units that "may not move"

[t1M0t8yk]

I recently played a scenario that prohibited units from moving until a condition occurs. It's unclear if the intent was no movement activation, which would also prohibit digging in and rallying, or simply no relocating to a different hex.

It seems situational. At varying times either interpretation may apply. How do you interpret such movement constraints? Is there a general consensus which limitation applies?

[cjsiam]

Given it is situational....where does it happen?  Can the Designer(or a Guru) provide clarifying....??

Which scenario was the constraint?
Given the Scenarios are not electronically searchable (with understood rational), we have
to revert to paper sources, which = eyeballs of sentient PG players (many questions...).

If anyone knows of such scenario---lets dump the list here and
then consolidate and go to D(G) above.
I'll help.
cj

[plloyd1010]

If it is no moving until an enemy unit is spotted, I would also say no digging in or other activity. Such SSRs are usually about one side being unaware of the other. If such is the case, why would one be digging in "now" instead of last night or whenever?

[triangular_cube]

Is there a scenario where rallying would be relevant? I guess I cant say if thats moving or not, but usually when units are frozen they wake up when fired on or spotting the enemy or some such circumstance that would allow them to then rally afterwards. 

Have to agree with Peter that digging in would count as moving as it specifically "costs all of a units movement allowance" per the rules in addition to the situational context mentioned above.

[plloyd1010]

Is there a scenario where rallying would be relevant? I guess I cant say if thats moving or not, but usually when units are frozen they wake up when fired on or spotting the enemy or some such circumstance that would allow them to then rally afterwards.

Probably not. The caveat being that I don't know of any scenario arrangement where one side begins with disrupted/demoralized units and has a no move rule. Since no move restrictions are are void when the opposing side is spotted or starts firing, the situation is unlikely to come up.

[cjsiam]

So "no move" should be "no move or fire activation" until the condition of sighting enemy is met, perhaps?

Given it's about them "going about their business", not knowing of the approaching problem....this would clarify it all...

[plloyd1010]

So "no move" should be "no move or fire activation" until the condition of sighting enemy is met, perhaps?

Given it's about them "going about their business", not knowing of the approaching problem....this would clarify it all...

No fire seems superfluous.

[cjsiam]

So "no move" should be "no move or fire activation" until the condition of sighting enemy is met, perhaps?

Given it's about them "going about their business", not knowing of the approaching problem....this would clarify it all...

No fire seems superfluous.

Worse, I think it would be incorrect....
A fire activation requires target, requires sighting......
I suspect that would be in most activating conditions...

So "no voluntary move activation"

[Hugmenot]

What scenario specifically are you referring to? I've developed well over a hundred and I may be able to help.

[t1M0t8yk]

I think my original question was prompted by my recent solo play of BotB scenario #1.