Advanced Squad Leader Tutorial #5 - Line of Sight & TEM

[@joevano]

I really like your “zone” example... I guess I never really thought of it that way

[@StewsReplay]

YEAH his zone was good....I don't use it often but looking at that building...it cant see shit

[@Jimo1956]

Incredible. Well made. Your example at the last chapter of the video was superb. Again: A picture tells more than 1000 words. Thanks for taking your time and sharing.

[@ASLAcademy]

Thank you so much 😀

[@hrfepo1]

Thanks!

[@ASLAcademy]

Thank you sir!!

[@jonathanplott7651]

Just joined. The very least I could do after your stellar VASL 101/201 series and now the Boot Camp!

[@kozimandius]

Awesome content. I would only add 2 things. 1: Clarify that unlike obstacles, the hindrances are inherent terrain independent of the artwork depiction, and 2: the difference between a soft and hard hindrances, specifically on the effect on fire lanes. But the latter is chrome. :)

[@marfac70]

Look forward to watch it. Thanks for this Easter present 😉.

[@artvandelay2274]

Perfect explanation

[@joeperez3520]

Learning the system by watching these videos. I can understand why there would be a rule where you have to declare that you're firing before you trace your LOS, but the flip side of that coin is that you could have ASL players who live and breathe ASL, and they HAVE played so many times that they'll know whether the tricky LOS traces on certain boards are good or not. This is a BIG advantage against someone who hasn't dedicated his life to ASL.

[@joeperez3520]

@@ASLAcademy I’ve come across a few ASL fanatics at the Consim Forums that I’d be suspicious of. 😂 Having been playing games for 50 years, looking over many an LOS, I think I’m pretty good at “eyeballing” LOS myself.

[@davidwilliams7935]

Just like in real life, the more experienced generals have an advantage.

[@amphora8321]

Another excellent tutorial

[@WARdROBEPlaysWWII]

I like the white board next to it.

[@markc8401]

I love ASL. I wouldn't have invested almost 40 years and thousands of dollars into it if I didn't. But IMO it has some glaring weaknesses that drives me nuts, and LOS is one of them. You, as a player, shouldn't have to visualize anything like "Do I have a LOS or not", because really it is whether your "troops" see the enemy or not. If the troops see them, then they have the option to shoot them. There shouldn't be this weird guess work. I also play Old School Tactical, and that game does its right. You are allowed as many free LOS checks as you like...as a matter of fact, your troops are not allowed to fire UNLESS they have a LOS, which, when you think about it, makes total sense. Another good video - it is tough to subdivide this game into teaching sections, because so many other future teachable sections influence the one you are talking about!

[@ASLAcademy]

I appreciate the ASL LOS system. Fog of war is missing from most wargames. ASL has HIP and concealment, but not allowing LOS checks until after you fire adds additional fog of war. Nervous soldiers with itchy trigger fingers firing at ghosts have existed since gunpowder was invented. 😁😁

[@markc8401]

@@ASLAcademy Then we agree to disagree :) Itchy trigger fingers are one thing (which the night rules are effective in simulating), but seeing a target and then inexplicably not seeing it because my personal vision sucks and I misjudged the LOS is entirely different IMO.

[@ClockMonsterLA]

I am inclined to agree with you, Mark. The idea behind "declare before you measure" is a very gamey one, and doesn't seem to model anything that isn't already covered by the intrinsic uncertainty of (fire attack) dice rolls. I'm curious; if you remove that rule, and allow players to measure LOS before they declare an attack, how does that affect the game as a whole? Perhaps there would be a slight up-tick in casualties as attacks get made that might not have otherwise been made? But I would expect that would also incur a slight up-tick in machine gun breakdown, cowering, etc. It's hard to imagine it would substantially undermine the playability or balance of the game.

[@gogol1st]

Merci!

[@ASLAcademy]

Thanks you sir!

[@WARdROBEPlaysWWII]

Just got on here and heard you say something about “screwing or up”. It’s ASL so inevitable to get rules wrong.

[@janikdeckers4304]

Great as usual!

[@thierrym7154]

For me the most difficult los to check is for kampfgruppe peiper I

[@JamesGraham-f7y]

I've always thought that not checking LOS prior to attacking was strange or gamey. Obviously the soldiers would know if the enemy was in their LOS. We don't use this rule when playing and most war games we play similar to ASL doesn't use this rule.

[@ASLAcademy]

I think the design intent is that if the LOS is obviously clear you can see enemy units moving around. If it's tight you might see them moving on the periphery of the obstacle and take a shot, only to find out it's just blocked or you didn't have the right opportunity have have an affect (because you still roll the dice). Announcing a shot before checking LOS adds a lot of tension to the game.

[@StewsReplay]

3:30 SOLD!!! DICEBOT FOREVER

[@StewsReplay]

@@ASLAcademy I want a Bathing ASL in counters EMOJI!!!

[@pm71241]

The only thing not being relatively intuitive is the thing about half-height obstacles blocking everything but the hex just behind it.

[@jonnytenebrous1113]

I think this rule is more intuitive if you're familiar with the appearance of rural European hedgerows. They're not orderly waist-level American-style domestic "hedges" that one might envision when thinking of "half-height" terrain - most of them are shoulder or head-height, deep, unruly masses of foliage that you can just barely see through (and forget trying to traverse through one without injury). As a soldier you could see a "shape" move just beyond the other side and take a shot at it, but that's about the extent of your vision through one (unless, of course, you are pressed directly up against the opposite side).

[@squidly99p68]

Thank you for your videos. I just bought the game and am in the process of learning the rules. At about 18:20 you mention that terrain effects are not cumulative. I can't find where it says that in the rules. A2.4, A7.3, and A7.6 seems to indicate that terrain effects are cumulative. So the DRM looks like it would be +4. Please help.

[@squidly99p68]

Thank you sir. I was looking in the wronge section. Again, thx for these videos.

[@toddalancox]

Getting back into ASL and recently read through smoke again. At about 28:29, wouldn't the hindrance be +4 instead of +3? You are shooting from M4 to L2 along the hex side between grain in one hex and grain plus smoke in the other hex. Or in your example where you pretending the grain wasn't in the hex where the smoke is for demonstration? Or I am not understanding this correctly?

[@ASLAcademy]

You're correct. Should be +4. Hindrances are cummulative.

[@区楚岷]

18:53,wouldn't the wall between G7 and H7 block the German from firing into the building?

[@ASLAcademy]

No, the wall is part of the hexside the German unit is in. In fact, they would have a mandatory Wall Advantage counter on it since they are in an open ground hex. If the German unit was in F6, for example, yes the wall would block LOS. See B9.2 "Wall and hedge hexsides are Half-Level obstacles to same-level LOS (A6.21) unless the wall/hedge hexside is part of the viewing/target hex."

[@davidwilliams7935]

And you roll even if the shot is blocked because your might break your machine gun.

[@WARdROBEPlaysWWII]

No, LNL tactical doesn’t take LOs to the same level, much more simplified.

[@jeffbarker246]

Thanks!

[@ASLAcademy]

Thank you sir!

[@jeffbarker246]

Thanks so much for doing these videos, I am learning a lot.