Hi

It bothered me greatly from our las regionals. Was trying to found clear answer on this but fail.

Situation:

We have tie fighter trying to shot on A-wing in debris field. Both bases are all hiden in obstacle and toucheach other.

Question:

Does debris field obstruct LoS during Tie attack and a wing counter attack?

In my opinion No (but this is my opinion-judge on tournament say Yes). For me there is unobstructed LoS (small but still)

56 minutes ago, NairoD said:

Hi

It bothered me greatly from our las regionals. Was trying to found clear answer on this but fail.

Situation:

We have tie fighter trying to shot on A-wing in debris field. Both bases are all hiden in obstacle and toucheach other.

Question:

Does debris field obstruct LoS during Tie attack and a wing counter attack?

In my opinion No (but this is my opinion-judge on tournament say Yes). For me there is unobstructed LoS (small but still)

Here's the deal:

Essentially, if there's an obstacle involved, and bases are touching, you are still obstructed . (By feedback)

The only rule we have on this matter is this:

• If line of sight is drawn over an obstacle, the attack is obstructed even if the bases of the attacker and defender are touching.

The feedback we've had from the Rules Team in the past is that the intention is for things to be obstructed when they're both milling about on an Asteroid or Debris field.

Can I give you anything more than that from a rules perspective? No. Not unless we get super-pedantic - so here we go:

Essentially, the only way to argue semantics is to boil things down to an atomic level... In which case, you're still obstructed, because no matter how close you get, you won't actually be touching . So there will be an infinitely small area of obstacle inbetween the two points... There you go, boom, obstructed LOS.

Or another way - ask yourself, 'how big is the "touching" area'?. These items are circles, if your actual "Width" of LOS has any actual width to it, then you will be overlapping the obstacle, because the touching point between two circles is, essentially, an infinitely small point.

I feel, given both the nature of the absurdity of the arguments, plus the feedback from James Kniffen way back when... Was that they were to be Obstructed.

Sinc the Squadron bases represent fighters milling about, rather than just a specific actual blob, they're all attempting to duck and weave between Asteroids (or debris, or station components) as well as fight - they're distracted, and distracted means obstruction, and obstruction means no Engagement.

I'm sorry I can't be more specific than that, but its not addressed anywhere else other than the single rule above...

The squadron base doesn't represent the actual size of the fighter group, it's just a game mechanic.

Try and picture it like an atom where 99.9% is empty space and you can never predict the exact location of the electron.

If you can then yes the attack would/could be obstructed.

That makes an interesting (not really) debate about the same situation with ships cause:

Q: While a ship is overlapping an obstacle and the attacking hull zone’s traced line of sight does not pass over a visible portion of that obstacle, or another obstacle or ship, is that
attack obstructed?
A: No.

You can still argue that there is a portion of obstacle, an atomic one but... are atoms visible?

Btw, what happens if is it the attacing hull zone rather than the defending hull zone?

Anyway, as Dras said:

If line of sight is drawn over an obstacle, the attack is obstructed even if the bases of the attacker and defender are touching.

That answers are fine for my. Thx guys

On 06/07/2017 at 5:27 PM, ovinomanc3r said:

You can still argue that there is a portion of obstacle, an atomic one but... are atoms visible?

You obviously didn't understand what I typed.

3 hours ago, Vetnor said:

You obviously didn't understand what I typed.

And you obvious thought I made the joke about your post what I didn't.

If a ship or squadron shoots at something where the LOS would go off its own base (including plastic and shield dials) and still cross over an obstacle (no matter how small a part that might be), it is obstructed.

Now, if a part of a ship or squadron is on an obstacle but the LOS is traced through a part of the base that doesn't overlap the obstacle (such as a shield dial extending into open space or a ship corner that isn't on the obstacle) then LOS isn't obstructed, even if the LOS dot it targeted is on top of an obstacle.

1 hour ago, thecactusman17 said:

even if the LOS dot it targeted is on top of an obstacle.

Do you have any official refference on that? I had a situation like that once and with a dust field, so the outcome in that case was greater (attack or no attack) and we didn't know how it really should have worked

Just now, Lemmiwinks86 said:

Do you have any official refference on that? I had a situation like that once and with a dust field, so the outcome in that case was greater (attack or no attack) and we didn't know how it really should have worked

It is specifically addressed for an attacking ship in the FAQ:

FAQ v3.22 pg 6 OBSTRUCTION said:

Q: While a ship is overlapping an obstacle and the attacking hull zone’s traced line of sight does not pass over a visible portion of that obstacle, or another obstacle or ship, is that attack obstructed?

A: No.

Applying it to an attacking squadron is a reasonable, but not explicitly supported, extrapolation.

12 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

It is specifically addressed for an attacking ship in the FAQ:

You're right, I read it in the FAQ some time ago, but for some reason I seem to keep forgeting out that