| Author | Topic |
|---|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Thu, 01 April 2010 19:13
 
|
 |
Note:
Under Beaches, I have text about units being able to move into Ocean hexes on their own. That same text needs to be available under the Oceans section.
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Sun, 11 April 2010 23:46
|
|
Note:
Under Overlord, add the following FAQ -
Q. Let's say I'm playing an Overlord battle and I have 2 cards less than the maximum number I could hold (e.g. I have 10 cards and I could have 12). If I play a Recon 1 card, do I get to draw 3 cards and keep the best two (since I can't hold more than 12 cards)?
A. No. In Overlord, the Recon 1 card simply allows you to draw up to 3 cards to replenish your hand. You may never draw more cards than you are allowed to hold by the scenario briefing.
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Mon, 12 April 2010 03:55
|
|
Note:
Q. When playing as the Allies in the Pacific theater, the Marine player gets to order two Infantry units with Behind Enemy Lines. Does one unit finish his whole move before the other one does anything, or do they each move...then each attack...then each move again?
A.
Q. How should the Combat Cards be played with the U.S. Marines? Does the Allied player get to order an extra unit for each of the cards?
A.
|
|
|
stevens
Posts: 2725
Registered:
February 2007
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Mon, 12 April 2010 15:52
|
|
| stevens wrote on Mon, 12 April 2010 04:04 |
It might be clearer on the answer if you also added;
A. No. In Overlord, the Recon 1 card simply allows you to draw up to 3 cards to replenish your hand. You may never draw more cards than you are allowed to hold by the scenario briefing. So in this example, you may not draw additional cards if the number of drawn cards allowed by the use of Recon-1 would bring your hand past the limit of 12.
|
I like it. I might play around a little bit still with the wording but I like the idea of the example. Thanks! 
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Sat, 17 April 2010 16:17
|
|
Note:
I don't know how this question didn't get into the FAQ before...
Q. Under night rules, can an Airplane be brought onto the board before full daylight? Before full daylight can an Air Sortie be used to order one unit on the board?
I'll find out and include this question in the next update of the FAQ.
|
|
|
50th
Posts: 1277
Registered:
October 2006
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Sun, 18 April 2010 14:02
|
|
| rasmussen81 wrote on Sun, 11 April 2010 20:55 |
Note:
Q. When playing as the Allies in the Pacific theater, the Marine player gets to order two Infantry units with Behind Enemy Lines. Does one unit finish his whole move before the other one does anything, or do they each move...then each attack...then each move again?
A.
Q. How should the Combat Cards be played with the U.S. Marines? Does the Allied player get to order an extra unit for each of the cards?
A.
|
I thought that the combat cards were only used in the Sword of Stalingrad scenarios. Are people using them in other scenarios? I think they are designed especially for Eastern Front scenarios if they are used in others. There would be no Marines.
|
|
|
ad79
Posts: 773
Registered:
September 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Sun, 18 April 2010 14:19
|
|
I htink it's a case of trying to fit the Combat rules to the pacific theater. Maybe someone whats to design scenarios with marines and use the combat deck.
The combat deck came into this question through the question of how to handle BEL for the marines. How to do the extra movements for the BEL card. And the same applies to the "infliltrators" card in the combat deck. When do we move the extra 3 hexes? And thus came the question: Does the Combat decks allow Marines to order extra units? It's all BEL's fault.
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Sun, 18 April 2010 15:50
|
|
| ad79 wrote on Sun, 18 April 2010 05:19 |
It's all BEL's fault.
|
Indeed, like so many other things...acne, sleeplessness, hair loss, premature aging.
You're right, 50th, there may never be any official scenarios where the Combat cards are used in the Pacific Theater because they were designed for urban conflict, but players can choose to use them any time they want and someone might want to use them with Marines. Therefore, I thought it might be worth finding out and answering so players know how it should be played.
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Wed, 21 April 2010 22:03
|
|
Q. If a Combat Engineer unit moves onto a mine and it turns out to be a Decoy ('0') does the engineer get to battle?
A. As the rule is written - An engineer unit that moves onto a Minefield hex and that is eligible to battle must clear the Minefield hex instead of battling. A minefield token represents a minefield no matter what the value of the token.
