low crawl

Swiftandsure

Robin Reeve
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
16,575
Reaction score
2,122
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
I agree with the A or B but...where in the rules does it say LC uses ALL MF?
It is spelled at the beginning of the Low Crawl rule:
A10.52 LOW CRAWL: Low Crawl is a rout of one Location which requires the entire MF allotment of the routing unit
 

Tater

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
9,713
Reaction score
544
Location
Ardmore, TN
Country
llUnited States
A10.52:
"Low Crawl is a rout of one Location which requires the entire MF allotment of the routing unit ..."
Then the LC to either A or B costs 6MF...so the unit could move to either and abide by the shortest path in MF.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
16,232
Reaction score
2,700
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Then the LC to either A or B costs 6MF...so the unit could move to either and abide by the shortest path in MF.
Yes, I think it can use Low Crawl to either A or B, as I don't think a Low Crawling unit need to take the shortest (in MF) route. Why would it when a unit not using Low Crawl is not required to do so?
 

Tater

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
9,713
Reaction score
544
Location
Ardmore, TN
Country
llUnited States
Yes, I think it can use Low Crawl to either A or B, as I don't think a Low Crawling unit need to take the shortest (in MF) route. Why would it when a unit not using Low Crawl is not required to do so?
I agree...but the fact that any hex the LC unit moves to costs 6MF seals the deal if someone wants to get picky.
 

Eagle4ty

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
4,031
Reaction score
1,607
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Yes, I think it can use Low Crawl to either A or B, as I don't think a Low Crawling unit need to take the shortest (in MF) route. Why would it when a unit not using Low Crawl is not required to do so?
Not the shortest route but the shortest Path in MF.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
16,232
Reaction score
2,700
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Not the shortest route but the shortest Path in MF.
In my above answer route = path....i.e., since a unit not using LC can go through the Smoke, I see no reason that a unit using LC would not be allowed to....and I don't see it in the rules either....
 

SSlunt

Member
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
252
Reaction score
53
Location
Calgary AB
Country
llCanada
I realize that this is an old thread reserection, but I did not want to start a new tread with a similar vain

Assume a broken unit is in a brush hex sitting outside a foxhole. ADJACENT to the brush/foxhole hex is a woods hex that would be the route destination hex
Can the broken unit use low crawl to just move beneath the foxhole? The leader PINNED outside the foxhole. It is technically not moving further away in Hexes but certainly increasing the MF by 1
 

Eagle4ty

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
4,031
Reaction score
1,607
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
I realize that this is an old thread reserection, but I did not want to start a new tread with a similar vain

Assume a broken unit is in a brush hex sitting outside a foxhole. ADJACENT to the brush/foxhole hex is a woods hex that would be the route destination hex
Can the broken unit use low crawl to just move beneath the foxhole? The leader PINNED outside the foxhole. It is technically not moving further away in Hexes but certainly increasing the MF by 1
Assuming just the stated facts are relevant (e.g. the unit is not forced to rout and the woods is a valid rout destination), I believe the unit must select the woods as its rout destination if it elects to rout. Since by moving to the ADJACENT woods hex it would not be attempting to avoid Interdiction and thus could not enter the foxhole for 1MF cost per A10.51 "...a routing unit must move to the nearest (in MF calculated at the start of its RtPh) building or woods hex (even if overstacked) unless that route is through/into a known minefield or FFE, or is not traversable (e.g., through a Blaze, unbridged Water Obstacle, Cliff, etc.)... " Of course the unit could remain in the brush hex without routing.
 

kokobolo

Recruit
Joined
Oct 31, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Country
llCanada
Yes, I think it can use Low Crawl to either A or B, as I don't think a Low Crawling unit need to take the shortest (in MF) route. Why would it when a unit not using Low Crawl is not required to do so?

I feel like this thread needs a new life. I used to be an AB guy but now I have seen the light and am joining the B team with Eagle :)

Klas, I think what you wrote is misleading. Your comparing apples and oranges when you say a unit not using low crawl is not required to take the shortest route. Strictly speaking its true, but it also not relevant. In one case the unit is reaching the rout destination, in the other it is not. This is crucial and seems to be ignored.

I am not a logician but I will assume that (from a10.51) "As long as it reaches that hex during a single RtPh, it need not use the shortest route" implies that As long as it does NOT reach that hex during a single RtPh then it MUST use the shortest route. Most seems to agree with this.

Since " All other Rout provisions apply unchanged to Low Crawl" Then the crawler MUST use the shortest route since it is not reaching its destination.

