1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NCE [CE Update] Your preferred method of hiding poll.

Discussion in 'Rules, Mechanics & Skills' started by Anthony, Oct 12, 2017.


Your preferred rule methods for hiding?

  1. A) Base contact with concealable vertical terrain.

    11 vote(s)
  2. B) Within 1" of concealable terrain, with terrain sight obscuring bubble of 1".

    4 vote(s)
  3. C) Anywhere.

    5 vote(s)
  4. D) Anywhere, with terrain sight obscuring bubble of Initiative range.

    5 vote(s)
  5. E) Anywhere reasonably possible and cannot be clearly seen.

    4 vote(s)
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Anthony

    Anthony Community Edition Editor
    Necromunda Custodian

    In an effort to find some water tight rules for the NCE hiding rules there's been indepth discussions which you can find here and here. It seems there are several viable ways of dealing with hiding, so here is a poll so we can get some sort of numbers behind the preferred methods. The poll will be open until probably late November, so hopefully we can see how the new Necromunda does hiding, and there's plenty of time to playtest the varying ways (Ambushes are particularly useful).

    Note the poll is aimed more for just getting some numbers behind the various approaches rather than voting on exact rule wording. We can still discuss tweaking the example rules later on.

    In all options, except E, the proposed visual spotting rule would be to see the majority of the model. Otherwise the normal hiding rules apply (fighter must not have ran or charged to hide, Initiative ranged auto-spotting bubble).

    A) A model must be in base contact with concealable vertical terrain (e.g. barricade or wall). Hiding represents hugging terrain to hide behind it or stay in its shadows and break up his outline.

    B) A model must be within 1" of concealable terrain (e.g. barricade, end of a wall, ledge). However, only terrain within 1" is used when determining if he can be seen (unless he's fully obscured from that enemy). Hiding represents the fighter usually hiding behind a particular piece of terrain.

    C) A model can hide anywhere. Hiding represents more of a 'stealth mode' where he's keeping his head down while moving slowly or going prone.

    D) A model can hide anywhere. However, only terrain within a number of inches equal to his Initiative characteristic is used when determining if he can be seen (unless he's fully obscured from that enemy). Hiding represents the fighter using his wits amongst the surrounding terrain to stay out of sight.

    E) A model can hide anywhere a person might reasonably conceal himself. He will be seen if any enemy are in a position where they would clearly be able to see him. The subjective nature allows players to figure out for themselves whether the fighter could realistically hide in that particular situation.
    #1 Anthony, Oct 12, 2017
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2017
    MedMos likes this.
  2. Stoof

    Stoof Lord High Admiral of the YakBap
    Tribe Council

    Why is there no option for Proposition #109? :eek: It's a fix! The NWO/Illuminati/Gubmint/Russians are tampering with the votes!

    *cough cough*

    I like the Initiative-distance based hiding one (D). It's very similar to B, but I think slightly more practical for gameplay and makes Initiative a more useful stat.

    I had a quick play with myself (stop sniggering!) trying different hiding rules on Tuesday night and whilst my equivalent of A, B and D all worked in their own way, D felt nicest. It's almost a half way between anywhere (ie as it is now) and base contact, works well in moderate scatter, allows maneuvering but not hiding in the wide open... overall quite nice.

    It's not the paragon of ultimate perfection that is Proposition #109 though. Proposition #109 is opposed to cuts to essential public services and supports the brave and hard working staff of the NHS.
  3. Ben_S

    Ben_S Hive Guilder

    Without wanting to restart the whole debate, because there's been enough talking over different options in the other threads, I find these options a bit unclear and limiting.

    For instance, what if I don't like the base contact requirement in A and prefer B's 1" rule, but I do like A's restriction to vertical terrain? That is, I'd like an option that says you must be within 1" of concealable vertical terrain - this option isn't open.

    Or if you think a model should be able to hide anywhere but, when it comes to being spotted, only terrain within 1" should be used in determining whether he can be seen (so, like D but swapping the initiative distance for B's 1" rule)?

    I don't see why different issues have to be packaged up like this before the vote, rather than having a vote to find favoured options.
    Stoof and Fold like this.
  4. Fold

    Fold Gang Hero

    Well said Ben.
  5. Anthony

    Anthony Community Edition Editor
    Necromunda Custodian

    Yeah feel free to post other options if I've missed some, though there does have to be some degree of viability otherwise we're just going to have a million options.

    So this would be "A model must be in base contact with concealable vertical terrain (e.g. barricade or wall). However, only terrain within 1" is used when determining if he can be seen (unless he's fully obscured from that enemy). Hiding represents the fighter usually hiding behind a particular piece of terrain."?

    I would say in this case vote option B since unless I'm missing something they are essentially the same?

    Isn't this just option B?
  6. Stoof

    Stoof Lord High Admiral of the YakBap
    Tribe Council

    Yeah, but Proposition #109 sounds cooler :ROFLMAO:
  7. Ben_S

    Ben_S Hive Guilder

    It's not B, because B says that you must be within 1" of a piece of vertical, concealable cover in order to hide, rather than being able to hide anywhere.

    I've been trying to work out how best to do this and there's probably no perfect way, at least that I can think of. But it seems there are a number of distinct questions, including at least these:

    Q1. Should you have to be in base contact with cover to hide? Or 1"? Or hide anywhere?
    Q2. When can full cover stop you being spotted - a) only when in base contact? b) Or in 1"? c) Or initiative distance? d) Or anywhere?
    Q3. Does cover have to be vertical? Or will a ledge do?

    These questions/options give a lot more than four possible combinations, which was why I thought the four options above are limiting. E.g. the only one that restricts cover to vertical terrain is A, but this also requires base contact - there's no option for someone who thinks it should be vertical terrain only but within 1".

