So the group I've been playing with has been measuring zoc's and rangebands in horizontal distance, recently I went out of my meta and was told they were measured in definite spheres around the unit for zoc's, and from silhouette to silhouette for rangebands, taking vertical distance into account. Which is right?
From the graphic and text on this page, it seems neither of you are correct. It is a cylinder 8" above and below (or 4" depending on which side of the recent debate on this you fall) the base with a radius of 8" (+half base width).
Nice, that's rather easy to understand, and explains why my group never measures vertical (we don't have any buildings higher than 7.5") I should have contested, it would have gotten me first in the tournament I was in!
They are right about rangebands, though, that's measured closest silhouette point to closest silhouette point (from the position during the order's movement that is most beneficial for the shooting model)
I've encountered this last game. My opponent tried to move to position around corner to fall into 32+ HMG range. His base was merely visible due to terrain, but LOS from base side to target was clear. The problem was that he tried to measure firing range along the LOS because line connecting nearest points was blocked with terrain. But for BS attack range measurement procedure there is no word about intervening objects. http://wiki.infinitythegame.com/en/Distances_and_Measurements Thus you can fall in situation when LOS measured gives one rangeband, but TRUE distance is another.
You right on the fundamentals, but I would not put it that way. It's more that LOS-based rangebands are simply not a thing, there is no reason to even measure them in the first place. It amounts to the same, but I think it's less confusing.
Is this one of those things where the FAQ that Base-to-base can be met by being SIL-to-SIL has started to cause confusion? The actual rule is:
Possibly, but I'm also fairly sure I've read it clarified by a commonly accepted source (IJW or Koni) on the forums that distance is measured STS, though possibly old forums. N4 wishlisting below: Can I just say that measuring BTB is excessively awkward and in many situations very difficult to do with any sense of accuracy? I'd honestly prefer to measure shortest LOF for attacks requiring LOF (or potentially actual LOF used) and shortest STS for attacks that don't, simply to accommodate for the fact that this is a physical game with physical tools and physical objects getting in the way.
I honestly can't remember anymore, as this was almost a year ago. I'm sure there were some people arguing about it, though ;).
N3 is, as the rules say, base edge to base edge. CodeOne/N4 is, as the rules say, Silhouette-to-Silhouette, with a note that for most situations base-to-base is enough, and faster.
Now that I think about it more, I seem to recall that the debate I was referencing was about ZoC (not measuring distances for BS attack). Some people were arguing that the 8" up and down were from the base (providing a height of 16" + 3 mm), some were arguing from the top/bottom of the silly (providing a considerably larger height), and I think there may even have been an argument for the midpoint of the silly being the reference point (having the shortest height of the cylinder for ZoC).
Though this too has been sorted in C1/N4 as it is 8" from the top and bottom of the Silhouette, so the total height is now 16"+Silhouette height.
It is. But like I said in my post before, this is a resurrection of a 1 year old thread, and at that time there seemed to be some debate on the subject.
Yeah. I'm fairly sure that my response to that thread was "how the fuck is there an argument about this?" But, whatever, N3 is dead: long live N4!
