Jump to content



Photo

Question about cover and defense bonus


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 AceMilo

AceMilo

    Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 04:28 AM

I understand the rules about LOS and cover and the bonuses you receive for full and partial cover, and that when in the same area cover does not apply.  However, what happens when you are not in the same area, but DIRECTLY behind someone in cover?  I ran into several circumstances where I was directly behind a locust in cover but his back was facing me and I was directly behind him.  Does the locust still get a partial cover boost for being in cover, even tho I'm directly behind him and no part of the cover is near me?

Thanks!



#2 Dam

Dam

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,292 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 07:17 AM

You mean like?

 

Cover - COG | (area separation) Locust - Cover

If so, then both would get partial cover against attacks from one another.


"A dirty mind is its own reward."


#3 samruiz123

samruiz123

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 08:24 AM

I agree too with Dam



#4 AceMilo

AceMilo

    Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 04:04 PM

|<locust> <-----area----> cog

 

Something like that ^^.  If you are directly behind them, it doesn't make sense that they'd have a cover bonus.  If you need it to be clearer I could set up a board and take a picture if it helps.



#5 Dam

Dam

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,292 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 07:31 PM

If a figure is in a cover space and the attack doesn't come from the same area, it gets cover bonus, even if the attack seems to come from a direction where no cover would seem likely. Don't think of cover as fixed blocks (although they are such in the video games), they provide a abstract picture of cover, all that matters are is the figure in cover and is the attacker in the same area (unless using area attacks that ignore cover).


"A dirty mind is its own reward."


#6 samruiz123

samruiz123

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 03:18 AM

I agree with Dam....again.



#7 AceMilo

AceMilo

    Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 05:17 AM

Ok.  I've only played a couple games so I'm still getting used to it.  It seems kind of silly if the cover is facing the opposite direction and he's completely exposed, but if that's the rules, I'll stick to them.  Thanks for the help guys!



#8 Graf

Graf

    Member

  • Members
  • 304 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 12:05 PM

AceMilo said:

It seems kind of silly if the cover is facing the opposite direction and he's completely exposed, but if that's the rules, I'll stick to them. 

 

Imagine that he is crouching behind his cover, so he is a smaller target (and thus harder to hit) even for enemies who are shooting at him from behind. 



#9 madprof666

madprof666

    Member

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 09:36 PM

 plus i think the idea is that the characters arent static. theres a chance they could jump over the cover. or that the cover is more than just a block. its like when your in the open and you draw line of sight from the area, its because you are moving around and you could be occupying any part of the area at any given time. 



#10 AceMilo

AceMilo

    Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 04 November 2011 - 03:10 PM

Graf said:

AceMilo said:

 

It seems kind of silly if the cover is facing the opposite direction and he's completely exposed, but if that's the rules, I'll stick to them. 

 

 

 

Imagine that he is crouching behind his cover, so he is a smaller target (and thus harder to hit) even for enemies who are shooting at him from behind. 

 

That's what I figured when I read the rules but wanted to be sure.  Thanks again.



#11 willmanx

willmanx

    Member

  • Members
  • 776 posts

Posted 20 November 2011 - 09:16 PM

AceMilo said:

Ok.  I've only played a couple games so I'm still getting used to it.  It seems kind of silly if the cover is facing the opposite direction and he's completely exposed, but if that's the rules, I'll stick to them.  Thanks for the help guys!

 

note that in that case, the opponent only has a limited cover (+1d) and not a full cover (+2d). So that's not fully illogical on a miniature game's point of view






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS