Author Topic: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!  (Read 28394 times)

ajax98

  • Guest
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #15 on: January 08, 2010, 06:53:16 PM »
Excellent! Fresh eyes.
I have been diving in the minutia.

gull2112

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4197
  • From the RUSH faction
    • Meditations on Brain Injury
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #16 on: January 08, 2010, 07:05:14 PM »
A fresh pair of eyes is a great addition! It is sometimes difficult to anticipate how a new person might view something when you are a jaded participant. :P
"Rules are only as good as the book they're bound in."
http://gullsbattleground.blogspot.com/

ajax98

  • Guest
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #17 on: January 09, 2010, 01:46:13 AM »
I read through the rules and noted my questions below.  I'm a newbie but trying to learn the rules, so take these comments/questions/suggestions however you like.



?0.1 Introduction
Quickstart?  What is the best introduction and way to start games?  The quickstart in this rule set seems more of a summary without any of the details necessary to actually play when starting (the old rules quickstart seemed like a reasonable way to start playing).
•Too much condensing?

Quote
1.1.1. (Assigning standing orders)
Standing orders may change from routing or getting to objective
•Standing Orders may also change, involuntarily (routing or Spells/Magic) or conditionally (Objectives/Direct Control).

Quote
1.1.3.  (Ranged order)
Range order-unit will stop if in range of a unit. In giant example, can you expend the extra command early (or at any time) so giant will attack at range when gets there?
• The unit will completely expend its Movement in moving to become “in range”. (This means that it does not stop at the point wherein it might have the range. It moves its full movement and then the range is checked during the Combat Phase.) Since all Commands and Movement are to be completed before the end of the M&C phase, you must allocate the desired Command Actions to attain your desired end. This can be done at any time during the phase. Only if the prerequisite Cmd Actions have been allocated will the Giant be valid in making a Ranged Attack.

Quote
1.1.5. (Follow order)
How is nearest non center point measured?
• This is a good point in attention to detail. The specific detail is when you decide to move the “Follow” unit.
At that particular moment you will take the measure to non-front center points. Take a measure and determine the closest, ties are to be chosen by player. Under certain circumstances the correct tactical response is to "move" that unit first and move very little at all.

Quote
1.4.1.4.  (Nearest Enemy)
What if terrain blocks view of both armies, who is nearest enemy (none are clearly visible). What do units do that are on command "C"?
• Just take measure of the nearest Enemy unit regardless, as possible scouts would give your Army a general idea of where the enemy was.
Or at the beginning of the game it should be announced that all units without a Clearly visible enemy to Close on will take measure from the closest part of the enemy’s deployment zone.

Quote
1.4.5. (Maneuvers)
I didn't understand this before and I'm still not clear about it:  "A unit can't maneuver if the penalty would decrease its MC to less than the distance it has already moved this turn."


Does this mean if a unit moves LS (or even LL) and has already moved L then it can't do the special moves because that would drop it below what it has already moved.
• Yes, that is essentially the idea. The basic idea is that you can’t expend more movement than what you are alloted. I just work it backwards from where I want the unit to be and how to be oriented. It will give you a good idea of how to move your unit. Figure any special moves costs and subtract from MC and you should be able to do it in your head after a few times.


Quote
1.4.5.2.  (Move Sideways)
Does this mean you can reduce the movement 1 MC and then measure from one side of the card (like the forward measurement). What about turning while moving to side?
• Sideways movement is leading with your Flank. So yes, your idea seems correct. The Turning while moving to the side is not different from normal. Treat the Flank as the Facing or Leading side to measure from.
You may then revert to normal forward movement without penalty.


Quote
1.4.5.5.  (Turn)
It seems one could perform a turn to move slightly forward but move sideways and thereby not pay the penalty by moving sideways.
• “Turning” is an important concept to understand. In the direction of your movement (within 90 degrees of the face side moving, with 0 being directly forward) you place the measure at the corner of your card on the side which will be the “outside” or greatest part moving, measure out the correct distance and mark your spot. This will always place your measure in an arc that is in front of your unit.

