Yeah, but now that jumping infantry can jump cleanly over a three-storey building, it REALLY makes no sense whatsoever that they can't jump over a simple walker. This is an inconsistency that really needs to be corrected.
Operation Cerberus Rulebook
Loophole Master said:
Yeah, but now that jumping infantry can jump cleanly over a three-storey building, it REALLY makes no sense whatsoever that they can't jump over a simple walker. This is an inconsistency that really needs to be corrected.
The problem is, from a rules standpoint, I think you really need some way of blocking movement of jumping units. Otherwise NCO + Move 2 jumping unit could get to an objective square very quickly in some scenarios with no way of stopping them.
I agree it makes no sense, but without it, I think some scenarios would now be pretty much broken.
I do like how the roof seems to be specifically good for a sniper unit. The soft cover is just as good as hard cover for them, they get the height advantages, and being at the top of the building means they don't have LOS issues from the doors and windows.
felkor said:
I do like how the roof seems to be specifically good for a sniper unit. The soft cover is just as good as hard cover for them, they get the height advantages, and being at the top of the building means they don't have LOS issues from the doors and windows.
Yes, I agree. But there's a LOS issue that the rules don't adress. What if there's a target on the ground, standing right next to the building's front wall, and the sniper is on the roof, but standing on the edge of the BACK wall? Does the sniper have LOS? Logically there's no way a shot would be possible, but following the rules, there would be nothing really to prevent it, since the sniper is not IN the building.
Loophole Master said:
felkor said:
I do like how the roof seems to be specifically good for a sniper unit. The soft cover is just as good as hard cover for them, they get the height advantages, and being at the top of the building means they don't have LOS issues from the doors and windows.
Yes, I agree. But there's a LOS issue that the rules don't adress. What if there's a target on the ground, standing right next to the building's front wall, and the sniper is on the roof, but standing on the edge of the BACK wall? Does the sniper have LOS? Logically there's no way a shot would be possible, but following the rules, there would be nothing really to prevent it, since the sniper is not IN the building.
Good point. It wouldn't even occur to me that the unit would have LOS. I certainly wouldn't allow it (even if FFG sent out a FAQ saying it *was* allowed, because that would just be plain stupid.)
As far as I can tell, according to the rules, a person on a second floor of a building should also be able to see people on the other side of a different 3 story building, provided they aren't adjacent to it, again, even though common sense would say that that's just dumb.
Loophole Master said:
felkor said:
I do like how the roof seems to be specifically good for a sniper unit. The soft cover is just as good as hard cover for them, they get the height advantages, and being at the top of the building means they don't have LOS issues from the doors and windows.
Yes, I agree. But there's a LOS issue that the rules don't adress. What if there's a target on the ground, standing right next to the building's front wall, and the sniper is on the roof, but standing on the edge of the BACK wall? Does the sniper have LOS? Logically there's no way a shot would be possible, but following the rules, there would be nothing really to prevent it, since the sniper is not IN the building.
If I'm reading you right, the sniper cannot fire as it would be firing through the building and out the other side, which we all know you can't do.
felkor said:
Loophole Master said:
Actually, they are technically NOT in the structure, the rules make that very clear, so I'd think artillery fire is perfectly possible.
I didn't see that - so they're not in the structure - do they get cover bonus?
To be specific, however, as long as they're not in the structure, artillery allows no cover save anyway, according to the 1.2 FAQ.
Wombattangofoxtrot said:
To be specific, however, as long as they're not in the structure, artillery allows no cover save anyway, according to the 1.2 FAQ.
Right. Lots of things to keep in mind nowadays. This is no longer that very simple game we originally knew.
If I'm reading you right, the sniper cannot fire as it would be firing through the building and out the other side, which we all know you can't do.
You're right, of course. I'm merely pointing out that the rules don't really see it that way. If you just went by the rules, the shot would be possible, since the building is not technically between the target and the attacker.
Major Mishap said:
Loophole Master said:
felkor said:
I do like how the roof seems to be specifically good for a sniper unit. The soft cover is just as good as hard cover for them, they get the height advantages, and being at the top of the building means they don't have LOS issues from the doors and windows.
Yes, I agree. But there's a LOS issue that the rules don't adress. What if there's a target on the ground, standing right next to the building's front wall, and the sniper is on the roof, but standing on the edge of the BACK wall? Does the sniper have LOS? Logically there's no way a shot would be possible, but following the rules, there would be nothing really to prevent it, since the sniper is not IN the building.
