On ZOCs and their effects

[MarkusB]

Article 39.2 says: "Each stand has a rectangular region extending directly out from its front edge to a distance of 1 base width (2 MU) or until the point where it is blocked, whichever is less". Is this what was once called the 'rolling carpet interpretation'?

Article 40.5d says: "It may make any otherwise legal move, but is limited to a movement distance of 2 MU and may not end in front, flank, or rear contact with any other enemy stand". Given that conforming doesn't happen in the movement phase, a single element in the ZOC of another single element could thus contact it even if the contact wouldn't result in frontal/flank/rear contact?

[David Kuijt]

Article 39.2 says: "Each stand has a rectangular region extending directly out from its front edge to a distance of 1 base width (2 MU) or until the point where it is blocked, whichever is less". Is this what was once called the 'rolling carpet interpretation'?

Not really. Rolling carpet was always blocked by anything. Our ZOC is semi-transparent -- fighting stands and friendly stands block the ZOC, but other things don't.

Preventing friendly stands from exerting a ZOC is critical to avoiding some major cheese, where a stand hidden partially behind a friend is exerting a ZOC and controlling enemy moves.

Different cheese is created when fighting stands (stands in combat) are allowed to exert ZOC. Most critically the idea of X-ray ZOC paralyzing 2-3 stands by hitting or nearly hitting a stand from the front is really, really peculiar. The concept of ZOC is based upon the idea that your stands are unwilling to put themselves gravely at risk by fancy maneuvers when they could at any moment be hit by an enemy stand that is threatening in some way. Enemy stands that are in combat with a different friendly are clearly busy and not imminently threatening.

Article 40.5d says: "It may make any otherwise legal move, but is limited to a movement distance of 2 MU and may not end in front, flank, or rear contact with any other enemy stand". Given that conforming doesn't happen in the movement phase, a single element in the ZOC of another single element could thus contact it even if the contact wouldn't result in frontal/flank/rear contact?

If you look in the start of the rules somewhere it states that "Flank Contact" (same for rear) means the sort of flank contact that creates combat (or prevents fall-back if there is something in the front). Not any contact on the flank at all. So I'd modify your last sentence -- instead of saying "could thus contact it even if..." I'd say "could thus contact it ONLY if..."

It is possible to get into an overlap position by using your 2mu limited "in ZOC" move, yes -- in fact, that is the sort of "forming a more safe line" that is exactly the sort of move that guys in the ZOC would be expected to want in the real world.

[MarkusB]

Thanks for the explanation, and good point about the semi-transparent ZOC... It seems a really solid solution.

But I have a follow-up question: when and if ZOC is blocked, is the resulting 'blocked' ZOC a rectangular area (of 2MU x less than 2MU) projecting itself directly forward from the front edge until it touches the blocking element (as per the old carpet method)?

[David Kuijt]

Thanks for the explanation, and good point about the semi-transparent ZOC... It seems a really solid solution.

But I have a follow-up question: when and if ZOC is blocked, is the resulting 'blocked' ZOC a rectangular area (of 2MU x less than 2MU) projecting itself directly forward from the front edge until it touches the blocking element (as per the old carpet method)?

That's correct. It's simpler. All other shapes cause problems of measurement and clarity, and in many cases allow some cheesy abusive tactics.

[Kontos]

With the new clarification examples I am having trouble digesting the e44a and e44c diagrams and premise. I can accept a single enemy stand not blocking a ZOC. However; if that same enemy stand is engaged by a friendly unit it now does block ZOC. Doesn't that unit have better things to do than the idle one? What concept am I missing?

[David Kuijt]

With the new clarification examples I am having trouble digesting the e44a and e44c diagrams and premise. I can accept a single enemy stand not blocking a ZOC. However; if that same enemy stand is engaged by a friendly unit it now does block ZOC. Doesn't that unit have better things to do than the idle one? What concept am I missing?

It has to do with cheese reduction. In essence, enemy stands create ZOC unless they are busy. What is commonly called X-ray ZOC causes some real problems (bizarre problems) if there is no way to turn the ZOC off; since the concept of ZOC is that the enemy unit could potentially threaten the unit you are moving, having it be attacked is the logical way to turn its ZOC off.

To summarize:

• Every ZOC-blocking system we tried (and we tried MANY: Keyhole, Carpet, Laser, Triangle, others) creates rules complexity (longer, more complex rules), measurement complexity (how do you determine ZOC at all? Laser ZOC was one of our better creations, but measuring it required a special tool), and situational weirdness (special cases that leave you scratching your head going WTF?)
• Having no way to block ZOC (X-ray ZOC) creates other bizarre cheese (special cases that leave you scratching your head going WTF?)
• Blocking (turning off, really) an enemy unit's ZOC because it is engaged and defending itself this turn solves most of the problems.

The other "purification" of ZOC was allowing the 2mu move (to do anything but attack a non-ZOCing stand) in ZOC -- so ZOC can no longer paralyze completely.

[Rod]

Kontos,
In the particular case you sight.... Combat, think of it this way, the two units are friendly and enemy are now a mix of combatants... at least until their combat is resolved.

So the combat is the thing that is actually blocking the ZOC, not just an enemy stand.

And it is not about what the enemy has to do per say, but whether or not a unit on the opposite side of that combat considers him a threat?

I.e. two stands with a combat going on between two other units taking place in their mutual ZOC. Their ZOCs do not pass through the combat and threaten the units on the other side. Too much crap going on in between them to be worried about the guys on the other side of that dust cloud.

[Rod]

And yes could not agree more that the paradigm shifting 2MU move in ZOC was a huge break through from previous systems...!!!

[David Schlanger]

Conceptually it is brilliant, and is a vast improvement over certain legacy systems that shall remain nameless...

[Kontos]

Thanks all. I had a hunch it was to clean up the messy cheese wiz from another nameless system. I had to just conceptualize, and accept, the new premise. Looking forward to being "educated" in a few games during HCon. Can't wait to reconnect with old friends.