LCP ASL For Fun LOS Question (Java 11 Driver Advance!)

[Yuri0352]

I'm playing Java 11, 'Driver Advance!', and I have a question regarding LOS across the elevated road in the center of the board. The East and West hexsides of most of this road contain slope markings (EX.: M14). I do not have copies of the LCP slope rules referenced in the SSR's ( Q3), therefore I am inquiring as to the effect which these road hex slopes have upon LOS, especially in an east-west direction. The rest of the terrain on the board is at level 0.

My interpretation is that the elevated, sloped road is a hindrance similar to a stone wall, but I just wanted to be sure before I start playing. I have reviewed the slope hexside rules (P2) from KGP, however the example shown in the illustration is for a hillside, and not for a single hex, with slopes on opposite sides of the same hex.

Thank you!

 

[jrv]

The slope rules are not from LCP. They are from Kampfgruppe Peiper (P2) & Pegasus Bridge (Q3). The two rules sets are identical.

Stone walls are obstacles and never a hindrance, so you have me confused there. Slopes are also not a hindrance, and they are not obstacles either. LOS is clear from east to west, including to/from entrenched Locations (the lowest terrain I can think of on such a map).

JR

 

[Yuri0352]

Sorry, I misspoke when I referred to the wall as a hindrance.

I've played several scenarios from KGP and COS which included slopes, however in this scenario, the slopes are only present on the east and west hexsides of a North-south road. The road is NOT an elevated road, the road is at level 0 as is all of the other terrain on the map. The map represents terrain in Holland in the area of the Irish Guard's advance during the Market-Garden battle.

I understand the LOS effects of slopes upon a hill (as demonstrated in the KGP rules illustration) however I am unclear as to the LOS hindrance/obstacle effects these slope hexsides have on a board where all of the terrain is at the same elevation level. I would assume that the slope hexsides on this level 0 road must have some effect on LOS or why would they have been printed upon the board? Again, the slopes are facing in opposite directions on the east and west sides of the same hex.

It would help if I knew how to attach a picture of the hexes in question, but I don't know how to do that. Just hoping that someone who is familiar with this scenario could set me straight on this...I'm probably missing something obvious.

 

[jrv]

I have looked at the board. It has a road with two rows of slopes running north and south on either side. The decision to use slopes for this was, IMHO, not necessarily the one that would best simulate what would seem to be the situation. The slope will affect the LOS in that a unit that is upslope of a slope hexside is treated as being 3/4 of a level above the base level of the hex. Units on the road will see over ½-level obstacles/hindrances and units firing at the road will also have their LOS go over ½-level obstacles/hindrances when firing at the road. But LOS *through* slope hexes (i.e. beyond the hex with the slope hexside) is unaffected. Slopes represent rolling hills where the crest lines are too far apart to avoid "plateau-ing." If you had to pick a place that did not have rolling hills, you might settle on this map of Holland. If I were designing this scenario I might use the embanked railroad (SSR'd to a road) instead so that LOS across the road is blocked. As it is currently drawn, there is free LOS across the "elevated" road.

JR

 

[Yuri0352]

I have looked at the board. It has a road with two rows of slopes running north and south on either side. The decision to use slopes for this was, IMHO, not necessarily the one that would best simulate what would seem to be the situation. The slope will affect the LOS in that a unit that is upslope of a slope hexside is treated as being 3/4 of a level above the base level of the hex. Units on the road will see over ½-level obstacles/hindrances and units firing at the road will also have their LOS go over ½-level obstacles/hindrances when firing at the road. But LOS *through* slope hexes (i.e. beyond the hex with the slope hexside) is unaffected. Slopes represent rolling hills where the crest lines are too far apart to avoid "plateau-ing." If you had to pick a place that did not have rolling hills, you might settle on this map of Holland. If I were designing this scenario I might use the embanked railroad (SSR'd to a road) instead so that LOS across the road is blocked. As it is currently drawn, there is free LOS across the "elevated" road.

JR

Thank you for the clarification. I completely agree, I don't see the point of using slopes in this fashion on this map. The photos which I have seen of these roads certainly indicate a height which would block LOS across it from the sides.

 

[jrv]

The problem with using an embanked RR is that the ½-level hindrances still apply. Perhaps that was why slopes were chosen. An elevated roadway has the disadvantage of giving height advantage and a fairly heft cost to go up. Perhaps using an embanked RR-style road with a slightly higher height (level 5/8ths, 9/16ths, or metric 0.6?) would have been another way to approach the problem. Or one could have SSR'd that there was no LOS through a slope hex. On the current map there is LOS through the center road.

JR

 

[jrv]

If you add a house rule, all LOSes that cross > 1 slope hexsides (the slope artwork does not count) are blocked, that should do roughly the right thing.

JR

 

[Yuri0352]

If you add a house rule, all LOSes that cross > 1 slope hexsides (the slope artwork does not count) are blocked, that should do roughly the right thing.

JR

This seems to be the most sensible solution, so that's how I'm going to play it.
Thanks again.