Here's a good LOS problem that has happened in our last two games.
A positions himself has a clear line of sight onto B going across a few diagonals, ready to blast B away.
But C partially move his mech to block LOS between the dots, no problem you may think, I'll shoot C instead.
Now the problem is that C cannot be shot at as there is a corner building blocking LOS between the 2 spots.
So A can now no longer shoot as he can't gain LOS to either - pretty stupid huh?
Not really. A was in a position where they could barely engage B.
C moved into a position that was more threatening, and drew A's attention away from B, but C was not exposed enough to make an attack viable without A moving again.
It can be frustrating, but it isn't really that strange. Remember, while we're pushing pieces of plastic around, they need to work like real soldiers to some degree for the game to feel right.
If you were a soldier getting ready to light up some enemy infantry, and enemy armor came up where you saw they could threaten you, would you really keep worrying about the infantry, or switch your attention to the enemy armor in case they finished coming around that corner? Some soldiers could stay on their original targets, but most would switch to the more immediate threat, at least until someone gave them direct orders.
This isn't a rare occurance in our games, so we're quite used to it and don't find it strange at all.
Another thing to consider is that vehicles were frequently used in WW2 to screen the infantry. Someone doing that, while not giving you a good shot at the vehicle, is someone playing a good vehicle commander. Get in the way, but not so far in the way that you become a tempting target.
There was an old game about the African campaign called Tobruk that emphasized logistics as well as combat. Tank commanders were frequently given specific training on when it was appropriate to use ammo, and when not to. The game forced you to figure your odds of hitting, and if they were below a certain threshold, you couldn't fire, because the tank commander knew better than to waste ammunition on a doubtful shot, even if the player felt lucky.
Loophole Master said:
This isn't a rare occurance in our games, so we're quite used to it and don't find it strange at all.
Yes, I've found it common in my games as well, although it rarely happens on purpose. I just have to remember to think about using it as an actual defensive strategy.
Cool that you share this experience....hadn´t thought of this kind of stratigic move, it´s great.
Happens in our games also. Does make since becuase you have line of sight. I thought we were playing the game wrong by say you can not shot B(unit) but it looks like others have got into this position and played it out the same. Sucked in our last can becuase B(Unit) was screen by Ulimited range accrosed a double board, But was able to fire on everyone else.
The rules concept is that you do not have line of sight because the intervening unit blocks it. You can't see through a vehicle to shoot infantry on the other side if they're smart enough to stay low and use the cover it gives.
With infantry being trained to do just that, the game makes sense.
DUST is different from some games in that it checks LOS center of grid to center of grid, while the figures could be placed anywhere in the grid. Smart infantry would use the intervenig terrain for as much cover as they could, even if the player simply placed them in the square.
Trained soldiers are normally better at things like that than static plastic figures, or the players that get to push them around.
Gimp said:
The rules concept is that you do not have line of sight because the intervening unit blocks it. You can't see through a vehicle to shoot infantry on the other side if they're smart enough to stay low and use the cover it gives.
With infantry being trained to do just that, the game makes sense.
DUST is different from some games in that it checks LOS center of grid to center of grid, while the figures could be placed anywhere in the grid. Smart infantry would use the intervenig terrain for as much cover as they could, even if the player simply placed them in the square.
Trained soldiers are normally better at things like that than static plastic figures, or the players that get to push them around.
Heh, which is why you see the concept of "if any part of the mini is hidden by cover, then the mini gets the benefit of cover since the actual soldier is ducking and using the cover instead of standing up big and bold".
Unfortunately, you then also see "look from your mini's head to see if you can see your target unit".
Which means the simulated troop is both using duck & cover and standing up big & bold to take the shot.
Algesan said:
Heh, which is why you see the concept of "if any part of the mini is hidden by cover, then the mini gets the benefit of cover since the actual soldier is ducking and using the cover instead of standing up big and bold".
Unfortunately, you then also see "look from your mini's head to see if you can see your target unit".
Which means the simulated troop is both using duck & cover and standing up big & bold to take the shot.
That works for me. Soldiers don't always have a perfect fighting position, so they are trained to pop out, find a target, fire, duck back, and shift to a different position for the next shot. Not necessarily standing big and bold, but standing if needed to find a target while staying up no longer than absolutely necessary. If you stay exposed for under three seconds, it's much harder for an enemy to actually acquire and fire accurately at you.