Keep your measure in place as this is now the edge marker for that flank, take your unit and place the Leading edge perpendicular to marked spot with the side of the unit flush with the measure.

• Done properly the unit will not move sideways.

Quote
1.4.6.1. (Final Rush Priority)
I think this means a unit can be on H and then changed to C and then final rush.
• Yes, during the M&C phase the SO can be changed (and is often done) to achieve an Engagement. One thing to keep in mind is that you must do this BEFORE you initiate the Final Rush  Determination.

Quote
If final rushes are done sequentially can a possible final rush become impossible (or impossible become possible as other units move and rush.
• There is still some discussion on this matter, as to sequential determination or otherwise. Right now the way the rules are written for 3.0 you have the correct idea that things may change based upon how the player moves the units.

Quote
1.4.6.2. (Final Rush Exclusivity)
Does this mean two opposing units can have each other as H-objectives and then touch each other (and possibly take the extra turn to position on objective unit) and both units just stand there looking at each other without attacking?  In order to attack one would have to be given C command?
• The short answer is Yes, they will not attack one another. The most obvious way to Engage is to Close, so to cause that one or the other would have to be given “Close”.
There are two types of Objectives, Unit and Point (before known as Terrain).  “Hold“ with a Unit Objective generally doesn’t make sense so it is usually not an issue. But the general parameters are followed in any case.

Quote
1.4.6.3.3. (Open side) 
Do we final rush nearest open side or facing side?
• The Facing side is the primary target. Presently that is the only valid target. This may change.
1.4.6.3 Final Rush Conditions states all six criteria must be met for making a valid FR.
A seventh condition exists :1.4.6.4 Moving in a Final Rush
...
If possible, you should engage your unit with the enemy's facing side (1.4.1.3.)

And this is a point of discussion because it is not part of the 6 criteria.
Unfortunately this creates Ambiguities and in not clear in its execution.

Quote
1.4.6.3.4.  (Open Path)
What if nearest open side has no open path but another open side has a clear path?
• As above, all the Criteria must be valid for a valid FR. No Open Path, no FR. If the Open side has all valid criteria then a valid FR exists.

Quote
1.4.6.3.5.  (No Turning back)
What if final rush not legal?
• No Turning Back does not force a FR. It merely indicates that enemy unit is the Only valid target. Not valid, no FR.

Quote
1.4.6.6. (Pinches)
I think a pinch check is only made once per turn.
• Yes. Moves, FRs and Engagements are completed in the M&C Phase. To check for Courage caused by a Pinch is done once in the PreCombat Courage Phase.
It is very important to understand the Phases and how the discrete actions in each phase are addressed for resolution.

Quote
1.4.7.2. (Indirect Path)
Do I have this right?  Indirect path rule gives a few choices: move forward and hit obstruction (terrain, unit) and just sit there, move forward hit obstruction and then move around, or anticipate obstruction (if it is terrain only??) and then make quickest movement around.  Can a unit do something in between (anticipate obstruction make take an intermediate path?)
• Basically, Yes. You have choices. Anticipation works for both units and terrain.

Quote
1.4.7.4.  (Tiny Gap Rule)
I think I understand this but it could probably be made more clear with an example or two.  I think the point is if a unit routs but is trapped by friendly units, then it can disengage with the enemy unit routing it and therefore not be destroyed by the routing engagement rule.  Is this correct?
• Yes. The Tiny Gap rule always allows the immediate disengagement. Thus a unit is not automatically destroyed when caught in a bad position and forces the other player to make an Active choice to destroy the unit.
[Unless the Routed unit is totally surrounded by enemy and/or Blocking Terrain.]

Quote
1.4.7.5 Units Already Engaged
I can already see it--which units are actually moved?  Moving one or the other could be a benefit to one side or the other.
• You are Only permitted to move your own units (“At the beginning of your movement and command phase”). Thus to make this minor adjustment you move your unit. If this is not possible, so be it. Then the other player, during his next player turn, will be forced to make adjustment if possible.

