First Impressions of J12

Discussion in 'Advanced Squad Leader' started by Gunner Scott, Jan 27, 2017.

  1. jrv

    jrv Vare, legiones redde!

    May 25, 2005
    Teutoburger Wald
    In example in the first paragraph, the unit may not use a movement option in the current hex to end in Motion with MP remaining. The rule is parsed as "the next hex" means it is a different hex than the current one. If the unit has one MP left and its only options are to bypass the current hex for > 1 MP or enter the hex straight ahead for one MP (assume the other hex to the other side of the current bypass is not bypassable), then it *must* figure out how to spend that one MP. It may stop. It may move straight ahead. If allowed it might ESB and continue its bypass. It may not end in Motion with that MP remaining because the option to decline only applies if that move is into a hex other than the current one.

    If the unit was in bypass of one hex, and the other hex adjacent to the bypassed hexside had a bypassable hexside that the unit could enter, for example the unit was in the hex on the right-hand side of the bypassed hexside and the unit could turn left and continue bypass, then the unit could end with MP remaining because by turning left it would be entering a new hex.

    It is not allowed in the rules for a vehicle to end its MPh in Motion with MP if that vehicle's options include only other hexes where the vehicle has sufficient MP to enter.

    JR
     
  2. klasmalmstrom

    klasmalmstrom Well-Known Member

    Feb 26, 2003
    Sweden
    Technically, I don't think you can do that, as D2.4 only says the "next hex" - not the "next hexside in the current hex".
     
  3. Doug Kirk

    Doug Kirk Active Member

    Feb 2, 2003
    Columbia, MO
    To me the simplest solution is, and to be consistent with the infantry smoke rules, just make vehicles spend the point if they try for smoke. Why do you only spend it if you get it?
     
  4. klasmalmstrom

    klasmalmstrom Well-Known Member

    Feb 26, 2003
    Sweden
    I think it is a nice trade off in the VBM situation - enter with only one MP left and the intention to fire a sD - one takes one chances on not getting it, and having to spend that last MP.

    IMO, we don't need to make it easier for VBMing vehicles. :)
     
    BigAl737 likes this.
  5. James Taylor

    James Taylor I love women with brains

    Jun 28, 2005
    Michigan
    So you would say it is "technically" allowed if the hex which I want to continue bypass in is a new hex and not the same one, right?

    I didn't actually specify in my response that the attempted continued movement wasn't into a new hex... but I don't actually think it is required. The "next" hex could be the "same" hex--- the rules frequently consider continued bypass movement along a new hexside in the same hex as a new hex, (e.g. for mud bog purposes).

    For better or worse, the rules allow you to burn MPs by attempting a move you don't have the MP for, they also allow you to burn MPs by making VCA changes. As all this just adds headaches to the actual playing of the game I would not require someone to declare their "attempted move" to be to a new hex.

    JT
     
  6. klasmalmstrom

    klasmalmstrom Well-Known Member

    Feb 26, 2003
    Sweden
    Yes.

    I am going to disagree with you on that. :)


    The easiest (IMO) around this is just to ask the opponent how many MP (if unstated) he spends moving into bypass. Many players will just say "into bypass here an end in Motion" - so then I ask "so you spend all the remaining MP going into bypass then?" - problem usually solved. :)
     
  7. sdennis

    sdennis Active Member

    894
    Jan 14, 2005
    Wixom, Michigan
    So by the same logic if you are in an OBA hex are you attacked as you whip around the corner is this "same hex" that could be the "Next" hex? :)
     
  8. James Taylor

    James Taylor I love women with brains

    Jun 28, 2005
    Michigan
    Yes we can disagree.

    The problem isn't solved with your and JRV's solution IMHO. The problem is players spending too much time agonizing over a move they want to make with a vehicle. They don't face this problem with infantry because they don't have to expend all MF.

    The vast majority of ASL games I have played and will play will involve players that don't wish to be that pedantic over the vehicular MP point expenditures. Believe me... I'm capable of playing that way... but given the hokeyness that is already present in the vehicular movement rules, I don't have a problem interpreting "next hex" to be equal to "same hex" in this edge case.

    JT
     
  9. James Taylor

    James Taylor I love women with brains

    Jun 28, 2005
    Michigan
    Against you it wouldn't matter because you would roll 6,6.

    They probably should be subject to a 2nd attack just for the sheer stupidity of the move... but no I would not require it.

    Like I said---- this is an edge case--- and not one that I think merits concern--- but if you disagree feel free to seek a Perry Sez for clarification.

    JT
     
  10. rdw5150

    rdw5150 it's just a game Silver Supporting Member

    Feb 13, 2003
    Erie, PA
    This is my problem with the rule as well (I sure as hell know I am going to take longer). While I agree that it makes VBM "easier" (but not without risk), having to map out an entire MP in your head if you want to end in hex whatever is a PITA (things also happen that could change you mind, for instance suddenly gaining LOS to a unit where if you move one more hex you are toast). Not to mention the whole, "OK I stop, delay for 5 and restart" seems a little silly (this will mean taking even longer to plan out a red MP vehicle).

