|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Aug 27, 2018 17:41:47 GMT
Hello, I am asking for another clarification. It is the bounding player who declares all shooting attacks first, followed by the non bounding player. Is that correct? If that is the case the Bounding player will never have a unit "under fire" trigging the "is shooting at them" criteria. It will only ever potentially apply to the non bounding player. The actual text is... "Any Artillery, War Wagons or Bows elements of both sides that are eligible to do so, must shoot once each (in case of dispute in the order the moving player decides) and make or inflict outcome moves". So, no the players work it out together. Joe Collins |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 27, 2018 19:59:05 GMT
Hello Louien...it’s me again. I think I can add a bit more to what Joe posted above. Shooting is a two-step process:- *First, the bounding player announces his intended targets (i.e. those he would like to shoot at), then the opponent does the same. However, both sides intended fire may be distracted by the need to shoot back (see the shooting priorities in page 10 paragraph 4). *Only after the above determination of actual targets has been resolved does the shooting (i.e. the rolling of the dice) take place. And it is the bounding player who decides in which order the shooting combat and their corresponding dice rolls are made. (Exception: Third Party Shooting. No matter who's bound it is, those that are unable to shoot back must first survive being shot at)Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, such as the “Quick Reference Sheets” from the Society of Ancients,
and the new “Army List Corrections” file: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And this is the latest January 2018 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2018
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Aug 27, 2018 21:57:15 GMT
I believe both players must select a target which can shoot at them if possible. So yes you can use your archers to draw off enemy shooting.
You do not have to allocate any support shooters though and they are free to shoot at other targets (and must shoot at another target that can shoot at them).
Allowing the bounding player to shot at a non-shooter target and hope that the non-bounding shooter doesn't declare the bounding bow as a target is a massive (and unintended) change in DBX mechanics (and would contradict the diagram text).
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 28, 2018 0:27:09 GMT
Hmm...I see what you are saying Tom, but I do take issue with the “contradict's the diagram text“ bit. Consider the following situation:- Red Army = Kn Bw Cv
Blue Army = Bw Bw CvLet us assume it is the blue players bound. How would this be resolved? 1: The Distracted Shooter interpretationThe blue player (who’s bound it is) announces his intention to shoot both blue bows at the red Kn. The red bow, which is not being targeted, is free to choose, so can therefore target either a blue bow or the blue Cv. If the red bow shoots at a blue bow, that blue bow must shoot back, leaving only one blue bow shooting the Kn instead of two. This is entirely consistent with both the Shooting Priority rule in page 10 paragraph 4 and the figure 15b dialogue. 2: The Must Shoot at a Shooter interpretationAs both blue bows are in range of the red bow, at least one of them must shoot directly at the red bow. Other blue bow, which is not being shot at, is free to choose...it could target the red Kn, or, also support shoot the red bow. But this is NOT consistent with the Shooting Priority rule in page 10 paragraph 4, nor the figure 15b dialogue. Nowhere in the rules does it say “a shooter must target an enemy that is capable of shooting at it”. It only says “...they must shoot at a target that IS shooting at them.” Now it is true that the first interpretation could result in both sides shooting at an enemy mounted and not the enemy bows. But that would only happen if both players wish it to be so. If either player targets an opposing bow, the enemy must shoot back. The second interpretation does prevent this...but requires extra words to be added to the rules. So, are we to play by the rules as they are written, or are we going to add stuff that just isn’t there? Of course, none of this would have been a problem if figure 15b had another light grey element, say an Ax, to the right of Bow A. Then the dialogue would have had to mention whether dark grey Bow Y could target this light grey Ax or not. (Either way, once one of the bows targets the other, the other bow must shoot back) Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, such as the “Quick Reference Sheets” from the Society of Ancients,
and the new “Army List Corrections” file: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And this is the latest January 2018 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2018
|
|
|
|
Post by martin on Aug 28, 2018 3:15:15 GMT
Shooting is a two-step process:- *First, the bounding player announces his intended targets (i.e. those he would like to shoot at), then the opponent does the same. However, both sides intended fire may be distracted by the need to shoot back (see the shooting priorities in page 10 paragraph 4). *Only after the above determination of actual targets has been resolved does the shooting (i.e. the rolling of the dice) take place. And it is the bounding player who decides in which order the shooting combat and their corresponding dice rolls are made. (Exception: Third Party Shooting. No matter who's bound it is, those that are unable to shoot back must first survive being shot at)
Sounds like a pretty concise and usable summary to me. Good one, Stevie. Martin |
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Aug 29, 2018 20:36:13 GMT
Diagram 15b says a target which shoots takes priority (not is shooting). A Bow must shoot in both bounds so is a target that shoots (as usual there quite enough explaination - it must be able to shoot at the shooter arc/range but this is explained in the next paragraph "If Pike X was outside the TZ and Bow Y was facing in another direction and unable to shoot, Bow A could shoot at any of the three available targets."
By the proposed interp this text would be totally wrong as it is now argued that Bow A can shoot at any of these targets if Pike X was not in the TZ and only have to shoot at Bow Y if it announced it was shooting at Bow A.
But I get that its another poorly worded rule and has lead to may general exhaustion dealing with this stuff.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by martin on Aug 29, 2018 21:05:40 GMT
TomT,
I have a vague recollection that Mr Barker was reluctant to allow inclusion of diagrams, but when he consented, I thought the deal was - whenever the text and diagrams clash, the rules text overrides the diagram. Anyone else remember that?
Martin
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Aug 29, 2018 22:14:51 GMT
TomT, I have a vague recollection that Mr Barker was reluctant to allow inclusion of diagrams, but when he consented, I thought the deal was - whenever the text and diagrams clash, the rules text overrides the diagram. Anyone else remember that? Martin Errr. No. That is categorically untrue. You are incorrect.
Phil was not reluctant to allow inclusion of the diagrams.
Phil authored both the rules text and the diagrams (and the army lists, and all the rest).
The comments which you are referencing were made by Phil in response to a rather exasperating exchange. They were an esoteric response (typical Phil) to an annoying question. Taken out of context they can lead to great silliness.
Phil doesn't consider the diagrams as necessary to play the rules. He considers them a nice illustration of the rules text in action.
Indeed, working without the diagrams we would have needed much longer to standardize play.
A classic example of this is shooting. 15b makes it clear. Folks that don't believe, have or follow the diagrams could well play it incorrectly. Some do it seems.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 30, 2018 11:13:48 GMT
Diagram 15b says a target which shoots takes priority (not is shooting). A Bow must shoot in both bounds so is a target that shoots (as usual there quite enough explaination - it must be able to shoot at the shooter arc/range but this is explained in the next paragraph "If Pike X was outside the TZ and Bow Y was facing in another direction and unable to shoot, Bow A could shoot at any of the three available targets." By the proposed interp this text would be totally wrong as it is now argued that Bow A can shoot at any of these targets if Pike X was not in the TZ and only have to shoot at Bow Y if it announced it was shooting at Bow A. But I get that its another poorly worded rule and has lead to may general exhaustion dealing with this stuff. TomT Well Tom, let us not forget that in figure 15b, Bow Y only has one target to shoot at, that of Bow A. Bow Y has no choice but to target Bow A, and once Bow A is targeted, it too has no choice but to shoot back (if it can). This begs the following question: is Bow Y targeting Bow A because that is a shooter that is ‘capable’ of shooting back? Or is Bow Y only targeting Bow A because Bow Y has nobody else to shoot at? It all seems to boil down to the interpretation of the third paragraph of the figure 15b dialogue:- “...a target which shoots back takes priority over one that does not.” Note that it does not say “a target which can shoot back”... ...nor does it say “which might/may/could/is capable/has the potential/has the possibility - of shooting back.” Still, if the FAQ Team decides to add the word “ can” to the third paragraph of the figure 15b dialogue, then that in itself still won’t be enough. As I demonstrated in fanaticus.boards.net/post/14993/ :- (oh what the hell...I’ll show it again here)Red Army = Kn Bw Cv
Blue Army = Bw Bw BwIF the third paragraph of the figure 15b dialogue said “...a target which can shoot back takes priority over one that does not.”, and IF the page 10 paragraph 4 Shooting Priorities said “...they must shoot at a target that can shoot at them”, then what of the situation shown above? It would imply that all three blue bows, which ‘ could’ be shot at by the single red bow, have no choice but to target the red bow. This is absurd as it would mean mounted would be immune to shooting if they have a bow next to them. No, something like the following would be required:- First, “You must shoot at a target that can shoot at you” (which is not currently written in the actual rules). And “But those that could shoot in support are free to choose, unless shot at themselves” (also not written in the current rules). That’s an awful lot of verbiage just to replace the word “ is” in “must shoot at a target that is shooting at them”...  Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, such as the “Quick Reference Sheets” from the Society of Ancients,
and the new “Army List Corrections” file: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And this is the latest January 2018 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2018
|
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Aug 30, 2018 12:35:17 GMT
Good job stevie, I spent a bit of time with my CAD drawing up hypotheticals similar to your little example with just that point in mind.
Can or could? That is one of the questions.
Is makes much more sense (and is the actual text).
You can put it further - with a half BW offset it could be 4 BW elements that would be potential targets required to shoot at the single enemy bow. One of which would be completely wasted.
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Sept 7, 2018 22:38:25 GMT
Only a single element is required to shoot at an opposing shooting element. You can add helpers if you wish or they may shoot other targets. Once an element has been chosen as a target it must shoot back and so isn't an element that can shoot at any other element.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Sept 7, 2018 22:41:32 GMT
Phil reviewed and approved the text of the diagrams - which are essential to understanding the rules.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Sept 8, 2018 19:33:38 GMT
Fair enough Tom. I don’t mind playing it the way you say.  My only quibble is...how are we supposed to know that is the correct interpretation when it’s not mentioned anywhere in the rules or in the diagram dialogues? All we have is page 10 paragraph 4 saying “...must shoot at a target in their TZ. If there is none, they must shoot at a target that is shooting at them.” (no mention of you must shoot at an enemy that ‘could’ shoot at you). And all figure 15b says is “...Bow A would shoot at Bow Y because a target which shoots back takes priority over one that does not” (no surprises there...Bow Y has nobody else to shoot at, so Bow A has to shoot back at Bow Y. Still no mention of having to shoot at a target that ‘could’ shoot at you).Can we please have this made clear in the next FAQ, as I’m pretty sure that I’m not the only player who isn’t telepathic!  Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, such as the “Quick Reference Sheets” from the Society of Ancients,
and the new “Army List Corrections” file: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And this is the latest January 2018 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2018
|
|
|
|
Post by martin on Sept 8, 2018 19:40:41 GMT
Agreed, stevie. Played a number of games today with multiple bows, and it's still 'as clear as mud'.
Martin
|
|
|
|
Post by notjustromans on Sept 13, 2018 3:04:58 GMT
if your not shot at you can not get a negative result from shooting, while bow 1 is shooting at cav, which he can choose.....bow 2 and bow 3 can both be shooting at bow 1 and bow 1 keeps his die for all results in the same bound. that is how I read it,
|
|
