No unit - except air units - should be allowed to move during both CM and NCM during the same turn

Cernel

To understand why this rule should not be enforced (unless having a property for custom maps (aiming at making sense, rather than at blidly following some rulebook) not to have it), please read this thread, where this same matter has already been discussed:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/Movement-during-CM-and-NCM-tp6989743.html

This is a sum up, by @Hepps, of what is my opinion too:

I'd have to agree with V & Ice. I'm not sure changing the game to accommodate a silly rule just because its there makes any sense at all.

But I want to point out that the nonsense is not only in the case of placement in hostile and the sub-stalling, but there are other issues; plus you also have to consider maps with politics, where you can start movement and place in hostile land territories too, not just on sea. Enforcing this for whatever maps, without a property for not having it, would be quite bad.

prastle

@Cernel and @redrum I see its already being discussed here but yes its definitely a bug. As I said in github the real ? is how much work is it to fix this? Is it worth it?

Cernel

@prastle said in No unit - except air units - should be allowed to move as well in CM as in NCM:

is how much work is it to fix this? Is it worth it?

As I said, I surely believe that fixing this bug would have a negative value, as you would enforce a bad rule, that causes problems and it is nonsensical, for no reasons but that the rule exists (sadly).

prastle

@Cernel I agree. Also perhaps i have never really noticed this glitch because only if a player is cheating would a player try to do this in the maps that this affects. Perhaps the easiest fix is a general statement added to the rule set defining this as illegal. Sadly apparently it affects all of the most popular maps....
.

Hepps

@redrum It would seem to me that the original rule was 100% only for the boardgame since you had no way to validate which units had moved or not moved if you made NCM during your combat moves. In the TA version since it keeps track of what units you have moved or not moved it seems like adding this feature seems unnecessary. Seems more limiting in terms of gameplay... but at the end of the day I don't think it would have any impact other than to force players to only do combat moves during the combat phase.

Cernel

@Hepps said in No unit - except air units - should be allowed to move as well in CM as in NCM:

@redrum It would seem to me that the original rule was 100% only for the boardgame since you had no way to validate which units had moved or not moved if you made NCM during your combat moves. In the TA version since it keeps track of what units you have moved or not moved it seems like adding this feature seems unnecessary.

I've no proof, but I'm pretty sure the only 1 reason why this nonsensical rule (that if you partially moved during CM, then you cannot complete your movement during NCM) exist is only that in a boardgame, then, you would need to remember or flag all units with how much remaining movement they have (as you indeed have to do for air units), while just keeping track if they moved or not is easier.
This is of course a pointless limit for a digitalised boardgame.
Thus this "feature" would have exactly 0 positive value for custom maps, but only the negative value of the silly situations that this rule causes.

prastle

@Cernel I have to interject

existed for a few reasons

but mainly because ya cant enter combat

roll a die

and then retreat afterwards in non com because your unit could move 2 spaces

Cernel

@prastle That is another matter.

This discussion is not about using movement after having been in combat. That is already supported and not-air units can't move anymore if they did combat.

This is about only doing part movement in CM and part in NCM, without anything in between that blocks you, beside only the rule of not splitting movement.

It is relevant, for example, in case you blitz throug a hostile territory into a friendly one. By rules, you have to perform all this movement in CM, but currently the engine allows you to wait NCM to do the second part of it, which is good in case you may wish to see the dice before deciding if and where to go after having blitzed the first territory.

Of course, in the moment in which you can decide where to move, in NCM, the armour that didn't move at all, it makes no sense that you can't decide where to move the one that made 1 movement only, instead.

Thus the current behaviour should be kept, or a property for having it should be made, because this rule is just a silly thing that exists only for making boardgames easier to track, but would be detrimental for no reasons for a digitalised version of it.

Again, I suggest reading the thread I linked, where @wirkey already pointed out this matter (causing some strange situations, but there are other problems too, related to this rule), and the consensus was not to enforce this no-split limit. But the point is that this should be documented, if intended not to be supported, otherwise it keeps resurfacing, and the same discussions restart over and over again.

prastle

@Cernel i read your link before commenting and agree it should be left in engine. I also mentioned to hepps
i do believe a note should be made in the rules somewhere explaining this since it affects not just tanks

to be more specific i read your link in github before even commenting here

which included this link

http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/Movement-during-CM-and-NCM-tp6989743.html

thus my smile of your memory like an elephant! which is a good thing but just a slang term here i guess.

Panther

I hope you understand that I am not going to duplicate my Github-statements again. Please read through the respective issue(s) created there if interested.

I would vote for a solution, that correctly implements the rules compliance. If that goes along with keeping options for those who don't want that for whatever reason, that would be perfect.

And please don't let us start discussions about "stupid" rules. You either agree to what Veqryn said commenting on the issue "... our goal as always is to create a fully rules-compliant engine for all A&A versions." or you don't.

Personally I consider the discussed rule as a major principle of units movement thus far from being stupid. With whom do I have to discuss the stupidity of this specific rule now and any other game-rule in the future before opening the next "non-rules-compliant" issue?
This leads to nothing, IMHO.

prastle

@Panther I apologize if anything I said made you feel that it was upsetting. I think as @RoiEX said the best option would be an additional switch so it could be turned on or off. I do believe all agree it is a bug tho. The best example being @veq actually

"Seems kind of silly to be honest. If my guys can storm the beach with bullets in their face, I'm pretty sure they can storm the beach without bullets in their face...."

We also need to get some better rules/notes listing and describing these issues/bugs caused by this.

