View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 20th, 2017, 3:37 pm



Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
 July 28th Update: Not happy. 
Author Message
Employee
User avatar

Joined: August 22nd, 2016, 6:01 pm
Posts: 624
Anyway, LoS is always tricky.

I'll discuss with Freeman. And since it seems you'll be at Gen Con, you can as well. He's my boss, so if you can convince him, it doesn't matter what I say. :D

I really appreciate all of the work you (and others, Major Glitch, tinker goth, Pitstarter, and so many others) have put into this. Community involvement is something I really believe in and would like more of. So, even where we may disagree, I am really glad you're here voicing your concerns.

_________________
The Demogorgon tires of your silly human bickering!

Email: justin.gibbs@ninjadivision.com


August 3rd, 2017, 9:07 pm
Profile
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: August 27th, 2012, 5:11 am
Posts: 477
The initial reason I brought up the yo-yo wasn't a mechanical issue, as much as "does this create an unbalanced scenario?"

Move-shoot-move at ground level isn't an issue in my mind because LoS works fairly intuitively there. When you factor in elevated terrain, the issue becomes problematic due to how intervening terrain can be ignored. As I said, I'm probably overthinking it, but I'd feel bad if it turned out to be the only tactic that gets used at tournaments (looking at you Mayla/Betty/Lug and Suspect 7 lists...)


August 3rd, 2017, 9:24 pm
Profile
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 316
Location: Australia
ND_Justin wrote:
Anyway, LoS is always tricky.

I'll discuss with Freeman. And since it seems you'll be at Gen Con, you can as well. He's my boss, so if you can convince him, it doesn't matter what I say. :D

I really appreciate all of the work you (and others, Major Glitch, tinker goth, Pitstarter, and so many others) have put into this. Community involvement is something I really believe in and would like more of. So, even where we may disagree, I am really glad you're here voicing your concerns.


I was at GenCon last year and I'm unlikely to ever make it again, the US is a very low priority for family trips, I would have loved to have talked about this stuff with Dave last year, but I was just a crazy Aussie at GenCon last year.

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


August 4th, 2017, 2:03 am
Profile WWW
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 316
Location: Australia
(Because I missed some things..)

ND_Justin wrote:
But as the model on the ground moves further and further from the building, it becomes clear that, from an instinctive point of view, people will say "those two models can see each other." Yet the building is still blocking LoS because the model on top of the building is 3.1" from the lip of the building. See what I'm saying?


See part of the problem here is you are using "true LoS" to argue against an abstract system. What happens if you replace that 40mm based high base Black Dragon with a 30mm based, mounted directly to the base Blowhard girl? (Or plastic Fiametta vs a Prefect...)

This is the thing, the abstract system allows the models to be based and posed in whatever cool way you want, without changing the game effect of doing that, and at that point there needs to be some give and take between "realism" and "abstract" the current system is very close. My one, persistent, concern is the ability to ignore buildings if the attack involves a model on the building, for me its gone beyond reasonable because it isn't immediately obvious that is how it should work when you look at the situation.

Yes the 3" rule isn't immediately obvious, but its also easier to remember 3" matters for terrain for blocking LoS as a broad concept than having multiple rules and distance concepts all connected to the one thing.

ND_Justin wrote:
Actually, your picture brings up another issue I have with that change. The model on the upper level *IS* within 3" of the edge of the terrain.


That's why I put the little bit in brackets at the end... :)

Elevated terrain that either the model is currently standing on is ignored when drawing LoS if the model is within 3" of the edge (of the terrain in the LoS Window).

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


August 4th, 2017, 3:25 am
Profile WWW
Employee
User avatar

Joined: August 22nd, 2016, 6:01 pm
Posts: 624
Obsidian-Crane wrote:
(Because I missed some things..)

ND_Justin wrote:
But as the model on the ground moves further and further from the building, it becomes clear that, from an instinctive point of view, people will say "those two models can see each other." Yet the building is still blocking LoS because the model on top of the building is 3.1" from the lip of the building. See what I'm saying?


See part of the problem here is you are using "true LoS" to argue against an abstract system. What happens if you replace that 40mm based high base Black Dragon with a 30mm based, mounted directly to the base Blowhard girl? (Or plastic Fiametta vs a Prefect...)

This is the thing, the abstract system allows the models to be based and posed in whatever cool way you want, without changing the game effect of doing that, and at that point there needs to be some give and take between "realism" and "abstract" the current system is very close. My one, persistent, concern is the ability to ignore buildings if the attack involves a model on the building, for me its gone beyond reasonable because it isn't immediately obvious that is how it should work when you look at the situation.

Yes the 3" rule isn't immediately obvious, but its also easier to remember 3" matters for terrain for blocking LoS as a broad concept than having multiple rules and distance concepts all connected to the one thing.

