Hadn't noticed this before, but the rules governing balkas as written seem to indicate that a unit inside one can attack any unit within LOS while a unit wishing to attack a unit inside a balka would have to be adjacent. The latter makes sense the former does not. Is it really intended to be played like this????

I agree that the wording is not very clear. It seems to imply some sort of one-way line of sight. In ToI line of sight always runs both ways though, so unless mentioned specifically I think it still goes both ways here.

Latro said:

I agree that the wording is not very clear. It seems to imply some sort of one-way line of sight. In ToI line of sight always runs both ways though, so unless mentioned specifically I think it still goes both ways here.

"Units in a balka hex are not in LOS except to units in adjacent hexes or if the attacking unit can trace its entire LOS through contiguous balka and/or balka entrance hexes to the target unit."

On the other hand, unless mentioned specifically isn't LOS unlimited, so, since it is mentioned here as a restriction to being seen only, isn't reasonable to assume that the restriction is one way and seeing out is still unlimited? Wouldn't this make the terrain a more dangerous version of a concealed unit?

longagoigo said:

That's how I interpret it and that's why the balkas in "Meat Grinder" scenario are so interesting terrain for the Soviets to start in. On the other hand, if units can't see out of it, it importantly changes the tactical solutions for the Soviets.

my memory recalls that the Balka was set up to be advantegous to the unit in theBalka as they lower terrian feature so the attacker should have to be near to see units inside.

BJaffe01

Meta Baston said:

Did you find that this advantage for the Soviets balanced the advantage given to the Germans by the Elite Formations card?

longagoigo said:

Did not play it yet! Just studied it, following the discussions about it lately, figuring how I would set up when I'll play it.

BJaffe01 said:

Shouldn't it, realistically speaking, also work vice versa then? I agree that game-wise it might add a nice touch, but it seems incredibly gamey and unrealistic to me...

Kingtiger said:

I'll second that ... the game doesn't need tank-trenches with a built-in cloaking device.

well historically some balkas where big enough to allow tanks to sneak up on opponnets both sides used this in the don bend on the approach to stailngrad plus at kursk as well

BJaffe01

BJaffe01 said:

Yes, but the debate is all about units in a balka seeing and shooting at enemy units at all ranges while the enemy can only shoot back if they are at short range. Giving a hidden advance route is fine (and is what I think the rules describe), breaking the "seeing = being seen" rule is not ... and the rules as written do leave some room for interpretation unfortunately.

BJaffe01 said:

Sure, sneak up on them is one thing, but then firing-perhaps even multiple times and maybe even at long range- and not being seen unless the enemy is right next to you just doesn't make any sense.

If the intention is as you describe, there could be a special rule that units in balka cannot be seen until they attack or something. Once they do LOS should work both ways. It's always like that, isn't it?!

I would really like to see an official clarification on this one...

I agree that the wording needs clarification. I can live with units seeing and being seen only at range 1, but that needs to be clearly stated.

If units in Balkas can be seen after firing, the Balkas need better cover values, I think.

Units firing from Balkas at any range without being seen is not realistic.

I think I prefer the "cannot-see-in-cannot-see-out" solution. It is the simplest way to do this.

KlausFritsch said:

Seeing and BEING seen is indeed key here. Seeing and NOT being seen -consistently and intentionally, that is-doesn't make sense.

"Units in balkas can only attack adjacent units or be attacked by units adjacent to them unless LOS can be traced solely through (other contiguous) balka hexes. There is no LOS if units are NOT adjacent to one another and if LOS cannot solely be traced solely through contiguous balka hexes".

The above would be my version.

Kingtiger; Thats how i think it should read to then it would still act as a way of sneaking around by being in the balka as Bill posted but without the unrealistic I can see you and kill you but you cant do anything about it. Im trying to remeber how other games i have played deal with balkas and i think all of them need both units in or out of the balka to be next to each other for LOS.

This way the balka is still an advantage for the player using them as it forces the other player to respond to the threat, which may draw units into a trap or away from other areas in the battle

Kingtiger said:

I am going to use that version (including balka entrance hexes) in my games until something official comes out.

I think that is what the rules conflict of heroes use for balkas

I always thought that LOS went both ways anyway. I have just been reading the rules online (as im still waiting for the game) and from reading the balka rules I would just assume that they would need to be next to each other for both to have LOS.

The rules need to clear this up as it only refers to the unit in the balka

After rereading the rules for me it's clear.

LOS for Balkas are different to the standard rules. Here I wrote it in little different way:

Units in a balka hex are not in LOS except:

- to units in adjacent hexes

- or if the attacking unit can trace its entire LOS through contiguous balka and/or balka entrance hexes to the target unit.

Dogma79 said:

we know that. the question is do units in a balka HAVE LOS to other units.

yes, because the exception is LOS to units in balkas not from inside to outside.

Dogma79 i think your rewrite is correct. I reread the playtest rules and then the final version and what you rewrote seems more accurate. btw not an official answer.

BJaffe01

Dogma79 said:

There's one big catch though ... your explanation works fine for attacking units trying to shoot a unit in a balka, but at soon as the unit inside the balka tries to shoot back (and becomes the attacker himself), he finds himself facing the same restrictions that protected him. The RAW of a balka says that a unit outside and a unit inside are not in LOS regardless of who the attacker is ... unless adjacent or LOS can be traced through balka hexes.

Yes I know, but what is sense of balkas then?

We need official clarif.!!!

Where are the designers? Just ONE answer!!!