What is the contour interval on an HASL map?

[pryoung]

You can call a level 4 hill 40m or 400m for all I care. However, when the hexes hit the map, LOS is determined as if it were 40m or less. For scenarios that use cardboard and maps this doesn't matter much. However, if you start to play around with miniatures (i.e. chapter J) then this becomes much more important -- especially if you want to do "true" LOS with laser pointers and/or periscopes.

Yeah, but at that point you're not really playing ASL anymore, or at least you're using the terrain defined in the ASLRB in ways it probably wasn't designed to be used.

In any case, I interpreted Don's original question to be one of determining elevations on a map compared to the historical terrain, ie, how to translate that terrain into a playable ASL map. Sure, it's ultimately based on some form of reality, or more accurately, one person's view of reality. But it's all been abstracted, heavily, for playability purposes. Trying to extrapolate backwards, to determine, eg, the scale for elevation changes, is looking for standards where they don't exist. I'd stick with my earlier example: the terrain as laid out on an ASL map is determined by trying to match the effects of the historical terrain on the battle more than by trying to match the map exactly. Certainly HASL maps should be closer to the actual terrain than the generic boards (RB certainly depicts Stalingrad more accurately {not "realistically"} than Board 1 does) but you're still stuck trying to squeeze all the terrain into nice little 40 meter hexes.

Pete

 

[WaterRabbit]

Yeah, but at that point you're not really playing ASL anymore, or at least you're using the terrain defined in the ASLRB in ways it probably wasn't designed to be used.

Since you are from Yakima, I would assume that you have been to Enfilade? I have met a few there that would disagree that they aren't playing ASL anymore -- Chapter J is part of the rulebook (especially before it was gutted in v.2).

I'd stick with my earlier example: the terrain as laid out on an ASL map is determined by trying to match the effects of the historical terrain on the battle more than by trying to match the map exactly. Certainly HASL maps should be closer to the actual terrain than the generic boards (RB certainly depicts Stalingrad more accurately {not "realistically"} than Board 1 does) but you're still stuck trying to squeeze all the terrain into nice little 40 meter hexes.

I have no disagreement with you here at all. Designers are stuck trying to model aerial photos/topomaps into 40 meter quanta. I'm just saying they should have an idea as to the internal scale before they choose to ignore it. Just as they ignore the "Each Game Turn represents two minutes of actual time" temporal scale. However, I don't see the ASL Heresy police crying "Foul, reality argument!" when someone abstracts a scenario to represent several hours, when by the temporal scale few scenarios represent more than 12-20 minutes.

 

[pryoung]

Since you are from Yakima, I would assume that you have been to Enfilade? I have met a few there that would disagree that they aren't playing ASL anymore -- Chapter J is part of the rulebook (especially before it was gutted in v.2).

My disagreement wasn't over using Chapter J. It was over "using lasers and/or periscopes to determine "true" LOS."

I have no disagreement with you here at all. Designers are stuck trying to model aerial photos/topomaps into 40 meter quanta. I'm just saying they should have an idea as to the internal scale before they choose to ignore it. Just as they ignore the "Each Game Turn represents two minutes of actual time" temporal scale. However, I don't see the ASL Heresy police crying "Foul, reality argument!" when someone abstracts a scenario to represent several hours, when by the temporal scale few scenarios represent more than 12-20 minutes.

At this point, I think we're arguing pretty much the same points. :toast:

The reality argument isn't abstracting hours into 2-minute blocks. The reality argument occurs when someone argues that something that occurs in ASL couldn't actually happen during that 2-minute time span. Frankly, much like the 10-meter elevation levels as set out in Squad Leader so many years ago, I've always taken that 2-minute time span with a huge grain of salt.

Pete

 

[alanp]

WaterRabbit,

I stand corrected on the '1/2 level' vs. '1/2-level obstacle' comment. Have always thought of ASL maps in terms of 0, 1/2, 1, 1 1/2, 2, etc. LEVELS and never in any real measurements. Until your comment about walls being 1-2m, I'd forgotten that the specific definition was even in the ASLRB. I've looked, but is the 'hex=40m' still in ASL, too?

Alan

 

[WaterRabbit]

Alan,
Yep, A2.1.

Pete,
I wouldn't take that with too huge a grain of salt. I think 10m is the max you could take a C.I. to be and still have the LOS rules make any sense. As Legion pointed out, the area represented by ASL maps is fairly small.

A standard map is 40x33 hexes or .25x.825 mi or .2 sq mi.

The area of a 40 m hex is .5 * (3)^.5 * (40)^2 = 1386 sq. m. An acre is 4047 sq. m. So each hex is approx. 1/3 of an acre.

By way of comparison, I live on a plot that is about 5 hexes in size with an 80 tree pecan orchard in back.

After looking at this in all of its detail, I think a CI of 6 +/- 2 meters is about right.

 

[Dr Zaius]

Actually, what the rulebook says is an "abstracted scale of 40 meters" per hex. The desihners understood that there are some map/scale difficulties that arise whenever you use a gid or hex-based system to represent blocks of terrain and turns to measure time. It is abstracted, but it's roughly on target.

 

[Robin Reeve]

And note also that the blind hexes are also an abstraction.
If geometry were to be applied, there should be as much blind hexes as the distance between the higher point and the obstacle...
ASL News now dead magazine made that point.
In ASL, you see way too much, too far...
But I am glad not to have overly complicated terrain rules.
The "feel" and the global result of the scenarios show that, even with theses abstractions, ASL is not as far from "realty" as some would think (I presume some abstractions compensate one another).

