LOS and Hills: not well defined countour/silhouette

[Stefano G.]

Hello everyone and sorry if my question was already dealt.
We know that in LnLT maps, terrain silhouettes are considered when tracing LOS: so, if a LOS intersects a Light Wood Hex (degrading) BUT does not pass through any silhouettes of Light Wood, the LOS is considered clear (not degraded by crossed LW hex).

In many maps, Hill countour/silhouette is not well defined: it is soft, pale (see image1) ,and graphically very nice to be seen BUT it's very hard to check if a LOS touches/crosses it.
For example, in image1LOS, are the 3 yellow LOS blocked by 1-level Hill Hexes?
1) D5 - F3: D5 is 1-level Forest-Hill Hex and, according to new V.5.0 Rules, can see 0-level F3 because only E3 hex is shadowed by E4.
2) G6 - F3 : are 0-level Hexes both of them. Not having a well defined Hill countour/silhouette (F4) it's hard to see if LOS is blocked or not...surely it's degraded by tree of Light Wood, but is it blocked too?...how to decide?
3) G5 - F3: same as above...but uncertainty is now greater.

At the opposite, in HoD Maps, Hills countours/silhouettes are well defined with a clear line and there is no problem in checking if LOS touches or crosses them. (see image2)

Can you help me?

Thank you

Image1-HotM


image1LOS-HotM

image2-HoD

 

[Stéphane Tanguay]

Hello Stefano!

I agree with you, it can be confusing. In HotF, there are hill hexes that extend a bit into adjacent clear hexes. Of course, you can assume the elevation there is very small but how small? Low enough to not affect your LOS? I have asked question to Jeff and it seems to come down to the following, from page 16 of the rules:

The terrain surrounding a hex’s center dot defines the level (elevation) and terrain type of the hex.

So I treat all LOS traced through a hill hex side as being affected by the hill per the rules, even though LOS does not actually touch the hill silhouette. And since it does not say anything about the hill filling the hex, I consider LOS traced along a hexside to not be blocked by the hill.

Maybe, in a later edition of the rules, hexes will be declared as filled by the terrain type (this is what is applied for now in the LNLT digital playtest). It would make life simpler (including shooting between buildings) but would certainly remove a certain charm from LNLT, which is the only game that I know that take the silhouette into account.

 

[Stefano G.]

Hello Stéphane...thank for reply.

So, according your way to play, you consider the 2 Yellow LOS (image1LOS-HotM above) of G6-F3 and G5-F3 blocked by 1-level Hill, as they cross a "Hill-dotted" Hex (F4) - G6-F3 crosses F5 Hill Hex too - and without taking care if LOS crosses or doesn't Hill silhouette/contour... don't you?

Yes, i agree with you that using this home-rule you have no doubts during game sessions...but, as you have correctly pointed out, it sacrifices one of the LnLT charming traits: hexes silhouette importance.
So, for example, G6-F3 LOS would not be blocked by F5 because, in this case, it's clear that LOS does not cross Hill contour.

I'll follow your suggestion.

Thank you

 

[Barthheart]

I agree with Stephane. Although, I would say that G5 to F3 is really hard to call and might say it's only degraded by the tree. But G6 to F3 is definitely blocked.
Just agree with how you will interpret these cases with your opponent before you start. If you are playing solo... well then it's all up to you!

 

[Stéphane Tanguay]

Even worse is the LOS between G4 and E6...

Here is the kind of map art that lead me to adopt this attitude:



What about the LOS between A4-C4? A4-B3?A3-B5? If you play by the silhouette aprroach, they would all be blocked, just as B3-D3...It just seems easier to take the hex-filled approach for these.

It also simplify the LOS between different levels. For exemple, would a firer on C3 be able to see in B5? With the silhouette apporach, one could argue that it can't because there is bit of level 1 hill extending from B4 into C4

 

[Ben2013]

On page 60 it states that the center dot determines not just the type of terrain but also the level of the hex. For terrain elevation, I think the full hex based on center dot approach resolves a lot of ambiguity. The rule will not work for light woods hexes where the trees are so sparse that the center dot may not be on a tree. In such cases I would still treat the hex as a full light woods hex regardless whether the LOS passes between the trees or into trees. I would reserve the silhouette approach for obstacles like buildings ie unless the LOS passes through the silhouette of a building, it is not blocked.

 

[Barthheart]

That's what great about owning these games. You can use your own house rules to make them play how you want them to.

 

[Stéphane Tanguay]

That's what great about owning these games. You can use your own house rules to make them play how you want them to.

Yes but just to be clear, the actual ruling on light wood (and other degrading terrain) is that if the LOS does not intersect artwork, it is not degraded, except if LOS is traced exactly between two light woods hex *(along the hexside), in which case it is always considered degraded, even if it dos not touch artwork