Slopes and hills in OV

[Oberst Balck]

Hi,

I just don't get the slope rules to OV ( ditto: PGP).

In the cut out above the slope lines are in hexes P 26 , Q27, R27 and S 27.

These hexes - R 12.22 - are said to be " downlslope" and represent a dip to the hexes north of them. These are 3/4 of as level higher than lower terrian that begins/or ends its LOS in that location

Hill crestlines exist in P21, Q22 etc and are 1 level higher than ground level.

QUESTIONS:

1) A unit in Q 26 has no LOS restrictions except S28 which it cannot see?


2) If instead the P26,Q27,R27,S27 hexes were upslope would it be able to see " into" the hill crest line Q22, Q 21 for example ?

3) A unit in a trench/ foxhole in R27 cannot be seen from any crest line to the hill north of it?

If anyone has a good understanding of these rules I would very much like to know the LOS idea of slopes, of which maybe this picture would be a good example to take from ( ??).

Thanks

 

[Oberst Balck]

Firelanes

In the example RR12.42 ( p.Z 22):

The illustration shows a possible FL from squad D as --> EE14, DD13, DD12, and CC12

RR 12.41

The direct fire TEM rule is very hard to work out.

" Ground level infantry in a hex containing =>3 ( or 2 non contiguous ?? ) down slope hexsides may claim a +1 TEM vs direct fire provided the attack originates from a non adjacent firer whoes elevation advantage ( if any) over that of the target is < range of the attack AND the attackers LOS crosses >= one of the targets downslope hexsides."

Clear to you ????

I

1) Don't understand the non contiguous bit.

2) Can't see any instance on the OV board where this elivation/ range thing comes into play

3) why not just say " crosses any downslope " to the last bit of obscurantism.

A LWAYS
S TILL
L EARNING

 

[Jeff Leslie]

QUESTIONS:

1) A unit in Q 26 has no LOS restrictions except S28 which it cannot see?

Q26 CAN see S28, the R26/R27 slope hexside is not an obstacle or a hindrance to LOS according to P2.3. If the grain were in-season, the two grain hexes that lie between that LOS would hinder the LOS as if there were no slope at all, but a LOS between Q26 and Q28 would not be hindered by the grain hex in Q27 because Q26 is high enough to see over the grain.

2) If instead the P26,Q27,R27,S27 hexes were upslope would it be able to see " into" the hill crest line Q22, Q 21 for example ?

Q22 yes, Q21 no. The LOS to the crest hexes O21, P21, Q22, R22 would exist with or without slopes being involved, but any LOS beyond the crest hexes would still be blocked unless the target hexes are higher elevation or up-slope themselves. Being up-slope does not make a unit high enough to see beyond higher level hill crest hexes to elevations at the same level as the crest hex. If the Q21/Q22 hexside was a slope hexside with Q21 being the up-slope hex, there would be an LOS to any hex (barring any other intervening obstacles) where the LOS crosses that up-slope hexside (i.e... P26, Q23, R24), whether or not those hexes were also themselves up-slope or not.

3) A unit in a trench/ foxhole in R27 cannot be seen from any crest line to the hill north of it?

Not true, there would still be LOS to/from any hex on that map where a LOS would exist if the slope hexside was not there. Even if the slope hexsides were wall/hedge hexsides instead, there would still be LOS to/from an entrenched unit in R27 and the crest hexes to the north per B9.21.

The map in this post is actually not a very good map to illustrate the slope rules, there just aren't that many LOS's that are affected by the slope hexsides depicted.

The P2.3 and the P6.2 examples are very good illustrations of the slope rules.

Clear as a muddy slope?

 

[apbills]

The direct fire TEM rule is very hard to work out.
1) Don't understand the non contiguous bit.

2) Can't see any instance on the OV board where this elivation/ range thing comes into play

Some example hexes on the OVHS board.
Normal 3 hexside slopes that qualify for possible TEM-
AA26 gets the TEM if fire LOS enters from any of Z25/AA25/BB25 hexsides.
Z14 gets the TEM if fire LOS enters from any of Y15/Z15/AA15 hexsides.
Similar hexes include E6, H6, N7, Q7, GG7, Q14, RR13, PP13, E26, B25.

As far as I can tell (CMA) there are no examples of 2 non-contiguous slope hexsides on the Rileys map. If you look at the PB map, there is one - BB12. In the case of BB12, fire entering from the BB13 or CC12 hexsides would gain the +1 TEM (an attacker in CC11 or DD12 would qualify, CC12 would not since it is adjacent). I found other qualifying hexes on the ST board - U35, V30.

As for the range thing, I have not found any good examples, however, if you look on the PB board, hex E17. Assume there is no wall. If an attacker is in C16, 1st level, it has LOS to you. He is 2 hexes away, and has a 2 hex height advantage. You could claim a +1 downslope TEM. If the attacker was at level 2 in C16, he would have a 3 level height advantage, with a 2 hex range, therefore you could not claim a +1 TEM for downslope.

I have to believe cases of this range thing are very rare.

 

[IYAOYAS]

As for the range thing, I have not found any good examples, however, if you look on the PB board, hex E17. Assume there is no wall. If an attacker is in C16, 1st level, it has LOS to you. He is 2 hexes away, and has a 2 hex height advantage. You could claim a +1 downslope TEM. If the attacker was at level 2 in C16, he would have a 3 level height advantage, with a 2 hex range, therefore you could not claim a +1 TEM for downslope.

I have to believe cases of this range thing are very rare.

This example is incorrect. In order for the TEM to apply, the height advantage has to be less than the range. This example does work when you replace hex E17 with hex G17, and replace hex C16 with E15. BTW, the wall is irrelevant per B9.62.

I agree that cases in which this TEM is negated due to height advantage are rare. None that I can see in the Riley's Road map.