A minefield token with a "0" will still require an Engineer unit to clear the "0" token instead of battling.
This will be included in the next FAQ update.
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Tue, 27 April 2010 23:22
|
|
A few more questions and answers to include in the FAQ:
Minefields
Enemy re-rolls all battle dice from a minefield that score a hit.
If at least one re-roll is a Grenade, kill is confirmed and the Tiger is eliminated, all other re-rolls are ignored.
Frozen Rivers
For each Star rolled, 1 figure is lost.
A Tiger Tank unit only has one figure, no re-roll is required to eliminate the single figure Tiger Tank unit.
Crossing a Frozen River with a Tiger Tank unit is indeed a risky move.
Richard Borg
|
|
|
Freeloading Phill
Posts: 61
Registered:
August 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Fri, 30 April 2010 04:16
|
|
Another question.
In the Campaign Book scenario Driving to Sedan, the rules state:
| Quote: |
The river Semois is impassable except through the ford of Alle (Terrain 41 - Fords & Fordable Rivers) and over a pontoon bridge (Terrains 33 - Pontoon Bridge) which can be built by any German infantry unit.
|
This text is different from all other pontoon building scenarios.
Are pontoon bridges built as normal for this scenario or are there some special rules missing about infantry building the bridges?
Phill
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Fri, 30 April 2010 04:50
|
|
| PhillWebb wrote on Thu, 29 April 2010 19:16 |
Another question.
In the Campaign Book scenario Driving to Sedan, the rules state:
| Quote: |
The river Semois is impassable except through the ford of Alle (Terrain 41 - Fords & Fordable Rivers) and over a pontoon bridge (Terrains 33 - Pontoon Bridge) which can be built by any German infantry unit.
|
This text is different from all other pontoon building scenarios.
Are pontoon bridges built as normal for this scenario or are there some special rules missing about infantry building the bridges?
Phill
|
Hi Phill,
Check page 12 of the FAQ and look under Pontoon Bridges. You'll see that building a pontoon bridge is not an action done by units...it's a card play.
I hope that answers your question.
|
|
|
Freeloading Phill
Posts: 61
Registered:
August 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Fri, 30 April 2010 05:02
|
|
| rasmussen81 wrote on Fri, 30 April 2010 12:50 |
Check page 12 of the FAQ and look under Pontoon Bridges. You'll see that building a pontoon bridge is not an action done by units...it's a card play.
I hope that answers your question.
|
Not really.
I understand how the card says the rules work but when you go to play the scenario the text makes it sound like there are other special rules - why say "which can be built by any German infantry unit" when you could say "which the German player can build". Does killing all the German infantry stop the ability to build Pontoon Bridges? How are they built by any German infantry unit? etc.
I think that scenario needs clarification that the Pontoon Bridge building follows the normal procedure and ignore the text about infantry units.
I know of one gaming group (mine) that had a lot of discussion, and a minor argument, about why the text was different and what it meant. There may be others that have the same confusion and a FAQ entry could save them some angry words.
Phill
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
|
Freeloading Phill
Posts: 61
Registered:
August 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Fri, 30 April 2010 06:05
|
|
Sorry I thought that the Scenarios from the Campaign Book would be covered by the FAQ in the scenario section. My question is specifically about the scenario.
That's the trouble with producing such a fantastic FAQ - we just expect everything. 
| rasmussen81 wrote on Fri, 30 April 2010 13:35 |
I must be confused now, because I thought the FAQ does have an entry that deals very clearly with this very topic.
|
Nah, I'm asking about the specific scenario which talks about pontoon bridge building with different wording to every other pontoon building scenario. It's the extra wording that is being queried as it looks like a modification to the standard pontoon bridges rules.
The Driving to Sedan scenario adds ...built by any German infantry unit.
