If I might add, these things always go better if players state their intentions
to each other, ie this tank is going hull down behind this hill or this FOO is
periscopes up. The same can be applied to using other vehicles as cover, if the
player is expecting to fire from a given position then he needs to let people
know that part of his model is exposed and therefore liable to be spotted and
fired at (but with a cover modifier).

If a player starts using random lorries to block LOS then he'll soon run out of
opponents!

Regards,

--- In RF2support@yahoogroups.com, James Hall <flashingblade06@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Marc,
> Thanks for your views. If the firing vehicle is in contact with a damaged
vehicle it can be used as hull down cover according to the rules.  As you
suggest, this is essentially an area of damaged/knocked out vehicles, not just
one. which firers are using to their advantage as a fire position, just like a
terrain feature.  If not in base contact then perhaps the damaged vehicles
present an obstacle to fire.  However, if a line of fire can be drawn from the
turret or gun of the fire which does not cross the obstructing vehicle (or its
base), it seems to me you have a valid shot.  Well that is how I interpret the
obstruction rule.
> Jim
>
> --- On Thu, 7/5/09, marc33594 <marc33594@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: marc33594 <marc33594@...>
> Subject: [RF2support] Re: Firing grpups
> To: RF2support@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Thursday, 7 May, 2009, 12:56 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jim:
>
> All comments welcome! I find Rapid Fire folks usually easy to get along with
and enjoy discussions, no one feels, at least I dont, they are arguements. I
believe you have hit it with the scale. It isnt just one tank using one other
tank or item for partial cover but you are talking about 5 tanks firing and 5 in
the way, 5 targets with multiple angles and such. I believe, rather then get
bogged down with multiple exceptions, the authors choose to keep it simple on
purpose. Units do block fire, hull down positions dont since specifically chosen
not to. It is the same with the simplistic determination of front and rear
shots. A line drawn across the rear of the tank and anything behind a rear shot,
anything in front a front shot. NO flank shots for example and no arguements
that the turret is facing one way and the hull the other or that since 5 tanks
represented then some would be turned one way and some the other.
>
> Whats nice is most Rapid Fire players I know usually just settle things with a
die roll. Odds and the shot is blocked in this case, even it isnt :)
>
> --- In RF2support@yahoogro ups.com, James Hall <flashingblade06@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Marc, can I intervene?  My understanding of LoS/LoF is as you have
explained it from Mr Marsh.  However, what puzzles me is can a firing tank claim
cover behind another vehicle and claim Line of Fire?  I'm thinking of the way in
Normandy a Firefly would, on occasion, shoot "over the shoulder" of an ordinary
75mm gun armed tank.  I've read about this tactic; it seems plausible to me.  If
we say no in RF2 to this, perhaps because the vehicles actually represent an
area covered by five vehicles, my objection would be that a tank can fire from
behind a hull-down position such as a terrain feature so why not from behind a
tank?  If we say yes this is ok then surely we need a clearer definition of when
it is possible/not possible to fire through an intervening vehicle.  Or at least
I do !
> > Jim
>