The Densest Most Beautiful Cover, So Dense

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.

**Amishprn86**

You are -1 to shoot unless you can see all of a models Hull or Base and no drawn LoS is over the terrain.
If you are in/on the terrain with your opponent then you are not penalized.
If you are within 3" of an Obstacle with this rule when you shoot you are not penalized.

Honestly this is a fine rule, yes its a bit wordy but i understand why. They wanted the ability to hide single man or elite units easier than hordes, but also not be penalized if you and any opponent are point blanks. Over all its actually a well writen rule from GW lol.

**Amishprn86**

Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Amishprn86 wrote:
Over all its actually a well writen rule from GW lol.
It's not well written if I can't read it. Needs better formatting, and less word soup.

As i said it is wordy but it is going what GW wants it to do at face value.

**Amishprn86**

Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:Honestly as of yet they have not even once explained something decently.
The Pts-pricehikes seemed rather random f.e. and we can not really gauge what is going on, yet we know that both vigilus and PA still counts for 9th.
Cover rules as of yet are written in a way that i am fairly sure, even as a non native english speaker, been written more conscise.
Would it have killed to make some pictures?
The faction foci, well, ehhhh
Exactly - I'm a native speaker, and I struggle to read this. I weep for non-native speakers or people with dyslexia/learning difficulties.

I don't care too much for needing to know what pricehikes are, or really, I don't care what the mechanical changes are, so long as I can understand them!

Nazrak wrote:Seems like they've swung so far towards trying to remove any possible space for misinterpretation, they've rendered the whole thing borderline unreadable.
That's what it seems like to me - and in doing so, they've just stripped out fun (in my opinion) in favour of legalese.
I would much rather have had a more simplistic terrain ruleset that erred more on the side of "you have cover" than this.

Amishprn86 wrote:
Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Amishprn86 wrote:
Over all its actually a well writen rule from GW lol.
It's not well written if I can't read it. Needs better formatting, and less word soup.

As i said it is wordy but it is going what GW wants it to do at face value.
That's no use if I can't understand what the words mean. Sure, it might be accurate and do what GW wants, but if I can't understand it, does it matter what GW wants? Again - hopefully with better formatting/pictures to demonstrate, I'll actually understand what this means.

You must not understand english then, i'm terrible at it and dyslexic and i understood this rule. Whats your main Language?

**Amishprn86**

Not all fly units has -1 to hit, many don't even in CWE and DE.