Slitherine

Having started to build my Yorkist army I was browsing through the shooting rules and I couldn't see anything to stop my longbow making the second move and then shooting at the end of it. Am I missing something here?

You can't get within 6 MU in a second move

But you can stop at 6 MU, which is max shooting range. So can you second move to exactly 6 MU then shoot ?

Within 6 MU would include exactly 6MU...so you would have to stop one of those famous gnat's todgers just beyond 6MU

Polkovnik wrote:But you can stop at 6 MU, which is max shooting range. So can you second move to exactly 6 MU then shoot ?

No - the glossary defines within as "at or closer than", thus the correct meaning of "closer than" doesn't apply.

sagji wrote:

Polkovnik wrote:But you can stop at 6 MU, which is max shooting range. So can you second move to exactly 6 MU then shoot ?

No - the glossary defines within as "at or closer than", thus the correct meaning of "closer than" doesn't apply.

Except that "closer than" is not the "correct" meaning when "within" is applied to measures of distance. The correct meaning is in fact "at or closer than" as per the glossary - or more strictly "not beyond", which means the same thing.

Some definitions of within:

dictionary.com wrote:9. at or to some point not beyond, as in length or distance; not farther than: within a radius of a mile.

encarta wrote:1. not beyond: not beyond the scope, experience, range, time, or distance of
regulations requiring that all accidents be reported within 48 hours

fda wrote:When used in the context of numerical or time specific MQSA regulatory limits, the word "within" is intended to include the limit itself.

Cambridge learners dictionary wrote:inside or not beyond an area or period of time:

etc. etc.

sagji wrote:

Polkovnik wrote:But you can stop at 6 MU, which is max shooting range. So can you second move to exactly 6 MU then shoot ?

No - the glossary defines within as "at or closer than", thus the correct meaning of "closer than" doesn't apply.

I thought it was quite plain page 75 first bullet point "...Neither the 1st nor the second move can start,end or go within 6MU of any enemy..." this to me means to me your outside 6mu and can't shoot.
Dave

The the dictionaries being victorious and back to the question ...

You therefore can't get close enough to shoot using a 2nd move as only heavy artillery have a range beyond 6MU+Gnats todger ... and cunningly they can't move at all

Si

thinks all the gnats should rise up and demand 2% FoG royalties....where would it be without their todgers??!!??

ROTFL

Don't worry they are sent copious quantities of author blood!

Si

david53 wrote:

sagji wrote:

Polkovnik wrote:But you can stop at 6 MU, which is max shooting range. So can you second move to exactly 6 MU then shoot ?

No - the glossary defines within as "at or closer than", thus the correct meaning of "closer than" doesn't apply.

I thought it was quite plain page 75 first bullet point "...Neither the 1st nor the second move can start,end or go within 6MU of any enemy..." this to me means to me your outside 6mu and can't shoot.
Dave

Of course this also means that by definition it will take HF 3 moves to close with a non-advancing opponent after a double move since there will be that remaining gnat's todger to go. Presumably this is also the author's intent.

Chris

batesmotel wrote:

david53 wrote:

sagji wrote: No - the glossary defines within as "at or closer than", thus the correct meaning of "closer than" doesn't apply.

I thought it was quite plain page 75 first bullet point "...Neither the 1st nor the second move can start,end or go within 6MU of any enemy..." this to me means to me your outside 6mu and can't shoot.
Dave

Of course this also means that by definition it will take HF 3 moves to close with a non-advancing opponent after a double move since there will be that remaining gnat's todger to go. Presumably this is also the author's intent.

Chris

It may be the author's intent but it isn't the way people are playing it. In every game I have played and I do mean literally EVERY game including tournaments the enemy stop at dead on 6 inches, no messing about at 6 inches plus a millimetre or whatever. It has never been queried as far as I am aware.

I can accept that you can't double move then shoot, it's a similar mechanism to marching in DBM but to say to your opponent that you can shoot him for three moves and not two because his troops have to stop a millimetre over 6 inches away due to a rule mechanism? Nah, it's too gamey for me and frankly seems a little silly.

As far as I'm concerned if the Lancastrian HI stops at 6 inches away from my Yorkist bow after making a second move, march move or whatever you want to call it, it moves 3 inches a turn after that so it takes two turns to reach my guys. Six divided by three equals two!!! To argue anything else seems tortuous and a step away from fun and common sense and into gamesmanship.

