Excelsior Entertainment Forums
Warzone => Game Questions => Topic started by: dmcgee1 on October 09, 2005, 11:07:31 AM
-
The book states, "In general however, an army is entitled to one False Lead for every five hundred points it has."
Does this mean that for 500 points and below, you get one, for less than 1001 points you get two, for less than 1501 you get three, etc.?
Or, does it mean that at 500 to 999 you get one, 1000 to 1499 you get two, etc.?
We play the former. In other words, we feel that you are always entitled to at least one, therefore anything below 501 points gets one False Lead.
-
Up to (and including 500) 1 False Lead.
Up to 1000 2 False Leads.
And so on ...
-
Nice to see there's yet one more person who thinks like me (yeah, it's okay to shudder at the thought).
-
Up to (and including 500) 1 False Lead.
Up to 1000 2 False Leads.
And so on ...
Ok now im curious. Most times when the rules state something, unless its a typo, the general concensus is to abide by the rules. SO with that being said, Why does when the book state "In general however, an army is entitled to one False Lead for every five hundred points it has." do we not abide by whats written? My feeling is that 500-999Pts get 1 false lead 1000-1499 gets two etc.
Why do you ask? IMO because the rule states "for every five hundred points it has" not every five hundred or portion thereof. IMO if playing a 300pt battle there should be no false leads, if playing a 750pt battle there should be one etc.
Just my two cents
-
In my opinion, it was never intended that armies of under 500 points should not get a false lead. Hence, every 500 points is read as, "each 500 points (or fraction thereof)."
Breaking it down, one could not argue the following sentence "For every part, there is a counterpart," to not mean anything other than, "for each one, there is one."
The same applies here: "For every 500, there is one." That means that if there is more than one 500, but less than two 500's, there is two, etc.
Think of each group of 500 as its own, individual group.
-
Without my book I have to go by what is quoted here but the way I read it you have to have 500 points to get a false lead so it would break down as
000 - 500 no false lead
501 - 1000 1 false lead
1001 - 1500 2 false leads and so on
-
Without my book I have to go by what is quoted here but the way I read it you have to have 500 points to get a false lead so it would break down as
000 - 500 no false lead
501 - 1000 1 false lead
1001 - 1500 2 false leads and so on
Well im glad at least one other person sees it that way. I was beginning to think I was going crazy :) Well I am but thats besides the point ;D
-
Without my book I have to go by what is quoted here but the way I read it you have to have 500 points to get a false lead so it would break down as
000 - 500 no false lead
501 - 1000 1 false lead
1001 - 1500 2 false leads and so on
That's always been my understanding of it, as well.
-
Without my book I have to go by what is quoted here but the way I read it you have to have 500 points to get a false lead so it would break down as
000 - 500 no false lead
501 - 1000 1 false lead
1001 - 1500 2 false leads and so on
Not that I agree with the interpretation, but the breakdown for your example is a little off. It would , technically, be:
- 0 - 499 - No False Lead
- 500 - 999 - 1 False Lead
- 1000 - 1499 - 2 False Leads
etc.
I reiterate that it is my opinion that the rules did not intend to have forces of less than 500 points not be entitled to a false lead.
I believe that this discussion has reached a point that it needs an official ruling.
P.S.: What's with the Karma, around here. I applaud everyone who gives meaningful input, yet I get none - are my comments not worthy? Am I not worthy? Am I a Karmawhore? I dunno... ;)
-
I reiterate that it is my opinion that the rules did not intend to have forces of less than 500 points not be entitled to a false lead.
I believe that this discussion has reached a point that it needs an official ruling.
I agree with both statements. For what it's worth that's the way two members of the old FAQ Team play it.
P.S.: What's with the Karma, around here. I applaud everyone who gives meaningful input, yet I get none - are my comments not worthy? Am I not worthy? Am I a Karmawhore? I dunno... ;)
Green text sorry cannot read. ;)
-
copy/paste
yeah, this is the way we swing round these parts too.
