I maintain that they should already have answered this.

35 minutes ago, Willange said:

Yeah, certain points here could certainly change with FAQs, but if you try to read section 18 alone then I feel like you'll get it wrong. The biggest argument against moving through terrain is the section of 55.3 that's been quoted several times by myself and others.

Just look at the first sentence before you even get into the collision part at the end. The movement is halted.

There's no way to look at that and say, "Well then I clearly get to keep going through the terrain". I get how you could say the collision part at the end doesn't count (though I think you'd be wrong, I mean this let's you enter terrain if you didn't the first time you hit it for example), but regardless of that, the movement still halted.

So basically the collision rules is for collisions that aren't under the exception presented in 55.3. It just so happens that this exception is quite common. I'm confident that if/when a FAQ comes out, this point will be made clear assuming they even touch on movement.

At the same time, in the past I've seen ten page long rules discussions get answered with a "Lol you guys overthought this" and some random ruling that flies in the face of all reason, so, fingers crossed.

I think I've gotten all the mileage out of the RRG I'm going to on this subject until then.

25 minutes ago, Taki said:

I maintain that they should already have answered this.

At this point, I agree. Whatever the answer is, and as confident as I am in my own at this point, it is not succinctly worded in any one place. This would have been a good subject for some of those spiffy FAQ diagrams in the back of the book.

I have a couple of questions to add to this discussion:

- Where is it noted that, when exiting terrain via a March or Shift, the movement is negated? 81.3 reads "While occupying terrain, a unit can perform all of its actions and modifiers as normal with the exception of the march (?) and shift (?) actions. If the unit performs a march (?) or shift (?) action while occupying terrain, it immediately exits the terrain." The first sentence indicates that March and Shift are handled differently when occupying terrain, the second outlines how they are handled. To my reading of the second sentence, you would exit terrain, and then continue with the standard March/Shift action as outlined in 47 and 73. Should I be reading the second sentence of 81.3 as "If the unit performs a march (?) or shift (?) action while occupying terrain, it exits the terrain instead "?

- A piece of terrain is touched by an enemy unit. My unit enters the terrain via a charge. Does my unit get an attack against the enemy unit?

81.2, 2nd bullet: "After the unit resolves all effects of entering the terrain, its activation immediately ends. If it had a bonus action or other game effects to perform, these are canceled."

81.8, 3rd bullet:"When a unit enters a piece of terrain that an enemy is touching, those units resolve any effects of a collision as if the unit had collided with the enemy."

16.3 "If a unit resolving a charge collides with an enemy unit, the charging unit performs a melee attack (?) action targeting that enemy unit after the move is complete."

Is the attack at the end of the Charge move an effect of the collision that is resolved under 81.8, or is it a other game effect that gets canceled under 81.2? I would read this as the later: the move is ended once the occupation of the terrain has completed, the completion of the terrain occupation triggers the ending of the activation, thus canceling the attack. Do I have this correct?

1 hour ago, Govrek said:

- Where is it noted that, when exiting terrain via a March or Shift, the movement is negated? 81.3 reads "While occupying terrain, a unit can perform all of its actions and modifiers as normal with the exception of the march (?) and shift (?) actions. If the unit performs a march (?) or shift (?) action while occupying terrain, it immediately exits the terrain." The first sentence indicates that March and Shift are handled differently when occupying terrain, the second outlines how they are handled. To my reading of the second sentence, you would exit terrain, and then continue with the standard March/Shift action as outlined in 47 and 73. Should I be reading the second sentence of 81.3 as "If the unit performs a march (?) or shift (?) action while occupying terrain, it exits the terrain instead "?

That is quite interesting. Huh.

It doesn't explicitly state that you immediately perform the indicated march or shift either, but it doesn't really say anything negating the possibility.

1 hour ago, Govrek said:

- A piece of terrain is touched by an enemy unit. My unit enters the terrain via a charge. Does my unit get an attack against the enemy unit?

81.2, 2nd bullet: "After the unit resolves all effects of entering the terrain, its activation immediately ends. If it had a bonus action or other game effects to perform, these are canceled."

81.8, 3rd bullet:"When a unit enters a piece of terrain that an enemy is touching, those units resolve any effects of a collision as if the unit had collided with the enemy."

16.3 "If a unit resolving a charge collides with an enemy unit, the charging unit performs a melee attack (?) action targeting that enemy unit after the move is complete."

Is the attack at the end of the Charge move an effect of the collision that is resolved under 81.8, or is it a other game effect that gets canceled under 81.2? I would read this as the later: the move is ended once the occupation of the terrain has completed, the completion of the terrain occupation triggers the ending of the activation, thus canceling the attack. Do I have this correct?

81.2 says "After the unit resolves all effects of entering the terrain." According to 81.8 one of the effects of entering terrain an enemy is touching is resolving a collision, and according to 16.3 if you used a charge modifier you resolve that collision by attacking.

