Vehicle with MP remaining

[buser333]

I find the whole idea of people saying that if you enter a hex with a vehicle, stating a certain number of MP as you do so, that that vehicle cannot thus end its turn in motion in that hex incorrect.

I use C6.16 "A moving vehicle that ends its MPh with MP remaining is assumed to expend all those MP in its present hex (D2.1)" and the above referenced D2.1 "A vehicle which ends its MPh with MP remaining is assumed to use all those MP in that hex." as basis.

For example: I find it perfectly acceptable using the written rules that a 16MP vehicle enters a hex in bypass expending 15MP, tries for smoke and fails, and ends in motion (using the remaining 1MF in the process).

 

[WuWei]

You can end a vehicle's movement phase with MP remaining if you claim you want to enter a hex you don't have enough MP left to enter.
So if you spend 6 of your 11 MP, you can then announce: "I want to enter that woods hex for half my MP. Oops, can't do that, so I remain here!" THEN you are assumed to have spend your remaining 5 MP in the hex you are in.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

So if you spend 6 of your 11 MP, you can then announce: "I want to enter that woods hex for half my MP. Oops, can't do that, so I remain here!" THEN you are assumed to have spend your remaining 5 MP in the hex you are in.

Those 5MP are actually not considered spent at all.

D2.4:
"...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...."

Q&A:
D2.4
“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.” May “unspent” MP be used to determine Defensive Fire opportunities? E.g.: Suppose an Armored Car
wishes to enter a Brush hex (cost: 4 MP) but it only has 3 MP remaining unused in this MPh. Per D2.4, the AC may end the MPh
in Motion with 3 MP left unspent. May the AC be attacked on those remaining 3 MP (or some fraction thereof) as if it had actually
spent them? If the AC had only just entered an enemy unit’s LOS and had expended ≤ 3 MP in doing so, may the enemy unit wait
for (some portion of) the “unspent” 3 MP to be “spent” so as to avoid the Case J1/J2 Limited Aim penalties?
A. No to all.

 

[buser333]

Apparently I needed to read a bit further eh? As always, you're the man Klas.

 

[WuWei]

Thanks for the correction!

 

[CTKnudsen]

I haven't really run into this situation before, but doesn't this invite opportunity for a certain amount of gaminess? If I were not inclined to properly plan out my MP, for example, I could trundle along, realize that I've buggered up my MP count, and then say "well I want to go into/through that terrain feature, but I can't, so I'm going to have to cease my move having expended less MP than I actually have."? Cue irritated opponent, who was looking forward to having extra MP to shoot at.

Now I would not think much of an opponent who did that routinely, although in most games I would encourage my opponent to have a mulligan and plan out the move more smartly - the first time or two...

 

[jrv]

I haven't really run into this situation before, but doesn't this invite opportunity for a certain amount of gaminess? If I were not inclined to properly plan out my MP, for example, I could trundle along, realize that I've buggered up my MP count, and then say "well I want to go into/through that terrain feature, but I can't, so I'm going to have to cease my move having expended less MP than I actually have."? Cue irritated opponent, who was looking forward to having extra MP to shoot at.

Now I would not think much of an opponent who did that routinely, although in most games I would encourage my opponent to have a mulligan and plan out the move more smartly - the first time or two...

It also allows a certain amount of play-by-the-seat-of-your-pants, so that players don't have to spend five minutes for each vehicle planning every MP to be spent. Tradeoff.

JR

 

[Tuomo]

I haven't really run into this situation before, but doesn't this invite opportunity for a certain amount of gaminess? If I were not inclined to properly plan out my MP, for example, I could trundle along, realize that I've buggered up my MP count, and then say "well I want to go into/through that terrain feature, but I can't, so I'm going to have to cease my move having expended less MP than I actually have."? Cue irritated opponent, who was looking forward to having extra MP to shoot at.

Now I would not think much of an opponent who did that routinely, although in most games I would encourage my opponent to have a mulligan and plan out the move more smartly - the first time or two...

