Author Topic: (Answered) Unusual movement situations  (Read 3567 times)

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
(Answered) Unusual movement situations
« on: 11 April 2017, 16:46:12 »
The rules on p. 148 TW / p. 52 Intro Rulebook make it clear, that you can't charge a target behind your unit ("the target must be in the hex directly in front of the charging unit"), but can you move backward (or some hexes backward, some forward), during a Movement Phase in which you declare a charge attack?

If you can move backward during a turn you charge, how do you calculate damage to the target of the charge. Is it still determined by total number of hexes moved by the attacker during movement phase, or is it somehow reduced, like for example Target Movement modifier of a unit that changed between forward and backward movement during a single turn is (see p. 108 TW / p. 36 Intro Rulebook)?
« Last Edit: 12 April 2017, 10:30:49 by Xotl »

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Moving backward and charging
« Reply #1 on: 11 April 2017, 16:56:05 »
This is addressed in the BattleMech Manual, and will also be in this year's TW errata:

If the attacker moved both backward and forward in the same move, base the number of hexes it moved from the hex in which the ’Mech last reversed its movement.
« Last Edit: 12 April 2017, 10:35:41 by Xotl »
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Moving backward and charging
« Reply #2 on: 11 April 2017, 17:16:19 »
Does entering target's hex during physical attack phase count as forward movement for the purposes of this rule? In other words - can attacker deal any damage if during movement phase (s)he moved backward, and then only turned to face the target?

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Moving backward and charging
« Reply #3 on: 11 April 2017, 17:23:21 »
Interesting question.  By the rules, no, as you don't count the hex you're entering when calculating charge damage.  I'll try to make that clearer without being cumbersome.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Moving backward and charging
« Reply #4 on: 12 April 2017, 02:55:22 »
A few more related questions (although with them here this topic's subject should probably be changed to something like "Unusual movement situations, and how they affect to-hit modifier for target movement and charge damage"):

1. Is lateral shifting (p. 50 TW) forward left or forward right considered moving forward for the purposes of calculating number of hexes moved when calculating charge damage (p. 148 TW / p. 52 Intro Rulebook) and to-hit modifier for target movement (p. 108 TW / p. 36 Intro Rulebook), or are those shifts considered their own movement directions? Same with backward left or backward right shift - do they count as moving backwards, or are considered their own movement directions for the purposes of those rules? I would assume that front shifts count as front movement, and back shifts - as back movement for those rules, but just want to make sure.

2. What about falling/going prone, and then getting up - does a 'Mech that falls, gets up and continues moving during the same movement phase adds hexes it moved before the fall to total number of hexes moved for the purposes of charge damage calculations or to-hit modifier for target movement (assuming it kept movement direction - for example moved forward  both before, and after the fall)?

3. Does a 'Mech that ends movement phase prone due to fall or intentionally going prone get to-hit modifier for target movement?

4. If the answer to the above is yes, then what about 'Mech location after fall - if a 'Mech falls into a lower hex due to failed piloting roll while trying to climb to a higher hex - is it considered moving forward into the higher hex, and then backward into the lower hex, or simply never leaving the lower hex for the purposes of to-hit modifier for target movement calculations (I would assume the latter, but want to make sure)?

5. What about skidding/sideslipping (p. 62 TW). I assume, that a skidding/sideslipping unit is considered to move in the same direction it did before she skid/sideslip begun (as far as I can tell always forward in TW, not sure about more advanced rules) for the purposes of accidental charge damage or to-hit modifier for target movement (if it applies - depending on answer to question 3)?

6. How is damage to a target of an accidental charge calculated calculated if the charge resulted from unit displacement (p. 151 TW/p. 55 Intro Rulebook), especially if the charging unit was displaced in a different direction it moved at the end of it's movement phase (for example - what happens if a unit moving forward this turn gets displaced backward into another unit)?

7. Does unit displacement affect to-hit modifier for target movement of a unit being displaced, and if so - how? Does it mater if a unit was displaced in a direction different, than it's movement direction at the end of it's regular movement this turn?

8. What about to-hit modifier for target movement of a unit moving to avoid domino effect (p. 152 TW/p.55 Intro Rulebook)? Is it considered a continuation of the unit's regular movement this turn for the purposes of to-hit modifier for target movement/damage done by an accidental charge that unit may perform later this turn?

