KILL TEAM LINE OF SIGHT - DEEP DIVE - Rules, Examples, Re-Write, Thoughts & Mods - Kill Team 2021
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 07. 2024
- KILL TEAM LINE OF SIGHT - DEEP DIVE - Rules, Examples, Re-Write, Thoughts & Mods - Kill Team 2021
#killteam #howtoplay #warhammer40k
If you’d like to support the channel and receive some awesome benefits, please take a look at my Patreon Community page. Link to Patreon: / tabletopskirmishgames
Get your Kill Team books, sets, models and game products with up to 20% discount here:
elementgames.co.uk/wargames-a...
affiliates.waylandgames.co.uk...
Also on Amazon here: amzn.to/2WsNsZ3
If you’d like to support the channel and receive some awesome benefits, please take a look at my Patreon Community page. Link to Patreon: / tabletopskirmishgames
In this KILL TEAM LINE OF SIGHT - DEEP DIVE video, you’ll see the rules and examples of line of sight for the new Kill Team game. Hopefully this will help you get playing and if you have any questions please add them in the comment section below. Let me know what you think about the KILL TEAM LINE OF SIGHT - DEEP DIVE in the comments below.
Connect:
Website: www.tabletopskirmishgames.com
Facebook: / skirmishgames
Instagram: / skirmishgames
Discounted Games and Miniatures:
elementgames.co.uk/warhammer?d...
HTTPS://www.firestormgames.co.uk
Paints & Sprays:
All Paints - elementgames.co.uk/wargames-a...
Contrast Paints - elementgames.co.uk/wargames-a...
Find them all on Amazon too: amzn.to/3q8E1Z6
Brushes:
Army Painter Character - elementgames.co.uk/paints-hob...
Rosemary & Co Kolinsky Pointed Synthetic Brushes (Link to lots of sizes, but I use the size 2) - amzn.to/32nOPbD
Basing & Accessories:
elementgames.co.uk/paints-hob...
Drawing:
iPad Mini 5 - amzn.to/2JyA8vx
iPad Pro 12.9 inch - amzn.to/2PtXIZv
Apple Pencil - amzn.to/3n2zC7t
Micron Artist Pens - amzn.to/356g7Vu
Video Equipment used:
iPhone - amzn.to/32fVODl
iPad Mini 5 - amzn.to/2JyA8vx
iPad Pro 12.9 inch - amzn.to/2PtXIZv
Macbook Pro 15 inch - amzn.to/2GyZ1SO
Canon 750d kit - amzn.to/2J3ztQm
Canon 750d mains battery - amzn.to/2GCqVBh
Rode Camera Microphone - amzn.to/3l4P02R
Clip On Microphone - amzn.to/3p7Mv2e
Phone Camera Holder - amzn.to/38kbmJR
Apple Lightning to USB 3 - amzn.to/38lWbA3
Apple Keyboard - amzn.to/2U6p76U
(These links are affiliate links that earn us a commission but cost you nothing. Using these links not only saves you money, but also helps support the channel. Thank you so much for your support!) - Zábava
Here in 2024. used all of the examples and put them together in one PDF so there are no confusions at the table, and easy to look up. This whole series made the long thig a lot easier.
Glad it was helpful!
@tabletopskirmishgames
If you've kept playing this and Warcry, I'd love to hear your updated thoughts!
this is by far the best video I have seen about line of sight and cover! 9 months old and I`ve still not seen anything that comes close to explaining this as well as you have and I reference your examples in games I play just to make sure we are playing by the rules, thank you so much for making this :)
Thanks, Lee, that's great to hear! Thank you for watching.
Search glass half dead. Same but different😊
"Games Wordyshop" got that right
🤣
Those LoS rules are written way to complex for a quick game (ex. lunch break) or narrative game. I really like your suggestion to house rule it for ease of play.
The more I play the more I think this is aimed at competitive players who like to focus on one team faction and know everything they can do inside and out. As far as collecting and trying out different factions goes, it looks this isn't going to be that kind of game. That was a big plus for me with Warcry. You can grab a new warband and almost immediately have a good idea of how to play them. I'm thinking I'll continue with the narrative and lore of KT (which I really like) and most of the rules, but just tweak the bits I don't like, and then it'll be more fun with less book checking ... I Hope! 🤣
You said it man.
House ruling things with regards to heavy terrain - obscured multiplied by pathfinder team was/is too OP. GW has to make the rules clearer.
I wish line of sight was called eligible targets or something like that. Using the word visibility with a separate meaning than line of sight is not the best choice imo. With that said, great job shedding some light on the topic!!
Thanks! I agree, visibility isn't a great choice.
@@tabletopskirmishgames On a similar note, the cover and obscured words do not totally define the scenario, which bugs me. Obscured can mean totally hidden but it can also mean partially hidden/visible. To take cover would mean to remain out of sight.
@@neilrock7386 agreed, hidden would probably be a better word than obscured in this context
@@tabletopskirmishgames there were A LOT of not-great choices made by designers regarding cover rules in KT21. At some point it seems like a joke to all of us...
Good video, however there were a number of times where you only drew cover lines from the centre of the attacker's base to find the target. Yet if you drew them from the edge the target would be valid.
Yeah, it was difficult to come up with solid examples and the cone lines have a huge impact. I think almost all the examples could be changed. Someone even pointed out that technically the diagonal lines going over a thin piece of terrain could become thick enough to change the rules too. I'd love to see a video or images from GW using actual terrain they had in mind for these rules, that would be helpful.
Thanks so much for working so hard on these videos! I find them very helpful and I really appreciate it.
Thanks for watching, really happy they are helpful 👊
Late to the Kill Team party. Been wargaming for over 40 years and the LoS, cover and obscuring rules are the most unintuitive I’ve ever come across! Your explanation was the clearest I’ve found. The single graphic sheet was genius too, many thanks Lee.
Glad it was helpful, thanks, Richard
Hi Lee and I make you 100% right and totally agree that your thoughts are exactly how I'm going to play Kill Team from now on. I play solo and just want to play a game for enjoyment. I never got into 40K because it was to much of all these complications, but listening to your thoughts on how to make this sooooo much easier to play, you've really got me excited again at realising how much fun and enjoyable this game really can be.
BUT I have to say that I am absolutely gobsmacked at how much time and effort you have seriously put into this video with so many more examples, changing words and also the way that you've verbally expressed the examples that you're giving us, you really have done an incredible and amazing job, which makes it so much easier to understand.
So mega thanks for all the hard work that you've done here and I'm sure that even your son is really proud of you. Lee many thanks mate, it really is seriously appreciated.
Thanks so much Terry, happy it was helpful! 👊
I acctualy like these rules a lot. They made a good job with it. It's logical. It's really important what type of terrain everything on the zone is and making it clear before the game.
Be good to see the different types of terrain that comes out over the next year.
Best LOS video thanks Lee!
Thank you!
Great video on this subject. Helped a lot! I’m like you, I did some minor house rule adjustments to bring down all the unnecessary technical nonsense, which takes away from just trying to have a fun game to play. Thanks again for all the time and effort you put into Kill Team and Warcry content, really appreciate it sir!
That's awesome to hear, thanks so much for watching!
The way I think about this is that it’s the defender’s job to claim cover/obscuring and the attacker’s job to verify it. That way, if you both don’t remember it, no stress, the defender just missed an opportunity. As they play more, they’ll spot it more and become a better player.
This said, if the defender misses it and the attacker spots it, I’d say it’s the attackers responsibility in the name of good sportsmanship to point it out! Who wants to win like that?
Either way, don’t stress and more reps = more fun and less mistakes.
Great advice!
This video and examples make so much more sense than the book, thanks for all the hard work!
Thanks for watching!
Friends of mine and I have been slowly getting into kill team and LoS rules have been the biggest headache. Thank you for this video and your other how to plays. In the end, we just made up our own rules to keep the game moving.
That's great to hear, thanks for watching! Same here, makes the game much smoother.
Amazing clarifications thanks a ton 🙏
Glad it was helpful, thanks for watching!
Great video. Determine los was the most confusing part for me when I started. Your videos and other really help, keep up the great work.
Also on the los example you asked for feedback on I would say the attacker could shoot the target. The reason why is because the attacker can start the cone from any part of his base and I believe if he starts the cone from the side that’s closest to the camera the terrain will not be an issue.
Keep up the great work!
Nice one thanks Patrick! 👊
Appreciate your work in clarifying these absolutely bonkers LoS mechanics and I also really also like your proposed house rules. I think we'll adopt your Visible/Cover rework, but leave Engage/Conceal untouched, mostly because I know there are some sniper-type units who have either weapons or abilities that let them shoot from in Conceal, and changing Conceal would mess with that a little. But in general, I like your dynamic of having everyone start in Engage and make Conceal cost 1AP. It opens up opportunities. It adds some more weight to Initiative, so you can make sure your unit in a good position can shoot and hide before someone else starts taking shots at it.
Like you mentioned, these rules are clearly designed for competitive play, and I think that's an absolute shame. Honestly, I think if you're designing your game with that in mind, you should make a streamlined "fun version" for the rest of us who just want to hang out with our friends and play with toys. I don't have any data to back this up, but I just have a hunch that the majority of players have no interest in playing competitively.
I've really gone off competitive play and am focused on fun games now, just like Population Z that we launched earlier in the month. We've got our own Sci-fi skirmish game coming out later this year (November/December) which will appeal to Kill Team fans who want to play for fun. I'll be posting more about that as the year develops. Glad this video helped with the rules, and thanks for watching!
Really good explanation. Thanks
Happy it was helpful! Thanks for watching 👊
I’m still not 100% on everything, but this has helped; I hadn’t realized the difference in light terrain and heavy terrain in regards to that “attacker within 1”/target beyond 2” ” stuff; I though ALL terrain had to follow those line of sight rules, but it sounds like it’s just heavy terrain, so thank you for that! Also, I think you hit the nail on the head, a lot of this detail seems geared toward tournament-play. I’m just going to be playing casually (probably), so I think the players can just decide on simple terrain traits and save themselves trouble.
I'm not 100% either 🤣 Simplifying it is the way to go I think too 👊
First note is that the choice of what point to pick to start the cover lines from is very important. In some of your heavy examples the shooter could pick the start of his cone toward the edge of his base away from the terrain and not have them touch the close terrain at all.
Yeah that's really important for sure. It was tricky coming up with examples of this and keeping it to a manageable length. I think a lot more could be added and discussed for line of sight.
Yes, this is the most confusing thing to me. If point A from attacker’s base is blocked, but point B is not blocked, can attacker shoot or not? Read rule book many times it doesn’t say any for this, only says “a point from any part of base…”
@@liefzhu4794 the attacker gets to choose which point inside their base to start the cover line cone fron.
Appreciated the breakdown, was a good video. I think the one I keep struggling to figure out is the final terrain piece if it’s the usual light cover.
Say you have attacked and target within 1 inch either side of the junk pile. The target has the conceal order. Does that mean you can’t target them?
I agree with your interpretation of all the examples with 2 heavy terrains.
That's great, I've spent way too long going over these rules in my head 🤣
Excellent description of these overly complicated rules
Love your house rules workaround
Thanks, David!
Thanks for very helpful video for kill team newbie
Glad it was helpful, thanks for watching!
Amazing video!
Thank you!
As an easy judgement do it in steps,
Heavy cover/ obscuring.
is the attacker in 1" of cover?
Yes.
Is target within 2 " of cover?
Yes.
Legal shot.