Makes sense to me, unless I'm overlooking something.

Edit: Then again maybe it's just late and I'm wack with poo brain.

Good questions.

15 hours ago, Tvayumat said:

It describes a timing window and a series of conditions, then states that if those conditions are met inside of that window, a collision occurs.

Other rules both describe alternate timing windows and conditions that can cause collision, and describe what Collision actually is and what it does based on the context in which it's occurring. Hell, 55.3 describes what you actually do when you collide in far more specificity than RR-18 does.

Other rules reference collisions. They all still cover the same thing as 18. Collisions do not happen outside of the sequence of events in section 18.

13 hours ago, Tvayumat said:

Yes. The collision in your second example is triggered by overlapping during movement, not by touching after movement.

Overlapping does not cause a collision. Overlapping causes the unit to halt, slide back, and end touching. By ending touching, they trigger a collision per section 18. There is no other way to trigger a collision.

I'm actually not sure on the terrain exiting stuff myself... my brother and I have been trying to work this one out without much luck. We assumed that you exit INSTEAD of marching/shifting and not 'in addition to'. However, it really could be interpreted either way. Given that you can do a full movement and then enter terrain, I think it makes a lot of sense that you should be able to exit terrain and then follow-up with a full normal movement.

On that note, I think march actions are still cancelled by engagement if in terrain and any shift would have to be considered a disengage. Am I wrong on that?

As far as charging into engagement via terrain goes... I had assumed the rest of the charge was cancelled, but the sections pointed out by @Govrek definitely seem to indicate that you would charge. By that same token, it seems you would also take a panic token if you didn't charge in this situation.

Honestly the terrain rules are the worst part of the game IMO. This wouldn't be the case if they had included some more substantive examples of terrain interactions in either of the manuals. Now that we've beaten them to death, they seem to make sense (if we're even right) and are pretty cool, but it shouldn't take 2 weeks of manual analysis to figure out how to move with respect to terrain. So I'm really starting to agree more with Taki that it's, at least initially, way too confusing.

26 minutes ago, Willange said:

I'm actually not sure on the terrain exiting stuff myself... my brother and I have been trying to work this one out without much luck. We assumed that you exit INSTEAD of marching/shifting and not 'in addition to'. However, it really could be interpreted either way. Given that you can do a full movement and then enter terrain, I think it makes a lot of sense that you should be able to exit terrain and then follow-up with a full normal movement.

On that note, I think march actions are still cancelled by engagement if in terrain and any shift would have to be considered a disengage. Am I wrong on that?

As far as charging into engagement via terrain goes... I had assumed the rest of the charge was cancelled, but the sections pointed out by @Govrek definitely seem to indicate that you would charge. By that same token, it seems you would also take a panic token if you didn't charge in this situation.

Honestly the terrain rules are the worst part of the game IMO. This wouldn't be the case if they had included some more substantive examples of terrain interactions in either of the manuals. Now that we've beaten them to death, they seem to make sense (if we're even right) and are pretty cool, but it shouldn't take 2 weeks of manual analysis to figure out how to move with respect to terrain. So I'm really starting to agree more with Taki that it's, at least initially, way too confusing.

I don't think it is just terrain, it's obstacles in general. It involves a lot of combining of independent rules, and reading them across several sections of the RRG.

I'm planning to make a guide/flow chart for movement. If it is feasible, anyway.

I can't tell if you can charge into terrain or not. Seems like yes, but not sure.

Marches while engaged in terrain would be canceled, and your shift would have to be to disengage, but since you are moving out of the terrain, I feel like you can leave at any angle. I could be wrong there, too.

I'm fairly certain you do not get to execute the move you revealed while exiting terrain. The rules just say to place your tray touching the terrain, they do not say to perform the movement. The reason you can March or shift is that marching is the only way to leave terrain with your back to it. Shifting allows you to leave with your front or side touching the terrain.

36 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

Marches while engaged in terrain would be canceled, and your shift would have to be to disengage, but since you are moving out of the terrain, I feel like you can leave at any angle. I could be wrong there, too.

Well it does specify that when you shift out you have to touch the terrain with either your front or side. Marching you touch with your back (you mentioned both of those rules, I'm just giving context to my statement). Other than that, yes, any angle.

37 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

I'm fairly certain you do not get to execute the move you revealed while exiting terrain. The rules just say to place your tray touching the terrain, they do not say to perform the movement.

You could be right that you don't move again. I was just saying that if you could, the distance you can cover entering and exiting would be about the same, but that doesn't make that the rule. I'm really unsure on this one.

3 minutes ago, Willange said:

Well it does specify that when you shift out you have to touch the terrain with either your front or side. Marching you touch with your back (you mentioned both of those rules, I'm just giving context to my statement). Other than that, yes, any angle.

