Removing units from the map

[Montana Grizz]

I consider the fair removal of combat units a situational thing and seldom agree to allow the exit of them, with certain exceptions.

As mentioned, some scenarios require the destruction of your opponents forces to gain a victory. I've played scenarios wherein if one side were to exit all their forces from the map in the very beginning, there were not enough VP hexes in total to provide the aggressor with more than a minor loss.

Many times there are artillery units located on a map edge hex. Artillery units incapable of movement without transport, should not be allowed to exit the map without first being assigned a proper transport unit and then both units could exit the map together.

Just my opinion.

Pat

[Crossroads]

Just a question:

The default ROE is that there are no ROE, right? I would hate to find myself in a situation someone would assume there was a rule in place that was not explicitly agreed upon beforehand.

[Kool Kat]

As far as combat units if there is no good reason to leave a badly disrupted unit on the map for an easy kill, or if your are sure units will be surrounded and annihilated, head for the hills and get off the map :) You should give the other player as little free rides as possible.

Joe

Joe:

Unless the scenario explicitly allows combat units to exit the map (via defined exit/victory hexes)... I would not do so... or ever agree to this ROE.

IMO, this is NOT a best practice... and one that should be avoided. That is about as "nice" as I can phrase it! :eek1:

[Glint]

Why leave a unit on the map that you no longer need? Why give the other player an easy kill like a truck? Remove them if you do not need them any more. As far as combat units if there is no good reason to leave a badly disrupted unit on the map for an easy kill, or if your are sure units will be surrounded and annihilated, head for the hills and get off the map :) You should give the other player as little free rides as possible.

Joe

Yeah Joe, I was talking as it happened, I asked myself, 'is it a fair ploy or not?'
End of the day,I agree with you and with cpl KK's post - Default ROE's are what counts, any decisions on play,within the roe, is war!

As for your post, Pat, perhaps the scenario is not a good one if it allows for that to happen? (i.e, - ''As mentioned, some scenarios require the destruction of your opponents forces to gain a victory. I've played scenarios wherein if one side were to exit all their forces from the map in the very beginning, there were not enough VP hexes in total to provide the aggressor with more than a minor loss.'')

---

Just a question:

The default ROE is that there are no ROE, right? I would hate to find myself in a situation someone would assume there was a rule in place that was not explicitly agreed upon beforehand.

As far as combat units if there is no good reason to leave a badly disrupted unit on the map for an easy kill, or if your are sure units will be surrounded and annihilated, head for the hills and get off the map :) You should give the other player as little free rides as possible.

Joe

Joe:

Unless the scenario explicitly allows combat units to exit the map (via defined exit/victory hexes)... I would not do so... or ever agree to this ROE.

IMO, this is NOT a best practice... and one that should be avoided. That is about as "nice" as I can phrase it! :eek1:

So, if units are gonna be annihilated, is it realistic for them to stay and be killed, as if the limits of the map are like forty foot walls that they can't escape through or over? The scenario map is for the area of fighting, it's pretty unrealistic to me that units cannot escape from the battle?

---

Equally, I haven't come across many, if any, of all the scenarios I've played, where it states, 'combat units may exit the map' ? Neither have I seen them state that you can't. So, to me anyway, it's how each player interprets it surely?

[Kool Kat]

So, if units are gonna be annihilated, is it realistic for them to stay and be killed, as if the limits of the map are like forty foot walls that they can't escape through or over? The scenario map is for the area of fighting, it's pretty unrealistic to me that units cannot escape from the battle?

Players should agree on ROE prior to the start of a match. If both players agree to exit combat units off the map... no problem?

Equally, I haven't come across many, if any, of all the scenarios I've played, where it states, 'combat units may exit the map' ? Neither have I seen them state that you can't. So, to me anyway, it's how each player interprets it surely?

Many scenarios that I have played have Exit Objective Hexes. Opposing units must exit from these hexes for victory points. Opposing units would include both combat and non-combat units? Trucks would have a hard time capturing Exit Objective Hexes guarded by enemy armor and infantry?

[Troll]

Hi Guys, what I have in quotes below comes right from the game manual, removing units from the map is a tactic to "deny VPs to your enemy if the unit has no recourse but to exit"

Some may argue that you should be limited to playing on the existing map and there should be no off map movement of units. If that were the case then there should be no OFF BOARD ARTILLERY?, your opponent can not attack it nor can he get VPs for destroying it, but both are allowed by the game. Joe


"If a unit is removed from the map edge hex that is not an exit Objective,
no VPs are awarded, but neither does the exiting side lose VPs for such a removed unit; this is a way to deny VPs to your enemy if the unit has no recourse but to exit. A removed unit cannot be reentered during that scenario."

[Crossroads]

So, if units are gonna be annihilated, is it realistic for them to stay and be killed, as if the limits of the map are like forty foot walls that they can't escape through or over? The scenario map is for the area of fighting, it's pretty unrealistic to me that units cannot escape from the battle?

Players should agree on ROE prior to the start of a match. If both players agree to exit combat units off the map... no problem?

Which brings the discussion back to my question (I do not believe I got a straight yes/no answer...)

You seem to imply that removing fighting units from map is disallowed, and one would need a ROE to agree that it is allowed?

Surely it is the other way around? The Blitz rules aside, all's fair as the game engine plays?

