:: :: FAQ :: Search :: Memberlist :: Join! (free) :: Profile :: Log in to check your private messages :: Log in ::
Rheinubung Bismarck & Mines
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Axis & Allies ForuMINI Forum Index -> WAS General Discussion -> WAS Rules Clarification
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.

 


Likes received:




Post subject:   (Liked by:)  Like this post
Back to top
au64

 
MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 13 Aug 2013
Likes received: 103

Posts: 3800
FLAGS




Post subject: Rheinubung Bismarck & Mines  Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
If the Rheinubung Bismarck is "deployed" to a sector that has been mined, is this classified as "Entering" thus all ships need to roll for damage, or does deploy not equal enter thus they are immune to an already mined sector?

Rheinubung Bismarck Secret Breakout:
This unit may begin the game undeployed, along with up to one of your Cruisers. Set the undeployed Ships aside. They are out of play. Deploy them together during turn 2 or 3 at the end of the Air Return phase in any sector on your side of the map.

Mines:
Once per game, instead of making an attack in the Surface Attack phase, this unit can mine its sector. Whenever a ship enters the mined sector, roll a die. On a 1, the ship takes 1 point of damage. On a 2, 2 points. Torpedo defense works against this damage.

I can see arguments and intent for both sides.

The spoiler below is how we ruled it:
Spoiler:


Deploy does not equal Enter, thus the Bismarck and VDT did not have to roll for mine damage.



I just wanted to make sure that we ruled it correctly by consensus.[/b]
PostTue Jun 21, 2016 8:26 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
ticat1

_
 
MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Likes received: 818

Posts: 10680
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
I'm going to disagree sith that judgement. The Bismarck as VDT are most definitely entering the sector.

If mines said "moves into" then it sound be a different story.  

But it doesn't matter how a shop gets there, by definition it's entering the sector.

Plus I'm pretty sure that this has been, in fact, clarified. Hang on
_________________

Qui Tangit Frangitur

To you, from failing hands we throw the torch; be yours to hold it high
           -John McCrae
PostTue Jun 21, 2016 8:38 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
My gut tells me that ticat is right.
_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~
PostTue Jun 21, 2016 9:07 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
au64

 
MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 13 Aug 2013
Likes received: 103

Posts: 3800
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
I couldn't find anything other than a single reply by Ticat on this same question back a year or two ago.

The intent of the Mines is to prevent a ship from entering the sector.  Secret Breakout intent is that the ship was always there and you are just deploying or "revealing" its location.

The question boils down to does "deploy" = "enter"?
PostTue Jun 21, 2016 9:29 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
I never thought of Secret Breakout as the ships always being there, but that the ships somehow managed to covertly sail to the location and then be revealed.

"Enter" is broader (less specific) than "move" (which could have been used), so I would say deployment into a sector is entering it.

Quote:
de·ploy
verb: deploy; 3rd person present: deploys; past tense: deployed; past participle: deployed; gerund or present participle: deploying

   move (troops) into position for military action.

_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~
PostTue Jun 21, 2016 10:02 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Darkbringer

 RL-202 lives...

MyTheaterClub

Joined: 06 Dec 2011
Likes received: 259

Posts: 3118
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
ticat1 wrote:
I'm going to disagree sith that judgement. The Bismarck as VDT are most definitely entering the sector.

If mines said "moves into" then it sound be a different story.  

But it doesn't matter how a shop gets there, by definition it's entering the sector.

Plus I'm pretty sure that this has been, in fact, clarified. Hang on


I agree with everything but the typos Wink
_________________


Mention my name, you'll get a good seat...
PostTue Jun 21, 2016 10:34 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
ticat1

_
 
MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Likes received: 818

Posts: 10680
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
au64 wrote:
I couldn't find anything other than a single reply by Ticat on this same question back a year or two ago.

The intent of the Mines is to prevent a ship from entering the sector.  Secret Breakout intent is that the ship was always there and you are just deploying or "revealing" its location.

The question boils down to does "deploy" = "enter"?


OK, if the ship was always there and we just didn't know about it, it still sailed into a mine infested sector.

BTW that's a fantastic interpretation of Breakout
_________________

Qui Tangit Frangitur

To you, from failing hands we throw the torch; be yours to hold it high
           -John McCrae
PostTue Jun 21, 2016 11:07 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Darkbringer

 RL-202 lives...

