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 I have a skimmer transport on a stick that is the hight of a infantry model, do enemies I shoot with the unit just disembarked get cover saves because of the intervening Transport?

does it block LOS to the models? If it does they get a cover save

Basically, true LOS. The only way to know is to take a look from the model's eye view.

If you get a full view to the majority of the target unit with the majority of the firing models there are no cover.

The air (and the base unless you are assaulting) under a skimmer is not part of the skimmer unit.

Thanks for the confirmation guys. This is pretty much how fish of fury works correct?

It doesn't work as well as it used to since the tactic mostly relied on the 4th edition rules of resistance of skimmers to assault and their total inabilty to block any LOS.

Its nowhere near as useful anymore since you're most likely to find the skimmer isn't quite high enough to clear the fire warrior's heads meaning they can't see in order to fire but enemies can see their knees and thus shoot back. While debatably you could put the vehicle on an even higher base but people might raise issue with your inability to deploy many models within 2" of the doors if they're that far off the ground...

However while the height of the vehicle may be equal to the firewarriors heads, often, if you take the models eye view, you'll still see the feet of the target on the other side of the devilfish and be able to fire at full effect.

off topic...but what does your pic say sazzlefrats??i can read the tournament part but not whats under it...

Sazzlefrats wrote:However while the height of the vehicle may be equal to the firewarriors heads, often, if you take the models eye view, you'll still see the feet of the target on the other side of the devilfish and be able to fire at full effect.

Yes, but seeing as the firewarriors disembarked their sight range would be shorter due to being closer. Actually I'll use a picture to show you what I mean...



The model closer to the vehicle can't see as far as the one further away, it means that you won't always see your enemies feet. As always of course the only way to really know what LOS is what is to take a look at the models (Yes, I know my diagram is obviously out of scale before anyone points it out - its only a demonstration of a possiblity not a scale diagram of what will always happen).

NOT YMTC but you can fix through modeling on slightly higher stands, if not sufficiently high now, or agree before game they can shoot and be shot at.

If you can't agree before game and you'r not in a tournament, then you might reconsider playing this individual as you're about two wate two hours of your life that you will never get back.

Frazzled wrote:If you can't agree before game and you'r not in a tournament, then you might reconsider playing this individual as you're about two wate two hours of your life that you will never get back.

So you're saying that if your opponent doesn't let you cheat, hes a bad person? I guess thats one way of looking at it, although I expect the person on the other side of the table would be more than happy not to waste two hours of his life playing against someone who can't deal with the fact they aren't playing 4th edition anymore...

I'm not advocating cheating, I'm just trying to decide if Valk of Fury with Stormies will be worth it come May, as it will be pointless if they get 4+ covers.

Considering the height of the Valkyrie base stands that i've seen so far, los shouldn't be a problem.

I don't know if its RAW but I always play it that when Firewarriors or whatever pop out the skimmer gives a 4+ cover save to the unit being shot at and also that any return fire occurs the tank provides those Firewarriors with a 4+ as well.

Oh, just a quick FYI, I don't play Tau I'm a Nid player. (So it only hurts me:-P)

Houserules are of little to no help when discussing rules.

At best they add confusion, at worst they screw everything up entirely.

Thank you for playing.

Gwar! wrote: I'm not advocating cheating, I'm just trying to decide if Valk of Fury with Stormies will be worth it come May, as it will be pointless if they get 4+ covers.

Given the height of the Valk flying base, you're going to need to Deep Strike out of the thing just to disembark - it stands way more than 2" off the ground.

Gwar! wrote: I'm not advocating cheating,

I'm not acusing you, I'm merely pointing out that Frazzle's option to throw a trantrum as a result of not getting his way in defiance of the rules is completely ridiclous.

I'm just trying to decide if Valk of Fury with Stormies will be worth it come May, as it will be pointless if they get 4+ covers.

One would imagine highly worth it, the valk has a stand that places it some 12" above the table so its not going to block LOS to anything, except possibly other valkeries (or amusingly you could park it infront of a titan's face in apocolypse... it wouldn't be able to see anything else!

