Quick Question: CA change cost for Hvy Mortar on Rooftop?

Luthoricas

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
61
Reaction score
1
Location
USA
NRBH --

A heavy mortar on a rooftop does ~not~ pay double for a CA change, correct?

(somewhere I thought I read in the rules that rooftops were "open ground" for line-of-sight, etc.)
 

Sapper_D

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2010
Messages
132
Reaction score
17
Location
Down Under
Country
llAustralia
"Rooftops are treated the same as another building floor level at the next higher half-level elevation..." [B23.8 ROOFTOPS] but a unit on a rooftop "is considered to be in Open Ground for FFMO, Rout and Interdiction purposes from an equal or higher LOS." [B23.81 TEM]

So AFAIK you pay double for firing outside of your CA with the hvy mortar.
 

Fred Ingram

Average Player
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
2,944
Reaction score
198
Location
Winnebago, IL USA
Country
llUnited States
"Rooftops are treated the same as another building floor level at the next higher half-level elevation..." [B23.8 ROOFTOPS] but a unit on a rooftop "is considered to be in Open Ground for FFMO, Rout and Interdiction purposes from an equal or higher LOS." [B23.81 TEM]

So AFAIK you pay double for firing outside of your CA with the hvy mortar.
I have always played a rooftop is "open ground" so you do not pay double for turning the covered arc because you are not "IN" the building

There is nothing on the roof to hinder the turning of the "gun" unlike in a woods or actually being inside a structure/rubble

"the Case A DRM is doubled if the firer is in woods/building/rubble"



this part you quoted:

"but a unit on a rooftop "is considered to be in Open Ground for FFMO, Rout and Interdiction purposes from an equal or higher LOS."

is probably to prevent people from rationalizing that the small "lip" around the edges of most flat roofs could be used like a wall
 
Last edited:

rdw5150

it's just a game
Joined
Feb 13, 2003
Messages
8,288
Reaction score
941
Location
Erie, PA
First name
Roger
Country
llUnited States
I have always played a rooftop is "open ground" so you do not pay double for turning the covered arc because you are not "IN" the building

Agreed, this is how I would play it
 

Spencer Armstrong

Canard de Guerre
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
8,624
Reaction score
1,682
Location
Gainesville, FL
First name
Spencer
Country
llUnited States
"Rooftops are treated the same as another building floor level at the next higher half-level elevation..." [B23.8 ROOFTOPS] but a unit on a rooftop "is considered to be in Open Ground for FFMO, Rout and Interdiction purposes from an equal or higher LOS." [B23.81 TEM]

So AFAIK you pay double for firing outside of your CA with the hvy mortar.
I agree with the guys who say it seems like you shouldn't pay double, but I've read the entire Rooftops section and the Case A section and I find no counter to Sapper's argument. AFAICT, you do pay double, weird as it seems.

S
 

Bret Hildebran

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
4,884
Reaction score
1,279
Location
NE OH
Country
llUnited States
It's all the antennas and satellite dishes on the roof that make it double to turn! :laugh:

Like Spencer, I'm not aware of a rule that indicates it's not 2X, no matter how logical it would seem.

In a more serious reality argument vein, the fear of falling off may slow down the turn somewhat... :devious:
 

Fred Ingram

Average Player
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
2,944
Reaction score
198
Location
Winnebago, IL USA
Country
llUnited States
It's all the antennas and satellite dishes on the roof that make it double to turn! :laugh:

Like Spencer, I'm not aware of a rule that indicates it's not 2X, no matter how logical it would seem.

In a more serious reality argument vein, the fear of falling off may slow down the turn somewhat... :devious:
Well - the rule which states about the 2x cost is very explicit, you have to be IN the building (which you are NOT if you are up on the roof). It does not say hex or location, just in the building. Like a unit in bypass of a building, it is not in the building

5.11: "the Case A DRM is doubled if the firer is in woods/building/rubble"
 
Last edited:

Spencer Armstrong

Canard de Guerre
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
8,624
Reaction score
1,682
Location
Gainesville, FL
First name
Spencer
Country
llUnited States
Well - the rule which states about the 2x cost is very explicit, you have to be IN the building (which you are NOT if you are up on the roof). It does not say hex or location, just in the building. Like a unit in bypass of a building, it is not in the building

5.11: "the Case A DRM is doubled if the firer is in woods/building/rubble"
Except that, as Sapper posted above, per B23.8, rooftops are treated as building locations, with some exceptions and this is not listed as an exception.

So as much as the in/on helps for VC, it's irrelevant here.

S
 

Fred Ingram

Average Player
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
2,944
Reaction score
198
Location
Winnebago, IL USA
Country
llUnited States
Except that, as Sapper posted above, per B23.8, rooftops are treated as building locations, with some exceptions and this is not listed as an exception.

