posted this elsewhere, but realized, it's really rules question...

Jump ignores terrain, or so I understand... so ...

1. do Jump troops have to enter a building on the first floor? or can they make a diagonal up movement to enter on the second?

2. can Jump troops enter through a wall (ignoring terrain)

3. can jump units simply land on the roof without entering the building?

mr_smigs said:

1. ALL units must enter a building through the ground floor. Jump troopers can't jump into a higher window.

2. Not at all. Jump troopers can ignore the obstacle presented by a building if the want to completely bypass it. They can jump OVER the whole building, if they have enough movement to make their way across. But they can't ignore a wall and end up inside it.

3. No, they can't. But they can jump OFF the roof once they climb their way up there.

Hijacking your thread, I do have an issue of my own regarding movement inside buildings: Do vertical diagonals work the same way as horizontal diagonals? Meaning that diagonals after the first cost 2 movement points?

See the example below:

Here's a Move 2 squad trying to make a Move+Move action. If vertical diagonals always cost 1 movement point, then it would be able to perform this whole movement all the way to the red square on the 3rd floor. If, however, vertical diagonals are just like horizontal ones, then the movement from the blue to the yellow square on the 2nd floor would be the second diagonal, costing 2 movement points and ending the squad's move there.

Full, exampled, rule in Cerebus to answer this

I don't see it, could you point it out?

The example on page 15 has the squad starting in front of the central door, so they need only one diagonal to get to any of the top spaces. It doesn't really address this issue of vertical diagonals beyond the first.

I would certainly consider it diagonal movement and consider the second one 2 movement points.

Related - what about a move that is both diagonally horizontally and vertically? Is that just a 1 movement point action, ir is it more? I'm thinking still just 1, but wasn't 100% sure.

Yeah, that was my follow-up question, what about a movement that goes diagonally both vertically and horizontally? I'd say, for simplicity sake, that it works just like any diagonal. Alternatively, it might not be allowed at all...

As far as I'm aware, you only measure diagonals in the horizontal plane. There is no rule that states otherwise, so in your question - vertical diagonal movement is all at 1mp per square.

Yeah, that's the issue. The rules are a bit iffy on that part. All they say is:

" Units may move diagonally both vertically and horizontally. Each space, in any direction, costs one movement point."

But that is saying that horizontal diagonals also cost one movement point, which we know to be only true for the first diagonal. So we really must conclude that vertical diagonals are treated exactly like horizontal diagonals, hence, 2 movement points after the first.

Thats it, just read exactly what is written and not add what you might think the rule should go on and say, it does not say every other diagonal after the first counts as 2 - so don't.

So you're saying we should start considering all diagonals, both vertical and horizontal, as costing 1 movement point, even after the first? Cause that's what this rule is saying, if you just follow it to the letter without taking into account the rest of the games' rules.

Loophole Master said:

From Cerberus : "Units may move diagonally both vertically and horizontally. Each space, in any direction, costs one movement point."

Which if taken as an absolute means all diagonals always cost 1 movement point.

From the Revised Rulebook : "For each activation, a unit’s first diagonal movement costs one movement point. Any additional diagonal movement costs two movement points."

Which might directly contradict the Cerberus rule.

You could reconcile this by saying that Cerberus trumps the basic rules, and thus now all diagonals cost 1 movement point, both vertical and horizontal, no matter how many you take in a single activation. To me, that's crazy talk.

Or you could say that the Cerberus rule is only referring to the first diagonal in an activation. Further diagonals follow the standard rules. That seems pretty reasonable to me.

Or you could interpret that the Cerberus rule only applies to vertical diagonals, even though the rule specifically refers to both in the same sentence. That seems really iffy to me.

Loophole Master said:

No, where did you get that from? You follow horizontal move rules as normal :? Just look down on the unit, as it tells you to do so in Cerberus, and if the unit moves diagonal then follow standard movement rules. If it doesn't, then follow standard movement rules.

Are you at least getting my point, even if you don't agree with it? The cerberus rules lumps both vertical and horizontal diagonals in the same bag of movement cost. So what applies to one, must apply to the other.

Loophole Master said:

Sure, I get your point and when looking direct at the building it would appear that the unit is moving diagonal, but a diagonal in DT is where 2 squares touch corner to corner, there is no corner touching in vertical movement. I don't know if its possible to rationalise the MP cost using the shooting at buildings with flamethrower rules at all? where we know that the flame only effects one level even though you could theoretically run the flame right up a building but the levels do not count as adjacent squares, so we can't.

Well, I went ahead and asked about this to FFG, and got a swift response:

The basic movement rules do not apply to vertical diagonal movement. One point of movement is used to make any vertical diagonal movement, even if a unit would make two or more of these movements during a single activation.

Ok, I can accept that. So the rules were just poorly written (what else is new) when they lumped all diagonals together. But I also went ahead and asked my follow-up question, about a single movement that is both a vertical and horizontal diagonal:

It is possible to make a single movement that is diagonal both vertically and horizontally. This form of movement also costs one movement point, even if a unit would make two or more of these movements during a single activation.

And now I grow really wary. More and more I've grown to distrust these responses by FFG's Zach, remembering how most of them were overruled by the latest FAQ. This answer makes no sense whatsoever. If you move diagonally in both directions it always costs just 1 movement point? Well, using that ruling, look at the situations below, of a Move 2 units crossing a large building diagonally:

If they try to get to the final square by crossing the floor level, it would require a whopping 7 movement points, so they'd need 2 activations to do it. Ah, but if they're smart and keep on going up and down one floor, now the diagonals always cost a single movement point, so they can get there spending just 4 movement points, a single activation!

The absurdness of this almost makes me disregard the whole answer. This guy doesn't seem to be giving these things half as much thought as we are...

I'm not sure that Zac really reads the questions TBH, I was asked a question to a specific example, but the example was ignored and I was still none the wiser from the answer. His answer and your extreme (but good ) example is totally wrong as it breaks the normal rules for diagonal movement. Sure you have exeptions to the rules but they tell you this and offer some logical reasoning, this does not.

personaly I think it should be just the first diagonal in either direction not every. the ruling zach gave seems so wierd.

Yeah, I'm completely disregarding his answer to the second question. But then the problem is that this makes me not really trust the first answer as well. My problem with this ruling is that it creates this situation:

Here we have BBQ (red) racing against the Sturmpioniere (green), both Move 1+Fast squads. At the end of the second activation, both managed to reach the exact same square. But while the BBQ simply crossed the ground floor, the Sturmpioniere managed to climb all the way to the roof and back. That just seems very wrong to me.

And yeah, I know it's another extreme (but good) example. But I find that you need to go to the extreme to fully realize whether a rule makes sense or not.

I like the Cerberus example, though it would be fun if you had enough to illustrate the full diagonal problem. The climbing unit could cover corner to corner in a 6x6 space building in two turns with Fast (1+1+1F/1+1+1F), while the unit walking along the floor would only be able to cross the floor in two turns if they had Speed 2 (1+1+2/1+1+2). Assault would let the Fast unit get to one space away in one turn (1+1+1+1+1), while going along the floor with Speed 2 doubled would only keep up with their lateral movement.

Ignoring diagonals for movement inside a building also makes Agile a useless skill within a multi-story building, as units could get the same benefit by climbing up and down, even though that would normally slow movement down.

I'm going to continue with the expectation that the rule, not specifically overriding normal movement on diagonals, is supposed to mean diagonal movement stays the same, with the increase to account for the actual increased distance rounded up after the first space. Each diagonal is 1.4 times longer than an orthagonal movement, so the rounding balanced the actual distance moved. That fits going up and down as much as it does staying on the same level. Going up diagonally in both directions is actually 1.6 times longer than an orthagonal move of 1. For that matter, a limited ranged gun shell, like the Petard Mortar, is certainly climbing up and down on its path, so the same logic would imply diagonals shouldn't matter for its firing.

For another stupid example, imagine a unit with Jump faced with a 4x3 building with big doors. If they wanted to jump the building to the opposite side, they could only do so orthagonally, but if they entered the building and climbed up and down stairs, they could clear the building diagonally. It would cost them 7 MP to Jump diagonally, or to pass through on the ground floor, but only 4 MP by running up and down stairs.

When someone can explain that in a way that makes any realistic sense, I'll be happy with the suggested interpretation. Otherwise, I'll keep each additional diagonal in any direction as worth two.

No one is saying that moving diagonally horizontally is ignored, just in the vertical plane.

Major Mishap said:

No one but Zach, that is.

But Mishap, how do you feel about my vertical diagonal example above?

It does seem stange but I don't feel it would make any real difference to the game.

Major Mishap said:

It would be nice to see if Zach can fix the problems he's again created.

We'll keep playing with a diagonal being a diagonal, because the rules as written carry contradictions, so I'm happy to play with a commons sense answer.

Moving between two points should never be shorter by going a longer distance.