If we ignore that then are we supposed to ignore the additional text ...in the central section in the Camouflaged in Monthermé scenario;
and the ...as soon as an Axis unit occupies the west hex of Dinant. in the Bouvignes Bridgehead scenario?
| Quote: |
Maybe if someone makes a specific Campaign Book FAQ this question could be included.
|
Definitely.
Does this belong in the Campaign Book errata thread?
Phill
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Fri, 30 April 2010 06:42
|
|
I can see how you might be confused by the wording in that scenario but there aren't any specific rules about how the "Infantry Units" in that scenario would place Pontoon Bridges so we're left to use the rules that are originally set out. If it had been intended to change the norm, the Special Rules would have been more intricate than a short phrase.
I'm afraid the wording may have confused you, but weren't written to change the normal placement of Pontoon Bridges. This would be a good thing to place in the Campaign Book Errata so we don't loose it.
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Fri, 30 April 2010 07:11
|
|
| PhillWebb wrote on Thu, 29 April 2010 21:05 |
Sorry I thought that the Scenarios from the Campaign Book would be covered by the FAQ in the scenario section. My question is specifically about the scenario.
That's the trouble with producing such a fantastic FAQ - we just expect everything.
|
Thanks for the kind words! I'm glad you find the FAQ useful and it wouldn't be that big an issue to add in this one scenario into the Scenario Section, but the FAQ is already so big...and it's going to keep growing with coming expansions. The Campaign Book is an independent enough project that I'm trying to keep the two things separate where I can.
|
|
|
sam1812
Posts: 1911
Registered:
August 2006
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Sat, 01 May 2010 01:18
|
|
Some questions were raised about Fort Eban-Emael, from CB1. Even though this is a Campaign Book scenario, but would it be appropriate in the regular FAQ simply by virtue of it being a scenario, and since the answers are so significant?
| jdrommel wrote on Thu, 22 October 2009 12:10 |
Hello,
Just some considerations about this scenario :
1) Defenders are Belgian, not French.
2) Bunkers are not really bunkers, they represent artillery turrets, so nobody can used them as bunkers.
3) Turrets are objective only for the Axis player.
4) It's effectively a nonsense to bring a tank unit on the top of the fort.
5) No units can exit the top of the fort, so a flag means a loss if no retreat path.
6) No reserve unit in renfort for the Axis player.
7) All hexes inside the hills are at the same level (height) than the hills since hills represent the walls of the fort, and fortress hexes are effectively at the same level.
I hope these informations can help you.
Jdrommel.
|
|
|
|
stevens
Posts: 2725
Registered:
February 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Sat, 01 May 2010 22:39
|
|
Dear Jesse,
For the Campaign book FAQ:
I asked Jacques about the scoring in the scenario DEFENSE DU CATEAU. My opponent thought that he could run up the score by killing all my units before capturing the town. In this way, he could maximize his total medals before meeting the victory conditions for the Axis. This didn't seem to be the intent of the author, so I asked him how this scenario was scored. The following is his email response:
| Quote: |
Re: La Cateau Sun, 14 February 2010 13:25
Hello Stevens,
Sorry for the delay, I was in holidays, and I just came back home.
Ok, For the scenario "Défense du Cateau", the victory conditions for the Axis player are 5 medals including the temporary medal-objective of "Le Cateau". So, if the Axis player wins this scenario, he earns only 5 medals (even if he kills all the Allied units). There is no other option.
By the way, there are only 8 Allied units in the scenario (!)
Yours,
Jdrommel.
|
Jacques couldn't understand how my opponent could score 10 medals. I later reminded him that I had placed reserves. This gave my opponent more than the original starting point of 8.
|
|
|
stevens
Posts: 2725
Registered:
February 2007
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Tue, 04 May 2010 00:57
|
|
Thanks, stevens, for the link to that discussion.
I've been trying to figure out what the line is between the regular FAQ and the Campaign Book questions. The Campaign Book has enough questions from it that I think there will eventually need to be a specific Campaign Book FAQ. Until then, I'm going to have questions from the Campaign Book posted over on the Campaign Book Official Errata page.
