True line of sight is horseshit

>it takes all of ten seconds to pull out a silhouette marker and check.
10 seconds! That's like an eternity of game time! You might as well break out the rulebook or reference a table with that much time.

>Makes it less than an 1" tall, Power Gaming Bullshit

How so? If it can't be seen, then it can't see.

>Retarded hobby shit, they wouldn't drag a breeze block around with them.

You're right there, save for the old Dwarven Oath Stones from WHFB, there really isn't a good reason for guys walking around on top of a seemingly mobile plinth. If that's the case, then it may be worth using another model of an equivalent size as a proxy for working out line of sight.

The reason 40k moved to a true line of sight model, was because the abstract rules were poorly written, and resulted in stupid shit, like Orks, embarked upon a size 3 Squiggoth, being able to fire over a size 3 ruin, while the enemy infantry they targetted couldn't return fire because the Orks were considered part of the Squiggoth, which was completely obscured by the size 3 ruin. It was a dark time filled with powergaming bullshit.

The simplest answer was TLoS, because it was really hard for GW's rules writers to fuck it up (thank you, based Alessio) and any weird shit that happened as a result was on the players, and not the designers.

I think Warpath/Firefight handle abstract LoS pretty well. There aren't too many categories for model size, and it's generally however many inches tall the thing is, rounded up, which makes it easy to work out on the fly.
I also like the "terrain shadow" effect for working out if a unit is in cover or not.

dropbox.com/s/nl3jybmonjq02b4/Operation Heracles - Firefight Smol.pdf?dl=0

>I definitely prefer more abstracted LOS rules like the ones in Malifaux or Infinity though.
I just don't see it as a big deal. It feels like you needlessly encumber the game for little benefit. Even laser pointers are a little pretentious. If you can't line up a shot like the shot on a real gun lines up then the shot isn't valid. It's pretty damn simple. The kind of people that argue over shit like this don't get a lot of games under their belt because no one wants to play with them.

Honest people can always come to agreement over LOS and proper modifiers. The people that are problems are exactly the kind of people we need to get out of gaming culture and are causing a lot of the social issues with gamers. A wider audience is really being alienated because of the obvious lack of sportsmanship in tabletop and gaming in general.

>TLOS is pretty garbage, if only because a lot of scenery isn't all that well made for actual gaming purposes.
Any terrain is good terrain as long as it gives contour and dimension to the tabletop. To many good games have been played with salt shakers, pringle cans, and tupperware for me to ever think otherwise. Beautiful terrain is great and worthy of solid craftsmanship. But it is not essential for a challenging and exciting game. Just play.

>(thank you, based Alessio)
Represent!!!

>People who want a tight, gamist rule set are the kind of people who need to stop playing games.

Why the hobby focused gamers are cancer, everyone.

>Any terrain is good terrain as long as it gives contour and dimension to the tabletop.
I agree 100%, but I meant that the terrain often isn't quite to the right scale or isn't designed with gameplay in mind, which makes TLOS less than ideal.

I agree re people getting anal about terrain, but I find that clean, abstract LOS rules just makes the game easier to play, as you can quickly agree with your opponent about what does or doesn't give cover or block LOS, without having to faff about with TLOS, especially when the angle is awkward or the distinction between a model having cover/LOS or not is important to the game's outcome.

Which OP clearly isn't

>simpler and easier to understand
Have you actually played with 8th Ed 40k's cover rules? They look simple, but they're unintuitive as fuck

Dude this debate went down in the late 70's and the consensus was that more complex ruleset have the same outcomes as simple ones. At the end of the day you need a tight ruleset if you are a computer game. And that is where this stuff is totally useful as great games like Steel Panthers proved. But that shit isn't important on the tabletop, least of all with fucking miniatures.

>I agree re people getting anal about terrain, but I find that clean, abstract LOS rules just makes the game easier to play, as you can quickly agree with your opponent about what does or doesn't give cover or block LOS, without having to faff about with TLOS, especially when the angle is awkward or the distinction between a model having cover/LOS or not is important to the game's outcome.

In the time it takes to use an abstract rule both plays and even an arbiter can come over and take a look at the shot.

