First off it is possible for your ship to have it's yellow dot over an obstacle but because the line of sight from cardboard to cardboard of the firing and target hull zones is not over an obstacle, that shot is therefore unobstructed.

So I was at a Seasonal Tournament at Beanie Games yesterday and I was called over to another game to help resolve a query. There was some good natured chuckling going on between the players and one player wanted to know if he could get away with conscientiously achieve the following:

• Ship A wants to shoot Ship B at long range. Half way along the line of sight (LOS) is a dust cloud obstacle that would block LOS completely. The owner of ship A has time to wait as B has activated so decides to bring in Ship C to sit on the dust cloud covering it with its base completely along the original LOS. Can ship A now fire as the LOS doesn't cross a dust field between cardboard of the ship bases? If this were not a dust field but an asteroid then ship C wouldn't make any difference as the shot is just obscured by either an obstacle or Ship C.

Initially I thought "how ridiculous" but then had doubts and we all discussed it more. Eventually we agreed the shot couldn't go ahead as Ship C wasn't either the firing or target ship so wouldn't count and you go with the most disruptive obstacle on the LOS which is the dust cloud. Thoughts...

It was initially ruled that the obstacle counted.

But an email response essentially ruled that, when viewed directly from above , portions of an obstacle obscured by ship bases do not count... you only count that obstacle if Los touches the obstacle visible outside of the ship.

It's an interesting case, but as @Drasnighta said, I think that this FAQ could be applied there:

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.

Although in your case the ship attacking isn't the one overlapping the obstacle, the principle is the same, LOS pass over a non-visible portion of an obstacle, so I think that obstacle doesn't matter in tha case.

Yes! I thought it had been added as faq after the email, but today is not a good day for my head and I played it safe.

Be cautious though with the overhead view concept that shield dials DO NOT COUNT for LOS purposes...

but they do for overlapping.

go figure.

but certainly, using a THIRD OARTY ship to obscure the dust cloud is.... unique and not covered by the ruling in particular.

added to questions for clarification.

How does a ship cover an obstructing obstacle and not become an obstruction itself?

The difference is... Ships merely obstruct (-1 Die).... Dust Clouds are No Attack through it!

So by parking a ship on it, and firing through the ship, you still get to attack, albeit at -1 die... which is better than not at all.

For extra fun, you should be able to pull the same trick with a squadron base, provided it's at one of the thinner portions of the cloud, right? Wouldn't even obstruct.

4 hours ago, Snipafist said:

For extra fun, you should be able to pull the same trick with a squadron base, provided it's at one of the thinner portions of the cloud, right? Wouldn't even obstruct.

I think that doesn't apply, the closest rule we have is the FAQ and that point only mentions a ship covering the obstacle, not a squadron.

So I'm curious.. If two ships are touching at a point that overlaps an obstacle and LOS is somehow drawn exactly over the spot that touches so that it never passes over a visible part of the obstacle.. what then?

Is the rule stating that even if bases are touching it's obstructed in conflict with the FAQ stating that it has to cross a visible part of the obstacle?

I admit, this situation is extremely rare. It would take a very precise and lucky movement to get the bases touching in the first place, and then they would have to be in an exact position so that LOS would be traced through that point of contact.

6 hours ago, Snipafist said:

For extra fun, you should be able to pull the same trick with a squadron base, provided it's at one of the thinner portions of the cloud, right? Wouldn't even obstruct.

If that's true you could daisy chain squads to break obstruction across obstacles. But squads touching bases sitting on obstacles are still obstructed so maybe not?

2 hours ago, durandal343 said:

If that's true you could daisy chain squads to break obstruction across obstacles. But squads touching bases sitting on obstacl  e  s are still obstructed so maybe not? 

My interpretation on that one has always been that the cardboard of the squadron bases covers up the obstacle, but the transparent plastic on the beveled base does not, so even two base-to-base squadrons both in the same obstacle would be obstructed. However, I've never actually seen it spelled out as to why so I'm curious if you can use squadrons to produce clear LOS where otherwise it would've been blocked. So long as the cardboard segment of the squad base is covering all the obstacle the LOS is going through, there's no real way of telling.

