Combat Movement

[plloyd1010]

Well Vince, I certainly hit a nerve, though I am not sure where it was.

I base my predictions on having read the 4th Ed preview, Infantry Attacks, and Modern Battles. Translating some is mentioned in the preview into the PG system in general looks problematic due to the incongruity between the games. I also have the 2nd Ed. rules. I am quite aware of what did not get cleaned up last time.

All games have chrome on some level. For example rule 7.23, the Split Fire rule. Another is rule 15.31, Cavalry Charges. Chrome is an old wargamer term used to refer special rules or units to create a particular desired affect which the rule would not otherwise allow normally. There was chrome in PG, there is chrome in PG, and there almost certainly be chrome in PG. The real question is whether or not it overruns the game system.

Of course someone asked Fred's question was asked before. I asked it. I agreed with answer. My philosophical view for prohibition units to move into the LOS of an enemy capable of harming them would imply some tactical coordination which the game system invests in leaders. Without a leader, my popping up over a dune, or Fred's jumping out of the jungle, at an appropriate moment is quite unlikely.

lastly, old gamers, like myself, view rules as merely being the designer's opinion as how the game should be played (and I think Brian Knipple had an errant opinion in PG). i frequently find the fundamentalist view in gaming as irritating, as I find it disturbing in religion. In case you are wondering, i do like Calvinball.