So as much as the in/on helps for VC, it's irrelevant here.
I guess - probably one of the those rules holes when you are required to link 4 separate concepts together to get a result (and they forgot an exception).

By the way, were roofs in the system when the CA change rule was written ? Or were they added in later Red Barricades

I certainly would never have my opponent pay the doubled cost for this condition

Now - in the top floor of a VotG gutted building (yes - due to the crap laying around)
 
Last edited:

Jazz

Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
12,188
Reaction score
2,739
Location
The Empty Quarter
Country
llLithuania
Well - the rule which states about the 2x cost is very explicit, you have to be IN the building (which you are NOT if you are up on the roof). It does not say hex or location, just in the building. Like a unit in bypass of a building, it is not in the building

5.11: "the Case A DRM is doubled if the firer is in woods/building/rubble"
Interesting point, and if I wuz playing for fun, I'd play it that way.

By a strict reading of the rules, where does it say he ain't *in* the building? The specific rules for which he is not in the building are explicitly listed (eg FFMO, bldg control, etc....). CA changes is not one of them. If it was a game with kidneys on
the line, I'd have say he pays double CA change.

I guess that's why I just play for fun.

Jazz
 

Spencer Armstrong

Canard de Guerre
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
8,624
Reaction score
1,682
Location
Gainesville, FL
First name
Spencer
Country
llUnited States
I guess - probably one of the those rules holes when you are required to link 4 separate concepts together to get a result (and they forgot an exception).

By the way, were roofs in the system when the CA change rule was written ? Or were they added in later Red Barricades

I certainly would never have my opponent pay the doubled cost for this condition

Now - in the top floor of a VotG gutted building (yes - due to the crap laying around)
Added in RB, I think. But RB had been out quite awhile before 2nd Ed.

I did say I thought it was weird. :)

S
 

Faded 8-1

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2006
Messages
1,887
Reaction score
831
Location
Ohio
First name
Mark
Country
llUnited States
Pretty sure rooftops have always been in the rules, since 1st edition. RB added roofless factory hexes.

FWIW, I agree that the CA change would be doubled by a strict reading of the rules. Like Jazz though, I wouldn't actually play it that way in casual play.
 
Last edited:

Sparafucil3

Forum Guru
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
11,335
Reaction score
5,071
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
By a strict reading of the rules, where does it say he ain't *in* the building?
I don't think there is a strict place to say he isn't "in" the building, but I think we can get there with a rules-based inference. Building control is gained when one side is the sole occupant of a building. Roof top Locations don't deny the other side control of the building. By inference, units on a rooftop are not "in" the building. -- jim
 

Luthoricas

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
61
Reaction score
1
Location
USA
Well, since we weren't playing for kidneys and had agreed that all eyeballs gouged out would be handed back afterward, we played it as no-double-CA-cost. I guess this will need to be submitted for a "Perry-Sez" ?
 

Spencer Armstrong

Canard de Guerre
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
8,624
Reaction score
1,682
Location
Gainesville, FL
First name
Spencer
Country
llUnited States
Well, since we weren't playing for kidneys and had agreed that all eyeballs gouged out would be handed back afterward, we played it as no-double-CA-cost. I guess this will need to be submitted for a "Perry-Sez" ?
Probably not a bad idea.

S
 

Fort

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Messages
5,867
Reaction score
1,509
Location
virginia
Country
llUnited States
I don't think Rooftop units are considered 'IN' a building...YMMV. Just because the Rooftop is considered another floor of the building does not mean it is a location 'in' a building.

There is nothing concrete but many hints to guide me to this conclusion, such as this one:

"A unit on a rooftop is considered in the building for Searching/Mopping Up purposes."

If you were considered 'IN' the building while on the rooftop there would be no need for this statement. JMHO.
 

Spencer Armstrong

Canard de Guerre
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
8,624
Reaction score
1,682
Location
Gainesville, FL
First name
Spencer
Country
llUnited States
I don't think Rooftop units are considered 'IN' a building...YMMV. Just because the Rooftop is considered another floor of the building does not mean it is a location 'in' a building.

There is nothing concrete but many hints to guide me to this conclusion, such as this one:

"A unit on a rooftop is considered in the building for Searching/Mopping Up purposes."

If you were considered 'IN' the building while on the rooftop there would be no need for this statement. JMHO.
It's the "nothing concrete" that would make a clarification valuable, IMO.

S
 

jwb3

Just this guy, you know?
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
4,393
Reaction score
260
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Country
llUnited States
Agreed on the clarification.

Rooftops have been around from the beginning of ASL; however, before RB came along I doubt there were any scenarios that had the combination of rooftops, heavy mortars, and a reason to put them on the roof. I can only think of a couple of scenarios that even had rooftops in play before RB.


John
 
Top