Fire Lane and EmRR

[Juan SantaX]

I hate some rules....

Can I lay a fire lane from an hex adyacent to a EmRR past it?

I understand I can see thru the EmRR, but when it comes to fire lanes I go to the Hillocks rules (F6.53), firelanes (A9.22) and that example, and get lost...

Both the firer and the target are same level, but in between there is a half level obstacle.... (I have to defend in Hatten in Flames...)

TIA

 

[volgaG68]

...I go to the Hillocks rules (F6.53)...

Sorry, NRBH to answer your question because it has been awhile, but at the time I found the ETO explanation/example of EmRR from Festung Budapest much easier to understand. Check it out, might help; if not now, maybe in the future.

 

[Doug Leslie]

per it?

I understand I can see thru the EmRR, but when it comes to fire lanes I go to the Hillocks rules (F6.53), firelanes (A9.22) and that example, and get lost...

Both the firer and the target are same level, but in between there is a half level obstacle.... (I have to defend in Hatten in Flames...)

TIA

My understanding is that your unit can lay a fire lane if it has LOS to a same level target. The EmRR is not a half level obstacle to a non-entrenched unit that is in a hex directly behind it. Think of it as if it were a wall/hedge.

 

[Juan SantaX]

Ok, but I still don´t understand it.... That, or something is rotten in the state of Denmark... I think it will be me, and not Denmark.

The 236 has set a fire lane and hit the moving German squad. Next the German 548 assault move to Z9. I think it will not take any residual from the fire lane, because its not same level as the Firelane counter/MG. It is half level higher, or at least they are not same level.

That looks weird to me. The example of Hillock (F.6 for squads E sand F) its useless I think because that fire lane starts at level 1/2.

(Edit: I think that EmRR make fire lane impossible, but I don´t see it in the rules)

 

[Doug Leslie]

It certainly seems to be odd that a fire lane can affect level 0 targets but not a unit right in front of the MG. Might be worth a Perry Sez?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

By the rules - as currently written I believe the Fire Lane does affect units in AA9, BB8, but not Z9. Which, IMO, does not make a whole lot of sense. Even less so if the Fire Lane was across 4-5 hillock hexes.

 

[lt_steiner]

From Chapter F Hillock LOS examples:

Squad F could not place a Fire Lane counter in any non-adjacent, level 0 hex since that Fire Lane would not lie along a Continuous Slope.

Squad F is at 1/ level but as reciprocity applies, it seems to me that in this situation you cannot lay a firelane from 0-level non-adjacent hex past squad F either. Yet the units in the example have LOS to each other.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Squad F is ON the Hillock - so it's not the same situation as here.

 

[nekengren2]

Seems to me one of these 2 should be played........

1. The Firelane should work across the entire LOS despite any number of Hillock hexes (up to end of LOS after third Hillock of course)
2. The Firelane should end past the FIRST Hillock hex.

I don't think the rules cover this. It makes no sense to say the Firelane hits all Level 0 and never Hillock level half. You end up with the crazy case like the adjacent guy NOT getting hit. I like #2 since this creates a good tactic impact for Hillocks.

I personally hate the Hillock rules. An amazing amount of complication trying to create something between walls and hills.

 

[Juan SantaX]

I think you can only set a fire lane between same height hexes, and if there is a half level (or more) obstacle higher than that in between, no fire lane allowed but I dont see that on the rules.

I agree with Neal, some rules are too complicated and with loopholes.

 

[nekengren2]

So the rule should be.
1. The Firelane ends in front of the FIRST Hillock hex.

Well this impact on Firelanes certainly makes them more interesting than just the +1TEM.

 

[lt_steiner]

Squad F is ON the Hillock - so it's not the same situation as here.

Yes but I was looking at the reciprocal situation with a unit at a 0-level non adjacent hex firing at squad F at 1/2 level. Despite the LOS there is no firelane allowed because a continuous slope is required. In the above example from Juan SantaX, a firelane could be laid from Y10 (0-level) to Z9 (1/2 level) and a hypothetical 1st level in AA9.

B.5 CONTINUOUS SLOPE: A Continuous Slope is a change in elevation such that, in each hex successively crossed by the LOS, the elevation changes by one level in a continuous gradient.
All rules pertaining to same-level LOS also apply to Continuous Slope LOS [EXC: walls/hedges and AFV/wrecks (D9.4)] even though the latter term is not mentioned, although Height Advantage is unaffected

And

A9.22 FIRE LANE: Whenever the DEFENDER declares a Defensive First Fire attack with a Good Order SW MG that is manned by unpinned Infantry (even as ordnance or as part of a FG), he may also declare a Fire Lane with that MG if it is not already marked with a First/Final Fire counter and is firing within its Normal Range (but not using TPBF) and at a same-level (B.5) target.

Note that same-level target refers to B.5. There is an exception for walls but not for hillocks. The only strange thing here is that continuous slope is defined for one level changes per hex not half-level changes. But the hillock example for squad F still refers to continuous slope.

I guess a Q&A would be helpful here.

I have to admit, I think it is the first time I am not in agreement with you Klas. Sounds strange.
I am probably wrong all along, yet I keep arguing.

 

[Juan SantaX]

Can someone proficient with English send that Q&A, please?

Meanwhile, I accept that a continuous slope is required.

 

[Doug Leslie]

I've sent this:

A 9.22 and F6.44



Can the LMG lay a fire lane when it shoots at the 4-5-7 as it enters P2? If so, how would it affect the 4-5-7 in oR4 if it subsequently entered oR3?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Maybe this is being clarified in the new Chapter F....

 

[klasmalmstrom]

But the hillock example for squad F still refers to continuous slope.

It refers to it not being a continuous slope though. The EX does spell out that a Fire Lane from a unit on a Hillock can be placed in an adjacent, ground level hex.

 

[von Marwitz]

Maybe this is being clarified in the new Chapter F....

Hear, hear...

... in the new Chapter F...

Interesting!

von Marwitz

 

[Doug Leslie]

Maybe this is being clarified in the new Chapter F....

Does this qualify as insider knowledge?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Does this qualify as insider knowledge?

Yes, time to sell the stock in "Fire Lanes International" before they plumet.

 

[Juan SantaX]

I have never played chapter F....