I was roundaboutly referencing the fact that typically when you disengage you must move directly away from the engaged enemy. However combined with the terrain rules, I would argue you could exit the terrain on any side.

Someone needs to make a video regarding this... This is getting as complicated as Armada Shooting is...

10 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

Someone needs to make a video regarding this... This is getting as complicated as Armada Shooting is...

So that one is in my arc, and in range, but I don't have line of sight. I have line of sight to that one, but the hull zone I want to hit is not in my arc, however his other hull zone is so I will target that one.

I hit you for 6 damage and will activate assault concussion missiles. Oh you redirect? Well then you take damage here, then carry the 4, put a token here and basically, well... It's a CR90 we can just say it ?.

6 hours ago, rowdyoctopus said:

Other rules reference collisions. They all still cover the same thing as 18. Collisions do not happen outside of the sequence of events in section 18.

Overlapping does not cause a collision. Overlapping causes the unit to halt, slide back, and end touching. By ending touching, they trigger a collision per section 18. There is no other way to trigger a collision.

Look, man, I wish what you were saying was true.

It'd be easier if this was the case. It's the flow that makes the most sense. I totally understand why you want it to be this way.

It's just... not.

I'd even accept "Well the designers intend for it to be this way". Sure. That's cool. If so, they need to change it, because objective reality at this point is that the game lists several conditions that trigger collision, only one of which is actually under the Collision rule header, and that header just describes a trigger condition that occurs after movement wraps up.

20 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

So that one is in my arc, and in range, but I don't have line of sight. I have line of sight to that one, but the hull zone I want to hit is not in my arc, however his other hull zone is so I will target that one.

I hit you for 6 damage and will activate assault concussion missiles. Oh you redirect? Well then you take damage here, then carry the 4, put a token here and basically, well... It's a CR90 we can just say it ?.

I was expecting someone to push back on my comment so I could tell them it's not like they made videos on this right before the rules were changed slightly but enough to mess it all up

That example works though.

The way I think it works is not complicated, it just seems like you guys really ARE over thinking this.

Are you in terrain?

If yes, did you march?

If yes, put back tray edge touching anywhere on terrain feature. You are done.

If no, did you shift?

If yes, put back or side edge touching anywhere on terrain feature. You are done.

If not in terrain. You move normally.

Do you hit terrain at any point during move?

If yes, can you occupy terrain?

If yes --> occupy terrain.

If no, stop and suffer any ill effects.

You are not moving THROUGH terrain (though there will probably be some units that will break this rule)

The terrain is not jumping out in front of you. Don't want to hit it? Go around!

Why is this a thing? This is not Advanced Squad Leader guys....

20 minutes ago, Tvayumat said:

Look, man, I wish what you were saying was true.

It'd be easier if this was the case. It's the flow that makes the most sense. I totally understand why you want it to be this way.

It's just... not.

I'd even accept "Well the designers intend for it to be this way". Sure. That's cool. If so, they need to change it, because objective reality at this point is that the game lists several conditions that trigger collision, only one of which is actually under the Collision rule header, and that header just describes a trigger condition that occurs after movement wraps up.

You cannot look at each rule independently. They are all in effect at the same time. Section 60.1 is a summary of what is explained in section 55.3. Otherwise every time you overlap a single tray ally you would collide. Additionally, if you just read 55.3, you wouldn't know to gain a panic token which is explained in 18.1.

By combining all 3 sections, you see that overlapping an obstacle causes movement to halt and results in you touching that obstacle, and then that touching causes a collision unless you were already touching said obstacle.

None of those sections work on their own.

19 minutes ago, loki_tbc said:

The way I think it works is not complicated, it just seems like you guys really ARE over thinking this.

Are you in terrain?

If yes, did you march?

If yes, put back tray edge touching anywhere on terrain feature. You are done.

If no, did you shift?

If yes, put back or side edge touching anywhere on terrain feature. You are done.

If not in terrain. You move normally.

Do you hit terrain at any point during move?

If yes, can you occupy terrain?

If yes --> occupy terrain.

If no, stop and suffer any ill effects.

You are not moving THROUGH terrain (though there will probably be some units that will break this rule)

The terrain is not jumping out in front of you. Don't want to hit it? Go around!

Why is this a thing? This is not Advanced Squad Leader guys....

I wrote it I-don't-even-know-how-many-posts-ago

If you move and wind up touching or overlapping an obstacle = Stop and collide
If you don't move and wind up touching obstacle = Nothing happens

The final product is very common sense, but the process is almost always a tooth-puller. That's how these things go.

17 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

You cannot look at each rule independently. They are all in effect at the same time. Section 60.1 is a summary of what is explained in section 55.3. Otherwise every time you overlap a single tray ally you would collide. Additionally, of you just read 55.3, you wouldn't know to gain a panic token which is explained in 18.1.

By combining all 3 sections, you see that overlapping an obstacle causes movement to halt and results in you touching that obstacle, and then that touching causes a collision unless you were already touching said obstacle.

None of those sections work on their own.

Literally no one is suggesting you take the rules independently.

You have to follow the rules, in sequence, paying attention to all timing phrases.

RR-18 begins with the phrase after . Not during, not while... after.

RR-60.1 doesn't say after, it says when. RR-59.3 doesn't say after, it says during. These things occur during movement or when conditions are met. After the march/shift has been performed, and all these steps are completed, you check for the condition listed under RR-18.

This is why there is a whole section of the RRG specifically and unambiguously defining what each and every one of these phrases mean, and how they interact.

So... Umm.. I am still lost. Now, I could explain in detail the entire process for shooting in Armada (hell, I made several videos on it) but you guys are losing it.

Anyone got a time line chart to go with this to make it clear? That way we have a point to go, "THIS RIGHT HERE IS THE ISSUE!"

Honestly, the whole thing is pretty common sense, and I don't think the majority of players will get as hung up as we be let ourselves get here.

Just an exercise in pedantry at this point.

If I understood better the point of contention it would help.

As far as I understand it is if you are colliding when just touching after a March or something like that

14 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

If I understood better the point of contention it would help.

As far as I understand it is if you are colliding when just touching after a March or something like that

That, but also when you overlap.

The contention is this: If RR-18 is the end all, be all of collision, you can collide with an obstacle (terrain for instance) but then, while touching, if you issue a march or shift, the claim is that you can't collide with a piece of terrain you're already touching at all .

Because occupying terrain depends on collision, this means you couldn't enter a piece of terrain you're already touching, even if it is now unoccupied (say, you engaged the terrain when it was occupied then killed the occupants). Instead, you'd have to shift away so you aren't touching, then march back into it, eating up an extra action.

This would also mean that once you've collided with Spikes or terrain with negative effects, you can't collide with them again and will only take damage the first time. (Important because there are Morale cards one could use to force the enemy to perform a shift or march, and if they can't collide twice, you can't use that morale card to force damage if they're already touching.))

This is an extension of the "If I can't collide twice, then I can hop over terrain" school of thought that sprung up from someone first noticing the phrase "an obstacle that it was not touching before performing that action" in RR-18. As simply as I can put it, the RRG describes more instances than just RR-18's example in which a unit collides, the counterargument is that RR-18 is the complete and final description of ALL instances of collision.

I contend that it is not.

We now await some manner of clarification.

1 hour ago, Tvayumat said:

Literally no one is suggesting you take the rules independently.

You have to follow the rules, in sequence, paying attention to all timing phrases.

RR-18 begins with the phrase after . Not during, not while... after.

RR-60.1 doesn't say after, it says when. RR-59.3 doesn't say after, it says during. These things occur during movement or when conditions are met. After the march/shift has been performed, and all these steps are completed, you check for the condition listed under RR-18.

This is why there is a whole section of the RRG specifically and unambiguously defining what each and every one of these phrases mean, and how they interact.

You are, though. You claim there are multiple instances that can cause a collision to happen. This isn't the case. A collision happens as soon as your unit is touching an obstacle. That's it. Timing doesn't matter. The timing only changes depending on the action taken. Rule 18 then tells us that we cannot collide with something we were already touching before the action.

5 minutes ago, Tvayumat said:

That, but also when you overlap.

The contention is this: If RR-18 is the end all, be all of collision, you can collide with an obstacle (terrain for instance) but then, while touching, if you issue a march or shift, the claim is that you can't collide with a piece of terrain you're already touching at all .

Because occupying terrain depends on collision, this means you couldn't enter a piece of terrain you're already touching, even if it is now unoccupied (say, you engaged the terrain when it was occupied then killed the occupants). Instead, you'd have to shift away so you aren't touching, then march back into it, eating up an extra action.

This would also mean that once you've collided with Spikes or terrain with negative effects, you can't collide with them again and will only take damage the first time. (Important because there are Morale cards one could use to force the enemy to perform a shift or march, and if they can't collide twice, you can't use that morale card to force damage if they're already touching.))

This is an extension of the "If I can't collide twice, then I can hop over terrain" school of thought that sprung up from someone first noticing the phrase "an obstacle that it was not touching before performing that action" in RR-18. As simply as I can put it, the RRG describes more instances than just RR-18's example in which a unit collides, the counterargument is that RR-18 is the complete and final description of ALL instances of collision.

I contend that it is not.

We now await some manner of clarification.

Yeah, you definitely cannot hop over terrain, either. You can enter it, if possible. Otherwise, you can go around.

I can see them making an errata that you can enter terrain if you end a movement touching it, regardless of collision. That makes the most sense.