Completely agree. I must have not been paying attention, but Klas's note has me dumbfounded. I can end my vehicle's MPh adjacent to some high-MP terrain (perhaps even if it's not in my VCA?), declare that I don't have enough MP to enter that terrain, and boom, those extra MP vanish?

It would seem to have a huge effect on urban battles, no? Where adjacent buildings are everywhere? You roll up, declare you can't enter the building, and suddenly we're no longer worrying about every MP being spent in particular hexes with LOS to enemy units, we're doing something different where MP just... go away?

I must be misunderstanding Klas's message, or I've been playing the game wrong forever, or people I've been playing with have never used this because it seems pretty sleazy or perhaps Secret Option D, cuz I'm dang confused.

 

[jrv]

Completely agree. I must have not been paying attention, but Klas's note has me dumbfounded. I can end my vehicle's MPh adjacent to some high-MP terrain (perhaps even if it's not in my VCA?), declare that I don't have enough MP to enter that terrain, and boom, those extra MP vanish?

It would seem to have a huge effect on urban battles, no? Where adjacent buildings are everywhere? You roll up, declare you can't enter the building, and suddenly we're no longer worrying about every MP being spent in particular hexes with LOS to enemy units, we're doing something different where MP just... go away?

I must be misunderstanding Klas's message, or I've been playing the game wrong forever, or people I've been playing with have never used this because it seems pretty sleazy or perhaps Secret Option D, cuz I'm dang confused.

I believe the hex you want to enter but can't has to be in your VCA (or reverse VCA if moving in reverse). But you have the gist of the rule.

It's hard for me to see why this is such a frightful ruling. In the right situation a unit may burn off slightly less than half its MPs. It will still be in that hex for the DFPh. If it had to spend the MPs how would that make such a big difference? In most situations with careful planning (i.e. five minutes calculation per vehicle moved) the vehicle could have done the same thing after spending all its MPs. It's a very rare situation that it would be different from spending a great deal of time planning each move. As long as you don't mind my turns taking that much longer I don't mind doing the planning, but I don't see the magic key to victory here.

JR

 

[Honosbinda]

But the OP still has a valid point. Isn't the question about whether or not the vehicle can stay in motion in the hex after NOT spending all of it's MPs? What about the case of the vehicle not wishing to enter any new hex, period, what happens then? And if the rules don't specify any sort of Vehicle CA criteria, who is anyone to say that, 'oh yeah, it has to be one in your VCA.' Sorry but this needs to be written somewhere, gentlemen...!

I just played a game where I tried to overrun a squad in brush and failed the attack; I had 5 MP left or so. Due to my understanding of the rule, I wouldn't be allowed to 'putter around' in the hex and stay in motion. Therefore I had to leave the hex, spin around (taking fire in that next hex) and then re-enter the hex to 'freeze' the enemy infantry I had failed to affect with my OVR. But if a woods hex had been in my way (notwithstanding that in many cases bypass would also be allowed), I could declare 'oh, I want so badly to move into that woods hex, but alas, I cannot' so therefore I could stay in motion having only spent the 13MP.

Sorry, what kind of rubbish is this? I don't smell a rose here in these rules I'd prefer to play it that the unit could putter around and stay in motion...as if there were a hypothetical hex nearby that is going to cost too many points to enter. After all, can't I declare that the next hex is going to cost me X number of points to enter --- oh woops, I don't have them, can't do it...

 

[jrv]

I just played a game where I tried to overrun a squad in brush and failed the attack; I had 5 MP left or so. Due to my understanding of the rule, I wouldn't be allowed to 'putter around' in the hex and stay in motion. Therefore I had to leave the hex, spin around (taking fire in that next hex) and then re-enter the hex to 'freeze' the enemy infantry I had failed to affect with my OVR. But if a woods hex had been in my way (notwithstanding that in many cases bypass would also be allowed), I could declare 'oh, I want so badly to move into that woods hex, but alas, I cannot' so therefore I could stay in motion having only spent the 13MP.