Quote
1.4.7.6.2 Routing into Friendly Units
If a routing unit moves through a friendly unit, does it gain an additional 2.5" of movement by moving through the card or is this movement taken away from its maximum movement?
• There is no gain of MC or inches due to moving through another unit. If the full extent of the movement would clear units of overlap, no problem. If not then the routing rabble is placed on the opposite side and stops.

Quote
1.4.7.6.3 Routing to the Table Edge
If it begins in contact with the edge of the table, do you have a chance to rally the unit or it is destroyed?  I would guess this should be worded, "if a routing unit begins the combat phase in contact . . ."
• You always have the “last chance” to rally your unit. If at the end of your M&C Phase you have not expended the CA to do so the unit is destroyed.

Quote
2.1.1 Failed Rout Checks
Turning engaged units seems to give a lot of freedom.  Does the card orientation have to remain the same?  (I'm guessing not since this seems to be covered by the Note)
• The rule “If it is engaged, turn it to face directly away from the enemy unit of your choice, if able.” Means that you have a choice only if more than one unit is involved. Normally the unit on its Front Facing is the unit “directly” turned away from. This also depends on the direction the unit will move to attain the greatest distance away from the enemy.

Quote
2.2 Fear Checks
So the penalty of a fear check is only one turn?
• Yes, for the immediate next Courage check phase. The possibility of Fear is only before combat. Once engaged by that specific Fear causing enemy unit, it is no longer applicable. That does mean if other Fear causing units become Engaged, more checks will happen.

Quote
2.5 Rout Movement
So a routing unit turn around, runs 2" and runs into an enemy and has to stop.  Are they now engaged and therefore destroyed?  Or, are they almost but not quite touching and therefore not engaged (since they can only engage by a final rush)?  I just don't understand the typical situations when a unit would be engaged after routing (especially since a unit unengaged and be unable to move due to a friendly unit.

Also, the routing movement is supposed to move its full movement toward the player's side of the table.  What if the routing unit is faced to the side of the table.  What happens then--will it be faced toward the edge of the table after routing movement?
• If a unit Routs, it will move away from enemy units. Since the Routing unit has no formation, it has no Maneuver Penalties. The distance it flees is directly related to the Front redline cp. It will never engage an enemy unit, no matter how close it is. Tiny Gap rule means that if there is room for the unit card, it will not be engaged.
For all purposes Routing units may not Engage.

• The only situation wherein a unit remains engaged after Routing is where the unit is completely surrounded by enemy units and/or Impassible Terrain.

• The initial Rout will move the Routing unit away from and out the greatest distance between it and A) the unit(s) causing the Rout and B) other enemy units; if this allows movement towards friendly edge, even better.
Once that is accomplished, the next turns the unit will rout as best it can towards the Friendly map edge and keep as much distance as possible away from enemy units, priority given to getting to map edge. As such each turn it should be in some measure closer to that edge, not greater. It will use its entire MC.


Quote
2.6 Courage Cleanup
Does this mean a unit could be in a loop until they are destroyed?  So, a unit fails a courage check, takes a free attack and is put into the yellow, still engaged (so, it should probably just be destroyed) and takes another courage check and fails.  I'm not sure what could possibly happen in this phase.
• This is phrased as such due to a specific set of circumstances, presently anticipating a very specific Umenzi on Umenzi exchange. Generally nothing will cause this phase to recycle. All other situations will resolve themselves aptly during this phase.

Quote
3.1.1 Shooting Attack Defenders
I didn't see anywhere where "unblocked line" is defined.  Since indirect fire attacks can occur, its not clear to me what this means (or why it is necessary).  (Or, maybe unblocked is defined in below where it talks about line of sight and indirect attacks).
• Good point for defining things. Yes the definitions are resolved in the following rules text. A “blocked” line (of fire or attack) depends greatly upon the Type of attack it is. Generally you can not fire past blocking terrain or the front line of enemy troops. There are exceptions and to be found in the details.

Quote
3.1.1.2 Line of Sight Attacks
In 2nd example, I think the first "If" should be deleted.
• Quite right, good eye.