If I'm reading you right, the sniper cannot fire as it would be firing through the building and out the other side, which we all know you can't do.
There's a disconnect in the rules because they didn't say, "in or on a building" with alot of their rules. For example, another rules situation that is valid according to the rules as written, yet obviously wrong, is that if you're on the roof of a three story building you add one to the range to a target that on the floor below you. Definitely FAQable, but I think we need to use common sense until a FAQ is released.
Major Mishap said:
Loophole Master said:
felkor said:
I do like how the roof seems to be specifically good for a sniper unit. The soft cover is just as good as hard cover for them, they get the height advantages, and being at the top of the building means they don't have LOS issues from the doors and windows.
Yes, I agree. But there's a LOS issue that the rules don't adress. What if there's a target on the ground, standing right next to the building's front wall, and the sniper is on the roof, but standing on the edge of the BACK wall? Does the sniper have LOS? Logically there's no way a shot would be possible, but following the rules, there would be nothing really to prevent it, since the sniper is not IN the building.
If I'm reading you right, the sniper cannot fire as it would be firing through the building and out the other side, which we all know you can't do.
Major Mishap said:
Loophole Master said:
felkor said:
I do like how the roof seems to be specifically good for a sniper unit. The soft cover is just as good as hard cover for them, they get the height advantages, and being at the top of the building means they don't have LOS issues from the doors and windows.
Yes, I agree. But there's a LOS issue that the rules don't adress. What if there's a target on the ground, standing right next to the building's front wall, and the sniper is on the roof, but standing on the edge of the BACK wall? Does the sniper have LOS? Logically there's no way a shot would be possible, but following the rules, there would be nothing really to prevent it, since the sniper is not IN the building.
If I'm reading you right, the sniper cannot fire as it would be firing through the building and out the other side, which we all know you can't do.
No, because according to the rules, if you're in a multi-story structure, you can fire over obstacles to hit units as long as they're not directly behind the unit (i.e. not adjacent.) So you would technically be firing over the building, even though it's taller than the one you're in.
I mean, according to the rules. In reality, you obviously couldn't fire in this situation.
But what about if you're in the 3rd story and there's a 2 story building in between you and your target - are you allowed to fire over it?
felkor said:
But what about if you're in the 3rd story and there's a 2 story building in between you and your target - are you allowed to fire over it?
Technically, as long as the target isn't adjacent to it, you could. Thankfully this sort of problem will be very rare, since only infantry can climb buildings, and their max range is 6, so it's unlikely you'll even have range to shoot beyond a nearby building.
Loophole Master said:
felkor said:
But what about if you're in the 3rd story and there's a 2 story building in between you and your target - are you allowed to fire over it?
Technically, as long as the target isn't adjacent to it, you could. Thankfully this sort of problem will be very rare, since only infantry can climb buildings, and their max range is 6, so it's unlikely you'll even have range to shoot beyond a nearby building.
A good point. Considering the scale of this game, 6 squares isn't very far for a sniper rifle to fire.
Wombattangofoxtrot said:
There's a disconnect in the rules because they didn't say, "in or on a building" with alot of their rules. For example, another rules situation that is valid according to the rules as written, yet obviously wrong, is that if you're on the roof of a three story building you add one to the range to a target that on the floor below you. Definitely FAQable, but I think we need to use common sense until a FAQ is released.
Ooops! You actually can't target a unit on a floor below you because they aren't next to a window or door that faces in your direction. =)
Wombattangofoxtrot said:
oops! You actually can't target a unit on a floor below you because they aren't next to a window or door that faces in your direction. =)
Well, it's becoming very obvious that we'll need a lot of common sense over written rules when dealing withe the 3D buildings....
Loophole Master said:
Wombattangofoxtrot said:
oops! You actually can't target a unit on a floor below you because they aren't next to a window or door that faces in your direction. =)
Well, it's becoming very obvious that we'll need a lot of common sense over written rules when dealing withe the 3D buildings....
Or you could read the rules and find that at the end of page 17 that you can shoot between levels
Major Mishap said:
Or you could read the rules and find that at the end of page 17 that you can shoot between levels
Nope:
"Two units that are both inside a structure , but on different levels, can attack each other through the floors and ceilings."
"If a squad is on the roof of a structure, it is considered to be outside of that structure ."
