Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

can a skimmer ignore intervining terrain on its way to ram? also, if yes, does the skimmer need line of sight to the vehical in question?

The movement for Ramming follows (mostly) the same rules as Tank Shock.

LOS is not a requirement.

For the other, though... Skimmers now move over terrain, rather than ignoring it. So you could certainly argue that having to go up and over a terrain piece is not 'moving straight forward'...

I'd probably allow it, but it's a little grey.

... god that is a big loop hole ... could you tank charge and jump over vehicles in the way?

That would be exactly the same answer: Only if you consider moving up and over intervening obstacles as 'moving straight forward'

You'd have to consider (in non-gaming terms) how high the skimmer is off the ground in the first place in order to argue that terrain is in the way. You could consider to skimmer 'dive bombing' into another vehicle, starting high enough to bypass the terrain then strike into a vehicle.

Smashotron wrote:You'd have to consider (in non-gaming terms) how high the skimmer is off the ground in the first place in order to argue that terrain is in the way.

No you wouldn't, because so far as the rules are concerned the actual, physical placement of the model is what determines where it is at any given time.

It was simply to understand the action, in non-game terms. Honestly this seems like a non-issue.

1) Ramming is a Tank Shock

2) Tank Shock is a Vehicle movement (this does not supersede the other effects of movement)

3) Vehicles are penalized for moving through terrain

4) Skimmers "can move over all terrain, ignoring all
penalties for difficult terrain and tests for dangerous
terrain. However, if a moving skimmer starts or ends its
move in difficult or dangerous terrain, it must take a
dangerous terrain test." p.71

That covers the terrain issue. Yes a skimmer that is ramming is uneffected by the intervening terrain.

Though, it would seem you cannot ignore other vehicles simply to strike an easier target while ramming, this rule is complicated:

1) "However, if the ramming tank comes into contact with an enemy vehicle, the collision is resolved.." p.69

2) "Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either." p.71

To me, the Skimmer 'flying' over one Vehicle to hit other ones seems like the serious loophole.

Smashotron wrote:Yes a skimmer that is ramming is uneffected by the intervening terrain.

A skimmer is not 'unaffected' by intervening terrain. It has to move over it. If the terrain is tall enough, that means the skimmer is not moving in a straight line, as it has to change altitude.

Which potentially runs affoul of the requirement to move directly forward, depending on how you interpret that requirement.

To me, the Skimmer 'flying' over one Vehicle to hit other ones seems like the serious loophole.

So moving over one obstacle (terrain) is fine, but moving over another obstacle (a vehicle) is a loophole?

You are applying the concept of altitude to a game that has no application for it. If the Skimmer:

1) moves forward (straight line, ignoring ups and downs)

2) moves it's maximum movement

Then, while ramming, it "can move over all terrain, ignoring all penalties for difficult terrain and tests for dangerous terrain."

The vehicle is a more complicated condition because there is no rule explaining the contradiction between Skimmers allowed to fly over enemy models, and the execution of a ram attack.

Smashotron wrote:You are applying the concept of altitude to a game that has no application for it.

And you make that assumption because...?

...ignoring ups and downs)

Why?

There is no relevance for elevation except where explicitly stated in the rule book for when it matters. Do you knock movement off when driving over a hill (after you make your immobilization check)? All that matters is the horizontal distance traveled. You technically went up, or are we all supposed to break out our geometry calculators?

Jayden63 wrote: Do you knock movement off when driving over a hill

No, you measure from the start point to the finish point of the move. If that means measuring on an angle, because the surface is angled, then you measure on an angle.

Nowhere do the rules specify that you should only measure on the horizontal plane.

Iorek is totally correct. The rule never mention that measurement in the game is relegated to a 2D concept so therefore you should be using the full 3 dimensions whenever applicable.

Of course, most people don't want to bother with reducing distance for moving over a steep hill (for example), so they ignore it, which is fine but it isn't what the RAW suggests.

When it comes to skimmers tank shocking, it is indeed a grey area that needs to be FAQ'd because the term "straight ahead" is too general when considering that skimmers have the ability to move over stuff.

Because if you apply strict logic and say that vehicles can't move up or down when making a tank shock all of a sudden you get into arguments about whether a non-skimmer tank can move over a small hill or not, etc, etc, etc.


It just needs to be FAQ'd, one way or another.

