Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Attack Vector: Tactical» Forums » Rules

Subject: 1.5 Rules: Bug in seeking weapon example? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Wilhelm Fitzpatrick
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Am I really missing something, or should the vertical component of the crossing vector in the example after F1.134 be -4, instead of +4 as printed in the rule book? That is, shouldn't the 6 in the lower half of the bottom vertical component hexagon in Figure F-2 be moved to the upper half of that hexagon before consolidating vectors, thus in F-3 the 4 in the lower vertical component hexagon actually ought to be written in the upper half of its hexagon (-) instead of the lower half (+) as actually printed.

I think there is an implied step in the middle of F1.133 -> "After adding together the numbers in all hexagons, the final number in each hexagon should be written in its top half". I know none of my CVs seemed to make sense until I intuited this into the 1.0 rules, and I was hoping the 1.5 rules would clarify this step, but they haven't.

Or am I totally lost here?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Anderson
United States
Sundance
Wyoming
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Am I really missing something, or should the vertical component of the crossing vector in the example after F1.134 be -4, instead of +4 as printed in the rule book?


Looking at it I agree it should be -4. CV is supposed to represent the vector of the target as if the firing ship was motionless. If I'm firing and have a 6+ vector, and my target has a 2+ vector, then obviously (to me at least, i think )his vector is -4 from my point of view.


Quote:
think there is an implied step in the middle of F1.133 -> "After adding together the numbers in all hexagons, the final number in each hexagon should be written in its top half".


I think your right here. If the 6 was copied to the top of the hex before consolidation then it would work out.


Quote:
Or am I totally lost here?


I don't think you are, but if so, you have company.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike zebrowski
United States
Unspecified
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
I agree that it should by 4- as well.

Mike Z
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Burnside
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
designer
mb
Good catch. Fixed. From Dauntless' perspective, Boskone is moving down by 4 hexes per turn. Doesn't change the rest of the example.

I've also made the "implied step" of moving the consolidated vectors into the "target half" of the hexagons an explicit step.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Picio
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
Ken, are those changes incorporated into the copy I have for editing? (and if not, can I get another one?)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike zebrowski
United States
Unspecified
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
I thought that the 1.5 rules were done. Why is the book still being editted if it is already being sold?

Mike Z
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Burnside
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
designer
mb
Matt mis-spoke.

He's the errata coordinator, not the editor.

As I find errata, I have people send them to Matt, so he has his list of things to send back to me (it's MUCH easier to have one point of contact, rather than have it come to me and get buried in my inbox.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.