[Rules] Question on elevations/slopes, and, spotting

[petermc]

Searched the folders and couldn't find an answer to my query, I apologize if this is redundant.

LOS at 0m and 20m is perfectly clear to me, the bullet points in 8.42 show what blocks and what doesn't.  And I've said this before, I like the way the 4th ed handles this.

But at 40m or higher I'm not sure what the rule is.  There aren't any bullet points in 8.42 that cover anything lower than equal or higher elevation.  In essence, blocking terrain at 0m, which rises to 20m, has no effect whatsoever on LOS from units at 40m.  This includes slopes at 20m. 

So, for example, if there was a clear hex/slope hex of 40m on board 2, surrounded by 6 clear 20m slope hexes, a unit on the 40m hex would have legal LOS to every hex of the large town on board 2.

If this is correct small "bald" hills like the one on board 9 are very commanding.

Spotting question:  the +6 per level rule, that adds to spotting range, only applies to non-limiting terrain, right?  In other words, a unit in a town is never spotted beyond 3 hexes, unless it fires/gets marked spotted.

Thanks for any assistance!

[Poor Yorek]

I'll take the last, first.  Correct, the increased spotting range from increased elevation (relative to the hex being spotted) is just the potential, one might say.  LT or reduced visibility conditions still apply in general.

8.42 covers all cases that would block LOS between units at two different elevations as they (the rules) are couched in terms of relative elevations.  So, yes, a unit spotting from 40-m would see over any 20-m obstruction, even a unit "hiding" right behind one (e.g. a unit in a clear hex just "behind" a 20-m woods or town.  Of course, a town or woods on a 20-m elevation is itself effectively 40-m.  

Simply put, to have a chance of blocking LOS between units at different elevations, a feature must be at an elevation at least equal to the higher of the two units involved in the LOS calculation (a necessary, but not sufficient condition).  

The first bullet in 8.41 seems a bit unclear as a 20-m town (a town at 0-elevation) would not block LOS between two units if the units themselves are at 40-m.  For that matter, even a town at 20-m (extending up to 40-m) would not block (this is analogous to the E-G case in the rules).  For units at the same level, the obstruction must be higher than both units.

Hopefully I have this right for you.

Spotting was a critical factor in RtB #19, http://www.pg-hq.com/library.php?type=sc...id=RtBr019.  The 40-m hill of B19 allowed a Stalinist leader to rain down artillery on the heads of the 3rd SS. ::cough::  Ok, bad pun, but given the snow conditions in the scenario forcing the Germans to be more-or-less road bound, that 40-m perch gave the Soviet artillery observer a nice clear view.

[J6A]

Yes, it's always 3 to limiting terrain. I've been playing the way you described, that 40m to ground would not be blocked by a 20m obstacle, even if it was the hex in front of the target.

[Poor Yorek]

Another thought experiment case: imagine B2 and B6 adjacent. A leader on the single 40-m hex on B2, 0713, could spot down to any artillery unit that fires (gaining a spotted marker) deep within the large regular woods on B6, e.g. 0608 or 0708.

[petermc]

Thanks for the confirmation/replies. That's what I thought...just checking to make sure I've got it right.

I think on the European maps or any dense terrain maps the x-ray level LOS from 40m and 60m hills might be too dramatic. It also changes the 2nd/3rd ed rules a lot. All the old scenarios using board 12 or 2 get changed, as 40m hexes can spot the whole town.

But I'm Ok with it. It won't come up that often, and the spotting=3 will still prevent long range plunking fire.

For Steppe/Med/North African maps, it probably works out a little better, so all is well.

[Poor Yorek]

I think on the European maps or any dense terrain maps the x-ray level LOS from 40m and 60m hills might be too dramatic. 

I submit (gently) that the spotting rules are not intended to imply that one can tell whether a guy at the latrine in a spotted hex sports a turtleneck or crewneck, but only that sufficient resolution is achieved so as to be able to direct combat effective fire into/onto said hex. This isn't spotting for sniper fire, after all.  

[petermc]

I think maybe I was confusing LOS and spotting in our posts. LOS from 40m bald hills is almost omnipotent. Spotting is much harder (and mitigates the first point). That's what I was trying to say.

For direct fire and bombardment fire, I agree with your sweater analogy. For AT fire it's more complicated and might present odd situations, but again, that's OK.

[petermc]

I saw the post on using the Panzerblitz-style 1/2 and 1/3 and 1/4 rules. That's not a bad idea, if anyone really wants to house rule it.

My idea, although I lean strongly against house rules, would be to have an automatic blind hex behind towns and woods at 0m, and 2 blind hexes behind towns and woods at 20m, etc. Something simple like that, if, heaven forbid, there is ever a fifth edition or an official rules revision.

[J6A]

One thing to remember is that you're talking a 20m rise over a 200m hex. So, unless everyone is huddled up at the base of the hill, there will be guys in the hex where the angle to see them isn't all that great.

[petermc]

Good point, thanks. I need to think about this some more.