ND_Justin wrote:
Actually, your picture brings up another issue I have with that change. The model on the upper level *IS* within 3" of the edge of the terrain.


That's why I put the little bit in brackets at the end... :)

Elevated terrain that either the model is currently standing on is ignored when drawing LoS if the model is within 3" of the edge (of the terrain in the LoS Window).


But the thing is, you are *also* using true LoS to argue against an abstract system. That's sort of my point.

And yes, there completely needs to be some give and take between realism and the abstract. Where that give and take ends up, and whether its closer to realism or abstract, is going to vary depending on who you ask, and what they find more important.

"Elevated terrain that either the model is currently standing on is ignored when drawing LoS if the model is within 3" of the edge (of the terrain in the LoS Window)."

Look again at your picture though. The building *is* the terrain in the LoS window. The model on top *is* within 3" of the edge (just not the edge that would intuitively make sense for it to be able to ignore the building.)

Now we could say something like:

Elevated terrain that either model is currently standing on is ignored when drawing LoS if the model is within 3" of the edge of the terrain which is closest to the target.

But then what if the target is at a corner and close to two edges (which your picture sort of shows).

It's opening a whole can of worms of rules interpretations and confusion.

The current rules are very straightforward, even if they don't match up with true LoS as well.

_________________
The Demogorgon tires of your silly human bickering!

Email: justin.gibbs@ninjadivision.com


August 4th, 2017, 1:00 pm
Profile
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 316
Location: Australia
Perhaps we have a very different definition of true line of sight.

For me true line of sight means model to model. If you can see, from your model's position part of the enemy model you can attack. This encourages line of sight lasers and low profile models to maximise cover and makes the models a physical concrete thing rather than a representation (ie a statue).

Abstract line of sight need not abandon the basic logic of seeing things, no looking through walls to attack things being one of the most basic principles of drawing LoS and where the current rules start from.

The current rules are not even consistent in how they treat walls!


A = Attacker T = Target, | = a wall.

A_______|T the wall blocks LoS

A_______
................|
................|T

In the first diagram the wall is opaque, in the second it's transparent (you'll have to forgive the line-spacing gap).

That's not abstract it's illogical, inside its own system!

As to the case of the corner I don't see a problem, it's no different to having a piece of blocking terrain that doesn't cover the entire LoS Window anyway.

Now back to my terrain. You still have to draw a LoS Window, that is the basics of LoS and you are looking to be within 3" of the edge of the terrain where the LoS Window crosses off (or onto) the terrain. In shooting at Sebastian with Lakmi you can only draw LoS along the top to the short edge of the building (it would need a top down shot to make this clear), so no problem.
You don't get to throw out the LoS Window partway through the process, nor the logic (such as it is) of English (unless you define new logic specifically for the game as some CCGs I've played have done).

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


August 5th, 2017, 10:18 pm
Profile WWW
Employee
User avatar

Joined: August 22nd, 2016, 6:01 pm
Posts: 624
I think I've made my points. If nothing else: it's not as simple and easy as you might think. And abstract systems are going to have some abstraction that don't meet up with realism, but we sacrifice realism to simpler, easier to manage rules.

This is not something we're going to agree on, and that's fine. :)

_________________
The Demogorgon tires of your silly human bickering!

Email: justin.gibbs@ninjadivision.com


August 6th, 2017, 2:10 pm
Profile
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 316
Location: Australia
My last comment:
Are people following the rules or are they following intuition on LoS?

If the former, great, if the latter wouldn't it be better for the rules to align with what people are doing?

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


August 6th, 2017, 8:54 pm
Profile WWW
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 316
Location: Australia
Oh wow... I just realised something strange...

Under the current LoS rules if you are standing on a higher floor of the building and I am inside the building under that roof, then as long as there are no internal walls (or floors) between us we can shoot at each other.

This is both cool and strange at the same time.

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


August 21st, 2017, 9:05 am
Profile WWW
Employee
User avatar

Joined: August 22nd, 2016, 6:01 pm
Posts: 624
Obsidian-Crane wrote:
Oh wow... I just realised something strange...

Under the current LoS rules if you are standing on a higher floor of the building and I am inside the building under that roof, then as long as there are no internal walls (or floors) between us we can shoot at each other.

This is both cool and strange at the same time.


Ha, that is kind of funny.

Easy enough to fix though. If we want to fix it?

_________________
The Demogorgon tires of your silly human bickering!

Email: justin.gibbs@ninjadivision.com


August 25th, 2017, 4:52 pm
Profile
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: August 27th, 2012, 5:11 am
Posts: 477
I'm leaning toward fixing it as a matter of fairness. While it's an interesting result of the current rules, I doubt many people will realize that it is possible (look at how long it took here); and I can imagine how devistating it could be for someone to lose a match because they didn't even consider that their unit wouldn't be safe inside a building.


August 25th, 2017, 6:44 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by STSoftware.