SgtTodd wrote:
Sorry - I'm just seeing this post some 14 months later, but I do have an opinion on it.
Feedback is always welcome! 
The entire premise ignores why the fields are numbered 1 through 5 and merges fields 1 through 3 into one.
Derek's rules do not simply merge the central fields (which would mean using 3 distinct fields: left, center and right): they use 2 overlapping fields - which is different from ignoring the differences between fields 1-2-3 and merging them.
This creates illogical situations as shown in Example 7 which is ludicrous when seen alongside Example 8.
There is no Example 8 in Derek's Rules, which Example are you referring to?
In Example 7, figure #8, ship B is in fields 2 and 4 while ship A is in fields 3 and 5. Your ship has a clear view of both vessels a should be able to fire a full broadside at either, but the rule as proposed defeats the purpose of dividing the "overlap" area into 3 fields and creates this illogical situation where you cannot fire at ship B because ship A is closer in this merged area.
According to the original rules, you must fire at the closer target (ship A).
Rule VIII.A.5.a
If a ship fires at a target that lies within the field of the entire broadside, i.e. fields 1,2, or 3, the ship must fire at the closest target as explained in the Basic Game.
Given that both ships (A and B) are straddling accross two fields, someone might question if they really "lie within" fields 2 and 3.
Thus, Rule VIII.A.5.d would be invoked:
NOTE: In many cases a ship will straddle two fields. For the purpose of determining fire, that ship occupies the lowest numbered field. For the purpose of determining line of sight, that ship occupies both fields.
So, those ships occupy both field 2 and 4 (ship B) and fields 3 and 5 (ship A).
However, the above rule says there are two exceptions:
1. Ships firing at a target straddling fields 2 and 4 may not fire the stern section if there is a closer target occupying field 4, it may fire its bow section.
2. Ships firing at a target straddling fields 5 and 3 may not fire the bow section if there is a closer target occupying field 5. It may fire its stern section.
These exception are somewhat unclear since it's not explicit to what part of the previous rule they are making exception (fire or line of sight). However, the most plausible interpretation is that they are referring to fire and they are to be intended like this:
"if a ship straddles 2 and 4, you can usually consider it as being in field 2 (lowest number) to fire a full broaside BUT (exception here!) if there is a closer target on field 4, you can only use the bow section".
So, all these rules considered, in Example 6, even using original rules, you would be able to fire a full broadside, but only to the nearest target (ship A).
I do not see how merging fields 1,2, & 3 into one improves the fields of fire rules in any way.
As I posted ealier in the thread, Derek's rules solve some inconsistencies of the original rules, while at the same time offering the same kind of behavior.
In other words, WS&IM authors tried to use 5 distinct fields but it seems that the resulting behavior could have been more clearly expressed using 2 overlapping fields, as Derek did. |
