LFT Q&A

[Kevin Kenneally]

Is there an estimated cost?

Or do I have to rob a bank (or two) to be able to afford this?

 

[bprobst]

Hmm ... The "3D" map symbology is not to my taste (and will clash terribly with the other DASL maps) but it seems clear enough so not worth making a fuss over.

I'm considerably more concerned with terrain not covered by Chapter B rules, though. Are you including a rules sheet in the package to describe the new terrain? I'm specifically referring to building-roads and grain-roads, neither of which are to be found in Chapter B.

 

[JohnisaG8tor]

How much longer Xavier! (Such a tease with that wonderful folder)

 

[olli]

Is there an estimated cost?

Or do I have to rob a bank (or two) to be able to afford this?

Lol! ;-)

 

[Xavier 658]

I'm considerably more concerned with terrain not covered by Chapter B rules, though. Are you including a rules sheet in the package to describe the new terrain? I'm specifically referring to building-roads and grain-roads, neither of which are to be found in Chapter B.

There is a small paragraph about grain-roads, yes. About building roads, not yet.

And about the price Kevin, two banks would be nice for us but it was scheduled to sell at about £ 45 to £ 50 when priting in UK (USD 75 to 85 $). Since LFT is doing it we will print more copies and cheaper so it will be probably sell at 50 euros (around £ 40 or USD 70 $). Until I am not physically in Phnom Penh, I can't say exactly how much it will be since negociations and printing processes can't be monitored by phone or email.

All the best;

X

 

[Honza]

Lots of PTO - good!

 

[BattleSchool]

I'm considerably more concerned with terrain not covered by Chapter B rules, though. Are you including a rules sheet in the package to describe the new terrain? I'm specifically referring to building-roads and grain-roads, neither of which are to be found in Chapter B.

DO brush-roads differ that much from grain-roads?

View attachment 46755

Hut-roads are something that is long overdue, and a word of guidance would be welcome.

 

[daveramsey]

Grain-roads are pretty straightforward, as I'd think most people would expect them to be, these have been documented and are part of the pack already.

Building-roads are a little tougher, but I don't think it's anything very difficult. I just need to put some succinct words around them. Essentially they're treated like Woods-Roads but with buildings on either side. Separate locations and street fighting, and some similar limitations to Narrow Streets is effectively how they should be played. The only weirdness I can think of is that infantry get a free move into the building if they're running down the road and finish on the road but not in the building as with woods/roads they'd be considered being inside the woods part, but they haven't had to 'pay' to get in there, and have possibly gained MF via a road bonus.

I'll post in the main forum to see if the collective wisdom can generate the "optimal" rules paragraph.

Dave

 

[BattleSchool]

Grain-roads are pretty straightforward, as I'd think most people would expect them to be, these have been documented and are part of the pack already.

Building-roads are a little tougher, but I don't think it's anything very difficult. I just need to put some succinct words around them. Essentially they're treated like Woods-Roads but with buildings on either side. Separate locations and street fighting, and some similar limitations to Narrow Streets is effectively how they should be played. The only weirdness I can think of is that infantry get a free move into the building if they're running down the road and finish on the road but not in the building as with woods/roads they'd be considered being inside the woods part, but they haven't had to 'pay' to get in there, and have possibly gained MF via a road bonus.

I'll post in the main forum to see if the collective wisdom can generate the "optimal" rules paragraph.

Dave

Yes, there are a number of unusual circumstances that need to be covered to ensure no weird things arise. As you mentioned, A4.132 raises the prospect of decreased MF costs to enter the building portion of the hex. This also has consequences for DFF. But huts may have additional, unintended consequences. Best to see what the PTO experts have to say on the matter.

That said, glad to see you push the envelope.

 

[pybarrondo]

Wait, those aren't brush-roads. Those are bamboo-roads. Or bamboo paths.

 

[BattleSchool]

Wait, those aren't brush-roads. Those are bamboo-roads. Or bamboo paths.

Or just Open Ground if Deep Snow is in effect and roads are unplowed.