Your sucking so much of the adventure out of the game, that once again your building variable that don't represent the actual conditions of the tabletop. And for what? To settle a dispute with a cancerous piece of shit that is playing his last game with you anyway? If its a tournament you can be damn sure an arbiter isn't going to put up with this kind of bullshit.

If you keep on laying on the abstract rules eventually you end up with scenarios that only happen in Hollywood Action movies and are simply meant to sell new miniatures (Yes we are all looking at you GW).

I don't think we've ever taken that long with abstract rules. At the start of the game we just agree on what does what, and that's that. Maybe occasionally we'll pull out a tape measure to check the line of fire to see if it crosses a bit of cover, but that's effectively the same as a cleaner version of TLOS.

I mean, you say we're pulling the adventure out of the game, but I don't really see what's so adventurous about TLOS.

>In the time it takes to use an abstract rule both plays and even an arbiter can come over and take a look at the shot.

You've never actually played with a real LOS ruleset, have you?

I think abstracted line of sight rules make a lot of sense. Miniatures are in static positions, so the fireteam that are posed running, if they use a copse as cover they aren't going to be just standing near upright wherever the hand of god can place them. If a unit garrisons a near intact building hardly any of them would see out.

Then I go from WW2 to Napoleonics. That copse is now woodland, that building represents the better part of an entire village. All TLOS all the time has long stopped making sense.

I watched one game of 8th edition where three hammerheads fired all their weapons from one engine pod poking around a corner and lost any interest in trying 40k again this time around

If you arent hobby focussed why play with miniatures at all? Just use coins or something.

Like your autism, gaming/hobby focus is a spectrum

...

>WW1
>WW2
Gee, definitely no hand to hand in those wars!

LOS on target is a very small percentage of fire in combat, its mostly suppression fire, support fire from outside los, IEDs that don't need los, etc.

name one major engagement (overarching battle) which was decisively decided by hand to hand combat in either of those wars.

This. Models are static. And what if a model has an army outstretched in a dynamic pose? Or a cape? Can you shoot at them then? According to TLOS you can.

Abstract LOS makes more sense when you consider a guy behind a wall would actually pull in to keep from being seen and shot at. TLOS only works, and even then just barely, if all ypur models are in very rigid poses standing ramrod stiff with no part of them ever crossing over the base they're mounted on.

>>WW1
>>WW2
Those wars, all about the Hand to Hand!!!!!!!!!! Whole battalions would charge across the field and fight bayonet to bayonet. Officers would stand tall and holler "come on men" and everyone would get out of their trenches and square off for a good fight. Hand to hand was considered the primary way units would engage and the best eye gougers and dick kickers were often champions on the field. Even though most soldiers only had knives many would make due with shovels, spatulas, and bec de corbins. Some say Kursk was the biggest H2H battle of WW2 with over a million soldiers on each side getting into arms reach of each other and fighting with katanas.

Yes hand to hand combat has really dominated the last 100 years of warfare and if 40K has anything to say about it H2H will dominate warfare for the next 40,000 years.

>Kursk
>katanas

wow those expat japs in russia must have breed like rabbits

Maybe Its because I'm a Necromunda player but I never had any problem with line of sight?

~If any part of the body was obscures it was -1
~If more than half of the body was obscured it was -2
~ You couldn't shoot at a minature if all you could see was a gun or a weapon.

I have never had any problems with line of sight use these guidelines.

I have had more issues with line of sight with charging than I have ever had with shooting in Necromunda.

dude, tell me about it. In WW2 people were so serious about hand 2 hand that they would just drop Hungarian Ninja comandos out of B17 bombers and hope they would stab someone before they hit the ground. In WW1 they just shot Charlie Chaplin out of the Paris Gun so that he could clobber the Kaiser with a mallet.

Hand to Hand is the reason the South won the Civil War. Don't let any Yankee Commie Jew tell you otherwise.

You forgot best example. All British landing craft had a dude with a sword to lead them up the beach. The Yanks did not. That is why they took a day to get off Omaha.

Infinity draws LOS from a standard template/silhouette. Prone models have to have LOS from the base only. It's the least complex thing in the entire damn game.

>people lose their shit over this
>didn't lose their shit when a bike could fire it's forward fixed bolters around the corner because its tire was poking behind it

The rules were never consistent, get over it.

