Linear Terrain vs Low Area Terrain and Visability

[fred.]

Hi

When we played last week, we found the rules for linear terrain a little odd, with respect to visibility. But we played RAW, now I've had a chance to review the rules for visibility I'm quite confused by the differences between the effects linear terrain has on visibility compared to Low Area terrain.

For visibility units are classified as Low or Average profile (supplementary question is Low Profile here the same as Low Profile in the army lists, along with the heights for visibility you get -1d6 on shooting attacks??)

Linear terrain, has very simple visibility rules. You cannot see a unit that is not in contact with the linear terrain - we could say this is 1cm visibility as that is the typical thickness of this type of terrain model.

For Low Area terrain, visibility for Low vs Low is 10cm, Low vs Average 20cm, and Average vs Average infinite.

This is massively different to Low Area terrain, considering that both are approximately the same height. And when you think of wheat fields or scrub land compared to a hedge or fence they feel of the same sort of density.

For high area terrain the visibility for Low vs Low is 5cm, Low vs Average 5cm, and Average vs Average 10cm, which is still much further than over Linear Terrain.

Is this intended that Linear Terrain should block LoS so effectively?

We found this odd in game, when tanks in the middle of field couldn't be targeted, unless the attacker was up against the hedge or fence around the field. The Low Area terrain distances feel much more useful to me.

I'd be OK to use the Linear Terrain rules for high walls or bocage. But neither of these are specified in the description

[Big Insect]

The Linear obstacle issue is one that comes up regularly across all 3 Commander rules as it's almost impossible to define and categorize every type of possible linear obstacle (in a rules book anyway).
Some examples of the issues:
A wooded 5 bar fence is a very different obstacle to a 6 feet high chain-link fence (for example) - both can potentially be seen through but one is all but impassable to infantry and both are a challenge to wheeled vehicles.
However, when considering walls, some are 4 feet high, some 6 feet, some 12 feet. Some are the unstable remains of a destroyed house (for example) others are purpose build defensive wall.
Some are at a height that infantry can shoot over them, others have to be loop-holed. The variants are almost endless.
Generally, we play a common sense WYSIWYG rule. But the intention is to make hedges and walls almost impossible to see through unless you are up close.
Also, if you are defending a linear obstacle and are up against it, you can see over/through it and so can see the tanks in the middle of the field.


To answer your supplementary question - on Low Profile - Yes. Certain units are inherently Low Profile - primarily Infantry and Infantry Support units.

Hope that helps?
Mark

[fred.]

Thanks, it clarifies the intention of the rule.

I think it is the major difference between the way  Low Area terrain and Linear obstacles work  for AFV visibility that jumps out to me.

Yes I understand that some linear obstacles are tall, but the narrative around the rule suggests that the rule is mainly considering the normal ones, a few feet high not 10' walls.

As to inherent Low Profile do all these units benefit from -1d6 when being shot at?

[Big Insect]

Yes - Infantry, Infantry Support, light vehicles, motorbikes, and AT guns (& any other unit specifically categorized as Low Profile in their army list notes - like a StuG for example) all get a -1d6 when being shot at by direct fire (so not Mortars in any circumstance, not on-table artillery shooting with direct Line of Fire, and not any area or template effect weapons). Some towed guns (not all fall into this Low Profile category as well - but would be specified as such in their army list.

This should have been stated clearly on page 14 in BKCIV, but is implied elsewhere throughout the rules, however for some reason didn't make the final edit.
Again it is the way it works in FWC and CWC as standard.

It will be corrected in the errata.

Hope that helps

Mark

[fred.]

Wow. That is huge.

[Solo General]

One reason I really like BKCIV is the flexibility of the rules. Common Sense and WYSIWYG really sets BKCIV apart from many other rulebooks. Not every example can be illustrated and I think the Common Sense factor is key to examining those situations that seems to pop-up all the time. The dialogue between all parties on this Forum is respectful, helpful, and great!

[Big Insect]

Wow. That is huge.

What is huge Fred? Is this a big change? If so, to what?

Cheers
Mark

[Dr Dave]

Mark,

"Infantry, Infantry Support, light vehicles, motorbikes, and AT guns (& any other unit specifically categorized as Low Profile in their army list notes - like a StuG for example) all get a -1d6 when being shot at by direct fire"

Infantry are low profile for shooting and only hit on a 5 or a 6? AT guns are low profile? It's not in profiles on p8, unit types on p45, special abilities on p78 or in any of the lists, or the rules as far as I can see. Are you mixing low profile for shooting and low profile for spotting/cover? I think that's why Fred said it was huge.

