Help Me Understand D2.18

[cwillmer]

I came across this when looking through the Perry Sez list for something unrelated.

D2.18 states: "D2.18 A vehicle is not prohibited from expending more MP to enter a hex than the minimum required, and may, as it enters a new hex, declare a higher-than-necessary MP expenditure."

But the Perry Sez states:
"D2.18 Is a vehicle prohibited from expending more MP than the minimum required, to enter a new hexside of its current hex while using VBM?
A. Yes it is so prohibited. {1}"

Can someone help me understand why VBM is restricted to only the minimum required to enter a new hexside? The vehicle could go slower in terms of MPs expended (all MPs) to enter an open ground hex than maneuver around a building or woods (2 MPs). That seem counter intuitive.

Apparently I have been playing this wrong for more years than I can count but that's not unusual.

 

[ScottRomanowski]

I can't speak to the purpose, but that Q&A and this one seem to focus on the "hex" in D2.18. My guess is COWTRA: since the rules do not specifically allow you to declare a higher MP expenditure when traversing a hexside with VBM, only when entering a new hex, it is not allowed. As to the purpose or motivation, you'd have to ask Perry.

D2.18 This reads (emphasis added) “A vehicle is not prohibited from expending more MP to enter a hex than the minimum required, and may, as it enters a new hex, declare a higher-than-necessary MP expenditure.” Should “hex” read instead, “hex/hexside” (in two places)?
A. No, “hex” is correct. [Wayne Hadady to Perry Cocke, ASLML 5 Feb 2002]

 

[Sparafucil3]

You can opt to pay more MP to "enter" a hex. If you enter into a hex in bypass, you can opt to pay more. What you can't do is enter into a hex leaving remaining MP and then say "I want to continue to bypass this same hex along another hexside and I opt to spend more MPs than I have left so I will remain where I am in Motion".

It closes a sleaze.

 

[ScottRomanowski]

There's a long, multi-parted Q&A in Kla's V33 that says you can't sleaze and claim you want to spend more MP than necessary to enter another hex in order to remain in Motion ("D2.1 & D2.4 Assume the AFV enters the bypass Location from B2 and announces a MP expenditure of 2. As it does so, presume it has MPs remaining. May the AFV declare a desire to enter into D2 for more MPs than it has left, remain in C2 and place a Motion Counter? A. No. ..."). If the intent of the D2.18 Q&A @cwillmer cited was to prevent sleaze, as @Sparafucil3 wrote, why wasn't it handled in the same way as the Q&A I cite? I.e., letting you spend extra MP as you VBM a new hexside and remain in Motion there, which doesn't allow the sleaze?

I think D2.18 is clear, you can't say that you want to enter a new hex spending a billion MP, but can't, so you remain in Motion. You can only declare that you spend more MP as you enter a new hex. So I think the Q&A I cite isn't necessary; desire isn't entry.

 

[ScottRomanowski]

One possibility I just thought of is that MMP didn't want to expand D2.18 to include new hexsides because they feared it might introduce new problems, new sleazes.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

...or they (MMP) thougth changing the rule wasn't worth it as the current one isn't "broken"/unclear, etc....

 

[ScottRomanowski]

...or they (MMP) thougth changing the rule wasn't worth it as the current one isn't "broken"/unclear, etc....

Yes. I don't think D2.18 is broken or unclear, it's just that, as @cwillmer pointed out, its different for a unit that starts in a hex versus one in a different hex.


Consider a vehicle with 12MP (red) in Motion in D3 (VCA E3/E3). It can change VCA to D4/E4 for 1, then VBM D4/E4 (CAFP D4/E4/E5) for 11MP more, ending in Motion.
Consider a vehicle with 12MP (red) in Motion in VBM along D4/D3 (CAFP D4/D3/E4). It cannot change VCA to D4/E4 for 1, then VBM D4/E4 (CAFP D4/E4/E5) for 11MP more, ending in Motion. In order to end in Motion there, it has to Stop, Delay for 7MP, and Start again, risking Mechanical Reliability.

I agree with the OP that the difference is puzzling. Although the difference may be preventing a sleaze that I haven't thought of, in which case it's not puzzling.

 

[Sparafucil3]

One possibility I just thought of is that MMP didn't want to expand D2.18 to include new hexsides because they feared it might introduce new problems, new sleazes.

It's how the rule was written. Change without reason is madness. If there were a reason for the change, then maybe it would be the thing to do.

 

[Sparafucil3]

I agree with the OP that the difference is puzzling. Although the difference may be preventing a sleaze that I haven't thought of, in which case it's not puzzling.

I doubt its a sleaze you haven't thought of. You just posted it here. Sleaze Freeze isn't an automatic "I win" button, but the tactic is more powerful than the risk. The J16 changes to Street Fighting have made it more deadly to Sleaze Freeze but I am not sure it is that much more deadly that it will make people seriously think about it now.

I have posited in the past and reiterate it here: the best defense against Sleaze Freeze is knowing and enforcing the rules. I am not one of those who will get really unhappy if you Freeze me telling you how ahistorical it is but I am one of those guys who will say "you can't do that like you just did". I will even tell you the right way to do it but I am going to make sure you do it right.