>Can't you just use a prone or hidden token.
Infinity does that too. If there's one criticism I have against Infinity, it's that it uses too many damn tokens.

I know you're being facetious, but as daunting as Infinity looks, it's actually a very neatly built and dynamic system once you start playing. There's a lot of rules, but in most games about half of them are being used, as not all factions have everything.

Part of it is that dynamic models are often more spread out despite being the same size dude in the end. A model of a guy running is a lot easier to hit with TLOS (Since it's harder to conceal all of it) than a statically standing model that is, ruleswise, doing the exact same thing. Which is a big of an issue with a hobby that supports customising up your own models.

It's a bit tricky with 40k as it has a lot of variation in the models.

Yeah, for comparison my SOB are all pretty closely put together and static pose. They are happy with TLOS because they are relatively small. My friend's genestealers? They are massive, despite the actual genestealer not being that much bigger because the arms are all spread out and they are running at full sprint.

And to go to a further extreme, c'tan shards, terminators and scarab swarms all come on the same base size.

Terrain is fun, yes

TLOS saps fun

>Infinity is the best skirmish game around

*blocks your path*

Before you ask, this model is already OOP

Said like someone who hasn't played Infinity yet!

Oop?
Infinity is so heavy on tokens sometimes I remember to bring 'adhesive' tokens but not 'prone' tokens.

>he doesnt pose his punchy models as gangly as possible, giving them maximum reach
>he doesnt pose his shooty models to utilize cover as they would realisticly be doing
>he doesnt realize the best way to utilize cover is to actaully be a base's width away from it, maximizing the distance needed to move to see the model while minimizing the area from which the model can be seen
RIP your dudes.

I didn't like it when my friend annonced that his breachers - with their massive plasma guns - shoot one of my trukks THROUGH THE TINY WINDOW BEHIND THE DRIVERS SEAT OF THE TRUKK THAT IS STANDING RIGHT IN FUCKING FRONT OF SAID TRUKK.
That got me mad.

Or said like someone who doesn't want or like the kind of game infinity is.

to begin with, beating chests over who has the best wargame is brainlet activity

Out of production.

>to begin with, beating chests over who has the best wargame is brainlet activity
Yes, especially when the answer is obviously Infinity.

As both a prior serviceman and part time /k/ommando with a degree in history I offer up the following

"In the last ten years, British troops have resorted to the bayonet to break impasses in combat both in Iraq and Afghanistan. In May, 2004, a detachment from the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders surprised a force of 100 insurgents near Al Amara, Iraq with a bayonet charge."

>The date was May 14, 2004, and Falconer, along with Wood, Private Anthony Rushforth, Sgt Chris Broome, and privates John-Claude Fowler and Matthew Tatawaqa, were speeding down a roadway 150 miles south of Basra in Southern Iraq. They were on their way to relieve fellow comrades caught in an ambush when they were caught in one of their own.
>The fire was so close and at such an angle (a close quartered, L-shaped ambush) that the only way to defeat it "was to put boots on the ground," said Falconer.
>So he immediately ordered his men to dismount and fix bayonets."When the order came to dismount and attack, it was just like what we've done dozens of times in training," said Rushforth to the Sun. "We were pumped up on adrenaline — proper angry. It's only afterwards you think, ‘Jesus, I actually did that.'" The six soldiers charged across open ground, pausing only to throw themselves to the ground to avoid enemy fire, and return a bit of their own. In a few small sprints, they had traversed to the first trench, into which they immediately leapt, coming face to face with the enemy. The fighting was close quarters and intense.
>"Basically, it was short, sharp and furious," said Wood, who was later awarded the Military Cross for actions that day.

One of a series of combat actions in the era of smart bombs, robotic drones, and directed energy weapons (military heat rays exist now youtube.com/watch?v=dmuyLIrSjxI) that was decided by hand to hand combat.

Also WW2 had effective horse and sabre cavalry charges that decided battles.

Now watch the autists move the goalposts.

I only wish to inform people about how brutal warfare still is.

Also Germany and the Soviet Union (the "Tank Armies") used more horses than motor vehicles throughout the war.

World War 2 was way crazier than any fiction.

Eh, they complement each other quite well.

