Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Buoyancy wrote:

efarrer wrote:And that is a great example of the problem of so-called guess range weapons. Anyone who has played the game or worked in a field which requires measurements is not guessing. They know the distance. I know I do. I can eyeball well enough to know distances to within an inch. And if you can do that it's not a guess. Since you know the target, the deliberate over guess is a cheat, bypassing the rules of the game by ignoring the line of sight rules.

Do we really have to continue to listen to your imaginary version of the rules? Please show us which rule the player is breaking by picking an arbitrary distance for the cannon shot. Until you can do so, I'm simply going to remind you that you are incorrect.

Per the FAQ

You cannot choose to charge if there is no reasonable chance of success.

Per LOS (p.26)
A shot aimed at a target that cannot be legally hit automatically misses.

Per cannons (p. 87)
The target must be in line of sight

Thus by using each part of these together. Overguessing isn't simply cheese, it is illegal, whereas guessing accurately and hoping to pass beyond the unit by the dice would not be.

It's not simply going against the spirit of the rules (which specifies you should try to guess the distance to your stated as accurately as possible), but cheating because the person (ie. Mauleed) has full knowledge that he will miss. And I refer back to Mauleed's brag earlier in this thread as a refernce point for his knowledge that he is not attempting to hit the target he has jokingly called. I should note the document he uses to support his arguement was in a prior edition, and no longer has relevance.

Yes I do and yes I do.

The problem with efarrer's whole premise is that it depends on 'target' being something other than what the rules actually say it is. It's a great argument until someone cracks the rulebook open and looks to see what the target of a cannon shot is.

If I was fortunate enough to play him, I'd overguess even when I didn't need to, just to see him flip out over it. If I can get him to throw some figs, or threaten me with violence, then it's like christmas morning.

OK guys, let's take this to the wildly popular WHFB You Make Da Call forum. Just want to talk about incidents of cheating here and not accuse other posters of cheating.