Vantage points - how do you use it on your tables

[Sol_Sorrowsong]

I've been reading a few bat reps lately and seeing images from tables at other stores around the world.  I've never thought our tables were empty but they've always been fairly flat.  Houses, walls, forests, impassable rock formations.  Locals have stated this is due to the rules for vantage points and attacking from heights being a bit troublesome and giving an edge to crews with snipers (katanaka, trappers, etc).

 

It might just be a lack of accessible terrain but how do you tackle towers, rooftops and hills? Fair, unfair? 

[Ludvig]

We have some plastcraft terrain with the bayou walkways which we use for vantage points but we never allow sniper nests and inaccessible rooftops. We also have a saloon with a walkway at about ht3 where we allow models to stand because there is a stair. Apart from that it sounds very similsr to the tables you are describing as well as the reasoning behind it.

[Adran]

I try to make sure there aren't snipers nests, in that every point on the board ought to be accessable to every model, or not at all. I don't mind there being some good spots for people to shoot from, but I try and avoid them begin in standard deployment zones, just to make it that little bit harder. Snipers should be viable in some games, just not all of them. 

I can understand groups deciding to largely play 2d games to avoid a lot of the elevation rules. 3d looks great, but if you're not used to the 3d rules it can be hard to use, and gives a huge advantage to models with Flight. 

[Fetid Strumpet]

Standard rule for me is that if a surface is flat and stable enough to support a model without holding it, the surface must be ruled such that all parts of it are climbable, or no model may be placed there period. There are too many rules that break the game if a model can position themselves such that they are safe from engagement.

[PirateCaptain]

We use a ton of vantage point and climbable things in our area and it works great, just make sure there's enough LoS blocking terrain to break up firing lanes.  Check out the article on Schemes and Stones blog for a really good breakdown on exactly how it works.

[Squirrelich]

nothing higher than HT 4, generally only HT 3 that a model can sit on. It also has to be climbable or have another way to get up there and not the only piece on the field that tall. It is also generally encouraged to before the game make a gentleman/gentlewoman's agreement that some of the vantage point rules will be played with common sense instead of RAW, at which point you will have to agree on what is "common sense". If not it is considered polite to call out you will be playing RAW so both players are prepared for/can be reminded of the... silliness those rules can sometimes produce.

[WWHSD]

2 hours ago, PirateCaptain said:

We use a ton of vantage point and climbable things in our area and it works great, just make sure there's enough LoS blocking terrain to break up firing lanes.  Check out the article on Schemes and Stones blog for a really good breakdown on exactly how it works.

https://schemesandstones.wordpress.com/2017/04/14/how-height-and-elevation-works/

[WWHSD]

6 hours ago, Ludvig said:

We have some plastcraft terrain with the bayou walkways which we use for vantage points but we never allow sniper nests and inaccessible rooftops. We also have a saloon with a walkway at about ht3 where we allow models to stand because there is a stair. Apart from that it sounds very similsr to the tables you are describing as well as the reasoning behind it.

How do you handle a model standing on the walkway shooting at a model under the walkway? Based on my reading of the vantage point rules, the walkway wouldn't block line of sight as long as the model on top of it was close enough to the edge.  

[Ludvig]

8 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

How do you handle a model standing on the walkway shooting at a model under the walkway? Based on my reading of the vantage point rules, the walkway wouldn't block line of sight as long as the model on top of it was close enough to the edge.  

We have houserules and a general attitude of not trying to game things like that. I don't think anyone would even consider trying to shoot through a solid object based on a technicality.

Technically the rules don't let you move over or overlapping another models base and the elevation rules don't say that you can ignore that part just because you are on different levels of the table so standing under the balcony could prevent anyone from moving on top of it and vice versa but we have "houseruled" that you can obviously be occupying the same spot but on different levels, mostly because those of us who know the rules well enough just think it's stupid and most players don't even realise there is such a weird inconsistency.

 Specifics such as how to handle the low porch or the support pillars for the balcony always get discussed before games to not cause issues during play. I find that varying how you define a piece leads to more playability, sometimes we let people walk and push through the supports and sometimes not. Something small like that makes a big difference, especially for 50mm melee models vs shooters or a crew with a lot of pushes.

I sometimes ask how my opponent would like to play certain scenarios and we decide how we want it to play regardless of how we defined it after we have picked crews just to avoid sour situations during the game if I see a model in their crew which could cause strange interactions with the terrain.

[H4ml3t]

On 2/2/2018 at 12:22 PM, Ludvig said:

Technically the rules don't let you move over or overlapping another models base and the elevation rules don't say that you can ignore that part just because you are on different levels of the table so standing under the balcony could prevent anyone from moving on top of it and vice versa but we have "houseruled" that you can obviously be occupying the same spot but on different levels, mostly because those of us who know the rules well enough just think it's stupid and most players don't even realise there is such a weird inconsistency.

The need for this sort of common Sense houseruling bothers me. I hope we'll either get an Errata focused on fixing 3d rules or they get fixed in version 2.5

At a recent Tournament I had Lilitu (Ht2) on a Ht1 platform and it was ruled that she couldn't see over the Ht2 model standing at ground level in front of her. The 1" platform wasn't a Vantage Point and I could find nothing in RAW to indicate that the level she's standing on can be added to her Ht when determining LOS. This ruling didn't have a significant impact on the game but it definitely left me feeling salty.

[Ludvig]

Yeah, for some reason the game doesn't let you add heights, we haven't actually houseruled that away, we just very rarely have ht 1 terrain. Vantage points don't add to youe ht either, you draw LoS at the ht of the vantage point but can ignore any model at a lower elevation even if that model is higher than the combined ht of your model + the vantage point. A ht 1 model on a ht 2 vantage point can see over a ht 4 model but a ht 2 model on a ht 1 box can't see over a ht 2 model. 

 

[H4ml3t]

^^^That makes perfect sense. 😜

[Sol_Sorrowsong]

On 2/2/2018 at 4:17 PM, PirateCaptain said:

We use a ton of vantage point and climbable things in our area and it works great, just make sure there's enough LoS blocking terrain to break up firing lanes.  Check out the article on Schemes and Stones blog for a really good breakdown on exactly how it works.

Could you snap a picture of what one of your tables looks like?

 

Also, thanks everyone for the info.  It is really interesting to hear how things are played.

[PirateCaptain]

2 hours ago, Sol_Sorrowsong said:

Could you snap a picture of what one of your tables looks like?

 

Also, thanks everyone for the info.  It is really interesting to hear how things are played.

Kevin posts a bunch on a wyrd place if you're on there, if not let me know and I'll snap a few tomorrow at game night

[Sol_Sorrowsong]

I'll check it out