superb infantry training

I asked this at BGG but will x post here.

If a player moves, say a Spanish Line for example, and then plays Superb Infantry training, will it roll 4 or 3 dice. Strictly reading the card, it says there will be NO battle die reductions after moving, so reading it that way would mean that the halving does not occur but also the spanish -1 die for moving does not occur. Is the intent to just ignore the halving however instead?

The unit don´t halve the movement dice but all other restrictions apply.
See FAQ example about british LN

Q:How many dice would a british Line Infantry roll with this card, especially get the brit. LN the +1 die for standing fire?
A: A unit fires with the number of blocks but a british Line Infantry would not get the +1 die, because they moved.
(Richard Borg: 2015 - July- 30)

That does not answer the question.

The reason is that British Line Infantry do not get a bonus +1 because they moved by definition. This is a basic feature of British Line Units. They NEVER get the +1 fire if they move, its inherent in the unit. So regardless of the card play, if British Line move, they won't get a +1.

Spanish is different. It states on unit description that if Spanish LN moves, they get a -1 die FOR MOVING. So, if the Spanish LN moves and play Superb Training, the card states that NO PENALTY applies, and the -1 is a penalty.

Not sure the ruling fully applies to this situation when taken strictly for the english written.

I think Richard would need to rule on this.

I think Richard would need to rule on this.

He did with the answer of the british line, i completed the FAQ.
It´s always difficulty, to decide which wording of our mails i add to the FAQ, because there is ALLWAYS a new small thing, which was not considered on one side and keep the FAQ simple and short on other side.
The better wording would been " a unit don´t halve his dice because movement, but all other movement restrictions apply"
(that´s the designers intention behind it).

And i also agree, it´s not satifying that we get with each new "mechanics/rules" a lot of new FAQ´s and we goes step by step in to a way as we have it in meantime with Memoir 44.
A worse example in my mind are also the rules for the Rocket Battery, half rules and same for range and close combat would been the better way....

So we can only hope, that Richards playtesters avoid in future to many new rules which collides with existing rules and
they notice such unclear words before they write it down on cards e.g.

But i am not in the playtesters team, so i can´t say, how many games they they play for playtesting and if they do it with all existing units/rules.
And why they use sometimes such unlucky wording as they did with the Superb Infantry Training, Sappers, Call Forward Reserves and others,
without seeing such obvious problems.

Also your other question about the Guerrilla Marker and the TC´s must be seen before, if you play/test it with enough spanish scenarios.
And i had yesterday another situation with the Capable Tactician card, which allows also different interpretations, so there are actually
2 outstanding responses from Richard...

I am personally happy with 10 new rules/cards less, but clear in wording, instead 30 new rules/cards, which complicates the good simple CCN system.

That helps a lot.

Very clear if it says: "The infantry unit is not halved when moving"