... straight line? ok i'll start on top of a hill pass through the middle of this building and stop on this other hill ... i ignore the Diff.Ter. of the building cause i'm a skimer but i tank charge the unit that was in there ... no even playing the RAW doesn't sound right ...

If By straight line you mean From point A to point B (like with a ruler) if it has to curve over something like a building then this isnt a straight line, it is curved or bent, to take it literal.

It seems from reading the rules that by "straight line" they meant "no turning." If I walk over the Rocky Mountains without deviating from a straight line, then I have travled in a straight line even though I went up and then down in elevation (from a top-down persepctive).

Saying that tanks can only tank shock if there are no hills is a rather severa penalty on it. From that perspective you could only tank shock on a hill if they tank-shockee was on the same hill slope. Regardless if it was a skimmer.

Personally, it seems to me that while the regular movement rules for skimmers allow them to move over intervening terrain, if another vehicle was in the way of a tank shock, you would have to hit it also as tank shock is not a "normal" movement and the tank shock rules specify that if you come into contact with another vehicle that is resolved also.

You do not come into contact with vehicles or terrain which is ignored by your movement because of being a skimmer.

I think the key is the use of the term 'ignoring all penalties' for the movement portion of the skimmer's tank shock action.

Rockit wrote:You do not come into contact with vehicles or terrain which is ignored by your movement because of being a skimmer.

Skimmers don't ignore terrain any more. They move over it.

Ignoring it doesn't affect the skimmer's movement. Moving over it potentially does.

Tri wrote: no even playing the RAW doesn't sound right ...

Not specifically that the RAW isn't right... the RAW can simply be taken a couple of different ways. Hence my pointing out that it's a grey area.

Assuming that they when they said that you should move straight forwards they meant simply that you couldn't turn corners on the way seems like the option that works best.

yakface wrote:
Iorek is totally correct. The rule never mention that measurement in the game is relegated to a 2D concept so therefore you should be using the full 3 dimensions whenever applicable.

Of course, most people don't want to bother with reducing distance for moving over a steep hill (for example), so they ignore it, which is fine but it isn't what the RAW suggests.

When it comes to skimmers tank shocking, it is indeed a grey area that needs to be FAQ'd because the term "straight ahead" is too general when considering that skimmers have the ability to move over stuff.

Because if you apply strict logic and say that vehicles can't move up or down when making a tank shock all of a sudden you get into arguments about whether a non-skimmer tank can move over a small hill or not, etc, etc, etc.


It just needs to be FAQ'd, one way or another.

I don't see what the issue is. The text says on page 68, top of the second column,

Once the vehicle has been 'aimed' and the speed declared, move the vehicle straight forward until it comes into contact with an enemy unit or it reaches the distance declared - no other changes of direction are allowed during a tank shock.

You point the model in a direction and move it in that direction. I suppose to be completely clear because of the amount of arguments over directions on scatter dice you could measure out to the end of movement and use that to specify the direction.

A tank comes into contact with an enemy unit because the rules for movement, page 11 paragraph 4,

A model may not move into or through the space occupied by another model (which is represented by its base or by its hull) or throught a gap between friendly models that is smaller than its own base (or hull) size.

So, you move your non-skimmer tank and it comes into contact with another model. If it's an enemy unit, you go to the tank shock rules or the ramming rules. If it's a friendly unit, you're done.

If you're moving a skimmer tank, page 71 paragraph 3,

Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either.

So, a skimming tank therefore has the additional option of simply moving over the model if the player does not want to come into contact for the purposes of either tank shock or ramming. By extension, a skimming tank which chooses to move over a section of terrain would not come into contact with models in that terrain for the purposes of tank shock or ramming.

Is there anything unreasonable about my logic?

This might seem like it is unrelated but:

If you ram a vehicle and it explodes (removed from the table) you contine your ramming move (remember you must move at top speed). If you come into contact with another vehicle you also ram that one.

The rules are pretty clear there and don't allow for a skimmer to move over the second vehicle so why would you be allowed to avoid the first vehicle your path crosses? It provides no exceptions for skimmers being able to avoid vehicles. It specifies that if your vehicle reaches another vehicle that another ram takes place.

The text also says that you are moving at top speed and any units other then vehicles are tank-shocked as normal.

