DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Wing Leader Rules Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 4762--------------------------------------------------
In the Sun
By: pilotofficerprune Date: March 15, 2020, 5:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Reviewing feedback on the v2.2 rules, I'm considering adding
this underlined text to the 4.6.2 'In the Sun' rule:
(2) It spent at least two Movement Points (MPs) in the Sun arc
immediately before entering the target’s square. (MPs spent
actually entering the target’s square do not count towards this
total.) The MPs can be spent moving, staying in the same square,
or changing facing, but must be spent in the same Movement
Phase.
#Post#: 4764--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Sun
By: Elias Nordling Date: March 15, 2020, 6:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is actually a rule I feel I'm never completely sure of. The
reason is the rules almost but not quite define when a movement
point is spent. So, if I move from a square not in the sun to
one in the sun, did I spend the MP after moving (in the sun), or
before moving (not in the sun). I thinknit is the latter, but
when I read the movement rukes I felt it was extremely
understated.
#Post#: 4766--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Sun
By: pilotofficerprune Date: March 15, 2020, 6:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Does the proposed new wording adequately fix the problem? Is it
clear?
#Post#: 4767--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Sun
By: Elias Nordling Date: March 15, 2020, 6:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
No, I still don't know if a MP is considered to be spent in the
square I'm entering or the square I'm leaving.
#Post#: 4768--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Sun
By: pilotofficerprune Date: March 15, 2020, 8:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Okay, how about these changes to 8.3. Make the following
underlined changes to the rule:
It costs 1 MP to move into an adjacent square at the same or
lower altitude. If a squadron dives to the square directly below
(not diagonally), it spends 0.5 MP (half a Movement Point), not
1 MP.
If a squadron moves into an adjacent square at a higher
altitude, it costs a number of MPs equal to the climb value on
the aircraft’s ADC. Use the climb value for the altitude it
starts from. This cost applies only to the first square the
squadron climbs into during a Movement Phase. If the squadron
climbs into a second square in the same phase, it costs 2 MPs,
regardless of the aircraft’s climb value.
Then add the following sidebar:
Moving Into Squares. For the purposes of rule 4.6.2, determining
whether MP are expended ‘in the Sun’. MP spent moving into a
square are considered expended in the square entered.
Would this fix the problem?
#Post#: 4769--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Sun
By: Elias Nordling Date: March 15, 2020, 8:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I still don't know if I spend before I move or move before I
spend.
#Post#: 4770--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Sun
By: pilotofficerprune Date: March 15, 2020, 8:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If we are stating that the MP are expended in the square moved
into then surely you spend after you move?
Move to square > MP expended in the moved-to square
#Post#: 4774--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Sun
By: Elias Nordling Date: March 15, 2020, 10:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, tired. That's not how I expected it to work which shows
rhe rule is needed.
#Post#: 4775--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Sun
By: pilotofficerprune Date: March 15, 2020, 10:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
How did you expect it to work? (A key question, because this may
determine how the 'in the Sun' rule has been played.)
#Post#: 4778--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Sun
By: Al Cannamore Date: March 15, 2020, 12:27 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I don’t see the reason for the clarification. Original wording
is very clear to me. The word “before” is key.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page