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.

Both sides of this argument are being intentionally dense. PLEASE STOP IT.

Side 1: The RULES AS WRITTEN allow you to pick a unit you can see, then pick a range at which your cannonball starts it's path of carnage.

Side 2: When you intentionally choose a range which cannot possibly hit the named target, you are not actually targeting that unit.

Using RAW, there is TECHICALLY nothing wrong with overguessing. This is however, the worst kind of .

This could be solved with a rule (either in the rulebook or a house rule) that if the cannon shot misses the named target (i.e the path of the cannon ball after land+bounce doesn't impact the named unit) then it misses all models it would have otherwise hit.

After 15+ posts on this topic, hasn't it become painfully obvious sides have been taken and no one is moving from them? Let's move on, shall we?

Viperion