Blue Stars

katadder said:
looks like no, no, yes from what you quoted matt saying.
Click to expand...

Indeed I summarised wrong, but Matt has changes his answer to number 2 when I pointed out the rules loophole.

Here is his amended answer to number 2:

> Thanks Matthew, but in regards to number 2, it is stated in the rules,
> that entering hyperspace in a scenario where entry into hyperspace is a
> victory condition does not count as a withdrawal, so like I mentioned
> previously, it could be interpreted that returns were allowed, but if
> you're ruling no I'm

Ah, with you now. In that case, I cannot see a reason for it not to return.
. .

Matthew
Click to expand...

So in summary now:

1)No
2)Yes
3)Yes

So the Blue Star can leave and return but only in certain scenarios, the ones where withdrawal to hyperspace is a Victory Condition.

By my reading those are:

Flee to the Jump Gate (maybe, exiting via the Jump Gate is the VC, not general exit into hyperspace)
The Long Twilight Struggle requires tactical withdrawal into hyperspace via a jump point, which is technically impossible as since withdrawal into hyperspace is a VC in this scenario it can't be considered a tactical withdrawal :lol: But this is a Narn/Centauri scenario anyway
Fall of Night similar to above, a NArn/Centauri fight.

So in summary of my reading, there are few if any situations where a Blue Star can exit into hyperspace and then come back, even with Matt's ruling, though future scenarios may change that.

LBH
 
Wait a moment, just to clarify (and bloat this thread up): (Just in case i got this mixed up)


If a withdrawal to hyperspace is important for the mission! a Blue Star captain can go crazy and return to battle to help out.

If a withdrawal to hyperspace only happens for e.g. save a ship and deny victory points to the enemy, then it cannot return.

So basically is i totally want to get away from the battle, i can return, and if ti doesnt matter i cant? (hows that making sense, so i think i might just be wrong)

As basically this might lead to the option of bringing an allied Apollo with heavy missiles back into the fray........ (if i keep extending the rule to other ships, as teh Apollo hasnt used its JE, but im babbling here)
 
David said:
This is the land of rules lawyers so having precise definition allows me to shoot them down (figuratively of course) without having to use the "because I'm the dad" explanation. Hasn't worked with my Kate since she was five and doesn't work at all with this mob here.
All I was asking for was completeness, not a new addition to the Bible.
Regards,
Click to expand...

Though I take umbrage at being labelled a rules lawyer, David is right...we're not going to take his word for it....any more than I would expect him to take my word for it in our WWII game.
 
lastbesthope said:
Matt's mantra is "Play the rules as written"
Click to expand...
To be fair... I could list off at least 10 times that he has quite blatantly given rulings which go against the rules as written. Nothing wrong with that; sometimes wording is hard to get right and complicatons or weird rules combinations mean that the rules as written just don't work. But the fact is that "play the rules as written" only applies when the intent of the rules matches the wording of the rules. In this case, it does match, But in quite a few cases, it does not.
 
It has been awfully hard to get a feel for when you are solid ground saying the rules are the rules, as too often folks then come on the boards and pull a ruling that contradicts what's in the book.

To push the religion analogy I've used before, this particular bible really does feel like you need a priest (read play tester) to interpret what was intended vs what is in the book. Or an appeal for direct divine intervention, as we've done here.

Not saying it's a bad system, just that it is sometimes hard to avoid stalemating at the table due to a disagreement as the 'philosophy' behind the rules is hard to get a grasp of.

Ripple
 
Burger said:
lastbesthope said:
Matt's mantra is "Play the rules as written"
Click to expand...
To be fair... I could list off at least 10 times that he has quite blatantly given rulings which go against the rules as written.
Click to expand...

Only 10? :lol:

Yes he does have a habit of changing his mind sometimes, especially one case that cost me 2 WS in a demo game.

LBH
 
My affectionate greetings to you all. I'm back after a bad day working on a bad project ( I do contract computer work) Looks like posts have run the gamut from "you're an idiot" to "well, maybe you have a point". Fair enough. Where is the respect for the True Seeker? ;) I would have responded yesterday but as I said, a very unpleasant day for me and I was in an awful mood. I try not to do forums when I'm in that mood... it makes for impetuous responses, unpleasant ones and often wrong ones. I don't like doing that. As is said in my neck of the woods, "Don't kick a buffalo chip on a hot day". ;) This is a medium where the smiley face is often the only indication of intent.
I should point out that I was not trying to find a fascinating new way to twist the rules. It is not my way. I was just looking for a little bit of wisdom. Got an earful too. It has been a good discussion, even with those who expressed frustration. I've been a Marine, and have taught Marines. Every once in a while, maybe more often than that, I would get one or two who weren't "getting with the program", or didn't see my words of wisdom. You find that sometimes anothers line of logic comes in from another direction, one that you hadn't considered. Sometimes they are just asleep at the wheel ;) This is why I like to talk things out. Sometimes I learn different things.
bkerhman is right. Where I am, we always question the questionable. And not because we don't trust one another. It is easy to read a rule, usually in haste, and read it differently than the next guy will. Some of this, I think, is cultural. Words are used in a slightly different fashion in one place than in another. The Blue Star issue is not the only one that has sparked discussion here. I will not say anything ill of the rules writers. Theirs is a unique talent. I've tried my hand at it and know the difficulties involved. Also, some games have run over many years and versions. Sometimes we remember a rule from ver 1.something and the mind thinks that it is still current. Those of use who game GWs 40K and Fantasy Battle are very aware of this.
I was not going to name any names in this response, but I must single out two of you.
LBH, thanks, you went to the Mountain and came down with the tablets on this. I appreciate the effort. It was what was needed. You are a gentleman and a scholar.
Locutus! I explained my penchant for closing with "regards" in another thread. I'm guessing that you all use it differently on that side of the ocean. For me, it is an acknowledgment of respect and affection for those who share their time in this forum. It is an honest regard for all. But, just for you, this one time, I'll fill it all out. ;0
Regards,
Norman David Morris
MSgt, United States Marine Corps (R)
Knight of the Realm, Defender of the Faith, Protector of the Soil
Anla Shok, and Prince of Denmark for eight weeks in the summer.
;)
Now, back to laconic mode. ;>
 