    Like I say, it's difficult to see a good way of voting on all these options, but - taking into account my understanding of how site polls work - I'm inclined to think the best way would be to have a list that goes something like this (check all that apply):

    1. A fighter can only hide when in base contact with cover
    2. A fighter can only hide when within 1" of cover
    3. A fighter can hide anywhere so long as they cannot be seen
    4. Fighters can only hide behind roughly 'vertical' terrain, such as barricades
    5. Fighters can hide whenever they are in full cover, even if obscured by a ledge, etc
    6. Full cover stops a fighter being spotted only if they are in base contact with it
    7. Full cover stops a fighter being spotted only if they are within 1" of it
    8. Full cover stops a fighter being spotted only if they are within initiative distance of it
    9. Full cover always stops a fighter from being spotted (unless within the spotter's initiative distance)

    (Note that lots of these options specify things like 'only' - without that, anyone who checks 3 should also check 2 and 1.)

    This would effectively allow everyone to pick and mix their favoured combination of options, though I see a couple of potential problems.

    First, the combination that comes out as a result may not be particularly popular as a combination - though I don't see that as a real problem, if it's what emerges from voting.

    Second, perhaps more problematic, is that if we were to set a poll up this way someone might vote for inconsistent things (e.g. what if someone checks boxes 1 and 3?) - if so, would we count that as a valid vote for each or a spoiled ballot?
    undertaker likes this.
  8. Fold

    Fold Gang Hero

    Or just do a series of 3 short polls then combine the results...
    Stoof likes this.
  9. Ben_S

    Ben_S Hive Guilder

    You could do that too, but it strings things out more. Although it would mean that you could do things sequentially, so people can vote on question 2 knowing the answer to question 1, if desired.
  10. Anthony

    Anthony Community Edition Editor
    Necromunda Custodian

    I'm not sure how useful the answers would be given how inter-dependent the options are. For example, I would only favour the "within 1" of terrain to hide" option as part of "only terrain within 1" counts for obscuring sight" since any other option doesn't make much sense to me either fluff or gameplay-wise. And with sequential voting I would think you're going to get different conclusions depending on the ordering of questions. But you're very welcome to do your own polling as you see fit, it can only help having more information.
    Ben_S and undertaker like this.
  11. Fold

    Fold Gang Hero

    *mic drop*
    Llewy likes this.
  12. Ben_S

    Ben_S Hive Guilder

    It's true that sequential voting probably would produce different outcomes depending on the order of the votes, which is one reason why I wasn't sure it was a good idea to do that. But if options are interdependent then indeed we need some way for people to say that they prefer A to B if C, but B to A if not C.

    However, even with only the options I mentioned above - which may not cover all the variables - there should be 3 x 2 x 4 = 24 logically possible combinations. I don't know how informative a poll over all of those would be unless it got a lot of votes.

    Maybe a better option is a series of polls over these combinations, weeding out the less popular ones and giving people another chance to vote between the more popular contenders.
    Fold likes this.
  13. Blood Donor

    Blood Donor Executive Officer in Charge of the 2014 Bake Sale
    Staff Member Necromunda Custodian Yak Philanthropist

    Base contact is restricting compared to the others but the simplicity of it as a rule could arguably be seen as holding significant merit of its own in this.
    Stoof likes this.
  14. Anthony

    Anthony Community Edition Editor
    Necromunda Custodian

    Hm.. just struck me there probably should be an option for if you are largely fine with the official rules (i.e. hiding is pretty much just 'figure out what would be realistically possible yourselves'). They're very subjective which ideally you would want to avoid, but they've lasted as long as they have by allowing people to interpret them as they prefer and see fit so can cover situations the other options can't.

    I'm just wondering if you could have a poll that literally had every possible option, then after say a week all the options with no votes are eliminated to bring them down to a more manageable level. Then as you said, for the remaining options the lower voted ones are progressively removed over intervals so losing votes can be redistributed.
    Ben_S likes this.
  15. Stoof

    Stoof Lord High Admiral of the YakBap
    Tribe Council

    Soo... the x-factor, but with hiding rules? Did I mention the very sad sob-story of Proposition #109's harsh upbringing?
  16. Ben_S

    Ben_S Hive Guilder

    That was the kind of thing I was thinking, though that may be difficult to manage too. Even if we were able to come up with a list of all possible options, having so many options available would make the voting pretty difficult.
  17. Konapowder

    Konapowder New Member

    I think base contact is the simplest and represents what hiding is in my mind, hugging terrain. Less measuring is good because it helps keep gameplay fast and checking those 1 inches in complex terrain can be a pain.
    Punktaku and Stoof like this.
  18. sebwiers

    sebwiers Gang Champion

    I voted "C". The underhive is poorly lit and has a lot of small obstructions not shown on the table. If a fighter takes the action to hide, the onus is on the enemy to prove they know exactly where he is (by establishing a clear line of sight, getting within initiative inches, etc). To me it actually seems a fairly elegant mechanic for "hidden movement" compared to some games where multiple "blip" counters are used, etc. Its also just the one that takes the least pre-game or in-game discussion over terrain effects, etc.

    The caveat I might add is that you only remain hidden if you continue to use "hide" actions. If you end a turn without taking that action, you are not hidden.
  19. Punktaku

    Punktaku Gang Hero

    i’m not a fan of the Init in inches spotting rule, simply because it invalidates games of hide and seek. people can be hidden right next to you without being spotted.
  20. undertaker

    undertaker Ganger
    Yak Supporter

    Separating the issue into these three questions makes it a lot easier to understand than having all possible combinations of the above to choose from. If only there was some way to create three simultaneous polls, one for each question. Maybe three straw polls?

    It should be clarified whether standing on a roof counts as being in base contact if it's the roof edge giving you cover.

Share This Page