 

[Honza]

Wait, those aren't brush-roads. Those are bamboo-roads. Or bamboo paths.

Back to the drawing board.

 

[bprobst]

DO brush-roads differ that much from grain-roads?

I can't imagine that they would differ much at all.

Unfortunately, brush-roads also do not exist in Chapter B (despite the fact that MMP carelessly added them to one or two geomorphic boards).

I would have thought that the time to consider what the rules for a new terrain type would be would be at the time of playtest, not a few weeks before the package is due to start shipping. So the scenarios using this board were playtested with terrain that no-one knew how to interpret? Or were different playtest groups just using their own interpretations and making it up as they went along? Not what I would call an ideal approach.

I'm not suggesting that the rules required need be very complex ... merely that they are required.

(It would have been better still if the boards had been designed to be compliant with the rules we already have.)

 

[BattleSchool]

I would have thought that the time to consider what the rules for a new terrain type would be would be at the time of playtest, not a few weeks before the package is due to start shipping. So the scenarios using this board were playtested with terrain that no-one knew how to interpret? Or were different playtest groups just using their own interpretations and making it up as they went along? Not what I would call an ideal approach./QUOTE]

If you are referring to brush-road hexes, I would be surprised if this terrain type presented any difficulties during play test (for AP9, the pack in which this terrain type debuted).

If, however, you are referring to the DASL pack, I would agree that the building-road hex would require much discussion before the scenarios were released for play testing. However, considerable play testing is still required in order to identify all of the unintended consequences and knock-on effects of this new terrain type. For instance, how do roadblocks work in such terrain? Given that units ON a building-road are not in Bypass, may a mortar fire while ON the road portion of the hex (EX: from a halftrack)? May an AA weapon (vehicle-mounted or otherwise) engage Aerial targets while ON a building-road? May a Gun be Manhandled onto the road portion of such a hex, or must it be Pushed into the building? Where is LOS traced from for SW/Gun/vehicle fire emanating from the road portion of the hex? Is the vehicle considered to be at the centre dot, or at one of the vertices crossed by the road, and so on?

(It would have been better still if the boards had been designed to be compliant with the rules we already have.)

I do not think that the addition of grain-roads constitutes a significant departure from the rules. Along with brush-roads, it is a terrain type that is long overdue.

But I do admit that caution is needed when attempting to introduce a more complex terrain type such as a building-road hex. The fact that multiple wooden buildings in a hex become huts when PTO Terrain is in effect add another layer of complexity. Stone buildings would get around this problem (unless all buildings are wood by SSR).

http://forums.gamesquad.com/showthread.php?118718-Suggestions-for-Road-Building-hex-rules

 

[daveramsey]

In terms of the Building-Road hex; I hadn't spotted it was an issue, presumably Steve hadn't when he first designed the boards, none of the playtesting groups raised the hex as an issue and neither did Tom when he "VASLized" them (and he caught plenty of things). Of course, it's down to me, not the playtesters, Steve, Tom or even Xavier, so I need to apologise for that, and try to make it better.

I appreciate that this has been pretty last minute, but the PB rules for the combination of building/narrow street hexes appear to catch most of the craziness. I'm sure there are outliers, and our choice now is to send all the scenarios back out to playtest (a process that will take about 6 months) or we release now with the rules that we have in place for them.

Here's the text, as I have it right now:

Building-Road hexes are those in which both a building and a road/path is depicted. For all purposes, the building is treated as per the standard depiction (Wooden building/Huts as per terrain modifications) and the road is treated as a Narrow Street (4.1). For the purposes of Street Fighting, vehicles are only subject to Street Fighting attacks originating from buildings within the same hex.

A moving unit in a combination building-road hex is not eligible for the building TEM during Defensive First Fire (and is subject to FFMO/Interdiction) if the LOS does not cross a building depiction and the moving unit entered the hex at the road movement rate regardless of the relative elevations of the firer/target. (See A4.132.) Otherwise, the normal building TEM is in effect.

