Quantcast

Seig trio default rules discussion

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
83 messages Options
12345
ice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Seig trio default rules discussion

ice
OK lets discuss the default rules for The seig trio (NWO-TRS-WAW) here

I think it would be best to have 1 ruleset for all maps and copy the same ruleset to all gamenotes

currently these are in the gamenotes of NWO wich are most clear:

Rule Clarifications and Hints

1 Rules
1a-The ruleset of the "REVISED" version of a well known board game are used as a basis. TripleA allows only valid moves, so it is possible to start playing without knowing the rules. There are a few exceptions to this, which are listed under "Default Rules" below.
1b-It is possible to play with LHTR style carrier-fighter production/movement rules by checking the carrier-ftr related property in the game options.
1c-A move illegal using dice is illegal under LL too. A move legal using dice is legal under LL too.
1d-Neutrals can be attacked in NWO, no penalties apply.
1e-Territories can only be strategically bombed up to their value. (TTL = Territory Turn Limit)
1f-A couple of extra units exist in NWO, and some basic units are slightly different. Their abilities are listed in the "Units" section above, as well as restrictions applying to Bunkers and Red Dot Units. Bunkers and Red Dot Units can be turned off by deselecting "Use Triggers" in the game options.
1g-Only 1 bunker may be placed per territory per turn. Bunkers do not use up factory slots. Territories may have unlimited total bunkers in them. To limit total bunkers to the value of a territory, deselect "Unlimited Constructions". The game options "More Constructions with/without Factory" can be turned off to limit total bunkers to 1 per territory total, in territories with/without Factories.

2 Default Rules for Disputable Situations 
2a-Bunker rules: For every territory, owned at the start of the turn, a maximum of ONE Bunker can be purchased PER TURN.
2b-Manually (two-step) flying over Neutral territory during combat movement is considered illegal, despite being technically possible. (helps balance G2-Paris take NWO)
2c-Carrier-Ftr movement is handled according to "REVISED" Rules, with the following exceptions and clarifications: Since the engine does not validate Fighter movement completely, this means explicitly: for EVERY Fighter, that has to be a potential landing spot provided, and YOU must make sure to follow the rules, as follows:
2d-Using a single Carrier for more than 2 Fighters, or for 2 Fighters going different directions, requiring different Carrier positions, is NOT allowed - even if LowLuck would guarantee for a Fighter to be lost.
It must be shown that all Fighters can land during Combat Move phase, and that any Carriers they will be landing on CAN move there DURING Combat Move phase, with legal movements.
The Carriers that will be picking up the aircraft must be CAPABLE of moving to their Pickup Destination DURING Combat Movement phase, BUT they do not actually have to make the movement until the Non-Combat Movement phase.
2e-You may NOT assume that you can move THROUGH a Cleared sea zone that has enemy units. This would be a violation of the rule above that the move must be Legal DURING the CM phase.
IF the pickup destination IS a sea zone that contains enemy units, THEN enough Carriers to pick up all air units must move into that pickup destination During Combat Movement phase (and then engage in combat). These Carriers must move during CM phase because we are NOT allowed to assume that the sea zone would be Cleared, and we MUST show that they can do the pickup using moves that are Legal during the Combat Movement phase.
2f-IF the pickup destination does NOT contain any enemy units, THEN the Carriers may wait until the Non-Combat Movement phase to actually make their movement. If the fighters do not survive the Carrier does not have to move to the pickup destination point, but if any fighters do survive they Must be picked up.