 

[ScottRomanowski]

It's how the rule was written.

Yes, it is well-written. D2.18 was added in ASLRBv2, so it's not a case of the lax use of hex when the rules mean Location of the original RB.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Yes, it is well-written. D2.18 was added in ASLRBv2, so it's not a case of the lax use of hex when the rules mean Location of the original RB.

IIRC, it was first added in Chapter F with West of Alamein.....apparently the tactic of not driving at full speed was something first utilized in the desert....

 

[EagleIV]

IIRC, it was first added in Chapter F with West of Alamein.....apparently the tactic of not driving at full speed was something first utilized in the desert....

It was needed to reduce the chance of immobilizing when moving near hammada.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

It was needed to reduce the chance of immobilizing when moving near hammada.

..and also to avoid Vehicle Dust I think...

 

[ScottRomanowski]

Then it makes sense for the wording to mention only hexes, not bypass, as there's not a lot to bypass in the desert.

I found the original under the rules to alleviate vehicle dust.

 

[Larry]

The RAW does not allow the vehicle to change hexisdes for extra MP but it does allow the vehicle to say I don't have enough MP to move hypothetically into another hex so those MP disappear. It is an exchange of one sleaze for another ... IMHO.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

The RAW does not allow the vehicle to change hexisdes for extra MP but it does allow the vehicle to say I don't have enough MP to move hypothetically into another hex so those MP disappear. It is an exchange of one sleaze for another ... IMHO.

But that last part is not limited to a vehicle in using VBM....

 

[Sparafucil3]

The RAW does not allow the vehicle to change hexisdes for extra MP but it does allow the vehicle to say I don't have enough MP to move hypothetically into another hex so those MP disappear. It is an exchange of one sleaze for another ... IMHO.

What you cannot do by Q&A is opt to not enter another Location if you can. Say you have 1 MP left and Open Ground is directly ahead in the AFV's VCA. You cannot say "I will enter the Open Ground for 2. Ooops. Guess I stay where I am in Motion." That's not allowed.

 

[von Marwitz]

What you cannot do by Q&A is opt to not enter another Location if you can. Say you have 1 MP left and Open Ground is directly ahead in the AFV's VCA. You cannot say "I will enter the Open Ground for 2. Ooops. Guess I stay where I am in Motion." That's not allowed.

But what you can do, I think, is this:

• You're in Bypass with 2MP remaining. You have a (bypassable) Woods hex in your front VCA.
• You can try to pop your sD. Depending on whether you succeed or fail, you have 1MP or 2MP left.
• You can then announce, "I am trying to enter the Woods in my front TCA. Ooooh, alas, I ain't got enough MP for that, what a pity. Thus I have regrettably to stay in Motion (rather than being forced to stop/and to spend delay) in my current hex (with or without Smoke) to continue Sleaze Freezing the enemy infantry within.

von Marwitz

 

[Sparafucil3]

But what you can do, I think, is this:

• You're in Bypass with 2MP remaining. You have a (bypassable) Woods hex in your front VCA.
• You can try to pop your sD. Depending on whether you succeed or fail, you have 1MP or 2MP left.
• You can then announce, "I am trying to enter the Woods in my front TCA. Ooooh, alas, I ain't got enough MP for that, what a pity. Thus I have regrettably to stay in Motion (rather than being forced to stop/and to spend delay) in my current hex (with or without Smoke) to continue Sleaze Freezing the enemy infantry within.

von Marwitz

If you can enter that hex in bypass and have enough MP to do so, you cannot avoid that by "trying" to enter the woods. If you can enter, you must in some way.

 

[ScottRomanowski]

As @Sparafucil3 wrote, you can't cheat the system. Here's the long text of the Q&A I cited above.

D2.1 & D2.4 Assume the AFV enters the bypass Location from B2 and announces a MP expenditure of 2. As it does so, presume it has MPs remaining. May the AFV declare a desire to enter into D2 for more MPs than it has left, remain in C2 and place a Motion Counter?
A. No.
Assume the AFV has less than Half its MPs left. May it declare a desire to enter into D1, have insufficient MPs left, remain in C2 and place a motion counter?
A. No.
Follow up, to enter D1, it would have to continue to bypass around to the C2/D2 hexside. Assuming it has done so and now has less than half MPs left, may it now declare a desire to enter D1 without bypass and stay in C2 with a motion counter in accordance with D2.4?
A. Not if it has enough MP to enter in bypass.
Is an AFV required to enter a new hex/hexside if it is able to before falling back on D2.4?
A. It must be unable to enter the hex in its VCA (or RVCA if moving in reverse) it desires to enter.
Does D2.4 only kick in if the AFV has no movement options left that do not require ESB?
A. No; see above.
When you say “It must be unable to enter the hex in its VCA (or RVCA if moving in reverse) it desires to enter” what happens to the remaining MPs?
A. Those MP disappear (D2.4). [K33]