Assualting tanks

[coredump]

The store employees told him to go away.

And we have a winner!!! Give that employee a gold star. :-)

I realize that the 'infinite' column is not an uncommon ruling, I just don't see how it is justified. I used to follow it, then a couple of people got me to check over the rules again. The only time 'size' comes into play is for area terrain, and if locked in CC. Otherwise it is wysiwyg. The rules specifically mention shooting 'over' tanks and MC's. And if the tank column is infinite, it seems pointless for them to provide a 4+ cover save, since you can't see past them anyway.

[cenpjas]

Hmm I think this is quite clear.

Any part of the model (weather it has said component at the time or not) when contacted in an assault, counts as an assault on the model, bit it a vehicle or infantry.

If somebody models there Nob on a 40mm base for looks, they can not then complain if you get an extra 2 models into contact due to the extra space. Like wise if there is a dozer blade on the tank, well its part of the model weather it has any effect in the game or not, end of story.

I believe that is the way it works at competitions, and it is the way I would do it anyway just because its simple, and simple and clear is good. Remember it should always be WYSIWYG, any question should always be resolved in favour of WYSIWYG, thus I can see a damm dozer blade, so I am gona assault it.

I tend to try and avoid house rules, with exceptions of scenarios, mostly because I like to play people all over the place and as often as I get a chance, a house rule will have me thinking in the 'wrong' way. The only things I look for agreement for at the beginning of the game is on what the terrain represents, and how we work out LOS and cover. Again I always favour clear and simple over anything else.

-cen

[lowlygaunt]

Ok page 20, CRB, "all vehicles. . . block line of sight. LoS can still be drawn over the vehicle or past the vehicle, but NOT through them." This is why the collumn theory was stated. According to page 20 you Cannot shoot thru a vehicle, dreads are vehicles, you may not shoot thru them, legs arms etc. That is why they made the ruling. According to GW you cannot shoot thru a vehicle, period, even if LoS lets you see thru the vehicle. you may check LoS to see if you can shoot past it. Finaly got home to look it up, I knew it said something qabout not shooting thru, and that the collumn was simply the best explanation of how to determine it. The reason they count it as a "size" is because people's terrain is so different. what i call a level one hill, you may call a level 2 hill etc. So rather than say a 1" hill is level one, they simplified and made them size 1,2 or 3 etc.

[coredump]

But that is the point. There is no such thing as a 'level one hill'

It does not exist in the rules.....

The *only* thing with a size are models, and area terrain. And the only time it matters with models is when dealing with area terrain, or in CC (Models in CC basically become area terrain...sort of...)

Aside form area terrain, all terrain is wysiwyg, there is no size to worry about. If you can see the model over the hill, you can shoot at it, doesn't matter what size the model is. If part of the model is obscured by the hill, it gets a cover save, if not, it doesn't. Again, size rating has no effect.

I can understand saying you can't shoot 'through' a dreadnaught, and thus not through the legs, arms, etc. But saying you can't shoot over that unit, is in direct contradiction of the rules. As you quoted, LoS can be drawn over a vehicle/MC.

From what you said, they are playing that you can't shoot over the dread, or tank, or whatever.... I don't see how they justify that.

[Overread]

To be honest I find that a small laser pen works wonders for line of sight arguments; and whilst the rule book outlines levels for hill etc... though the people I play with play with tend to stick with WYSIWYG

[coredump]

I am eternally amazed at how much misinformation is accepted as fact

and whilst the rule book outlines levels for hill etc...

As I explained earlier.... this is not true. The only terrain with a size descriptor is area terrain. The majority of terrain is intended as WYSIWYG.

[yoritomo]

The whole reason for tanks have a size number is so that you can compare them to area terrain. Since a tank is level 3 it can hide behind level 3 area terrain, get hull down from level 2 area terrain, and get nothing from level 1 area terrain. That is the only reason tanks have a size.

Since tanks are not area terrain you do not use the area terrain rule on them. Now, if the tank is destroyed it can become area terrain; but that's more how you play destroyed vehicles than something from the rulebook.

[sephiroth00055]

What does WYSIWYG mean, and what is hull down?

[yoritomo]

What You See Is What You Get (WYSIWYG).

Hull Down is the rule that changes penatrating hit to glancing hits on vehicles, at least in 3rd ed. I think they may have renamed it obscured targets in 4th ed.