David said:
LBH, thanks, you went to the Mountain and came down with the tablets on this. I appreciate the effort. It was what was needed. You are a gentleman and a scholar.
Click to expand...

The mountain was easy, it's trying to sneak past Ted Chang when he's lurking in the foothills that's hard, but you're welcome.

LBH
 
The mountain was easy, it's trying to sneak past Ted Chang when he's lurking in the foothills that's hard, but you're welcome.

LBH[/quote]

Office troll? ;)

the R word
 
Glad to see your not taking it badly (and again appologies for snapping the other day, it was more me having a bad day than you David!)

I still think the rule is fairly clear but I can kind of agree that Matts ruling raised more questions than it answered (as is the case at times with Matts answers ;))

Not sure if its everyone over here (and for that matter I was born and raised in Canada anyway so have a few unusual idioms in my speech occasionally) but to me anyway 'regards' is a fairly formal signature that I'd only ever put along with my name, whereas the way you use it seems more in line with the way I would sign something 'cheers!'. Whatever floats your boat really I guess (like I said you just caught me on a bad day and I went off half cocked as it were ;) Nothing personal :P)

Cheers ;)
 
Locutus9956 said:
Glad to see your not taking it badly (and again appologies for snapping the other day, it was more me having a bad day than you David!)

I still think the rule is fairly clear but I can kind of agree that Matts ruling raised more questions than it answered (as is the case at times with Matts answers ;))

Not sure if its everyone over here (and for that matter I was born and raised in Canada anyway so have a few unusual idioms in my speech occasionally) but to me anyway 'regards' is a fairly formal signature that I'd only ever put along with my name, whereas the way you use it seems more in line with the way I would sign something 'cheers!'. Whatever floats your boat really I guess (like I said you just caught me on a bad day and I went off half cocked as it were ;) Nothing personal :P)

Cheers ;)
Click to expand...

All is well then. Good. Here, we use "cheers" when lifting a cold one, or two. I try not to take things personally online. We all have bad days. Sometimes we have really bad days. Folks lash out sometimes. We survive it, don't we? There are times you wish that everyone were together in the same room where social protocols would keep things more civil. Imagine this crowd at a party together ;)
(insert preferred postscript) ;>
 
Burger said:
David said:
lastbesthope said:
Ted Chang
Click to expand...
Office troll? ;)
Click to expand...
OMG... you could get shot for saying that... or worse!
Click to expand...

Shot!? Ted would never to such distant tactics, Eunice being his weapon of choice.

Ted Chang, freelance member of the Mongoose staff, ex Ghurka, served, amongst other places, in the Falklands War. Sort of a troubleshooter/eliminator for Mongoose. Nice guy IF you can get on his good side, somehow I managed it. Ted used to do a lot of work on the North Sea rigs so he gets the Scottish sense of humour.

David said:
(insert preferred postscript) ;>
Click to expand...

Reminds me of an exclamation my friend uses:

"What in the name of the deity of your choice!!!"

:lol:

LBH
 
Ted Chang, freelance member of the Mongoose staff, ex Ghurka, served, amongst other places, in the Falklands War. Sort of a troubleshooter/eliminator for Mongoose. Nice guy IF you can get on his good side, somehow I managed it. Ted used to do a lot of work on the North Sea rigs so he gets the Scottish sense of humour.

Sounds like we would get along famously.
Regards/Cheers/Respects/Huh?
"Please select one" ;)

LBH[/quote]
 
Well Ted was discharged under less than normal/ideal/honourable circumstances.

I'll say no more, others know more of the story than I do, but I believe Argentinian appendages were being collected.

LBH
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Primordial System Age Question (WBH)
Replies
6
Views
365
rinku
R
S
Ship components size go up with TL?
Replies
10
Views
330
Condottiere
C
M
Drop tank mounted fuel/cargo tanks
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
ProfGrizzlyJon
ProfGrizzlyJon
Sageryne
New 1000-dTon Walden Class Heavy Lift Ship
Replies
2
Views
464
Terry Mixon
Terry Mixon
M
The OTU - the equivalent to that 1980s TV star after decades of drug abuse
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
5K
actionman
actionman
Back
Top