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Moving backward and charging
« Reply #5 on: 12 April 2017, 10:30:29 »
A few more related questions (although with them here this topic's subject should probably be changed to something like "Unusual movement situations, and how they affect to-hit modifier for target movement and charge damage"):

1. Is lateral shifting (p. 50 TW) forward left or forward right considered moving forward for the purposes of calculating number of hexes moved when calculating charge damage (p. 148 TW / p. 52 Intro Rulebook) and to-hit modifier for target movement (p. 108 TW / p. 36 Intro Rulebook), or are those shifts considered their own movement directions? Same with backward left or backward right shift - do they count as moving backwards, or are considered their own movement directions for the purposes of those rules? I would assume that front shifts count as front movement, and back shifts - as back movement for those rules, but just want to make sure.

For lateral shifts, forward is forward and backwards is backwards still.

Quote
2. What about falling/going prone, and then getting up - does a 'Mech that falls, gets up and continues moving during the same movement phase adds hexes it moved before the fall to total number of hexes moved for the purposes of charge damage calculations or to-hit modifier for target movement (assuming it kept movement direction - for example moved forward both before, and after the fall)?

Excellent.  A mech that falls, and then picks itself up and keeps moving, counts from when it starts moving again for charge purposes.  TMM applies as normal (hexes moved in total in the phase).  Will add to TW errata / the BMM final.

Quote
3. Does a 'Mech that ends movement phase prone due to fall or intentionally going prone get to-hit modifier for target movement?

Yes, as normal.  The prone modifier applies on top of any movement.

Quote
4. If the answer to the above is yes, then what about 'Mech location after fall - if a 'Mech falls into a lower hex due to failed piloting roll while trying to climb to a higher hex - is it considered moving forward into the higher hex, and then backward into the lower hex, or simply never leaving the lower hex for the purposes of to-hit modifier for target movement calculations (I would assume the latter, but want to make sure)?

Despite the passage in TW suggesting you fall down into the lower of two hexes, you always fall in the hex you are moving to.  I know this is clear as mud in TW, but that's the intent (and this year's errata and the BMM final will clarify it).

Quote
5. What about skidding/sideslipping (p. 62 TW). I assume, that a skidding/sideslipping unit is considered to move in the same direction it did before she skid/sideslip begun (as far as I can tell always forward in TW, not sure about more advanced rules) for the purposes of accidental charge damage or to-hit modifier for target movement (if it applies - depending on answer to question 3)?

You continue in the direction you were travelling before making the facing change that caused it to skid (or sideslip).  As you have to run/flank to do this, that has to be forward.

Quote
6. How is damage to a target of an accidental charge calculated calculated if the charge resulted from unit displacement (p. 151 TW/p. 55 Intro Rulebook), especially if the charging unit was displaced in a different direction it moved at the end of it's movement phase (for example - what happens if a unit moving forward this turn gets displaced backward into another unit)?

Unintentional charges only occur through skidding; the damage is calculated as per a normal charge in that case.  I suspect that's not what you meant, so can you be more specific as to your scenario here?

Quote
7. Does unit displacement affect to-hit modifier for target movement of a unit being displaced, and if so - how? Does it mater if a unit was displaced in a direction different, than it's movement direction at the end of it's regular movement this turn?

No.

Quote
8. What about to-hit modifier for target movement of a unit moving to avoid domino effect (p. 152 TW/p.55 Intro Rulebook)? Is it considered a continuation of the unit's regular movement this turn for the purposes of to-hit modifier for target movement/damage done by an accidental charge that unit may perform later this turn?

No.
« Last Edit: 12 April 2017, 10:51:23 by Xotl »
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #6 on: 13 April 2017, 07:02:26 »
Thank you for your answers.

Ad. 5 Under TO rules it is possible to skid on ice, even while moving at walking/cruising speed (see p. 50 TO). This means, that it is possible to skid while moving backwards. I haven't checked if ice is the only condition, that allow such skids or not, but I guess, that this one example is enough to justify my question.

Now, that I think about it - what happens if a unit walks in one direction (let's assume backward for a second) into an ice-covered hex, changes it's facing, tries to leave the hex moving at the other direction (forward in this example), and then starts to skid? Is it considered to skid in it's original direction (backward in this example), or the direction, it tried to move to leave the hex? In other words - do we (for the purposes of accidental charge damage) count the hexes the unit has travelled in one direction before entering the hex, where it starts to skid, or not?

As a side note - the rules for ice in TO say, that "'Mechs and ground vehicles that make a facing change and then move on an ice-coated hex must check to see if they skid". I can see two small problems here.

The first problem is that hover vehicles, VTOLS and WiGE vehicles should probably be exempt from this rule (they may face risk of sideslipping as usually instead).