But hull down is a much more colorful term, so I still use it.

[lowlygaunt]

Coredump, see Yori's post. He has a good explanation and I believe that is why the collumn is size 3 at the local shops. Regular troopers are size 2, size 1 is basicaly half a regular trooper, size 4 is a forest etc. I guess your group has never used this size designation. I never said you cannot shoot over a vehicle. But you cannot draw line of sight over a vehicle unless you are on a level 1 or above piece of terrain at least. Most low hills are considered level 2. A trooper on the ground at the same level of a vehicle cannot draw line of sight over a vehicle, because the vehicleis taller than the trooper, this works the same way as your LoS argument of course. I think most of these rules may be being brought over from fantasy, where hills are built on the table in steps. First step is level 1 , second 2 etc.
The players are supposed to determine the hieght of terrain at the beginning of a game. Designating a hill as level 1, 2 etc. Obviousely my group, the local non-GW store, and the three GW stores I play at use slightly different techniques. Before every game players determine the size of all terrain, the effects of the terrain etc, using the rulebook as a guideline, which is what its terrain rules are intended to be.
Maybe since the fantasy game is a more complex game, and the number of years I have been playing all manner of tabletopgames, this is second nature to me in all tabletop games.
Because of the vaguaries of modeling terrain yourself, the cut and dried obvious GW shop hills, trees and buildings rarely exist on a home table. So simplified size rules help.

[coredump]

I read Yori's post, and I agree with it 100%. But I don't see how it supports what you have been talking about.
I have very little knowledge regarding fantasy, except that terrain tends to be much less of a factor. But the rules you are talking about simply don't exist.

1) There is no such thing as a 'size 1' hill. (or size 2, or 3) Unless terrain is area terrain, it does not have a size. This is important.
2) If you are determining the size of (non area) terrain, you are creating new rules, not using the ones in the rule book.
3) Being on a hill does not help you shoot, or see, over size 3 area terrain. If a TMC is on top of a size 3 ruin (area terrain) it cannot shoot over a CC involving a wraithlord.
4) There is no size 4 terrain (or model). There is nothing larger than size 3. A TMC is size 3, a TMC on a hill, or on size 3 area terrain.... is still size 3.
5) A trooper on the ground can draw a line of sight over any (non area) terrain, or *over* any tank, as long as it can literally see (model's eye view) the target unit/model.
6) The size rules are very simplified, but they only apply to area terrain, and models locked in CC


There are some grey areas. The ability to shoot between the legs of a dread, can be seen either way. But the ability to shoot over a tank is pretty darn clear.

I love having good detailed discussions. But please, go look at the terrain section; and if you can find anywhere that talks about non area terrain having a 'size', I would love to find out.

The rules are generally very straightforward. Aside from specifically area terrain, and CC; if your model can see the model*, it can shoot it.
*There is some discussion to be had about how much of the model has to be seen... but that is a different topic.

edit: Grammar

[yoritomo]

I'm not sure you got the point of my post lowlygaunt. Read page 20 and 21 of the rulebook to understand why vehicles have a size and how it compares to area terrain.

[arcticsnake]

trolls said:

what i call a level one hill, you may call a level 2 hill etc. So rather than say a 1" hill is level one, they simplified and made them size 1,2 or 3 etc.

There is no level 1, 2, or 3 hill. There is however a level 1, 2, or 3 building; or if your hill is designated as area terrain then you can assign it a level.

[arcticsnake]

Additionally, models on terrain with height uses the height of the terrain. Level 1, level 2, or level 3, creatures on Level 3 terrain becomes Level 3.

I have a question though. What if the marine was modeled on top of a rock making its eye level higher than a tank? It would then be able to see over it right?

[coredump]

There is no level 1, 2, or 3 hill. There is however a level 1, 2, or 3 building; or if your hill is designated as area terrain then you can assign it a level.

Sort of.
Only if that building/ruin/whatever is designated area terrain does it get a size/level.

Once it is declared area terrain, it doesn't matter what it looks like. A 6"x6" flat board will have the same affect as a 3" tall hill, or 4" tall building, or 1" tall tank trap. If all 4 of those are considered Size X area terrain, they are treated exactly the same.

I have a question though. What if the marine was modeled on top of a rock making its eye level higher than a tank? It would then be able to see over it right?

Correct. Of course, other things could see it also...