Hello everyone!

I've got a question concerning the calculation of the distance between two figures, while one of them is a large figure like the E-Web.

Look at the "Example of an Attack" on p. 6 of the LtPG.

Trooper (1) has a distance of two spaces to the target, because it would need only two movement points to reach it.

RRG p.9:

" Many effects require players to measure the distance between two spaces. To determine this number, the player counts the number of movement points it would take for a figure to move from one space to the other. "

But what if an E-Web instead of the trooper occupies this space (the second space occupied is the one in the north)? It would need four movement points to reach the target's space, because it mustn't move diagonally.

So, is the distance suddenly four spaces????

RRG doesn't read "a small figure" explicitly.

Please help me, I'm confused!!

No, counting spaces has nothing to do with that limitation. If an Eweb engineer has Grenadier command card, he can choose a space within 3 diagonals just like a normal figure.

TL;DR: When counting spaces, all figures are small figures.

This is actually a really good question, as RAW states that you use movement points (with no penalties) for counting spaces. Because large figures cannot move diagonally, they would incur additional movement costs for moving to a diagonal space. However, Counting Spaces does not say "the attacker" or "the defender", it merely states "a figure". It also does not state that when counting spaces between the two figures, you have to count from the attacker to the defender, or from the source to the target. You could legally count spaces from target to source, or from defender to attacker. If either figure is large, this should only be taken into account for Line of Sight, and for the targeted space for counting spaces.

"Counting Spaces", RRG, Page 9:

Many effects require players to measure the distance between two spaces. To determine this number, the player counts the number of movement points it would take for a figure to move from one space to the other. Impassible terrain, figures, and difficult terrain can be moved into and through without costing additional movement point for this measurement. This measurement cannot go through walls, doors, or blocking terrain.

"Large Figures", RRG, Page 27:

When a large figure attacks, line of sight may be traced from any of the spaces it occupies. When a large figure is targeted by an attack, the figure performing the attack must target one of the spaces the large figure occupies.

The intention in Counting Spaces is that "a figure" is a small figure as a baseline so that every figure in the game is counting spaces for purposes of range and accuracy the same exact way. When attacking or attacking with a large figure, you must choose a single space the large figure occupies and base your count off that single space. This lends further credence to the intention that all figures are "small" figures for this calculation.

It would not make sense that in your above example, for the sake of accuracy and counting spaces, that the defender is 2 spaces from the attacker, while at the same time the attacker is 4 spaces away from the defender. A figure at an adjacent diagonal would need an accuracy of "1" (see Adjacent) where as the very next space would require an extra (up to) 3 accuracy.

Ranges assuming large figure movement counts (incorrect) on the left in red . Ranges using small figure movement counts (correct) on the right in green :

[6][5][4][5][6] [4][4][4][4][4]
[5][4][3][4][5] [3][3][3][3][3]
[4][3][2][3][4] [2][2][2][2][2]
[3][1][1][1][3] [2][1][1][1][2]
[2][1] [E] [1][2] [2][1] [E] [1][2]
[2][1] [W] [1][2] [2][1] [W] [1][2]
[3][1][1][1][3] [2][1][1][1][2]
[4][3][2][3][4] [2][2][2][2][2]
[5][4][3][4][5] [3][3][3][3][3]
[6][5][4][5][6] [4][4][4][4][4]

Powered by Fizzgrid™

Does that shed some light on your issue?

Yes, this was very helpful. Thank you very much!

But, Fizz, in your graphic example is a little mistake. In the left grid the red [1]s which lie diagonal adjacent have to be [2]s!

Yes, this was very helpful. Thank you very much!

But, Fizz, in your graphic example is a little mistake. In the left grid the red [1]s which lie diagonal adjacent have to be [2]s!

Actually, they would be ones if you look at the rules for accuracy and adjacent because the space is still adjacent to the attacker.

"Accuracy", RRG, Page 3:

While attacking an adjacent figure with a ranged attack, the attacker needs at least 1 Accuracy.

"Adjacent", RRG: Page 4:

Two figures that are in adjacent spaces are adjacent figures. These figures are one space away from each other. This means that a (ranged) attack targeting an adjacent figure needs at least 1 Accuracy to not miss.

Uuh, missed that.

Thanks again for the lesson.

Hey...no problem! Welcome to the forums and welcome to the awesome world of Imperial Assault!