This is the chat we just had:

Dany: what rule are we using for loading trannies?
tcurin: in terms of block?
Dany: now with new engine set up
Dany: we can load after combat
tcurin: if they were in combat, no
Dany: k because now they can't move combat and non combat
tcurin: this case we need to solve
tcurin: can i load these transports in NCM?
Dany: so has exemple they wont be able too come back in 24
tcurin: sz23
Dany: no they will be stuck in 232
tcurin: ok, solve that
Dany: but maybe they had for counter that they load after combat
Dany: since we use too move them away in combat and back in non combat
Dany: You were slapped by Dany
Dany: what do you think Cernel?
Cernel: let me read
Cernel: yeah no by revised rules you cannot load them in non combat
Cernel: if you moved them in combat
Cernel: which is dumb
Dany: but now engine allows load after combat
Dany: if they didnt move
tcurin: if i keep them in sz24
Cernel: yes because by revised rules you can load or unload (not both) after combat if you took part in a battle without unloading
tcurin: i would be able to load them?
Dany: yes
Dany: engine will alow
tcurin: that is wrong i guess
Dany: but not in previous version
Cernel: but if you move them away from the hostile zone, they count as having move during combat move, and don't have the special bonus of being able no load
Cernel: it is not wrong dany, just dumb
Dany: well i would like too adapt too new engine evently
Dany: to load after combat
tcurin: i would preffer that i can move them in CM phase and load them in NCM
Cernel: if those transports remain in 24 and take part in the battle without unloading, they will be able to load or unload but not both
Dany: since trannies don't have attacking value
Cernel: if you only move them away to 23 sea zone, they will be able to do nothing, during non combat move
Dany: so let's play with enigne rules Tcurin?
Dany: a load after combat allowed
Dany: ?
tcurin: ok
tcurin: but not unload?
Cernel: well, before being the engine rules, those are the revised rules; just the old engine gave freedom to the players to follow them or not
Dany: no engine won'T allow
Cernel: so as I said
Cernel: if you keep the transports in 24
Cernel: you should be able to either:
Cernel: 1) load them during non combat move, keeping what you loaded on board
Cernel: 2) now load something on them, and then unload it during non combat move
Cernel: but you should not be able to both load and unload in non combat move
tcurin: option 2 is not possible i guess?
Cernel: tho since the sea zone is hostile you cannot load in 24 sea zone now
tcurin: they are in battle zone
Cernel: correct
Cernel: so basically, in this situation only things you can do is either:
Cernel: 1) keeping them in 24 sea zone, do battle and in non combat move you will only able to load units on them and keeping such units on board
Cernel: 2) moving them away to 23 or 22 sea zone and do nothing else now and nothing else during non combat move
tcurin: yes
Cernel: realistically, what I believe you should be able to do is to move out to 23 sea zone in combat movement, then, during non combat movement, moving back to a cleared 24 sea zone and eventually load a...
Cernel: nd unload, but this is against the rules
tcurin: agree on that too
Dany: well it use to be that
Dany: engine allowed that before
tcurin: but let's follow rules on this, altough not ideal
Cernel: that is just because the engine didn't support those rules, but you were supposed to follow them anyways (since this is revised rules)

So, I'm not against enforcing this rule, as I said, since this is the actual rule for the basic Word War II Revised game, but I think it would be good to have either a property that, if set true, would allow to split movement of all units between combat and non combat movement or, even better, an option for define if each unit is able to still move during non combat movement if moved during combat movement or participated in a battle (default true if the unit is air, of course), and, then, a property for validating such option. This editable property (user option) can, of course, be added to World At War, I suppose off as default.

In the above case, this would allow the player to move those Russians transports from 24 Sea Zone to 23 Sea Zone during Combat Movement, then, during Non Combat Movement, go back to 24 Sea Zone and freely load and unload.

Tho I have to say that the recently added property for being able to load in hostile sea zones (not disposable in the mentioned game) goes a long way in reducing the distortive impact of this no-split movement rule.

It was just info if it is needed

@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?

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

1. 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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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

@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.

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).