It is hard to defend that A and B both qualify as the shortest route for a unit that is low crawling because very obviously only B qualifies as the shortest route for a unit that is not low crawling. A shortest route is a shortest route is a shortest route I say. So unless Perry Sez otherwise. B it is for me, and B only.
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,539
Reaction score
585
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
I feel like this thread needs a new life. I used to be an AB guy but now I have seen the light and am joining the B team with Eagle :)

Klas, I think what you wrote is misleading. Your comparing apples and oranges when you say a unit not using low crawl is not required to take the shortest route. Strictly speaking its true, but it also not relevant. In one case the unit is reaching the rout destination, in the other it is not. This is crucial and seems to be ignored.

I am not a logician but I will assume that (from a10.51) "As long as it reaches that hex during a single RtPh, it need not use the shortest route" implies that As long as it does NOT reach that hex during a single RtPh then it MUST use the shortest route. Most seems to agree with this.

Since " All other Rout provisions apply unchanged to Low Crawl" Then the crawler MUST use the shortest route since it is not reaching its destination.

It is hard to defend that A and B both qualify as the shortest route for a unit that is low crawling because very obviously only B qualifies as the shortest route for a unit that is not low crawling. A shortest route is a shortest route is a shortest route I say. So unless Perry Sez otherwise. B it is for me, and B only.
IMO, the answer should be that paths A and B are valid - both for a normal rout and for using Low Crawl. Using Low Crawl pretty much determines that the unit will NOT reach its destination during the RtPh, which makes stipulations regarding MFs spent kind of moot.

Since the first sentence of A10.52 already states that MFs will not be at issue in a Low Crawl (since it will use all of them), the operative factor is cited at the end of A10.52:

All other Rout provisions apply unchanged to Low Crawl, e.g., rout must still be towards the nearest woods/building Location within 6 MF.
The "other provisions" will still require a LCing unit to select the closest destination in MFs (BB1), but the path will no longer be MF dependent (as per the following EXCeption):

A10.51 ...At the start of its RtPh, a routing unit must designate its destination and must attempt to reach it during that RtPh [EXC: if using Low Crawl].​

Both A and B gets the unit closer to BB1, both require the same # of MFs to be spent (ALL of them).
 

kokobolo

Recruit
Joined
Oct 31, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Country
llCanada
IMO, the answer should be that paths A and B are valid - both for a normal rout and for using Low Crawl. Using Low Crawl pretty much determines that the unit will NOT reach its destination during the RtPh, which makes stipulations regarding MFs spent kind of moot.

Since the first sentence of A10.52 already states that MFs will not be at issue in a Low Crawl (since it will use all of them), the operative factor is cited at the end of A10.52:

All other Rout provisions apply unchanged to Low Crawl, e.g., rout must still be towards the nearest woods/building Location within 6 MF.
The "other provisions" will still require a LCing unit to select the closest destination in MFs (BB1), but the path will no longer be MF dependent (as per the following EXCeption):

A10.51 ...At the start of its RtPh, a routing unit must designate its destination and must attempt to reach it during that RtPh [EXC: if using Low Crawl].​

Both A and B gets the unit closer to BB1, both require the same # of MFs to be spent (ALL of them).
Here is a little thought experiment.

Imagine a situation where the only legal rout destination for a unit is exactly 6Mfs away using the shortest route. Lets say there are only two possible paths to get there, A and B. Path A costs 7MFs and path B costs 6MFs. The first hex for path A costs 2MFs, and only 1MF for the first hex of path B.
,
Basically, you are saying that a unit routing normally CANNOT use path A, whereas a unit low crawling CAN use path A. That doesn't make sense to me.
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,539
Reaction score
585
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
Here is a little thought experiment.

Imagine a situation where the only legal rout destination for a unit is exactly 6Mfs away using the shortest route. Lets say there are only two possible paths to get there, A and B. Path A costs 7MFs and path B costs 6MFs. The first hex for path A costs 2MFs, and only 1MF for the first hex of path B.
,
Basically, you are saying that a unit routing normally CANNOT use path A, whereas a unit low crawling CAN use path A. That doesn't make sense to me.
Why not? Either way the Low Crawler still makes it exactly one hex closer to the destination hex in the allotted time (one RtPh)

Using a normal rout, the unit is presumed to be attempting to reach the destination as quickly as possible. Using LC - when allowed - it is presumed to be routing as safely as possible.
 

kokobolo

Recruit
Joined
Oct 31, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Country
llCanada
Your arguments don't seem to have any basis in the rules.

