SW Transfer

Georgii2222

Really Groovy Frood
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
685
Reaction score
21
Location
ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Country
llUnited States

Morbii

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
4,320
Reaction score
392
Location
Gilroy, CA
Country
llUnited States
BUT...there are instances where the Motion Attempt has the possibility of failure, hence the "Attempt"...SW transfer does not. No offense but I find this a straw man example. :)
SW Transfer can fail if a player tries to transfer support weapons to a non GO unit and the opponent calls him on it :p
 

Spencer Armstrong

Canard de Guerre
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
8,624
Reaction score
1,683
Location
Gainesville, FL
First name
Spencer
Country
llUnited States
Just got this in my email, had to rescue this thread from Page 4...

S

> May a leader transfer a SW in the Rally Phase and then attempt to rally one or more units?
No.

....Perry
MMP

Does someone need to add this to the sticky thread? Can I do that?
 
Last edited:

snave

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
426
Reaction score
24
Location
Berlin, NH
Country
llUnited States
Wow Armstrong from Toronto. I think I will have you submit my questions from this point forward. That was record time. I don't know what the "proper" procedure is here for posting. I know somebody collects all this stuff at Dicetower.com. I saw Sam B's name and Scott Romanowski's name there. I don't know who runs it.

Sam B is the guy with the Homer Simpson getting ready to shoot you avatar.
 

Spencer Armstrong

Canard de Guerre
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
8,624
Reaction score
1,683
Location
Gainesville, FL
First name
Spencer
Country
llUnited States
Looks like anybody can. I added this.

As for Perry responding, the main thing that I tried to do was boil it down to the key yes/no question and, while linking him to the thread, I tried not to put any slant or lobbying into the question or my email. That's what I would want if I was in his spot.

S
 

Morbii

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
4,320
Reaction score
392
Location
Gilroy, CA
Country
llUnited States
Perry went on a response spree today. I got 8 responses from him, many of which have been out there a while.
 

snave

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
426
Reaction score
24
Location
Berlin, NH
Country
llUnited States
Cool, have you posted them to the dice tower, or anyplace else where the world can read them?
 

asler

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
1,143
Reaction score
30
Location
Vicksburg, MI
BUT...there are instances where the Motion Attempt has the possibility of failure, hence the "Attempt"...SW transfer does not. No offense but I find this a straw man example. :)
Actually, you could fail an an attempt to transfer a SW between two units. e.g. A ldr declares a transfer of a SW to a squad in a gully hex. Your opponent points out that since the leader is on a crest counter and the squad is not, they cannot transfer the SW as per the A4.431 exception. Therefor your attempt has failed. While this is often self-evident and you would not declare the transfer in the first place (knowing the rule), I could see many casual players not realizing certain actions such as SW transfer can not be done due to situations outside of the transfer itself (good-order, pinned status, location status etc.). Only once those criteria are met is the transfer automatically (no DR/dr) completed.
 

asler

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
1,143
Reaction score
30
Location
Vicksburg, MI
I hear what you are selling asler, I'm just not buying.
What don't you agree with? This has never happened to you where you have declared an action only to have your opponent point out a reason why you can't do the action? Now in pretty much every 'friendly' game I've played I always let my oppenent just skip that action and we consider that it wasn't delcared - but if you played by the book, if the action was declared then it 'happened'; i.e. no 'take backs'.
 

Aaron Cleavin

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
3,094
Reaction score
555
Location
Sydney
Country
llAustralia
Actually, you could fail an an attempt to transfer a SW between two units. e.g. A ldr declares a transfer of a SW to a squad in a gully hex. Your opponent points out that since the leader is on a crest counter and the squad is not, they cannot transfer the SW as per the A4.431 exception. Therefor your attempt has failed. While this is often self-evident and you would not declare the transfer in the first place (knowing the rule), I could see many casual players not realizing certain actions such as SW transfer can not be done due to situations outside of the transfer itself (good-order, pinned status, location status etc.). Only once those criteria are met is the transfer automatically (no DR/dr) completed.
Hmm have to agree with Fort here. A shot with a blocked LOS is still a shot. But If I say i'll attempt to rally the unit under this leader and the counter under the leader was in fact a SW, you do not fail to rally the unit: the action never happens as
it wasn't in the menu of the possible.
Similarly a transfer to an ineligible recipient is not in the menu of the possible so simply doesn't happen as an action, at least thats my read.
 

snave

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
426
Reaction score
24
Location
Berlin, NH
Country
llUnited States
OH, it happens all the time. I think you are using an oversight in game play to re-define "attempt an action".
 

Blackcloud6

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2004
Messages
6,968
Reaction score
675
Location
New Baltimore, MI
Country
llUnited States
This has never happened to you where you have declared an action only to have your opponent point out a reason why you can't do the action? Now in pretty much every 'friendly' game I've played I always let my oppenent just skip that action and we consider that it wasn't delcared - but if you played by the book, if the action was declared then it 'happened'; i.e. no 'take backs'.
What rule demands this?
 

asler

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
1,143
Reaction score
30
Location
Vicksburg, MI
OK, I can see your point - but now I wonder (and this really is getting anal) what stops a player from simply declaring any action and putting the onus of the rule on the opponent to point out it can't be done. If there is no 'penalty' for a declaration then that opens up a whole bunch of questionable ways of playing. Certainly you could just decide not to play that person again - but he could point out that what he is doing is legal because the rules allow it. What 'finalizes' and action - especially an action where no DR/dr is needed? Going by the book - I would assume that the declaration of an action is taken as the commitment as physically pushing a counter; why? because not all actions physically push a counter. This isn't like tournament chess rules where it is clear that once you remove your hand from the piece you have ended your turn. You can declare all you want in chess - but until the piece is moved and the hand removed it isn't considered a move.
 

asler

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
1,143
Reaction score
30
Location
Vicksburg, MI
What rule demands this?
Hmmm...I'm sure I'm not going to word this well but I'm going to give it a try. There isn't a single rule the demands this. It is a natural extrapolation of the context and logic of getting from point A to point C thru B. The rule book doesn't define every word because we assume a common ground of proper language skills (understanding/vocab/etc). If I say 'hex' the rulebook assumes the both players have a common knowledge of a 6 sided-polygon. Now the rules do define what 'location' is and the term 'hex' is in relationship to specific elements of the game- because in relationship to the game there is a quantifyable and important difference in those meanings beyond common knowledge. In the context of this thread - there is an accepted process of decision making in the game. I think about what I'm going to do (most of the time), I declare to my opponent what I am doing (so he can react to it in the case of FDF etc), then roll the dr/DR if needed, and then physically move a counter if needed. There is no rule in the book which states the process; even the ASOP doesn't do this. But in order for us to play the game in a logical manner something like this process always occurs. For me, the declaration of an action by my opponent should be taken at face value and as soon as it is declared it now affects how I'm going to react. i.e. insert an action that I can legally do, point out a disconnect between the delcared action and my understanding of the game, or simply sit there quietly as my opponent deftly avoids yet another one of my ambushes. Hope this makes sense. CG
 

Fort

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Messages
5,868
Reaction score
1,516
Location
virginia
Country
llUnited States
What don't you agree with? This has never happened to you where you have declared an action only to have your opponent point out a reason why you can't do the action? Now in pretty much every 'friendly' game I've played I always let my oppenent just skip that action and we consider that it wasn't delcared - but if you played by the book, if the action was declared then it 'happened'; i.e. no 'take backs'.
That's why there are very strict rules in Poker......You can't say, "I see your bet.....and raise" for example.
 
Top