A tank-shock (and ramming) are not "normal" movement. Therefore it is special movement (and I don't mean on the short bus with tinted windows). So we are only allowed to do what is specified in the tank shock rules - which don't allow for any tank (skimmer or not) to by-pass units and/or vehicles in the way.

In closing: On the table I'd play it either way my opponent wanted to play it. I agree that a FAQ is needed in this situation.

solkan wrote:
I don't see what the issue is. The text says on page 68, top of the second column,

Once the vehicle has been 'aimed' and the speed declared, move the vehicle straight forward until it comes into contact with an enemy unit or it reaches the distance declared - no other changes of direction are allowed during a tank shock.

You point the model in a direction and move it in that direction. I suppose to be completely clear because of the amount of arguments over directions on scatter dice you could measure out to the end of movement and use that to specify the direction.

If you're moving a skimmer tank, page 71 paragraph 3,

Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either.

So, a skimming tank therefore has the additional option of simply moving over the model if the player does not want to come into contact for the purposes of either tank shock or ramming. By extension, a skimming tank which chooses to move over a section of terrain would not come into contact with models in that terrain for the purposes of tank shock or ramming.

Is there anything unreasonable about my logic?

Yes. One can argue that the rules specify that the vehicle must move straight forward, but moving over a piece of terrain or other vehicle can be construed as not moving straight forward.


I'm not saying that's how I'd try to play, but it's enough of a grey area that it should receive a FAQ ruling IMHO.

yakface wrote:

solkan wrote:
I don't see what the issue is. The text says on page 68, top of the second column,

Once the vehicle has been 'aimed' and the speed declared, move the vehicle straight forward until it comes into contact with an enemy unit or it reaches the distance declared - no other changes of direction are allowed during a tank shock.

You point the model in a direction and move it in that direction. I suppose to be completely clear because of the amount of arguments over directions on scatter dice you could measure out to the end of movement and use that to specify the direction.

If you're moving a skimmer tank, page 71 paragraph 3,

Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either.

So, a skimming tank therefore has the additional option of simply moving over the model if the player does not want to come into contact for the purposes of either tank shock or ramming. By extension, a skimming tank which chooses to move over a section of terrain would not come into contact with models in that terrain for the purposes of tank shock or ramming.

Is there anything unreasonable about my logic?

Yes. One can argue that the rules specify that the vehicle must move straight forward, but moving over a piece of terrain or other vehicle can be construed as not moving straight forward.


I'm not saying that's how I'd try to play, but it's enough of a grey area that it should receive a FAQ ruling IMHO.

I think there are some tricky points to skimmer tank rules, but I think it's possible to try too hard when reading the rules, as well. But then again I haven't tried to run a tournament, either.

My interpretation is based on taking the Skimmer rules as providing exceptions to the movement rules specified elsewhere in the text (both the standard movement rules and also the tank movement rules). Here's my scenario in a bit of detail:

I have a wave serpent that I want to ram a land raider. In front of the wave serpent is a squad of guardians, beyond that is a forest and beyond the land raider is a hill. Following the rules on page 69, I declare that I'm ramming with the wave serpent, turn to the appropriate heading and measure the straight line along the board however far it is a wave serpent can move. For the sake of this example, the end point is on the hill.

So, according to page 68, I move my wave serpent's base along that straight line on the board. When I get to the guardians, I invoke page 71, lift up the wave serpent, put it back down on the board just past the unit, and keep moving it closer to the hill. The same thing happens when the wave serpent reaches the forest, I again invoke page 71 where it says I can move over the terrain. When the wave serpent finally reaches the land raider, turn to page 69 and resolve the ram as normal. If the land raider somehow explodes, the wave serpent continues moving until it reaches the previously described end point on the hill.

Additional complications:

If there was a rhino parked in front of the land raider, the wave serpent could invoke page 71 only if there was enough room between the rhino and the land raider to put the wave serpent. There needs to be that much room because the ram could fail to destroy the land raider and would need to stop there. If there isn't enough room, the wave serpent would either have to ram the rhino first, or else fly over both tanks.

If there was a tactical squad in the forest along the line of movement, if I chose not to invoke page 71 and instead chose to move through the forest and risk the terrain check, I could either move over that squad or tank shock them. If the wave serpent instead moves over the forest, that means that it also moves over the tactical squad without performing a tank shock.

That's how I'd play it out, anyway.