Why not? Either way the Low Crawler still makes it exactly one hex closer to the destination hex in the allotted time (one RtPh)
I can't see where it says that a crawler must move one hex closer to the destination hex. Seems like you are interpreting the "rout must still be towards the nearest woods/building Location within 6 MF" as "move one hex closer". However this example is referring to rule 10.51 and nowhere in that rule are rout destinations and path calculated in terms of number of hexes, always in MF. Why would you interpret an example referring to a rule differently than the rule itself?

As far as I can tell the only instances where distance in hex is relevant in the routing rule is when ignoring possible destination hexes (exc at the end of 10.51)
and to prevent a routing unit from moving closer to a KEU. It is NOT referred to when choosing a destination or a route path. Distance in MF is used in those cases.

Another difficulty with your interpretation is that it could allow a low crawling unit to move further away (in MFs) to its destination while moving closer (in hexes). That is not allowed. "As long as it reaches that hex during a single RtPh, it need not use the shortest route"




Using a normal rout, the unit is presumed to be attempting to reach the destination as quickly as possible. Using LC - when allowed - it is presumed to be routing as safely as possible.
Not much to say about that except that safely is not really used in the RB and so is hard to defend or define. Doesn't constitute a very good argument. Also it is false that using a normal rout the unit is presumed to be attempting to reach the destination as quickly as possible. The rules specifically state that units don't have to do that (with certain restrictions).
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,539
Reaction score
585
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
Your arguments don't seem to have any basis in the rules.



I can't see where it says that a crawler must move one hex closer to the destination hex. Seems like you are interpreting the "rout must still be towards the nearest woods/building Location within 6 MF" as "move one hex closer". However this example is referring to rule 10.51 and nowhere in that rule are rout destinations and path calculated in terms of number of hexes, always in MF. Why would you interpret an example referring to a rule differently than the rule itself?

As far as I can tell the only instances where distance in hex is relevant in the routing rule is when ignoring possible destination hexes (exc at the end of 10.51)
and to prevent a routing unit from moving closer to a KEU. It is NOT referred to when choosing a destination or a route path. Distance in MF is used in those cases.

Another difficulty with your interpretation is that it could allow a low crawling unit to move further away (in MFs) to its destination while moving closer (in hexes). That is not allowed. "As long as it reaches that hex during a single RtPh, it need not use the shortest route"






Not much to say about that except that safely is not really used in the RB and so is hard to defend or define. Doesn't constitute a very good argument. Also it is false that using a normal rout the unit is presumed to be attempting to reach the destination as quickly as possible. The rules specifically state that units don't have to do that (with certain restrictions).
The rules actually seem to say that a unit using Low Crawl doesn't have to rout towards any particular destination at all (due to an ambiguous EXC referent):

A10.51 ...At the start of its RtPh, a routing unit must designate its destination and must attempt to reach it during that RtPh [EXC: if using Low Crawl].​
Any ambiguity is cleared up at the end of A10.52:

A10.52... All other Rout provisions apply unchanged to Low Crawl, e.g., rout must still be towards the nearest woods/building Location within 6 MF.​
So it must still rout towards the originally chosen destination, even though MFs won't matter here - Low Crawling uses all of them.

There is an old Q&A that addresses this, which I believe is addressed by the above cited sentence:

A10.51 If a DM broken unit that must rout is within six MF of the nearest woods/building, must it attempt to reach the woods/building in a single RtPh?​
A. Yes, unless it uses Low Crawl, but it need not take the shortest route (in hexes/MF) to do so. Even if it uses Low Crawl, however, it must still do so toward that woods/building (i.e., at no time may it increase the hex range between itself and that woods/building, and must end that RtPh closer to it than it was at the start of the phase). [An92; An95w; An96; Mw]​
But of course, reasonable people will forever disagree about the rout rules. They are poorly structured and confusingly written! Cheers! :giggle:
 
Last edited:

hayman

Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
616
Reaction score
202
Location
Sydney
Country
llAustralia
rout must still be towards the nearest woods/building Location within 6 MF.
This is the gist of the matter: you have to originally plan a rout path for your broken unit before it moves: then either use normal rout MF's or low crawl.
 

Jeffrey D Myers

Senior Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Messages
864
Reaction score
270
Location
ABQ, NM, USA
Country
llUnited States
I think of it more as choosing first a valid rout target, then choosing LC or normal rout, then choose the path, then execute.
 
Top