Is attacker In 1" of cover?
No.
No legal shot.
Is attacker in 1" of cover?
Yes.
Is target within 2" of cover?
No.
No legal shot
The big light cover I'd say is from base of operatives respectively
I'd argue as written above.
Is attacker in 1" of cover from his side?
Yes.
Is target within 2" of cover from their side?
Yes.
Legal shot.
Eg, for other examples refer to top
Simplify cover, if you run to light big cover do you go from player base to first contact of object or from middle of object? If from first contact the 1" exists, if you go middle of cover then legally you'll only achieve 'in cover' if your base is touching
Unless another update has happened recently I'm not sure, I've only just started myself and trying to understand the rules. That's as basic a judgement I can make from following you and hearing others on the subject. Love your break downs though, so easy to understand. Look forward to more of your vids as I continue on my route to learning the game. I came from standard 40k wargamming so the kill team rules are new to me
The thing about taking cover from the bases of operatives who weren't in the Attacker's LoS... There was a whole thing with "daisy-chaining" cover from a concealed model. The erratum blocks a beardy and exhausting tactic.
Nice one, that makes a lot of sense now. Competitive gaming is not something I've got into yet.
I think the osbcurement check is best done as such. The attacker picks his cover lines start point. Then the cone is mapped out and all the places it crosses obscuring terrain are noted. From the above view these make like 2d areas which are collections of crossing points. Next you remove all area and the associated points within 1 inch of attacker or two inches of target. These excluded regions are marked out by circles around the model center with radius 1 inch or 2 inch more than the base radius for attacker and target respectively. If even a single point is left after this the model is obscured. For the octarius terrain the most interesting example is to align the target model on the long axis of one of the walls where is base touches the end of the wall. So if you were looking down the wall it cuts the view of the model in half. Then you put the shooter like 12 inches away from the target along the wall long axis and then see how far he has to get out from the wall to have to get past the obscuring. Turns out your cover lines have to start about 3 inches shifted from the wall such when the cross the wall to get to the other side of the targets base they do so at a point within 2 inches of the target. This makes a nice visibility zone where that model can shoot but not be targeted.
Be cool to see that drawn up.
THANK YOU!
Thanks for watching!
Hello! Thanks for your videos as always.
I have a question: When determining obscuring, is it enough if even one of the cover lines is obscured? More specifically, if there is Heavy ruins with windows, and the closes point of the model would-be-getting shot is within 2" of the ruins, but the left-and-right points of the base are more than 2" from the ruins via fire lines?
You do measure the atacker and target distance from the midle of heavy terrsin but ftom the nearest poiny of heavy terrain
To the first part, the discription of the rules, I just can say that you did a ood job and I like to show it to my friends if they have questions about the rules. But the second part, your rules suggestion, I think that method of ruling would take the best part out of the game: the tactics. Even as a narative player with now 20 games into the game and a fan of "story over rules" I realy felt in love with the cover rules and the possibility to sneak arround the battlefield. Without the 2 tokens and the 1st round special rule of not being able to change them the game would feel wrong, no matter if playing SM, sneaky orks or a Dark Eldar hunting party, because it reflects the more spec-ops and realistic game elements. The only thing I would change for quicker play is that heavy terrain only conceals you if all of the "cone" goes through it. On this way it would feel not so strange in some game moments.
Thanks, Birne! Some great points. I really like that idea for the heavy terrain rule.
Good video. I realize this vid is older but I just got into KT and as a new KT player, I find the LOS/Targeting rules are the most wordy, convoluted section of the rules. If you doubt that, just check out all of the videos on YT trying to explain it. :)
I think your homebrew rule for it is interesting. I like everything except the 1AP to "Duck". Maybe the RAW Conceal rules could be tweaked to be only within 1" of a piece of terrain that can provide Cover.
Yeah, I found the more we played it the more we didn't like those wordy rules. My boy and I have started to use the lore and kill teams and play them with our own Weekend Warriors ruleset.
In other example since the atacker is less than one inch from heavy terrain you draw line of sight from the heavy tereain corner instead from the attacker base!
I think I found a use for my old flamer templates. I will help with that cone
Nice idea!
Re 17:00 doesn't the rules day the attacker gets to pick where they are drawing their cover lines from? So they could pick the outermost edge of their base which looks like all lines would then avoid the first piece of obstructing terrain? I'm learning but that's what my impression was...
The cover line placement is a big part of this and I agree with you that the attacker can choose which would allow them to avoid the first piece of terrain. I used these angles as examples to explain the rules but I could definitely have expanded and moved those cones around.
This video is a great help but leaves me with a question: In the first three examples, isn't it possible to draw cover lines that do not cross the terrain feature at all using the guardsman's "3 o'clock point" instead of the "12 o'clock" point as the tip of the cone?
Hi a great explanation.
Glad it was helpful, thanks!
These rewritten rules are SO helpful. Can you share them as a pdf or image somewhere?
There's a weird case that I'd like to have your thoughts on: models on vantage points.
If you draw any cover line from a model on the ground to a model on a vantage point, the cover line will always pass through the floor of the vantage point on its way to make contact with the target's base.
Given that a model on vantage point can never receive cover or be obscured by terrain features that are lower than them, can a model on a vantage point ever be in cover vs models on the ground?
They can get cover from terrain features that are on the same level as the model. Such as the half walls on top of the Octarius Heavy Wall terrain.
Isn‘t 13:27 a bad example because if you had drawn the cone from the very bottom of the veteran‘s base it might not have touched the heavy terrain?
I think most of the examples can be changed by moving the cone. Someone commented about how the cover lines can go over thin terrain diagonally and then make that cover line 1" too. It would be great to see some more examples from GW with models and actual terrain.
You know... I think it's the 4th video I watch to try to understand LoS and I decided that I'll use your rules. I just want to make a match with a friend, I can't image me in years talking for 30 minutes of this stuff. Nobody would come to my house to play EVER.
GW is crazy... at least they should have put rules like yours as newbie rules.
This is definitely not a quick game to introduce others to like Warcry. I think simplifying and leaving out a few rules makes it much easier and just as fun.
I'm guessing the designer commentary on line of sight for wider Heavy terrain is aimed at users of the bunker from Sector Fronteris, who could be stood at either end with the attacker claiming cover doesn't count and the defender claiming it does!! It would help more if they used actual terrain and multiple views in their examples to show what they actually mean!!
Just starting to learn but this is the way i am thinking of it.
If you can see them you have LOS.
if there is something in the way that only partially obscures your target you then the impact is affected by how close you/the target are to it.
If the target has the attack order:
1) If the attacker is really close they are using it steady their weapon. It doesn't block LOS and you get a bonus to your attack.
2) If the target is really close to it then you can still basically hit the target by aiming for the obstacle. (I imagine the target is using the obstacle as a prop, waiting for their chance to fire. Still visible but not as much.) It doesn't block LOS but the target gets a bonus to defense.
3) If the the obstacle is just inbetween attacker and target then it just makes the shot too difficult and basically blocks LOS.
If the target has the conceal order:
Same as above, but for 2)the target is actively and deliberately using the obstacle to stay out of sight so you don't have LOS and can't target them.
That's a great way to think of it. I found at first the way it was all written it got quite confusing, but since I've been playing many times per week, it flows a lot better. The way you've written it definitely makes it feel logical.
@@tabletopskirmishgames Thanks. I agree that the way the rule book is written is way too confusing. I literally spent 20 minutes one day just looking at the one page and it still didn't really make sense to me.
I think i am going to use the rules i wrote as the house rules. Its great to get confirmation from an experienced player that they don't violate the intent of the game.
I think you got it wrong. In my opinion the line can be from any part of the atacker base to the whole defender base.
