Vehicular sized entrances in Red Barricades

[James Taylor]

Alan, your own example of the rooftop rules is a perfect example that supports my point. They use the "amended" phrase, but they also explicitly exclude portions of the building rules, e.g. fortification. If we did not have the phrase in the rooftop rules that prevents fortification, you would be able to fortify a rooftop location.

The other things I was referring to is how the rules seem to be attempting to generalize that roads and stairwells apply for both rooftop access and VSE. B23.742 has nothing to do with rooftop access, but the ABtF rule (R.3B) about rooftop access references B23.742, (at least in the RB I'm reading at the moment.) Since B23.742 has nothing to do with rooftop access this seems to be out of place---

I do find your VotG example interesting from the perspective of designer intent... but from a rules discussion point, the fact that it explicitly removes stairwellls, and the RB rules don't... seems to add more weight that stairwells are VSEs in RB "as the rules are currently written."

JT

 

[James Taylor]

I submitted the following questions to Perry via MMP site:

If a Factory hex is a Vehicular-Sized Entrance due solely to a road into the factory does an infantry unit have to enter the hex across a road hexside in order to benefit from the vehicular sized entrance benefits of open ground movement cost?

In Red Barricades are Factory hexes with printed stairwells and no road hexside Vehicular-Sized Entrance hexes?

After submission I realised it was bad form on my part and I should have posted drafts here for comment before submitting, so I apologise for that.

Regardless of wording... submitting to Perry was a good move IMHO.

 

[apbills]

Your own example of the rooftop rules is a perfect example that supports my point. They use the "amended" phrase, but they also explicitly exclude portions of the building rules, e.g. fortification. If we did not have the phrase in the rooftop rules that prevents fortification, you would be able to fortify a rooftop location.

The other things I was referring to is how the rules seem to be attempting to generalize that roads and stairwells apply for both rooftop access and VSE. B23.742 has nothing to do with rooftop access, but the ABtF rule (R.3B) about rooftop access references B23.742, (at least in the RB I'm reading at the moment.) Since B23.742 has nothing to do with rooftop access this seems to be out of place---

I do find your VotG example interesting from the perspective of designer intent... but from a rules discussion point, the fact that it explicitly removes stairwellls, and the RB rules don't... seems to add more weight that stairwells are VSEs in RB "as the rules are currently written."

JT

I disagree on all your points, I think all of the above points more towards my interpretation.

The ONLY reason I bring up rooftops is that is the only other rule I have found that uses the "as amended" phrase.

I am baffled how you think the statement "A rooftop may not be fortified (23.9)." supports an "addition" position on "amended" given there is no addition to that, they are specifically eliminating the entire abilty to fortify and are not adding anything to replace it at all. What other option is there to state you can not fortify a rooftop?

I'm not sure what R.3B implies that is not also implied in O.4B. They are identical in their references. Each rule provides the definition of what constitutes a FRAP. Without that rule, we have FRAPs in every hex due to the B23.8 rules. Nothing in O.4C (and R.3B) says anything about VSE. NOTHING. Why does the absence of any mention of VSE somhow imply they are talking about VSE? B23.742 is there since it is talking about Factory Movement, and the FRAP rule also has factory movement rules in it.

VotG has no 2nd level factories. No VotG factories have printed stairwell symbols. There are no stairwells to remove from the possible VSE.

I believe the designer understood there was some confusion concerning this in RB and made sure it was clear in VotG.

Edit: Do you believe you can have a 2nd level factory in VotG? V6.3 states "6.3 BUILDING HEIGHT: VotG Factories are 1.5 level buildings." If amended means "add" it simply restates a subset of the possible factory heights allowed in the game and you still have the possiblity of 2nd level factories, since B23.74 allows them. If ameded means "replace" than it is clear VotG factories are ONLY 1.5 level buildings.

 

[James Taylor]

I disagree on all your points, I think all of the above points more towards my interpretation.

The ONLY reason I bring up rooftops is that is the only other rule I have found that uses the "as amended" phrase.

I am baffled how you think the statement "A rooftop may not be fortified (23.9)." supports an "addition" position on "amended" given there is no addition to that, they are specifically eliminating the entire abilty to fortify and are not adding anything to replace it at all. What other option is there to state you can not fortify a rooftop?

I'm not sure what R.3B implies that is not also implied in O.4B. They are identical in their references. Each rule provides the definition of what constitutes a FRAP. Without that rule, we have FRAPs in every hex due to the B23.8 rules. Nothing in O.4C (and R.3B) says anything about VSE. NOTHING. Why does the absence of any mention of VSE somhow imply they are talking about VSE? B23.742 is there since it is talking about Factory Movement, and the FRAP rule also has factory movement rules in it.

VotG has no 2nd level factories. No VotG factories have printed stairwell symbols. There are no stairwells to remove from the possible VSE.

I believe the designer understood there was some confusion concerning this in RB and made sure it was clear in VotG.

Edit: Do you believe you can have a 2nd level factory in VotG? V6.3 states "6.3 BUILDING HEIGHT: VotG Factories are 1.5 level buildings." If amended means "add" it simply restates a subset of the possible factory heights allowed in the game and you still have the possiblity of 2nd level factories, since B23.74 allows them. If ameded means "replace" than it is clear VotG factories are ONLY 1.5 level buildings.