LOS to a unit moving along the building-road hex using the road movement rate is always traced to its center dot as per A4.132, not to its vertex, although the building depiction can block such LOS. In all other instances LOS is traced to and from the center dot and building depictions do not block LOS.



Let me know if anything obviously jumps out as being wrong/unworkable.

In terms of rules discussion:

> For instance, how do roadblocks work in such terrain?

I don't see why there'd be any change to roadblock placement on the hexside where the road crosses.

>Given that units ON a building-road are not in Bypass, may a mortar fire while ON the road portion of the hex (EX: from a halftrack)?

Yes, assuming LOS. (Ruletext has been added to supplement the pack)

>May an AA weapon (vehicle-mounted or otherwise) engage Aerial targets while ON a building-road?

Yes, assuming LOS.

>May a Gun be Manhandled onto the road portion of such a hex, or must it be Pushed into the building?

This is similar to the issue of infantry using road movement rate, finishing on the road and yet ending up in a building. I don't see any easy workaround for this one. Push it onto the road, it appears in the building. Not great :-(

>Where is LOS traced from for SW/Gun/vehicle fire emanating from the road portion of the hex? Is the vehicle considered to be at the centre dot, or at one of the vertices crossed by the road, and so on?

Centre dot.

I hope this doesn't detract too much from the product. It's been a phenomenal amount of work to get this far, and I'm disappointed that there's even this slight shadow over it. If we can tighten up these rules then I hope we can move on and even push the "innovation" that is a building and a road out to the rest of the world!

 

[dlazov]

It seems to be you play test it with the red text rules above and to me that seems good enough. I agree that these "new" building/roads are or could be used with B31 Village Terrain and see no issue at all with that.

Produce it, we may all be dead in 6 months anyway, or for some like me and Glennbo hiding out and giving the zombies the beat down...

 

[BattleSchool]

In terms of the Building-Road hex; I hadn't spotted it was an issue, presumably Steve hadn't when he first designed the boards, none of the playtesting groups raised the hex as an issue and neither did Tom when he "VASLized" them (and he caught plenty of things). Of course, it's down to me, not the playtesters, Steve, Tom or even Xavier, so I need to apologise for that, and try to make it better.

I appreciate that this has been pretty last minute, but the PB rules for the combination of building/narrow street hexes appear to catch most of the craziness. I'm sure there are outliers, and our choice now is to send all the scenarios back out to playtest (a process that will take about 6 months) or we release now with the rules that we have in place for them.

Here's the text, as I have it right now:

Building-Road hexes are those in which both a building and a road/path is depicted. For all purposes, the building is treated as per the standard depiction (Wooden building/Huts as per terrain modifications) and the road is treated as a Narrow Street (4.1). For the purposes of Street Fighting, vehicles are only subject to Street Fighting attacks originating from buildings within the same hex.

A moving unit in a combination building-road hex is not eligible for the building TEM during Defensive First Fire (and is subject to FFMO/Interdiction) if the LOS does not cross a building depiction and the moving unit entered the hex at the road movement rate regardless of the relative elevations of the firer/target. (See A4.132.) Otherwise, the normal building TEM is in effect.

LOS to a unit moving along the building-road hex using the road movement rate is always traced to its center dot as per A4.132, not to its vertex, although the building depiction can block such LOS. In all other instances LOS is traced to and from the center dot and building depictions do not block LOS.



Let me know if anything obviously jumps out as being wrong/unworkable.

In terms of rules discussion:

> For instance, how do roadblocks work in such terrain?

I don't see why there'd be any change to roadblock placement on the hexside where the road crosses.

>Given that units ON a building-road are not in Bypass, may a mortar fire while ON the road portion of the hex (EX: from a halftrack)?

Yes, assuming LOS. (Ruletext has been added to supplement the pack)

>May an AA weapon (vehicle-mounted or otherwise) engage Aerial targets while ON a building-road?

Yes, assuming LOS.

>May a Gun be Manhandled onto the road portion of such a hex, or must it be Pushed into the building?

