LoS and Cover have come up often in these forums and I thought I would post the flowchat I have been using in my head for games.

Based on the RR and emails provided here . We know that the intention with cover is to establish interactions between a unit and terrain during the pregame. You and you opponent decide on what units can benefit from certain terrain. This is NOT INTENDED to be done mid-game. Meaning that a unit can only gain cover from a piece of terrain if it was established pregame that the defender gains cover from that terrain.

This is still a WIP since we know the RR will be updated soon* so if you can think of any changes I should make to the flow, or think I am completely wrong in some part of all of it please provide your feedback. I am basing all of this on MY read of the rules and clarifications provided by the emails linked above.

15 hours ago, SwdPwnzDggr said:

LoS and Cover have come up often in these forums and I thought I would post the flowchat I have been using in my head for games.

Based on the RR and emails provided here . We know that the intention with cover is to establish interactions between a unit and terrain during the pregame. You and you opponent decide on what units can benefit from certain terrain. This is NOT INTENDED to be done mid-game. Meaning that a unit can only gain cover from a piece of terrain if it was established pregame that the defender gains cover from that terrain.

This is still a WIP since we know the RR will be updated soon* so if you can think of any changes I should make to the flow, or think I am completely wrong in some part of all of it please provide your feedback. I am basing all of this on MY read of the rules and clarifications provided by the emails linked above.

If you don't mind I would like to leave my comment I made in a previous post regarding LOS and Cover here.

Most of it is roughly the same as yours, but it also covers a few extra points that you missed.

Biggest most important part of LOS and Cover is determining the values before the game starts.

Hope this helps

"Best way I can explain it is when determining Line of Sight , you take the viewpoint at the very top center of the mini. When Determining Cover , you draw a line from the center of the attacking mini's base to the defender. if that line crosses Barricades or other Terrain, the defender is considered to have Cover X .

Barricades provided in the Starter set are to be considered heavy cover. Other Barricades Cover is determined by the spread sheet on page 8 of the RRG. When determining Cover , if majority of the models are in cover then that unit will gain Cover X . If there are mini's both in heavy and light cover, then whichever Cover has the most mini's is the Cover they gain. For Example, If you have 2 mini's with Heavy cover and 3 minis with Light cover, the squad is considered to have light cover .

These rules will have to be Errated because they don't make sense for some model EX; AT-ST.

That's how I interpret the terrain rules. Please correct me if i'm wrong".

Yeah, sounds about right. I didn't want to put all the Los instructions and such because it could bloat the spread sheet.

However the email clarifying the impact of LoS while determing cover does make sense for an atst. Using the base rules the most important part is the imaginary line from base to base. But with the email we are told that if a unit has clear los to every part of a mini you can skip this step as they gain no cover.

This is a great flowchart, and what I was going for when I made this chart. Mine is more of an attack reference chart, but yours has decision trees which is very helpful.

Link to chart as PDF

A flow chart such as this one should be in RRG. It would answer 99%+ of all of the confusion going on with the really obtuse cover rules. FFG, are you listening?

5 hours ago, Thraug said:

A flow chart such as this one should be in RRG. It would answer 99%+ of all of the confusion going on with the really obtuse cover rules. FFG, are you listening?

We are about to have a game that is 2 months old, the RRG should have been updated with the LOS/Cover rules and some other ambiguous or contradictory rules.

I think they may have their hearing aides turned off and have for some time. ?

2 hours ago, Amanal said:

We are about to have a game that is 2 months old, the RRG should have been updated with the LOS/Cover rules and some other ambiguous or contradictory rules.

I think they may have their hearing aides turned off and have for some time. ?

I'm sure they want to update it. But from what I understand there is an approval process for their SW games. No proof of it that I've seen but people talk about it a lot.

On 4/26/2018 at 1:09 AM, SwdPwnzDggr said:

LoS and Cover have come up often in these forums and I thought I would post the flowchat I have been using in my head for games.

Based on the RR and emails provided here . We know that the intention with cover is to establish interactions between a unit and terrain during the pregame. You and you opponent decide on what units can benefit from certain terrain. This is NOT INTENDED to be done mid-game. Meaning that a unit can only gain cover from a piece of terrain if it was established pregame that the defender gains cover from that terrain.

