View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
chazrobbins Ensign
Joined: 12 Sep 2008 Posts: 22 Location: Pasadena, CA
|
Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:50 pm Post subject: Here we go again. Declaring Accel v. Cancelling EM |
|
|
Ok, we got the ruling that declaring Emergency Deceleration comes BEFORE declaring acceleration at the beginning of an impulse (thanks Mike).
Next question:
When does declaring cancelling EM occur in relation to declaring cancellation of Evasive Manouvers? (Yes, these questions are really and truly coming up in our games.)
Thanks,
Chuck
Game Empire Pasadena |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Savedfromwhat Commander
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 Posts: 657
|
Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am not sure i understand can you re-explain the problem |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kang Fleet Captain
Joined: 23 Sep 2007 Posts: 1976 Location: Devon, UK
|
Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 8:31 pm Post subject: Re: Here we go again. Declaring Accel v. Cancelling EM |
|
|
chazrobbins wrote: |
When does declaring cancelling EM occur in relation to declaring cancellation of Evasive Manouvers? (Yes, these questions are really and truly coming up in our games.) |
I think you meant cancelling EM in relation to ED.
As far as I can see, the rules make no reference to the order in which these steps are carried out/announced. Neither do the Player Reference Cards, which as you know carry the Impulse Procedure ready reference charts.
The only place I can see these two functions differentiated is, once again, in the MITS cards from Orion Attack - as also referred to in the original post. In these, cancelling Emer Decel comes before Erratic Maneuvers.
But I don't know where the Murfreesbro guys got that order of play from.
Let's see what Mike says. _________________
Last edited by Kang on Sun Sep 20, 2009 7:18 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chazrobbins Ensign
Joined: 12 Sep 2008 Posts: 22 Location: Pasadena, CA
|
Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Savedfromwhat wrote: | I am not sure i understand can you re-explain the problem |
My opponent was using EM. At the beginning of an impulse, I asked her if she was going to continue EM. She said she would decide once I announced whether I was accelerating or not. The rules are not clear on this.
So that's the question: Does she announce cancellation of EM before or after announcing acceleration?
We have already seen Mike say that Emergency Deceleration must be declared before Acceleration. Is the same true for declaring cancellation of EM? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Hod K'el Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 21 Aug 2008 Posts: 301 Location: Lafayette LA
|
Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 2:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
EM is always in 'OTHER'. Do it / stop it in 'OTHER'.
ED is at the start of the impulse. _________________ HoD K'el
IMV Black Dagger
-----------------
Life is not victory;
Death is not defeat! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mjwest Commodore
Joined: 08 Oct 2006 Posts: 4074 Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Let's see what Steve says. The MITS cards could easily sink my ruling.
I am trying to make sure all of these will be in the next Communique. _________________
Federation Commander Answer Guy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
djdood Commodore
Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 3413 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 3:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
I still preferred the "original" name for those cards... _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kang Fleet Captain
Joined: 23 Sep 2007 Posts: 1976 Location: Devon, UK
|
Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
djdood wrote: | I still preferred the "original" name for those cards... |
What was that, then? We used to have a near-identical system that we simply called 'Impulse Cards'.
Anyway, to sum it up, what it looks like is that we need is a definitive sequence for all of the events in the Speed Change Phase of the impulse procedure, in a similar manner to how the Other Functions phase has been defined.
The MITS cards are excellent - I use them every game - but:
(a) they must have derived their order of play from somewhere - or perhaps not - and whatever, the rules that the MITS order of play comes from needs to be clarified and/or made 'official', although I hate that word , and
(b) not everyone has a set of MITS cards!
(c) Even the MITS cards contain errors! Or, at least one anyway No offence, Tony and friends!
And it also looks as if we could do with a CRUL-II _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kang Fleet Captain
Joined: 23 Sep 2007 Posts: 1976 Location: Devon, UK
|
Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hod K'el wrote: | EM is always in 'OTHER'. Do it / stop it in 'OTHER'. |
I'm not sure this is exactly correct - but you have a good point. As far as I understand it, EM is declared in Defensive Fire, but takes effect in Other Functions - and is cancelled in Speed Change. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
mjwest Commodore
Joined: 08 Oct 2006 Posts: 4074 Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kang is correct: Evasive Maneuvers are canceled in the Speed Change Phase. (EM is just weird.)
Anyway, is there anything else that takes place in the Speed Change Phase that needs to be considered, too? (Besides acceleration, ED, and canceling EM.) _________________
Federation Commander Answer Guy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DNordeen Commander
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 564
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
MJ - There's nothing else that I know of happening during Speed Change. _________________ Speed is life; Patience is victory
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
mjwest Commodore
Joined: 08 Oct 2006 Posts: 4074 Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As an aside on this, I have sent in the list of line items that were generated by the recent posts. I have not yet received confirmation one way or the other on the ordering in the Speed Change Phase. I will be sure to post once I get answer back, and it is most likely that the order presented on the MITS cards is the one that will be used.
(The reason is because even if that order causes undesired [to me anyway] side effects, it does work and it is in print. Better to be consistent with product in print when possible.) _________________
Federation Commander Answer Guy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mike Fleet Captain
Joined: 07 May 2007 Posts: 1675 Location: South Carolina
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wait a sec!
There was something about those MITS cards that was wrong. Was it the order of tractors and transporters? I think that was it. It was definitely in the wrong order from the way it was printed in the actual rulebook. I remember this coming up in a thread before and how it might have different effects. There was a scenario/situation asked about where it would definitely make a difference in the sequencing of those events. _________________ Mike
=====
Sandpaper gets the job done, but makes for a lot of friction. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mjwest Commodore
Joined: 08 Oct 2006 Posts: 4074 Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I will have to go back though the MITS cards to check for errors, but having only one error is better than having two. At that point, they become as much of a hindrance as a help.
So, in light of that, the order in the Speed Change Phase is the same as given on the MITS cards:
- Declare Acceleration
- Declare Emergency Deceleration
- Cancel Evasive Maneuvers.
Yes, this reverses my prior ruling. Note that this was my recommendation to Steve after much deliberation. In this case there is nothing "broken" about the ordering on the MITS cards, so I think precident rules. My biggest error in this whole thing was not first checking the MITS cards before speaking. _________________
Federation Commander Answer Guy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chazrobbins Ensign
Joined: 12 Sep 2008 Posts: 22 Location: Pasadena, CA
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mjwest wrote: | it is most likely that the order presented on the MITS cards is the one that will be used.
(The reason is because even if that order causes undesired [to me anyway] side effects, it does work and it is in print. Better to be consistent with product in print when possible.) |
I would hate to think that the integrity of the game would be sacrificed simply because someone printed something on the MITS cards without fully thinking out the consequences. I liked your reasoning in your original ruling regarding Emergency Deceleration because it followed a policy of avoiding "mind games" and gamesmanship. I hope that SVC makes a ruling that follows that same policy.
Chuck
Game Empire Pasadena |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|