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.

If your claim is that the turret is in the rear arc, then you would be shooting rear AV, albeit with a 3+ save.

Turret is in the front, 4+ save

BoyMac wrote:It is based on sections of the tank, not what direction parts sticking out are facing...

Except for page 60:

"If a unit has firing models in two different facings..."

And page 62:

"It may happen that the firing unit cannot see any part of the facing they are in..."

Both of these suggest that it is the area around the vehicle that is considering the front/side/rear facing, and not the vehicle. Otherwise, no enemy would ever be "in" any facing.

Facings are determined by the area outside of the hull of the vehicle. If you can draw line of sight from the firer to the target, and never cross into another facing, then there is no 3+ save.

The diagram shows the facings on the vehicle as well as outside of it.

I've read the thread. Thanks for the face palm.

I've also looked at the diagram.

And, furthermore, I've noticed that the diagram changes colors along the outside of the vehicle, and that the vehicle pictured shows no variation between the different sectioned areas.

Let me ask, if the turret is in the rear arc, why can't I always draw LoS to the turret and hit that sweet, sweet rear armor?

Because you can see the arc that you are standing in.

BoyMac wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

I was referring to the rear facing.

If you are in the front arc, you can not possibly see the rear facing of a razorback.

In the diagram above the top arrow can not see the rear facing of the vehicle.

Another quick drawing for you.

You are still shooting at front the front of the vehicle. Turret position doesn't matter.

juraigamer wrote:No. Stop making up rules. The book clearly states otherwise. This thread has gone from question to stupid.

See the above image. For those whom it doesn't make sense, please go to sleep and after you wake up tomorrow try reading all this again.

Thanks for adding something worthwhile to the thread?

DeathReaper wrote:If you are in the front arc, you can not possibly see the rear facing of a razorback.

In the diagram above the top arrow can not see the rear facing of the vehicle.

+1

calypso2ts wrote:okay I guess this discussion changed again, now the claim is the turret is in the back of the vehicle, so it must be the rear facing? I would be so pumped to play it this way and get loads of AV 10 rear armor shots if it wasn't ridiculous.

I don't even know where to begin...augustus is partially correct, there is no precedent to state features appearing in on top of the vehicle belong to the front, rear or side arcs.

It is patently ridiculous to assume you get to fire at the rear armor with a 3+ save.

+1

So now some of the people in this thread are claiming that the dread, standing directly in front of the razorback and predator is somehow shooting at the rear of the vehicle (so they can claim a 3+ save) but he isn't getting the benefit of hitting rear armor value (so they can benefit from the front armor value). This has got to be the biggest load of I've seen in YMDC in a very long time.

This thread is lowering the collective value of YMDC by making it to five pages.

It really is easy:

1) Can you see the tank at all? Turret? If yes then move on
2) Which facing are you in? Front, side or rear? This is determined by where the shooting squad is standing and nothing else.
3) Can you see the facing that you are in? If yes then go to 4. Else shoot with 3+ cover.
4) Is the vehicle more than 50% obscured? If yes, shoot with 4+ cover. Else, shoot without cover

The diagram still says vehicle facings, nor firer facings. Any definition claiming something other than those four triangles is personal interpretation.
As we are having a very colorful thread already, I might as well contribute an image:



So you are claiming that exhaust pipe is part of the front arc when shooting? Is there any rules backup to this? I did have this example come up in a game, when my battle wagon was mostly hidden behind a ruin, and heavy weapon teams on top of another ruin in front of the wagon could see the exhaust pipe sticking out. We didn't even think about the possibility of it being part of the front arc...

Arc is to determine where the shots are coming from.

Facing is used to determine what armor you use and what cover save, if any, the vehicle receives.

Jidmah, in your picture, if you weer in the front arc, then what you saw of the exhaust pipes were the front facing of the vehicle.

Think of the facings as a silhouette, and use that as an example of what is the front facing.


The vehicle rules do not allow you to shoot at the top of a vehicle, hense no top armor value is given.

In an abstract rules system for arc's facings and LoS is bulky to say the least,

DeathReaper wrote:Arc is to determine where the shots are coming from.

Facing is used to determine what armor you use and what cover save, if any, the vehicle receives.

Jidmah, in your picture, if you weer in the front arc, then what you saw of the exhaust pipes were the front facing of the vehicle.

Think of the facings as a silhouette, and use that as an example of what is the front facing.


The vehicle rules do not allow you to shoot at the top of a vehicle, hense no top armor value is given.

In an abstract rules system for arc's facings and LoS is bulky to say the least,

Could anyone please find a reference to Arc when firing at a vehicle?