Ah well then that's fine the

The thing is Rumours flying about say the Valk will actually become a skimmer, so wont have this 12" high stand anymore

"Use Modeling to Your Advantage!"

no its lame actually "Yeah, its kinda like that" is what it really says

saw54 wrote:off topic...but what does your pic say sazzlefrats??i can read the tournament part but not whats under it...

Well... I'm only trying to rapid fire anyways! Also remember that if you can deploy them about half an inch away from the vehicle and still get everyone within the 2". That extra 1/2" should get you the rapid fire range that you are looking for. If I do want to shoot across the board, obviously I'll do something different. Otherwise I totally understand what you mean with your diagram.

Hymirl wrote:

Sazzlefrats wrote:However while the height of the vehicle may be equal to the firewarriors heads, often, if you take the models eye view, you'll still see the feet of the target on the other side of the devilfish and be able to fire at full effect.

Yes, but seeing as the firewarriors disembarked their sight range would be shorter due to being closer. Actually I'll use a picture to show you what I mean...



The model closer to the vehicle can't see as far as the one further away, it means that you won't always see your enemies feet. As always of course the only way to really know what LOS is what is to take a look at the models (Yes, I know my diagram is obviously out of scale before anyone points it out - its only a demonstration of a possiblity not a scale diagram of what will always happen).

simple answer, stock up on the kneeling tau legs
make sure the unit is around 80% kneeling legs

i dont see the problem with it.

and if you want to "Use Modeling to Your Advantage!" I saw some great space marines on stilts so they could shoot over their razorback (made for a laugh i guess)

I'm surprised that no race have adopted to the staticness of modelhood and developed eyes on their feet.

I think that once you are comparing sightlines like the one in the diagram and talking about stocking up on kneeling legs, you have lost the necessary abstraction for wargaming.

Just assume that the hull is cover and the los is good underneath based on kneeling, etc. and move on. Think of the nitpicking arguments that trying to enforce a situation like the diagram above would cause.

This way, you don't have to worry about non standard skimmer bases, which lots of people have, either.

I have magnetized bases for my tau vehicles. I have a selection made up of both the long and short flying stems.

I fly the devilfish on the long ones. What is the point of having a skimmer troop transport that won't allow your troops a good line of sight underneath? Might as well be a Chimera?
WS2 firewarriors need all the help they can get. You don't want to be getting counter assaulted by an intact ork squad because you gave it a ton of cover saves!
Firewarrior model is fairly short, kneeling or otherwise (they are not known for large stature). Being within 2 inches of a hatch and seeing under the vehicle is not a problem. You only come unstuck when the target unit is standing on a piece of terrain that also gives it some height. When this occurs, invariably you are giving away cover saves and not all of the firewarriors will be shooting.

I fly the Hammerheads on the short versions. They then give cover to any units behind them and don't lose much in what can be seen from the weapon mounts for the purposes of firing.

Would anyone begrudge me playing to my armies strengths while trying to minimise the effects of it's weaknesses?

"Would anyone begrudge me playing to my armies strengths while trying to minimise the effects of it's weaknesses?"


GW 5th edition credo:

If you ain't imperial, you don't get it. If a xenos has something good make it better and give it to the imperials.

IMO LOS is LOS. When playing my tau and dumping out the back I found that the FW LOS was blocked by the vehicle and my enemy could see my legs and bases to shoot me. Granted the FW would get a cover save when being shot but your opponent does not need one as you really cant see them. The fix....Use the side ports to dump and pump!!

DAaddict wrote:"Would anyone begrudge me playing to my armies strengths while trying to minimise the effects of it's weaknesses?"


GW 5th edition credo:

If you ain't imperial, you don't get it. If a xenos has something good make it better and give it to the imperials.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Nice to see a fellow Wisconsinite on Dakka.

DAaddict wrote:"Would anyone begrudge me playing to my armies strengths while trying to minimise the effects of it's weaknesses?"


GW 5th edition credo:

If you ain't imperial, you don't get it. If a xenos has something good make it better and give it to the imperials.

I believe that is QQ moar?

No one would begrudge you because you play by the rules- they came with stands, you used the stands. LOS causes confusion because GW can't decide if they want to have an abstract ruleset or a very particular one. So you get situations like these. See also needing "true" LOS but no split fire.