Quote
3.1.1.3 Low Arc Attacks
Since these can not fire at engaged units, perhaps they are not more flexible (as stated) than line of sight attacks, just different.
• The “more flexible than line of sight attacks” is what makes the difference. What it amounts to is the inclusion of these units for more use in shooting attacks and no “engaged” penalty when shooting at large+ units engaged with friendlies.

Quote
3.2.3.2.4. Attacking to rear
I think the bonus is negative.
• Yeah, Typos.

Quote
3.2.3.2.5 Pinching
What if A and B are pinching X but X and Y are pinching B who gets bonuses?
• The criteria is that for a unit to get a Pinching Bonus the unit must be only engaged with One Enemy. Any unit can contribute to a pinch as long as it is on a different side.
Thus A and Y would get Pinching Bonuses.

Quote
6.3 Terrain Types
All these terrains would be very nice in a chart.
• Yes, there are a number of charts that would be nice.

Quote
7.6 Skirmishers
The routing rules are quite clear--there is no free attack but they may have to have another rout-check if the automatic dammage drops them to yellow/red?  What about if they do their rout movement and are engaged, are they destroyed automatically?  I assume they are automatically rallied to hold but can they then be ordered something else that same and attack the same turn they were rallied?
• They only auto rally under specific circumstances. The rules for Rally are specific in that a unit that rallies “in that phase” may not do anything else, to include receiving another SO. The Auto Rout rule would usually prevent them from becoming routed and still engaged as the FR to engage must be done before other movement. But if they were to be completely surrounded and unable to Rout move then the normal destruction would happen.

Quote
7.6.1 Skirmisher Recall
So this would mean it gives up any attack the skirmishers may have had?
• I think that “unegaged” should lead the phrase “skirmishers rout”. Otherwise that would be correct.

Quote
7.6.2 Routing Skirmishers
Moving through an enemy unit, could it possibly add to the MC of the skirmisher?  And, if the skirmisher moves through a friendly, these rules seem to imply that they are rallied on the opponents turn and thus can fight the next turn.
• Non Airborne Units never move through Enemy Units. The information was for moving through Friendly units. It does not add MC. It merely reflects that the Skirmishers would regroup at the back of a line of units.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2010, 03:43:49 PM by ajax98 »

ajax98

  • Guest
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2010, 05:42:31 AM »
Two items I don't see addressed:

Specifics for errata on units lacking Keywords denoting Movement Type. Right now a lot of the heavy equipment are default "Infantry", lacking credibility - Goblin Bomb Chucker, Giant Catapult, Dwarf Ballista, etc.

Specifics for "Voluntary" Routing. It is Implied in the course of the mechanics, through Back Up and Flee rules. Specifically state that a player may refuse to roll dice for any Courage Check and Result, Rout, automatically happens. Further, allow Direct Control to order a unit to Rout, essentially to get it out of the way.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2010, 03:03:03 PM by ajax98 »

lazyj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 839
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2010, 01:33:09 PM »
I like it Ajax - I'm all for extra-annoying Wolfkin!  8)

vwcamp

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #20 on: January 21, 2010, 03:00:41 PM »
Thank you for the detailed response!  It is very helpful and I am still digesting and now I need play (I need to find an opponent too!).  A couple follow-up questions.

Quote
1.4.5. (Maneuvers)
I didn't understand this before and I'm still not clear about it:  "A unit can't maneuver if the penalty would decrease its MC to less than the distance it has already moved this turn."

Does this mean if a unit moves LS (or even LL) and has already moved L then it can't do the special moves because that would drop it below what it has already moved.

• Yes, that is essentially the idea. The basic idea is that you can’t expend more movement than what you are alloted. I just work it backwards from where I want the unit to be and how to be oriented. It will give you a good idea of how to move your unit. Figure any special moves costs and subtract from MC and you should be able to do it in your head after a few times.

Sorry, I'm still confused.  It is easy to understand that you can't move more than your allotment, but this seems to give an additional restriction of not how much you have left in your allotment but how far you have gone compared to your allotment. Am I missing something?

