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.

So I found a thread on this one already, but I think it was from before N3.

You need to see at least a piece of your target as big as a head, or a 3mm square from the silhouettes to shoot at it. Does this mean there are no mods for cover, unless that miniature is in base to base contact with scenery at that time?
You benefit from cover only if scenery covers 1/3 of your height (and you're into btb), but you get no bonuses if an attacker only sees your head and your not in btb, that's pretty weird.
Is someone using houserules to correct something, or just taking it as it is?

Not sure exactly what you're asking, because you're wording it strange to my mind.

However, to boil it down: Those are two different if statements.

Can your opponent, at the point which he wants to shoot you, see at least a 3mm x 3mm square of your silhouette?
If yes, he can shoot.

Are you in cover by being in base contact with terrain blocking at least 1/3 of your silhouette when shot at?
If yes, apply the -3 BS penalty to the shooter, and +3 Armor cover bonus to the target.

Yeah so, if your opponent can only see a 3mm square he can shoot at you, and if you're not in btb at that time, you get no bonuses.
I just think the logic is weird: 'hey I can only see your head, I can shoot at you, no problem' vs 'Hey i can see 2/3 of your body, but damn you're in btb, that makes it harder to shoot at you'.
My question is if someone has found a simple way to correct for this, or just taking it as it is?

Have you actually tried this on the table? Because it is not an issue during play.

It is far more likely that you only see a small part of a model in cover, not the full 2/3.

And the base contact for for cover is to represent being able to cower behind it. Although I prefer a 1 inch leeway, it still works as is.

Okay. No i havent. Its just the idea that came up when reading the rules. Its an answer i was looking for ty.

The logic behind it is that you need to be in BtB with the piece of scenery to actively use it as cover
Infinity is assuming the models are normally moving around and taking firing positions behind cover
it IS hard to judge if intervening cover somewhere in the middle of a long shot might actually protect you or not as you can't place yourself in the position of your attacker
And also, it's way simpler in game terms

Also its good to note...

If in BTB with terrain, and someone is behind you and even if they see just a 3mmx3mm spot on you, you dont get the cover bonus of +3ARM and they dont get the -3 BS. You get cover based on being in BTB with terrain and the direction of the shot.

The other reason for it is that it really cuts down on cover arguments. If you look at the silhouette markers you can also see a horizontal line indicating 1/3 of the model at about knee level. Would have been nice to have a second vertical line too...

Just remember to make sure you print the silhouettes at the right height, and that the black borders and yellow tab at the top are not part of the silhouette.

http://warsen.al/ is also a good place for acrylic sil templates. 3 bucks for a whole set and it shows where you have cover and the square soze on them.