This is similar to the issue of infantry using road movement rate, finishing on the road and yet ending up in a building. I don't see any easy workaround for this one. Push it onto the road, it appears in the building. Not great :-(

>Where is LOS traced from for SW/Gun/vehicle fire emanating from the road portion of the hex? Is the vehicle considered to be at the centre dot, or at one of the vertices crossed by the road, and so on?

Centre dot.

I hope this doesn't detract too much from the product. It's been a phenomenal amount of work to get this far, and I'm disappointed that there's even this slight shadow over it. If we can tighten up these rules then I hope we can move on and even push the "innovation" that is a building and a road out to the rest of the world!

Dave,

The questions posed were not intended to derail the DASL Pack. I applaud innovation. I am, however, concerned that while this proposed terrain type is fairly intuitive, there is always the possiblity that one or more current ASL rules will lead to unintended consequences. (By "PB rules" do you mean Pegasus Bridge?)

For example, I do not believe that the rules for a Narrow Street (B31.) cover a roadblock placed across all building-roads. This is not an issue with the hex on the board below. However, if the road entered and exited the hex as indicated by the orange arrow, I am not sure how such a roadblock would be played. The example from the ASLRB, while similar, is not the same. Nor does the text of B31.141 address this hypothetical variant of a building-road hex. But once you open Pandora's box...

View attachment 46788 View attachment 46789

Another issue in the notion of being ON the road. If a vehicle begins play in such a hex, does it need to be placed on an ON counter (EX: similar to be placed on a bridge counter), if it is set up on the road portion of the hex?

Or how about Road Bonus? May an Infantry unit that begins the MPh in a building-road hex potentially qualify for road bonus (B3.43)? I think it would.

Presumably a Gun that was Pushed from such a hex, and across a road hexside, would qualify for a -2 DRM for crossing a road hexside even though the Gun began the MPh inside the building, not ON the road. In some respects a building-road hex works like a vehicular-sized entrance (B23.742). In many cases it does not.

I imagine that there are many other interactions with the body of rules. I have only touched on a few.

Wrt to part of your proposed rule:

LOS to a unit moving along the building-road hex using the road movement rate is always traced to its center dot as per A4.132, not to its vertex, although the building depiction can block such LOS. In all other instances LOS is traced to and from the center dot and building depictions do not block LOS.

I think this overlooks the special provisions of A4.132 regarding LOS traced to:

...any point on the road depiction of the xn-yn hexside.

Or was this intentional?

Edit: Forgot to add that these things happen whenever "new" terrain is introduced. I was reviewing a "new" terrain type for a forthcoming HASL map that has been in development for maybe a decade. To my knowledge no one had noticed a discrepancy between the terrain, as depicted on the map, and the rules, as written in previous AH/MMP HASL modules. These discrepancies are not show stoppers, but they do require some additional text to clarify how this modified terrain works, all without reinventing the wheel (or in your case, the road).

 

[Ryan]

Unfortuantely the last few thread posts echos the unsuccessful building - road terrain experimentation that Critical Hit did in thier Berlin modules. The CH rules were, and still are, a mess in that game due to unforseen game situations not spelled out in a few lines of well intentioned rules for a new terrain type. Players are pretty much left to come up with thier own interpretations.

LFT is top quality so I am hopful this does not happen here.

 

[Xavier 658]

Hi Ryan,

LFT is top quality so I am hopful this does not happen here.

Thanks for your kind words.

Actually, there is only 1 such hex in the Deluxe pack and the small paragraph explaining how to play it will be included.

Thanks again,

X

 

[bprobst]

If you are referring to brush-road hexes, I would be surprised if this terrain type presented any difficulties during play test (for AP9, the pack in which this terrain type debuted).

Er, no, the terrain debuted when board 51 was first released for purchase ... 1998? Somewhere around then. It then appeared (again, without rules) in PBr.

I do not think that the addition of grain-roads constitutes a significant departure from the rules.

I have never suggested otherwise. The complexity is not the point. Consistency of approach is the goal, and for that you need a rule.