Infantry movement

[AZslim]

All,

I had an opponent tell me that you have to say when your infantry is finished moving so you opponent gets a shot at the last MF(s). I think he said it in an errata or update or something.

I can't find it.

For example squad moving in the open 1,2,3 he's finished..then the opponent gets a shot on the third MF, or can you just stop and you opponent can't shoot FF unless said so on the third MF?

Help?

 

[bendizoid]

You can shoot him until he starts moving a new piece. That's the way I understand it. There is another thread about this out there somewhere.

 

[von Marwitz]

I believe your opponent can fire on the unit until you begin to move the next one.
But it is not about: "Hey, I moved the next unit quicker than you can say 'stop'." In other words IMHO you neither have to announce something like 'finished'. At the same time you can't 'escape' his fire by quickly moving the next unit, i.e. when it becomes apparent that you are done, he can still fire on the last MF you have announced (and whatever might come thereafter).

von Marwitz

 

[clubby]

Right in the rules

4.2 MECHANICS OF MOVEMENT: Whenever a player moves a unit during his MPh he states aloud the MF expended by that unit in entering each hex or in performing any other activity within its current hex. If the unit is going to end its MPh there it must state so before moving another unit.

 

[clubby]

...In other words IMHO you neither have to announce something like 'finished'...
von Marwitz

According to the rules, you have to do exactly that.

 

[von Marwitz]

According to the rules, you have to do exactly that.

IMHO you can announce it by telling but you can also announce it by conduct implying an intent i.e. by going about to move the next unit. At least that is how I've seen in played in the majority of my games, which are close to 500.

I would find it somewhat strange if someone insisted on me saying 'End of MPh' for each unit. About the same as if someone would try to deny my the extra 2 MF because I said a unit 'goes CX' instead of 'declaring Double Time'.

von Marwitz

 

[Robin Reeve]

Why would saying "finished" not be allowed?
I always say when I think that I have finished a unit's movement - for a vehicle, which expends all its remaining MP in the last Location that it has entered, announcing that last expense would be mandatory, I believe.

 

[Mister T]

EX.
1. Opponent spends MF with inf. Unit
2. You say 'no DFF'
3. Opponent starts moving another unit
4. You can say: 'wait, you did not say that the former unit's movement was over, i DFF on the last MF spent by this unit.'

 

[clubby]

IMHO you can announce it by telling but you can also announce it by conduct implying an intent i.e. by going about to move the next unit. At least that is how I've seen in played in the majority of my games, which are close to 500.

I would find it somewhat strange if someone insisted on me saying 'End of MPh' for each unit. About the same as if someone would try to deny my the extra 2 MF because I said a unit 'goes CX' instead of 'declaring Double Time'.

von Marwitz

I'm not 100% sure about your opinion on things, but the rules are pretty clear that you will "state" that your movement is done before moving another unit. State being a synonym for say. I don't think it says you have to say "End of MPh" for a unit. Personally, I usually say "they're done", wait a second for my opponent unless he says "OK, no shots" and start with my next unit. If he wants me to stop and go back, fine.

 

[von Marwitz]

Why would saying "finished" not be allowed?

If you refer to what I wrote, then I believe you misunderstood me.

IMHO it is allowed/sufficient to say 'finished' but it is also allowed/sufficient to remain silent and signify 'finished' by conduct implying an intent, i.e. going about to move the next unit.

Cheers,
von Marwitz

 

[von Marwitz]

EX.
1. Opponent spends MF with inf. Unit
2. You say 'no DFF'
3. Opponent starts moving another unit
4. You can say: 'wait, you did not say that the former unit's movement was over, i DFF on the last MF spent by this unit.'

This would be perfectly fine with me.

von Marwitz

 

[AZslim]

Thanks all. Found it!