Quote
Quote
1.4.7.2. (Indirect Path)
Do I have this right?  Indirect path rule gives a few choices: move forward and hit obstruction (terrain, unit) and just sit there, move forward hit obstruction and then move around, or anticipate obstruction (if it is terrain only??) and then make quickest movement around.  Can a unit do something in between (anticipate obstruction make take an intermediate path?)
• Basically, Yes. You have choices. Anticipation works for both units and terrain.

I thought somewhere it stated that anticipation was not valid for units since units could move or be destroyed.   But, anticipation for terrain was fine since that was fixed and not going to move.

ajax98

  • Guest
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #21 on: January 22, 2010, 05:19:41 AM »
Thank you for the detailed response!  It is very helpful and I am still digesting and now I need play (I need to find an opponent too!).  A couple follow-up questions.

Quote
1.4.5. (Maneuvers)
I didn't understand this before and I'm still not clear about it:  "A unit can't maneuver if the penalty would decrease its MC to less than the distance it has already moved this turn."

Does this mean if a unit moves LS (or even LL) and has already moved L then it can't do the special moves because that would drop it below what it has already moved.

• Yes, that is essentially the idea. The basic idea is that you can’t expend more movement than what you are alloted. I just work it backwards from where I want the unit to be and how to be oriented. It will give you a good idea of how to move your unit. Figure any special moves costs and subtract from MC and you should be able to do it in your head after a few times.

Sorry, I'm still confused.  It is easy to understand that you can't move more than your allotment, but this seems to give an additional restriction of not how much you have left in your allotment but how far you have gone compared to your allotment. Am I missing something?

The simplest way to move is to just do it. The Standing Order tells you where. If your unit needs to change directions, practice making turns according to the description in the rules. Turns do not reduce your Move Class.

When units get in each other's way, then more complex maneuvers come in handy. Move a unit sideways, that reduces your MC by one step, say 3.5 in to 2.5 in. Sometimes it takes a couple of moves sideways to get around an obstruction.

So if you move sideways twice, that would be 5" of movement. If you cleared the obstruction and had any movement remaining then you move forward that amount.

But if you could foresee that you would be needing to move at least 2x in that direction, then Reforming, -2MC and moving straight would give 1.75 + 3.5= 5.25" and face 90degree from original direction.

What you would be prohibited from doing is move sideways 1.5" and then Reforming, because the maximum movement you would have to move sideways (-1MC) and then Reforming (-2MC) would be 1.25"

Quote
1.4.7.2. (Indirect Path)
Do I have this right?  Indirect path rule gives a few choices: move forward and hit obstruction (terrain, unit) and just sit there, move forward hit obstruction and then move around, or anticipate obstruction (if it is terrain only??) and then make quickest movement around.  Can a unit do something in between (anticipate obstruction make take an intermediate path?)
Quote
• Basically, Yes. You have choices. Anticipation works for both units and terrain.

I thought somewhere it stated that anticipation was not valid for units since units could move or be destroyed. But, anticipation for terrain was fine since that was fixed and not going to move.

I am not real clear about this. The best thing to do is play it like "what is reasonable" for the unit commander to do to fulfill the Standing Order, with the an understanding of the Commander's Intent (You). If that makes it do something that you recognize as really bad, then you take Direct Control to put it correct to your plan. I've done that many times or changed the SO.

Close (attack), Hold (shoot) or Range (get to range and shoot). Simple orders for your units to move on their own to fulfill until you change the SO in some fashion.

Have you tried the on line tutorial?
« Last Edit: January 23, 2010, 04:11:20 AM by ajax98 »

vwcamp

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #22 on: January 22, 2010, 09:03:55 AM »
Great answers and now I need to play some more (played some last night, solitaire, and its starting to make sense).  Thank you.  The on-line tutorial is great but it doesn't answer the details as well as I would like.

ajax98

  • Guest
Terrain Type update
« Reply #23 on: January 29, 2010, 01:06:00 AM »
Terrain Type update - Bridge is missing from defined terrain types.
Like 'Shoreline' it is adjacent to water/river; can be tied into same def.
It has a 'road' feature across it; needs to be clear how 'road' feature works.