The second problem is that the sentence is written in such way, that it is unclear (at least to me - it may be clear to people, who speak English better then me) if risk of skidding happens when you try to leave an ice-coated hex after changing facing on it, or trying to enter an ice-coated hex after changing facing on a hex, that is not necessarily covered with ice. I assume, that it is meant to be the former, perhaps this sentence could be edited a bit for clarity?

Ad. 6 You are right, that the term "accidental charge" is not applied to unit displacement. That said - a unit that is displaced into a building "takes damage as if it had executed a successful charge attack" (see p. 151 TW/p. 55 Intro Rulebook). I understand, that this damage (as all damage a charging unit suffers as a result of a charge) does not depend on the number of hexes travelled, but what about the damage to the building itself? Does the building take charge damage to it's CF, and if so - how do you calculate the damage if the unit was displaced in a direction different, than it moved before the displacement?

More questions that came to mind as a result of the above:

9. Can buildings be declared as targets of charge attacks? Do you roll make a piloting/driving skill roll if you enter a building hex as a result successfully charging the building or a unit inside it and assign extra damage to the building and the charging unit if this roll fails (the roll is I'm referring to as described on p. 167-168 TW - the one modified by Buildings Movement Modifiers Table)?

10. What about entering the building as a result of displacement? Does the "takes damage as if it had executed a successful charge attack" (on p. 151 TW/p. 55 Intro Rulebook) bit apply instead or in addition to the piloting roll required when entering a building hex (again I'm referring to the roll described on p. 167-168 TW)?

11. Am I correct to assume, that if you enter a building hex in a way different, then regular movement during movement phase or one of the ways described in questions 9 or 10 above (for example if you perform a successful push attack against a target in a building -p. 147 TW, or move to avoid domino effect - p. 153 TW), then you make a roll to avoid damage to your unit and the building (still the same roll on p. 167-168 TW)?

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #7 on: 13 April 2017, 09:57:05 »
Ad. 5 Under TO rules it is possible to skid on ice, even while moving at walking/cruising speed (see p. 50 TO). This means, that it is possible to skid while moving backwards. I haven't checked if ice is the only condition, that allow such skids or not, but I guess, that this one example is enough to justify my question.

Now, that I think about it - what happens if a unit walks in one direction (let's assume backward for a second) into an ice-covered hex, changes it's facing, tries to leave the hex moving at the other direction (forward in this example), and then starts to skid? Is it considered to skid in it's original direction (backward in this example), or the direction, it tried to move to leave the hex? In other words - do we (for the purposes of accidental charge damage) count the hexes the unit has travelled in one direction before entering the hex, where it starts to skid, or not?

Ice is a TO-level rule, and I'd generally prefer to handle questions about such on the TO board.  However, backwards or forwards really doesn't matter in this case: you'd skid in the direction you were moving.

Quote
As a side note - the rules for ice in TO say, that "'Mechs and ground vehicles that make a facing change and then move on an ice-coated hex must check to see if they skid". I can see two small problems here.

The first problem is that hover vehicles, VTOLS and WiGE vehicles should probably be exempt from this rule (they may face risk of sideslipping as usually instead).

They already are, as ice has footnote 23.  The wording wasn't meant to imply that those unit types were affected.

Quote
The second problem is that the sentence is written in such way, that it is unclear (at least to me - it may be clear to people, who speak English better then me) if risk of skidding happens when you try to leave an ice-coated hex after changing facing on it, or trying to enter an ice-coated hex after changing facing on a hex, that is not necessarily covered with ice. I assume, that it is meant to be the former, perhaps this sentence could be edited a bit for clarity?

Agreed.

Quote
Ad. 6 You are right, that the term "accidental charge" is not applied to unit displacement. That said - a unit that is displaced into a building "takes damage as if it had executed a successful charge attack" (see p. 151 TW/p. 55 Intro Rulebook). I understand, that this damage (as all damage a charging unit suffers as a result of a charge) does not depend on the number of hexes travelled, but what about the damage to the building itself? Does the building take charge damage to it's CF, and if so - how do you calculate the damage if the unit was displaced in a direction different, than it moved before the displacement?

Damage is dealt to the building as normal.  The number of hexes moved is based on the number of hexes the unit was displaced.

Quote
9. Can buildings be declared as targets of charge attacks? Do you roll make a piloting/driving skill roll if you enter a building hex as a result successfully charging the building or a unit inside it and assign extra damage to the building and the charging unit if this roll fails (the roll is I'm referring to as described on p. 167-168 TW - the one modified by Buildings Movement Modifiers Table)?