I'm still working on updating the regular FAQ and some other projects, so I won't have time to create a Campaign Book FAQ any time soon...but for now let's keep the Campaign Book information on the other thread.
The FAQ is so big already (50+ pages with the latest update) and as other expansions come out it will only grow bigger...it's a good thing I didn't know what I was getting myself into! 
|
|
|
Achtung Panzer
Posts: 948
Registered:
December 2007
|
|
Interdiction and Firefight
|
Sat, 22 May 2010 10:32
|
|
Not sure if this question has been asked before but if not, this is the place to ask it.
When playing Firefight, does an aircraft performing Interdiction count, thus preventing the Firefight as it cannot be played by a unit adjacent to an enemy?
I know Interdiction does not stop the pinned unit from battling, it's the adjacent enemy bit of the Firefight card that's causing my confusion.
I allowed the Firefight because the unit (mobile artillery) was not targetting the adjacent plane as a Close Combat enemy.
|
|
|
tank commander
Posts: 1788
Registered:
October 2004
|
|
Re:Interdiction and Firefight
|
Sat, 22 May 2010 12:51
|
|
| Achtung Panzer wrote on Sat, 22 May 2010 04:32 |
Not sure if this question has been asked before but if not, this is the place to ask it.
When playing Firefight, does an aircraft performing Interdiction count, thus preventing the Firefight as it cannot be played by a unit adjacent to an enemy?
I know Interdiction does not stop the pinned unit from battling, it's the adjacent enemy bit of the Firefight card that's causing my confusion.
I allowed the Firefight because the unit (mobile artillery) was not targetting the adjacent plane as a Close Combat enemy.
|
It was brought up here:
http://www.daysofwonder.com/en/msg/?goto=165149#msg_165149
It does not look like there was an official answer though.
|
|
|
Achtung Panzer
Posts: 948
Registered:
December 2007
|
|
Re:Interdiction and Firefight
|
Sat, 22 May 2010 18:46
|
|
| tank commander wrote on Sat, 22 May 2010 11:51 |
| Achtung Panzer wrote on Sat, 22 May 2010 04:32 |
Not sure if this question has been asked before but if not, this is the place to ask it.
When playing Firefight, does an aircraft performing Interdiction count, thus preventing the Firefight as it cannot be played by a unit adjacent to an enemy?
I know Interdiction does not stop the pinned unit from battling, it's the adjacent enemy bit of the Firefight card that's causing my confusion.
I allowed the Firefight because the unit (mobile artillery) was not targetting the adjacent plane as a Close Combat enemy.
|
It was brought up here:
http://www.daysofwonder.com/en/msg/?goto=165149#msg_165149
It does not look like there was an official answer though.
|
Wow, almost a year ago to the day! Perhaps an official FAQ ruling is overdue? Although I allowed the unit to use Firefight, I can also see an argument for Interdiction causing them to keep their heads down, which I guess is the intention. Hhmmm... 
[Updated on: Sat, 22 May 2010 18:47]
|
|
|
tank commander
Posts: 1788
Registered:
October 2004
|
|
The Dig In card and Oaisis Recovery Rule.
|
Wed, 30 June 2010 00:35
|
|
I saw this on another thread and thought it might be best posted here:
So, if an infantry on an oasis is given an order to dig-in, may it also roll for oasis recovery? Dig-in card says "ordered unit" which "may not move or battle", neither of which a unit ordered by dig-in does...so why can it not take advantage of oasis recovery as well as digging in? Any ideas/ views/ rulings
|
|
|
stevens
Posts: 2725
Registered:
February 2007
|
|
Re:The Dig In card and Oaisis Recovery Rule.
|
Tue, 06 July 2010 21:09
|
|
Here is the link that Tank Commander is referencing:
http://www.daysofwonder.com/en/msg/?th=19820&start=0
I think the simple answer is that although the card states - "issue an order to four infantry units"
the particular order is not open to interpretation as a general order, as it it is particularly defined as a DIG-IN card. And so the particular order is to Dig-in, not do anything else you feel like doing.
|
|
|
genswanc
Posts: 8
Registered:
May 2006
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Tue, 06 July 2010 23:51
|
|
|
I've got a question on bunkers. If an infantry unit is forced to retreat from said bunker, but moves back into the bunker and is dealt another flag, is that second flag ignored?
