[philqw78]

You can get really abusive with this. Both the LH and the Cav can get a 9MU move. As they interpenetrate each other consecutively.

LH anc Cav cannot interpenetrate each other. They can only interpenetrate LF.

Sorry miss-typed. Should have been LF. It was me that did it to Jaques so I know the rule. But in effect the Cav can go through the LF and then theLF through the same cav, giving about a 10mu move each

[kal5056]

I think it would be better if only LH armies were banned from doing this.

I agree with Tim, In fact let's just ban LH armies from doing anything except standing still.
Gino
SMAC

[bahdahbum]

Hy Phil,

You did it tome and I had a very hard time out of it and as I said , you did it in a restricted way , which I appreciated .

Now , of course in any rules there will be loops, rules which can be used to some profit . But i maintain that in this case, a simple change in wording should be enough or as I proposed earlier if the interpenetration is volontary, you must be able to go the whole way trough . It will have some effects on the LF but perhaps it is better that way .

[david53]

I think it would be better if only LH armies were banned from doing this.

Since its written in the rules and was discussed during the writing i take it will be still played as it is then, pity can't have all the rules written for LH it just dos'nt seem fair.

Watch those LH armies zoom across the table more now followed closely by zooming LF.

Super any other cunning plans for the LH then.

[ravenflight]

It was bound to spread anyway ! so let's find a solution before it get's out of hand .

How can you find a solution? There isn't going to be another set of the rules issued for quite some time, so we're stuck with it for now.

[david53]

I think it would be better if only LH armies were banned from doing this.

I agree with Tim, In fact let's just ban LH armies from doing anything except standing still.
Gino
SMAC

I think your being to soft on those LH armies ban them all, make them face away from you on the table and only move 1MU after a double CMT needing 12 to pass both times.

Its not as if they did anything in History like have a massive empire or bless him Attila that attacked the Roman Empire both eastern and western parts.

[ravenflight]

Understand what your saying but how can someone be banned for using the rules as they stand.
Dave

Well, in a similar vein they change rules in golf all the time.

One classical example is preferred lies when the course has been under weather extremes. The course may have a 'there is a 30cm preferred lie through the green on holes 1-3' on the notice board. A similar thing could be done (with more difficulty I admit) in the competition. The comp organisers would just say 'no use of the space warp will be permitted'. The trouble will come about when people are trying to legitimately use the rules, and so it would become an interpretation by the organisers.

I feel one way around this (maybe - I haven't thought about it very much) is for troops gaining more than 1MU of distance for voluntary interpenetration lose one cohesion level. At least then it's really only going to be used to get away from the enemy, not go towards the enemy. Who's going to risk moving closer quicker whilst disrupted?

[david53]

It was bound to spread anyway ! so let's find a solution before it get's out of hand .

How can you find a solution? There isn't going to be another set of the rules issued for quite some time, so we're stuck with it for now.

Sorry I was told today that it had been raised at design stage as the part about the LF not shooting if they move than 7MU does show. I don't know why it was kept in but something like this I don't think is cheesy, the writers knew it was there as the rule about the LF shows.

Maybe a author can explain the background to this.

Still had a game this afternoon with two armies with loads of Cavalry/Light Horse(Boo Boo) and light foot and this never came up, neither did the river or road problum. Adding extra for LF for evading does happen a lot.


It would be interesting to know out of all the 132 early games at Britcon how ofton this moving thing happened.

I know off two games but two out of 132 dos'nt seem much.

[david53]

I feel one way around this (maybe - I haven't thought about it very much) is for troops gaining more than 1MU of distance for voluntary interpenetration lose one cohesion level. At least then it's really only going to be used to get away from the enemy, not go towards the enemy. Who's going to risk moving closer quicker whilst disrupted?

As I have said its written down as clearly if you make the rear you pass through up to 2MU, its not chessy as the LF are punished by not being able to shoot if they move 7MU.

To change rules is up to any event organisers but it may start a strange trend if you pick out certain parts of the rules and say you can't do this.

To do that I think not being a rule writer mind you that it could effect other parts of the rules.

[david53]

Well, in a similar vein they change rules in golf all the time.

Look were that gets them, hitting little balls about ops sorry that is golf

[dave_r]

It would be interesting to know out of all the 132 early games at Britcon how ofton this moving thing happened.

I know off two games but two out of 132 dos'nt seem much.

I do this in pretty much every game I play. Sometimes it is fairly cheesy, othertimes it is only a little bit cheesy.

Sometimes, it really, really, p*ss*es my opponent off, which can be a reason for doing it at all

In fact, i even did it at the IWF (using extreme gorgonzola), my opponent shouted "cheese", I looked guilty, shrugged, my opopnent smiled and we both got on with it. Depends upon your definition of cheese - if everybody knows about the rule and expects it, then it isn't cheese is it?

[carlos]

HUGE LOL @ "style handbook" for wargamers. What's next? Tournament points for army composition and quality of painting? Pretty soon we'll be playing Warhammer (both kinds) which is where scrubs go when they are tired of playing to win and just want to "have fun" (i.e. lose). And banning players for playing within the rules is a terrible idea. There aren't as many players as there should be as is, let alone with banning.

[hammy]

This type of move has been possible for a while in other rulesets. That doesn't make it right but it is nothing new. I remember the look on my opponents face when I managed to move a DBM double based knight further than a light horse element using the same trick.

I agree that it is difficult to legislate against as most of the 'solutions' introduce other problems that might infact be worse.

If I had to invent a rule it would be that if you are unable to complete the interpenetration with your normal movement distance you can only interpenetrate a BG that has not moved yet this turn. That would I think remove the worst abuses without introducing too many others.

[ravenflight]

As I have said its written down as clearly if you make the rear you pass through up to 2MU, its not chessy as the LF are punished by not being able to shoot if they move 7MU.

I don't think there is an issue about the LF moving 7MU, there is an issue about the Cavalry interpenetrating the LF and moving heaps more. If you have a column of 8 LF and interpenetrate with the second element only just getting into the rear of the LF, then being pushed through to the other side in some kind of transwarp drive scenario is going to give you about an extra 4MU of movement. Consider that they can be Lance Armed, and so being unable to shoot is of absolutely no negative.