8.11 FACING: Defensive First Fire must be resolved before the moving unit/stack leaves the intended target Location (or, if firing at a particular Target Facing of an AFV, before that AFV changes its current Target Facing). The DEFENDER may not request that a moving unit be returned to a previous position to undergo attack. However, the ATTACKER must give the DEFENDER ample opportunity (as previously defined between the players) to declare his fire before moving on and, before moving another unit, must declare the end of the first unit's movement at which time it may be fired on as moving. Vehicular Facing changes (D2.11) must be declared aloud and followed by an appropriate pause before further movement. Similarly, any moving vehicle planning to unload Passengers/Riders may do so only after an adequate pause following its expenditure of a Stop MP (D2.13). Once the ATTACKER announces that he is unloading Passengers, it is too late for the DEFENDER to announce an attack on the vehicle with its Passengers/Riders still loaded—even if the disembarking declaration is the first MP/MF expenditure of the MPh.

Why it's under 'facing' I don't know.

 

[von Marwitz]

State being a synonym for say.

I believe you can 'state' something without actually saying it - as aforementioned - by conduct implying an intent.

Edit:
Well, Azslim has found it. Surprising.

But in practice, I do not think splitting hairs about what 'state' can mean or not mean is not really relevant. In case the issue comes up as described in the OP, then it is very easy for both players to describe what their general intent is in such situations and move on with the game once this has been established.

Edit:
I still wouldn't call my opponent on it.

von Marwitz

 

[AZslim]

I believe you can 'state' something without actually saying it - as aforementioned - by conduct implying an intent.

Edit:
Well, Azslim has found it. Surprising.

But in practice, I do not think splitting hairs about what 'state' can mean or not mean is not really relevant. In case the issue comes up as described in the OP, then it is very easy for both players to describe what their general intent is in such situations and move on with the game once this has been established.

Edit:
I still wouldn't call my opponent on it.

von Marwitz

Why is it surprising I found it? :-(

 

[clubby]

However you want to play it within your own game is fine by me but the rules are clear. Since this is the rules forum. We don't need to split hairs on what state can mean, there's a rule book for that as well.

state v. express something definitely or clearly in speech or writing.

You can't state something without words, whether written or spoken.

And I'm honesty not sure how a rule found in the C chapter is much different than what I posted from A.

 

[clubby]

I believe you can 'state' something without actually saying it - as aforementioned - by conduct implying an intent.

No you can not. Implying is not stating. It's almost exactly the opposite.

 

[Philippe D.]

I remember a similar discussion a few months ago here, I was wondering whether you could state your intent to stop moving a unit so as to give your opponent a last opportunity to fire at it, and then, if fired upon, start moving it again (MF permitting); this, it turns out, is not allowed. So when you decide to stop moving a unit, the last say goes to the opponent, in the form of a fire opportunity.

 

[von Marwitz]

Why is it surprising I found it? :-(

Hehe. I was not surprised by you finding something but for something to be found to that effect.

von Marwitz

 

[Binchois]

New Example/Question:

1. An MMC moves several hexes, using its 4th MF to enter an open ground hex.
2. Player says "Done" seeing no enemy with LOS.
3. Opponent reveals a previously HIP unit and takes a shot... luckily, with no effect.
4. Player says oh! And expends MF 5 to enter a new hex that is out of LOS to this newly discovered enemy. Late CX.

Is this legal? Or was the original "Done" statement conclusive?

I think it is legal because we can read more of A4.2:

If the unit is going to end its MPh there it must state so before moving another unit. ​

However:

Once a unit moves, stops, and another unit moves, the original unit may move no farther during that MPh.
​

Because of the "and" (highlighted above), it seems like the "Done" MMC could still make the late CX since another unit hasn't yet moved. Agreed?

Alternatively, the last-cited sentence could be seen as the antidote for what happens when players ignore the first-cited sentence. That is, when a unit says "Done", he's really DONE, but if he forgets to say "Done", then he can keep moving unless and until he moves something else!

 

[Jeff Sewall]

Because of the "and" (highlighted above), it seems like the "Done" MMC could still make the late CX since another unit hasn't yet moved. Agreed?

No

Alternatively, the last-cited sentence could be seen as the antidote for what happens when players ignore the first-cited sentence. That is, when a unit says "Done", he's really DONE, but if he forgets to say "Done", then he can keep moving unless and until he moves something else!

This!