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Wed, 07 July 2010 00:32
|
|
| player241124 wrote on Tue, 06 July 2010 14:51 |
I've got a question on bunkers. If an infantry unit is forced to retreat from said bunker, but moves back into the bunker and is dealt another flag, is that second flag ignored?
|
I'm not totally sure I understand the question, but I'll try providing and answer and you can tell me if I'm off track... 
If an Infantry unit is in a Bunker, he gets to ignore 1 retreat Flag every time he is attacked. That means that even if your opponent is attacking with 4 units and each unit rolls 1 Flag during their attack, your Infantry won't have to retreat because it can ignore a Flag for each attack.
If an attacking unit rolled 2 Flags at one go, your Infantry unit must retreat 1 hex because it can ignore the first Flag but has to retreat for the second one. If you wanted to, you could choose not to ignore the first Flag, though, and hightail it 2 hexes back.
Looking at your question, it looks like you're talking about a unit being forced to retreat out of a bunker (which would mean someone rolled 2 flags with a single attack) but then moved back in to occupy the bunker on their next turn. Any time your unit is in a bunker (and the rules say that the bunker belongs to your side) you get to ignore the first Flag!
I hope that helps make things more clear.
|
|
|
genswanc
Posts: 8
Registered:
May 2006
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Thu, 08 July 2010 00:06
|
|
|
That answered my question perfectly, thanks!
|
|
|
sam1812
Posts: 1911
Registered:
August 2006
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Mon, 19 July 2010 14:09
|
|
Cross-posted from another thread:
Adding a sandbag to a hedgehog will reduce attackers' dice by 1, but does not allow you to ignore a second flag.
Adding a sandbag to a bunker gives no extra protection, because the bunker already reduces the dice and protects against the first flag. However, you are allowed to put an available sandbag on any land hex, so it does use up a sandbag that might otherwise have a small chance of being used later by your opponent.
Richard Borg has ruled that Infantry Assault lets Special Forces move 2 and battle, or move 3 and not battle. I thought that was already in the FAQ. (It's not there, but in the chart on page 35, you can see that on a road they can't move 4 and battle.)
| Meehael wrote on Mon, 19 July 2010 02:49 |
Hi everyone,
I just recently started playing M'44 and it's a really great game. But to keep things short, I have two questions to which I didn't find an answer in the FAQ.
1.) Improving position on bunkers or hedgehogs with the card "Dig-in": Can sandbags be placed on a hex with a bunker or hedgehog? If so, can a unit ignore 2 flags while on a hex with bunker/hedgehog and sandbags?
2.) The card "Infantry Assault" with Special Forces: Special Forces infantry move up to 2 hexes and still battle. Do they profit somehow from the card? Can they move 3 hexes and still battle?
Thanks,
best regards!
|
|
|
|
stevens
Posts: 2725
Registered:
February 2007
|
|
|
gheintze
Posts: 860
Registered:
August 2004
|
|
|
gheintze
Posts: 860
Registered:
August 2004
|
|
|
gheintze
Posts: 860
Registered:
August 2004
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Tue, 27 July 2010 15:26
|
|
I just heard back from jdrommel.
Air rules are not in effect for those three Breakthrough scenarios as well as the 12 French open scenarios. At least that is how they were designed...
Geoff
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Wed, 28 July 2010 01:58
|
|
Thanks guys, for the material that I can add to the FAQ. I don't have a lot of free time right now and I'm still working on a few other updates to the document, but I'll include these items in the next release.
My wife and I are moving in a little less than a month, so we'll see if I can squeeze this in before the move. If not, the FAQ update will have to wait a little while still. I'll keep you posted!
|
|
|
gheintze
Posts: 860
Registered:
August 2004
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Wed, 28 July 2010 15:26
|
|
Believe it or not, I actually think that I may have time to start updating the card compendium again. 