On the other hand if my Seleucid bowmen make a double move to get 6 inches from Roman cavalry I can accept that they don't get to shoot until next turn. It's logical to me, they've just finished a march move and haven't prepared to shoot yet.

Of course this also means that by definition it will take HF 3 moves to close with a non-advancing opponent after a double move since there will be that remaining gnat's todger to go. Presumably this is also the author's intent.

I agree. I think everyone is playing it wrong, but not intentionally. The problem is no one measures so precisely that they know they are 6.001" away from the enemy. I think what is really needed is exact numbers, rather than using terms such as more than or less than. In this case perhaps you should have to stop at 7. If you are really more than 6 the change to 7 should have no adverse consequences, because I don't think any measurement distances are in fractions. In reality there should be no diference between 6.001 and 7 in game terms. Except that 7 is a precise number that is relitivily easy to measure.

I think in ALL cases exact numbers should be used to specify distances, rather that uses the imprecise less than or more than phrase, including all non-charging troops stopping at one from the enemy. I seem to recall early additions of the original WRG Ancients had this problem.

If everyone is playing the rules wrong because it is difficult for anyone to remember they are 6.001" from the enemy, then clearly a change/clarification is required. There is a BIG difference between HF taking two turns rather than three to cover this ground.

Hal

Delbruck wrote:
If everyone is playing the rules wrong because it is difficult for anyone to remember they are 6.001" from the enemy, then clearly a change/clarification is required. There is a BIG difference between HF taking two turns rather than three to cover this ground.
Hal

I've never seen it played wrong

philqw78 wrote:

Delbruck wrote:
If everyone is playing the rules wrong because it is difficult for anyone to remember they are 6.001" from the enemy, then clearly a change/clarification is required. There is a BIG difference between HF taking two turns rather than three to cover this ground.
Hal

I've never seen it played wrong

No probs here either. You set down a 6MU stick and stop somewhere close to it. If the other side doesn't move, it DOES take 3 moves for HF to get there.There's no real point in being 6.001...6.5 is fine or anywhere there...you stop short of the 6MU.

I've never seen it played wrong

You and everyone you play with must be extremely precise. I know I am not. I think most people stop at 6", even though they know they can't shoot or be shot at. HF taking three turns to cover the 6.001" makes a big difference in the game and I doubt if many people are aware of what they are doing. The very nature of the way we move and measure on the table means nothing is ever measured precisely. And even if we are aware that HF takes three turns to cover 6.001", the normal ebb and flow of the action makes this fact difficult to keep track of.

6.001" is not a distance that I can accurately measure.

Hal

I have well over 100 US tournament games and can honestly say that I have NEVER seen anyone play where HF would take 3 moves to get to a unit that double moved and stopped at 6 inch. I think the common thought proccess (albeit not RAW) is something like, "I have double moved to 6 inches and stopped. I cannot shoot because I have double moved." The rest is then played as though the units are 6 inches apart (ie 2 moves for HF).

I have often moved my Jannissaries up (in a first move) and stopped short "AT" 6 inches and shot at long range. The movement distance between these 2 units is played exactly as above.

I read from this string of e-mails that I could move my Jannissaries twice and stop at 6.00001 inches from Pike and make them move three times before hitting me in a charge. I do not plan to do this as it does not pass my smell test and seeing the efforts in these rules to "make common sense" I have a hard time ibeleiving that this was the author's intent.

Gino
SMAC

kal5056 wrote:I read from this string of e-mails that I could move my Jannissaries twice and stop at 6.00001 inches from Pike and make them move three times before hitting me in a charge. I do not plan to do this as it does not pass my smell test and seeing the efforts in these rules to "make common sense" I have a hard time ibeleiving that this was the author's intent.

But it was. The authors are logical people - clearly, if you are just over 6" away, two 3" moves won't get you into contact. The logic is inescapable. You can't seriously believe it escaped our notice.

Sorry that you have been playing it wrong, but no change to the rules is required. They are working as intended.

Delbruck wrote:

I've never seen it played wrong

You and everyone you play with must be extremely precise.

It isn't a question of precision, but one of simple logic. If the rules require you to stop more than 6" away, as they do, there is no way that two 3" moves can get you into contact. No need for any measuring.