Yes.OK so NOW I'm getting lost. If an AFV/WRECK is IN a building AND is inherent terrain, would this hinder down the hex side?
No. See B.6.Or if the AFV/WRECK is in bypass on the north side of the hex is it a hinderance on the south side, it is inherent after all?
To this part about bypass, no.OK so NOW I'm getting lost. If an AFV/WRECK is IN a building AND is inherent terrain, would this hinder down the hex side? Or if the AFV/WRECK is in bypass on the north side of the hex is it a hinderance on the south side, it is inherent after all?
This sort of thing could really mess up fire lanes, not to mention what it's doing to my head!
B.6 INHERENT TERRAIN: Certain terrain depictions (orchard, crag, graveyard, shellholes, etc.) and counter contents of a hex (SMOKE, Bridge, rubble, AFV , wreck) [EXC: Bypass AFV/Wreck (D9.4)]...
D9.4 (again):...Or if the AFV/WRECK is in bypass on the north side of the hex is it a hinderance on the south side, it is inherent after all?
Cool idea for an SSR.limiting extra ROF shots to the ROF value
This is actually very similar to an old SL\COI\COD\GI rule similar to how penetration became Fire lanesCool idea for an SSR.
ROF 1 = one extra shot. ROF 3 = 3 extra shots max.
Some rule changes that people champion--say, lessening the vulnerability for exiting a Foxhole--have a possibility of affecting scenario balance.ROF 1 = one extra shot. ROF 3 = 3 extra shots max.
Assuming it was a 0 leader based on the fact that he got no results with 4s, a 6 +5 shot means you can only get a PTC on a 3. That's a pretty low odds shot.Thats crazy! I think I would have taken the leader counter (real one) and burned it in front of all the other counters to teach them a lesson. Hard to burn electrons though
It had to cross the artwork of the vehicle, but IIRC vehicles were not drawn to scale relative to each other so you could have an FT-17 wreck being the same size as a Tiger I wreck. It's been 37 years since I last played SL-GI so my recall is not exact.What a strange rule. Were there petitions to forbid counter clipping in response to it? Was the controversy smaller, or larger, than the IFT/IIFT one? I need to know!