    Plus I gotta be honest, I would feel strange even enforcing it. So what the guy wants to end in hex whatever but has a MP he could have spent anywhere along the way (or if he simply miscounted). I think the rule works fine that you spend all remaining MP in whatever hex you want to end in (in motion). It is not without risk. In a game that can be unforgiving, this seems a little too unforgiving. But it is something else to think about with vehicles (which already slow the game way down).

    Just my two pennies.

    Peace

    Roger
     
  11. Tuomo

    Tuomo Keeper of the Funk

    Feb 10, 2003
    Rock Bottom
    Thanks JR, that makes sense. So if the hexside immediately in front of the Bypassing vehicle is itself a candidate for Bypass in either of the two hexes it straddles, the vehicle can just shrug and end its MPh with MP remaining, as per D2.4.

    I'm glad I'm aware of these aspects, but quite frankly I like the flow better without them. As Jim said, it borders on pedantic. In a friendly game, I'm not worrying about it. I WOULD wonder, though, whether we still had a friendly game going.
     
  12. klasmalmstrom

    klasmalmstrom Well-Known Member

    Feb 26, 2003
    Sweden
    See my post #146 above. I usually just ask if he is spending the rest of his MP when he goes into bypass.
     
  13. Eagle4ty

    Eagle4ty Active Member

    Nov 7, 2007
    Eau Claire, Wi
    I think JT has a decent point here as it also says, "...only if it has insufficient MP remaining to enter the next hex it wishes to enter." Now if we're going to nit-pick on the choice of words "...next hex..." why not also include "...wishes to enter."? That is to say If I do not wish to enter the next hex can I remain in Motion if I do not possess the necessary MP to do so? Also, what if the next hex is an OG hex and I wish to enter it at an increased MP cost? The rule only abstractly intimates that the entry cost of the "next hex" is at the minimum MP expenditure. However, like you I normally ask my opponent how many MP they are expending to enter in bypass & I am normally a stickler about calling out my MP expenditures as I move my units. (e.g. the rule could need some cleaning up). JMHO
     
    volgaG68 likes this.
  14. volgaG68

    volgaG68 Fighting WWII One DR At A Time Silver Supporting Member

    Jun 15, 2012
    Hays, KS
    This...+1
     
  15. apbills

    apbills Active Member

    Jan 28, 2003
    Marinette, WI
    Some nice sentences in D2.1...
    D2.1 A vehicle may expend up to its full MP allotment (and tracked vehicles may even exceed it at some risk; ESB, 2.5) during its own MPh in accordance with the COT entered, as listed on the pertinent MP Entrance Cost column of the Terrain Chart. The mechanics of vehicular movement are the same as for Infantry (A4.2 & A8.1). ... A vehicle which ends its MPh with MP remaining is assumed to use all those MP in that hex.

    A4.2 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.

    I throw in A4.2 for those who do state their MP, which is the correct way according to the rules.

    2.4 MOTION STATUS: ... A vehicle may end its MPh in Motion without expending all of its MP only if it has insufficient MP remaining to enter the next hex it wishes to enter.

    So, using the sometimes convoluted logic of the ASLRB, if I end my MPh with MP remaining (per D2.1) it is assumed the remaining MP are used in my current hex. I then determine that I have not expended a Stop MP, so per 2.4 I get motion status, and since I now have no MP remaining, I do not have sufficient MP remaining to enter the next hex, which would have prevented my getting Motion status.

    Too many contradictions for me. Simplicity works. You want to declare Motion, no problem, I just get to DF at you for the remaining MP. No fuss, no muss.
     
    James Taylor likes this.
  16. Mr Incredible

    Mr Incredible Rod loves red undies

    Oct 26, 2004
    Perth, Australia
    Not quite, to end the MPh for a vehicle it either needs to spend a Stop MP or end in Motion (or get destroyed/immobilised/bogged etc).

    If a vehicle stops on say 12MP and end its MPh and has 16MP, the other 4MP are assumed spent in that hex.

    Motion is an exception and would allow the same vehicle to end its MPh on 11MP and in motion if the next hex it wanted to enter was a woods hex, for example. The other 5MP would not then be spent.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2017
    klasmalmstrom likes this.
  17. apbills

    apbills Active Member

    Jan 28, 2003
    Marinette, WI
    At my age I don't have time to go in circles with a rule like Motion. I like to enjoy the game, not play lawyer.

    I would also go so far to say the only reason it is an issue is too many people don't realize they actually have to have a plan when they are defending against tanks, and are too lazy to do so - hence the need to find another way to combat the AFV.
     
  18. jrv

    jrv Vare, legiones redde!

    May 25, 2005
    Teutoburger Wald
    Making sure my opponent follows the rules *is* part of my plan.

    JR
     
    volgaG68 and BruceC like this.
  19. BruceC

    BruceC Flitting Birdie

    501
    Aug 24, 2004
    Maine
    When the plan depends on how the tank is spending it's MPs it certainly matters. Driving up to and freezing a unit means spending MPs in LOS, which can be a key part of the defense plan, so these must be accounted for...somewhere.
     
  20. BruceC

    BruceC Flitting Birdie

    501
    Aug 24, 2004
    Maine
    By the way, I've played some of these J12 scenarios, Barn Burner was interesting and a good choice, Deadly Combat was a blast, Haunted Castle was excellent. I want to play more of them but this is all so far. Good Stuff J12.
     

Share This Page