Thanks to the excellent FAQ put together by rasmussen81, my job is a lot easier -- I just need to type in the questions and answers from the FAQ.
However, in the course of getting this started I came upon a few questions that are unanswered (unless I missed something).
Hill and Mountain LOS issues
-- do you have LOS from one mountain to another mountain if there is an intervening hill?
According to the rules, the answer is no, but it doesn't make sense.
-- how about a unit on a mountain firing at a unit on a hill with an intervening hill hex?
Same as above.
-- can a unit on a mountain fire on a mountain that is two hexes away with an intervening mountain?
Seems that you can according to the rules.
Are snipers able to fire out of wire?
No, the -1 die means they have zero according to the rules. But I wouldn't be surprised if they can...
Other than these questions, I'll just use Jesse's FAQ to update the card compendium.
Geoff
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Wed, 28 July 2010 15:36
|
|
| gheintze wrote on Wed, 28 July 2010 06:26 |
Believe it or not, I actually think that I may have time to start updating the card compendium again.
Thanks to the excellent FAQ put together by rasmussen81, my job is a lot easier -- I just need to type in the questions and answers from the FAQ.
However, in the course of getting this started I came upon a few questions that are unanswered (unless I missed something).
Hill and Mountain LOS issues
-- do you have LOS from one mountain to another mountain if there is an intervening hill?
According to the rules, the answer is no, but it doesn't make sense.
-- how about a unit on a mountain firing at a unit on a hill with an intervening hill hex?
Same as above.
|
It's not about making sense. The official rule is that if anything blocks LOS between two hexes, the units can't see each other. This is true if two units are on mountains and there is another unit between...even though the unit between would be at ground level. Check page 11 of the FAQ.
| Quote: |
-- can a unit on a mountain fire on a mountain that is two hexes away with an intervening mountain?
Seems that you can according to the rules.
|
This is basically just like hills...look at the online example for hills and you'll find your answer. Unless the mountains are connected, the units will not have LOS.
| Quote: |
Are snipers able to fire out of wire?
No, the -1 die means they have zero according to the rules. But I wouldn't be surprised if they can...
|
This one isn't included in the FAQ or rules. I'll check on it and include it with my next update. Good catch.
[Updated on: Wed, 28 July 2010 16:17]
|
|
|
gheintze
Posts: 860
Registered:
August 2004
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Wed, 28 July 2010 15:47
|
|
| rasmussen81 wrote on Wed, 28 July 2010 09:36 |
| gheintze wrote on Wed, 28 July 2010 06:26 |
Hill and Mountain LOS issues
-- do you have LOS from one mountain to another mountain if there is an intervening hill?
According to the rules, the answer is no, but it doesn't make sense.
-- how about a unit on a mountain firing at a unit on a hill with an intervening hill hex?
Same as above.
|
It's not about making sense. The official rule is that if anything blocks LOS between two hexes, the units can't see each other. This is true if two units are on mountains and there is another unit between...even though the unit between would be at ground level. Check page 11 of the FAQ.
|
I just didn't know if hills were different than village, units, forests, etc... because they are just "smaller mountains". But I agree that the FAQ is clear that hills (as intervening terrain that blocks LOS) will prevent LOS in the first situation.
Geoff
|
|
|
rasmussen81
Posts: 6070
Registered:
July 2007
|
|
Re:Official FAQ Book
|
Wed, 28 July 2010 16:20
|
|
| gheintze wrote on Wed, 28 July 2010 06:47 |
I just didn't know if hills were different than village, units, forests, etc... because they are just "smaller mountains". But I agree that the FAQ is clear that hills (as intervening terrain that blocks LOS) will prevent LOS in the first situation.
Geoff
|
Nope, there's no difference between hills and other terrain in this example. If something blocks LOS, it simply blocks LOS. I had the same question a while back and got a definite answer from Richard Borg saying that there is no 'step' effect that would allow units to see down the mountain, past the hill, to the fields below.
|
|
|
