Jump to content



Photo

using range rulers to place asteroids in a specific spot


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#41 VanorDM

VanorDM

    Rules Ninja

  • Members
  • 3,628 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 02:05 PM

Unless/until FFG clarifies it, it seems that up until the first planning phase pretty much anything goes.


Wasn't there something in the tournament rules saying that templates were not allowed for setup?

#42 XAQT78

XAQT78

    Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 02:18 PM

all this measuring beforehand to get a slight edge, especially measuring with a ship base plus 5 forward stick makes me think...

 

Is it legal to use a playmat where certain color stars are strategically placed to make 'eyeball measuring' easier?   Like a small bluish star at 1 inch intervals, and then a bunch of other stars splattered on so the pattern is hard for the opponent to notice?

 

Then you keep a little 4 inch by 4 inch grid right next to your cards and tokens, plus a spare base.  You can look at your ship and then place base and move template on your little grid to get an exact read on where your ship will end up.

 

I hope not, but that almost seems the direction people are going.

For Tourneys, TO supplies the mats, possibly borrow from players if need.

 

 

Unless/until FFG clarifies it, it seems that up until the first planning phase pretty much anything goes.


Wasn't there something in the tournament rules saying that templates were not allowed for setup?

 

 

Yes -->Earlier Post<--


Edited by XAQT78, 14 May 2014 - 02:21 PM.

Moving to New Hampshire this week, can't wait to start collecting & battling!

 

Prequel Consistencies and Contradictions


#43 phild0

phild0

    Member

  • Members
  • 606 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 02:34 PM

But then, say you place an asteroid and measure its distance from a nearby asteroid to determine Range 1 only to find you are too close, are you then stuck with that placement, but only shifted perpendicular away from the other roid? Or can you still say, well, I wanted it there when it was too close, but now I want it farther away. Why shouldn't I be able to move it farther?

I don't have a problem with using the range ruler to measure asteroid placement. It SHOULDN'T be something that is hounded on, imo. You already have to use the range ruler instead of the movement templates, and yes, if you do math they DO transfer between eachother, but it won't be exact since your ships arent going to be perfectly placed anyways, and you WILL move out of alignment just a bit.

If everyone does it, then it would be accepted. But it appears some people don't, so they might consider it cheating when seen for the first time.

Just give it a try before you knock it down. It adds another fun level of complexity and skill for this game. Another way to separate player skill from the randomness of dice. When we see another World Champ, I want to KNOW that he deserved it. Who can argue with that?

#44 Buhallin

Buhallin

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,519 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 02:47 PM

 

Unless/until FFG clarifies it, it seems that up until the first planning phase pretty much anything goes.


Wasn't there something in the tournament rules saying that templates were not allowed for setup?

 

Depends on your definition of "template".  Custom templates are prohibited.  Use of all standard game components, including the range ruler and maneuver templates, are explicitly allowed.



#45 Buhallin

Buhallin

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,519 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 02:55 PM

 

For gamers coming from other wargames, any form of unapproved measuring is outright cheating.  For example, if you have too much measuring tape out, or you're using a ruler, it's expected that you leave the extra behind your model.  If I'm moving 4" but my ruler measures 12", and I happen to put the full 12" ahead of my model, that's cheating.


Not in any war game I've ever played or seen played. About 10 years of 40k.

 

Really?  That's odd.  I learned that particular rule in Warhammer Fantasy, and you should have seen the flame wars over on the Warmachine forums when PP decided to allow unlimited measuring from your warcaster.  GW games were always the most restrictive on measuring, and some of the last to convert to allow premeasuring.

 

I won't guarantee that your experience is necessarily the minority, but here's at least one nice big citation for "It's cheating":

 

http://www.belloflos...ople-cheat.html

 

Major GW-oriented blog, one of the better known bloggers, several years old, first thing on the "How People Cheat" list.  So it's probably not a fringe corner case that nobody's ever heard of ;)


  • VanorDM likes this

#46 Aminar

Aminar

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,089 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 03:13 PM

Asteroids are placed before ships, correct?
 
Also, keep in mind that 5 range is MUCH longer than the 5 forward movement template.  The 5 forward template is about as long as range 2.5.


5 Template is exactly range 2. Just for reference.

#47 StevenO

StevenO

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,908 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 03:59 PM

Oh great, another thread that is going to go down the "good sportsmanship" rabbit hole.   :(

 

 

And so it has.  Perhaps this actually is something that FFG would address in the future but if you can use the range ruler and templates as you wish to set up ships allowing the same to set up asteroids certainly makes sense.