This is still a WIP since we know the RR will be updated soon* so if you can think of any changes I should make to the flow, or think I am completely wrong in some part of all of it please provide your feedback. I am basing all of this on MY read of the rules and clarifications provided by the emails linked above.

Great job.

I think, during attack only terrain pieces and minis that obscured the target at first could count when drawing the imaginary line of sight. If the line crosses a piece that didn't block LoS that piece doesn't count. But I could missread the email response.

Thank you anyways.

On 4/26/2018 at 10:40 AM, Banditoralf said:

Barricades provided in the Starter set are to be considered heavy cover. Other Barricades Cover is determined by the spread sheet on page 8 of the RRG. When determining Cover , if majority of the models are in cover then that unit will gain Cover X . If there are mini's both in heavy and light cover, then whichever Cover has the most mini's is the Cover they gain. For Example, If you have 2 mini's wi   th Heavy cover and 3 minis with Light cover, the squad is considered to have light cover .

These rules will have to be Errated because they don't make sense for some model EX; AT-ST.

Why will this need an errata? Barricades are defined on p 9 of the RRG as giving cover to trooper minis. It is perfectly reasonable for some terrain, like buildings or large trees/hills, to give cover to an AT-ST if that's decided before setup.

36 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

I think, during attack only terrain pieces and minis that obscured the target at first could count when drawing the imaginary line of sight. If the line crosses a piece that didn't block LoS that piece doesn't count. But I could missread the email response.

Sorry, but what does this mean? When performing line of sight, that is the "at first" to see if the target is obscured. There is no other line drawn if LoS wasn't blocked. If you look at the flowchart, that's the blue box at the top: "Can your unit leader see every part...of the defending unit?" If yes, you don't draw any lines, you just skip down to attacking.

On 4/25/2018 at 7:09 PM, SwdPwnzDggr said:

LoS and Cover have come up often in these forums and I thought I would post

Thanks for the useful resource.

53 minutes ago, Turan said:

Sorry, but what does this mean? When performing line of sight, that is the "at first" to see if the target is obscured. There is no other line drawn if LoS wasn't blocked. If you look at the flowchart, that's the blue box at the top: "Can your unit leader see every part...of the defending unit?" If yes, you don't draw any lines, you just skip down to attacking.

I meant that pieces of terrain that count when drawing the line are those that obscured the mini while measuring line of sight.

A stormtroopers unit shoot at Luke who is behind a tree. Between both units there is a barricade. When checking LoS Luke is partially covered by the tree but not the barricade. Then the line is drawn from center to center and it happens that it doesn't cross the tree but it cross the barricade though. As the barricade didn't block LoS it doesn't count despite the fact the line actually crossed the barricade.

That's how I read the email response but I could be perfectly wrong.

You are correct, that is the wording used in the e-mail. It does appear to be an error in the flowchart - not "any" piece of terrain, but the specific piece of terrain that obstructed line of sight.

OK, so I have a couple of pictures.

This cover is as we can see more than 50% of the height of the AT-RT.

Situation 1:

The AT-RT is partially covered by the terrain but I can still see more than 50% of the model. Since the piece of terrain is in between the Speeder's center of base and the AT-RT's, that target is concealed, and will get cover since this single model represents more than 50% of his squad.

Situation 2:

I can see 100% of the model and base above a piece of terrain, despite that piece of terrain theoretically giving cover to it. Since I see all of the model, no point in trying to see if it is concealed: It doesn't get any cover.

Situation 3:

I cannot see 100% of the mini, so draw a line in between our center of bases. Since I can, from my center of base draw a line to his center of base, the AT-RT doesn't get cover from the speeder.

Is this correct?

Yup, all 3 are correct!

3 minutes ago, Deuzerre said:

T  he AT-RT is partially covered by the terrain but I can still see more than 5  0% of the model

Not too nitpick too much, but at this point it doesn’t matter if you see 50% or not. During the game you only need to determine 100%, or not 100%.

Thanks (It was just to point out that 50% of the mini part didn't actually matter, to be sure)

On 5/25/2018 at 7:31 AM, Deuzerre said:

Is this correct?