 

[Dr Zaius]

And note also that the blind hexes are also an abstraction.
If geometry were to be applied, there should be as much blind hexes as the distance between the higher point and the obstacle...

Yes, PC wargames do this all the time. You're right, it would be more correct to do it this way, but it would also make the LOS rules even more complex. :shock:

 

[paulkenny]

Alan,
Yep, A2.1.

Pete,
I wouldn't take that with too huge a grain of salt. I think 10m is the max you could take a C.I. to be and still have the LOS rules make any sense. As Legion pointed out, the area represented by ASL maps is fairly small.

A standard map is 40x33 hexes or .25x.825 mi or .2 sq mi.

The area of a 40 m hex is .5 * (3)^.5 * (40)^2 = 1386 sq. m. An acre is 4047 sq. m. So each hex is approx. 1/3 of an acre.

By way of comparison, I live on a plot that is about 5 hexes in size with an 80 tree pecan orchard in back.

After looking at this in all of its detail, I think a CI of 6 +/- 2 meters is about right.

THere should be a pi in there somewhere!

 

[da priest]

...
The area of a 40 m hex is .5 * (3)^.5 * (40)^2 = 1386 sq. m. An acre is 4047 sq. m. So each hex is approx. 1/3 of an acre.....

Wow, I'm on a third of a deluxe board!!:smoke:

 

[alanp]

any marsh hexes? runways? 1-2m walls?

 

[da priest]

any marsh hexes? runways? 1-2m walls?

Nope half woods, rest brush and OG with a stone building..:laugh:

 

[WaterRabbit]

Actually, what the rulebook says is an "abstracted scale of 40 meters" per hex. The designers understood that there are some map/scale difficulties that arise whenever you use a grid or hex-based system to represent blocks of terrain and turns to measure time. It is abstracted, but it's roughly on target.

Don, I have always interpreted this to mean the terrain is abstracted to fit the scale. IOW, if you took a topo map of the appropriate scale and slapped a hex grid on it, you would have to move the walls to the hexside, fix crest lines, etc.

I agree that the LOS rules are a simplification and I'm definitely not pushing for more realistic rules here. I am just saying if you make a cross-section of a board using various contour intervals, a 10 m C.I. makes it look like your troops are fighting in canyons. At 20, they are fighting in the Grand canyon.

Paul,
I have never been served pie in a hexagonal dish before. But area for hexes is based upon right triangles and not circles.

Alan,
I have walls that are 1.5-2 meters and a swimming pool. I guess we need to add:

B35 Swimming Pools;
E6.22 Diving; and
E6.23 Platform Diving,

to the ASLRB. :cheeky:

 

[Dr Zaius]

Don, I have always interpreted this to mean the terrain is abstracted to fit the scale. IOW, if you took a topo map of the appropriate scale and slapped a hex grid on it, you would have to move the walls to the hexside, fix crest lines, etc.

Well, that's the ideal and you can come pretty close to that in most types of terrain. Elevations are more abstracted than the other two aspects of the system IMHO, but it's an acceptable trade-off. Using a graphics program, If you lay a topo map on top of an HASL map and make it a transparent layer, you will quickly discover that ASL only represents a fraction of the actual contours in hilly terrain.

 

[pryoung]

B35 Swimming Pools;
E6.22 Diving; and
E6.23 Platform Diving,

to the ASLRB. :cheeky:

Actually, the diving rules are already there. See E6.1.

Pete

 

[da priest]

Actually, the diving rules are already there. See E6.1.

Pete

Yeh, and there are pool aka pond rules already. Unless it is small, then I guess an SSR to allow bypass. :laugh:

 

[pryoung]

Yeah, but you can't use bypass and double-time at the same time. No running around the pool, remember?

Pete

 

[Pitman]

You guys who want to quantify everything in ASL just make me laugh. Don't you understand that ASL is a design for effect game? Virtually everything in ASL is abstracted, so that it just "feels right."

Of course height levels are abstracted. There is no set level.

In fact, building heights are abstracted as well. Someone up topic referred to "one-story buildings" and "two-story buildings" and so forth in ASL.

The truth is there is no such thing as a two-story building in ASL. There is only a "two-level building" in ASL. How many stories might that have? Two? Often. Three or four? Perhaps. Building heights are just as abstracted as anything else.

 

[Pitman]

To piggyback on to my own post, this is akin to all those nerds out there who try to figure out why exactly a 4-6-7 squad is a 4-6-7 squad.

Read the next Schwerpunkt for the reason why counter values are the way they are in ASL. There's an interview I conducted with the designer. All squads were created relative to the Russian 4-4-7, and I'll save the reason WHY the Russian squad is a 4-4-7 for the magazine.

 

[M Faulkner]

To piggyback on to my own post, this is akin to all those nerds out there who try to figure out why exactly a 4-6-7 squad is a 4-6-7 squad.

Read the next Schwerpunkt for the reason why counter values are the way they are in ASL. There's an interview I conducted with the designer. All squads were created relative to the Russian 4-4-7, and I'll save the reason WHY the Russian squad is a 4-4-7 for the magazine.

Tease! Tease! :nuts: Tease! :hush: I've read your interview already. It is quite good.