Assualting tanks

[cenpjas]

I should really cheak my facts, but as far as I know tanks are level 3, and block LOS, due to infantary (ie non MC) being level 2 you can see over them (which is diffrent from version 3, where combat was hight 3.)

The exception is skimmers which do not block LOS, except for when they cease being skimmer and become terrain. You can shoot anything you can draw LOS to.

Now the way I play is you can NOT see over vehicles (excpet flyers), as otherwise it might depend which way the turret was pointing, and then you get into issues about vehicle that have no turret and so on. Thus a dreadnaught is a columns of level 3 the size and shape of its base for all intents and purples... (damm my english).

For terrain rather than LOS WYSIWYG, I tend to play generic terrain, that is to say if its a level 3 building on a large base, the whole base is level 3 and difficult terrain, with the 6" though. As opposed to trying to work it out based on can I see your model though the window?, which just leads to confusion and arguments. In much the same way when you agree on cover saves.

Hill hight is an intresting one, as it is important to designate hights of hills. And its where the current rules are well and truly devorced from natural logic. Its a shame but not hard to deal with.

As hight 3 is the max (except in cityfight, which I belive is the correct thing to use with appoc), a tank on a hill can not see over another tank. However Infantary on a hight 1 or 2 hill can block LOS of a tank.... if infantray not in combat blocked LOS.

See troops in a 'terrain' feature of tank traps which are deeped level 1, it makes little practical diffrence as a hill is diffrent from other terrain features as it can 'alter' the hight of the unit in it, were as a hight 2 infantray in a tank trap terrain feature may get a cover save but they do not become hight 3.

I think in the end, the rules will never be 100% and will alwas have room for interpretation, what is important is getting a clear understanding with your opponent and then using it consistantly.

-cen

NB: in the morning should I remember I am gona look up them pages mentioned above.

[coredump]

At this point, I am repeating the same things...

As hight 3 is the max (except in cityfight, which I belive is the correct thing to use with appoc), a tank on a hill can not see over another tank.

This is *not* true.

The fact that a tank is size 3 has *no* effect on checking LoS over it. None. Ever.

Any model can fire any weapon at any target.... over a tank....at any time.... as long as the model can 'see' the target.

So lets say your marine is standing behind the Predator, and on the other side is my warrior. If you bend down, and determine that the marine can in fact see the warrior.... he has LoS, and can shoot. It does not matter what 'size' the Tank/marine/warrior is.

that is to say if its a level 3 building on a large base, the whole base is level 3 and difficult terrain, with the 6" though.

Some people play buildings/ruins as area terrain, in which case it may be level 3. But if you are not calling it area terrain, then it does not have a size.
If it is area terrain, it doesn't matter how many inches the piece is, it counts the same.

Hill hight is an intresting one, as it is important to designate hights of hills

Hills don't have a size. Unless you are playing that the piece of terrain is representing area terrain, there is no size involved.

People are making this much harder than it is meant to be.

Assuming no area terrain involved, and no CC involved.

Bend down, can your model 'see' the target? If yes, you can shoot. That is it.... it does't matter that it is looking over a tank, or over a hill, or over a hive tyrant. If you can see it, you can shoot it. Simple.

Now, if/when area terrain is involved.... that is when size matters. Then you have to compare the size of the area terrain and the size of the shooter/target. But tanks are never area terrain.
[quotes

[arcticsnake]

Coredump is right. The only times Model Size matters would be:

1. When determining LOS when there is area terrain between model and target, and

2. When there are units in Close Combat between model and target.

All the other times you use the model's eye view to determine LOS.

Thus, if there is a Level 3 area terrain (or a Level 3 model in Close Combat) between model and target, being a level 3 model will not grant you LOS, even if it is on a hill.

The rules then add on to say that even if you do not have LOS through vehicles, wrecks, monstrous creatures, and artillery, -so no shots between dreadnought legs- you can still see over them, and you have to use the model's eye view to determine if you have LOS over the vehicle (wreck, MC, artillery) or not.

(See rulebook, Page 20)

[cenpjas]

arcticsnake said:

Coredump is right. The only times Model Size matters would be:

1. When determining LOS when there is area terrain between model and target, and

2. When there are units in Close Combat between model and target.

All the other times you use the model's eye view to determine LOS.

Thus, if there is a Level 3 area terrain (or a Level 3 model in Close Combat) between model and target, being a level 3 model will not grant you LOS, even if it is on a hill.

The rules then add on to say that even if you do not have LOS through vehicles, wrecks, monstrous creatures, and artillery, -so no shots between dreadnought legs- you can still see over them, and you have to use the model's eye view to determine if you have LOS over the vehicle (wreck, MC, artillery) or not.

(See rulebook, Page 20)

Call me mad, but I like rules that are easy to understand, and do not allow 'issues'. In this case the simplification of hills as area terrain, and vehicles as columns makes for a very clear game, and in 99 of 100 games has no down side impact in tactics (provided you are both 'reading from the same book').

Thus yes you could use a models eye view, or you could just work out LOS in the horizontal, ie top down. A top down LOS stops many arguments and bickering, now if you have good pals and you never argure then maybe its not the best route for you. However I find only having to work out LOS from a top down view is much much easyer and faster.

So in summary, generic rules for terrain, and all 'objects' on the board being terrain of some sort or another means fast and well understood games. - which is good.

I find working out individual's LOS from model to model a right pain in the ass, who wants to play a game like that, especially when you can not 'put' your model where you want in the terrain because you can not bend your models legs with out it breaking (and other similar issues), thus generic rules (all models in terrain X are 5+ inv) are very handy.

-cen

[coredump]

Hey, house rules are great. They let everyone play the way they want. And there is no problem calling everything on the board area terrain, or even making up your own terrain rules.

My point is that we should know when we are creating new rules, and when we are following the ones in the book.

And my experience, is that when people change the rules, they don't take into account all the repurcussions, and weirdness shows up latter.