* 0 - 499 - No False Lead
* 500 - 999 - 1 False Lead
* 1000 - 1499 - 2 False Leads
make that three members of ze FAQ team
-PFC joe
-
My friends and I have always played it that for every fraction of 500, you get 1 false lead, meaning that forces of less than 500pts still get one. I even remember playing in Wedges Warzone tourney at GenCon and it being the same way, our forces of 750pts being allowed to have 2 false leads. I just think the idea of false leads is so awsome, that it shouldn't be left out of any games, even the smaller ones. Why can't a smaller force succesffully provide a false lead to its enemy?
-
dmcgee1 -
Thanks for the correction to my list. Never let it be said I am stingy when someone helps me out. Enjoy the +1 karma :)
-
make that three members of ze FAQ team
Joe, I think we're split 2-1 so far. I am of the opinion that you always get one even if the point limit of the game happens to be 378 points.
-
hrmm...
hadn't thought of that. (we never play less than 750 so it doesn't come up much)
Aight, i'd swing that way then, scratch the last entry.
for game sizes of 1-999 points you get one false lead
for 1000- 1499 you get two
there, that's complicated enough.
-
Yes, that would make it complicatd. Why would there just be 1 for 1-999 and then gain another for the next 500 points? I think it makes sense to have it:
1-500 = 1 false lead
501-1000 = 2 false leads
1001-1500 = 3 false leads
etc...
Therfore you just divide by 500 and round up. Pretty simple. Not trying to be anal, just trying to stick with how I feel about the subject. False leads are just such a freaking awsome idea, you should never leave home without them and the more you have, the more entertaining it becomes. Anywho, back to studying.
-
I reiterate that it is my opinion that the rules did not intend to have forces of less than 500 points not be entitled to a false lead.
I believe that this discussion has reached a point that it needs an official ruling.
I agree with both statements. For what it's worth that's the way two members of the old FAQ Team play it.
P.S.: What's with the Karma, around here. I applaud everyone who gives meaningful input, yet I get none - are my comments not worthy? Am I not worthy? Am I a Karmawhore? I dunno... ;)
Green text sorry cannot read. ;)
.
So, who told you it was there? ;)
-
This needs to be clarified in the FAQ as a simple entry.
-
My question concerning False Leads: The book mentions that some armies will get additional false leads, but in checking, I didn't see any lists that got extra. Are there any or did I just search in the wrong places?
-
Those units that provided false leads got shifted to a future release. They'll be around before too long.
-PFC joe
-
The same applies here: "For every 500, there is one." That means that if there is more than one 500, but less than two 500's, there is two, etc.
I do not agree with this statement.
What "For every 500, there is one." means is For every 500, there is one. So at 500 you get one and "For every 1000 there are 2, so at 1000 you get your second and "For every 1500 there is 3." so at 1500 you get your third so on and so forth.
This is the way the group I play with handles it.
-
The same applies here: "For every 500, there is one." That means that if there is more than one 500, but less than two 500's, there is two, etc.
I do not agree with this statement.
What "For every 500, there is one." means is For every 500, there is one. So at 500 you get one and "For every 1000 there are 2, so at 1000 you get your second and "For every 1500 there is 3." so at 1500 you get your third so on and so forth.
This is the way the group I play with handles it.
So, if I say, "for every one, there is one," this means that there isn't one unless there's two?
That's not right. Think of the number 500 as the first group - or group one. Therefore, 501 - 1000 would be group two, etc. By your definition, the phrase, "For every one, you get one," means that you don't one unless you have two of that thing. That doesn't make sense. Please, if you are going to quote my point, don't take it out of context...here is the entire original quote:
In my opinion, it was never intended that armies of under 500 points should not get a false lead. Hence, every 500 points is read as, "each 500 points (or fraction thereof)."
Breaking it down, one could not argue the following sentence "For every part, there is a counterpart," to not mean anything other than, "for each one, there is one."
The same applies here: "For every 500, there is one." That means that if there is more than one 500, but less than two 500's, there is two, etc.