3 Examples:
3a-On Moving Through A Cleared Sea Zone: In Revised and LHTR rules, it is legal to make moves under the assumption that all your dice are hits and all enemy's dice are misses, thereby allowing the assumption that the carrier could move through the zone in non-combat-move phase. However, in NWO this move is considered illegal, regardless of using Dice or LowLuck Example: Sea Zones A, B, C are in a line, you have 1 carrier, 1 ftr [with only 2 movement left], and 1 sub in SZ A. In SZ B there are 80 enemy sea units, and in SZ C there are enemy transports. With Revised and LHTR rules, if you attack the fleet in SZ B with even a single unit, you may then attack the transports in SZ C with your ftr, because you get to assume that you will win the battle in SZ B and then pick up that ftr with your carrier during NCM. This move is illegal in NWO, because you must show that the carrier can move there during combat movement, and during combat movement the carrier can not move there because there are enemy units in the way.
3b-On Moving Into An Enemy Controlled Sea Zone: Example: Sea Zones A, B, C are in a line, you have 1 carrier, and 1 ftr [with only 3 movement left]. In SZ B there are some enemy units, and in SZ C there are enemy transports. In this example, if the air attack SZ C then they must be picked up in SZ B. Since SZ B has enemy units, this move would be illegal unless we can show that we can pick up the units with legal moves during combat-move phase. Simply attack the enemy units in SZ B with a submarine or warship is not enough, because we are not allowed to assume the sea zone would be cleared for a non-combat move of the carriers. Instead, we are required by the rules to send enough carriers to SZ B during combat movement (and those carriers will engange in combat with the enemy units in SZ B). If we send the carriers, it is now legal because we have shown how we will pick up the units using moves made during comat-movement phase.

4  Differences due to the New Phase Order 
4a-Under the New Phase Order (combat movement before purchases), one knows about any air losses occurring during combat movement due to AA fly-overs, prior to the purchase phase.
4b-Under the New Phase Order, a nation which is able to conquer a COMPLETELY empty enemy capital during combat move, could spend all captured money right away in the same turns purchase phase. It is thus advised to leave one Inf behind if abandoning a capital. Prominent early example is Paris in round 3.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are all rules above still needed, are some fixed bec of newer engine? do some of them need changes?
i marked them to discuss easyer


I think we need some additional rules to this, or clarifications:

5-Use of transports, do we use official revised rules on this, meaning everyone i know does it wrong, or are we gona allouw noncombat actions of tranports in combat move? if so we need to specify
6-multiple canal rule for waw and trs, suggestion:
6a-To use a canal u most own both sides of the canal from start of your turn, in some cases seazones have multiple canal, you need to own 1 of these canals to move trough.
7-any other disputable rule, or clarification
8-
9-

ice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
Some of the most absurd unsupported Larry rules that most people play wrongly, in v2, v3 and v5 alike:

5) Can you load 2 units onto a transport and unload only 1 in combat, keeping the other on board? (in revised you can't; in order to unload only one of the two units during combat move, the other must be already loaded in the transport at start turn)

- As a side note, for consistency, then you should also modify the behaviour of AA guns. Meaning that if during Combat Move I'm able to load 1 artillery and 1 infantry onto a transport and unload only the infantry, keeping the artillery on board, then I should also be able to load 1 AAgun and 1 infantry onto a transport and unload only the infantry, keeping the AAgun on board, but the engine won't allow me to do so, because AAgun can't move during Combat Move (by Revised rules nothing that it is not going or escaping combat can move in Combat Move, but TA enforces it only for AAguns, but not for the other things)

6A) When starting in a hostile sea zone, can you go out and into again to create retreat ways for your ships? (in revised you can't, except only if you are going out to load units)

6B) When starting in a hostile sea zone, can you move out and load and unload without doing combat? (in revised you can't)

6C) When starting in a hostile sea zone, can you move out only during combat move, then doing the remaining movements or loading/unloading during non combat move (thus eventually reentering the cleared sea zone you escaped during combat move)? (in revised you can't)
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
In reply to this post by ice
I would like to see all the things changes so that the combat move before purchase or after would imply no actual rules changes, but being merely a playability thing.

For example, I think it should be better if some developer assures that income gets captured after Combat; so that capturing an empty capital during Combat Move won't allow you to spend the income right on the same Purchase phase thereafter, which is just plainly silly nonsense.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
In reply to this post by ice
First thing first, I would suggest changing the:

The ruleset of the "REVISED" version of a well known board game are used as a basis.

with:

WW2v2 rules are used as a basis.

That is the coded ruleset in the engine, as per:
property name="WW2V2" value="true"
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

redrum
Administrator
@ice - Good post and I'm planning to copy these rules into both WaW and TRS along with make any updates to NWO if we come up with changes. I'd also like if map conventions are standard across the 3 as well so however canals look/work on one is how they are in the others, etc.

