BP2 – clear shot
July 25, 2022 at 3:08 pm #188003
Is my reasoning for a clear shot correct (see attached pic)?
- Is there a clear line of sight from the centre of the red unit frontage to any point on the blue unit? YES
- Is blue unit is in range? YES
- Is the blue unit the nearest clear target? YES
- Can at least half of the blue unit be seen from the centre of the red unit’s frontage? YES
- Is the red unit shooting through either no gap or one wider than its own frontage? YES
- Is the blue unit wholly within the red unit’s Field of Fire (front quarter measured at 45 degrees from front corners)? YES
<u>Result = clear shot</u>
Attachments:July 26, 2022 at 7:34 am #188011
I don’t agree with your point 5. The shooter’s frontage is obscured, so the whole unit can not see part of blue. In this case, I would restrict the number of the red unit’s shooting dice, and may be add a -1 not clear factor.July 26, 2022 at 12:40 pm #188013
Many thanks for the reply CTG.
Whilst I think your point makes a lot of common sense, I always struggle with this scenario as it is not what the main BP2 rules actually say.
P45 states “a unit’s ability to see is always judged from the centre of the unit’s front rank” and the diagram at the bottom of P47 says the shot is only “not clear” when “less than half of the enemy unit is visible”, which doesn’t apply here i.e. the red unit can see more than half of blue when measured from the centre of its front rank.
Am I misunderstanding the rules or is this more a case of common sense should prevail?
ThanksJuly 26, 2022 at 1:51 pm #188014
I think this situation needs to be considered ‘a gap’ and so top of p48 needs to be applied (also last of the ‘not clear’ explanation boxes). The key bit for me is that the unit is trying to shoot through less than its own frontage.
Our club tends to drop the number of shooting dice in this situation, with such a significant ‘masking’, but this is a club agreed amendment rather than being in the rules.July 26, 2022 at 2:34 pm #188015
Thanks CTG – very helpful. I wish the rules were clearer on these types of situations but your house rule does seem a sensible solution.July 26, 2022 at 2:53 pm #188016
Yes, perhaps an additional explanation box in the ‘clear shot’ section would help. Your example is not overly obscure so it would be good to call it out.
To be honest, I’m not sure we are always consistent on how we deal with this situation game to game, but as long as both sides are happy on the day, and it seems reasonable, then it all comes under the “crack on with it” principal 😀.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.