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.

Now that you just have to have one model standing on a bumpy rock to get a unit cover save, I think being able to shoot exposed heads is reasonable.
The only obvious problem is that people can use the modelling advantage, but real cheese players can beat you with cheese lists and tactics, and don't need cheese modelling to prove it!

Valhallan42nd wrote:Here's your solution to your TLOS woes. Now, can we please move on?

That post is made of win.

Last time I checked (which was some years ago), necromunda used true line of sight. Has that changed?

It does.

yes... but you have well under 20 models to worry about. not having to deal with 9 crisis suits a few broadsides, a few hammerheads, a bunch of firewarrior, kroot, gue la... ect ect ect.

or 3 russes, 3 hellhounds, and 50+ guardsmen.

now im not saying you should be able to hide everything. just a few more LOS blockers to take away more of that 4+ cover save death field know as the table top.

Troops give cover saves now. Stick you expendable Kroot behind Firewarriors, and suddenly, you have a survivable Kroot unit, ready to step forwards and hold up enemy assault units whilst the Firewarriors make an ordered withdrawal.

Plus, bung Kroots into a Forest, and keep going to going. Immense satisifaction is then gained as the enemy deseperately try to winkle them out!

I was really down on TLOS before I tried it. Since I've actually played with it now, I'm willing to admit that it works well. Reminds me of how we did things back in 2nd edition.

I have been playing with TLOS for awhile. I have played necromunda in the past so this is not foreign.

Sounds like a great idea but it really sucks IMO. What I have seen is pseudo LOS. TLOS with 180 orcs vs 120 IG and a rules lawyer. Let's just call it a draw and go home. I am watching 30 orc mobs where there is no way all 30 orcs can see the target. Let's say 3 dark reapers in a forest. Do you really want me to be a PITA and make mr. orc PROVE to me that all 30 orcs can see my figs? Let's take 15 minutes to pull out are GW-approved 10 dollar laser pointer and prove that your individual fig and see one of my models and prove that you can see all of the models in my unit.

Don't tell me if one orc can prove he can see A model means the whole unit can die. Then we are NOT playing TLOS.

My opinion of TLOS is we can have fun and play a game or we can be jack-a$$es and truly play TLOS.

5th edition comes down to this. If you shoot at anything in the front of your opponent's army, then check to see if there is a tumble weed or a rock intervening, if so, they get a 4+ cover save. (Or have an arguement.) If you shoot at anything not in the front of your opponent's army, they get a 4+ cover save. If you fire over one of your units, your opponent gets a 4+ cover save.

I hate TLOS for more than about 40 figs in a game. However, as many have said, this is GW new concept of the game and we are stuck with it. The only true joy is knowing that if I am still playing it in 2 or 3 years, 6th edition will get rid of the real insanity that this rule is. On the other hand, I see improvements in other sections of 5th ed and would hope that they don't go away. As usual, the new edition is a mixed bag - take the good with the bad and play on.

Of course we could go back to 2nd edition so we can watch individual scattering grenades and the like, overwatch fire etc. All good concepts and preserved in necromunda but things that really have no place when we have 2000 points worth of armies and hoping to finish the game in 2 or so hours.

DAaddict wrote: Do you really want me to be a PITA and make mr. orc PROVE to me that all 30 orcs can see my figs?

It's generally not that difficult. A quick scan along the unit at head height very quickly shows you which of them have LOS. Takes a couple of seconds at most, in most cases.

Don't tell me if one orc can prove he can see A model means the whole unit can die. Then we are NOT playing TLOS.

This one just won't die, will it?

It's still true LOS, because you're drawing LOS to the unit, not to the individual models.

However, as many have said, this is GW new concept of the game and we are stuck with it.

And as many others have said, it's not a new concept.

It's been the standard for Warhammer 40K since its inception. Necromunda, which you say you've been playing, uses the same LOS rules (based around true LOS) as 2nd edition 40K.

It took me a few games before I was able to get wins with the new edition, but even so I really enjoyed it. Like insaniak says, 40k has always worked on TLOS, all they've really changed from fourth edition is that area terrain has been made a little less abstract. If there are enough actual tree models in that wood, it will work the same way as it did in fourth ed, it is just a matter of the terrain actually being there and not assumed to be there just on the basis of the terrain piece being a "area" feature.

As far being able to "hit models you can't see because you can see one model in the unit", that is a design choice that speeds up play. The theme is that *models* fire at *units*. It speeds up play greatly from not having to check if every model in your firing unit can draw a bead to an individual model in the target, yet keeps the immersive feel of TLOS. It is a compromise, yes, but I believe it is a good balance between expediency and depth.

"TRUE true line of sight", where indivdiual firing models draw an individual line of sight to a target *model* work great for Necromunda, but would be a little slow for today's 40k, with many infantry models on the table.

DAaddict wrote:I have been playing with TLOS for awhile. I have played necromunda in the past so this is not foreign.

Sounds like a great idea but it really sucks IMO. What I have seen is pseudo LOS. TLOS with 180 orcs vs 120 IG and a rules lawyer. Let's just call it a draw and go home. I am watching 30 orc mobs where there is no way all 30 orcs can see the target. Let's say 3 dark reapers in a forest. Do you really want me to be a PITA and make mr. orc PROVE to me that all 30 orcs can see my figs? Let's take 15 minutes to pull out are GW-approved 10 dollar laser pointer and prove that your individual fig and see one of my models and prove that you can see all of the models in my unit.

