1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

FAQ1.0 - Impetuous

Discussion in 'Rules' started by RobertShepherd, Jan 18, 2021.

  1. RobertShepherd

    RobertShepherd Antipodean midwit

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2018
    Messages:
    2,048
    Likes Received:
    4,191
    The following is included in the most recent FAQ:

    How does movement work during Impetuous activations if you cannot reach Silhouette contact with an enemy?
    Go towards the enemy Deployment Zone. The Trooper must end his movement as far as possible from the movement's starting point, and as close as possible to the enemy Deployment Zone.​

    I'm looking for some clarity on how to interpret this. Should it be played like the old N3 impetuous where you had to pick the most direct path, or is this just a 'move in straight lines, no zigzagging, along whatever path you choose' ruling?

    E.g. if I have a biker that could go either left or right around a building toward the enemy DZ; the left path is very marginally shorter but I don't want to take it. Am I obliged to, or can I still take the right path, noting the obligation to use my full move distance and end as far from where I started as possible?

    Proposed answer: I think it's the latter, but wanted to check to see what others thought.
     
    inane.imp likes this.
  2. QueensGambit

    QueensGambit Chickenbot herder

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2019
    Messages:
    2,213
    Likes Received:
    3,456
    It's certainly an improvement over the pre-FAQ rule! But definitely still needs to work out some kinks.

    In your example, I think the answer is, "if by taking the right path you can move further and end closer to the enemy DZ, you have to take that path, even if the difference is marginal."

    The ambiguous scenario that jumps for me: suppose that if I take the left path I can end farther from my starting position, but if I take the right path I can get closer to the enemy DZ. Which obligation takes priority?
     
    toadchild likes this.
  3. Nuada Airgetlam

    Nuada Airgetlam Nazis sod off ///

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2018
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    3,019
    It's AND so compare both values, (distance from starting point) - (distance from enemy DZ). The larger value is the correct choice.
     
  4. kghamilton

    kghamilton The_Omnishambles
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2018
    Messages:
    94
    Likes Received:
    68
    So for example if my biker has two options,
    - Option 1: Move 8" from her starting point but only 4" closer to the enemy dz
    - Option 2: Move 4" from her starting point but 8" closer to the enemy dz

    Now I realise this may not be a particularly realistic example but just trying to see which one take priority? I also don't want to go back to n3 days where we measure out each route to the mm to figure out the closest as it just slows down play

    Follow up question, is distance from starting point measured as the crow flies?
     
  5. Alphz

    Alphz Kuang Shi Vet. Retired.

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    2,947
    Can people actually draw out these scenarios where you can have differing routes which satisfy both criteria, BOTH criteria.

    I'm struggling to visualise these.
     
  6. RobertShepherd

    RobertShepherd Antipodean midwit

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2018
    Messages:
    2,048
    Likes Received:
    4,191
    It's not even the question I asked! But we're down this rabbit hole now.

    I think it's predicated on strict definitions of 'closer' rather than the old N3 definition which was 'further along the optimal path'.
     
    Barsik and nazroth like this.
  7. nazroth

    nazroth 'well known Nomad agitator'

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    3,139
    There are some situations where you have two possible routes. One will take you closer to enemy deployment zone, the other further from starting point. It's not that difficult to happen actually. Simplified AF example just to make a point.

    [​IMG]
     

    Attached Files:

    Barsik, Teslarod and Alphz like this.
  8. Alphz

    Alphz Kuang Shi Vet. Retired.

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    2,947
    The answer to your question is no. Because one of the paths doesn't meet both criteria - closer to the DZ as possible. The right path only satisfies moving as far as possible from your starting point.

    Noting that general impetuous rules still stipulate you must use your full move value unless terrain prevents it.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  9. Alphz

    Alphz Kuang Shi Vet. Retired.

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    2,947
    Ignoring this hypothetical as fuck piece of terrain which I must presume is totally unscalable.

    If your move is 8" A is clearly not an option as you haven't used your full move.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  10. nazroth

    nazroth 'well known Nomad agitator'

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    3,139
    Yeah it is unscalable, totally. Scenery piece presented is purely hypothetical, you can imagine any amalgam of buildings, walls, additional scenery pieces, fillers... it's all about the shape of the wall from the miniature's starting point.

    Anyway, guess this is still a thing with FAQ, just as it was without?
    [​IMG]

    For what it's worth I think the FAQ makes the rule pretty clear, except for some corner cases. No zigzagging, no moving sideways, just move as far as possible and toward enemy depzone to end up closer. Seem legit, much much more clear than pre-FAQ which is a good direction.
     

    Attached Files:

    Barsik and Alphz like this.
  11. Alphz

    Alphz Kuang Shi Vet. Retired.

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    2,947
    Yeah by the wording of the rules thats still a thing, but should happen less as if you're less than 4" away from the corner that changes it and if you're more than 4" and depending where the other corners are, they might still feature.

