Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FAQ Unintended Change To Hill Mechanics?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Lurcker2 View Post
    Touching (barely in) means slightly in terrain.
    This is where we differ. I see touching in the rules as "in base contact with, but with no part inside". So in the cover rules we have "A firing unit ignores any piece of terrain that it is currently within, or in base contact with, for determining whether an enemy unit is in cover, unless the enemy unit is also touching or within the same piece of terrain." Here touching is separate from within the terrain, and is paralleled by in base contact with.

    Elsewhere units are described as touching each other, and units can't overlap so it must mean in base contact.

    I do agree that there are differences when you are slightly in, but there will still be issues even if that is standardized.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Fyrax. View Post

      This is where we differ. I see touching in the rules as "in base contact with, but with no part inside". So in the cover rules we have "A firing unit ignores any piece of terrain that it is currently within, or in base contact with, for determining whether an enemy unit is in cover, unless the enemy unit is also touching or within the same piece of terrain." Here touching is separate from within the terrain, and is paralleled by in base contact with.

      Elsewhere units are described as touching each other, and units can't overlap so it must mean in base contact.

      I do agree that there are differences when you are slightly in, but there will still be issues even if that is standardized.
      Touching or in base contact or just on the terrain (but not majority), does not appear to matter for hills. I agree touching or just in terrain means that the unit can ignore cover penalties associated with that terrain feature when shooting through the terrain but is still in cover when shot at (which is quite useful for chariots that are height 3). That is not the disagreement or the issue per se or the lack of clarity. With height 2 hills the unit that is height one or two has no line of sight and also cannot be seen by opposing units on the other side of the hill because it is not on standing on this hill. Hills are unique in that regard and different from difficult terrain.

      Comment


      • #18
        A small update on this issue: The US MA and US PNW regions have both decided they are going to be disregarding this change to the hill mechanic. Reasons cited against it is that they believe it was an unintended rules change and that said change is counterproductive to the games relative simplicity and clarity.

        Other US Regions may or may not also be disregarding this change to Hills, I havenít heard word from all of them yet.
        Last edited by Carcearion; 09-05-2018, 12:46 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Dan did confirm today publicly that this was not intended and will be dealt with when the next FAQ comes out.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Thorgrim View Post
            Dan did confirm today publicly that this was not intended and will be dealt with when the next FAQ comes out.
            I understand that the South Region, at least the next GT in Austin, is also following the reversal of the unintended consequence of the FAQ 1.7.

            That is good but I still would prefer that they "fix" the rules so that they are not so counterintuitive. If your unit is even slightly on a hill, it should be seen by opposing units as though on the hill. And you should have line of sight as if on the hill if your unit leaderpoint is on the hill. That would conform the hill rules more closely to the difficult terrain rules in terms of line of sight.

            I don't mind the cover penalty existing as before for units mostly behind a hill absent being at least 50%+ on the hill and agree with requiring 50%+ on the hill to benefit from seeing over opposing and friendly units of the same or lesser height than the hill to shoot without a cover penalty (but would prefer that it goes both ways then).

            At LoneWolf, three of my five games were affected by the unique hill rules in counterintuitive ways, two times to my benefit and once to my opponent's benefit.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Thorgrim View Post
              Dan did confirm today publicly that this was not intended and will be dealt with when the next FAQ comes out.
              Yeap issue essentially resolved

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Lurcker2 View Post

                ...
                And you should have line of sight as if on the hill if your unit leaderpoint is on the hill. That would conform the hill rules more closely to the difficult terrain rules in terms of line of sight.
                Except difficult terrain doesn't care where your leaderpoint is. It only cares if any part of the unit is inside the difficult to be able to see through it. you could have a far flung corner of your unit inside the difficult, and the whole patch becomes see through from your unit's leader point.
                The Vampire's War Diaries - Undead blog
                http://thevampireswardiaries.blogspot.com.au/

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Carcearion View Post

                  Yeap issue essentially resolved
                  well, if you wanted different types of terrain to have different rules (making the game more complex), then I guess that's a resolution I prefer consistency myself.
                  The Vampire's War Diaries - Undead blog
                  http://thevampireswardiaries.blogspot.com.au/

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X