Right now NWO is the best quality map in terms of map and notes so starting with what it has is a good idea.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
In reply to this post by ice
ice wrote
2c-Carrier-Ftr movement is handled according to "REVISED" Rules, with the following exceptions and clarifications: Since the engine does not validate Fighter movement completely, this means explicitly: for EVERY Fighter, that has to be a potential landing spot provided, and YOU must make sure to follow the rules, as follows:
2d-Using a single Carrier for more than 2 Fighters, or for 2 Fighters going different directions, requiring different Carrier positions, is NOT allowed - even if LowLuck would guarantee for a Fighter to be lost.
It must be shown that all Fighters can land during Combat Move phase, and that any Carriers they will be landing on CAN move there DURING Combat Move phase, with legal movements.
The Carriers that will be picking up the aircraft must be CAPABLE of moving to their Pickup Destination DURING Combat Movement phase, BUT they do not actually have to make the movement until the Non-Combat Movement phase.
2e-You may NOT assume that you can move THROUGH a Cleared sea zone that has enemy units. This would be a violation of the rule above that the move must be Legal DURING the CM phase.
IF the pickup destination IS a sea zone that contains enemy units, THEN enough Carriers to pick up all air units must move into that pickup destination During Combat Movement phase (and then engage in combat). These Carriers must move during CM phase because we are NOT allowed to assume that the sea zone would be Cleared, and we MUST show that they can do the pickup using moves that are Legal during the Combat Movement phase.
2f-IF the pickup destination does NOT contain any enemy units, THEN the Carriers may wait until the Non-Combat Movement phase to actually make their movement. If the fighters do not survive the Carrier does not have to move to the pickup destination point, but if any fighters do survive they Must be picked up.

3 Examples:
3a-On Moving Through A Cleared Sea Zone: In Revised and LHTR rules, it is legal to make moves under the assumption that all your dice are hits and all enemy's dice are misses, thereby allowing the assumption that the carrier could move through the zone in non-combat-move phase. However, in NWO this move is considered illegal, regardless of using Dice or LowLuck Example: Sea Zones A, B, C are in a line, you have 1 carrier, 1 ftr [with only 2 movement left], and 1 sub in SZ A. In SZ B there are 80 enemy sea units, and in SZ C there are enemy transports. With Revised and LHTR rules, if you attack the fleet in SZ B with even a single unit, you may then attack the transports in SZ C with your ftr, because you get to assume that you will win the battle in SZ B and then pick up that ftr with your carrier during NCM. This move is illegal in NWO, because you must show that the carrier can move there during combat movement, and during combat movement the carrier can not move there because there are enemy units in the way.
3b-On Moving Into An Enemy Controlled Sea Zone: Example: Sea Zones A, B, C are in a line, you have 1 carrier, and 1 ftr [with only 3 movement left]. In SZ B there are some enemy units, and in SZ C there are enemy transports. In this example, if the air attack SZ C then they must be picked up in SZ B. Since SZ B has enemy units, this move would be illegal unless we can show that we can pick up the units with legal moves during combat-move phase. Simply attack the enemy units in SZ B with a submarine or warship is not enough, because we are not allowed to assume the sea zone would be cleared for a non-combat move of the carriers. Instead, we are required by the rules to send enough carriers to SZ B during combat movement (and those carriers will engange in combat with the enemy units in SZ B). If we send the carriers, it is now legal because we have shown how we will pick up the units using moves made during comat-movement phase.
All this rule is so much lenghty and bloated, in the explanation, I think it can be much reduced while keeping it well understandable and dummies-proof. Actually, the whole wall of text in the above quote could be just deleted and substituted (while giving the same amount of actual info) with this (in bold):

"
NWO = Carrier-Fighter movement is handled according to WW2v2 rules, except only that you can validate Fighter moves only if the picking Carrier is able to move to the landing zones during the Combat Movement phase; only in case the landing zone is hostile (not if it is friendly), the picking Carrier has to move there during the Combat Movement phase (thus engage in combat).
"

Then you can make a Topic for linking up examples to explain noobs, and maybe link it in the gamenotes; I think the gamenotes are better kept short on single case's explanations.

