Strange LOS Q- which effects ? loss

Joined
Mar 21, 2015
Messages
871
Reaction score
35
Location
Oz
Country
llAustralia
If there are two stacks adjacent but both in +3 smoke, there is no LOS between them because of +7 LOS Hindrances (extra for outgoing).
However, if one unit "bumps" the adjacent stack the MvPh, does he force it to reveal a unit?
I had an opponent who said no because the LOS range is infinite (no LOS), but I never played it that way. I think the bumper and one defender must be revealed.
He said if Dummy stack, it is eliminated and the bumping unit enters the hex, but if MMC, nobody gets revealed. What is your take on this?


This is not my question but just a relay-. Look forward to the voting LOL/.
 

Binchois

Too many words...
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
801
Location
Michigan
First name
Lester
Country
llUnited States
The units must be revealed as usual. This is because A12.15 governs this situation which has no LOS requirements:

A12.15 DETECTION: Concealment can also be lost due to attempted enemy movement (not advance) into a concealed unit's Location. Whenever a non-berserk enemy infantry/non-charging Cavalry unit attempts to move into a Location containing a concealed unit during the MPh [EXC: Bypass (12.151)], the DEFENDER must immediately reveal at least one concealed unit in that Location and thereby force the moving unit back (even from a Wire Location) to the last Location occupied before entering his Location [EXC: units allowed to enter an enemy Location during the MPh] where it will lose Concealment and end its MPh (unless it goes Berserk first) and is subject to possible Defensive First Fire attack (or, in the case of a routing unit, eliminated or captured for Failure to Rout; 10.533)....​

The situation is basically the same as if a unit in a Rowhouse attempts to enter an ADJACENT Rowhouse Location (of the same building) that contains a concealed enemy unit.
 
Last edited:
Top