The diagram on page 60, clearly shows the facings, it's inherently impossible to be in the rear facing zone when firing from in front of the vehicle.
The diagram also happily takes into account the three dimensional aspect of this situation by being top down. We know that the 'Top AV' is the same as whatever facing on is refencing - this is shown and explained.

If one can not see the facing in which one is standing then the cover save is 3+.

Which is the point.

You are in the front arc of the vehicle, and can see part of that arc (the turret) - meaning a 4+ save.

You are not somehow seeing the "rear" facing. That's nonsense.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You are in the front arc of the vehicle, and can see part of that arc (the turret) - meaning a 4+ save.

Facing Nos, arc is only ever used for weapons and "arc of sight" pg 61 (admittedly changed to "arc of fire" on page 61).

The only time arc is mentioned in any rules beyond firing a vehicle and drawing LoS is on page 73 "if it is rammed in its rear arc". This error is highlighted by page 72 "Unlike infantry, a walker has a facing, which influences where it can fire (see below) and its Armour Value when fired at." lol lol lol

Could he be using "arc" as the general mathematic term, since each facing is determined by an arc on a circle centered on the midpoint of the vehicle?

Arc being something already defined in the rulebook, along with facing. The rules we are currently discussing only metion facings, to bring other, inaccurate, terms into the discussion only serves to muddy the waters.

DeathReaper wrote:Arc is to determine where the shots are coming from.
Facing is used to determine what armor you use and what cover save, if any, the vehicle receives.
Jidmah, in your picture, if you weer in the front arc, then what you saw of the exhaust pipes were the front facing of the vehicle.
Think of the facings as a silhouette, and use that as an example of what is the front facing.
The vehicle rules do not allow you to shoot at the top of a vehicle, hense no top armor value is given.
In an abstract rules system for arc's facings and LoS is bulky to say the least,

Leading to stuff like that.

DeathReaper wrote:Facing is to determine where the shots are coming from.
Facing is used to determine what armor you use and what cover save, if any, the vehicle receives.
Jidmah, in your picture, if you weer in the front Facing , then what you saw of the exhaust pipes were the front facing of the vehicle. *Nope pretty sure they are rear or side*
Think of the facings as a silhouette, and use that as an example of what is the front facing.
The vehicle rules do not allow you to shoot at the top of a vehicle, hense no top armor value is given. *It is, as any part of the roof will belong to a facing
In an abstract rules system for arc's facingswhat??? and LoS is bulky to say the least,

Is why I'm sure Nos, wouldn't use a misleading term which already belong to another aspect of the game as the appropriate term is quite important as we are talking about "Vehicle armour facing" Pg 60 and "Armour Values for individual vehicles also vary depending on which facing of the vehicle the shot comes from" or "If a vehicle is even partially under a template weapon, it is hit on the Armour value the firer is facing." after that "It may rarely happen that the firing unit cannot see any part of the facing they are in (front, side or rear), but they can still see another facing of the target vehicle."

There's no circle used to work out a vehicles facing either...

I think it was mainly too many uses of "arc" (or arch) in the thread.

If you can see the front facing, that is what you shoot at. Not sure you could consider the turret to be the rear facing, otherwise I'll happily always shoot the rear of your razorback....

As long as you can't see any part of the front facing, and the shooting models are slightly elevated or tall enough to see it, you're fine to shoot the rear. The razorback would get 3+ cover in this case.

What about if you can see both?

Which was the point we were making: you use the facing to determine what AV you shoot at (front, rear, side) and then see if you can see any part of the facing.

If you can see the turret, and are in the front facing - you shoot the front facing.

That's if the turret is part of the front facing. The diagram on p.60 says it is.

The Razorback remote mount may be farther back on the hull, sitting in the Rear arc -- I don't know as I don't have a model of it.

The sponsons seem clearly to be in the side arcs, even if viewed from in front.

I just think this is another case where the rules do not cover all possibilities and we have to interpret a bit.

nosferatu1001 wrote:What about if you can see both?

Which was the point we were making: you use the facing to determine what AV you shoot at (front, rear, side) and then see if you can see any part of the facing.

If you can see the turret, and are in the front facing - you shoot the front facing.

You may only ever shoot the facing you are in, 3+ shooting other facings is only allowed if you can't see your own facing. For an unobstructed view there is no option to shoot the razorback's turret.

By that same logic you are applying those 3+ shots would never, ever be possible, as the side of the vehicle would be front facing, too. If I see the side of a vehicle, it's still the side of the vehicle, even if I am standing in the front facing.