Yes they can, per TW p. 148.  Charging the building and charging a unit inside a building are two very different things, though.  You can't charge a unit inside a building hex from the outside (TW p. 171).  Charging the building operates as charging any unusual target, per the charge rules.  You'd roll first to see if you take normal damage from entering a building hex, before resolving the charge.

Quote
10. What about entering the building as a result of displacement? Does the "takes damage as if it had executed a successful charge attack" (on p. 151 TW/p. 55 Intro Rulebook) bit apply instead or in addition to the piloting roll required when entering a building hex (again I'm referring to the roll described on p. 167-168 TW)?

Both apply.

Quote
11. Am I correct to assume, that if you enter a building hex in a way different, then regular movement during movement phase or one of the ways described in questions 9 or 10 above (for example if you perform a successful push attack against a target in a building -p. 147 TW, or move to avoid domino effect - p. 153 TW), then you make a roll to avoid damage to your unit and the building (still the same roll on p. 167-168 TW)?

I don't think there's any method that allows you to avoid the building entry PSR check ("every time a unit enters" is the wording).  That covers everything.
« Last Edit: 13 April 2017, 10:52:53 by Xotl »
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #8 on: 13 April 2017, 10:22:49 »
Hmm, not clear actually on if you should always apply the "entering a building" PSR check for damage.  TW p. 167 says "Units that involuntarily enter a building hex
(such as during a skid or after being displaced by another unit’s actions) should use Skidding and Unit Displacement rules to resolve such movement (pp. 62 and 151, respectively)."

However, this brings on the odd situation that if you accidentally charge a building you resolve it differently (and take less damage) than if you deliberately charge it.  At the same time, it's not 100% clear that the above mention is supposed to be "instead of the normal rules", rather than a friendly pointer to the relevant section.  Have to consult on that one.
« Last Edit: 13 April 2017, 10:52:27 by Xotl »
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #9 on: 13 April 2017, 11:07:25 »
Ice is a TO-level rule, and I'd generally prefer to handle questions about such on the TO board.  However, backwards or forwards really doesn't matter in this case: you'd skid in the direction you were moving.

Sorry about posting this question in the TW forum, but since it refers directly to a previous question I earlier in this thread (it's essentially a special case of applying TW rule I asked about in question 5), I felt it is better to put it here, where the context of the question is already explained, rather than creating a separate thread in the TO forum, which would require fairly elaborate explanation (and possibly a link to this thread) to ask the same question, and later quote any answers from the thread in the TO forum back in the thread in the TW forum if they impact any further discussion there.

Let me know if you prefer me to create multiple threads in similar situations (one for every rulebook involved), or try to keep entire discussion in one thread.

Quote
Damage is dealt to the building as normal.  The number of hexes moved is based on the number of hexes the unit was displaced.

Do by "damage [...] as normal" you mean the building takes charge damage (number of hexes attacker travelled this turn, not counting the last hex * attacker's mass in tons / 10), but "number of hexes attacker travelled this turn" is just number of the hexes attacker was displaced instead of "number of hexes attacker moved this turn in one direction (backward vs. forward)"? In this case buildings would rarely take any damage from displacement, since units are usually displaced by only one hex, so it becomes [1 (hexes displaced) -1 (not counting last hex)] * (mass /10 tons) = 0. Or do you mean something different (like 168 TW for entering building hexes).

Quote
Yes they can, per TW p. 148.  Charging the building and charging a unti inside a building are two very different things, though.  You can't charge a unit inside a building hex from the outside (TW p. 171).  Charging the building operates as charging any unusual target, per the charge rules.  You'd roll first to see if you take normal damage from entering a building hex, before resolving the charge.

What do you mean by taking normal damage from entering a building hex, before resolving the charge? Don't I need to at least make a to-hit roll for the charge I don't even know if I'll end up in the hex in question (see Location After Attack on p. 148 TW)?

Is the sequence:
- make to-hit roll for the charge,
- if you succeed (meaning you will enter the building) resolve the entire procedure from pp. 167-168 TW (piloting roll and possible damage for entering a building hex),
- resolve charge damage,

or is it something else?

Also one more question:
12. If I charge a building hex, and there are enough units in this hex, that I'll exceed stacking limit, does domino effect happen as normal (meaning, that I can't charge a unit inside the building hex from the outside directly, but I can potentially damage it indirectly by making it fall, displace into another building etc.). I guess the answer is yes, but just want to make sure.