Actually yes you can have a 2nd level factory in VotG, just not a 2nd level "VotG Factory". Since there are no other factories on the VotG map other than the VotG factories, there is no 2nd level factory. But the *rules* allow for them if somebody decides to throw a factory overlay on the VotG map later.

I'm not saying that in all cases the word amend means the same thing in the RB, which is what you seem to be trying to do. I'm saying that we have an example of its use where the designers felt the need to EXPLICITLY exclude something they wanted excluded, i.e. fortifications on rooftops.

The other example they did not EXPLICITY exclude something, i.e. stairwells for VSEs. If there is an *equalness* in the use of the word "amend" then it would seem unwise to assume that we should EXCLUDE given the precedent set in the first example.

Of course, YMMV.

At this point I'll be happy to wait for a Perry Sez on this issue.

JT

 

[apbills]

Actually yes you can have a 2nd level factory in VotG, just not a 2nd level "VotG Factory". Since there are no other factories on the VotG map other than the VotG factories, there is no 2nd level factory. But the *rules* allow for them if somebody decides to throw a factory overlay on the VotG map later.

I'm not saying that in all cases the word amend means the same thing in the RB, which is what you seem to be trying to do. I'm saying that we have an example of its use where the designers felt the need to EXPLICITLY exclude something they wanted excluded, i.e. fortifications on rooftops.

The other example they did not EXPLICITY exclude something, i.e. stairwells for VSEs. If there is an *equalness* in the use of the word "amend" then it would seem unwise to assume that we should EXCLUDE given the precedent set in the first example.

Of course, YMMV.

At this point I'll be happy to wait for a Perry Sez on this issue.

JT

I think your VotG overlay example is weak at best. If someone puts an overlap with a building that meets the requirements of V6.1, and states that VotG rules are in effect, versus just using the board (in which case you are NOT playing VotG and who cares what those rules state) then that building will indeed need to either be a 1.5 level factory or else it will need an additional SSR in order to make it a 2.5 or higher (or even a 1 level) factory.

Why? Because 6.1 is the definition of what a VotG Factory is. You can't change that without changing what rules you are playing with. Slap any overlay down and you still don't get to change what the VotG definition of a factory and their height (barring further clarification and modification of the VotG rules).

In RB, O5.2 is the defnition of what a VSE is in RB. As long as you are playing RB rules, you can't change it.

I agree the v2 rule updates in B23.742 are not clear. They lack precision, since there is no real statement in that section defining what a VSE is. Regardless, the RB rule is clear. It takes precendece over the body of the rules. At the time written, the B23.742 rules had one thing referred to as a VSE, namely printed stairwells in SSR defined factories.

Along came RB and the factory rules were changed. VSE was defined, and defined as a factory location with a road entering it.

I also agree that we will be happier (regardless of the outcome) when Perry chimes in.

 

[AZslim]

So I think you are saying you feel you can use all rules, both the original and the amended. I am assuming you also believe that movement on factory rooftops only cost 1 MF since the "amended" rule making all rooftop movement 2 MF can be ingnored since the factory rules state 1 MF between factory hexes, and since the rooftop rule does not specifically state something like "factory movement rules do not apply to factory rooftops", the "amended" rule also allows you to use the orignal rule.

No, I'm using all of the current rules. The new Chapter B ones, and the current RB ones. RB says a road depiction in a building hex makes it a factory. The Chapter B rules further define the factory VSE rules.

 

[apbills]

After having my turkey dinner I thoguth about this more. I think the General hit the smoking gun in my mind.

During the v2 update they moved RB rules back into B23.742, including the " or across a road hexside" language. However, this statement "A vehicle that becomes Immobile in a Vehicular-Sized Entrance (O5.2 for RED BARRICADES) does not negate Entrance benefits" IMO clearly states that for RB, VSE are defined in O5.2. If that is not what the parenthetical is saying, I have no clue why it is there.

 

[apbills]

No, I'm using all of the current rules. The new Chapter B ones, and the current RB ones. RB says a road depiction in a building hex makes it a factory. The Chapter B rules further define the factory VSE rules.

So you use O5.1, defining what makes a factory, and then ignore O5.2 defining VSE and just go back to B23.742. And then you ignore the part of the sentence "... Vehicular-Sized Entrance (O5.2 for RED BARRICADES)..." which seems to indicate that O5.2 defines VSE for Red Barricades.

 

[AZslim]

So you use O5.1, defining what makes a factory, and then ignore O5.2 defining VSE and just go back to B23.742. And then you ignore the part of the sentence "... Vehicular-Sized Entrance (O5.2 for RED BARRICADES)..." which seems to indicate that O5.2 defines VSE for Red Barricades.

Nope. I use O5.1 which defines a factory. Then I read 5.2. It says a road hex entering a building is a VSE, then it sends me to Chapter B. Cool. I go to Chapter B. 23.742 defines the VES rules in detail. Yay! I'm ready to play some RB, with the two types of VSE's defined by Chapter B.

