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.

Vehicles and troop covers saves - I have noticed this more as of late.  If units are behind or partially obscured by vehicles, do they receive a 4+ cover save.  I have seen this issue come up in two different events:

1) with drop pods where the pod owner claimed a cover save from active pods.

2) IG claiming cover saves behind a chimera from an ordinace blast.

Until these two instances, I have never encountered this in any event.  That said though - what are your thoughts?

This is one of those areas where the rules say one thing but I think most people play differently, primarily due to difficultly interpreting the rules and the rarity of the situation. The rulebook is pretty clear in saying that vehicles (yours or theirs) provide cover, but they also block LOS completely. So normally if you are position to claim a cover save from the vehicle you can't be shot either. Or more likely the part of the squad that could claim a cover save can be seen and thus can't claim the cover leaving the exposed guys out in the open. Depending on the exact setups I could see both scenerios be allowed. However you have to be careful because just having the vehicle in the way doesn't mean you get cover, you need to have the majority of the eligible models to be in a position to claim that cover.

Live Vehicles usually Block LOS since they are size 3 vs size 2 troops. Destroyed Vehicles you can claim a +4 cover save from.

Vehicals don't block LOS based on size catagory.

Posted By thehod on 11/09/2007 7:37 AM
Live Vehicles usually Block LOS since they are size 3 vs size 2 troops.

The Size categories are only relevant when LOS goes into or through Area Terrain or a close combat (rulebook, page 7 and 20)

At all other times, you draw a LOS using the model's eye view. If you can see the target over the vehicle, you have LOS and if that target is at least partially obscured by the intervening vehicle, it would get a cover save. The rules for cover on page 25 specifically list vehicles as providing a 4+ cover save.

Posted By Inquisitor_Malice on 11/09/2007 4:34 AM

Vehicles and troop covers saves - I have noticed this more as of late.  If units are behind or partially obscured by vehicles, do they receive a 4+ cover save.  I have seen this issue come up in two different events:

1) with drop pods where the pod owner claimed a cover save from active pods.

2) IG claiming cover saves behind a chimera from an ordinace blast.

Until these two instances, I have never encountered this in any event.  That said though - what are your thoughts?

I don't know why this is a question really.

Vehicles are listed as providing cover saves in the rulebook just like any other piece of terrain. They absolutely provide cover saves to troops and other vehicles obscured behind them.

 

Well Yak -

It's actually more of a question of how people play.  Nobody plays with the 1" limitation on assaults and yet it is clearly stated in the rulebook (and is one that Mike and I got burned on in the UK).  However, 99+% of the players do not play with the 1" assault limitation (and this includes AdeptiCon).  I have been playing in events since 1996 and this year is the first time that I have encountered the vehicles providing cover saves.  Hell, I played against drop pods several times including once with Steinrep above and he did not claim a cover save from the pod on an ordinance shot that hit the pod and covered some marines behind.  Plus a ruling was handed down in the one of my games at AdeptiCon that vehicles do not provide cover for troops. 

So - let's rephrase it.  How have people seen this played in events?

Well, I always play that way by default.

Sometimes in tournaments people have been a bit surprised, but everytime I show them that vehicles are listed as a type of cover in the rulebook, they seem perfectly fine with it.

Unfortunately, because of that I can't really give a good estimate about the way most people play because in this case it has always seemed to play 'my way' without any argument or hesitation after the rulebook comes out.

Also, its not a situation that comes up every game, so again its kind of hard for me to judge general behavior on the topic.

We could always do a poll if you are really curious.

I really wish I could have been around when the judge ruled that vehicles don't provide cover.  . .on what possible basis could he make that ruling?

insaniak I stand corrected with the size categories and LOS.

From what the rule book says: (page 25)

"Models may claim cover from Area Terrain up to one size smaller ..."

I never saw anyone ever try to claim cover from a vehicle unless it was a wreck

Inquisitor_Malice wrote:

Well Yak -

Hell, I played against drop pods several times including once with Steinrep above and he did not claim a cover save from the pod on an ordinance shot that hit the pod and covered some marines behind.  Plus a ruling was handed down in the one of my games at AdeptiCon that vehicles do not provide cover for troops. 

So - let's rephrase it.  How have people seen this played in events?

Don't forget if a Ordnance weapon covers infantry that are not in LOS, while behind a vehicle or vehicles, and does not deviate will not cause any hits on the infantry since there is no LOS. If the Ordnance weapon deviates and hits infantry, not in LOS and behind a vehicle, then I would presume this rule would go into effect.

All in all, it's a strange rule.

The only situation that I think this may apply is when a unit is behind a functional skimmer and being shot at. But skimmers on the other hand does not block LOS so it's moot.

inquisitor_bob wrote:

Don't forget if a Ordnance weapon covers infantry that are not in LOS, while behind a vehicle or vehicles, and does not deviate will not cause any hits on the infantry since there is no LOS. If the Ordnance weapon deviates and hits infantry, not in LOS and behind a vehicle, then I would presume this rule would go into effect.

All in all, it's a strange rule.

The only situation that I think this may apply is when a unit is behind a functional skimmer and being shot at. But skimmers on the other hand does not block LOS so it's moot.

Beg pardon, but what????

If I target a tank with ordnance, and it doesn't deviate, covering the target and other models, how does it NOT affect the covered models LOS or not?

inquisitor_bob wrote:

Don't forget if a Ordnance weapon covers infantry that are not in LOS, while behind a vehicle or vehicles, and does not deviate will not cause any hits on the infantry since there is no LOS. If the Ordnance weapon deviates and hits infantry, not in LOS and behind a vehicle, then I would presume this rule would go into effect.

All in all, it's a strange rule.

The only situation that I think this may apply is when a unit is behind a functional skimmer and being shot at. But skimmers on the other hand does not block LOS so it's moot.

I think you're referring to regular blast weapons, because the rulebook online FAQ makes it clear that scattering Ordnance can indeed hit and kill models out of LOS.