Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
[Rules] 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me
02-27-2014, 06:30 AM,
#26
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me
Played scenario 2 of Elsenborn Ridge today. (FWIW this time the Germans slaughtered the US and won a major victory.)

The system is clicking better. 18-turn scenario took 4 hours or so.

There is a lot of fiddly counter shuffling. It seems to be wise to set up big stacks spread out individually in a line beside the map with a marker on the map to indicate where the line of units are, and then disrupt/demoralized markers can go beside them instead of on top of them too.

===

(02-27-2014, 05:33 AM)Poor Yorek Wrote: Just FYI, a related (to the OBA matter) thread from some time ago.

http://www.pg-hq.com/comms/showthread.ph...88#pid2188

Excellent, thanks for that link. So hopefully my 3rd solo play will be all correct with respect to OBA at least. Smile

So it seems that the printed rules (and even the online annotated rules too) don't specify that you CAN target different hexes with your 3 off-board artillery strikes in the same action... but officially you can, right? You don't have to combine them against a single target in a single action of OBA strikes, based on that linked thread.

Thanks again to all of y'all for the helpful comments and answers in this thread! Very nice to have an active helpful online community for the game.

====

About 8.4 and elevation:

FWIW I took a look at the Combat Commander maps to see why its elevation/LOS rules seem so much clearer and realized that its maps are drawn so that every hex which has an elevation change line ("crest" in CC jargon) is such that the center of the hex is at the upper elevation and the entire hex is thus considered at the upper elevation.

The PG maps don't seem to be consistent that way: there are elevation lines in some hexes which seem (by the naturalistic artwork) to be intended to be at the lower elevation, so that a unit one hex further back "up the hill" wouldn't be able to see over the crest line in the hex in front of it (if I understand the hazy intent of the rules), which seemed weird

So for playing my second scenario today, I just decided to treat all hexes with a crest line as being at the higher, not lower elevation, ignoring the occasional seeming contradiction between that and the naturalistic artwork, and this made the elevation/LOS work fine, consistently, and simply for me...
Reply


Messages In This Thread
8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by russ - 02-24-2014, 09:32 PM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by Shad - 02-25-2014, 11:11 PM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by russ - 02-26-2014, 07:33 PM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by Shad - 02-26-2014, 10:50 PM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by russ - 02-27-2014, 06:30 AM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by russ - 02-27-2014, 07:49 AM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by russ - 02-27-2014, 08:15 AM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by russ - 02-27-2014, 08:42 AM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by russ - 02-27-2014, 05:29 PM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by russ - 02-27-2014, 07:25 PM
RE: 8.4 Elevation makes no sense to me - by russ - 02-28-2014, 01:09 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)