Playtest Rules 1.1 - Vree

[Da Boss]

----------
...(EXCLUDED MY COMMENTS)...

We play that E-mines must see the target location to be able to fire
at that location.

yep so do we - again dodgy wording but also on p20 it says you do not have to target an enemy ship an empty area of space will do - we read that as you have to target a empty area of space - hence we play LOS is required to that point.

I still think both scouting functions work wothout LOS as surely you have to locate a ship to jam its ECM with your ECCM? It could be arguing either way I guess but I would say the two functions work in the same way and that LOS is either required or not required for both.

need a voice of authority but they are argueing about firebolts and posidons :wink:

 

[Greg Smith]

Later in the 'scout' (3rd para.) the word 'alternativly' is used to provide
an option to 'redirect' fire from other ships (Twin-Link). The problem
here is that you must be able to see the target to be able to 'redirect'
the fire of the third ship. It would make no sense to say that one
does not need a LOS to the target to be able to redirect fire to the same
target. If the scout does not need a LOS and is able to 'redirect'
fire from a third party then the third party does not need
a LOS either, as the scout is 'redirecting' the third party fire.

Why should the scout need line of sight? It possesses very high powered sensors, of a high tech sci-fi nature that are capable of passing through an asteroid field and detecting a ship on the other side. To use a real world analogy ultrasonics will pass through the ground but bullets won't.

Not needing a LOS is a very bad concept, if accepted, the E-mines
will be able to shoot through dust clouds and asteroids because they
do not need to target anything.

I assume you say this because both rules use the word 'target'. I think this should be taken as the English word, rather than a strict game definition, ie meaning 'to direct or use towards a target'.

Nowhere in the E-mine writeup is there a requirement for LOS.
We play that E-mines must see the target location to be able to fire
at that location.

You are absolutely right, there is nothing in the emine rule that says it requires LoS. The rules say an attack must have LoS, but the emine isn't an attack, it is simply targeted on a point in space.

I can tell you, that typically scouts are played as not requiring lone of sight, and that the emine detonation point must have LoS.

 

[JTL109]

Why should the scout need line of sight? It possesses very high powered sensors, of a high tech sci-fi nature that are capable of passing through an asteroid field and detecting a ship on the other side. To use a real world analogy ultrasonics will pass through the ground but bullets won't.
-------------
Because the rules say that stellar debris blocks LOS.
The rules are always talking about sensors, not some guy
standing at the window with a telescope.



I assume you say this because both rules use the word 'target'. I think this should be taken as the English word, rather than a strict game definition, ie meaning 'to direct or use towards a target'.
-----------
Sounds good to me!



You are absolutely right, there is nothing in the emine rule that says it requires LoS. The rules say an attack must have LoS, but the emine isn't an attack, it is simply targeted on a point in space.
-----------
It is certainly an attack, as it does damage to the intended
target(s). It just does not require one to 'target' an enemy ship
prior to firing.



I can tell you, that typically scouts are played as not requiring line of sight, and that the emine detonation point must have LoS.[/quote]
---------------
Naturally, I disagree with the first half and agree with the second half.

I have brought this up in rulemasters, looking forward the the replies.

 

[Da Boss]

Whilst I note its now in rulesmasters - which is useful - I am little confused by your stance on Scouts - do you allow them to lower stealth whilst within 36" and with no LOS as its written ?

If so then the second alterntive Scout function should work the same way? Both require you to affect the target ship and as I read the rules (or rather attempt to interpret :wink: ) neither therefore require LOS

However if you do require LOS to lower stealth - isn't that against what is written although consistant with requiring LOS for "locking on"

I would agree that the stealth lowering thing is a bit odd - I think the whole rule came about from the "target the explosion and fire idea" which is a good one - but is now a bit odd in that although for instance although a emine lights them up, a ship explosion or asteroid collision does not? Also if it is Target the explosion it should not matter if the targeting ship is there or not?

Probably a balance thing? (or a tricksy Minbari plot)

 

[JTL109]

Whilst I note its now in rulesmasters - which is useful - I am little confused by your stance on Scouts - do you allow them to lower stealth whilst within 36" and with no LOS as its written ?

If so then the second alterntive Scout function should work the same way? Both require you to affect the target ship and as I read the rules (or rather attempt to interpret :wink: ) neither therefore require LOS

However if you do require LOS to lower stealth - isn't that against what is written although consistant with requiring LOS for "locking on"

I would agree that the stealth lowering thing is a bit odd - I think the whole rule came about from the "target the explosion and fire idea" which is a good one - but is now a bit odd in that although for instance although a emine lights them up, a ship explosion or asteroid collision does not? Also if it is Target the explosion it should not matter if the targeting ship is there or not?

Probably a balance thing? (or a tricksy Minbari plot)

-----------
The word 'target' was taken to mean a LOS was needed.
This position has been changed to simply within 36".
My opinion is that this invites abuse of the rules far too
much. (As noted in my comments in the original post.)