MyTheaterClub

Joined: 06 Dec 2011
Likes received: 259

Posts: 3118
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
ticat1 wrote:
au64 wrote:
I couldn't find anything other than a single reply by Ticat on this same question back a year or two ago.

The intent of the Mines is to prevent a ship from entering the sector.  Secret Breakout intent is that the ship was always there and you are just deploying or "revealing" its location.

The question boils down to does "deploy" = "enter"?


OK, if the ship was always there and we just didn't know about it, it still sailed into a mine infested sector.

BTW that's a fantastic interpretation of Breakout


Hmm, if the ship(s) had always been there then the mines were laid after and it didn't actually sail into a mine infested sector, it was present for the infestation.
_________________


Mention my name, you'll get a good seat...
PostTue Jun 21, 2016 11:48 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
weedsrock2

 
MySpecialCauseClub

Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Likes received: 909

Posts: 36854
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
This came up during a tournament at Origins and I was the one that had to make the call. At first I was inclined to say the mines were in effect, but after hearing both sides I came to two conclusions.

1) There is no correct answer. The wording of the two SAs gives no clue to intent in this case. Only RB could make that call. And we know he frequently didn't make what a lot of people thought was the "logical" clarification. Keep in mind that he strongly favored game play over historical accuracy.

2) The only "rules lawyer" difference I could find was the use of the word "enter" compared to "deploy." Since they are two different words I decided to rule that mines do not affect deployment.

As I said, there is no way to know the correct answer. I'll bet (based on other clarifications we used to get from RB) that he didn't even think about the interaction and would just have to make a call if asked. And no, I don't have a line to him anymore.

On longer reflection my own bias is I don't like mines playing a big part in the game. The map is too small and they could become ridiculous very quickly. RB also made it very clear he didn't think there should be a lot of terrain on the map. So my call is mines don't affect deployment. You guys can all call it the way you want since there is no definitive answer here.
_________________

The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care"
Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship!
PostWed Jun 22, 2016 2:44 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Admiral Duncan

 
MySingleNationClub

Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Likes received: 68

Posts: 2826
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
This looks like a classic case of 'lets roll a die, odd = affected by the mines and even = not', unless both players are in agreement of course.
_________________
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today"
PostWed Jun 22, 2016 9:17 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Flakstruk

 Nobody Expects The FLAK-ATAK

MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 23 Jan 2010
Likes received: 405

Posts: 35335
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
I think if you've got the ability to place anywhere and you choose to place in a minefield you should have to roll for it.

PostWed Jun 22, 2016 9:32 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic



   Axis & Allies ForuMINI Forum Index » WAS General Discussion -> WAS Rules Clarification

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Editor's Choice
Forumini Generals
All AAM cards
All AAAF Cards
All War At Sea Cards
Forumini Admirals
A20 World Rankings
1. Jcmonson 1066
1. Bean965 1038
3. Vergilius 1024
WAS World Rankings
1. Admiral Wannabee 1240
2. mnnorthstars 1170
3. Azrael 1120
AAM World Rankings
1. Lil Snips 1096
2. Tripwire 1021
3. Kawolski 1010
Friends
Official WoTC site
Richard Baker's new Blog
Le Forum de A&ANM
Riverside Gaming
A&A Underground
Top posters
Brigman 42738
weedsrock2 36854
Flakstruk 35335
RAEVSKI 26750
firesdstny 26685
Asbestos 24554
SWO_Daddy 23223
Solomiranthius 19325
NeuralDream 18234
nrnstraswa 17161
herky80 16512
Lt_V 16301
jfkziegler 15353
Swished3 14762
carrion 14490
LcdrSwizzle 13698
packertim 13611
DaJudge 13360
mnnorthstars 12784
The_lucky_Y 12511
danaussie 12161
Shinnentai 11688
hokiepastor 10867


Forumini Newsletter
Issue #10 (Sep. 2013)
Issue #9 (Sep. 2012)
Issue #8 (Dec. 2011)
Issue #7 (Sep. 2011)
Issue #6 (Apr. 2011)
Issue #5 (Christmas 2010)
Issue #4 (Dec. 2010)
Issue #3 (Jul. 2010)
Issue #2 (Apr. 2010)
Issue #1 (Feb. 2010)


Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Theme by: :: Cosmic Distortion ::
Powered by phpBB © 2001 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum