|
Taerkar posted:Furthermore they don't actually have to kill the infantry, just render them incapacitated. Sometimes, dead means dead. Other times, dead means 'dropped their rifles and ran.' VVV Depends on the autocannon, but each 'shot' is actually a revolver-style shell casing with 3-5 actual shells. PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Dec 12, 2011 |
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:35 |
|
|
Or it means 'Writhing on the ground in pain, clutching a shattered arm'. But any way you look at it, there's more than just 200 bullets in an MG ton, or in any autocannon for that matter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 20:10
|
|
|
Whoa, whoa whoa. Hold up. ActionZero, Ostroc pilot! Okay. I'm going to tell you about a magical maneuver here that will BLOW. YOUR. MIND. I'm here to tell you about BACKING THAT rear end UP. "What?" you say? "What the gently caress are you doing in my cockpit?!" Nevermind that! Back up to 0707. You only use walking movement. You back up for +1 for both of you to hit. You're in short range for your LLs, and his brackets are awful there. Also, you only get a little bit of heat, and you get to hammer him hard with what you've got. Then, you can go and gently caress up that Stalker. Be smart. Back that rear end up. Andrevian fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Dec 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 20:24
|
|
|
* Whoops I am blind.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 20:29
|
|
|
AtomikKrab posted:Gladiator will need to jump 4 and end up range 6 from the stalker and hidden from the rest. Then alpha, ignore the heat build up you can jump back over and cooldown. You have the most armor out of goonlance and the stalker ignores you at its own peril. This is actually such a terrible idea that I lack the words to adequately describe it. But let's go line by line: - jump 4: There is rarely a good reason to ever jump less than 5 if you have a mech that jumps 5. Why? At J:5, you break even in modifiers (+3 for your shots, +3 for shots against you). At J:4, you're at a net loss (+3 for yours, only +2 for theirs). - range 6: It's not bad in that it steps in between the LRM and LLAS brackets, but it's still fairly close and the STK will probably ding you quite heavily anyway. The Gladiator really can't win a war of attrition with the STK. - then alpha, ignore the heat build up: Yes, you can jump away, but you're also badly isolated already. Not good. Overheating here outright forces you to completely hide next turn just to cool down some. In general, if you do this move, you will at best trade roughly equal damage, be overheating and isolated from the rest of your team against one of the most dangerous L1 assault mechs. If I have to explain why that's all bad, well...
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 20:42
|
|
|
Andrevian's idea does make the Whitworth a lot easier to hit at only slightly increased risk for return fire, so it's really ActionZero's call. As far as the Gladiator goes, it's entirely possible that Guitar Hero could be trying to maneuver himself into position to hit the Stalker's rear armor. Now that the odds seem to be tilting back to even rather than "Oh Crap," he might just be feeling aggressive. You can tell he's been wanting to make use of his jump jets for weeks. Though he really should stop taking incidental shots at the one-load-of-LRMs-left Bombardier and start trying to take the much more fragile and dangerous-at-range Gaussbie. Runa fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Dec 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 21:11
|
|
|
Andrevian posted:0707 Hmmm... it gives the Urbanmech and Bombadier line of sight to me but gives the Whitworth worse odds to hit me, gives me better odds of taking him out, puts me in a better position to help with the Stalker if I manage to kill the Whitworth, and the Bombadier and Urbanmech's chance to hit me isn't great there anyway (plus they might be about to get distracted by the Gladiator getting up in their business). A little more risk but I think it's worth it overall. Sending my orders now I reckon. Gotta say I'm feeling a bit amused at myself with each of the last two turns I start with an idea of my own that I think is pretty decent and I'm like "Yes! I am starting to get the hang of this game!" but then someone else pops up with a much better move to make. Not that I don't appreciate the help. ActionZero fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Dec 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 21:50
|
|
|
