The Commander Series Forum

Forum Home Forum Home
ImageCurrent Forum Category Blitzkrieg Commander, 1936-45
ImageImageCurrent Forum BKC-II Rule Queries
ImageImageImageCurrent Topic Visibility and Linear Terrain
Post Reply
Post Reply
Author Page 1 
Tango13Alpha
United Kingdom
Joined 13/09/10
Last Visit 15/06/19
15 Posts
Posted on 13 September 2010 at 16:50:22 GMT
Hi

Just purchased BKC at the weekend and reading through the rules. Just want to check that I understand the paragraph refering to Linear Terrain on page 6. Am I right in saying that a unit that is in base-contact with say a hedge or wall can be seen by an enermy unit that is on the opposite side of the wall but some way off?

Apologies if this has come up before but couldn't find an answer when I did a search.

many thanks, Paul
GavinP
United Kingdom
Joined 03/04/06
Last Visit 27/06/13
102 Posts
Posted on 13 September 2010 at 16:55:42 GMT
Only if it's fired, the enemy unit is within automatic spotting distance or the unit itself moved ALONG the linear obstacle.
cleach
Canada
Joined 20/03/05
Last Visit 02/03/11
228 Posts
Posted on 13 September 2010 at 20:56:12 GMT
As per Gavin's comment --also look at the Concealment rules. These are crucial to the game.

Chris
ivan the reasonable
England
Joined 08/12/06
Last Visit 07/08/12
67 Posts
Posted on 14 September 2010 at 09:40:33 GMT
There seems to be a contradiction between Linear Terrain P6 "line of sight is blocked by linear terrain unless either the target or the observer are in base contact with the terrain" and the examples under Concealed troops P6 which says that units are concealed when "they move to the edge of cover when they were previously out of sight" linear terrain hedges,fences etc. are cover are they not?Confused Ivan.
mehrunes
Germany
Joined 10/08/07
Last Visit 26/02/11
35 Posts
Posted on 14 September 2010 at 10:58:34 GMT
Don't worry, nobody understands the rules for concealment. Grin
GavinP
United Kingdom
Joined 03/04/06
Last Visit 27/06/13
102 Posts
Posted on 14 September 2010 at 16:24:10 GMT
Peter, my understanding is that line of sight and concealment are not the same thing. Something can be in Line of sight but concealed.

A linear obstacle prevents seeing anything further than the hedge UNLESS the unit is physically touching it.

A unit behind a linear obstacle touching it which has not fired or moved laterally along the obstacle is concealed.
cleach
Canada
Joined 20/03/05
Last Visit 02/03/11
228 Posts
Posted on 14 September 2010 at 17:24:05 GMT
Spot on GavinP. Having LOS is the basic requirement for spotting but concealment robs you of that possibility unless, as noted earlier, the target fires, you move to within spotting distance, or it moves along the feature without breaking contact with the far edge. The last situation is quite rare, but sometimes I say that hedge lined roads are too narrow for vehicles not to be touching the interior edges of the hedges.

Chris
ivan the reasonable
England
Joined 08/12/06
Last Visit 07/08/12
67 Posts
Posted on 15 September 2010 at 09:35:11 GMT
Thank you Gavin and Chris, it would seem that we have been playing this wrongly,ie.a unit in contact with,for instance a hedge, could see and be seen regardless of whether it had fired or moved laterally along the hedge, which is as you have explained incorrect. It looks like we will have to make a few adjustments! Having said that I think the rules could be clearer on this point, for example if you look at the LOS example on P7 tank unit C, blue arrow toward a Russian inf. unit behind a hedge the Russian unit is described as "visible". Likewise on P11, units described as "visible" Well that's my excuse anywayBlush Thanks again to Gavin and Chris. Ivan the enlightened.
mehrunes
Germany
Joined 10/08/07
Last Visit 26/02/11
35 Posts
Posted on 15 September 2010 at 10:02:48 GMT
Well, the russian infantry could be within 10cm or have fired or moved along the hedge. In all these circumstances concealment would have ended.
They are not visible in one case: They were previously out of sight and moved to the edge of the hedge.
Technically you have LOS, but they would be still concealed.
ivan the reasonable
England
Joined 08/12/06
Last Visit 07/08/12
67 Posts
Posted on 15 September 2010 at 15:41:58 GMT
"In all these circumstances cocealment would have ended" Well, quite, but this is not clear in the example, which was my point Grin Ivan.
ivan the reasonable
England
Joined 08/12/06
Last Visit 07/08/12
67 Posts
Posted on 15 September 2010 at 15:44:06 GMT
Sorry, "concealment"
mehrunes
Germany
Joined 10/08/07
Last Visit 26/02/11
35 Posts
Posted on 16 September 2010 at 06:58:53 GMT
Yes but apart from that the picture is there to show the LOS rules, not the concealment rules. You have LOS if the enemy unit touches the far side of a linear obstacle. And if the picture says there is LOS then we can assume the unit is no more concealed. Gimme
Tango13Alpha
United Kingdom
Joined 13/09/10
Last Visit 15/06/19
15 Posts
Posted on 19 September 2010 at 19:14:00 GMT
Hi

Many thanks for all the replys and clarification, I think I've got it now.
Just to confirm my understanding, a unit with a 'low profile', moving along and in contact with a hedge or wall can be seen by an enermy unit some distance away on the far side of the hedge or wall and exactly the same would apply if the low profile unit was in the open, moving and not behind the hedge or wall.
Is that right?

Cheers Paul
johnboy
United Kingdom
Joined 17/10/08
Last Visit 11/03/15
332 Posts
Posted on 20 September 2010 at 11:03:54 GMT
Yes that's right. I guess it can be visualised that guys who only move to the edge of cover (hedge, wall, woods) can be sneaking and making the most of the cover, whereas troops who are moving along the cover are much more visible as their silhouettes are moving from left to right.

Don't forget that the appropriate cover modifier is still used to hit them even if you can see them.
Page 1