"In order for a unit outside a structure to attack an enemy unit inside a structure , the target unit must be on a space that has an entrance in the direction of the attack."
Yes, it's a loophole, and a very stupid one, but it's there.
I suppose anti-tank traps are also allowed on the roof of the building too. Just not inside.
The only problem with relying on "common sense" in a game, is that I've found it isnt so "common" after all! Many gamers are simply too competative, and if they can find an interpritation of the rules to their advantage, they most certainly will!! This is why some "other" wargames have over a hundred pages of game rules and explanations in the game books!!
I sorta like using the rules AS WRITTEN when playing with new people. We all know what trouble can be caused by "interpretation"-anger, strife, religious wars, toxic cool-aid, etc.!!!
And then, once everyone is numb to the head slapping frustration of how the rules are written, then start "house-ruling" the game back into shape!!
( the other reason for this post, is to see how many times I can misspell "interpretation"....)
Have fun blow'n stuff up!
felkor said:
And if, according to the rules, the roof is too "fragile" for a jumping unit to land on it, why can't artillery penetrate the roof? It seems strange that my Hammers would break the roof if they landed on it, but Steel Rain's rockets wouldn't make a dent.
The Steel Rain's rockets would make a dent on the roof. Their contact fuses would hit the roof, ignite, and blow up parts of the roof. The people inside don't have to worry about anything that doesn't penetrate the roof and then blow up, which contact fuses won't do. Artillery didn't use delayed burst fuses.
Artillery in WW2 was starting to use proximity and had timed fuses, which both give air bursts, and contact fuses, which give contact bursts. Blowing up at the roof is not a guaranteed way to hurt people inside.
The Hammers won't want t land on a roof, because they might break through, or simply get stuck part way through, and are not as hard as some construction materials they might run into.
Loophole Master said:
felkor said:
I do like how the roof seems to be specifically good for a sniper unit. The soft cover is just as good as hard cover for them, they get the height advantages, and being at the top of the building means they don't have LOS issues from the doors and windows.
Yes, I agree. But there's a LOS issue that the rules don't adress. What if there's a target on the ground, standing right next to the building's front wall, and the sniper is on the roof, but standing on the edge of the BACK wall? Does the sniper have LOS? Logically there's no way a shot would be possible, but following the rules, there would be nothing really to prevent it, since the sniper is not IN the building.
Whether the sniper is in the building, or not, there are three situations to consider.
First, if the building is only one space, the sniper is considered to be roaming around the space, and can move to either the front of back of the space without using movement to fire from any edge of the space. A sniper can peer over a roof edge and fire straight down into the target.
Second, if it is a multi-space building, the first consideration is that it is 'obvious' as suggested in the rules, that there is no line of sight. A 2D consideration shows a building space blocking line of sight. The target is also adjacent to a building wall, which precludes line of sight from a higher firing space per the 3D building rules.
Loophole Master said:
Major Mishap said:
Or you could read the rules and find that at the end of page 17 that you can shoot between levels
Nope:
"Two units that are both inside a structure , but on different levels, can attack each other through the floors and ceilings."
"If a squad is on the roof of a structure, it is considered to be outside of that structure ."
"In order for a unit outside a structure to attack an enemy unit inside a structure , the target unit must be on a space that has an entrance in the direction of the attack."
Yes, it's a loophole, and a very stupid one, but it's there.
I don't have an issue with a unit on a roof not being in line of sight to a unit below it because they are outside the building without an opening.
Within a building, the rules would either have to deal with specifying where there were stairways and other passages between levels, or use simplified rules as they do.
Between the normal floors and the roof, however, there are normally far fewer access routes to allow combat. Limiting combat thus becomes a reasonable alternative.
That does make sense. Inside the building there's a big stairwell in the center, which allows units to fire at each other through the gap. However, if you imagine the roof closed, with just an emergency door giving access to it, you'd have to step out onto the roof in order to shoot somebody there. This is just not very instinctive due to the fact that, by design necessity, there a big gaping hole in the middle of the roof.
I don't even think of it as a stairwell in the middle. I simply think of it as an easy way to reach in and move models without having to take off the upper floors to do it. Less aesthetically pleasing visually than a full building, but much better for play.
I wonder how much of a hassle it will be to stick your hand inside a 3-storey building and move an entire 6-men unit from half-square to half-square, though. How do you even fit 6 figures on half a square?