B23.83 Rooftop Location Not Building Location ...

[Spencer Armstrong]

A major difference between building control and he/location control is that you HOLD building control once you obtain it until the conditions are such that control is gained by the other side.

So once you gain control of a building, it does not matter if other enemy units subsequently enter the building.

You still control it until you leave it totally and thus pass control to the other side.

That's true of Hex/Location control as well (A26.16)

S

 

[jwb3]

I should say that it's not another interpretation of the current rules as written, which Jim has successfully convinced me are "utter crap" due to the vergule usage.

I agree with him that the usage "Location/hex/building" only makes logical sense as a mapping -- and I'm quite sure that's how it was intended. I also agree with the results that Spencer listed for that mapping... and I too could live with that interpretation. The problem is that it runs head-on into the statement in A26.13 about "at ground level".

I believe the explanation lies in what I came across while researching for my earlier post. I went back to the first printed version of the control rules to see how such "mapping" might have been presented there, and mostly it reminded me why they got rewritten in the first place! However, there's one key statement in them:

26.11 HEX CONTROL: A hex is Controlled by the last side to have occupied it with a Good Order MMC at ground level without the presence of an enemy ground unit in the same hex at ground level or in an upper building level.

In other words, before the rewrite, it was quite clear that building Locations other than the ground level one did matter for hex control. (And in response to Jim's 11:34 post, I have no problem with that concept.)

However, the sentence could be read as specifically including or implicitly excluding rooftops, depending entirely on whether they were considered "building" levels. The original rules were naturally silent on that issue...

However, we now have a rule (B23.83) which at least some of us interpret as saying that a unit on the rooftop is not "in" the building for purposes of denying the other side Building Control. By that interpretation it logically follows that the unit is also not "in" the building for purposes of Hex Control. Putting that together with the intent garnered from the original rules, such a unit is not in an upper building level and therefore can't prevent the other side from taking control.

Not saying this is the right interpretation, just that it works.


John

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

I should say that it's not another interpretation of the current rules as written, which Jim has successfully convinced me are "utter crap" due to the vergule usage.

I agree with him that the usage "Location/hex/building" only makes logical sense as a mapping -- and I'm quite sure that's how it was intended. I also agree with the results that Spencer listed for that mapping... and I too could live with that interpretation. The problem is that it runs head-on into the statement in A26.13 about "at ground level".

I believe the explanation lies in what I came across while researching for my earlier post. I went back to the first printed version of the control rules to see how such "mapping" might have been presented there, and mostly it reminded me why they got rewritten in the first place! However, there's one key statement in them:

In other words, before the rewrite, it was quite clear that building Locations other than the ground level one did matter for hex control. (And in response to Jim's 11:34 post, I have no problem with that concept.)

However, the sentence could be read as specifically including or implicitly excluding rooftops, depending entirely on whether they were considered "building" levels. The original rules were naturally silent on that issue...

However, we now have a rule (B23.83) which at least some of us interpret as saying that a unit on the rooftop is not "in" the building for purposes of denying the other side Building Control. By that interpretation it logically follows that the unit is also not "in" the building for purposes of Hex Control. Putting that together with the intent garnered from the original rules, such a unit is not in an upper building level and therefore can't prevent the other side from taking control.

Not saying this is the right interpretation, just that it works.


John

I think I follow you, but I don't follow the idea that being "in a building" matters for Hex Control. Seems to me that controlling the Hex means something more than controlling its included building or the distinction loses purpose.

S

 

[aslredbarricade]

A26.11 … During play, a side gains Control of a Location/hex/building by occupying it with an armed Good Order Infantry MMC without the presence of an armed enemy ground unit [EXC: subterranean units] in that same Location/hex/building.

Ummm…. What is a ground unit ??? That word sticks out to me like a sixth finger (No offense if any of you have six )

There is no reference in the Index, and no definition I can find.

ground may mean ground level unit?

ground may mean non-aerial unit?

ground may mean non-vehicular unit?

Randy

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

A26.11 … During play, a side gains Control of a Location/hex/building by occupying it with an armed Good Order Infantry MMC without the presence of an armed enemy ground unit [EXC: subterranean units] in that same Location/hex/building.

Ummm…. What is a ground unit ??? That word sticks out to me like a sixth finger (No offense if any of you have six )

There is no reference in the Index, and no definition I can find.

ground may mean ground level unit?

ground may mean non-aerial unit?

ground may mean non-vehicular unit?

Randy

Any unit that is neither aircraft nor boat is what I've taken that to mean, but I can't find that definition either.

S

 

[aslredbarricade]

This is interesting to me!

12.153 Mopping Up Any hidden enemy unit(s) in the building is immediately placed in view beneath a "?", and all enemy dummies are removed.

For those of you who hold the position that a unit on a rooftop is not "in the building", I believe that if you Mopped Up a building with hidden enemy units on the rooftop, such units would remain hidden, and would not have to be revealed.

Though you still control the building, by your reasoning, since you believe the rooftop units do not prevent gaining control of the building, such enemy units would have the freedom to potentially advance down a stairwell and possibly grab back buildings late in the game, or whatever.

Following such a position that rooftop units are not "in the building" for control purposes may short circuit though, in light of A26.11 "After successfully securing a building by Mopping Up (12.153), a player gains Control of the building and all its hexes and Locations.

So here's the problem: If you Mop Up a building, you gain Control of the building and gain Control of all its hexes and locations. But rooftop units remain.

Therefore rooftop units must not affect Hex Control.

Therefore rooftop locations must not be building locations, unless you can control a building location occupied an enemy squad, which seems rather wrong.

I hope the considerations of the Mopping Up rules, which appear in A26.11, combined with the A12.153 language, may shed some light on this discussion?

Randy

 

[aslredbarricade]

I still leave open the possibility that if you don't apply the B23.83 A Rooftop Location is not considered a building location four rout and Victory Condition Purposes quite so rigidly or in such a broad blanket manner, but rather do what it actually says, and only apply it for Victory Condition Purposes, it clears up quite a bit, for me. I think when this B Rooftop rule is applied to trump all Control Rules, that it causes problems. Why not just treat rooftop units as irrelevant to Victory Condition Building Control, but let them affect building control for other game purposes. And let them be "in the building" or let the occupy "building locations" for all other purposes, such as Mopping Up. I think the beginning error in logic, IMO, that causes these problems, is to apply the rooftop rule for perhaps more than it was actually included to cover.

The rule simply says "A Rooftop Location is not considered a building Location for rout and Victory Condition purposes."
So let us perhaps consider a Rooftop Location to be considered a building Location for all other purposes.

Rooftops are "building locations" for all other purposes. That seems clear from B23.83

Hope that is helpful.

It fixes the problem that is created in the Mopping Up rules, per my previous post.

Randy

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

This is interesting to me!

12.153 Mopping Up Any hidden enemy unit(s) in the building is immediately placed in view beneath a "?", and all enemy dummies are removed.

For those of you who hold the position that a unit on a rooftop is not "in the building", I believe that if you Mopped Up a building with hidden enemy units on the rooftop, such units would remain hidden, and would not have to be revealed.

Though you still control the building, by your reasoning, since you believe the rooftop units do not prevent gaining control of the building, such enemy units would have the freedom to potentially advance down a stairwell and possibly grab back buildings late in the game, or whatever.

Following such a position that rooftop units are not "in the building" for control purposes may short circuit though, in light of A26.11 "After successfully securing a building by Mopping Up (12.153), a player gains Control of the building and all its hexes and Locations.

So here's the problem: If you Mop Up a building, you gain Control of the building and gain Control of all its hexes and locations. But rooftop units remain.

Therefore rooftop units must not affect Hex Control.

Therefore rooftop locations must not be building locations, unless you can control a building location occupied by enemy units, which seems rather wrong.

I hope the considerations of the Mopping Up rules, which appear in A26.11, combined with the A12.153 language, may shed some light on this discussion?

Randy

B23.82 last sentence specifically includes Rooftops w/Buildings for the purposes of Searching and Mopping Up. So you're describing an impossible sequence of events.

S

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

I still leave open the possibility that if you don't apply the B23.83 A Rooftop Location is not considered a building location four rout and Victory Condition Purposes quite so rigidly or in such a broad blanket manner, but rather do what it actually says, and only apply it for Victory Condition Purposes, it clears up quite a bit, for me. I think when this B Rooftop rule is applied to trump all Control Rules, that it causes problems. Why not just treat rooftop units as irrelevant to Victory Condition Building Control, but let them affect building control for other game purposes. And let them be "in the building" or let the occupy "building locations" for all other purposes, such as Mopping Up. I think the beginning error in logic, IMO, that causes these problems, is to apply the rooftop rule for perhaps more than it was actually included to cover.

The rule simply says "A Rooftop Location is not considered a building Location for rout and Victory Condition purposes."
So let us perhaps consider a Rooftop Location to be considered a building Location for all other purposes.

Rooftops are "building locations" for all other purposes. That seems clear from B23.83

Hope that is helpful.

It fixes the problem that is created in the Mopping Up rules, per my previous post.

Randy

I still posit that Building Control is definitionally a sub-set of Victory Conditions so it's impossible to have a sense of "Building Control" outside a sense of "Victory Conditions." It's like saying something is "Sky Blue" but not "Blue."

S

 

[aslredbarricade]

B23.82 last sentence specifically includes Rooftops w/Buildings for the purposes of Searching and Mopping Up. So you're describing an impossible sequence of events.

