Jump to content


Photo

Determining what is an Engagement


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Jahan

Jahan

    Private

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 07 March 2012 - 10:51 PM

Hello,

I am trying to determine what qualifies as an engagement, this is particularly important because of the situation I am in. The rules state the following:


An engagement between two forces means their non-Patrol mission was not successful. To qualify as an engagement, a side must:

1. visually detect all of the other side’s ships, AND
2. have three rounds of tactical area interaction, OR
3. receive damage from the opponent.


This can be interepreted in two ways and me and my opponent couldn't figure out which. Can you please let us know which of the following two is the correct interpretation:
(1 AND 2) OR 3 = Engagement
1 AND (2 OR 3) = Engagement

Thanks in advance

#2 RazorMind

RazorMind

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 79 posts
  • LocationGeorgetown, TX

Posted 07 March 2012 - 11:01 PM

as read, I would go with this: 1 AND (2 OR 3) = Engagement
"I wish to have no Connection with any Ship that does not Sail fast for I intend to go in harm's way.

Capt. John Paul Jones

#3 Jahan

Jahan

    Private

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:15 AM

I was interpreting it the other way as (1 AND 2) OR 3 = Engagement

Which means that if you damage any ships from the opposing side then it's considered an engagement, which makes sense.

The situation we currently have is this:
I, the IJN, have launched a Bombardment force from Truk, the force was intercepted by an Allied Patrol. During the tactical combat I am attempting to withdraw my forces so that I can continue on to the bombardment mission without being engaged. I have split my force into two commands, a screening destroyer squadron, and my battleship squadron. The Battleships have almost left the table and while they have been detected by enemy radar they have not been visually acquired. The destoyer force has been acquired and is putting up a smoke screen, but in the process one of the destroyers sustained damage from Allied gun fire. There have only been two rounds of tactical combat and I am close enough to get off the board on the next turn.

This means that my force has not completely been visually spotted (1), has not taken part in 3 rounds of combat (2), but it has sustained damage (3).

Furthermore my BB squadron that has not been visually spotted, can I send them off the table, making them count as unengaged allowing them to continue with the bombardment mission while the DD squadron stays behind and engages the patrol. Or does the entire force count as either engaged or unengaged together?

I wish the rules were a little clearer in this regard. Thanks again.

#4 Jahan

Jahan

    Private

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 09 March 2012 - 02:26 PM

I would like to see an official answer as I'm going to play another game tomorrow and this will have some influence on the outcome.

Once again, thanks in advance.

#5 Blue Leader

Blue Leader

    Major

  • Deactivated
  • 400 posts

Posted 12 March 2012 - 04:36 PM

Hello,

I am trying to determine what qualifies as an engagement, this is particularly important because of the situation I am in. The rules state the following:


An engagement between two forces means their non-Patrol mission was not successful. To qualify as an engagement, a side must:

1. visually detect all of the other side’s ships, AND
2. have three rounds of tactical area interaction, OR
3. receive damage from the opponent.


This can be interepreted in two ways and me and my opponent couldn't figure out which. Can you please let us know which of the following two is the correct interpretation:
(1 AND 2) OR 3 = Engagement
1 AND (2 OR 3) = Engagement

Thanks in advance

1 and 2 or 3. Defining what constitutes an engagement was one of the more difficult things to decide, when writing the game. We had to come up with something that could cover a myriad of circumstances. Good judgment is required to decide if enough has happened in the way of interaction so that one side's breaking off makes sense.

#6 Blue Leader

Blue Leader

    Major

  • Deactivated
  • 400 posts

Posted 12 March 2012 - 04:42 PM

I was interpreting it the other way as (1 AND 2) OR 3 = Engagement

Which means that if you damage any ships from the opposing side then it's considered an engagement, which makes sense.

The situation we currently have is this:
I, the IJN, have launched a Bombardment force from Truk, the force was intercepted by an Allied Patrol. During the tactical combat I am attempting to withdraw my forces so that I can continue on to the bombardment mission without being engaged. I have split my force into two commands, a screening destroyer squadron, and my battleship squadron. The Battleships have almost left the table and while they have been detected by enemy radar they have not been visually acquired. The destoyer force has been acquired and is putting up a smoke screen, but in the process one of the destroyers sustained damage from Allied gun fire. There have only been two rounds of tactical combat and I am close enough to get off the board on the next turn.

This means that my force has not completely been visually spotted (1), has not taken part in 3 rounds of combat (2), but it has sustained damage (3).

Furthermore my BB squadron that has not been visually spotted, can I send them off the table, making them count as unengaged allowing them to continue with the bombardment mission while the DD squadron stays behind and engages the patrol. Or does the entire force count as either engaged or unengaged together?

I wish the rules were a little clearer in this regard. Thanks again.

The engagement rules were put in to keep players from gaming the system and to have some way of deciding when a break off would qualify as being chased from the sea. In essence sea denial. Your BB's are part of the same force that is being engaged they would stay together, as BB's would still want their screen with them, and the general rule is that a mission is engaged together.

#7 Jahan

Jahan

    Private

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 12 March 2012 - 05:33 PM

1 and 2 or 3. Defining was constitutes an engagement was one of the more difficult things to decide, when writing the game. We had to come up with something that could cover a myriad of circumstances. Good judgment is required to decide if enough has happened in the way of interaction so that one side's breaking off makes sense.



Thank you for the response, however, I don't think you answered my question as '1 and 2 or 3' can be interpreted in two ways.

Also I hope you guys had a good showing at Cold Wars?

#8 Blue Leader

Blue Leader

    Major

  • Deactivated
  • 400 posts

Posted 12 March 2012 - 06:33 PM

The engagement rules were put in to keep players from gaming the system and to have some way of deciding when a break off would qualify as being chased from the sea. In essence sea denial. Your BB's are part of the same force that is being engaged they would stay together, as BB's would still want their screen with them, and the general rule is that a mission is engaged together.

You are certainly welcome to interpret the rule any way you see fit, for your game, in fact that is the best way to go.

#9 simanton

simanton

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • 147 posts

Posted 05 April 2013 - 11:14 PM

So, this can mean: a. A non-patrol force which receives damage from the enemy was in an engagement and therefore has failed in its mission, alternatively a non-patrol force which visually detects all of the other side's ships and has at least three rounds of tactical area interaction was in an engagement and therefore has failed in its mission. Thus a non-patrol force which has not received damage from an enemy and has either not visually detected all of the other side's shops or has visually detected all of the other side's ships but has not had at least three rounds of tactical area interaction has not been in an engagement and therefore has not failed of its mission by reason of being in an engagement. OR b. A non-patrol force which has visually detected all of the other side's ships and which has had at least three rounds of tactical area interaction or has (after visually detecting all of the other side's ships) received damage from the opponent whether it has had three or more rounds of tactical area interaction, has been in an engagement and has therefore failed in its mission. A non-patrol force which has not visually detected all of the other side's ships has not been in an engagement and therefore has not failed of its mission by reason of being in an engagement, and a non-patrol force which has visually detected all of the other side's ships but has neither had at least three rounds of tactical area interaction nor has received damage from the enemy has not been in an engagement and therefore has not failed of its mission by reason of being in an engagement. I suppose the basic issue comes down to: Does the receipt of damage from the enemy by a non-patrol force automatically constitute the non-patrol force being in an engagement? Or does the failure of the non-patrol force to visually detect all of the other side's ships automatically preclude having been in an engagement?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users