Snake like movement, why is this in the game?

[Presidente]

Well what would your solution be

[Commodore Jones]

My solution is just as Spartan Alex said in his post. I'm just venting about @$$hats that make such a ruling necessary, instead of simply playing war like civilized (wo)men.

[Brimat]

Then i have a question about the opposite of snaking.

 

I use the 0" turn limit on my frigattes and corvettes to make a 8 turn cycle and be on the spot i started and then move forward, in the case i want them to match the speed of my slow T1's.

 

Would this also be considered as abusing the rule?

[Ranus_Magnus]

Probably not - you do not gain anything.

[NickH]

Then i have a question about the opposite of snaking.

 

I use the 0" turn limit on my frigattes and corvettes to make a 8 turn cycle and be on the spot i started and then move forward, in the case i want them to match the speed of my slow T1's.

 

Would this also be considered as abusing the rule?

I actually made a *full circle* movement template to help with this.

 

On first acquaintance it seems odd but we rationalised it as the very manoeuvrable ships being able to *feather* so as to keep station rather than actually flying in a circle (this was with v1).

 

I would consider *snaking* to be an abuse of the system, however you can eliminate it by measuring from the flight peg.

[Commodore Jones]

Then i have a question about the opposite of snaking.

I use the 0" turn limit on my frigattes and corvettes to make a 8 turn cycle and be on the spot i started and then move forward, in the case i want them to match the speed of my slow T1's.

Would this also be considered as abusing the rule?

Heck no, 'stop-signing', going 'full circle' pulling an '8/360', taking a 'zero move' has long been a legit maneuver. You don't gain any extra distance like you do with snaking.

[ThePayneTrayn]

My friends and I do it all the time; you can even use it to move backwards if it's advantageous to do so. Also speeds the game up a bit too.

[werewyvernx]

I think it comes down to the intended usage. The stop sign maneuver has always been about saving time in my group. It wasn't about gaining any advantage. It's mainly used by corvettes to stay in the aft arc of the target they're chasing, but saying, "They use 8" of movement to go in a circle," saves a lot of of play time, especially when dealing with 6 corvette squadrons. I've only seen snaking used to abuse distances, and gain some advantage that would have otherwise been unavailable following normal movement. Plus, snaking wastes play time.

[slimeball]

It does make sense that escort ships can 'keep down' with their battleship, and doing stop signs is the only way to do that.

[SMDVogrin]

I think it comes down to the intended usage. The stop sign maneuver has always been about saving time in my group. It wasn't about gaining any advantage. It's mainly used by corvettes to stay in the aft arc of the target they're chasing, but saying, "They use 8" of movement to go in a circle," saves a lot of of play time, especially when dealing with 6 corvette squadrons. I've only seen snaking used to abuse distances, and gain some advantage that would have otherwise been unavailable following normal movement. Plus, snaking wastes play time.

 

Just claim your frigates are performing a "Catabrian circle", so you look all edu-ma-cated.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_circle

[Cannor]

Then i have a question about the opposite of snaking.

 

I use the 0" turn limit on my frigattes and corvettes to make a 8 turn cycle and be on the spot i started and then move forward, in the case i want them to match the speed of my slow T1's.

 

Would this also be considered as abusing the rule?

 

No, that's not an abuse of the rule because the ship would have made those turns and ended up on the same spot. I frequently do the "stop sign" with 0" TL models and it saves so much time. In fact, I point it out to new players when I teach them the game.

 

As Alex said, just make sure the ships would have room to make the turns.

[FragEmAll]

Personally, as I play Sorylian and Directorate fleets. If my opponent wants to abuse a rule to get closer to me then I will let them. Saves me having to chase them down but yeah in general if someone insists on it being 'legal' politely tell them that they are a muppet.

[avien]

Movement is the big bug bear for me. It's cumbersome, particularly in tight areas of the table.

I'd love if they ditched the movement tool and just used an eyeball turning method like BFG or Halo. Just reduce movement by 1" for each turn. Sure it slightly takes away a bit of the tactical element of the movement phase but it would go a long way toward speeding up overall gameplay.

[Pok]

Actually, just using pivot rather than the "move-turn" process would speed the game up a lot.

[Frans]

I don't like the inability to move less than halve the movement value.

 

It just feels unrealistic, and also invites strange movement behaviour.

 

Why not just add “slow” as a fourth option to the secondary movement segment, meaning the ship has to move up to half its movement allowance?

 

You could also reduce turn limit by one when going "slow".

[Commodore Jones]

I say just add back the 2 inch Drift move option from V 1.0

[FragEmAll]

To be honest I don't think my group have ever had an issue with movement. I think it represents momentum and the bulk of the big ships really well. As for moving less than half move? If you are in a position where you don't want to move. Just declare a full stop.

[Ryjak]

... Or use superior speed and maneuverability so you don't have to limit your options on the following turn. Most of the time, when players perform this maneuver, they still move a little. Essentially, this is a an elegant way to give these ships more movement options without introducing g new rules.

Would it be better if there were a MAR that said something like a ship can fly backwards, or ignore the 1/2 Movement requirement?

[lightcavalier]

a MAR to allow ships to move less than half or sideways (like Glide in HFB) would be really cool for some sort of unltra manouverable, physics defying fleet

[Frans]

To be honest I don't think my group have ever had an issue with movement. I think it represents momentum and the bulk of the big ships really well. As for moving less than half move? If you are in a position where you don't want to move. Just declare a full stop.

 

For me only turn limit represents momentum.

Being able to go from 1/2 to full movement directly to full stop depicts the exact opposite.

Would make more sense if ships could only go from 1/2 to full movement to less than 1/2 movement, and only from less than 1/2 movement to full stop (and vice versa).

[Presidente]

I like Pok's idea, it would speed up the game massively, but that could only be applied to t3 squadron's

 

and would quite nicely sort out snaking too.

[alextroy]

I'm rather amazed to have found a "solution" to the snake with the standard FSA turn template.  Instead of placing the template so that the front of the turn is in line with the front of the base, you place it so the back of the inch is in line with the back of the base.  You then move to line the front corner in line with the front of the turn template.  The result is a 45 degree turn with the stem moving almost exactly 1"!  Doesn't work so well for large based models....

 

 

 

[gr1mdan]

The only reason it's more "important" is because of one style of weapon arc and that's Fore Fixed. Otherwise they share exactly the same arcs and the exact same importance in turning. I would say four range bands count too but that's generally to do with speed and when you start turning. Not how you turn.

Just out interest what movement mechanics are in other games coming or already out? Dropfleet ( I've seen previews of the rules and it doesn't appeal to me )

[NickH]

Dropfleet ( I've seen previews of the rules and it doesn't appeal to me )

Me neither, it seems to exist in the gap between FSA and Planetfall where combat should be dominated by orbital mechanics

 

Some cool but completely impractical spaceship designs though.

[avien]

avien I understand how you feel about movement, BUT movement is very important in FSA (much more so than in Halo).

Eyeballing (or loose rules on turning) gives a significant advantage to factions like the Dindrenzi and can lead to disagreements or player fustration. Unlike many other miniature games out there, movement is extremely critical in FSA and movements taken in turn 2 can result in issues in turn 4 due to not having the fore sight to see where that movement would leave you down the line.

Perhaps Taskforce will make it simplier in this regard... or try house ruling 45 pivots and then move 1 inch forward is an acceptable turning method.

Haha I think I'm getting the reputation as that guy who won't shut up about movement