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.

I don't consider that as a good argument against clarifying these things in the book.

I accept if you guys think that the low wall rules are good as they are now and my suggestion is not needed. Just tell me and I'll stop talking about it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Trench has similar hiding mechanic as the Low Wall. I'd suggest to create a hiding mechanic and just allow the trench and the Low Wall to be able to hide units.

 WhiteRoo wrote:
I don't consider that as a good argument against clarifying these things in the book.

Except every game company out there does this. This is why when you're getting a Demo of Warmachine and Hordes the Pressganger doesn't use power attacks to knock your guy over with a trample so he can get to your warcaster without much difficulty. This is why GW Redshirts tell you to roll a die and if you get a 3 or higher you hit, but don't tell you why. Or why in Malifaux they explain the game without the use of soulstones until an opportune moment when it will aid the person they are demoing for. Because people don't want to be bogged down with all of the rules as you teach them the game. This is why I can run a demo of Brushfire and have a person understand the basics in 5 minutes. Because I teach them just what they need to know.

But I'm not talking about the demo. The full rulebooks contains these things.

 WhiteRoo wrote:
But I'm not talking about the demo. The full rulebooks contains these things.

The hiding behind walls is explained. So you as a player, who I would have hoped has read the rulebook, says, "Hey I can hide behind low walls. But my cavalry can rush out, fire a gun, and then rush back. Oh man, that's awesome I can't wait to try it in a game." Then you would check to see if you can't do that (i.e. a rule stating, this doesn't work like you think it does" and then you say to yourself, "Wow I can do this!"

Edit: We're not going to list out every tactic and trick people can do because then it doesn't leave you as the player to feel crafty when you sit there and go through the process I have earlier in this post.

I think you misunderstand. I didn't said it is not explained. I said it would work better if the low wall would not be either blocking or obscuring terrain depending on the situation. I think it should work somewhat like the trench.

I'm not even sure what the proposed problem is any more. I see nothing wrong with walls. They obscure, blocking if you hide, and light cav can dash over them. Cool.

I see what you're problem is. If no models are behind a low wall, or if the models are not hiding, as cannon's distance is NOT cut short. But, if those models hide, the wall stops cannon fire. I will see about fixing this.

Light cav pop out fire will remain as is.

Personally I don't like that hiding units can shoot with 0 RS from behind a low walls.

-Models always have a 10% hit chance(Rifling and Quick Nock pushes this up to 18%), so even if your model hides, why wouldn't you try? You can still get lucky. And if you have a horde of ranged models, you can critfarm from safety just as effectively.

-Many ranged models only have 3 points of RS anyways. if the defender has 5 or more ES, loosing that 3 RS is not that big of a tradeoff for relative safety.

-You can't do the same in a trench, but I believe the situation is very similar.

 WhiteRoo wrote:
Personally I don't like that hiding units can shoot with 0 RS from behind a low walls.

-Models always have a 10% hit chance(Rifling and Quick Nock pushes this up to 18%), so even if your model hides, why wouldn't you try? You can still get lucky. And if you have a horde of ranged models, you can critfarm from safety just as effectively.

-Many ranged models only have 3 points of RS anyways. if the defender has 5 or more ES, loosing that 3 RS is not that big of a tradeoff for relative safety.

-You can't do the same in a trench, but I believe the situation is very similar.

1) Trenches were designed to keep the people in them "relatively" safe while being able to fire back (you're below ground level, your body is protected by tons of dirt, and the only thing sticking up is your head and arms).

2) The loss in RS from Low Walls is due to this:


Do you see how they're not taking the time to aim? They're just firing blindly over the wall HOPING to hit something? That's why you lose your RS when ducking behind a low wall and firing rather than sitting in a trench firing.

It's fine that you personally don't like that hiding units can fire with no bonus, but that's the way it works, and it's a pretty good trade-off. You can't hit me while I'm hiding behind a low wall, but the chances of me hitting you are just as worthless.

(assault rifles are designed for this, you can't do it with crossbows, muskets, pistols of bows)

I do believe if there would be only 1% of hit chance, taking that shot would still worth it, since it's just a test of luck and there is no risk involved.

The minimum chance is pretty significant. 18% is almost as good as one out of five. Even with crossbow it's 10%, and this is the bare minimum,

If you flip trough the book, the basic troops only have 3 ES top, but mostly 1 or 2. So if most squads are being blind fired at, the attacker only has to roll that higher than the defender. And the defender only roll once, while the one who blind fires, once after every shot.

One shot of blind firing has 25% hit chance if the defender has 3 ES.

You can blind fire a musket, crossbow or a pistol, single shot or not. All it takes is putting the weapon up and on the top edge of the wall and firing.