Hepps

@Panther I see your perspective... and it is certainly a valid one.

Personally, I think TA has developed to a point where its role has transcended its initial mission as a simple platform for cloning. Therefore I suggest the following...

Stay true to its roots of achieving complete adherence to the rules system which inspired its creation where...

A) It allows enough flexibility as to enable players and designers the freedom and ability to selectively choose as many or as few options as they wish.

B) It does not become a hard coded component of the engine where it will be the only option available and require an enormous investment of technical resources if and when an officially sanctioned "revised" or "amended" rule is implemented in the future.

In short I view it like dating an Olympic gymnast... the more flexibility you can get from it... the more enjoyment you can extract from it.

Frostion

I have always enjoyed having the freedom to non-combat move in the combat move phase. I would consider my self a casual player and don't play the board game maps in TripleA. Just all kind of other maps that have no reason to enforce this rule. Have there ever been an investigation into how many people actually non-combat most units in the combat move phase, instead of waiting? I can imagine this being a widespread practice, but I have no way to know.

In the maps I have made, the only reason that there are both combat and non-combat phases is that non-combat is required for moving flying units home, otherwise I would like to have my maps with only one move phase.

I would hate to see this freedom be taken from me and my play style. If an enforcement was to be made (available), I would hope it to be false/off as standard and activated via true/false in the XML. This way all the original Axis and Allies maps can chose to make use of the enforcement, and other maps/mapmakers can choose not to.

Cernel

@frostion Actually, this is not about removing the capability of making NCM during CM. This is only about disabling the ability to split a unit's movement between CM and NCM. However, the two matters are quite interrelated. Anyways, I will paste what I said in GitHub:

As I said, I think the two major rules that have never been enforced in TA are the limits that you can't do non combat movements during CM and the limit that you can't split movements between CM and NCM (aside from air).
For all a series of reasons, most of which I've detailed, I think both these so far unsupported limits should have opt-out properties, if implemented, because I just can't see how anybody may want to have these rules, but for the traditional games, for which they are to be followed.

Cernel

@frostion said in No unit - except air units - should be allowed to move as well in CM as in NCM:

In the maps I have made, the only reason that there are both combat and non-combat phases is that non-combat is required for moving flying units home, otherwise I would like to have my maps with only one move phase.

The other issue is that the AI doesn't see that tere is not NCM. Anyways, this is totally off topic, because in the moment you have only 1 movement phase, then there can be no split at all.

redrum

So based on the discussion both here and in github, I'm not really convinced that there is much value in being allowed to move non-air units during both CM and NCM. I'm leaning towards just changing this to align with official A&A rules.

While I do agree TA has gone beyond just being able to play A&A maps, they are still a core part of the platform and supporting official A&A rules as closely as possible is one of the goals. You could definitely argue this rule was created to simplify tracking movement points in the board game but having more complexity and options isn't always better.

We have many features and options that go well past A&A rules and will continue to develop more. But there is a balance where if an option doesn't really add much value then efforts to develop and support other more interesting features and properties is a better use of time and resources. I think addressing any of the features on the list we have provide more value than being able to move non-air units during CM and NCM.

I'll give it a few more days for folks to present reasons not to go in that direction before fixing this.

Cernel

@redrum Can you clarify if units starting in a hostile empty territory and not moving during CM will or will not be influenced by this (being able to move out during NCM, after having taken the territory without moving) and if being able to blitz will make a difference, in this case.

The other case I can think of, beside what I already said, is that it is currently supported to give the bonus movement before NCM; thus units may have additional movement they were not able to use during CM (for example, a blitz unit that receives a bonus movement before NCM, and would be able to move on to friendly), but I'm not aware of maps using this.

prastle

@redrum I can safely say i often move all my moves in combat even if they were not going into combat(Yes it often bites me in the ass! ) but if this is not affected by your changes it speeds game play. I could care less if we match the rules. I generally save the few non coms that i think might be needed elsewhere. jmho

edited in. I guess i should clarify. I think it would be nice if we could match the rules. I hope any changes will not affect the players that want to do non-com moves in combat. Also it would be nice if we could move aa in combat. Since everyone always forgets them like me because we cant. Finally I guess my issue is that if we cant do as Veq said, "Seems kind of silly to be honest. If my guys can storm the beach with bullets in their face, I'm pretty sure they can storm the beach without bullets in their face...." realistically I cannot recall a complaint of blitzing my second move if it didn't involve combat. As for the trannie issues etc its a rare thing. BUT YES current engine makes it possible.

So no matter what your decision is I think a few have made their points clear. The engine needs to support both. perhaps a switch? button that can be turned on and off like many maps? Either way GlHf GREAT JOB!

Cernel

@redrum I think you need to reword the title, as it is not clear this is only incidentally about making NCM in CM.

Also, I believe you should reword this phrase "All other units should only be allowed to both during one or the other", as I'm sure you agree it doesn't make sense (changing "both" to "either" would suffice, but I'd reword it more extensively; up to you).

Just a suggestion to help to make the topic clear.

redrum

@cernel said in No unit - except air units - should be allowed to move as well in CM as in NCM:

@redrum Can you clarify if units starting in a hostile empty territory and not moving during CM will or will not be influenced by this (being able to move out during NCM, after having taken the territory without moving) and if being able to blitz will make a difference, in this case.

Umm can you provide a map where this is possible? Is the only way this happens due to diplomacy changes (friendly/neutral turned hostile)? Do any A&A maps potentially have this happen?