Sorry, what kind of rubbish is this? I don't smell a rose here in these rules I'd prefer to play it that the unit could putter around and stay in motion...as if there were a hypothetical hex nearby that is going to cost too many points to enter. After all, can't I declare that the next hex is going to cost me X number of points to enter --- oh woops, I don't have them, can't do it...

If all you want to do is burn five MP or so after an OVR while staying in hex, then change CA. Five times or so. No need to exit. Done. If the defender has no credible DFF options (including CC-RF) then stop, delay and start. But only if it's safe. Otherwise, change CA.

JR

 

[Honosbinda]

If all you want to do is burn five MP or so after an OVR while staying in hex, then change CA. Five times or so. No need to exit. Done. If the defender has no credible DFF options (including CC-RF) then stop, delay and start. But only if it's safe. Otherwise, change CA.

JR

right right, so I have to do that BECAUSE a non-enterable hex is not somewhere next to my tank.

Of course, I know you realize that 'just changing CA' might result in vehicle BOG, might result in facing the SIDE to an enemy, that STOPPING and delaying, I believe, makes the tank non-motion for CC RF, does force the player to SPEND those extra MP in an LOS that might enhance the TH chances - all that extra stuff that an adjacent woods hex would SAVE us from...I may not have listed all the disadvantages overlooked in the simply solution of grinding the treads back and forth in some aimless and dare I say unrealistic fashion to make the awkward rules work... and ALL the advantages an adjacent impossible-to-enter hex offers gone, dust in the wind, kaput, vaminos, etc. etc :nod:

 

[Eagle4ty]

I don't see a problem here. Say you're moving an AFV with a respectable frontal AF and a weak SR AF so as to get deep into the enemy's backfield but after you've spent > half your MF allotment an ATG pops out and opens up on your flank and misses but has another shot at your SR should you continue along your route; simply spend another MP (or two) to turn you VCA towards him and if fortunate enough to have terrain to your front announce you intend to move into it but lack the MP to do so and will hence remain in motion. Now he's likely faced with a low to no probability TK or a very low probability of an immobilization TH based upon your last MP(s) only. If you've got other guys in the area, swarm the ATG and you're back in business. Seems like a pretty slick move (certainly takes the onus off the moving player to have to figure out some portions of his movement in advance).

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Completely agree. I must have not been paying attention, but Klas's note has me dumbfounded. I can end my vehicle's MPh adjacent to some high-MP terrain (perhaps even if it's not in my VCA?), declare that I don't have enough MP to enter that terrain, and boom, those extra MP vanish?

Not sure about the VCA, but otherwise - per D2.4 quoted above.

It's hard for me to see why this is such a frightful ruling.

I am not even sure it is a "ruling" - D2.4 clearly (IMO) says that all MP are not spent.


All this being said, I can't recall a single time (since 1990-ish) that I have used this rule or seen it used by others that I have played. Perhaps because many/most aren't aware of it.

 

[Honosbinda]

I don't see a problem here. Say you're moving an AFV with a respectable frontal AF and a weak SR AF so as to get deep into the enemy's backfield but after you've spent > half your MF allotment an ATG pops out and opens up on your flank and misses but has another shot at your SR should you continue along your route; simply spend another MP (or two) to turn you VCA towards him and if fortunate enough to have terrain to your front announce you intend to move into it but lack the MP to do so and will hence remain in motion. Now he's likely faced with a low to no probability TK or a very low probability of an immobilization TH based upon your last MP(s) only. If you've got other guys in the area, swarm the ATG and you're back in business. Seems like a pretty slick move (certainly takes the onus off the moving player to have to figure out some portions of his movement in advance).

The problem is this and it's obvious: am tank WITHOUT having a fortunate woods hex to perform this slick maneuver has to spend all the MPs in some fashion, while Mr. Lucky Tank doesn't have too. Sheer gameyness.

Most people probably don't play with this rule and just allow units to end in Motion even if they have MPs left and just act like they have never spent them. Now that would make a player NOT HAVE To figure out it's move in advance, which they do have to now, just to make sure they only spend 2 MPs at the end moving in and stopping or staying in motion, rather than 4, 5, 7 or 10 MPs spent in LOS to stay in motion/stop. Oh, except if there's a tree stump in the next hex that they pretend they meant to run over...but of course never intended to make it there.