To find out facings you quarter the entire board from the center of the target vehicle, including the vehicle.
Any part of the vehicle that is in the same quarter as me(the shooter), is in the same facing.
If I can see more than 50% of that quarter of the vehicle, I can shoot it without cover.
If I can see 50% or less, I can still shoot that facing, but it gets cover.
If I can't see any part of the vehicle that is in the same quarter as me, but I can see a part of the vehicle in a different quarter, I can shoot that quarter and its corresponding facing while granting 3+ cover.

I don't really see any further definition or explanation than the quartering of the vehicle in the BRB, which would make the razorbacks entire turret part of the rear facing.

Kilkrazy wrote:That's if the turret is part of the front facing. The diagram on p.60 says it is.

The Razorback remote mount may be farther back on the hull, sitting in the Rear arc -- I don't know as I don't have a model of it.

The sponsons seem clearly to be in the side arcs, even if viewed from in front.

I just think this is another case where the rules do not cover all possibilities and we have to interpret a bit.

This is exactly the conclusion I came out with. It doesn't give any exact ruling on it. The original purpose of this post was for someone to point out any rules in the rulebook that would address my issue. Since there hasn't been anything DIRECTLY addressing it I came up to my conclusion that I would just have to interpret it with whoever I play.

Remember, the rules are abstractions.

'Facing' is how the vehicle is facing. 'Arc' is the portion of the battlefield that sees that facing of the vehicle, or that that portion of the vehicle 'sees'.

Cover is not Armour, and is not stopping the rounds. Even a lowly guardsman is counted as being able to basically tear through solid ferrocrete walls with their bare hands (or whatever equipment they have on them) so a couple bushes aren't going to be able to stop a Lascannon shot.

If you see any bit of the vehicle, that means that you know the vehicle is there. But you aren't going to waste your Lascannon shot on the exhaust of a Battlewagon, are you? No, you're going to try and shoot the main body of the Wagon. Trouble is, there's a wall there, and you can't see it. So you take your best guess as to where the engine is, and fire. Whoops! Turns out the Big Mek that put this Battlewagon together decided he'd rather use two smaller engines on either side, instead of one big one in the middle. You would have been able to tell this if you'd been able to see the Wagon, but since you couldn't, that Lascannon shot went right between the two engines, hurting neither. That's the 4+ cover save.

However, to even get to the engines, that Lascannon shot had to get through the armour facing that was directly behind that wall, between the Lascannon and the Battlewagon. It turns out that was the front (which you couldn't tell from the exhaust pipe, which was the only thing you could see) and so you had to shoot through AV14. It's lucky you had a Lascannon instead of a Heavy Bolter, isn't it?


Now in this case, since it's technically the top armour that's seen, and the Dred would probably think "Hey, that might be an important bit! I'ma shoot it!", I'd say use the Top armour. The closes thing in the rulebook to Top armour, I believe, is related to Barrage or Ordinance weapons, and says to treat Top armour as though it has the same value as the Side armour.

There is no such thing as top armor.

Anvildude wrote:
'Facing' is how the vehicle is facing. 'Arc' is the portion of the battlefield that sees that facing of the vehicle, or that that portion of the vehicle 'sees'.

No, it is not.
Look at page 59, arc of sight, use to determine what a vehicle can draw LoS to.
You facing comment is fairly accurate, as facings are what vehicle present to the battlefield.

Now in this case, since it's technically the top armour that's seen, and the Dred would probably think "Hey, that might be an important bit! I'ma shoot it!", I'd say use the Top armour. The closes thing in the rulebook to Top armour, I believe, is related to Barrage or Ordinance weapons, and says to treat Top armour as though it has the same value as the Side armour.

Yeah, the only time 'top armour' is mentioned is on page 60 "Hits from barrage weapons, however, always hit the vehicle’s side armour (representing its top armour)." as an abstraction, to only be used when a barrage weapons center hole end over the hull.
Otherwise one uses the AV of the facing one is in and can see, or if one can not see the facing one's in - any facing one can see and this shot's grants a 3+.
The diagram on page 60 show that all parts of a vehicle belong to a facing, there is no 'Top Av' because there doesn't need to be one.
Why would you make rules up instead of following the one's in the rulebook?

ChrisCP wrote:

Anvildude wrote:
'Facing' is how the vehicle is facing. 'Arc' is the portion of the battlefield that sees that facing of the vehicle, or that that portion of the vehicle 'sees'.

No, it is not.
Look at page 59, arc of sight, use to determine what a vehicle can draw LoS to.
You facing comment is fairly accurate, as facings are what vehicle present to the battlefield.

Now in this case, since it's technically the top armour that's seen, and the Dred would probably think "Hey, that might be an important bit! I'ma shoot it!", I'd say use the Top armour. The closes thing in the rulebook to Top armour, I believe, is related to Barrage or Ordinance weapons, and says to treat Top armour as though it has the same value as the Side armour.

