To Inter-Bound or not to Inter-Bound

markm · Post by **markm** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:58 am

As discussed elsewhere on these forums I strongly dislike the term bound and would rather see plain English used where possible (turn anyone?).

This got me to thinking about the Inter-Bound. Why not just make the turn 5 phases and call it the Control Phase? Like the Impact and Shooting phases, both players get a go. It gets rid of a level of complexity, uses a 'normal' name for a phase, and fits in nicely with the existing structure.

It would also be useful to signify who gets to move generals first (I'd suggest the phasing player): there are times when this will be critical.

Just my 2p.

shangtuming · Post by **shangtuming** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:51 pm

I tend to agree the term 'bound' is more obscure than Turn, but having generals move in the bit between turns rather than twice inside the same one does seem have a certain clarity about it.

markm · Post by **markm** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 4:04 pm

It's not just generals moving though. It's also rallying, bolstering and removing of BG's down to 1 base.

shall · Post by **shall** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 7:56 am

Happy to consider any good wording changes for names

The one thing to keep in mind is thay the game has 4 phases that are yours and 1 "phase" that is for both players. So whatever words are chosen need to reflect this. So it isn't a phase 5. More happens in the interbound than just generals.

So Inter---------"the the 4 phases" is a good description. If anyone can come up with a great word that is new and fits the concept fab. Maybe there is some play on th fact both players move - the "common phase" but with words that are less dull. Go for it....

Si

sagji · Post by **sagji** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 7:58 pm

shall wrote:Happy to consider any good wording changes for names

The one thing to keep in mind is thay the game has 4 phases that are yours and 1 "phase" that is for both players. So whatever words are chosen need to reflect this. So it isn't a phase 5. More happens in the interbound than just generals.

So Inter---------"the the 4 phases" is a good description. If anyone can come up with a great word that is new and fits the concept fab. Maybe there is some play on th fact both players move - the "common phase" but with words that are less dull. Go for it....

Si

No the game has 5 phases of which 1.5 are yours -
impact - phasing player charges, other evades & intercepts, both sides fight
movement - both player can expand in combat, phasing player moves.
shooting - both sides shoot.
melee - both sides fight.
interbound - both sides move generals, rally, rout.

markm · Post by **markm** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:50 am

Sagji,

pretty much my point.

Almost all phases have some 'other' player reaction/involvement, which is a good thing. I see the 5th Phase as no different to the first 4, and IMO it keep things one level more simple for newbies to get to grips with.

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:27 pm

I like the fifth phase suggestion. Both players can be active in most of the other phases, so there is no reason to have an additional technical term 'inter bound phase'. Interesting that this is really obvious, but did not get a mention until now.

sagji · Post by **sagji** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:21 pm

My perference is to move the "inter bound" to the beginning of the next turn instead of the end of the current - this makes it much clearer that you don't get it when the game ends. And an interbound at the beginning of the game has almost no effect.