It's actually a fair trade off for safety that favors low-cost horde models. A Badger Grenadier is hurt considerably more than a merc'd in mouse conscript with a bow hiding behind a wall.
There is really nothing wrong with low walls rules. It's a tactical decision where you trade degrees of one thing for degrees of another.

 Zygrot24 wrote:
It's actually a fair trade off for safety that favors low-cost horde models. A Badger Grenadier is hurt considerably more than a merc'd in mouse conscript with a bow hiding behind a wall.
There is really nothing wrong with low walls rules. It's a tactical decision where you trade degrees of one thing for degrees of another.

I do not agree. The advantages of hiding are the same regardless how many your RS drops, but units with low RS loose way less effectiveness.

Also, you can rush to a low wall, hide behind it and shoot without further restrictions to your ranged phase, but cancelling out the vulnerability that rushing causes on those models.

 WhiteRoo wrote:

 Zygrot24 wrote:
It's actually a fair trade off for safety that favors low-cost horde models. A Badger Grenadier is hurt considerably more than a merc'd in mouse conscript with a bow hiding behind a wall.
There is really nothing wrong with low walls rules. It's a tactical decision where you trade degrees of one thing for degrees of another.

I do not agree. The advantages of hiding are the same regardless how many your RS drops, but units with low RS loose way less effectiveness.

Also, you can rush to a low wall, hide behind it and shoot without further restrictions to your ranged phase, but cancelling out the vulnerability that rushing causes on those models.

And that's a perfectly acceptable thing to do.

There are also situations when a model's hit chance per shot on a target will not be any different regardless of hiding or not.

For example, if any rifle wielding model has the choice of hide and shoot or just cover and shoot, if the defender's total ES(base + cover + anything else) is just 4 or more points higher than the attacking model's RS, there is no significant difference between the hit chances of shooting from hiding or from cover.

Dual pistols and quick nocking shots behave similarly. The chance of scoring at least one hit is the same as with rifling.

I'm not seeing an issue

 WhiteRoo wrote:

 Zygrot24 wrote:
It's actually a fair trade off for safety that favors low-cost horde models. A Badger Grenadier is hurt considerably more than a merc'd in mouse conscript with a bow hiding behind a wall.
There is really nothing wrong with low walls rules. It's a tactical decision where you trade degrees of one thing for degrees of another.

I do not agree. The advantages of hiding are the same regardless how many your RS drops, but units with low RS loose way less effectiveness.

Also, you can rush to a low wall, hide behind it and shoot without further restrictions to your ranged phase, but cancelling out the vulnerability that rushing causes on those models.

1)That's exactly what I was saying. Advantages are the same but some models lose more for that.
2)Nothing wrong with that.

 WhiteRoo wrote:
There are also situations when a model's hit chance per shot on a target will not be any different regardless of hiding or not.

For example, if any rifle wielding model has the choice of hide and shoot or just cover and shoot, if the defender's total ES(base + cover + anything else) is just 4 or more points higher than the attacking model's RS, there is no significant difference between the hit chances of shooting from hiding or from cover.

Dual pistols and quick nocking shots behave similarly. The chance of scoring at least one hit is the same as with rifling.

I'm okay with that. These are mechanics interacting in subtle ways that allow for or force strategic decisions. Indications of a healthy ruleset.

I also can live with it, but I think it's worth mentioning.

Can you use an enemy burrow marker to ambush with your troops?

 WhiteRoo wrote:
Can you use an enemy burrow marker to ambush with your troops?

Yes, but not if an enemy is in B2B with it.

What is the reason the burrow markers being 4" by 4". They are awfully big for just being markers.

Gives you an excuse to make a pretty diorama for it.

Or use Ramshackle's Worm Hole. His Boring Machine is also good for Aquitar..

Good point, but putting a 4"x4" where the deviation points...

That drill capsule thing is awesome by the way.

Centered, just as if you were ambushing a 120mm base model.

Seeing these models... Is the Burrow marker impassable terrain?

Burrow Markers are not impassable. Folks are welcome to use something that models wouldn't stand on too well, like the drill tank, and just follow the same courtesy placement similar to B2B or slopes on hills and what not.

Did we play them as impassable when I was there? I might be mistaken but I recall not being about to move through them.

Four inches are a heck of a grace distance.

The book should mention that no matter the fancy model, the burrow marker doesn't block line of sight or counts as impassable, assault or different terrain than it is stands on.

What do you do when you deviate your ambushing squad into impassable terrain? Like there is a house in the map that you agreed to be impassable and you end up in the middle of it.

You stop short.

The Burrow Marker does not block line of sight, its entry stats that it's LoS is Clear.