S

Great Spotting Job Spencer. It would almost seem that units on the roof are considered in the building for some purposes (mopping up), and not in a building location for other purposes (Victory Conditions). But there doesnt seem to be a "default" statement of what they are to be generally considered as…. Weird.

Randy

 

[aslredbarricade]

I still posit that Building Control is definitionally a sub-set of Victory Conditions so it's impossible to have a sense of "Building Control" outside a sense of "Victory Conditions." It's like saying something is "Sky Blue" but not "Blue."

S

I'm starting to agree with you!

Randy

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

Great Spotting Job Spencer. It would almost seem that units on the roof are considered in the building for some purposes (mopping up), and not in a building location for other purposes (Victory Conditions). But there doesnt seem to be a "default" statement of what they are to be generally considered as…. Weird.

Randy

Rooftops are weird... I heartily agree with that!!! :clown: :laugh: :toast:

S

 

[aslredbarricade]

I still posit that Building Control is definitionally a sub-set of Victory Conditions so it's impossible to have a sense of "Building Control" outside a sense of "Victory Conditions." It's like saying something is "Sky Blue" but not "Blue."

S

Would you also posit that Hex Control is definitionally a sub-set of Victory Conditions so it's impossible to have a sense of "Hex Control" outside a sense of "Victory Conditions." It's like saying something is "Sky Blue" but not "Blue."

If so, then the same rooftop unit exclusion/irrelevance rule would necessary have to apply to Hex Control. That is what I was trying to ask earlier.

Randy

 

[aslredbarricade]

These rules discussions are quite a bit of fun, but I have to go do some work, lol. Catch up you with you again later.

Randy

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

Would you also posit that Hex Control is definitionally a sub-set of Victory Conditions so it's impossible to have a sense of "Hex Control" outside a sense of "Victory Conditions." It's like saying something is "Sky Blue" but not "Blue."

Yes. The very notion of Control is a VC notion.

If so, then the same rooftop unit exclusion/irrelevance rule would necessary have to apply to Hex Control. That is what I was trying to ask earlier.

Randy

I don't understand the question. Help?

S

 

[aslredbarricade]

Yes. The very notion of Control is a VC notion.



I don't understand the question. Help? S

Spencer,

In the instance of Vehicular Factory Entrances, it was noted that the hex must be controlled (B23.742) by friendly forces in order to enter at 1 MF cost.

With an enemy squad on the roof of the hex with the vehicular factory entrance, it was discussed whether the roof presence denied hex control for this purpose.

I think you would agree that such a rooftop unit can have no effect on hex control? And therefore cannot prevent the other side from using the benefits of VFE if they control the ground level of the factory.

Randy

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

Spencer,

In the instance of Vehicular Factory Entrances, it was noted that the hex must be controlled (B23.742) by friendly forces in order to enter at 1 MF cost.

With an enemy squad on the roof of the hex with the vehicular factory entrance, it was discussed whether the roof presence denied hex control for this purpose.

I think you would agree that such a rooftop unit can have no effect on hex control? And therefore cannot prevent the other side from using the benefits of VFE if they control the ground level of the factory.

Randy

No, I wouldn't agree with that. The exception for Rooftop units only applies to Building Control (B23.83, A26.14). Like I said, they're not in the building, but they are in the hex. This is what Jim and I were discussing in posts 34-39. Due to the wording of A26.13, that Rooftop unit can't control that hex, but it can deny control of the hex (though not the building).

S

 

[Eremite]

Fascinating discussion ...

I'm in general agreement with Spencer but sympathize with the troubling inconsistencies of control schemes .. hex, building and location control are not parallel.

It seems the inconsistencies between VSE's via B23.742 and the control schemes might best be resolved by a small addendum to 23.742 and not a revamping/remapping of the control schemes.

But kudos to the thread for teaching me a new word ... virgule .. who knew?!

 

[aslredbarricade]

No, I wouldn't agree with that. The exception for Rooftop units only applies to Building Control (B23.83, A26.14). Like I said, they're not in the building, but they are in the hex. This is what Jim and I were discussing in posts 34-39. Due to the wording of A26.13, that Rooftop unit can't control that hex, but it can deny control of the hex (though not the building).

S

I dont agree. You are stating (I think) that "the exception for rooftop units only applies to Building Control (B23.83, A26.14)". The exception in B23.83 does not only apply to building control. It applies to Victory Conditions, of which both Building Control AND Hex Control are a sub-set.

So the rooftop units must be ignored for both building control and hex control, according to our interpretation of B23.83. What am I missing on that point?

R

 

[Eremite]

You are forgetting the terms of the Rooftop exception .. Rooftops are not building locations for purposes of Rout and Victory Conditions. Whether a rooftop is a building location or not does not change the ability of a unit in a non-ground location from contesting Hex control and VSE bonus.