Yeah, the only time 'top armour' is mentioned is on page 60 "Hits from barrage weapons, however, always hit the vehicle’s side armour (representing its top armour)." as an abstraction, to only be used when a barrage weapons center hole end over the hull.
Otherwise one uses the AV of the facing one is in and can see, or if one can not see the facing one's in - any facing one can see and this shot's grants a 3+.
The diagram on page 60 show that all parts of a vehicle belong to a facing, there is no 'Top Av' because there doesn't need to be one.
Why would you make rules up instead of following the one's in the rulebook?

This x100.

Anvildude wrote:Remember, the rules are abstractions.

'Facing' is how the vehicle is facing. 'Arc' is the portion of the battlefield that sees that facing of the vehicle, or that that portion of the vehicle 'sees'.

Cover is not Armour, and is not stopping the rounds. Even a lowly guardsman is counted as being able to basically tear through solid ferrocrete walls with their bare hands (or whatever equipment they have on them) so a couple bushes aren't going to be able to stop a Lascannon shot.

If you see any bit of the vehicle, that means that you know the vehicle is there. But you aren't going to waste your Lascannon shot on the exhaust of a Battlewagon, are you? No, you're going to try and shoot the main body of the Wagon. Trouble is, there's a wall there, and you can't see it. So you take your best guess as to where the engine is, and fire. Whoops! Turns out the Big Mek that put this Battlewagon together decided he'd rather use two smaller engines on either side, instead of one big one in the middle. You would have been able to tell this if you'd been able to see the Wagon, but since you couldn't, that Lascannon shot went right between the two engines, hurting neither. That's the 4+ cover save.

However, to even get to the engines, that Lascannon shot had to get through the armour facing that was directly behind that wall, between the Lascannon and the Battlewagon. It turns out that was the front (which you couldn't tell from the exhaust pipe, which was the only thing you could see) and so you had to shoot through AV14. It's lucky you had a Lascannon instead of a Heavy Bolter, isn't it?


Now in this case, since it's technically the top armour that's seen, and the Dred would probably think "Hey, that might be an important bit! I'ma shoot it!", I'd say use the Top armour. The closes thing in the rulebook to Top armour, I believe, is related to Barrage or Ordinance weapons, and says to treat Top armour as though it has the same value as the Side armour.

The lascannon example falls appart when you fit a killkannon turret with a lobba on top on the passenger compartment. It would still be in the rear facing, but a critical part of the wagon, and can be shot without penetrating the entire wagon. The two guns should be packing enough explosive ammunition to rip the bw appart when you hit the right spot.

You also mix up "cover" and "out of sight". Whether lasgun or lascannon, both can't shoot through a solid concrete wall. They shoot over it or through windows, but never through it. Cover represents the increased chance of missing(due to smaller target) combined with the increased chance of the enemy dodging the shot. If you can't see something, you can't shoot it at all, including a vehicle facing.

The key here, to me, is do we include turrets in the "facing". To draw LOS, yes, as it is clearly outlined for that purpose. However, if all you can see is the turret, does that count as a facing? From what I see a lot of people doing, the facing is literally the hull front, sides, and rear and nothing else. Though the diagram doesn't exclude the turret, it isn't exacltly spelled out well.

The turret is explicitly included in the rules for drawing LoS to a vehicle.

calypso2ts wrote:The turret is explicitly included in the rules for drawing LoS to a vehicle.

For LoS, yes, but not for facing. Though the diagram helps, it just isn't too clear.

Another question could be, does the turret itself have facings? If you turn a turret around so it's looking behind, does that mean that the turret is showing rear armour where the hull is showing front? Or is the turret using the armour value of the hull, so if you have a 14, 12, 10 AV vehicle, and turn the turret, different parts of the turret (the parts facing 'forwards') will gain and lose that AV 14?

em_en_oh_pee wrote:

calypso2ts wrote:The turret is explicitly included in the rules for drawing LoS to a vehicle.

For LoS, yes, but not for facing. Though the diagram helps, it just isn't too clear.

If you're already having trouble diving your vehicles into quarters to determine facings, then yes, the disgram won't help you. If you can divide your vehicles into quarters to tell which facing the shot is coming from, then the turret or whatever other pieces of the vehicle you can see belong to the facing that they belong to. That simple, they belong to the facing they occupy - it's possible for a turret to be in two facings.
If we have firers in two facings we've been told how to do that "If a unit has firing models in two different facings of a target vehicle shots are resolved separately for the two facings." Pg 60, so really it just telling where the firer is, front, side or rear, and seeing which bit's they can see.