As per the 5th edition rules, p. 16, models in the same unit DO NOT block los.

Hi all.
I belive the real problems with TLOS is that the 40k system is so full of abstractions , plonking a concrete absolute in the middle of them just seems to stick out like a gigantic sqiggoth in a boar pen!

We all know the models are just representative of the units in play.(They dont change actual position when running, diving for cover, kneeling, laying prone , etc.)
We know the horisontal scale is about 10 to 1 compared to the vertical scale.(Unless the weapons of the far future only shoot as far as I can spit!)

And even terain is representative and abstracted to make game play flow better.

How could GW keep it simple , and take all these abstractions in to concideration?

If all units were given a 'size' 1 to 5. (1 being the smallest unit, and 5 being the largest unit.)

If all terrain was given a size as well....(size 1 wall, size 2 ruins etc.)
Units claming cover behind terrain just deduct the terain size from the unit size.
Eg a size 3 unit behind a size 1 wall counts as a size 2 unit when targeted over the intervening wall.(3-1=2)

And units were given an 'Awarmness Value 'The distance they can see a size 1 target at.

A unit with an Awarness value of 12'' can see...
Size 1 target at 12''
Size 2 target at 24''
Size 3 target at 36''
size 4 target at 48''
size 5 target at 60''

This gives the rudiments of FoW, effective use of terrain for all units , etc.

However GW will not use any game mechanic that involves any maths in 40k.Its 'roll a dice' or it doesnt get in the book!

TTFN
Lanrak

I'd much rather just pull guys standing behind a rock than deal with 'sizes' for every single shooting proposal.

"Okay, that unit has 11 guys making it size 2 so I can shoot it from 23 inches."

"What? No, that unit only has 9 guys".

"1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Well okay, there's only 10, but that still makes it size 2, right? Let me spend a minute and a half finding the correct sizing chart in the rulebook."

"Oh, okay. But you moved that guy when you were counting, he should be back...here... putting him 25" away. You can't shoot them."

"Well, whatever, then if they can't see them, they can hardly shoot them, can they? I meant to shoot at THIS size 1 unit instead."

Hi sourclaims.
You seem to have implied the need for complication where there is none.
Size and Awarness would be included in the unit stats.

But if multiplication is too compicated procedure for most 40k players ,why not just give everything a 4+ cover save and say you can shoot at everything on the table with no restrictions.Roll the dice and see what happens.Oh you have got that already with most 40k 5th ed games!

I know it sounds daft making things futher away or behind cover harder to see, when applied to the current 40k rules.
But concidering the current state of the 40k rules its hardly suprising.
When this mechanic is applied within a rule set that is intuitive and elegant,(in comparison, ) it works well and doesnt seem out of place.

TTFN
Lanrak.

TLOS is straight forward though.

Read the rulebook. If I can see you, I can shoot you. This does not necessarily preclude your cover save.

I just don't get what peoples problem with it is? Perhaps, having played Fantasy for several years and learned to cope with a 90 degree arc of vision, I grasp it better, perhaps not.

The trouble with giving Terrain a 'size' is that the players need to agree on it, and you can bet your arse those with big stuff will demand it all be as big a nominal size as possible.

Lanrak wrote:But if multiplication is too compicated procedure for most 40k players ,why not just give everything a 4+ cover save and say you can shoot at everything on the table with no restrictions.Roll the dice and see what happens.Oh you have got that already with most 40k 5th ed games!

This is nonsense. If it's happening in your own games, there's one very easy fix, that's been mentioned repeatedly in 5th edition discussion threads (and threads discussing pretty much every previous edition, for that matter):

Use

More

Scenery.


It's that simple.

If you're playing on planet Bowling Ball, then yes, you're going to have LOS to the entire table. Put more scenery on there, and put bigger scenery on there, and the problem magically goes away... things further away or behind cover are suddenly harder to see, without the need for any extra terrain rules.

On the subject of Terrain, and using more of it, it's not like it's really that hard these days.

I mean, you have a wealth of kits available off the Peg from GW themselves, and once you have built a couple of these, you should have a rough idea of how to build your own.

Remember, impassable terrain is a good thing. Big ruins, small ruins, single level ruins, multi level ruins, forests, bogs, swamps, hills, cliffs and so on are very, very easy to build or buy, and make for more indepth games.

insaniak wrote:

Lanrak wrote:But if multiplication is too compicated procedure for most 40k players ,why not just give everything a 4+ cover save and say you can shoot at everything on the table with no restrictions.Roll the dice and see what happens.Oh you have got that already with most 40k 5th ed games!

This is nonsense. If it's happening in your own games, there's one very easy fix, that's been mentioned repeatedly in 5th edition discussion threads (and threads discussing pretty much every previous edition, for that matter):

Use

More

Scenery.


It's that simple.

If you're playing on planet Bowling Ball, then yes, you're going to have LOS to the entire table. Put more scenery on there, and put bigger scenery on there, and the problem magically goes away... things further away or behind cover are suddenly harder to see, without the need for any extra terrain rules.

It constantly amazes me that people who will buy a $35 box set of 10 guys will balk at buying an $11 4x8 sheet of foam. Oh, and 10 for a quart of paint. And if you want to get fancy, some sand for texture. (I live in Florida. Sand = dirt for me, so it's free). And if they don't want to do that, there's terranscapes.com, hirst arts, at-43 has some really cool 28mm scale cargo container sets and a new bunker (all pre-painted, no less), etc, etc...