The dumb fact that you can't send kamikaze fighters unable to land because in LL you are sure they will die is very obvious in itself and already well covered by the previous rule:
1c-A move illegal using dice is illegal under LL too. A move legal using dice is legal under LL too.
so I don't think it's needed to say it again.

Also this explanation:
If the fighters do not survive the Carrier does not have to move to the pickup destination point, but if any fighters do survive they Must be picked up.
Is not fully correct and might be a source of misurderstandings, because simple rule is just that in Non Combat you can do whatever of the possible movement combinations that assure to save the biggest possible number of Fighters. This means that each Carrier do not need to go picking up exactly the Fighters whose moves it previously validated, and actually it is possible for a validating Carrier not having to move at all even when all Fighters survive, in case that units redispositions out of retreat movements will allow other Carriers to be landing spots, just because of the added single move they gained for retreating (retreat moves can't be accounted for validating Fighters moves, and, on the other hand, you can actually retreating not caring about what you have to land, but once retreat moves are made, then you can use those Carriers that became able to be in range of picking Fighters only thanks to the additional retreat move (by moving 2 then retreating in the way of some other sea unit in the same battle, a sea unit can actually move total 3 spaces) to free from this duty the other Carriers that validated but didn't move yet.

As a side note, it's not just v2: v1, v2, v3, v4, v5, v6 and the Global series all have the same rules for validating Fighters combat moves with Carriers.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
In reply to this post by ice
1b-It is possible to play with LHTR style carrier-fighter production/movement rules by checking the carrier-ftr related property in the game options.

This is actually not true. One of the various annoying rules distortions of putting Combat Move before Purchase is that (aside from editing) you won't be anymore able to make combat moves requiring landing on new carriers.

This is actually the main limit (but not the only one) why it is not really feasible to adopt Move-Then-Buy in v3 and v5 rules based games. For example, the Move-Then-Buy move mod of WW2v3 solves this by allowing kamikaze and letting the players watch the moves for themselves, which is sort of lame.

Anyway, as a matter of fact, it is NOT possible to play NWO with LHTR style carrier-fighter stuff (you have to edit or put kamikaze on).
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
In reply to this post by ice
Also the special Carrier-Fighter movement raises the issue that it is currently impossible to properly play WaW/NWO/tRS with AI, which is a big limit, since so many people enjoy playing these maps with AI.

The best way to solve this would be that some developer codes a "NWO Carrier Rules" option for the xml, that restrict Fighter-Carrier movement, adding that couple of NWO restrictions i've summarized in bold two posts above, on top of the regular default ones, plus updating the AI for getting it.
History plays dice
ice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

ice
wel im not participating in any sort of ai related stuff and i will protest to ballance any existing map around ai. triplea was invented as a multiplayer game, fine if someone wants to create an ai. but this is not where ballanced maps should change for.

especially if u realise the actual ballance only counts for 2 experts playing eachother, wich is and will always be impossible if ai is in the game. and not to mention that for any experieced player ai wont be much of a challenge whatsoever nomatter howmany hours of coding goes into ai.

so in wich case ur gona change a game for noobs, who dont know what ballance means yet, thus dumb.

create a ballance for a map for experienced players, as it should be. noobs vs ai wont know all the specific exeptions anyways so why bother

ice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

redrum
Administrator
So I think we need to add clarification around whether fighters can consider landing on purchased carriers when using LHTR when calculating potential attacks. Question/discussion here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37026.45

The rules seem to lean towards that its illegal to use any potentially purchased carriers but isn't definitive.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

crazy_german
Can I just say that giving each iteration of the game a different carrier ruleset was a horrible decision by axis and allies designers. I would love to see some convergence not just in Sieg games but across tripleA because this is a terrible design decision.
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
ice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

ice
In reply to this post by redrum
about manuevering planes so they can land on newly phurcased carriers: no another mumbojumbo rule that yust wont fit into the bigmaps we have. not to mention the rules already covers this:

The Carriers that will be picking up the aircraft must be CAPABLE of moving to their Pickup Destination DURING Combat Movement phase, BUT they do not actually have to make the movement until the Non-Combat Movement phase.