EDIT - Regarding the post above - guess some questions in this post will have to wait until we figure out when "entering a building" PSR check applies.
« Last Edit: 13 April 2017, 11:14:14 by Alfaryn »

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #10 on: 13 April 2017, 11:29:40 »
Sorry about posting this question in the TW forum, but since it refers directly to a previous question I earlier in this thread (it's essentially a special case of applying TW rule I asked about in question 5), I felt it is better to put it here, where the context of the question is already explained, rather than creating a separate thread in the TO forum, which would require fairly elaborate explanation (and possibly a link to this thread) to ask the same question, and later quote any answers from the thread in the TO forum back in the thread in the TW forum if they impact any further discussion there.

Let me know if you prefer me to create multiple threads in similar situations (one for every rulebook involved), or try to keep entire discussion in one thread.

No, this is fine.  It was a more an explanation for why my answers here in the TW forum only deal with TW realities, in general.  I usually don't consider TO stuff when giving a TW answer.

Quote
Do by "damage [...] as normal" you mean the building takes charge damage (number of hexes attacker travelled this turn, not counting the last hex * attacker's mass in tons / 10), but "number of hexes attacker travelled this turn" is just number of the hexes attacker was displaced instead of "number of hexes attacker moved this turn in one direction (backward vs. forward)"? In this case buildings would rarely take any damage from displacement, since units are usually displaced by only one hex, so it becomes [1 (hexes displaced) -1 (not counting last hex)] * (mass /10 tons) = 0. Or do you mean something different (like 168 TW for entering building hexes).

TW p. 148: "as if the unit executed a successful charge attack".  So, you assume the unit charged the thing at full speed, for some reason.  I guess you have to, because the alternative is 0 damage, as you point out above.

Quote
What do you mean by taking normal damage from entering a building hex, before resolving the charge? Don't I need to at least make a to-hit roll for the charge I don't even know if I'll end up in the hex in question (see Location After Attack on p. 148 TW)?

Whenever you enter a building hex, you have to make a PSR to avoid taking damage.  The section in TW implies (but doesn't outright say) that you ignore this for involuntary charges, but even so, it doesn't speak about deliberate charges.  I'm running this by the rules team right now.

Quote
Is the sequence:
- make to-hit roll for the charge,
- if you succeed (meaning you will enter the building) resolve the entire procedure from pp. 167-168 TW (piloting roll and possible damage for entering a building hex),
- resolve charge damage,

or is it something else?

Looks right.  But as per above, we're going over this to see about the applicability of the move check in this case, so hold on a bit.

Quote
12. If I charge a building hex, and there are enough units in this hex, that I'll exceed stacking limit, does domino effect happen as normal (meaning, that I can't charge a unit inside the building hex from the outside directly, but I can potentially damage it indirectly by making it fall, displace into another building etc.). I guess the answer is yes, but just want to make sure.

Dispalcement always happens if you violate stacking.  So yes.
« Last Edit: 08 May 2017, 10:17:45 by Xotl »
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #11 on: 13 April 2017, 11:49:06 »
TW p. 148: "as if the unit executed a successful charge attack".  So, you assume the unit charged the thing at full speed, for some reason.  I guess you have to, because the alternative is 0 damage, as you point out above.

The only potential problem with this interpretation with this interpretation, is when a unit gets displaced in a direction that does not match it's facing and movement direction (backward versus forward) during last movement phase. Let's consider this:

This is addressed in the BattleMech Manual, and will also be in this year's TW errata:

If the attacker moved both backward and forward in the same move, base the number of hexes it moved from the hex in which the ’Mech last reversed its movement.

In light of this change can there be a situation, when unit is considered displaced in the direction opposite to it's movement? For example if a unit moved forward, and was displaced backward (possibly including backward and to the side, as we discussed in question 1. about lateral shifting). In such case would the damage to the building be 0?

Or does the rules change quoted above does not apply to displacements, because they are not considered forward or backward movement, so displacements are always considered a continuation of unit's movement in their original direction for the purposes of determining damage to the building regardless of the direction of the displacement?
« Last Edit: 13 April 2017, 11:58:35 by Alfaryn »

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #12 on: 13 April 2017, 12:01:17 »
A displacement would have to considered a continuation of the unit's existing movement, even if it's backwards.  It's the only way for the charge to be guaranteed to do damage.  A pre-displacement fall or bit of backwards movement would reset the charge momentum as normal, however.