 

[Eagle4ty]

The problem is this and it's obvious: am tank WITHOUT having a fortunate woods hex to perform this slick maneuver has to spend all the MPs in some fashion, while Mr. Lucky Tank doesn't have too. Sheer gameyness.

Most people probably don't play with this rule and just allow units to end in Motion even if they have MPs left and just act like they have never spent them. Now that would make a player NOT HAVE To figure out it's move in advance, which they do have to now, just to make sure they only spend 2 MPs at the end moving in and stopping or staying in motion, rather than 4, 5, 7 or 10 MPs spent in LOS to stay in motion/stop. Oh, except if there's a tree stump in the next hex that they pretend they meant to run over...but of course never intended to make it there.

Well then simply say you were going to enter the next hex at an increased MP cost (let's say 1MP greater than your remaining MP allotment as you always have an option to spend more MP than the minimum to enter a location), but fail to have the required MPs to accomplish the move - problem solved! :facepalm:

 

[Honosbinda]

Well then simply say you were going to enter the next hex at an increased MP cost (let's say 1MP greater than your remaining MP allotment as you always have an option to spend more MP than the minimum to enter a location), but fail to have the required MPs to accomplish the move - problem solved! :facepalm:

yes well-articulated, what I pointed out earlier hehe: 'I intended to make into that hex, but I decided that it costs 7 MP and I only have 6 MP so therefore I can't make it in, and don't spend the movement points, and I'm still in motion. Dang!'

 

[CTKnudsen]

It also allows a certain amount of play-by-the-seat-of-your-pants, so that players don't have to spend five minutes for each vehicle planning every MP to be spent. Tradeoff. JR

Ohhh man, good point. It takes me FOREVER to figure out exactly where I should spend 6 MP to enter which hex, in order to have just enough to... well, you get the idea.

I think a lot of the gaminess points that others raise are unavoidable to a certain degree. There are always going to be rules that make sense on the face of it but are exploitable in some way or another. All I can say is that I would be disinclined to play someone who tried some of the exploits outlined above. I don't mind errors in play, hell I'd be the worst sort of hypocrite if I did, but super rules cheese is another story. It's just a game, be a gentleman. If you need to win that bad, go play against yourself.

But not SASL, it's really easy to lose at that.

 

[Honosbinda]

Ohhh man, good point. It takes me FOREVER to figure out exactly where I should spend 6 MP to enter which hex, in order to have just enough to... well, you get the idea.

I think a lot of the gaminess points that others raise are unavoidable to a certain degree. There are always going to be rules that make sense on the face of it but are exploitable in some way or another. All I can say is that I would be disinclined to play someone who tried some of the exploits outlined above. I don't mind errors in play, hell I'd be the worst sort of hypocrite if I did, but super rules cheese is another story. It's just a game, be a gentleman. If you need to win that bad, go play against yourself.

But not SASL, it's really easy to lose at that.

Okay, let's be clear: these are hypothetical exploits designed to demonstrate how poorly written the rule is. Sorry if that's not obvious. To be super clear, we are poking FUN at the rule. Sure it's just a game, but we expect this game to have an internally consistent rules set. If that doesn't matter to you...well, you probably know what I'm going to suggest, don't you

 

[Philippe D.]

For about as long as I remember, I've played this correctly - you have to spend all your MP except if you have an excuse not to. Since you're also allowed to overspend when entering a new location, this really is not a big deal at all - in all situations I remember in actual play, the AFV player had at least one safe place to overspend MPs in. And yes, I play that it has to be in the (R)VCA, because it's a matter of wanting your next move to be entering that hex, and you can't enter a hex that is not in the proper CA.

Quite often when I start planning an AFV MPh, I know where I want to go and I how I want my AFV to end it - Motion or not, which VCA, etc. If my opponent has HIP AT assets, I'll try to pick the places to overspend; otherwise, if there are not too many DFF options on the way, I'll typically say "I want to move here and here and end up here in Motion, do you have a problem with it".