Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
12 Posts

Squad Leader» Forums » Rules

Subject: Do wheafield hexes block LOS to passengers on a tank? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Gary Kessler
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
In the illustration below, the Russian squad has unobstructed LOS to the German tank; the wheat field (in season) does not block LOS from the squad to the tank.

My question is: Could the Russian squad "see" any passengers on the tank, and if so, fire at those passengers?

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott B
msg tools
mb
I would say yes, the passengers are the height equivalent of the vehicle and in LOS of the 447, just like the vehicle is in LOS.

The GIA Brush rules seem to say so, in that mounted cavalry are visible too.

Quote:
154.4 SUSPECT TARGET: Brush blocks all same level LOS but does not create blind hexes nor block LOS. Vehicles (EXC: 2 size vehicles), mounted cavalry, and vehicular equivalent sized guns in or behind a brush (or wheatfield), which are not emplaced/entrenched, are always visible barring other LOS obstacles regardless of viewer’s elevation. However, the reverse is not true. A vehicle (or its height equivalent) cannot see through brush/wheatfield hexes to detect non-vehicular-sized units on the same level. Any non-ordnance (EXC: Canister 148.41) weapon may fire through a brush or wheatfield hex as Area Fire provided it has reason to “suspect” the presence of a target on the opposite side. In order to “suspect” the presence of a target the firing unit must either be adjacent to an unbroken friendly unit with a LOS to the target which is also firing at it, or be part of a FG containing at least one firer which does have a LOS to the target (in which case only that portion of the FG which does not have a LOS to the target would be halved for Area Fire). Ordnance weapons may fire through a brush/wheatfield hex at full strength at a same level target only if it can see the target and it must add +2 to its TO HIT DR for Case K.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
craig grinnell
United States
speer
Illinois
flag msg tools
Screaming Eagle and Damn Proud of it!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I really wished they would have called them corn fields instead of wheat fields... That has always bugged me.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
T. Dauphin
Canada
Belleville
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar

sbramley1967 wrote:
I would say yes, the passengers are the height equivalent of the vehicle and in LOS of the 447, just like the vehicle is in LOS.


Agreed. They're sitting on the vehicle which itself is visible.
And GI does help confirm that.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
T. Dauphin
Canada
Belleville
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar

grinnell1969 wrote:
I really wished they would have called them corn fields instead of wheat fields... That has always bugged me.


Well, it was Russia when they started, right? So what would have been more common there? I think of Russia as a grower of wheat, but I don't know exactly.
Certainly corn would be more of an obstruction, but sometimes it would have been wheat and I guess they had to pick one name.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Walters
United States
Hercules
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Corn/maize is a new world crop, and very little was grown in the Soviet Union until Khrushchev tried to popularize it starting in 1954, earning himself the name "Mr. Corn" (except in Russian). Pretty much the same in Germany, and probably France. On the other hand, all those places grew a *lot* of wheat.

It would be weird to fight WW2 in corn fields.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gary Kessler
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the responses, guys! Fire away at those passengers it is then.

Never dreamed that this thread would branch out into a discussion about crops! laugh

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
craig grinnell
United States
speer
Illinois
flag msg tools
Screaming Eagle and Damn Proud of it!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tanik wrote:

grinnell1969 wrote:
I really wished they would have called them corn fields instead of wheat fields... That has always bugged me.


Well, it was Russia when they started, right? So what would have been more common there? I think of Russia as a grower of wheat, but I don't know exactly.
Certainly corn would be more of an obstruction, but sometimes it would have been wheat and I guess they had to pick one name.


That's never been my complaint about it. my issue is that wheat only grows waist high, so it wouldn't really provide concealment unless you are crawling.

I realize this is a waaaaaay too nitpicky rant, but I've been harboring this for decades and had to vent it. it is very therapeutic. I feel much better now.

do I owe my "therapists" any geek gold?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Walters
United States
Hercules
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

I don't think there's such a thing as being "too nitpicky" if you've having fun, thought there certainly is such a thing if you're being a jerk. But this is fun.