in other words when there is no carrier u surely cannot do it.

ice

edited:

let me explain those custom rules a bit, they arent made to work with an engine, but they where discussed and made by the expert gamers. Larry is providing some rules that work perfectly on small maps like revised, but we experienced they yust make things impossible for bigmaps. yust imagine what limits you set for fleet maneuvering if planes can reach almost every seazone they want. this is stupid and impossible to defend resulting in 2 boring big fleets standing next to eachother until 1 attacks. any secundary fleet is yust another death target. not to mention if every seazone bordering a factory suddently becomes a protentional carrier spot, meaning fighters can even kamikaza at 4 and survive.


redrum wrote
So I think we need to add clarification around whether fighters can consider landing on purchased carriers when using LHTR when calculating potential attacks. Question/discussion here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37026.45

The rules seem to lean towards that its illegal to use any potentially purchased carriers but isn't definitive.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
Actually, Larry rules are fine with dice, but are ambiguous for LL games and work silly. That's not much of an issues for games like Classic or Revised, because those maps are so dumb you almost never get the related issues actually happening, but nonetheless Larry's rules are bad for LL, but fine with dice; it's not really a big vs small thing. The issue is only for LL (meaning, as long as it is dice the map can be as big as you wish), and simply small/dumb maps hide the problems.

I think there is a good chance not a single xp Sieg player will ever bother himself coming here, so I would suggest you decide, based on what most people actually do (do they limit themselves not loading/unloading during non combat if they start in hostile sea zone? etc.).

Regarding the fact that with Combat Move before Purchase you can't validate fighter movement for landing on new carrier, it is true it is already covered, but I do believe 1 short sentence to make it noob proof is in order. Something like:

"LHTR or v3 Rules, if enabled, allow landing on new Carriers, but do not allow aircraft Combat Move moves requiring landing on new Carriers"
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
In reply to this post by ice
ice wrote
not to mention the rules already covers this:

The Carriers that will be picking up the aircraft must be CAPABLE of moving to their Pickup Destination DURING Combat Movement phase, BUT they do not actually have to make the movement until the Non-Combat Movement phase.

in other words when there is no carrier u surely cannot do it.
I've already pointed this out, but I'm repeating it in case in got drowned by all the many things I said.

This sentence (and other similar ones) is confusing in explaining the rules, because, while of course it's clear for xp people that knows perfectly what they're talking about, I believe that, noob-wise, for a person reading it with no A&A knowledge at all, it makes you think that the Carrier that validates the move is the one that will be picking up the aircraft thereafter, while, as everyone xp knows, then you can pick it up with whatever, also carriers that validated nothing (the extreme case is retreating ones that became able to be landed on only due to the retreat) or, if LHTR is enabled, just send it to land over a new Carrier.

For example, this sentence might induce noobs playing LHTR rules to think that a Fighter that was able to attack only thanks to being able to land on 1 Carrier, then has to land on that Carrier only, and can't go landing on a newly produced one or whatever other one (while, instead, of course it can).

The simplest suggestion would be changing "will" with "can" or "may" or other wording not making you think those Carriers are bound to do what they validate.

For example these:
It must be shown that all Fighters can land during Combat Move phase, and that any Carriers they will be landing on CAN move there DURING Combat Move phase, with legal movements.
The Carriers that will be picking up the aircraft must be CAPABLE of moving to their Pickup Destination DURING Combat Movement phase, BUT they do not actually have to make the movement until the Non-Combat Movement phase.


would be better as:
It must be shown that all Fighters can land during Combat Move phase, and that a minimum number of Carriers required for them to land on CAN move there DURING Combat Move phase, with legal movements.
The Carriers that would be picking up the aircraft must be CAPABLE of moving to their Pickup Destination DURING Combat Movement phase, BUT they do not actually have to make the movement until the Non-Combat Movement phase, eventually.


Plus this:
IF the pickup destination does NOT contain any enemy units, THEN the Carriers may wait until the Non-Combat Movement phase to actually make their movement. If the fighters do not survive the Carrier does not have to move to the pickup destination point, but if any fighters do survive they Must be picked up.