 

 

I've mentioned the idea of custom star maps with "pre measuring" already done when it comes to measuring die-hards.  It may be my imagination but I can easily see those people who venomously oppose any measuring, except in a very specific incident with no possibility of measuring anything else accidentally, as being the very same people who would have no trouble allowing someone to use a printed playfield that may just happen to have strategically placed reminders on it.  The possibility of this is why you aren't supposed to use them in official play.

 

 

Now since we are on the topic of asteroid placement do I dare point out the difference between the "rule" and the "tournament rules" where the basic rules allow one player to pick his side AFTER asteroids have been placed?  If sides are picked after asteroid placement that would certainly promote a more neutral placement instead of making asteroid placement an important skill to develop if you want to play at the highest levels.


Edited by StevenO, 14 May 2014 - 05:31 PM.


#48 Buhallin

Buhallin

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,519 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 04:15 PM

It may be my imagination but I can easily see those people who VENOMOUSLY oppose any measuring, except is a VERY SPECIFIC incident with no possibility of measuring anything else accidentally, as being the very same people who would have no trouble allowing someone to use a printed playfield that may just happen to have strategically placed reminders on it.  The possibility of this is why you aren't supposed to use them in offical play.

 

So just to make sure here, you're bringing up an issue nobody's discussed here, putting it out there, and declaring the opinions of anyone who disagrees with you without anyone else actually weighing in at all?  I'm sure there's a term for that, but I'm not sure it wouldn't set off language filters.



#49 Forgottenlore

Forgottenlore

    Midnight Dreary

  • Members
  • 1,451 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 04:42 PM

For gamers coming from other wargames, any form of unapproved measuring is outright cheating.  For example, if you have too much measuring tape out, or you're using a ruler, it's expected that you leave the extra behind your model.  If I'm moving 4" but my ruler measures 12", and I happen to put the full 12" ahead of my model, that's cheating.


Not in any war game I've ever played or seen played. About 10 years of 40k.
Really?  That's odd.  I learned that particular rule in Warhammer Fantasy, and you should have seen the flame wars over on the Warmachine forums when PP decided to allow unlimited measuring from your warcaster.  GW games were always the most restrictive on measuring, and some of the last to convert to allow premeasuring.
 
I won't guarantee that your experience is necessarily the minority, but here's at least one nice big citation for "It's cheating":

I won't guarantee that it's in the majority either, but it does seem ridiculously retentive to me. It should be noted that the BoLS article generated, shall we say, a lot of discussion on the topic. I suspect it is more how exactly you are using it. If you have an extra 3-4 inches of measurement and are clearly moving things quickly and not looking past your move distance it would be fine, if you have 24" of tape measure out and are spending 2 minutes moving each guy, which just happens to be directly in line with a likely target, then yeah problem. Basically, yeah, premeasuring improves most war games (but not, I think, x-wing).

Thanks, Troy

 

Once Upon a Midnight Dreary....


#50 StevenO

StevenO

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,908 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 05:30 PM

 

It may be my imagination but I can easily see those people who VENOMOUSLY oppose any measuring, except is a VERY SPECIFIC incident with no possibility of measuring anything else accidentally, as being the very same people who would have no trouble allowing someone to use a printed playfield that may just happen to have strategically placed reminders on it.  The possibility of this is why you aren't supposed to use them in offical play.

 

So just to make sure here, you're bringing up an issue nobody's discussed here, putting it out there, and declaring the opinions of anyone who disagrees with you without anyone else actually weighing in at all?  I'm sure there's a term for that, but I'm not sure it wouldn't set off language filters.

 

 

Perhaps I shouldn't use all caps but I'm not the one who first brought up the custom star maps.  I see Akodo1 had done that back on post #33 and it was commented on after that.  As this thread seems to be talking about "measuring" and how much is allowed I don't see how bringing up people who oppose anything except for very specific measures is new material.  Perhaps it is overstepping to think that many of the people who hold "measuring" to the strictest uses may also be the kind of people who get all kinds of "extras" for the game including custom star maps to play on.

 

Maybe I left something out there but my thought are:

1.  Custom star maps allow for chance of "pre measuring" and because of that they are not officially approved for tournament play.

2.  At least some of the people with an overwhelming passion for measuring rules are likely to have so much passion for the game they would be the ones getting those custom star maps.

 

To me this thread certainly seems like a place where there will be much arguing about just what and how asteroid placement gets measured.


  • XAQT78 likes this

#51 XAQT78

XAQT78

    Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 06:12 PM

 

An asteroid token cannot be placed at Range 1–2 of any edge of the play area or at Range 1 of another asteroid token.

I don't see how there can be much argue about this lol. 

 

Edge > (Range 2) to Asteroid  , Asteroid > (Range 1) to Asteroid 


Moving to New Hampshire this week, can't wait to start collecting & battling!