>wound
>prone
>camo/mines/other markers physically present
>dry-erase markers for everything else
Problem solved.

>being this retarded
I hope to god you either pick up a book, or you never breed.

How for the love of god is Abstract LOS in any way harder or slower to use than TLOS? While setting up the game, you point at every piece of terrain and say "that's height 3, that's height 4" and so on. Most of these are completely self-evident. There's nothing to look up, no ambiguity. Alessio just had a boner for TLOS and it poisons every game he touches.

>you point at every piece of terrain and say "that's height 3, that's height 4" and so on
That would only work for a board game or with a unified terrain system. Did old 40k really work like that? I'm often amazed by how ass-backwards old GW design is. Compared to that TLOS sounds much more reasonable.
It's easier and more reasonable to assign sizes to units, like this

>Did old 40k really work like that?
Yes. It was no issue whatsoever. It's an ABSTRACT LoS System, after all, you have leeway. It doesn't matter if one building is half an inch bigger than the other one.
Units had sizes too, you know? TLOS has been nothing but a pain in the ass since its inception.

>Also WW2 had effective horse and sabre cavalry charges that decided battles.

no it didn't.

>Also Germany and the Soviet Union (the "Tank Armies") used more horses than motor vehicles throughout the war.

they used them to pull supply wagons and cannons.

>Also WW2 had effective horse and sabre cavalry charges that decided battles.
Which battles? Eastern/Asian theatres i'm assuming. Probably China?

That model is not legal for play though, the base size is completely wrong

You don't get to decide if models that are older than you are are legal.

>Other cavalry charges of 1939 were as follows:

September 1 - Battle of Mokra - 19th Volhynian Uhlan Regiment took by surprise the elements of German 4th Panzer Division, which retreated in panic.[5][8] During the charge, lances were used. In fact, the cavalry charge in the traditional sense was neither planned, nor executed. The mounted infantry rode over behind the attacking German armor in behind the tankettes with the tank men throwing smoke grenades to cover the approach. Indeed, the mounted infantry did repel the German support infantry and forced part of the German armored regiment to continue to advance while deprived of the infantry support.
September 1 - Battle of Janów - 11th Legions Uhlan Regiment on a reconnaissance mission encountered a similar unit of German cavalry. Lieut. Kossakowski ordered a cavalry charge, but the enemy did not accept battle and after a short clash withdrew[4] towards their positions.
September 2 - Battle of Borowa Góra - 1st squadron of the 19th Volhynian Uhlan Regiment encountered a squadron of German cavalry in the village of Borowa. A charge was ordered, but the Germans withdrew.[4]
September 11 - Osuchowo - 1st squadron of the 20th Uhlan Regiment of King Jan III Sobieski charged through[4] the German infantry lines to avoid encirclement, and broke through. There were negligible losses on both sides.
September 12 - Kałuszyn - 4th squadron of the 11th Legions Uhlan Regiment charged overnight at the German positions in the town of Kałuszyn. Although the charge was a mistake (the Polish infantry commander issued a wrong order which was understood as a charge order while the cavalry was meant to simply move forward), it was a success. After heavy casualties on both sides, the town was retaken[4] in the early morning.
September 13 - Mińsk Mazowiecki - 1st squadron of the 2nd Regiment of Grochow Uhlans charged German infantry positions, but was repelled by German MG and artillery fire.

The list goes on after this

well yeah but stepped hills errywhere is bullshit too

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_of_the_Savoia_Cavalleria_at_Izbushensky

What's th alternative? Sliding and tumbling models, or completely flat boards?

>40k
>modern military tactics outside of Tau and mechanized Guard
Do us all a favour and jump from your number of chromosomes to your IQ.

Just accept it's a game
Gas TLOSfags
Accept stepped hills
Spread the abstraction

...seriously, Infinity uses an abstract template for its models (bypassing its problem with overly-dynamic poses to a degree) and then you draw "true" line of sight to the template.

No terrain rules required beyond a general consensus on what's easily climbable (e.g. chain link fence)

no dumb issues where someone fit a custom arm on their model and now they're harder to hit

Draw LOS from the models and if there's any doubt, drop in a silhouette template (which you can literally just photocopy from the books)

It's the least complex part of that whole confusing game.