Think of each group of 500 as its own, individual group.
-
In my opinion, it was never intended that armies of under 500 points should not get a false lead. Hence, every 500 points is read as, "each 500 points (or fraction thereof)."
Breaking it down, one could not argue the following sentence "For every part, there is a counterpart," to not mean anything other than, "for each one, there is one."
The same applies here: "For every 500, there is one." That means that if there is more than one 500, but less than two 500's, there is two, etc.
Think of each group of 500 as its own, individual group.
I think you just made my "our" point for us. You said "For every 500, there is one." you didnt say fraction of 500, you said 500 with 500 being the target number not the qualifier. ;D
Its been said before and I think it bears saying again.... I think we need an official ruling on this one beucase actually both sides are making alot of sense
-
you guys realize that the False leads are for the Game level and not the actual army composition, don't you?
i.e. for a 1000 point game both sides would get two cards, irregardless of whether they have 999 or 1001 points.
I don't know many people that crunch numbers to get exact, round point totals.
-PFC joe
-
PFC Joe actually has a good point that should actually end the whole debate but I'll bet it won't so here is my two cents on DMcGee's arguement.
The book states, "In general however, an army is entitled to one False Lead for every five hundred points it has."
The answer is in the quote you made in the first post bubba. It does not say that for every 500 points or part thereof - it clearly indicates that having 500 points is a pre-requisite for a False Lead. Therefore it would take a second full 500 points(1000 points) to have a 2nd False Lead and a third full 500 points(1500 points) to have a 3rd False Lead.
You are putting words into the sentence that aren't there. By your logic I should be able to take any portion of 2 grunt squads to take a support squad rather than two squads.
-
you guys realize that the False leads are for the Game level and not the actual army composition, don't you?
i.e. for a 1000 point game both sides would get two cards, irregardless of whether they have 999 or 1001 points.
I don't know many people that crunch numbers to get exact, round point totals.
-PFC joe
Yes, I realize that, Joe. BTW, please, define, "irregardless." ;)
-
PFC Joe actually has a good point that should actually end the whole debate but I'll bet it won't so here is my two cents on DMcGee's arguement.
The book states, "In general however, an army is entitled to one False Lead for every five hundred points it has."
The answer is in the quote you made in the first post bubba. It does not say that for every 500 points or part thereof - it clearly indicates that having 500 points is a pre-requisite for a False Lead. Therefore it would take a second full 500 points(1000 points) to have a 2nd False Lead and a third full 500 points(1500 points) to have a 3rd False Lead.
You are putting words into the sentence that aren't there. By your logic I should be able to take any portion of 2 grunt squads to take a support squad rather than two squads.
Bubba? I understand what it the quote says, however, I think that it, like other ambiguities in the book, is open to interpretation. I, firmly, do not believe that it was intended for games of less than 500 points to not have a false lead for each side. It is my opinion, and I have been trying to back it up with logic and reason.
You are, as well, entitled to your opinion, as is anyone who has a point of view on the subject. It is as valid, if not more so, than mine. I am not saying that anyone is wrong on the issue at hand. Some examples are flawed, and I pointed them out, but I did not mean to give the idea that I believe that I am right beyond all doubt. If I did, my apologies.
I believe that I am interpreting the quote from the book correctly, in keeping with the intent, and not, necessarily the text.
-
I use the word bubba a lot. I don't mean anything derogatory by it. I'm not sure where I picked it up - I think when I was at Ft Bragg 20 freaking years ago. Trust me if I want to slam you I have much better weapons in my arsenal. BTW I also use the word buckwheat as well.
As for the question at hand - I don't think you wanted an answer to your original question as much as you wanted validation. That being the case I withdraw from the field and leave you to interpret the book any way you want.
-
I use the word bubba a lot. I don't mean anything derogatory by it. I'm not sure where I picked it up - I think when I was at Ft Bragg 20 freaking years ago. Trust me if I want to slam you I have much better weapons in my arsenal. BTW I also use the word buckwheat as well.