But I'll be double-checking much of this.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #13 on: 13 April 2017, 13:52:04 »
Regarding displacement into building hexes.

If calculating damage to a building clashes with the new clarification to the way distance travelled is calculated for the purposes of charge damage calculation and may give wired or unrealistic results in some situations (when you get displaced in a direction opposite to direction of your movement this turn for example), then would simply changing the rules, so that damage to a building a unit was displaced into is independent on the unit's speed, be the best way to go? For example we could drop this whole "damage as if charged" idea, and resolve being displaced into a building just like any other case of entering a building hex on pp. 167-168 TW. The question is if this change would improve the rules, or fix our current problem, but break something else in the process.

This is just a thought, not really a rules question. I guess it would be better suited for another section of the forum (Ask the Lead Developers? Ask the Writers? Ground Combat? I'm not sure where suggestions for rules changes should go), but since it depends on answers to questions we are already discussing here, and in fact may influence the answers, I decided to post it here for now - at least until we figure out just how the current rues are supposed to work.
« Last Edit: 13 April 2017, 13:54:11 by Alfaryn »

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #14 on: 13 April 2017, 14:16:15 »
Quote
For example we could drop this whole "damage as if charged" idea, and resolve being displaced into a building just like any other case of entering a building hex on pp. 167-168 TW.

That's exactly what I'm proposing to the team. :)  It smooths out the absurdities and questions, and gives us one mechanism to handle all instances of damage involving entry into building hexes.

Thanks for bringing all this up.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #15 on: 17 April 2017, 04:36:08 »
First - something, that I guess should is an error in the rules. The Stacking rules on p. 57 TW say to check for stacking limit violations at the end of each Movement Phase. The Stacking rules in the Introductory Rulebook (p. 27) don't define an exact moment, but seem to suggest to do it right after any unit ends it's movement doing Movement Phase. The way, that Displacement and Domino Effect rules are phrased would suggest one of two things:
- you should check stacking limits every time a unit ends it's movement OR IS DISPLACED,
- you should check stacking limits at the end of EACH Phase (not just Movement Phase).
This probably should be clarified by an errata.

I've got a bigger problem though. I can't figure out what should be the sequence of the following events:
1. resolving unit displacement and movement due to physical attacks/domino effects (of both attacker and target),
2. resolving falls due to physical attacks,
3. applying damage from charge, DFA and falls,
4. checking stacking limit violations, and resolving domino effects,
5. resolving unit destruction (including removing unit from the board) (p. 128 TW and p. 49 Intro Rulebook),
6. checking if a unit causes collapse of a building hex, entire building or a basement (pp. 176 - 179 TW).

There are several possible situations when this sequence of events is important, for example:
- If 5 happens before 4, than a unit destroyed directly or indirectly (for example by a fall) by a physical attack or domino effect, which would also cause the unit to be displaced, than the destroyed unit can't cause or propagate a domino effect or damage/cause a collapse of a building it would be displaced into. When playing with TO the sequence of 5 and 4 may also influence where engine and ammunition explosions (p. 77-78 TO) happen.
- The sequence of 1 and 3 may be important if being displaced may cause the displaced unit or something else something to be damaged. This happens if a unit is displaced into a building for example. Consider:
What do you mean by taking normal damage from entering a building hex, before resolving the charge? Don't I need to at least make a to-hit roll for the charge I don't even know if I'll end up in the hex in question (see Location After Attack on p. 148 TW)?

Is the sequence:
- make to-hit roll for the charge,
- if you succeed (meaning you will enter the building) resolve the entire procedure from pp. 167-168 TW (piloting roll and possible damage for entering a building hex),
- resolve charge damage,

or is it something else?
If 3 happens before 1, then you should resolve charge damage before entering the building and following the procedure from pp. 167-168 (PSR to avoid damage due to entering a building) TW.
- If 5 also happens before 1, then in the example above if a unit charging a building destroys itself by a charge damage to attacker it gets removed from the game before a PSR to check for damage due to entering a building can happen.
- The sequence of 2 and 3 can also be important in the example above, as it may determine, if a unit charging a building may take falling damage before it enters the building (which may also cause damage to both the building and the unit).
- Depending on the final ruling about the damage to a unit displaced to a building hex, the sequence of 2 and 3 may be also important if a unit falls and gets displaced into a building hex by a charge/push/DFA/domino effect etc.
- Depending on the sequence of 5 and 6 (and other events, that may lead to 5) a unit may get destroyed and removed from the board before it's weigh may cause a building or basement to collapse.