The leIG18 is listed as low profile - and rightly so.

I think many (not all) AT guns should be low profile - they often seem too vulnerable in the games and we always added one to the 88 hits (hence 4 not 3).

[fred.]

Sorry, original reply was on my phone, so quoting is hard.

Infantry, Infantry Support, light vehicles, motorbikes, and AT guns (& any other unit specifically categorized as Low Profile in their army list notes - like a StuG for example) all get a -1d6 when being shot at by direct fire

This is what is huge.

This is a major change from earlier versions of BKC (I get it may be a FWC or CWC thing).

It is a major change to the survivability of infantry etc.

My specific question was in Visibility (p 14) it mentions Low and Average profiles (this is also on p8). Neither of these mention anything about modifying attacks. Then in the special rules there is a Low Profile rule, which gives the -1d6 when being shot at (note -1d6, not -1 on the to hit score).

Mark, you seem to have confirmed that Low profile (as part of the unit definition) means that the Low Profile special rule applies to them.

From the comments posted by others, I'm not sure anyone else is playing this way.

[Dr Dave]

There's low profile for visibility and then low profile targets when shot at. The latter case attracts a -1 die modifier for the shooter. I think (hope?) Mark has mixed them up in the question-festival since the rules came out.

[Big Insect]

Without wishing to be pilloried for referring back to a previous set, I quote BKCII - Page 6.

Profile
Command units, troops on foot, light vehicles, deployed guns, and dug-in troops* of any type are classified as having low profiles. All other troops are classified as having average profiles.
* so this also answers the 'dug-in' question from an earlier thread.

However, in BKCII the only thing that low profile did was not allow units to shoot over Average profile units or spot other low profile troop types in certain terrain (unless I've missed something dramatic?).
The -1d6 for low profile was introduced to give infantry (& other low profile units) a greater survival chance on the battlefield, as in my gaming Infantry have a historically inaccurate high casualty rate in BKC. This was also the view of the the play-testers, who felt that adding extra protection to Low Profile troops was actually much more realistic and none of the (global) proof readers and play-testers felt any different.
It is also designed to encourage Tanks to fight Tanks, as too many players seem to have worked out that if you use your Tanks to mow down your opponents infantry you can win the came as they are so very vulnerable.

So in that respect, yes it is a change.
Whether it is a major change is a matter of opinion but it made infantry (& other low profile units) a bit harder to target with Direct Fire but that I felt to be more realistic.

Mark

[Dr Dave]

Wow. That is huge.

Crikey. So all infantry are hit on a 5+, not a 4+ as before. 

That's Fred's huge change. I think picking that out in the hit table on p35 would be a good idea. There's no mention of it in firing at all.

The paragraph on p14 PROFILES gives different units to the PROFILE table on p8.

p14 says deployed guns are low profile, on p8 they are average profile.

[fred.]

Its -1d6 so roll 3 dice to hit rather than 4 dice. Not a change to the score needed to hit.

Although from some rough calculations, the overall effect is much the same on the average number of hits.

I have to agree that this isn't at all clear in the rules. The only place I have seen the -1d6 to shooting attacks is in the Special Rules for Low Profile. If it applies to all infantry then I would have expected to see this in the shooting rules, and in the details of low profile at the start of the rules.

For the errata, I would suggest explicitly listing Low Profile against all units on the army lists that get Low Profile either by their class or as  an exception, as this will make it very clear that this rule applies so widely.

[fred.]

Profile
Command units, troops on foot, light vehicles, deployed guns, and dug-in troops* of any type are classified as having low profiles. All other troops are classified as having average profiles.
* so this also answers the 'dug-in' question from an earlier thread.

The above makes digging in pointless for Infantry, as they are already Low Profile, so they get no advantage for digging in.

[T-Square]

Here's the low profile section in question, "All direct shooting at a low-profile target subtracts 1d6 from the attack value."

Here's the setup.  Two US Infantry Platoons (AP 5/30 each) and one US Mortar (3/120) are successfully commanded to fire upon a German Infantry Platoon that is at 20cm (over 1/2 range) from both US Infantry Platoons.

All fire is combined.  As I read the rules; there will be 3d6 from the Mortars (indirect fire) and 4d6 from each of the US Infantry Platoons (since it is direct fire a -1d6 for each unit).  This results in rolling 11d6 against the German Infantry Platoon with results according to the cover status of the German unit.