[ASLML] A9.21: CA and Rooftops

[Jim McLeod]

Tate Rogers wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 15:55:11 +1100
>   Bruce Probst <bprobst at netspace.net.au> wrote:
> >
> >Rule of thumb: if you have to resort to a reality argument to make your
> >(preferred) interpretation of a rule valid, you're probably wrong.
> 
> Almighty Tater Sez...
> 
> Ditto...
> 
> For every seemingly perfect reality argument one can "imagine" there is an
> equaly perfect reality argument to the contrary...for example:
> "Having seen numerous roof tops I recall very few that were perfectly
> flat/level. There are normally stairway access points, exahaust pipes, roof
> peaks, skylights, parapets, etc. All these combined (particularly a parapet)
> could easily serve to restrict CA change."
> 
> See what I mean.

Actually, the RA approach to RT's makes perfect sense.

Consider for a moment how European buildings, roofs in particular are
contsructed.
  
In most residential structures, the roofs are very often quite steeply
pitched.  This would make just getting up on top of and staying on a
roof quite difficult.

Now imagine, after manhandling and setting up one's MG on the roof,
trying to quickly swing an MG 180 degrees or even 90 degrees without
having everything and everyone go clattering down the tiles and onto the
ground.  It would be very difficult to say the least.

Many of the more modern, especially public/government/manufacturing type
buildings, would have flat "deck" roofs with easily accesible access
points.  Many would even have a fairly high parapet around them which in
game terms would be very similar to a stone wall.  On such a roof,
changing CA of a MG would be no big deal, unless one argues another RA
that you would have to pack the MG over to the opposite side of the
building in order to fire behind you.

One the whole, a good compromise is struck with respect to CA and RT's
and there are many RA's to support this POV.



			=Jim=