Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAmishStig
the current PDF of the rules even straight-up suggests it by mentioning hexes with Bridges in them.
|
That's not necessarily the case, and the way it's worded is actually a source for discussion.
Mines affect only the unit that sets it off, so it's unrealistic to assume a mine on a bridge hex (note that it says "bridge hex", not water) would affect the bridge unless the intended meaning of 13.04 is that the mine is on the bridge itself, not just in the hex (i.e., in the water).
Furthermore, 13.04 isolates the damage even further when discussing roads and railroads to the point that they are damaged only if the mine was
on the road/rail. There is no reason that same logic shouldn't be applied to the bridges as well.
None of this changes the discussion about putting mines in water, though. The rule is very clear when it says "He places them in whatever hexes he wishes." There are no exclusions listed for water, so there's nothing stopping you from putting them in water. However, it
does matter when you talk about the specific case of a mine in the same hex as a bridge for damage resolution; it should follow the same guidelines for mines in hexes with roads. A mine in water will be unaffected by a unit on the bridge, and a mine on the bridge will be unaffected by units on/in the water.
The only real edge case is whether there needs to be a distinction between submerged units vs not. From a KISS standpoint, there should be no difference. It gets too fiddly trying to keep track of submerged/surface status of both the units and the mines.