New house rule to the spotting stuff

[Rydo]

Disclaimer : I'm only giving this as an example. I've never used it but maybe someone could use it.

I've read some hate about the spotting mechanic. To be honest i've never found it strange, probably because Ln'L was my first tac game ever so everything was the norm to me and i found strange were in other tac games i can shoot on enemy units just because i see them on the map.
Also when scenario goes hot, spotting will be long gone as everyone is visible.

BUT if out there someone still don't like to spot then you can use this rule: " When, during your impulse, a unit you just activated have LOS to an enemy unit and usually need a spotting attempt, could shoot instead. By doing so, you have to halve your die roll result ( fractions rounded down ) ".

For example : a German 1-6-4-5 in a hex with a TM of +1 get shot by an American 2-5-4. The American squad roll a 4. Total would be 6 if the German squad was spotted but since it is not the final result is 2+2=4 ( the roll of 4 get halved ). The German then roll a 3 +1 for TM. Total 4. No effect. In the other case the German would have received a +2 on the roll on the damage check.

Try it an tell me if could work.

Let's give an excuse for that rule : Basically you can see everything on the map but your soldiers not. The spot mechanic reflect this. Since you don't like it the situation could be that your soldiers have seen something move or maybe a silouette in the distance or simply they know that in that place could be hiding someone.

 

[Charlie Heckman]

I would only consider that alternate IF the German squad in your example had been previously spotted (in a prior turn through fire or movement) AND that restriction seems like it would be too much book keeping for LnL Tactical.

I have considered some alternate variants based loosely on Assault Move in essence considering a unit that fails a spot test to have used 1/2 of their impulse and allowing that unit to fire on an alternative (spotted) target at -2 FP or make a half MP move in the same impulse...

However, my conclusion is that the spotting rules are just fine as they are, chalk it up to the Friction / Fog of War.

 

[Rydo]

I would only consider that alternate IF the German squad in your example had been previously spotted (in a prior turn through fire or movement) AND that restriction seems like it would be too much book keeping for LnL Tactical.

I have considered some alternate variants based loosely on Assault Move in essence considering a unit that fails a spot test to have used 1/2 of their impulse and allowing that unit to fire on an alternative (spotted) target at -2 FP or make a half MP move in the same impulse...

However, my conclusion is that the spotting rules are just fine as they are, chalk it up to the Friction / Fog of War.

I made up this one for the ones that don't like to spot.

I've always used the spotting rules so no problems for me.

Why book keeping? Just halve the die roll if you attack an unspotted unit.

In Ln'l spotted hexes have a spotted marker on them...its easy to see if a hex was spotted or not, not book keeping at all...

 

[Charlie Heckman]

To clarify my book keeping comment...

The example complaint I hear on spotting is this:

1. German squad fired in turn 1 from that hex.
2. During the end of turn the Fired marker is removed from that squad.
3. At the start of turn 2, the US player complains, 'why can't my airborne fire at those Germans? We just saw them fire'

In this example, I could support your half die Firepower for an attack.

However, if the Germans have been in those woods the entire game, have never fired or moved... how does the Airborne know to shoot them (except for the Player's superior knowledge of the situation?) Therefore, in this second example, I would not want to allow the half die FP attack.

Keeping track turn after turn of who has remained hidden and who had been located in a previous turn? Too much book keeping. I think your variant addresses one issue (example one above) but creates a new hole in the case of the second example.

To each is own of course.

- C

 

[Rydo]

To clarify my book keeping comment...

The example complaint I hear on spotting is this:

1. German squad fired in turn 1 from that hex.
2. During the end of turn the Fired marker is removed from that squad.
3. At the start of turn 2, the US player complains, 'why can't my airborne fire at those Germans? We just saw them fire'

In this example, I could support your half die Firepower for an attack.

However, if the Germans have been in those woods the entire game, have never fired or moved... how does the Airborne know to shoot them (except for the Player's superior knowledge of the situation?) Therefore, in this second example, I would not want to allow the half die FP attack.

Keeping track turn after turn of who has remained hidden and who had been located in a previous turn? Too much book keeping. I think your variant addresses one issue (example one above) but creates a new hole in the case of the second example.

To each is own of course.

- C

Yes, i get it. You're right. We can assume, but at an extreme degree that those Americans were looking very carefully

But it would mean force things.

The only way would be to mark units with concealment markers on them, so you will know if they moved or not. But at this point its better to jump on asl instead that already have this.

Ln'l is like a puzzle, the pieces could look strange but they are perfectly tied togeter. Add a new piece and you create holes

BTW mine was just an experiment for those who seek an alternative to spotting. I'm against this alternative that i created myself but i tried to help other platers

The only thing that would be cool in the system would be a suppress and pinned rule for each. What do you think?

 

[Barthheart]

....
The only thing that would be cool in the system would be a suppress and pinned rule for each. What do you think?

That's what shaken is.

 

[Rydo]

That's what shaken is.

What do you mean?

I always tought shaken units were just broken, i mean in the rulebook it says that shaken squads are frightened and unwilling to fight. To this represent suppression too?

I've never looked at it in this way...now everyrhing have much more sense!

Thank you Vassal boss!

 

[Barthheart]

Yeah I always looked at shaken as a combination of pin/suppressed both of which can be caused by being frightened or minor wounds etc.