May be changed as:
IF the pickup destination does NOT contain any enemy units, THEN the Carriers are not required to move during Combat Move. If the fighters do not survive the Carrier can move wherever, but Non Combat Move moves Must be done so to land the greatest number possible of surviving fighters (doesn't matter how).

This is quite important due to the fact that, during "Combat", you can choose casualties and decide retreats with no regard to being able to land Fighters, thus it's not just a matter of Fighters surviving or not, but also it can happen that not all surviving Fighters will be able to land, and some of your Carriers may be obliged to pick up some other Fighters, than the ones they were originally intended to.

In, general, I believe the NWO carrier rules are bloated and even not that correct or noob proof, and may be explained both better and shorter, as per an example I already previously posted.

My suggestion is really to rewrite them all from scratch in a shorter and better manner, if we consider this possibility at all (tho, I guess it should be made by a NWO veteran).

Also, probably better an Englishman does it, to assure everything is perfect (for example "during the Combat Move phase" instead of "during Combat Move phase" or "If the fighters do not survive, the Carrier does not have" instead of "If the fighters do not survive the Carrier does not have" and other little things like these).

In general, I think the current wording of the NWO rules is not sure to make all sensible noobs play it correctly, without joining the lobby and learning from the xp.

At Crazy_German: Actually, Fighter - Carrier movement-only validation rules are exactly the same in all A&A games, at least from the second edition onwards; the only things that ever changed through the editions are the placement rules, and the only one influent change is the ability to land on new carriers in LHTR thereafter. So, what you are allowed or obliged to do during Combat Move, Combat and Non Combat Move has been very stable through the many years.
History plays dice
ice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

ice
ice attempt with crappy english to make carrier rule more noobproof, if u think this is better feel free to correct gramar

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fighter/Carrier Rules:

fighters CANNOT kamikaza as revised rules say, but theres a change to what we call kamikaza as followed:
1.  You must determin and check in COMBAT MOVE phase on wich carriers ur fighters will land.
2.  You cannot presume to win any battle even if its 100% for LowLuck, to be clear when a carrier cant reach the spot to pickup the fighter in combat move but a battle is needed for the carrier to reach the spot is considdered illigal (change towards revised rules).
3.  If ur carrier must MOVE to pickup scrambled fighters they may wait to do so until noncombat move, the carrier can choose to move to a different spot if theres NO suviving fighter to pickup, but when a fighter survives the battle it MUST be picked up by the carrier even if u dont want to.
4 You may send a carrier into battle and count that battlezone as ur pickup destination, in wich case when the carrier dies the fighter(s) lost there landing spot and will die at the end of ur turn.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


ice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

aaalafayette
Administrator
Two situations where the carrier rules are really important, in both cases it's when fighters are legally allowed to move 3 and then land on a carrier. Case 1: carrier is blocked and can only move 1 during combat. Case 2: carrier can move 2 spaces, potentially into combat.

So the rules for case 1 have been made clear, but it's not spelled out yet for case 2. Said simply for that, anywhere you can legally move a carrier during combat, may be used for landing. So you can move a carrier into 20 bships, use that as a landing zone, and have a fighter attack the SZ behind the bships, and use the SZ with the 20 bships as a landing zone (most likely having no carrier to land on, "kamikaze" carriers are allowed, but not planes)


ice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

ice
aaalafayette wrote
Two situations where the carrier rules are really important, in both cases it's when fighters are legally allowed to move 3 and then land on a carrier. Case 1: carrier is blocked and can only move 1 during combat. Case 2: carrier can move 2 spaces, potentially into combat.

So the rules for case 1 have been made clear, but it's not spelled out yet for case 2. Said simply for that, anywhere you can legally move a carrier during combat, may be used for landing. So you can move a carrier into 20 bships, use that as a landing zone, and have a fighter attack the SZ behind the bships, and use the SZ with the 20 bships as a landing zone (most likely having no carrier to land on, "kamikaze" carriers are allowed, but not planes)

wel this is correct, unless ur pickup spot isnt contested and maybe u think its smarter to wait to move the carrier. my point 4 covers this i think
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
In reply to this post by ice
This rewording is not good enough, but, as a matter of structure and guidelines, I think goes in the right direction.