3. As you have observed, there presently is no "Bridge" definition under "Terrain Types" (p.48, pdf R2,4). I use and suggest the "Shoreline" definition for Bridge, as you have described. If it is a Shallow River, High Ground for the unit on the Bridge against units in water is correct and no Defended Obstacle, as per.

I just realised - you also get +1 MC for 'Road' - does the Bridge count? I guess it does...
Depends on how you parse out Movement. I'll let somebody fraction it out if it is clean and quick.
That would be what fraction of your MC is spent on the bridge/road and add that fraction of the +1MC in to the overall movement.

The simple answer is - only if you start and end your movement on the "road". Thus technically the Bridge would equate to a road feature, but the advantage is small but perhaps useful.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2010, 01:10:19 AM by ajax98 »

Unknownman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #24 on: February 09, 2010, 11:19:49 AM »

I posted this in another thread as well.

What happened to the proposed FEAR change?
Where a unit gets (-1) hit dice and roles for the additional -1/-1 penalty...

Is this going to be added? I think large units need this.

ajax98

  • Guest
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #25 on: February 10, 2010, 05:13:46 AM »
The 'Fear' proposal update is being thought over by the powers that be.

Our group has already adapted it for testing.

I'm thinking that it was responsible for about a 35% increase survivability on a Dragon that had 1 last Green box for the owning player to ensure a Major 5vp Victory.

Unknownman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #26 on: February 11, 2010, 02:59:12 PM »
My friend and I were playing yesterday trying different ideas for fear. One that we liked, and that was simple, was fearsome units cause an automatic -2 courage to units engaged with it. Automatic and constant. And terrifying causes -3. No other dice affects just a courage modifier.

ajax98

  • Guest
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #27 on: February 11, 2010, 04:57:09 PM »
My friend and I were playing yesterday trying different ideas for fear. One that we liked, and that was simple, was fearsome units cause an automatic -2 courage to units engaged with it. Automatic and constant. And terrifying causes -3. No other dice affects just a courage modifier.

What it comes down to is how does (the designer/developer) wish to portray the multitude of factors that are at play on a 'pre-gunpowder' battlefield.

Presently in this game system the 'Courage' function is a major factor in Victory or Defeat. It can cause a unit to Rout. A unit routs another unit is open to Pinch or being ganged up upon.

IMO, it really needs to be viewed in the larger sense of Army morale rather than Individual fight or flee.

When used in the manner which you have demonstrated it is focusing on some very specific factors that are not in line with the game mechanics.

For what you are actually doing is to impose the entire unit with the "courage" level of a unit that has been in Heavy Combat over an extended period of time suffering severe casualties.

"Fear" in this game context doesn't and shouldn't do that. An individual, though frightened, gains confidence, 'courage', from his 'buddies' being around him in the 'unit'. The cohesion of the unit would be impaired but not to the extent that Failing a Courage check would imply.

Although the -1s seem small, they are very much painful and signify significant changes in the probabilities.

Unknownman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #28 on: February 12, 2010, 11:38:32 AM »
Ok, but if you dont believe fear should affect courage, then why do you have Terrifying units cause -1 Courage?


« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 11:48:04 AM by Unknownman »

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4708
Re: The Battleground Rules: Version 3.0!
« Reply #29 on: February 12, 2010, 12:55:01 PM »
It's a -1 Courage to the Fearsome roll.  That's a massive difference.  If you blow the Fearsome roll you're less effective for a turn, which may have rippling implications through the game.  But a penalty to the Courage stat for Rout checks is huuuge.

The fundamental strategy of BGFW is to win a one-on-one matchup so you can flank the other guy's line.  So if you make it easier to do that, then there must be a corresponding cost for that ability, which is almost certainly not reflected in the costs of Fearsome & Terrifying units.  I think we can all agree that Fearsome/Terrifying is pretty underwhelming right now, but this would swing the pendulum too far the other way.

I think the automatic (-1) -0/-0 and then an additional (-0) -1/-1 if you fail a Courage Check is perfect.  If the person makes the test, it's worth less than a command card.  If they fail the test it's worth more than a Command Card.