How do they work now? terrain sheet says a maximum of one per pre-laid town or village.
Presumably then, once a town or village is down, someone can pick a boundaried field and they go on just like any other terrain piece?
Correct.
So to get one down you need to get a village down.
S
This perhaps implies I've been doing terrain selection wrong all along
At the start of the game do you pick all terrain in each category (compulsory, optional) before you roll for any of them or do you pick it when it's your turn to put something on the table?
My understanding (and yep would be good to get clarified) is its chronological.
e.g. Dense terrain type:
Compulsory (1 Difficult, 2 Rough)
DEF: I'm going to choose the Difficult piece as XXX. <do the placements rolls and outcomes>
ATK: <Attacker considers board after Defender choice>
Ok, well I have to choose a Rough piece. I'll pick YYY. <do the placements rolls and outcomes>
DEF: <Defender surveys board after previous Compulsories resolved>
And I get the final Rough piece. Hmm. It will be a ZZZ. <do the placements rolls and outcomes>
Optional (up to 2 any, per player)
DEF: <Defender considers the board after the Compulsories and decides happy with layout>
I'm going to choose to place none.ATK: <Attacker reviews the board and wants more terrain>
Right. Ok, well I am going to choose to place my first piece as an AAA. <do the placements rolls and outcomes>
ATK: <Attacker surveys results after the 1st Optional piece. Decides whether or not to choose a second optional piece. In this case, decides she's happy with the board as is>.
Cool, I'm happy. I'll elect not to choose a second Optional.<Progress to Outscouting>
No, all compulsory are chosen (alternately), before any are put down. Then you put down the compulsories
Then all optionals are chosen (alternately). Then you put down the optionals.
You don't get to see the result of one terrain piece and then choose your next piece.
QRS: "Defender chooses a compulsory item, then the invader until all are chosen.
...
Place compulsory items alternatively starting with the defender"
I don't think alternatively is correct either ;)
If you loose the village/town then you also loose the field. My regular opponent says you have to throw for the field and if it lands the either of the two sections not occupied by the village you also loose it. Is that correct?
Geoff
That's right Geoff, if you position your settlement on a border, you have a 66.66666666666666666666666etc of keeping your field.
I thought that had changed. As long as the village stays then your field can then be anywhere on the table. It used to have to be adjacent to it.
Yep it says nothing about being adjacent or otherwise on the new terrain chart.
It's in the clarifications. p5. "Boundaried Fields. Must be placed touching a BUA that has ALREADY been placed on the table or touching another field adjacent to a BUA (the 2 BW spacing rule is ignored for these)."
There was a long debate about this on the old forum which arose from a point made after a tournament that the placing of boundaries Fields was too easy. My recollection was that Simon concluded that a mid way was required which made thecplacing of a village compulsory but thereafter there was no need for this to be adjacent to the village. Only one field per village.
This was Simon's response late last year on the old forum site - not sure if it changed.
Actually just noticed its already fixed in my draft
R Boundaried Fields S,C Fields that have hedges or walls around them and are potentially defensible Infantry visible at 3 BW Any bases defending the edge Obstacles pre 800AD, or Barricades from 800AD. Must touch houses or another BF when initially placed (if not possible lost).
So much harder and rarer to get as 2/3rd chance of losing it with only 1 village on the table.
Ah - just saw this later response:
May only be placed in sectors with a village/town or an adjacent one.
Now 67% chance - and a decent bet.
The latest clarification for the placement of a boundary field is:
• MUST be placed touching a BUA that has ALREADY been placed on
the table or touching another field adjacent to a BUA (the 2BW
spacing rule is ingored for these). There is no placement roll but the
opponent still gets an adjustment die roll. Prior to 800AD they a
bounded by OBSTACLES, thereafter they may be BARRICADES at the
choice of the placing player (using the date of the defending player).
If chosen and there is no BUA at the time of placement, they are lost.
Which implies that you choose all terrain pieces before laying them.
Geoff
OK but where is it ?
I did not find it and the latest modified terrain table says nothing of it except that you need a BUA !
Could not find it either ... please be kind
IWC is next weekend 19/20 and my Vikings would like the opportunity to attempt boundaried fields
Else i will have to avoid Boundaried just to avoid time wasting argumentations ::)
Quote from: badhabum on January 13, 2019, 04:34:45 PM
OK but where is it ?
I did not find it and the latest modified terrain table says nothing of it except that you need a BUA !
The latest clarifications document in 2019 Rules Materials, https://the-wargames-zone.co.uk/wp/theancientszone/2019-rule-materials/
BOUNDARIED FIELDS
• MUST be placed touching a BUA that has ALREADY been placed on
the table or touching another field adjacent to a BUA (the 2BW
spacing rule is ingored for these). There is no placement roll but the
opponent still gets an adjustment die roll. Prior to 800AD they a
bounded by OBSTACLES, thereafter they may be BARRICADES at the
choice of the placing player (using the date of the defending player).
If chosen and there is no BUA at the time of placement, they are lost.
I really think we need a ruling on this. The clarification does not agree with what I thought was the conclusion reached by Simon after a lengthy debate on this on the old forum. To be honest, I am now just confused as to where we are.
Craig has posted what is in the most current material, therefore, I would suggest that this is what is official - use that until Si says something different.
Also is there any actual issues with what is in the claries? Looks reasonable to me and is nice and clear.
Or are the issues that it doesn't quite match people's (possibly flawed) recollections/desires? Or that Si may have tweaked what he said on the old forum to something he thinks is better/clearer for actual 2019 publication?
I think the 2019 clarifications are clear, but may not match previous discussion.
BUT.. the clarification does say they go next to a BUA that is already down (or a field next to existing BUA).
So you muct get a BUA down and then you can place it next to the BUA.
If the BUA is removed, the field cannot be placed. (so sad)
Yup right now not easy to get down.
Si
A very old discussion but to be 100% sure, enclosed/Boudaried fields may not anymore be placed next to a village that has been scrapped away
So if I want open ground, I choose boundaried fields and hope my opponent doesn't choose a village?
Quote from: badhabum on September 16, 2022, 09:41:52 PM
A very old discussion but to be 100% sure, enclosed/Boudaried fields may not anymore be placed next to a village that has been scrapped away
I could be more précise. Has that rule be scrapped away and I mean being able to place an enclosed field without dicing next to a BUA
OK so no one to answer 8)
What is the answer about this rule : may we or not place the field net to a BUA without dicing
The RULE was scrapped with the COMPENDIUM EDITION. Placing of boundaried fields is the same as any other rough terrain piece. There is a maximum of 1 per pre-laid town or village, so if no town or village has been laid, the terrain piece cannot be placed. If the number of boundaried fields already equals the number of towns or villages then the terrain piece cannot be placed.
If you want open ground, choose open ground. There is no circumstance where you can choose rough but not open.
Richard
Thank you. The answer was needed as someone ar Rueil insisted on that rule in order to have a boundaried field next to a village 8)
i think the issue arose here, because there was a clarry about placement which supported to placement touching the village, a decision was then made to alter the clarry but not published in updates or current clarries. It would probably be a good idea not just for this clarification of clarification to be published but that any other Clarries that have been doubly clarified be published as well, i haven't looked but i suspect there may be more conflicting clarifications or unpublished decisions or clarification