That said, I'm mostly just curious as to what the answer is on that one. It's not something I would push very hard, but I'd like to see it spelled out at some point.

12 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

My interpretation on that one has always been that the cardboard of the squadron bases covers up the obstacle, but the transparent plastic on the beveled base does not, so even two base-to-base squadrons both in the same obstacle would be obstructed. However, I've never actually seen it spelled out as to why so I'm curious if you can use squadrons to produce clear LOS where otherwise it would've been blocked. So long as the cardboard segment of the squad base is covering all the obstacle the LOS is going through, there's no real way of telling.

That said, I'm mostly just curious as to what the answer is on that one. It's not something I would push very hard, but I'd like to see it spelled out at some point.

Squadrons base to base on an obstacle are treated as obstructed and not engaged as there is always a gap, no matter how small. Same is true here.

2 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

My interpretation on that one has always been that the cardboard of the squadron bases covers up the obstacle, but the transparent plastic on the beveled base does not, so even two base-to-base squadrons both in the same obstacle would be obstructed. However, I've never actually seen it spelled out as to why so I'm curious if you can use squadrons to produce clear LOS where otherwise it would've been blocked. So long as the cardboard segment of the squad base is covering all the obstacle the LOS is going through, there's no real way of telling.

That said, I'm mostly just curious as to what the answer is on that one. It's not something I would push very hard, but I'd like to see it spelled out at some point.

It doesn’t actually work that way. (Re: two squads touching being obstructed over an obstacle)

Unlike ships, squads don’t use their cardboard for LOS.

Their point of reference is the closest point of their base.

Basically, the only reason they are obstructed is the Rules say so. There isn’t any other real precedent for it... jyst that without a rule, it could be argued either way via physics, atomic distance and infinitely thin lines being wider than two points of a curve touching... so it’s just out if the way of argument this way.

If you were going to daisy chain squads over a long obstaclevlike that (theoretically) they would have to be positioned with infinite precision - which the current rules on squad placement do not allow (even taking extra time to measure it) as if you are off be even a fraction of a millimeter , the chain is (theoretically) broken.

...

I’m mistky rambling now, but I think it basically boils down to: do you believe in precedence?

As there is no specific rule provided, if you are going to have this happen, to avoid a null gamecatate, you must have a rule.

Where so you pull the rule from?

Some people pull from thin air and go with it. That’s cool, and perfectly acceptable for disjoiningbissues in casual games.

When it comes to me and TOing events, I generally need Sinething to base a rule on.

in this instance, it would probably be the Ship Rules, applying them to squadrons (the part of the obstacle under the base does not count)...

But I think in the end, it says that squads are ignored for LOS purposes... if that’s the case, they are technically transparent all the way through ?

On 5/17/2018 at 1:34 AM, Drasnighta said:

The difference is... Ships merely obstruct (-1 Die).... Dust Clouds are No Attack through it!

So by parking a ship on it, and firing through the ship, you still get to attack, albeit at -1 die... which is better than not at all.

I’m more confused than first appeared. What’s a “dust cloud” vs a “debris field”? This isn’t in Learn to Play or Rules Reference for obstructions. Is this a Correlian Conflict thing? Thanks.

4 minutes ago, ShoutingMan said:

I’m more confused than first appeared. What’s a “dust cloud” vs a “debris field”? This isn’t in Learn to Play or Rules Reference for obstructions. Is this a Correlian Conflict thing? Thanks.

It is indeed a Corellian Conflict thing.

Or rather, it can be a certain standard mission thing, but it’s in the Kit.

off the top of my head... the objectives “Salvage Run”, “Jamming Field” and “Close Range Intel Scan” all utilize the Dust Cloud obstacle.

The dust cloud does not allow ship attacks through it. Squadron attacks are obstructed as normal, and there is no effect on overlapping them with ships or squadrons.

Got it. Thanks. I have CC but haven’t played.