So in your first example if the line was traced from the left part of the attacker base the atacker would have Los
The examples at 17:15 are spot on, correct. Still curious about windows though. Can you charge someone and fight through to someone on the other side of the window, of heavy terrain?
Thats great to hear! I'm not sure about that, hopefully someone here has the answer.
I'm pretty sure that you can always fight as long as you are in engagement range and the enemy operative is visible to you.
Fight rules state that you have to be within Engagement range (triangle) and target has to visible (same as shooting). So, as long as both models are up against the window and you can see part of the model, you can take a swing at them!!
This is my simplest way to describe obscurity. Image a 1" bubble from the shooter's base. Imagine a 2" bubble from the target's base. If there are heavy terrain intersecting the coverlines OUTSIDE these bubbles -> the target is obscured.
I agree on a simpler version for friendly matches, however do no like conceal is an AP and you lose it at the start of the round. It dramatically changes the game.
If I activate a model last and want to keep it hidden I can no longer do that, if I lose priority the model can be taken out before I activate.
IMHO the rules are fine even for a friendly game, you just need to simplify the "can I see them or not" rule. There isn't many cases I've found that doesn't simply fall under the normal rules.... And if a friendly narrative game just D6 for it.
Yeah it would definitely change the game a lot and add limitations.
Wordy is The Word Of The Week
This has really helped me. Got back into it after leaving at 2/3 rd ed wh40k. My 9 yr old is loving the lore but I forgot how damn wordy the rules are. I'm a kinesthetic learner and learn by doing so wordy rules don't help.
That's great to hear, thanks John. Same here, my boy is 10 and loves the lore and models but the rules were too much. We play our Weekend Warriors rules with it together now, and then I'm playing the proper KT rules on my own solo.
I believe your examples at 6:55 and onwards are incorrect.
in order to be able to shoot through obscuring terrain, the attacker has to be close enough that the 1" circle goes *through* the entire obscuring terrain for every cover line. In other words, if an operative is physically touching an exactly 1" wall, they can never fire at an operative obscured by it because the the cover lines on the sides of the cone are angled and thus the line is over 1" thick. The same thing applies to the 2" for obscured.
So if we looked at the example at 13:55, the right gauge should be moved to the left until it touches the other one (and thus the ork would be obscured) and then the left gauge should be moved to overlap the right gauge until it's lined up with the other side of the wall. (they should also be slightly angled to be paraallel with the "top" cover line)
The part about other operatives exists to prevent using operatives to extend terrain pieces for other operatives (reminds me of the checkerboard formation in good ol' days in 40k)
And yes, all of this makes precise measurements an absolute nightmare and often impossible, but that's what the rules say. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That's a good point about the lines being angled and then going over the 1"! Oh no, I'm definitely never going to play this in any type of competitive play 🤣
GJ
Thanks!
At the 8min mark you comment that you can choose “any point” to measure from but say that the attacker cannot attack because the central line is more than 1” away. I ask: why then not just choose the “any point” to be the close side of the terrain piece?
A bit off topic .. what's your orkskin recipe?
I got a great recipe from watching The Painting Coach channel. It's a thin coat of Plague Bearer Flesh Contrast then a coat of Biel Tan Green Shade. Super simple but a nice effect. I tried a load of combos but liked that the most.
yeah I'm not using these trash rules. Your house rules are now my official rules. Great content!
Be great to hear how it goes!
It doesn't make sense to me that being closer to a Heavy terrain ignores the broken cover line.
Ty. It's something I've been trying to figure out for awhile now. Been sitting on these box sets since they came out. Have a young special needs child. Just now getting to the point where I can play again. I thought maybe I was having trouble because I've been away from the sport for awhile
They are poorly done all around in my opinion. Did they edit this book at all. I'm hoping the arena type format of thr later stuff kinda negates some of these rules.
I barely made it through high-school. Lol I can't math hard enough to play a table top game. Who are they making this for?
