Page 1 of 1

Number of Shooting Dice??

Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 2:42 pm
by Blathergut
Does being in cover reduce the number of dice you shoot with? I have LF bows in plantations that are only shooting with 1 die.

Re: Number of Shooting Dice??

Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 3:24 pm
by batesmotel
Blathergut wrote:Does being in cover reduce the number of dice you shoot with? I have LF bows in plantations that are only shooting with 1 die.
Since they cannot shoot overhead, that sounds correct for a BG of 4 stands deployed in 2 ranks which is what the basic FoG PC BG represents.

Chris

Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 3:27 pm
by Blathergut
Sorry?

Je ne comprends pas.

Under 'number of attacks' it mentions LF getting two dice. What I am asking is, where, if anywhere, does it mention reduction in dice for being in cover?

Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 3:41 pm
by Blathergut
Cover seems to be reducing shooting dice. Is this mentioned in the HELP? This ancient brain has missed that one somehow.

Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 4:54 pm
by batesmotel
Blathergut wrote:Cover seems to be reducing shooting dice. Is this mentioned in the HELP? This ancient brain has missed that one somehow.
I think it was fixed in the last patch and I suspect the HELP hasn't kept up. What FoG PC needs for help is something with an equivalent amount of detail as the TT rules so you can understand how everything works ;-).

Chris

Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 6:50 pm
by deeter
I have noticed the reduction as well. Is this how it's supposed to work?

Deeter

Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 7:34 pm
by Blathergut
I looked thru 1.2.6 but saw no mention. Was it changed earlier?

Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 1:47 am
by iversonjm
Certain types of terrain, such as woods and plantations, prevent second ranks of troops from shooting in TT. In practical effect this means that MF and CV shoot with 2 dice, and LF and LH shoot with 1. This effects is apparently being mirrored in computer FOG now as well.

Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 12:00 pm
by batesmotel
Blathergut wrote:I looked thru 1.2.6 but saw no mention. Was it changed earlier?
I think it may have been covered under the all reported problems fixed category rather than getting called out separately.

Chris