Reversing in bypass cost?

Aaron Cleavin

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
2,961
Reaction score
483
Location
Sydney
Country
llAustralia
If a fully tracked vehicle is stopped in OG bypass and is at the front CAFP and wishs to start in reverse then reverse into the hex dirctly behind the vertex it's counter is on (which is also OG) is the cost 5mp or 13mp?
Does it have to traverse the hexside back to the rear CAFP then enter the back hex or just enter the back hex?

The RB and Q&A seem silent on this.
 

Swiftandsure

Robin Reeve
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
16,052
Reaction score
1,635
Location
St-Légier
Country
llSwitzerland
The CAFP is a game convention.
Exiting woods or any terrain which costs more than open ground could cause you the same reasoning.
 

Aaron Cleavin

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
2,961
Reaction score
483
Location
Sydney
Country
llAustralia
The CAFP is a game convention.
Exiting woods or any terrain which costs more than open ground could cause you the same reasoning.
When You start at a CAFP and Turn and go forward bypassing another hexspine you have to pay to traverse the whole hexspine to a new CAFP, before potentially entering another hex to the front, why should it be any different to the rear?

It's a pretty basic physics violation
 

Hemaelstrom

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2017
Messages
100
Reaction score
26
Location
Bundanyabba, Australia
Country
llAustralia
A violation of Newtonian hex-time-space physics perhaps, but good chunks of ASL reside in a quantum mechanical hex-reality where uncertainty over location and momentum for example reigns, at least until final resolution of certain gameplay circumstances. YMMV
 

Mister T

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
3,523
Reaction score
846
Location
Bruxelles
Country
llFrance
From OG to bypass, the AFV drives directly to the front CAFP and do not spend MP at the rear CAFP.

From bypass to OG in reverse, it's the same thing. The AFV drives directly outside the bypassed hex and do not spend MP at the rear CAFP.

It's reciprocal.
 

Swiftandsure

Robin Reeve
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
16,052
Reaction score
1,635
Location
St-Légier
Country
llSwitzerland
Spending half MP to enter woods from OG but only 1 MP to enter that same OG from the same woods, i.e. following the exact same path, is basic physics violation too.
 

Aaron Cleavin

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
2,961
Reaction score
483
Location
Sydney
Country
llAustralia
From OG to bypass, the AFV drives directly to the front CAFP and do not spend MP at the rear CAFP.

From bypass to OG in reverse, it's the same thing. The AFV drives directly outside the bypassed hex and do not spend MP at the rear CAFP.

It's reciprocal.
But you still have to traverse the hexside, while in reverse you do not.

P.S. I am happy with rules as written as long as there is clarity, physics be durned.
I have a friend though who takes exception, and I can see the point: the idea that it as easy to back along in bypass of a woods as it is
to back straight back from an OG hex to another OG hex doesn't sit quite right.
 
Last edited:

Philippe D.

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
1,284
Reaction score
449
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
See it this way: while in bypass, you're not really at the CAFP, you're more at the middle of the hexside, like when you're not in bypass you're at the center of the hex. The CAFP is just a simplified notion, to make it clear where LOS is traced to/from, like Robin said.

Yet, when moving, you only pay the cost of the hex you enter - never half of the cost of the hex you're leaving plus half of the cost of the hex you're entering. Yet another gaming abstraction, designed to make the game remotely playable...
 

Aaron Cleavin

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
2,961
Reaction score
483
Location
Sydney
Country
llAustralia
"you're not really at the CAFP, you're more at the middle of the hexside, ": this kind of works, at least til we have Superadvanced squad leader with infantry allowed to end Movement at CAFP's
 

Philippe D.

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
1,284
Reaction score
449
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
I don't think it would make much of a difference - mostly, I would expect it to work similarly to how it happens for vehicles.

But I also don't really expect the rules to be changed to allow infantry to remain in bypass. If a vehicle is stopped next to a building, alongside it, it's very difficult to change your mind and make enter the building; whereas for men on foot, it's much easier to take cover in the building when left stranded next to it.
 

mgmasl

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
3,891
Reaction score
186
Location
Cadiz
Country
llSpain
The cost of terrain traversed in the initial hex/hexside is never considered.. Even so, per game purposes the units are considered in a specific point of the hex/hexside (and not everywhere in the hex) to decide LOS to avoid excesively complex rules.. I suppose the CAFP was decided to have a clear point to check, similar to the drawn center in normal hexes.. It´s the way to allow the maximun field of fire from a bypass position for vehicles with a gun firing usually from the frontal aspect.. This abstraction is as bad/good as any other in the game.. same as a hex with no LOS because a minimun building or a hexside is blocking the LOS to the center when the rest of the hex is clearly visible.. Or being able to jump unharmed from a stream directly to an adjacent hex but not from the same Stream if being in crest position.. It´s ASL Magic. You may move from INSIDE a stream to INSIDE another parallel stream being subject only to snap shots, and I suppose a vehicle may do it without receive any shot.... If you do it from crest to crest receive lot of shots in every hex. Another similar problem is created because the Wall adv rule... you keep aiming to the center even the vehicle being adjacent to every (!!!!!) Wall/hedge/Bocage in the hex..... Why to be worried only about the CAFP dilemma?
 
Top