 

Prequel Consistencies and Contradictions


#52 Buhallin

Buhallin

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,519 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 06:18 PM

Perhaps it is overstepping to think that many of the people who hold "measuring" to the strictest uses may also be the kind of people who get all kinds of "extras" for the game including custom star maps to play on.

 

I may have misunderstood you.  When you said "use a printed playfield that may just happen to have strategically placed reminders on it." it came off very much as a suggestion that those players would use those strategically placed reminders to take measurements they shouldn't.  If the point was simply to delineate the hardcore, my apologies for reading too much into it.

 

I can't speak for everyone, but I've never found it useful to try and use printed marks to gauge anything anyway.  Maybe I just don't put enough time into memorizing my mats, but X-wing especially has always seemed too fluid to me to really take advantage of that.  Someone certainly could, if they really put their mind to it, but I don't think it's an issue for anyone not actively trying to cheat it.



#53 Buhallin

Buhallin

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,519 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 06:19 PM

 

 

An asteroid token cannot be placed at Range 1–2 of any edge of the play area or at Range 1 of another asteroid token.

I don't see how there can be much argue about this lol. 

 

Edge > (Range 2) to Asteroid  , Asteroid > (Range 1) to Asteroid 

 

Except that FFG published an article by Paul Heaver where he does considerably more than that.  So either they seem that they think it's fine, or that was one colossal editing error.



#54 XAQT78

XAQT78

    Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 06:55 PM

Ah, interesting.  Frustrating to keep finding how much grey area there is.

 

Although, Buhallin.  TeamCov, I love your video effects for reports!


Moving to New Hampshire this week, can't wait to start collecting & battling!

 

Prequel Consistencies and Contradictions


#55 macar

macar

    Member

  • Members
  • 463 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:48 PM

Guys I truley did not want this to be a continuation of the thread that got blocked. If you have personal quarrels please take them elsewhere. Nowhere in my OP did I ask about warhammer 40k, fantasy, or even CHEATING. 

 

Seriously I almost had a stroke when I came back 3 hours later because I couldn't comprehend what was going on.

 

Go get a breath mint and chill.

 

 

Back to responses!

 

So the overall sense is that it's a grey area. It was stated that last years world champion was able to do what I was talking about and it was viewed by several TOs and all of the X-wing staff. If nothing came of it in the errata I cannot see it being against the rules to do. I'm going to have to say yes It's allowed and let the conversation drop here. Thanks for your input guys


  • stegocent likes this

2013 Regional Winner:

2013 Top 16 at Nationals (US)

2014 Store Championship Winner-Game Preserve Fashion Mall

2014 Ohio State Regional Winner-Epic Loot & Games


#56 akodo1

akodo1

    Member

  • Members
  • 83 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 08:45 PM

 

 

For gamers coming from other wargames, any form of unapproved measuring is outright cheating.  For example, if you have too much measuring tape out, or you're using a ruler, it's expected that you leave the extra behind your model.  If I'm moving 4" but my ruler measures 12", and I happen to put the full 12" ahead of my model, that's cheating.


Not in any war game I've ever played or seen played. About 10 years of 40k.

 

Really?  That's odd.  I learned that particular rule in Warhammer Fantasy, and you should have seen the flame wars over on the Warmachine forums when PP decided to allow unlimited measuring from your warcaster.  GW games were always the most restrictive on measuring, and some of the last to convert to allow premeasuring.

 

I won't guarantee that your experience is necessarily the minority, but here's at least one nice big citation for "It's cheating":

 

http://www.belloflos...ople-cheat.html

 

Major GW-oriented blog, one of the better known bloggers, several years old, first thing on the "How People Cheat" list.  So it's probably not a fringe corner case that nobody's ever heard of ;)

 

It has also been my experience that table top games have either official or unofficial rules about measuring using at most the length you are attempting to move/shoot.

 

For example you have range 24 shooting, you put 25 inches on your tape measure so you can put the 24 right on the front of the model and see if the tip reaches the target.  You could NOT put the tip on the target and pull it back to your model.

 

It was considered 'legal but bad form' for two models next to eachother, one shoots at a target he clearly cannot hit, but in the process of laying out the tape measure to the target he can make very astute observations on the distance of a nearby model to different points along the same trajectory.



#57 StevenO

StevenO

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,908 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 09:13 PM

 

Perhaps it is overstepping to think that many of the people who hold "measuring" to the strictest uses may also be the kind of people who get all kinds of "extras" for the game including custom star maps to play on.

 

 

I may have misunderstood you.  When you said "use a printed playfield that may just happen to have strategically placed reminders on it." it came off very much as a suggestion that those players would use those strategically placed reminders to take measurements they shouldn't.  If the point was simply to delineate the hardcore, my apologies for reading too much into it.

