I looked through the revised rulebook and it says pretty much the same thing as the old one about flamethrowers.

Good call on the blocking of LOS, so in D the Ludwig cannot be targeted due to blocked LOS by the light walker.

Ah yes, the key sentence here is "you still need to be able to target each square independently" which is something the Revised Core Rulebook doesn't really say.

Ok, so taking that into account, would D be legal if all targets were squads?

And also, keeping the example as it is, would you be able to hit the 1st light walker, skip the Luther cause you have no LOS to it, and still hit the 2nd light walker at your maximum range? All the while avoiding your friendly squad?

No and no, the friends must be a target as the LOS goes through their square, you only deviate the shot when it crosses a corner.

Major Mishap said:

But going back to the official Hot Dog example, when it targets the Luther, the LOS clearly goes through the squares of both the Heavy Flak and Laser Grenadiers, and yet it is able to completely bypass one or the other...

In that situation the Hot Dog gets to choose which infantry unit it hits as having a range of 2 can only hit 2 squares.

Well, same goes for the Fireball, being Range 3, it can only hit 3 squares, so it can chose what path the blast takes to get to its final destination.

I understand I'm playing the "loophole master" roll here, but I think it's necessary to do so in this case. The fact is that the rules don't really explain how you go about "choosing the spaces where the flames spread". I wish they would impose some clear restrictions that would drastically limit the amount of options you have to direct your flame jet.

As it is, the rules only have three things to say:

- "inflict damage on all units in spaces between the attacking unit and the target unit"

- "player chooses the spaces where the flames spread"

- "must still be able to see each target following normal LOS rules"

The big issue is what constitutes this "space between" attacker and final target. The rules say nothing, but the example allows us to conclude that a "space between" is one that is crossed by the LOS line, even if it just skims a corner. But we still don't know for sure what are the limitations of ignoring such a "space between" in favour of another.

Yeah. It bothers me that there isn't so much a "rule" for how it works, but merely examples.

If it were me, I would have made it thus:
If it passes through the square, it hits the unit.
If it passes exactly through a corner, the player can choose which square gets hit by it.

Then you wouldn't need a myriad of examples on how it would work - you could just follow the rule. As they have it now, if there is a real "rule" to it, the developers found it too difficult to explain so they just gave us examples instead. It makes it very difficult to determine how a range 3 napalm thrower would work.

Yes, those rules you establish make sense, but if that were the case, then the Hot Dog would hit both squads when firing at the Luther.

In fact, the rules themselves don't really say anything against that. They say you hit " all units in spaces between attacker and target", without limiting the amount of targets to your range. So if we followed that to the letter, the Hot Dog could hit 3 units and the Fireball could hit up to 6 units with a single blast!

Their example does break their own rules which felkor and I have already written, which means one of 2 things:

a) Their example is wrong.

b) There is an unwritten rule in that flamethrowers can only effect a number of squares = to their range and the shooter decides which is effected.

If the answer is b) then I don't see a problem as the shooter has the choice of route.

Yes, b) does seem to be an unwritten rule, and as such it really should be spelled out. But the real crux of the matter is still what constitutes a "space between" and what circumstances allow you to circumvent one of these spaces in favour of another.

I don't think there are any special circumstances, the shooter just chooses the route along LOS, The example shows this with the several options the player has, its up to him. Any diagrams to show what you are worried about?

This one is a good example (again, treat the target tanks as squads):

When I first posted it you said it was illegal, cause the blast would necessarily hit the friendly squad, since they are in the way of the LOS. But the thing is that the other two enemy units are also on the path of the LOS, it's skimming their corners. So the question is, if the attacker can chose which spaces to affect, can't he bypass that central square and go around it like in the example above?

I would not want to allow it, but it would seem allowable based on previous examples for range 2 fire.

Hopefully they will update the rules for this in the FAQ and/or Operation Cerberus.

Replace all three Axis walkers with Axis infantry squads to remove the LOS issues in example D. In that case, going with the unwritten rule that a flamer can only hit as many targets as its range, you could then light up all three Axis squads and the Allied squad in the middle would be unaffected because the flame jet would be lofted over the top of them.

Give the game system a break here guys, doubly so since it is grid based. Squads don't block LOS and their location is variable in a square. Otherwise how does an entire squad get soft cover from a corner except by assuming that the "actual" soldiers would be hugging the wall in a way the miniatures never can.

Oh my. It is time to be scared, to be very scared. Movement/Range 1 = 6" in Dust Warfare. 18" Flamer Templates!

Personally, I think it would fix it if they ammended the rules with the following:

- A fire blast can only hit as many squares as the weapon's range (ie: Range 3, maximum of 3 different targets)

- If the LOS crosses a space, the blast will necessarily hit any units in it UNLESS the number of targets exceeds the allowed limit, in which case the attacker choses which spaces to affect.