 

[Tater]

That requirement is for using a road VSE of course. A "stairwell" VSE doesn't have hexside-crossing requirements.

I could see your point if O5.2 had any wording that even hinted at printed stairwells not being VSEs. Chapters A-D apply to RB unless otherwise specified.

It is "otherwise specified"...the only VSE are the road entry points. It references B23.742 to indicate the movement costs/effects of a VSE but there is now only one type of VSE on the RB maps...the road entry points.

Given that there are at least 4 stairways in factory interior building locations, someone will have to explain the odd situation/neccesaity of a VSE in hex L15 before I will buy any other reasoning.

 

[AZslim]

It is "otherwise specified"...the only VSE are the road entry points. It references B23.742 to indicate the movement costs/effects of a VSE but there is now only one type of VSE on the RB maps...the road entry points.

Given that there are at least 4 stairways in factory interior building locations, someone will have to explain the odd situation/neccesaity of a VSE in hex L15 before I will buy any other reasoning.

Because it's not real, it's cardboard.

 

[Tater]

Because it's not real, it's cardboard.

OK, let me "amend" my statement..."someone will have to give a reasonable and useful explanation of the odd situation/necessity of a VSE in hex L15 before I will buy any other reasoning".

 

[AZslim]

OK, let me "amend" my statement..."someone will have to give a reasonable and useful explanation of the odd situation/necessity of a VSE in hex L15 before I will buy any other reasoning".

I know what you mean, I agree it's odd. I think your interpretation makes sense from a realism point of view, I just don't think the rules support it. You can play the game any way and you opponents want to, of course.

 

[Stacks]

I agree with Alan B., that should answer your previous question.

I was mostly speculating about the intent of the rule - especially since there are interior hexes in some RB Factories that have a printed stairwell symbol - it seems strange to me if these where VSE.

Det står skrivet att --enheter får använda öppna grundmark fördelarna av en port öppning--men endast när man äntrar den från utsidan av fabriken (men aldrig vid avsaknad av tak). Därmed finns det ingen portöppning inom slutna väggar. Det finns även en ganska logisk förklarning till hur reglerna har skrivits och då ment jag int så mkt av regelmässiga grunder utan mer på tänket bakom--mina gissningar förstås, och även P. Manlig när vi diskuterade detta ämne på 90-talet.
ring om du vill höra ett längre utlägg el. invänta svar frånhansomintspelar

 

[Morbii]

OK, let me "amend" my statement..."someone will have to give a reasonable and useful explanation of the odd situation/necessity of a VSE in hex L15 before I will buy any other reasoning".

What's more curious to me is why there are stairwell symbols in P6 and O9, but not P9. There obviously had to be a stairwell symbol in this building to signify that it is 2.5 levels high, but why only two of the the three!? Does that mean P9 isn't a stairwell as well? L15 doesn't bother me because it's obviously there to state that there's a stairwell in the middle of the building (just like S18) and right next to the wall.

 

[apbills]

Nope. I use O5.1 which defines a factory. Then I read 5.2. It says a road hex entering a building is a VSE, then it sends me to Chapter B. Cool. I go to Chapter B. 23.742 defines the VES rules in detail. Yay! I'm ready to play some RB, with the two types of VSE's defined by Chapter B.

Like I said before. Many people have no clue what a reference is. B23.742 also never actually defines a VSE, rather it leaves it up to us with this statement "(the stairwell symbol in this case representing a vehicular-sized entrance)" It clearly tells us all about how a VSE affects movement, but it never states more than the parenthetical defining a "VSE".

 

[apbills]

What's more curious to me is why there are stairwell symbols in P6 and O9, but not P9. There obviously had to be a stairwell symbol in this building to signify that it is 2.5 levels high, but why only two of the the three!? Does that mean P9 isn't a stairwell as well? L15 doesn't bother me because it's obviously there to state that there's a stairwell in the middle of the building (just like S18) and right next to the wall.

O.4C clearly states that both stairwell symbols and road entry Locations have FRAPs. No need to just add a stairwell in the same hex as the road. On the other hand, you need to put them somewhere if you want the 2.5 level factory, and if you don't want too many of them you need to put them where the roads enter.

 

[Tater]

I know what you mean, I agree it's odd. I think your interpretation makes sense from a realism point of view, I just don't think the rules support it. You can play the game any way and you opponents want to, of course.

Since we are talking HASL the "anyway you and your opponent want to" is pretty much a given.

But let me ask you, based on your interpretation, do you believe that L15 is a VSE? And if not, why not?

 

[Morbii]

Since we are talking HASL the "anyway you and your opponent want to" is pretty much a given.

But let me ask you, based on your interpretation, do you believe that L15 is a VSE? And if not, why not?

VSE or not, the movement costs and bog penalties are the same - so why not, sure, it's a VSE.

 

[Tater]

VSE or not, the movement costs and bog penalties are the same - so why not, sure, it's a VSE.

So keeping the rules reasonably internally consistent isn't an issue for you? OK...good to know.

BTW, those interior building VSE would be OG costs to enter for vehicles.