Love thr models and thr terrain. BEen waiting for orky stuff for along time now.
Ty for wrapping your head around this. You do a great job visualizing it for thr audience.
do you have a PDF of this somewhere?
No I don't sorry.
Thx for the reply…
This is the part of the rules that causes a lot of arguing when me and my friends are playing KillTeam. Lol GW
The relationship between Vantage Points, Cover and Concealed Order are very contradictory and confusing. The Concealed Order states explicitly that "an operative with the Conceal order is not a valid target for an enemy operative's shooting attacks". But, the terrain rules say that an operative with Conceal order CAN be targeted with a shooting attack, unless they are one inch away from a piece of Cover Terrain and they can also be targeted by shooting attacks by attackers in a Vantage point. Quite misleading.
I soon stopped using the rules and now use my Weekend Warriors ruleset to play it.
You really should be drawing the most advantageous possible cover lines for the attacker every time as that's how anyone would play it. Otherwise all these examples are really confusing. You can just position the models in a way that even with that most advantageous cone the examples are still valid.
I think I just brained my damage.
🤣
It's like the GW lawyers that are typically busy sending out "Cease and Desist" orders to people finished sending one to everyone on the internet, and decided they should go rewrite some rules books.
I mean really, I've watched 3 videos on this topic... I'm a long time professional game designer (Hell, including Gears of War dealing with cover!), and this is lunacy. House rules, incoming!
House rules are the way to go for sure. I watched the recent GW Blood Angels battle report and it looked simple, but reading and interpreting these rules has not been simple at all.
We are after the first games and these new rules are a failure. In the end, we played like you did, but without that cover idea. I think we will try the next game with your idea because it is interesting. I don't know why GW made it so complicated, something that worked. We have experienced players from WH40K, and everyone has to wonder and measure whether they have LoS or not.
It's a real shame this isn't as good as it could have been. The game itself has so much going for it and it looks like there is a lot of ongoing support for it from GW with all the new products in the pipeline. Would love to hear how you get on with the idea!
Thanks, this is helpfull. But in some of your examples the outcome would be different if the cones were drawn from the outer edge of the attackers base instead of the centre. Like in 16:48, when playing this would not be obscured. Because if you draw the cone of the attacker from the outer edge of its base it would not cross the terrain piece closest to him.
I used these angles as examples to explain the rules but I could definitely have expanded and moved those cones around and done a few more. Happy it was helpful, thanks for watching! 👊
GW Does It Again......
I'm pretty sure you're correct, although as others have mentioned in a lot of your examples you could draw different cover lines and have a different result.
FWIW, I don't agree that this is *all* that complex once you understand where the rules are coming from, and I suspect your house rules are going to produce a radically different game which hugely disadvantages 2AP teams with weaker shooting. Attaching an AP cost to concealment means 2AP teams can't do it and maintain mobility, but 3AP teams can. That's going to have a huge impact.
Yeah if the lines moved it would change the examples completely. I found it difficult to show solid examples that I could explain on camera.
Thats a good point!
so hang on, the line of sight isn't actually the line you draw from the head of the model, emulating it's sight... and visibility isn't actually how visible the enemy in from the attacker's position... it's the opposite.
Yep, the way they worded the rules has made it pretty confusing when you first play. After a few games it all makes sense, though
Thanks for your honest analysis.
It is quite fidly and not intuitive.
I think I’ve finally got the hang of the rules now but I’m sure they’ll change soon haha
Honestly this is the only part of the game that I do not like so far mechanically. I feel The game should just come a laser pen.
The laser pen is a game changer. It makes the wordy rules playable for sure. I found after a bunch of games you do get used to the rules but they are so badly written and the examples only help to confuse them I feel.
It's just so unnecessarily complex and for no reason. GW should have just been logical about it. Is the attacker within one inch of heavy terrain from front of base? Is the defender within two inches of it? If yes to both of these, it can attack. If no, it cannot attack. And it can only attack if there is a visible feature like a window it can shoot through or if it's shooting around a corner.
