lastbesthope
Mongoose
Glad to help, sometimes you need to cross reference two rules areas to get the answer you need. Now all we need is a ruling on this one :lol:
lastbesthope said:
A couple of BF EVO questions (NEW Qs 28th Mar 1749 UTC)
- Thread starter lastbesthope
- Start date
LBH
Please read less and play more.
do what makes sence and both parties are happy with.
its a game, ie for fun, realy hope i dont have to play a rules lawer in the tourney or il give them mius 50 sportsmanship points.
if you feel the modle could be using said tank as cover, then count it as cover. just do what feels right. please...
Please read less and play more.
do what makes sence and both parties are happy with.
its a game, ie for fun, realy hope i dont have to play a rules lawer in the tourney or il give them mius 50 sportsmanship points.
if you feel the modle could be using said tank as cover, then count it as cover. just do what feels right. please...
Mr Evil, I do not fault LBH his question, at all. It's not a rules lawyer situation if he is asking Matt for an answer to a specific question. Your situation would only work in casual play between two players, and only then while they waited for an official answer, which might overrule their "agreement". If you tried that in a tournament, don't you think an answer would have to be forthcoming from Matt, right then and there? I do not think Matt would say "work it out between the two of you". I think LBH is asking an important question, one that asks if models can be used under terrain rules or if they are "transparent". Infantry hiding behind a tank is a basic tenant of urban or even open field combat, and should be addressed "officially" in the game. 
lastbesthope
Mongoose
Mr Evil said:
I think you misunderstand my motives Evil, I'm not trying to gain advantage here, in fact my rules lawyering often ends up to my disadvantage, but what it always does is clarify the situation.
As the rules are written, a tank or other model can NOT provide cover, however(terrain provides cover, models are not terrain), common sense would suggest that a guy crouched down behind a tank should get as much cover bonus as if he were crouched behind a tank shaped wall. No matter which way Matt rules I win, as do we all, as the point is clarified.
LBH
yes but what im saying is play a few games first, your see what situations need resolving.
i see it as this, you cant see through enemy units, so it blocks los, anything blocking los but you can see the modle poking out behind it in theory is cover, but in practice its a mobile battle field.
so the los rules come into play here and you probably find the cover in the case of a tank absorbs all the shots, havnt got rule sheet infront of me at mo, but i think the dice alocation rules would cover the situation.
i see it as this, you cant see through enemy units, so it blocks los, anything blocking los but you can see the modle poking out behind it in theory is cover, but in practice its a mobile battle field.
so the los rules come into play here and you probably find the cover in the case of a tank absorbs all the shots, havnt got rule sheet infront of me at mo, but i think the dice alocation rules would cover the situation.
docrailgun
Mongoose
I think there's way too much "we need to fix this" going on here anyway... at some point there has to be a firm set of rules if there are going to be a tournament scene. The rules we have really are fine the way they are... but IMHo there're too many people trying to apply "we've done this for years" and rules from other games in the name of "common sense" or whatever.
The rules are fine the way they are.
The rules are fine the way they are.
Mr Evil said:
lastbesthope said:
As written, no - it can block or provide Obscurement. I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . .
The Old Soldier
Mongoose
msprange said:
Seem fairly straight forward to me. Like Matt stated a Tank is not cover. Cover is a type of terrian. But since the tank is a large model it could obscure a small model that was near it, and possible Block line of sight to the model. So the infantry soldier might be able to gain a modifer at best of -1 if fired on, and at best be out of sight. It doesn't happen often, and when it does it is quite obvious.
The Old Soldier said:
Yes TOS, but if I look at all of the words that Matt stated (and thus why I asked for a bit of a clarification of his clarification, lol), in the rules as written it cannot (if I read through a possible typo) provide Obscurement or Cover. Further, if the tank were a battlefield casualty it might be kept on the table by the players as terrain, but only then. Of course, I am writing this before seeing Matt's response to my interrogatory. :wink:
The Old Soldier
Mongoose
He does dodge the bullet well. :lol: :wink:
lastbesthope
Mongoose
BuShips said:
I don't think he did, the rules clearly state that models not in the firing unit CAN obscure or block line of sight. 2nd page of the rules, left hand side, in the LOS section under the definitions of Clear, obscured and Blocked:
LBH
The Old Soldier
Mongoose
LBH, has the sense of it! 8)
I know it's 2-to-1 against :wink:, but I was looking at the sentence flow of the words that Matt chose. To say "As written, no" and then go on to say "it can block or provide Obscurement", I mean the two don't mesh well :roll:. "As written, no" in my book says "NO" to LBH's question of "So, can soldiers take cover behind a tank or other large model?". Having no to mean no guys (I mean really! :wink
, the next words should be "it cannot block..." (etc.). If that is the meaning taken, then in addition the closing comment of "I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . ." backs up the "NO" but adds that rather than players removing dead tanks from the table they might leave them indeed as terrain. This would assume an uncrewed, inoperable unit while LBH was trying to see if a combat effective unit could be hidden behind. I'll cease disecting Matt's comments and just wait until he hopefully returns to see what wasteland he has wrought :lol:. Ok, I can't quite stop yet :wink:. I'll phrase it this way for Matt. One of the following sentences is what he fully meant to say, and sit back for an answer. :wink:
original answer as quoted by Matt:
As written, no - it can block or provide Obscurement. I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . .
What he really meant to say:
As written, yes - it can block or provide Obscurement. I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . .
or perhaps:
As written, no - it cannot block or provide Obscurement. I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . .
My wager is that it is the last. A note for Matt- you cannot pick the original written text. You must choose from one of the blue options. :wink:
Thank you Matt for any kind attention to this matter.
, the next words should be "it cannot block..." (etc.). If that is the meaning taken, then in addition the closing comment of "I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . ." backs up the "NO" but adds that rather than players removing dead tanks from the table they might leave them indeed as terrain. This would assume an uncrewed, inoperable unit while LBH was trying to see if a combat effective unit could be hidden behind. I'll cease disecting Matt's comments and just wait until he hopefully returns to see what wasteland he has wrought :lol:. Ok, I can't quite stop yet :wink:. I'll phrase it this way for Matt. One of the following sentences is what he fully meant to say, and sit back for an answer. :wink: original answer as quoted by Matt:
As written, no - it can block or provide Obscurement. I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . .
What he really meant to say:
As written, yes - it can block or provide Obscurement. I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . .
or perhaps:
As written, no - it cannot block or provide Obscurement. I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . .
My wager is that it is the last. A note for Matt- you cannot pick the original written text. You must choose from one of the blue options. :wink:
Thank you Matt for any kind attention to this matter.
The Old Soldier
Mongoose
well a wrecked tank for your own gaming purposes could be left on the board, but as written it isn't. For my games I do leave it on the board and put a smoke and fire counter on it, thus it continues to obscure, and possibly even block as if it was a unit still. But, I don't think of it as terrain.
If you really want to go as written, then because it is a large size model, there is the possiblity that it will block smaller size models from enemy line of sight, and it is quite possible it will obscure the smaller model from enemy line of sight. BUT, NEVER gives COVER because it is not a terrain piece. Once destroyed it is removed from the board.
If you really want to go as written, then because it is a large size model, there is the possiblity that it will block smaller size models from enemy line of sight, and it is quite possible it will obscure the smaller model from enemy line of sight. BUT, NEVER gives COVER because it is not a terrain piece. Once destroyed it is removed from the board.
The Old Soldier said:
Well, I'm just trying to coax Matt into clarifying his statement. After that, we can argue about semantics :wink:. In a discussion between you and I and LBH I'd be very much with you two, but as I have said I'm wanting to know what Matt has really said recently. I'm betting that you two possibly missed something important in Matt's answer and I for one am a bit curious. If my guess is correct, then you will have to reevaluate how the models are to be used in shooting. Either way, we will all benefit from Matt's response (even if I have to eat humble pie). As for me, I rather like the taste of coconut. :wink:
The Old Soldier
Mongoose
make mine keylime! but coconut is in my top 3. Humble pie all around please! :wink:
The Old Soldier said:
Nah, you didn't see my wry meaning (I can be a sly dog occasionally). You see, if Matt approves of a person's comment on the forum, he gives him a coconut. The guy on the other side of the issue doesn't get any coconuts, and is left with pie. Either way, we all get something to chew on, though. :wink:
lastbesthope
Mongoose
I'm really not seeing where your confusion is Buships
I asked if a model could take cover (I should have used 'Cover' not 'cover' admittedly) but I was referring to the state where a model gets a +2 bonus to Target and Kill scores.
Matt said no, and repeated that which is already stated in the rules which I quoted earlier, that models not in the firing unit can ovscure or block the LOS.
Now whether you agree with that ruling is another matter, but I see no ambiguity in the ruling itself.
LBH
I asked if a model could take cover (I should have used 'Cover' not 'cover' admittedly) but I was referring to the state where a model gets a +2 bonus to Target and Kill scores.
msprange said:
Matt said no, and repeated that which is already stated in the rules which I quoted earlier, that models not in the firing unit can ovscure or block the LOS.
Now whether you agree with that ruling is another matter, but I see no ambiguity in the ruling itself.
LBH
lastbesthope said:
All right, I think what you have just said might be clearing this up for me, and yes, you should have used a capital "C" in cover :lol:. So, what would perhaps have helped me understand much earlier is if Matt had worded the answer only slightly differently as maybe "As written, no - it cannot provide Cover but it can block or provide Obscurement (and Matt should have used a capital "B", lol). I would, however, be tempted to call a wrecked tank terrain. . . and allow for active units to achieve Cover behind it." I can finally separate the Cover answer specifically from the BLOS or OLOS issue. Somehow in my deranged mind I was grouping all three targeting conditions together in an all-or-nothing resolution (slaps self upside of head) :roll:. Well, at least we know now that when you take infantry casualties you should remove your standing units first. Then, when the surviving squad members find a track to get behind the kneeling units will be able to hide completely behind and be Blocked. :wink: :twisted: Sigh, and I was so wanting a coconut... :lol:
Similar threads
