Slitherine

kal5056 wrote:Before I get flamed on. I know the authors have put thier definition in the glassary and for this game that is what is meant. However, one definition listed by Webster's.com is :

" at or to some point not beyond, as in length or distance; not farther than: within a radius of a mile. "


Using this definition within 6 mus would include 6mus.

Not sure whether you are agreeing or disagreeing, but the Webster's definition quoted above corresponds to the one used in the rules.

i.e. The rules use the normal dictionary definition of "within" as applied to distances.

No Richard I am sorry but:
"AT or To Some point Not Beyond"

Would translate (using this definition) to At or to some point not beyond 6MU's.

I understand that this is not the definition on which the rule is based and that once one reads the glossary for the definition that you have chosen to use it is clear. I only point this out to show that in the abscence of a glossary (or the idea that you might need to look up the definition of WITHIN) one could resonably read this and stop at 6MU's from the Enemy and consider yourself not 'Within' 6MU.

I certainly hope this does not now turn into a discussion of the definition of "AT" LOL.

Gino
SMAC

Very good my good friend Gino.

Now look up the definition of "cannot go" and the light might switch on over your bald head.

Best of luck in Lancaster.


JM

JM,
Don't bring the rules into this now.
I paid for a proper argument and that was never 10 minutes there.
Gino
SMAC

Before I get flamed on. I know the authors have put thier definition in the glassary and for this game that is what is meant. However, one definition listed by Webster's.com is :

" at or to some point not beyond, as in length or distance; not farther than: within a radius of a mile. "

Using this definition within 6 mus would include 6mus.

Gino
SMAC

Another definition that matches our definition therefore is it not?

Si

kal5056 wrote:No Richard I am sorry but:
"AT or To Some point Not Beyond"

Would translate (using this definition) to At or to some point not beyond 6MU's.

I understand that this is not the definition on which the rule is based.

But it is.

2nd moves cannot go "within" 6 MUs of enemy = 2nd moves cannot go "at or to some point not beyond" 6 MUs of enemy = 2nd moves cannot go "at or closer than" 6 MUs of enemy.

I can only think that its something that has been lost in translation Gino. Even what you post is exactly as defined in the rules.

Now FOG is very international we are bound to get a bit of this here and there.

No problem but please trust RBS and I that what you have "unearthed" is just another definition that is exactly the same as all the others and the rules as written.

The forum has served its purpose and allowed a misunderstanding to be easily fixed.

Can we drop this one now. The rules are quite specific on the matter and we are in danger of all disappearing in a pointless puff of logic and illlogic

Si

I think Gino just lost himself in the argument, as it dragged on. JM's answer sorted him out I believe. Although my picture of Gino is now

We were playing this wrong also, so will now start playing it correctly, ie. you must stop outside of 6 MUs when you double move. However, this won't give bowmen any more shots against HF than when playing it wrongly, will it ? The HF must come within 6 MUs to be able to contact the bow in two moves. And they can only be shot at when they come within 6 MU.
So when playing it wrongly, they would double move to 6 MU where they would be shot at. Now they double move, stop outside 6 MU and don't get shot at.
Yes, they now take an extra turn to get into combat, but they don't get shot at more.

Polkovnik wrote:Yes, they now take an extra turn to get into combat, but they don't get shot at more.

There is a chance they will be shot at less. If facing undrilled MF, they stop beyond 6 MU. If the undrilled Shooters wish to shoot and fail a CMT or do not have a general they would have to move 4 MU to be within range. This would put only 1 move between them and the shooters, meaning they would only be shot once.

last 2 posts both correct

plays better this way

Si

JM was spot on. I got my brain so convoluted over the definition of 'Within" that I forgot the use of the word in the rule.
Completely my mistake.

I have slightly less hair than the emoticon used to depict me.
Gino
SMAC

No worries Gino, this is what the forum is for after all.

Si