Vis-a-vis wheat height, remember that wheat drastically changed its height over the course of the 20th century. Early 20th century wheat grew about four feet hight, but nitrogen fertilizers caused larger heads, which made the stalks to bend and break. Wheat was cross bread with dwarf wheat (from Japan? somewhere) to give us modern, "semi-dwarf" wheat, which is 2-3 feet high. I'm not sure exactly what strain and what fertilizers the soviets were using, but it's possible their what was four feet tall, or taller.

As far as the rules go, I do think they're kind of backwards. If I'm reading my rules right, wheat blocks LOS *through*, but doesn't reduce the fire strength of an attack. I think when the shooting starts people are going to duck, so you should get protection from fire, but at four feet I think you should be able to see people on the far side unless *they* are crawling.

At the end of the day, though, I suspect Mr. Hill et al designed the game based on accounts of combat, not horticultural minutia. At lest the designer's notes suggest this. And combat accounts should be the ultimate authority.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott B
msg tools
mb
wouldn't they have been sunflowers in the Ukraine?

I think the more interesting question, Andrew, is how you know so much about wheat in 1954 Soviet Union? Had no idea Mr. Corn was promoting it.


Craig, glad you finally got to let it go. I would never have guessed you would find someone knowledgeable on the subject to discuss. My peev is Russian entrenchments on '5' or less, it should be '6', like the Supplemental.

You can fire into a wheat hex at full strength but any penetration beyond is halved for Area Fire. It also negates the -2 for moving in open. There is an oddball LOS rule, the one here. A vehicle can be seen through a wheatfield but it can't see past intervening wheat fields. Its about the only place the 'if A has LOS to B than B has LOS to A' rule doesn't work.


Scott
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kris Miller
United States
Lincoln
Nebraska
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yea... That information might be a bit too fine-grained for an SL board.

andreww wrote:

I don't think there's such a thing as being "too nitpicky" if you've having fun, thought there certainly is such a thing if you're being a jerk. But this is fun.

Vis-a-vis wheat height, remember that wheat drastically changed its height over the course of the 20th century. Early 20th century wheat grew about four feet hight, but nitrogen fertilizers caused larger heads, which made the stalks to bend and break. Wheat was cross bread with dwarf wheat (from Japan? somewhere) to give us modern, "semi-dwarf" wheat, which is 2-3 feet high. I'm not sure exactly what strain and what fertilizers the soviets were using, but it's possible their what was four feet tall, or taller.

As far as the rules go, I do think they're kind of backwards. If I'm reading my rules right, wheat blocks LOS *through*, but doesn't reduce the fire strength of an attack. I think when the shooting starts people are going to duck, so you should get protection from fire, but at four feet I think you should be able to see people on the far side unless *they* are crawling.

At the end of the day, though, I suspect Mr. Hill et al designed the game based on accounts of combat, not horticultural minutia. At lest the designer's notes suggest this. And combat accounts should be the ultimate authority.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
T. Dauphin
Canada
Belleville
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar

grinnell1969 wrote:

do I owe my "therapists" any geek gold?


My "The Doctor is in cup" takes nickels. As long as they make a noise.
Oh, the glorious sound of money. Don't you just love it!

andreww wrote:

At the end of the day, though, I suspect Mr. Hill et al designed the game based on accounts of combat, not horticultural minutia. At lest the designer's notes suggest this. And combat accounts should be the ultimate authority.


They did talk about design for effect, and I believe we should try to keep this in mind.
But, it's hard sometimes.

sbramley1967 wrote:
wouldn't they have been sunflowers in the Ukraine?

Good Question.

sbramley1967 wrote:

A vehicle can be seen through a wheatfield but it can't see past intervening wheat fields. Its about the only place the 'if A has LOS to B than B has LOS to A' rule doesn't work.

I have to confess, I've never had to deal with this one.
My first thought is that the eyes (visor) in a buttoned up tank are closer to standing eye level so it seems consistent. However, once you have an exposed man in the turret this should definitely be a different situation. I would absolutely support a change to that one.

travellerne wrote:
Yea... That information might be a bit too fine-grained for an SL board.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.