As for the question at hand - I don't think you wanted an answer to your original question as much as you wanted validation. That being the case I withdraw from the field and leave you to interpret the book any way you want.
Sorry, Top, I didn't mean to insinuate that you were insulting me. I didn't take it as such.
As for the validation? Yeah, I guess I am looking for that. That would mean that my opinion is correct, and not just supposed. If the official ruling is how you interpret, I'll be okay with it, and won't linger on it.
-
i'm pretty certain that irregardless is actually a combination of irrespective and regardless, both of which apply to the original idea that actual points don't really matter so much as allotted points.
and I'd have to agree with Topkick in that sub-500 point games don't get a False Lead.
-PFC joe
-
So, if I say, "for every one, there is one," this means that there isn't one unless there's two?
Are you a Lawyer or Politician by any chance?
For every one there is one means that for one there is one: for two there are two.
It does not mean that for one half there is one or that for one and a half there are two.
It is VERY clear to me and my group.
-
Moderator
To summarize we have:
- Two different interpretations of how many cards you get to take in games that aren't 500, 100o, 1500 etc. This will only be a problem when you face someone who does it differently. It will only remain a problem for the 2 seconds it takes you to choose one or the other though.
- The debate is starting to stall and while noone has insulted anyone yet we do not want that to happen.
Conclusion:
Let it rest and if we are all nice we will get an explanation of how it is supposed to be later.
/Andreas
-
Kudos to you Coil for your excellent summary adn call for restraint. Good Karma is coming your way :)
-
Works for me. Thanks, everyone, for the input.
-
Nice Coil ... spoken like a true mod!
-
I have come around on my way of thinking about this. I am now of the mind that 1 False Lead for every 500 points means the following:
1 - 499 PC - NO False Leads (the force is too small to effectively pull off a distration or feint manuever)
500 - 999 PC - 1 False Lead
1000 - 1499 PC - 2 False Leads
etc.
-
that seems to be logical...
another question...shouldn't there be an officer present in the force?...I don't think that the rules say anything to that effect...
B.
-
I don't think that an officer would be required but it would make sense in order to pull off the guile. In battles 500+ I don't think that this would be a problem. Except for the rare occasion, I don't see how anyone wouldn't bring an officer with that many points. They're just too useful.
-
It doesn't neccessarily have to be about guile and intentional deception. The cards and Blind Deployment also simulates the fog of war and the fact that you do not know exactly where the enemy is and who he is.
I still maintain the view that it's two cards for a 750 pt battle and that even battles with a point limit under 500 still get at least one card. The cards are fun and a unique part of UWZ and Chronopia and their use should be encouraged to the fullest.
The FAQ team is divided on the issue though. What I said earlier still applies though. Play it however you want and if you should meet someone who plays it differently just settle the issue before starting. Shouldnt take more than 4 seconds. :)
/Andreas
-
Play it however you want and if you should meet someone who plays it differently just settle the issue before starting. Shouldnt take more than 4 seconds. :)
4 seconds and 3 pages of disscusion with no final solution ;).
It must be writen on FAQ because of "ruleseaters".
For me its all about propositional calculus and my english bit rusty (read it bad) so i cannot bring my two cents but my opinium is that it must be clarificated in oficial FAQ or you will risk holly war between those with blue caps and those with red caps ;)
-
About False leads:
does the false lead need to be the same as one of the real units, or can it be a different one?
e.g. my army has no hidden units.
I could say the false lead is the hidden unit, so I can activate it during the first turn without revealing it. I could keep doing the same every turn, just to force my opponent to activate more of his units before mine, if it's convenient for me.
-
Just to add my two cents. I feel the flase lead is important. Just agree before the game or go by a strict ruling of the rules. I like at least having one up to 499. It adds a little bit of deception to your deployment.
-
Maybe I should have opened a new thread, as I'm really asking something different, though still related to False Leads?
-
any help on this guys? I have a tournament this week end... ::)