- If the LOS skims a square's corner, a unit occupying it MAY be targeted, as long as all spaces which the LOS crosses are already being targeted.

- (might be necessary) If attacking more than one skimmed square, they must all lie on the same side of the LOS.

So basically crossed squares take precedence over skimmed squares, and that solves a lot of problems. I think if FFG doesn't further clarify the rules, this is what I'm personally going with.

Loophole Master said:

No it can't be done. The first square between shooter and target is the friendly infantry, but as the shot passes a diagonal you choose to left or right, you of course choose right to hit the enemy walker. The shot MUST now still go along LOS and into the friends as that is in the direct path of the shot, you can't use the range of the weapon as an excuse not to hit something directly in the way.

Talk about making it more difficult than it is..... remember this is a board game not a tabletop game. The idea of DT is to keep the rules simple and if one doesnt try to overthink it and just go about it how its written there shouldnt be any problems.... stop thinking tabletop logic and just think DT logic.

One doesnt shoot along LOS with a flamethrower, one just needs to have LOS to all the squares one wants to target. The rules says you have to have LOS to be able to hit a square and that means(implied) that when they state that all squares in between are affected it has to be squares that you actually target, are adjecent to eachother and not a square that you just happen to skim past, making a rule stating that one can only hit the amount of squares equal to the range of the flamethrower weapon redundant.

Major Mishap said:

But where in the rules does it say that? "The player chooses the spaces where the flames spread", well, can't I choose to stick to the skimmed squares and avoid the crossed one?

Gian said:

Well, as I've never played a tabletop game in my life, you can hardly accuse me of that. And I agree that the rules should be kept simple, but at the same time they should also be clear. As they are you can pretty much do magic tricks with your flamethrower. If that's the intention of the rules, then fine. But I doubt it, so I think they should try to make sure they achieve the desired effect with as simple a rule as possible.

Gian said:

If that were the case, then in the example they give, when the Hot Dog fires at the Ludwig, it would not hit the Laser Grenadiers as well, which it just happens to skim past. I think everything would be peachy if only their example had not included that bit of oddity.

If you want an extreme case, think of the Fireball firing at three units adjacent to it. All of them match the guidelines for line of sight, and none of them have intervening units causing problems.

The easy answer is that all three could be attacked as the Fireball arcs its weapon. There is real world justification, because a flamethrower is a hose shooting burning fuel, and you could do that with such a hose. I have seen video of tanks spraying fire across an area, so why not in DUST?

A Flamethrower can be used as a short burst weapon, but even that short burst was usually two to three seconds. It can also be used as a stream effect weapon, with flames spread across an area. It could also be used to fire unlit fuel into an area, where it was allowed to soak down into passages and such, to then be lit for yet another effect. A man portable flamethrower didn't do that as often, simply becaue they had a more limited fuel supply, anf their range was shorter. They could when they needed to, and then simply go back for more fuel.

There was a marine on Iwo Jima that took out multiple pill boxes by using those methods, going back for multiple loads of fuel as he did. He won the Medal of Honor for it.

Loophole Master said:

"...inflict damage on ALL units in spaces between the attacking unit and target unit..."

There is nothing in the rules that allow you to deviate from the direct LOS path.

The only exception is where you have to choose between two squares such as crossing the diagonals.

Not sure why you are debating the point as I'm pretty sure this is what you agree on anyway.

Loophole Master said:

Again dont really see the confusion in this example.... the Hot Dog first aims the flamethrower at the Laser Grenadiers and then at the Ludwig since he is allowed to choose which squares to affect as long as LOS and range is respected.

the example text says the following:

This powerful flamethrower has range 2, so the Hot Dog‘s pilot can choose which squares to affect, as long as
he respects line of sight rules.
In this example he may target either:
- The Laser Grenadiers and the Battle Grenadiers
- The Laser Grenadiers and the Luther
- The Battle Grenadiers and the Luther
- The Laser Grenadiers and the Ludwig

so it is saying its targeting two unit because of its range, not that one of the targets get hits because it just skims past a square.

I think the only reason to write "..all squares between your unit and the target are affected by the flamethrower." is to clearify that you cant "jump" over the closest square to the shooting unit and that if it would be a friendly unit standing in that square it would also get affected.

Major Mishap said:

Yeah, I think I agree with you on what is the best way to handle it. All I'm saying is that the official rules themselves don't really agree with us. They leave big loopholes wide open, that could be exploited. Take what Gian is saying, for example, by his interpretation you can basically simply attack a couple of different targets of your choice, with no clear governing rule on what path your attack has to follow.

The way I read the rules is that you choose the route the flame goes using standard range calculations (one diagonal, etc), but unlike "regular" guns you need to have LoS to each square you choose to hit since everything in the flame's path takes damage.