Fraction Jackson posted:This is actually such a terrible idea that I lack the words to adequately describe it. But let's go line by line: The Stalker is coming into this damaged. RT was clear Left arm was damaged. It probably has a bunch more weakpoints, I'm not talking a war of attrition. but you need to piss in the Stalkers Chips, it is a risky move I will not deny that, but the only other option that gets you a good target is taking on the bombardier and urbie at the same time. Gladiator pilot needs to make a choice really. Engage the Stalker or the other 2 mechs, and if stalker do you jump 4 and land at 6 hexes. Trading a +1 better to hit you for a +2 better to hit him with all your guns, or jump 5 to 7 hexes away for being harder to hit... except you are in the sweet spot for lrm fire so he will actually hit you at the same rate with those, and you are at medium/long range on all guns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 21:55
|
|
|
AtomikKrab posted:The Stalker is coming into this damaged. RT was clear Left arm was damaged. It probably has a bunch more weakpoints, I'm not talking a war of attrition. but you need to piss in the Stalkers Chips, it is a risky move I will not deny that, but the only other option that gets you a good target is taking on the bombardier and urbie at the same time. Honestly, the goal should be to finish off the non-Stalker stuff first. The Stalker will be fairly easy IF the rest of the board is clear and thus Rolling Thunder can focus fire. It should be quite possible to clear out the Whitworth and the other Urbie easily; the Bombardier is fairly inconsequential, so once the two smaller mechs are done the STK is a good target. Splitting up and trying to do it all at once while making moves that are mathematically poor is not the best idea though. There's really just no reason to worry about the STK just yet as long as it's isolated behind the buildings. The move you're proposing is a completely unnecessary risk for little perceivable gain other than a nebulous "pissing in the Stalker's chips".
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 22:02
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:There is no overkill. Only 'open fire' and 'I need to reload'. True, after thinking about it the Whitworth would probably still have a roughly 30% chance of survival (if crits and leg-kills contribute a whopping 30%), so it's only Fraction Jackson posted:This is actually such a terrible idea that I lack the words to adequately describe it. But let's go line by line: I'm mostly concerned about the basic idea of (that move and the Awesome's position) leading to the lance being dispersed and being shot at by the stalker (and others that are not the Whitworth) at all while there's still a fight going on at the top of the map, but I hear you. The general strategy for the battle so far had been a fairly consistent divide and conquer, which then changed to optimizing standoff range and setting up flanking moves once the Stalker got close enough (both would be easier with only the Stalker left). Goonlances seem to have an aversion to focus fire, and PBP combat has an aversion to defensive combat like avoiding LoS in general. The Gladiator has two good options that aren't risky though... firing at the Gaussbie while moving for the mysterious container as cover or evading combat alltogether (though it'll take a landing check or a running on wet pavement check). Boring but safe. The whole lance can avoid all but indirect contact, except against the Whitworth. Directly attacking the Gaussbie is a bit riskier, but is a solid option if it positions against the Stalker turning the corner. cwDeici fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Dec 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 22:02
|
|
|
ActionZero posted:Hmmm... it gives the Urbanmech and Bombadier line of sight to me but gives the Whitworth worse odds to hit me, gives me better odds of taking him out, puts me in a better position to help with the Stalker if I manage to kill the Whitworth, and the Bombadier and Urbanmech's chance to hit me isn't great there anyway (plus they might be about to get distracted by the Gladiator getting up in their business). A little more risk but I think it's worth it overall. It was a good move, but it wasn't using all the things at your disposal. There's a lot of basic stuff, but seeing how it all fits together takes a few games, not just one. Really, the biggest trouble I've seen with the group thus far is that you all never have concentrated fire. 'mechs are sturdy. Even when they don't look to be sturdy, there's nothing that means that a given shot is a killshot until it happens. But it's a little too late for that, unless you go to help the Awesome after this. Hopefully the Whitworth dies, but there's no reason to expect it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 22:12
|
|
|
Or the Gladiator could just run up to the Urbie and put some holes in it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2011 23:14
|
|
|
cwDeici posted:True, after thinking about it the Whitworth would probably still have a roughly 30% chance of survival (if crits and leg-kills contribute a whopping 30%), so it's only It's the combination of being dispersed and not concentrating fire which is really killing them. It's possible to overcome inefficient moves as long as your overall tactical gameplan is sound, but there've been some things that are really questionable. Also, I know there's a lot of newer players in the thread/reading the thread. So explaining about BTech math and how to evaluate a move's efficiency is something I want to try to do from time to time. The proposed move by AK was iffy on both fronts: the mathematical one and the general tactical one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 01:26
|
|
|
I am alarmed at how many people seem to think it's a good idea to just totally ignore the Bombardier. Yes, it's LRM ammo is basically gone, but even without its LRMs it's still at least as well armed as a good light mech. Would you leave a good light mech totally free to run around behind you while you focus on trying to fight an assault? I sure wouldn't. I am guessing there's excellent chances that if the goons ignore the Bombardier, it's going to get another kill from shooting a mech in the back at medium or close range with its remaining weapons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 01:36
|
|
|
Its hard for that to happen when the Bombardier is slower than most of our machines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 01:39
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I am alarmed at how many people seem to think it's a good idea to just totally ignore the Bombardier. Yes, it's LRM ammo is basically gone, but even without its LRMs it's still at least as well armed as a good light mech. Ignoring it doesn't mean for the players to let it get easy shots on them, it means to treat it like a slow heavy that is currently isolated from the fight and who can't hit poo poo past 9 hexes. It can't hurt anyone if the players are smart.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 01:40
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I am alarmed at how many people seem to think it's a good idea to just totally ignore the Bombardier. Yes, it's LRM ammo is basically gone, but even without its LRMs it's still at least as well armed as a good light mech. The Bombardier has only one remaining weapon which can't reach farther than 9 hexes and the mech itself is slower than everything besides the awesome which is very far away.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 01:41
|
|
|
Fraction Jackson posted:It's the combination of being dispersed and not concentrating fire which is really killing them. It's possible to overcome inefficient moves as long as your overall tactical gameplan is sound, but there've been some things that are really questionable. Funny, you'd think we'd have learned our lesson re: focusing fire by now. Yeah, the current Goonlance has been too worried about "wasting" shots in case of a lucky kill when they should be more worried about making sure they have enough redundant firepower directed at a single target to bring an enemy down when they really have to. Every turn an enemy is left on the field, within striking distance of your own forces, is a turn where you run the risk of something going horribly wrong. Frankly, I'm surprised the Ostroc is being left unsupported when a single round of bad luck could end him or, at the very least, tie him up for another round in case that Whitworth is still standing come another barrage. And in a straight slugging match, it's very likely the already heavily-damaged Awesome could buckle under the Stalker's fire. We've got two members of Goonlance who could really use some help. There was really no question that the Awesome needed to keep the Stalker's attention as long as it can and the Ostroc was the only one in position to prevent the Whitworth from becoming flanking the Awesome, so that only leaves the Gladiator. I'm still wondering why he opted to jump into the fray and shoot a low-priority target last turn and I want to give Guitar Hero the benefit of the doubt, but I'm worried. He really ought to have stuck with ActionZero and not moved to engage another target until that Whitworth was confirmed down. As it stands the best thing we can hope for is that he's just setting himself up to flank the Stalker. Regarding Sair's suggestion: moving off to just hammer the Gaussbie full-on and ignore the Stalker altogether is pretty much the opposite of the "Concentrate Your Fire" principle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 01:48
|
|
|
To confirm, since there seems to have been a lot of speculation about why I had the Gladiator make the jump, the idea was ideally to jump somewhere safe that would let me flank the Stalker this turn (I probably shouldn't have turned BOTH lasers on the Bombardier though - they were basically just potshots just because). Given that the Stalker stood still this turn, I know the rule is to concentrate firepower, but I'm thinking that the Urbanmech is probably the better target at the moment, as I can't see any position to take that wouldn't expose me to fire. 0322, maybe, but that means no PPC, and the Bombardier (and possibly the Urbie) would get free shots at my back. generally I prefer fucked around with this message at 02:00 on Dec 13, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 01:58
|
|
|
Guitar_Hero posted:To confirm, since there seems to have been a lot of speculation about why I had the Gladiator make the jump, the idea was ideally to jump somewhere safe that would let me flank the Stalker this turn (I probably shouldn't have turned BOTH lasers on the Bombardier though - they were basically just potshots just because). How lucky do you feel about getting hit on a roll of 6 or higher for 2d6?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 02:08
|
|
|
Guitar_Hero posted:To confirm, since there seems to have been a lot of speculation about why I had the Gladiator make the jump, the idea was ideally to jump somewhere safe that would let me flank the Stalker this turn (I probably shouldn't have turned BOTH lasers on the Bombardier though - they were basically just potshots just because). At the moment I think survival and minimizing damage should be your priority. Followed by any potshots you can spare for the Stalker or the Gaussbie. If that Stalker had moved forward then flanking it would be easier, yeah. As it stands, though, the nearest jumpable point to flank the Stalker is basically an enemy killzone. I'm thinking, if 0420 is a safe place to jump, you should try it. Even if it means not getting any shots off this turn. The turn immediately after would let you jump to 425 which, unless the OpFor decided to get aggressive, should let you take rear shots at the Stalker with minimal risk. To PTN on LOS rules, since extrapolating from diagrams was never a strongpoint of mine: Would Guitar Hero get any cover from anyone if he jumped to 0420? VVV EDIT: True, but I'm also working under the understanding that he means to set himself up to flank the Stalker at the same time. Runa fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Dec 13, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 02:13
|
|
|
T.G. Xarbala posted:At the moment I think survival and minimizing damage should be your priority. Followed by any potshots you can spare for the Stalker or the Gaussbie. If that Stalker had moved forward then flanking it would be easier, yeah. As it stands, though, the nearest jumpable point to flank the Stalker is basically an enemy killzone. If he doesn't move at all he'll have blocked LOS from the stalker, bombardier, and gauss urbie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 02:20
|
|
|
Gotta concentrate, gotta concentrate. But concentrate on Stalker or Urbie?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 02:28
|
|
|
Longinus00 posted:If he doesn't move at all he'll have blocked LOS from the stalker, bombardier, and gauss urbie. Seems a bit pointless given how the Gladiator is currently the least damaged of our mechs. We would be better off with him moving to a stronger position to do some damage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 02:51
|
|
|
Guitar_Hero posted:To confirm, since there seems to have been a lot of speculation about why I had the Gladiator make the jump, the idea was ideally to jump somewhere safe that would let me flank the Stalker this turn (I probably shouldn't have turned BOTH lasers on the Bombardier though - they were basically just potshots just because). walk to 621 and kill the urbie if you want to take the risk against the gauss and the bombardier. Don't fire the ppc min range, both MedLas and the srm-6 will be fine against that guys paper armor without puttin you up too far. and then you are in position to backstab the stalker. Don't get headcapped 
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 02:57
|
|
|
ActionZero posted:Seems a bit pointless given how the Gladiator is currently the least damaged of our mechs. We would be better off with him moving to a stronger position to do some damage. Did you read the post I was replying to?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 03:02
|
|
|
ActionZero posted:Seems a bit pointless given how the Gladiator is currently the least damaged of our mechs. We would be better off with him moving to a stronger position to do some damage. Ah, that was Long's somewhat snarky response to a suggestion I made. A humorous exaggeration based on the "safety" side of my idea. Basically, I'm wondering if the Gladiator can set itself up to flank the Stalker next turn by making a relatively "safe" jump this turn. If he moves in too aggressively he's basically asking to get focus-fired by the Bombardier (whose main armament is now short-ranged, as its LRMs have a single volley to them), the Gaussbie (who is still a Gaussbie), and the Stalker (who can torso twist and unleash seven different flavors of hell, ironically taking some heat off the Awesome in the process). While the Gladiator is undamaged, a Charge of the Medium 'Mech One-Man Brigade would be glorious but ill-advised. Granted, if everyone's shooting at him then they won't be taking long-range potshots at you, so there's a plus. Instead, I'm hoping he might be able to set up actions two turns ahead and position himself to eventually flank the Stalker and receive minimal return fire in the process. This depends a lot on whether 0420 is a safe place to jump or not, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 03:23
|
|
|
Guitar_Hero posted:To confirm, since there seems to have been a lot of speculation about why I had the Gladiator make the jump, the idea was ideally to jump somewhere safe that would let me flank the Stalker this turn (I probably shouldn't have turned BOTH lasers on the Bombardier though - they were basically just potshots just because). 1. Regarding all this discussion of flanking the Stalker, you should know that the Stalker can flip its arms behind it, so it can put 4 MLs and 2 LRM-10s into its rear arc if it wants. 2. Non-water hexes where you would not be exposed to fire except from the Whitworth, which has closer targets to worry about : 0316, 0518 (i.e. stand still). It only makes sense for the Gladiator to hide if the Awesome moves out of the Stalker's LoS and tries for a couple of long shots at the Whitworth. You could ensure that 3/4 of their 'Mechs have zero shot at you at all, assuming the Ostroc hides behind the lighthouse. As for the Ostroc: 0707 = Urbie has 9 to hit you with Gauss rifle, Whitworth has 10 to hit you with medium lasers 1304 = Urbie can't hit you, Whitworth has 9 to hit you with medium lasers In either case someone is firing 15 points of damage at you on 9s. But if you back up to 0707, you also have another 15 points of damage coming at you on 10s. Your chances to hit him back are 0707 = 5s with Large Lasers, 7s with everything else 1304 = 6s with everything If the Awesome walks out of the Stalker's LoS to 0411, she'll have 10s on the Whitworth. Not great, but it prevents the Stalker from using its firepower while giving you a better chance to take down the Whitworth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 04:25
|
|
|
Just wanted to reiterate something that's been mentioned: the Stalker can commit a large majority of its firepower to any facing it pleases fairly easily, and even losing initiative I know several tricks to help deter flanking maneuvers (like the one I pulled this turn, for example). The Whitworth, however, is isolated... but if you don't put it down (or at least knock it down) this turn, it will flank the Awesome.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 06:16
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I am alarmed at how many people seem to think it's a good idea to just totally ignore the Bombardier. Yes, it's LRM ammo is basically gone, but even without its LRMs it's still at least as well armed as a good light mech. Except for the fact that it's 1) slow, 2) isolated on the far side of the water without jump jets, 3) has nearly full armor and 4) is the least threat/highest survival envelope between a loving Stalker, a Gauss Urbie and a nearly dead Whitworth that's in flanking position. Sure, take a pot shot if it's convenient but it's by FAR the least dangerous mech on the map and would require serious firepower to put down at this point - you could kill the Whitworth and Urbie twice over with the same amount that the Bombardier is likely to soak.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 06:24
|
|
|
Finally caught up with this thread, and it looks like things are actually getting pretty dangerous for GoonLance here, especially considering last turn... Missing the Whitworth a lot and it not going down, threatening a flank on one of your heavy hitters that ate a lot of damage from a nearly pristine Stalker without dishing much of it back? And an untouched GaissUrbie just getting into decent range to put some hurt on people? I dunno guys, this turn could be critical. That Whitworth really has to die really soon, preferably this turn, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 06:27
|
|
|
Rear armor is still Rear armor shots.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 06:32
|
|
|
AtomikKrab posted:Rear armor is still Rear armor shots. It is, but the Stalker's rear armor is fairly thick for an artillery `Mech.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 06:36
|
|
|
Tempest_56 posted:Except for the fact that it's 1) slow, 2) isolated on the far side of the water without jump jets, 3) has nearly full armor and 4) is the least threat/highest survival envelope between a loving Stalker, a Gauss Urbie and a nearly dead Whitworth that's in flanking position. All of the things written here are true. Just thought it deserved to be reiterated. PoptartsNinja posted:Just wanted to reiterate something that's been mentioned: the Stalker can commit a large majority of its firepower to any facing it pleases fairly easily, and even losing initiative I know several tricks to help deter flanking maneuvers (like the one I pulled this turn, for example). Which is why it's so important to be able to concentrate fire on it, when the opportunity arises to do so. One mech backstabbing isn't the most effective idea. The only way it works is by staying at range 5 and slipping in between the ML/LRM brackets. However, between the rear armor and the relatively small amount of fire that can be brought to bear on its back, it really isn't worth it. Without putting 2-3 mechs on it, the Stalker is definitely going to have good odds to down whatever goes after it, and without taking too much in return. Goonlance should swat the Whitworth away this turn (Andrevian and Carbolic both outlined some good ways to do that), and ding the Urbie as soon as possible, putting as many mechs on each target as possible. If you guys can arrange it so it's the Stalker against all three of yours, you should be able to pull off a fairly easy victory in that situation. In other words: one way or another, pick one target for the entire lance and follow up on it until it dies. In BTech you want to remove enemy firepower from the board as quickly as possible. In a normal game with normal init, less enemy units equals more unbalanced initiative for you as well (or at least less unbalanced against, if you're outnumbered), making it even more important. You can choose your initial targets on whatever metric - biggest threat, best to-hit numbers, etc., but whatever you pick you need to follow up on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 07:40
|
|
|
Another thing to work into the concentrated firepower formula is that the Stalker can only shoot so many of you at once. If you all take your turns to stand in front of him and trade fire he'll kill you all one after the other. If you all do the same thing at the same time, he'll still kill you one after that other, but everyone who dies after the first Mech will have gotten extra shots in thanks to their handy ablative armor. By which I mean their friends.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 07:44
|
|
|
AtomikKrab posted:Rear armor is still Rear armor shots. I'm still of the opinion that most mechs, medium and up, can take a round of shooting in their backs without any problems under most circumstances. Unless you can and will follow up on these shots, you are actually doing the enemy a favour by splitting up your fire between the front and rear.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 07:51
|
|
|
Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words, so I drew you one. This is the Gladiator's armor situation as it stands now. It is nearly pristine. If you jump in behind the Stalker, you're putting him between the rock and the hard place - you're the rock, the Awesome is the hard place. It can choose to shoot at you with its four medium lasers - at a +1 TH penalty for firing into its rear arc - or it can choose to shoot at the Awesome with its LRMs, but not both. If you catch it in a pincher and keep it in the pincher, one of you is getting free shots. You'd be closer, more likely to take hits, but you also have the armor to spare. Of course, the Stalker still has companions on the map. Whatever you're going to do, I suggest you do it quick-like. But you need to stop playing conservative - you've got armor to ablate, the Awesome's looking mighty thin. You need to keep its holepunchers in the game as long as possible, though it wouldn't hurt if you can bring your own to bear as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 08:25
|
|
|
Of course, if you move to any point to the rear/side of the stalker, you're going to take fire from the urbanmech and bombadier too. With a jump of 5, you can't quite make it into his rear arc, so it's not really much of a temptation. As it is, the stalker does not have the best to-hit numbers against the awesome, but it's short range weaponry is pretty brutal. I'd recommend hitting the urbanmech from behind the cover of the building, since it's a glass cannon you can take down quickly. The stalker can't move forward while you're there, since you threaten to jump in it's rear, and the awesome can range-duel it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 08:45
|
|
|
Azathoth256 posted:I'd recommend hitting the urbanmech from behind the cover of the building, since it's a glass cannon you can take down quickly. The stalker can't move forward while you're there, since you threaten to jump in it's rear, and the awesome can range-duel it. Neither has line of sight to the other.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 08:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:35 |
|
|
By behind cover, I mean moving out of the corner it's in right now, but still keeping the building between itself and the stalker. Anything 0821 and above is still out of los of the stalker, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 09:05
|
|