And so on... You could probably invent plenty of other situations, where a sequence of those events may influence final outcome.

When deciding when 5 happens (destroyed unit gets removed from the board), you should also consider what happens if you play with TO rules, that allow to carry or drag a destroyed 'Mech (pp. 92 - 99 TO), in which case it needs to stay on the board even after it is destroyed.

You should also consider, that the precise moment a unit's destruction is resolved may influence damage that it will take for the purposes of salvaging/repairing it (for example - does such unit take damage from being displaced into a building by a physical attack, if such attack would deal enough damage to destroy the unit). I seem to recall the a rule, that if a 'Mech is destroyed, you track damage to it until the end of a current phase, but I can't find it at the moment. I'll add an appropriate page reference if I find it. The closest thing I can find at the moment are the rules on repair and replacement and salvage in the pp. 175 - 192 SO, but those are not quite the rules I mention here - they only say what you can do with a destroyed unit after the battle depending on damage it suffered.

Another problem to consider is if a destroyed unit may contribute its mass to a collapse of a building or a basement. It may be relevant during the phase the unit was destroyed depending on sequence of 5 and 6, but may also be relevant during further phases if we track position of destroyed units for the purposes of TO rules about carrying or dragging destroyed units mentioned above.

EDIT - I realise, that some of the particular situations, I've given as examples above may have been addressed in the previous rulings on this forum, but I'm afraid, that as long as we don't have a unified sequence, new questions may keep popping up due to general ambiguity of the sequence of events listed, and multiple ways some of them may be triggered together. Plus - without one general rule on how to establish sequence of such "simultaneous" events, you run a risk of creating rulings for particular situations, that contradict each other.
« Last Edit: 17 April 2017, 05:39:32 by Alfaryn »

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #16 on: 17 April 2017, 12:50:22 »
Timing Checks

1) Domino effect (and presumably other displacement actions): timing not really listed, but it seems to imply it happens the moment the effect occurs.

2) Falls due to physical attacks: end of the physical attack phase.  No idea where it says this in TW, but it's in the Manual.

3) Damage application: at the end of the phase the damage was dealt in, except movement phase damage, which occurs immediately.

4) Stacking limit violations: end of the movement phase (TW p. 57).  I'll add a small note to the Manual that the check occurs after all destroyed units are removed, but for the most part I would assume players would decide that way to begin with.

5) Unit destruction: at the end of the phase in which it was destroyed (TW p. 128)

6) Building collapse: depends on the cause.  If due to movement (i.e. weight exceeded, or charge/moving through damage), the collapse happens immediately.  If due to damage, at the end of the phase the damage is applied.  Not sure if this is in TW anywhere, but it's in the Manual.


With all this having been stated, would you mind restating any problematic timing issue that occurs as a result?  I'm a bit busy at the moment, and don't have time right now to crunch this all myself.  If not, let me know and I'll get to it when I can.  Either way, thanks.
« Last Edit: 17 April 2017, 12:58:15 by Xotl »
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #17 on: 17 April 2017, 14:22:12 »
I'll try to think about some more examples of possible timing problems later, though I think I've already given you enough to illustrate my problem in my previous post above, below events I've marked 1 - 6.

You seem to miss that the main problem I wrote about in that post, isn't when 1 - 6 happen on their own, but that sometimes some of the events 1 - 6 may be triggered at the same time, and it becomes important for the final outcome, in what sequence you resolve them. Once again - the examples of such conflicts are in my last post.

Also - I know, that p. 57 say, that you should check for stacking violations at the end of the movement phase, but some other rules imply, that you should also check for them in other phases (mostly Physical Attack Phase when they happen due to displacement or other similar effects - see my examples above). P. 57 should probably be changed to allow to check for stacking violations during other phases. One problem though is when you should do it - as soon as the units are moved/displaced? At the end of every phase phase? Before, or after you resolve falls and/or destruction of units potentially violating stacking limits? Those are the sorts of conflicts I'm worried about.
« Last Edit: 17 April 2017, 14:27:31 by Alfaryn »

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #18 on: 17 April 2017, 14:56:51 »
No, I didn't miss them; I said I'm busy, and I very much am, hence the abbreviated post and asking you to restate things with that taken into account.

I'll get to it when I have the time.  Thanks.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #19 on: 17 April 2017, 20:25:51 »
Domino Effect/Displacement: TW p. 144's Initiative and Displacement section strongly implies that displacement occurs immediately after the events that caused it, even to the point of interrupting other attacks.  As such, I'll be adding the following into TW errata / the BMM:

Timing: Displacement (including any resulting PSRs and damage) is resolved immediately after the action that caused it, regardless of what phase it is. If any damage was inflicted by that action, apply it before resolving the displacement, even though the phase has not ended yet.

With that in place, everything should be answerable now.  If not, concisely mention specific scenarios left unresolved.

5 & 4: 5 happens first.  4 (checking the stacking limit) happens after everything else I can think of so far, because the ways involuntary stacking violations can occur demand immediate action.

Charge / DFAs & 1: damage from the attack is resolved before displacement in these scenarios, as laid out by the text of the attacks themselves.  With the above errata, the damage is now applied prior to displacement as well.  As such: resolve and apply physical attack damage, resolve displacement, resolve and apply displacement damage.

Falls and Displacement: Falls generally don't happen automatically; they occur due to PSRs, which have established timing.  Procedure is: displacement occurs.  If PSR results from displacement and unit fails, unit falls.  If not, make normal PSRs required by action that forced the displacement (which happens in the case of charges and DFAs) at the normal time (usually end of phase; immediately for movement phase).

Building stuff: displacement occurs immediately, check for collapse due to weight also immediately.  A destroyed unit would indeed contribute to mass, as it doesn't get removed until the end of the phase but displacement and weight check happens immediately.  So a dfa'd unit destroyed by the damage could be shoved onto a building, damage the building, potentially cause its collapse (and take more damage, although this is relevant only for campaign games), and only then be removed after all this.  TW p. 177 and info above should cover the rest; if not please concisely state what is unclear.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #20 on: 04 May 2017, 15:19:59 »
Sorry for not responding earlier. I felt, that I had been rambling a little to much, and decided to take a bit of a break from discussing Battletech rules to gather my thoughts, and hopefully explain them better. The only problem scenario regarding timing of displacement and similar effects not covered by your answers I can think about at this moment is the following:

- unit A is hit by a charge/DFA, and takes enough damage to be destroyed (but does not get removed from the game until the end of the current phase),
- unit A is then displaced by the attack into a hex in which it would violate stacking limits.

Does the unit cause domino effect to occur? Between your answers, and the first sentence of the Domino Effect section in the TW/Intro Rulebook the answer would be yes (the domino effect happens immediately after the displacement, which happens immediately after resolving the damage received directly from charge/DFA - so before the end of the phase, when unit A would be destroyed), but I just want to be sure if you considered this scenario, when answering my question.

In other words - do the units about to be removed from the game due to destruction can cause domino effects (or propagate them if other units are displaced into their hexes)?
« Last Edit: 04 May 2017, 15:24:38 by Alfaryn »

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #21 on: 04 May 2017, 15:34:19 »
Good point.  I think it best to say that, despite interrupting anything else, displacement does not cause further displacement if the unit being displaced was destroyed.  I'll make sure the wording is clear on this point.

Thanks again.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #22 on: 04 May 2017, 15:47:56 »
The best way to do it would probably be to rephrase the beginning of the Domino Effect section and/or the Stacking section to exclude units, that have taken enough damage to be destroyed from calculating stacking limits. Otherwise people will start to wander again if a destroyed unit, that has been displaced into a building, can cause the building to collapse. It needs to be clear, that a destroyed unit remains in play until the end of the phase in which it was destroyed for all purposes, except calculating stacking limits.

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #23 on: 04 May 2017, 15:54:02 »
I'm kind of having second thoughts.  It might just be easier to say that you resolve it anyways: that's what people are used to and the rules already technically call for.  I already have a note that destroyed units don't violate stacking, so allowing corpses to still cause smash into buildings or fall off a cliff on top of some other guy might actually be easier.

I think I'll run this by the gang and see what they feel like.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 331
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #24 on: 04 May 2017, 16:49:44 »
Another related problem - what happens with piloting skill rolls of a unit, that has taken enough damage to be destroyed, but has not been yet removed from the game? If such unit is forced to make a piloting roll - does it automatically fail? Can the unit elect to make an optional roll, for example to avoid domino effect (if you rule, that an already destroyed, but not yet removed unit takes part in domino effects)?

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11642
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Answered) Unusual movement situations
« Reply #25 on: 08 May 2017, 10:13:43 »
A destroyed unit automatically fails any PSRs required.  However, we're going to go with destroyed units not being able to cause displacement at the TW level, and potentially look at something for TO that allows them to cause displacement as a more advanced option.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

 

Register