And, again, this phrase:
1.  You must determin and check in COMBAT MOVE phase on wich carriers ur fighters will land.
might induce noobs to think that those fighters will have to land to the validating carrier; while instead they can land wherever, as long as they can land at all.

In general, I believe that shorter is better and clearer, for main explanations; so the main explanations should all be stated at start, in a concise manner, then following with more unneeded wording for noob-proofing, because many people can't just understand the implications themselves.

Moreover, I want to make you notice that this sentence, in the current NWO:

The Carriers that will be picking up the aircraft must be CAPABLE of moving to their Pickup Destination DURING Combat Movement phase, BUT they do not actually have to make the movement until the Non-Combat Movement phase.

is intrinsically nonsense, because, by A&A rules, you are never capable to move to a friendly sea zone during Combat Movement, because making Non Combat Moves during Combat Move is forbidden.

So, under a correct interpretation of the previous sentence, you would be able to validate moves only if the carrier is going to a hostile sea zone (that are the only sea zones your Carriers are capable of moving to, during Combat Movement), not to a friendly one, which is ridiculous.

So, a rewording is needed, because definitively no carriers starting in friendly sea zones are capable to move to friendly sea zones during Combat Movement, because anticipating Non Combat Movement moves during Combat Movement is illegal, no matter if the TA engine allows you to do so.

Also, the rules should better be written to be universal; meaning to work with whatever maps having whatever kind of landing stuff; for example, they should work also for maps that allow Bombers to land on carriers (like Ultimate World, in case anyone want to make a revised version of it working with NWO rules), that allow Battleships or whatever to land Aircrafts, or that allow whatever kind of Aircraft, not necessarily called "Fighter", to land on whatever kind of ship, not necessarily called "Carrier". This means using the term "Aircraft", not Fighter; but I think we can still use the term "Carrier", referring not to a unit necessarily called "Carrier", but to whatever sea units able to land air units.

The conclusion is that I'm suggesting to totally delete all the following mumbo-jumbo:

Carrier-Ftr movement is handled according to "REVISED" Rules, with the following exceptions and clarifications: Since the engine does not validate Fighter movement completely, this means explicitly: for EVERY Fighter, that has to be a potential landing spot provided, and YOU must make sure to follow the rules, as follows:
Using a single Carrier for more than 2 Fighters, or for 2 Fighters going different directions, requiring different Carrier positions, is NOT allowed - even if LowLuck would guarantee for a Fighter to be lost.
It must be shown that all Fighters can land during Combat Move phase, and that any Carriers they will be landing on CAN move there DURING Combat Move phase, with legal movements.
The Carriers that will be picking up the aircraft must be CAPABLE of moving to their Pickup Destination DURING Combat Movement phase, BUT they do not actually have to make the movement until the Non-Combat Movement phase.
You may NOT assume that you can move THROUGH a Cleared sea zone that has enemy units. This would be a violation of the rule above that the move must be Legal DURING the CM phase.
IF the pickup destination IS a sea zone that contains enemy units, THEN enough Carriers to pick up all air units must move into that pickup destination During Combat Movement phase (and then engage in combat). These Carriers must move during CM phase because we are NOT allowed to assume that the sea zone would be Cleared, and we MUST show that they can do the pickup using moves that are Legal during the Combat Movement phase.
IF the pickup destination does NOT contain any enemy units, THEN the Carriers may wait until the Non-Combat Movement phase to actually make their movement. If the fighters do not survive the Carrier does not have to move to the pickup destination point, but if any fighters do survive they Must be picked up.
Examples:
On Moving Through A Cleared Sea Zone: In Revised and LHTR rules, it is legal to make moves under the assumption that all your dice are hits and all enemy's dice are misses, thereby allowing the assumption that the carrier could move through the zone in non-combat-move phase. However, in NWO this move is considered illegal, regardless of using Dice or LowLuck Example: Sea Zones A, B, C are in a line, you have 1 carrier, 1 ftr [with only 2 movement left], and 1 sub in SZ A. In SZ B there are 80 enemy sea units, and in SZ C there are enemy transports. With Revised and LHTR rules, if you attack the fleet in SZ B with even a single unit, you may then attack the transports in SZ C with your ftr, because you get to assume that you will win the battle in SZ B and then pick up that ftr with your carrier during NCM. This move is illegal in NWO, because you must show that the carrier can move there during combat movement, and during combat movement the carrier can not move there because there are enemy units in the way.
On Moving Into An Enemy Controlled Sea Zone: Example: Sea Zones A, B, C are in a line, you have 1 carrier, and 1 ftr [with only 3 movement left]. In SZ B there are some enemy units, and in SZ C there are enemy transports. In this example, if the air attack SZ C then they must be picked up in SZ B. Since SZ B has enemy units, this move would be illegal unless we can show that we can pick up the units with legal moves during combat-move phase. Simply attack the enemy units in SZ B with a submarine or warship is not enough, because we are not allowed to assume the sea zone would be cleared for a non-combat move of the carriers. Instead, we are required by the rules to send enough carriers to SZ B during combat movement (and those carriers will engange in combat with the enemy units in SZ B). If we send the carriers, it is now legal because we have shown how we will pick up the units using moves made during comat-movement phase.
And substitute it with this only (I just wrote), that I think is both much more clear, shorter and actually correct:

Aircraft-Carrier movement follows WW2v2 rules, except only that:
- During Combat Movement, moves of Aircrafts requiring landing on Carriers are legal only if a minimum number of Carriers, required for landing all Aircrafts either:
 - move to the landing zones, during Combat Movement, or
 - will be surely able to move to the landing zones, during Non Combat Movement
 (without entering (from start to finish) any sea zones that was hostile at the start of the turn).
(doesn't matter if any of those Carriers will die for sure, during Combat)
(this means that, in case the landing zone is hostile, the picking Carrier has to move there during Combat Movement)
(this means that you cannot assume to move to a landing zone for which a battle is needed for clearing the path)
(this means that, if using LHTR or v3 Rules, Aircrafts can land on new Carriers, but Aircraft Combat Movement moves requiring landing on new Carriers are illegal)
The following regular WW2v2 rules still apply:
- You can never use planned Carriers' retreats to validate Aircrafts' Combat Movement moves, no matter if you are surely able to retreat.
- During Combat, you can choose casualties and retreat without caring about landing Aircrafts at all.
- During Non Combat Movement, you must land the greatest number possible of surviving Aircrafts (doesn't matter how, or what each Carrier was supposed to land, during Combat Movement).
(this means that, if all Aircrafts needing landing on Carriers died, the Carriers can move wherever)
You can also notice, that only the first 3 points of the above explanations (only the stuff in bold) are actually needed; all following being clarifications and repetitions of regular WW2 rules. But since there are so many noobs around, most of them refusing to read 1 rulebook ever in their lives, I much suggest copypasting it all into any Notes tab.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
In reply to this post by aaalafayette
aaalafayette wrote
Said simply for that, anywhere you can legally move a carrier during combat, may be used for landing.
In all rulesets, from v1 to v6, Global included, you cannot legally move a carrier to a friendly sea zone during combat movement, unless the carrier is starting its turn inside a hostile sea zone (this is just an exception for allowing you to escape combat with ships that your enemy placed where you are).
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Seig trio default rules discussion

Cernel
Cernel wrote
aaalafayette wrote
Said simply for that, anywhere you can legally move a carrier during combat, may be used for landing.
In all rulesets, from v1 to v6, Global included, you cannot legally move a carrier to a friendly sea zone during combat movement, unless the carrier is starting its turn inside a hostile sea zone (this is just an exception for allowing you to escape combat with ships that your enemy placed where you are).
But if you meant "anywhere the current TripleA engine allows you to move a carrier during combat, may be used for landing", then yes.

But I think it is better referring to rules, not to the engine behaviour, when setting rules (especially since TripleA is wrong in allowing you to make Non Combat Movement moves during Combat Movement).

In general, I think all rules should be written (as well as all graphics made) from a boardgame perspective; meaning that a sound TA game should be 100% unmistakeably playable also in case you want to print it out and play it on a board, without using the TA engine at all.
History plays dice
12345
Loading...