Btw, everyone's made good arguments on their side. I personally always try to conduct my play as "realistically" (what ever that means - each to our own?) as I can.

I do not use "gamey" tactics.

Sometimes, when going gets desperate, I bring my HT's to front line. Sometimes, when I feel threatened, I send my trucks to safety (while I absolutely hate the loss of transport capabilities - I do this very very rarely).

But herein lies the problem. I do not particularly feel retreating out of battle is a gamey tactic...

I have not so far ever had a need to order my combat units to retreat out of map, but should the situation rise and no ROE would be in place I do not see why I would neet to order them to stand out and die.

Unless of course, my opponent would have presented a ROE proposal prior to game starting.

But again, surely the basic ROE is that there are not ROEs? Or is it?

[Glint]

Yeah well, glad that's in the manual, lol!
I personally have hardly ever had a game where ROEs ever got mentioned.
As I said earlier, we all have our opinions and interpretations on the game and how it should be played and guess most of us play people with like-minded views.
Actually stating something is disallowed, when it clearly isn't, (unless pre-agreed roe's state such) is a bit misleading in my view?

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Which brings the discussion back to my question (I do not believe I got a straight yes/no answer...)

I'll give it a try. ;)

You seem to imply that removing fighting units from map is disallowed, and one would need a ROE to agree that it is allowed?

No. Only some specific tournament rules require units to remain on the map. I also seem to remember a few custom scenarios where the designers asked that players keep all units on the map.

Surely it is the other way around? The Blitz rules aside, all's fair as the game engine plays?

No. There are no "blitz rules" governing the removal of units from the map. Individual ROE's should be discussed by the players. If you mean that "all's fair" is using every little trick in the book, then I have to disagree with that. I draw the line with the famous transports block roads "trick" and transports driving deep into the enemy rear to spot "?s".

I do not use "gamey" tactics.

That is good to hear.

But again, surely the basic ROE is that there are not ROEs? Or is it?

Not exactly. ROE's exist. Some assume them. Others state them. Some discuss them. Others expect them. Some ignore them? :chin:



HSL

[Crossroads]

Thanks HSL! Let us continue as I am genuinely (sp?) interested to get into the heart of this.

Which brings the discussion back to my question (I do not believe I got a straight yes/no answer...)

I'll give it a try. ;)

I am afraid I will need to ask you to try harder ;)

You seem to imply that removing fighting units from map is disallowed, and one would need a ROE to agree that it is allowed?

No. Only some specific tournament rules require units to remain on the map. I also seem to remember a few custom scenarios where the designers asked that players keep all units on the map.

I conclude removing fighting units from the map is thus allowed unless explicitly agreed otherwise beforehands (or if the scenario states so).

In other words, unless such a ROE would have been mutually agreed, there would be no limitation to gameplay as such?

Surely it is the other way around? The Blitz rules aside, all's fair as the game engine plays?

No. There are no "blitz rules" governing the removal of units from the map. Individual ROE's should be discussed by the players. If you mean that "all's fair" is using every little trick in the book, then I have to disagree with that. I draw the line with the famous transports block roads "trick" and transports driving deep into the enemy rear to spot "?s".

All's not fair then, as you state.

I am not by the way disagreeing with your or anyone else's logic as how to enjoy this fine game the most. I do want to get into the bottom of this ROE-or-no thing however.

Assume we would not have any ROEs, and I would use the famous truck-blocking technique, we would then have a situation where one of us would be very upset, to say the least. Yes?

But that's my point exactly. My non-gamey tactics arsenal is quite likely at least somewhat different in comparison to some one elses arsenal. Exiting combat units from map a case in point.

Remember, I believe I have never exited a combat unit but will defend my right to do so if I so choose! Unless I've agreed not to do so, which could be easily something I could agree into.

If we would find ourselves arguing about the truck-blocking technique at turn 24 of a 26 turn scenario, what would the outcome be? No ROEs in place, remember?

Who'd be right, who'd be wrong here?

I do not use "gamey" tactics.

That is good to hear.

But as you see, we still have a problem :)

But again, surely the basic ROE is that there are not ROEs? Or is it?

Not exactly. ROE's exist. Some assume them. Others state them. Some discuss them. Others expect them. Some ignore them? :chin:

Ahh, the Yes / No question I asked about :smoke:

Now what ROEs would those be, those that are in play even without being spoken? You are IMHO asking (assuming? expecting?) quite a lot here... Or, your uber-philosophical answer got me all lost :)

I am definitively not here to stir up problems I realise this is a touchy issue.

But I am honestly more confused now than what I was when I started with this thread.

Better to discuss this in general terms, instead of in the middle of a game, right?

Therefore, one more time: The default ROE is that there are no ROEs? Yes? No?

EDIT: To state my personal stand in public: I do not use 'gamey' tactics, but as we have seen, someone's gamey tactics are someone else's fair play. I do not have any problems with ROEs as such. I do have a problem someone would expect there are certain rules unless they've been discussed before starting the game. I am willing to learn more about this however!

EDIT2 I realise I might have not succeeded in phrasing my question properly? Let me try one more time:

If the players have not agreed beforehands about any ROEs, then there are no ROEs in play, explicit or implicit. Only rules to follow would then be the Blitz rules. Yes? No?

EDIT3 Maybe I should create a poll about that question? :)