Impetuous: let's take the stock of the situation

A. forced movement rules with fluffy requirements in a 3d environment with multiple movement skills will always be a bother.
B. So it would be pretty nice if after over a decade of trying to make impetuous work and failing CB at last acknowledged that.
C. Impetuous should be a free order, no restrictions, but you lose cover, cautious move option, stealth and marker state. No longer a discount, would also fix all those troops with frenzy/impetous that are undercosted in FT, or overcosted outside. BAM, done.

 

That's like... Inferior Tactical Awareness.

I do think losing cover is a big deal. Bigger deal than the free order would give. Would probably have to come with additional benefits like free Berserk as well.

But still, the current rules seem fairly well ironed out. The only remaining kink is the one that CB won't ever be able to get rid of - the fact that players will keep measuring poorly because they don't want to make tactical errors.
Saw it in the Fast Panda video CB linked on their Facebook account, and see it just about every other game with people angling their movement into total cover instead of the straight path, or measuring the second skill as if a normal move, or missing a vaulting movement so they don't have to round a corner. It's all unconscious, I'm absolutely certain, but happens all the time.

 

Kinda like religious is inferior courage.

So maybe instead of no discount, a smaller discount? Points are easy to add or subtract. It's not an insurmountable problem...

...unlike this one.

 

Since the FAQ came out we a re quite happy with the movement and the intention of the movement so we dont do that anymore

 

So, weird interaction that came up in a game. The second movement can go "backwards" from the first movement.

Contrived example (easier to happen if surrounded by taller units): 4-4 trooper in a dead-end.
Declares move-move
First move: Straight back.
Second move: Straight forward

 

Unless that's a much longer dead end corridor than on your picture, it'll have to move around the corner and can't go back to the starting position due to having to end movement as close to enemy DZ as possible. Otherwise, yeah, they'll yo-yo in a corridor, not knowing what to do.

 

If it moves around the corner, it isn't fulfilling the 2nd priority bulletpoint in the impetuous. i.e. a straight line gets you further way than any line with a turn in it.

 

I'd say that's open for interpretation.
Since the end point of your movement is reached by moving the shortest possible distance to the end point from the starting point, and this point has a combined total movement equal or greater to any other point you can possibly reach in such a way, this is by definition the furthest you can get from the starting point.
On the other hand, you can also do your interpretation which is "as the bird flies from the starting location".

Take your pick. Wonder if it is ambiguous in the Spanish FAQ as well?
(It's not really an argument, but you can express the second version it fairly unambiguous and simpler, still, by asking the player to simply move in as straight line as possible.)

 

If you think “move in as straight a line as possible” is unambiguous.... D:

Which is straighter: A line with three (3) five degree turns, or a line with a two (2) eight degree turns?

 

What's the delta on those turns?

 

I am NOT busting out a calculator mid-game to figure out which way my Krakot needs to run.

At any rate I don't think I've every encountered such a dead-end on the boards I've played on, except at the very edges of the map. And I've never had an Impetuous Trooper sitting on such an edge, as I usually (try to) get them in a good position to use their Impetuous Order on the next turn if my opponent doesn't do anything about it.

 

I'm not finding "move in as straight a line as possible" anywhere in the rules or FAQ for impetuous movement.

 

That's fair. I do challenge you to find a situation where you're incapable of figuring out whether one movement is more straight than the other in an actual game and where you'd not have problems with the other description as well.

Just to reiterate what @pseudonymmster wrote; in their interpretation the impetuous unit has to be placed as far away as the bird flies from the starting point, meaning even the slightest tiniest little "dead end" such as a rain pipe on a wall will cause this behaviour. Impetuous units are also nearly incapable of moving around corners under this interpretation if they can be placed so they don't have to deviate their movement as much by not turning the corner
Keep in mind, the "straightness" of movement has higher priority than ending closer to the enemy's DZ.

It's not. That's the point.

 

Nice. I think this is pretty much enough to convince me that it's measured by "shortest movement path" rather than "as the crow flies."

 

When the FAQ was discussed, the intention, in the above situation, was to turn the angle and go toward the enemy DZ.

I can see that the priority 2 and 3 should be switched...

I'll get in touch with the rest of the team, meanwhlile I suggest to play this way when this extremely rare case occours.

 

Not that hard, actually: In whichever one where the start and end points are furthest apart.

 

In one movement, this is true. I didn't think of this.