Yes you are correct in your final determination of wether the targets does or does not receive cover.

As pointed out above, your comment on situation 1 about the AT-RT being more than 50% visible, while an correct observation, does not have any bearing on the resolution of the rules.

It is useful to remember that cover and visibility are abstractions and that the models represent units in motion and in various poses over time.

Well, to be honest, this is how I have been playing it since reading this thread, but I always suck at explaining it to others (especially since the third step after "no" on the "during attack" is poorly worded in the rules.) so I made the pics as a visual example and to be sure I wasn't mistaken.

Did I forget anything?

1: full model seen, no terrain in between: no cover

2: full model seen, terrain in between: no cover

3: partially seen model, terrain in between: cover

4: partially seen model, terrain not in between: no cover.

5: same as 3, but cover is less than half the height of the model: no cover.

6: same as 3: even a tiny bit hidden provides cover

7: only concealed by terrain that will not provide cover even if terrain providing cover is in the way of the bases: no cover

8: shooter touches terrain providing cover: no cover

9: no line of sight: no shots

10: leader with no line of sight, other members with line of sight: apply cover

11: at least half the target squad is in cover: apply cover

12: less than half the squad is in cover: no cover

Now I have a question: if my leader is hugging a wall that blocks his line of sight but the rest of the squad can see, will the target get cover or not as raw? He touches terrain (check) and thus ignores the terrain for cover...

3 hours ago, Deuzerre said:

N  ow  I have a question: if my leader is hugging a wall that blocks his line of sight but the rest of the squad can see, will the target get cover or not as raw? He touches terrain (check) and thus ignores the te  rrain for c  ov  er... 

The target will indeed get cover. You’re right that touching the terrain allows you to ignore it for cover (or to be more accurate, that terrain does not obscure, per page 22), however in that case the terrain is not directly providing cover. Lack of LOS is why they have cover, and touching the terrain does not suddenly allow you to see through it. So that terrain won’t obscure, but will still block LOS.

All the other situation look correct to me. That’s a handy chart.

4 hours ago, Deuzerre said:

Did I forget anything?

Nice chart!

I think other rows that can be useful are ones showing all the permutations of targets on terrain *above* the elevation of the attacker. I was making up a diagram in illustrator for those, and I really like your format!

On 5 & 6 listing the 50%, 75% coverage on the chart may be misleading to some because it implies that % is some how relevant to evaluating cover during combat and not before.

2 may be more clear also if you include cases where the terrain is 75% or even taller than the target, but the attacker can completely see over the model.

For giggles there's also the situations of two squads lined up with a wall almost entirely between them but with only one trooper peeking out from both sides. Depending on the position of the attacker's leader the defender may or may not be in cover, and you can have multiple units contribute to the wounding the other squad, where the one attacking exposed unit allows t he ot her squad to receive wounds on all of it, and the one defending exposed unit allows the attacker to contribute all it's dice.

It's not 50 / 75% but badly written >50% ; <50% markers on the height of the mini, with a line of dots drawn from the top of the cover horizontally to the mini.

I'll have a look at these situations.

40 minutes ago, nashjaee said:

[...]So that terrain won’t obscure, but will still block LOS.

I can't find any bit in the rules that say anything like this. Could you provide a page?

25 minutes ago, Deuzerre said:

I can't find any bit in the rules that say anything like this. Could you provide a page?

From page 22:

Quote

If the attacking unit leader’s base is touching a piece of
terrain, that piece of terrain cannot cause a mini in the
defender to be obscured.

And then page 8:

Quote

Terrain that completely blocks line of sight always provides heavy cover.

edit: ah, I see my mistake now. What I wrote before this edit was incorrect. You still have to check for obscuring before proceeding to what type of cover is “provided”. So, no cover is granted.

37 minutes ago, nashjaee said:

edit: ah, I see my mistake now. What I wrote before this edit was incorrect. You still have to check for obscuring before proceeding to what type of cover is “provided”. So, no cover is granted.

However, the leader does not contribute dice to the attack pool I believe.

Okay here's the baseline diagram. I think everybody agrees this is how it works.

https://imgur.com/a/MPzROiY

Derp