The more I played it, the worse it seemed to get. In the end, we changed to house rules and now much better.
I loved the explanations but I hope you don’t use house rules if filming batreps, which I enjoy. It might just be me but I want to watch the game played in accordance with the rules (however wordy or complicated those rules might be) and not doing so in a batrep would kill it for me. I watch to learn and to reinforce my understanding of the game and it’s mechanics as that will help me when I play other people. House rules which affect everything from where you place your models to whether or not you get to shoot would mean that what I am seeing is potentially “wrong” if I reproduce it in a pick up game or at a tournament and I really wouldn’t want that. I love the channel and the content so please take that feedback in the spirit it is intended. Assuming you intend to film batreps. 🤨
Thats a great point and I really appreciate the feedback. If I do a bat rep then I'll definitely follow the official KT rules. I need to play a lot more before I'd feel confident making a bat rep. The rules are so precise and so many that I need some practice. As I play solo or with my young son, I'd be thinking about both sides too. Thanks again! 👊
I wonder how these mess of rules even saw the light to the official rules. It's clunky, unnecessary complicated and they bog down the game in a tarpit of LoS rules checking.
For what is worth I agree with your example interpretations.
I'm left with a doubt though: in the phase of drawing "cone" lines, should I choose the best starting point or the worst? I can't interpret that ANY point of the base...
My boy and I use our own Weekend Warriors rules set now.
Holy shit this was hard to understand… the rules that is. Your guide is super helpful. I need to practice with this. This whole thing needs a redo I worry. Line of sight is so damn confusing.
It was hard to make too 🤣 I'm going to stick to home brewed rules after this.
These rules are confusing because:
A. GW doesn't have an information/UX designer
B. GW are intentionally obfuscating their rules to hide that they are really just 1 page long
C. GW needs to hit a certain word/page count to be able to charge £25 for each book
D. All of the above
So you made 3 big mistakes
1 you trace the line from the part of the atacker base that is more favorable to the attacker
2 you measure distances : the attacker to the closest point of heavy terrain and not France m the midfle of heavy terrain and the same for the defender
3of the attacker os less of pne inch from heavy terrain you do not draw the line fromthe heavy terrain corner but always from the base
Thanks for pointing those mistakes out.
This "Point of line crossing" has no sense at all.
If a scrap pile (with light cover) is more than 2" wide it will never provide cover, even while rules try to imply it is light cover..
Because even if operator is base-2-base with terrain, there is 'point' at this terrain feature between him and shooter that's further than 2" from him.
It's not cool at all. Someone commented about diagonal lines taking up over an inch too. I'm going to use house rules from now on.
These rules are cray. My god. Just use true line of sight and say you’re in cover if you’re within an inch of the terrain. If you have a conceal order and in cover, can’t shoot you. Classic GW over complicating things.
After actually playing a few games with different people, you'd only be confused with LOS and cover is if you're playing against someone who isn't worth even playing with.
I agree. I've only played against one person but it's been fine with the rules as they stand. As long as you're not cover line wrangling to try and escape every attack, and both players position their models fairly for flanking moves etc. then I think they work ok. If someone I was playing was being a pedant then I'd probably just pack up my minis and leave.
The original rules for cover/LOS are garbage. Your house rules are much getter. Cheers!
People are making this way more complicated than it is. It's all really obvious when you're playing.
I agree that most of the time you are correct but the issue is there's individuals out there who will abuse the rules to their advantage so it's a benefit to understand this stuff in and out because sometimes it could mean the difference between a win and a loss
Cant we just play it like Necromunda? If you can see half you can shoot etc but they are in cover blah blah. Why is 40k always so f'd up.... its not hard people to write a decent rules set. These rules seem like they are for Adepticon Neckbeards
My boy and I use our Weekend Warrior rules now so I don't see why you couldn't use Necromunda.