    Personally I'd house rule areas like this where the rule gets a bit iffy to look a few steps ahead to determine 'closest'.
     
  12. Teslarod

    Teslarod when in doubt, Yeet

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,407
    Likes Received:
    4,864
    If we remember N3, Impetuous measured "closer to the DZ" by "how many Orders it takes to get there" instead of "linear distance unimpeded by terrain".
    By that criteria A does not bring you any *closer* to the enemy DZ unless that position was further up the field and Move A actually ends in the DZ.
    Using "Orders to get to DZ", instead of linear distance as the bird flies, fixes pretty much any problem here.
    B does get you closer to the enemy DZ than A and allows to move maximum distance.
     
    inane.imp and miguelbarbo84 like this.
  13. solkan

    solkan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,335
    Likes Received:
    1,982
    That's all pretty much irrelevant because N4 doesn't use "orders to get there", for a variety of reasons that probably includes the number of arguments that were caused by troopers that had two different MOV values.

    As it stands, impetuous is an optional order that if you use it, you don't have much control over your movement* and you might get stuck somewhere. (*If you make it to the enemy deployment zone, congratulations, you get to do the victory dance of moving however you want!)
     
  14. Teslarod

    Teslarod when in doubt, Yeet

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,407
    Likes Received:
    4,864
    Well would be nice if CB told us "closer" means linear distance on the 2d plane of a table then. Or gave us an example to work with.
    If you can show me where N4 defines what "closer to the DZ" means, sure. But we don't have that.
    Stealth has a similar problem, the rule was copy pasted from N3, but the bits and pieces of the Order Sequence it refers to, do not exist anymore and it can't work as the rule says.
    We know how Stealth is supposed to work so we all happily play it the same way as N4.
    We also still use the technically obsolete N3 FAQs.

    By all means I'm open for a better solution than I proposed. It's unlikely there is a clear cut way to resolve this in the existing rules though.
     
    inane.imp likes this.
  15. tox

    tox SorriBarai
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    3,560
    Likes Received:
    3,542
    Without any further explanation, closer means physically closer. Remember that it is meant to be a downside.
     
  16. Knauf

    Knauf Transhumanist

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2018
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    2,290
    Not sure if this has been discussed already, but I would probably go along the lines of "move along the most direct route towards the enemy DZ, taking into account movement skills like super jump and climbing plus".
     
  17. QueensGambit

    QueensGambit Chickenbot herder

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2019
    Messages:
    2,213
    Likes Received:
    3,456
    I guess the FAQ doesn't say whether "closer" means (A) "reducing the direct distance measured to the nearest point of the enemy DZ" or (B) "reducing the distance required by the unit to move to the enemy DZ by the shortest available path."

    If it's (B) then yeah, it's hard to see how that could be measured in inches - it would really have to be measured in orders given that a unit follows different paths depending on the movement skills it declares (move, jump, climb, etc.)

    But, post-FAQ I've been playing it as (A) which seems to work pretty well. Basically, if you're in the open you move straight up the board towards the enemy DZ. If there's scenery in the way, you move around it and then straight up the board. For practical reasons I like it a lot better than the order-counting measurement from N3. So I prefer (A) over (B), and I also think that (A) fits the definition of the word "closer" somewhat better, although I concede that (B) could also fit the definition.

    The unresolved cases - basically where there's a cul-de-sac in the scenery - haven't come up for me in-game yet.
     
    toadchild likes this.
  18. Teslarod

    Teslarod when in doubt, Yeet

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,407
    Likes Received:
    4,864
    Which kind of physically closer?

    Physically closer to a infinite height cube with the DZ as footprint?
    Physically closer unimpeded by terrain?
    Physically closer drawing the line around terrain?

    What you're arguing for is mathematically closer, not physically closer, which is simply not defined anywhere at the moment.

    You don't get any advantage from having absolute rules on wich path to take with the ability to cancel it if you don't like it either way.
     
  19. Vanderbane

    Vanderbane Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2018
    Messages:
    505
    Likes Received:
    726
    I think the problem is that the definitions of "closer" and "towards" are always going to be fuzzy. CB is giving more guidance, mainly to avoid the bad faith zigzags and whatnot That's helpful. We will have to examine options together and agree at the table based on the specifics, like most other interactions in the game (LoF, I'm looking at you).
     
    miguelbarbo84, Knauf and Hecaton like this.
  20. tox

    tox SorriBarai
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    3,560
    Likes Received:
    3,542
    Leave last edition hindrances behind.

    A is closer to the enemy DZ, B is not. Are you really arguing about that?
    In the absence of any different definition, the "dictionary" definition is enough.
    upload_2021-1-22_8-35-39.png
     
  • About Us

    We are a company founded in 2001 in Cangas (Spain), and devoted to design and manufacture games and figures. Our main product, Infinity the Game, was born with the ambition to satisfy the most demanding audience, offering the best quality.

     

    Why are we here?

     

    Because we are, first and foremost, players.

  • Quick Navigation

    Open the Quick Navigation