 

I can't speak for everyone, but I've never found it useful to try and use printed marks to gauge anything anyway.  Maybe I just don't put enough time into memorizing my mats, but X-wing especially has always seemed too fluid to me to really take advantage of that.  Someone certainly could, if they really put their mind to it, but I don't think it's an issue for anyone not actively trying to cheat it.

 

 

I'd like to say it was just a misunderstanding.  I try to respect your post Buhallin and I hope you'd do the same so I was a little taken back if "filtered words" would need to be used.

 

The earlier posts basically mentioned laying out a 'hidden' grid within a starfield as an aid in maneuvering and decision making.  Granted X-Wing isn't played on a grid but if you could look and see where a "2 straight" will land you that makes it much easier to guess where a 2 band or 2 turn would land you.  It can also be an aid for figuring out what range you might end up in.

 

Seeing some disdain for precise asteroid measurements when placing them is because that would let asteroids serve as waypoints if you would.  After all, that asteroid as close to the corner as you can get it will be known to be a speed 5 move away from the edge.



#58 oneway

oneway

    Imperial Bomber Pilot

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 03:25 AM

I'm obviously a minimalist when it comes to what you're allowed to measure.  To my mind, you can measure what you need to measure - specifically, is the asteroid within range 2 of the edge, or range 1 of another rock.  Nothing else should be allowed.

 

That said, people are taking some very permissive views on the use of templates before the game starts.  Unless/until FFG clarifies it, it seems that up until the first planning phase pretty much anything goes.  I don't see that using the range ruler to position your asteroids is any worse than using the maneuver templates to preplan your first moves.

 

 

I happen to agree with you on this one, I think placing like the OP is asking is tantamount to chatinig. He's using the template to preset cover in the game. I believe he should reconsider his placement idea. 

 

Now if he eyeballs it and happens to find the right position to place it without them then I don't see a problem. Honestly though if I were playing against someone and I could be so predictable that someone could see my plan such as that.. I'd take up new plans, cause someone is gonna get wise to it eventually. 

 

I play my squints very random, and even I don't know where they will end up even after I place my dial down. Someone is always making me think about boost and barrel rolls when the movement starts. 

 

also, just to clarify. I know this was a question, and I don't know if the OP has actually done what he proposes.. so I am not calling him a chater.. just the idea of the use of the range templates for this particular plan of positioning. 

as always one should use the rules and only measure the placement when the distance to another asteroid is in question.


"I mean, come on kid, my armor's older than you are.."

Corp. Haig Talin, MK - 472

Armor 18 - Fire - N - Ice

181st Mechanized Armor Assault Div


#59 Osoroshii

Osoroshii

    龍神

  • Members
  • 1,078 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:14 AM

I would be of the mind that the *only* use of the range ruler would be to check the distance to meet the Distance 2 from the edge and the Distance 1 from any other asteriod. To do anything else is really bordering on cheating, or at least an *extremely* open interpretation of the rules to me.

So I guess you don't plan out your overall strategy, and just randomly place your asteroids?
Seeing as I can't place half of them, I'll put down the first one or two where I'd like them to roughly be. But then again, my squad builds aren't dependant on asteroid placement to win.

Then you have never played a game Vs an opponent who used those Astroids against you.
  • Deltmi likes this

#60 Galactic Funk

Galactic Funk

    Member

  • Members
  • 272 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:59 AM

Here is a FFG article written by X-Wing champion Paul Heaver discussing systematic asteroid placement:
http://www.fantasyfl...s.asp?eidn=4709
In this article there are diagrams that show asteroid placement strategies that go beyond determining range 1 to another asteroid. It also references placing asteroids at range 3-4 of an edge. While none of these examples discuss using the range ruler, isn't it implied?


Seeing as this thread isn't dead and given a night to sleep on this I'm going to bump this post I made yesterday that got buried.

The above link includes the Paul Heaver write up that talks about asteroid placement strategy. No it does not explicitly tell you to use your range ruler to measure these things but one has to acknowledge the practical application of such implies that you do use your range ruler to accomplish this.

If FFG did not intend for these tactics to be legal this story wouldn't be out there.

I'm sorry if this concept stomps on some people's idea of gamesmanship but based upon FFG's tournament rules and this story from Paul that they promoted it appears crystal clear that this is NOT CHEATING (caps for emphasis, not shouting) and that players that claim otherwise simply need to move on from this point and conduct themselves appropriately when this situation comes up the next time you are out to a tournament.

You don't have to like it but you do have to accept it because FFG has pretty clearly shown that this tactic is indeed acceptable and encouraged.
  • Deltmi, Nataris and Radarman5 like this




© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS