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.

This is taken from another thread. I am positng it here so discussion can take place here and not clog up the other thread.

Jaidon wrote:Do Thunderfire cannons count as Infantry for purposes of cover saves or Vehicles?

Marius Xerxes wrote: P.55 BRB Says that the Weapon is treated like a Vehicle. So it would follow the Vehicle rules for cover.

Drunkspleen wrote: This is true, of course since it's in a unit with infantry models it can still gain a cover save if atleast 50% of the unit is in cover from the point of view of the firer, which the crew may satisfy quite easily.

To take this a step further, we have an artillery unit in a piece of area terrain. The crew would all be considered in cover for this example, and be the majority models in the unit. So would the guns that are treated as vechicles, still get a 4+ cover save do to majoirty unit in cover rules? This seems to conflict with the rules for cover reguarding vehicles saying they must be 50% blocked from sight to gain a cover save.

also while we're on it page 62 "...It may rarely happen that the firing unit can not see any part of the facing thing they are in (front,side or rear), but they can still see another facing of the target vehicle. In this case they may take the shot against the facing they can see, but to represent such an extremely angled shot, the vehicle receives a 3+ cover save."

For sure. What happens if the Techmarine is completly out of LOS and the Cannon is in the situation you describe above. After Randomizing Hits, does the Cannon get a 3+ Cover and the Techmarine get a 4+ cover? Or can you only ever have one Cover save for a unit as a whole and have to determine which one to use?

In this case, I would think the hits would be resolved on the individual model. Say you fired 3 lascannons at the unit, and all three hit. The dice gods determine that 1 shot hits the cannon and 2 hit the marine. Is the cannon 50% obscured? If yes, roll your obscurement. If no, kersplode. Is your Techy in cover? If yes, roll your cover saves. If no, splorch.

I agree, the unit description even says "These units are quite complex as they include some vehicle models and some infantry models" so I would say that once you dice off to see what is hit, you resolve the cover situation then (i.e. the crew just have to be in cover, while the gun is treated like a vehicle and needs 50% coverage to claim it). the only sillyness I can think of is if you are getting an angled shot while the Techmarine is in the open and cannon is behind a high wall say, so the Cannon gets a 3+ cover save because of this while the techmarine gets none

right and this is where it gets tricky you ignore barrels, antennas, ect that doesn't leave you much to shoot at ... eldar support weapons are more or less hidden by a small hedge ... which only gives it a 5+ save but turn that model slightly so you can see a side facing slightly and yay that's now 3+. Personally i think that GW just forgot the Artillery rules and quickly tagged on last editions rules

I Thought eldar support weapons were not treated like artillery? Or is that just the Guardian weapons?

you're think of guardian heavy weapons platforms which are ignored (thank god) Support weapons batterys are Artillery

Tri wrote:right and this is where it gets tricky you ignore barrels, antennas, ect that doesn't leave you much to shoot at ... eldar support weapons are more or less hidden by a small hedge ... which only gives it a 5+ save but turn that model slightly so you can see a side facing slightly and yay that's now 3+. Personally i think that GW just forgot the Artillery rules and quickly tagged on last editions rules

Probably right on that last bit. I think that being able to strategically place your artillery to maximize survivability is a fair trade for them being terribly squishy in the reverse. A good commander will always protect their artillery, unless they want to use it as bait.

Gwar! wrote:I Thought eldar support weapons were not treated like artillery? Or is that just the Guardian weapons?

I think it is just the guardian weapons.

I don't have my brb handy but...you roll to see whether you hit gun or crew, right? Would this happen before cover saves? If so then it would be easy: if you hit crew then normal infantry cover save rules apply; if you hit gun then normal vehicle cover save rules apply.

You definitely roll before saves.

You roll to see what is hit after rolling to hit but before rolling to wound/penetrate.

Just a note guys, although it's not exactly the same situation, if 50% or more of a vehicle squadron is considered in cover then all vehicles in the squadron get a cover save, just like an infantry squad.

Also most people accept that a monstrous creature accompanied by non-MC models (such as a Hive Tyrant and Tyrant Guard) would get a cover save from having the majority of the unit in cover, while you randomize who is hit between the artillery and the crew I think that's no reason to not follow the normal rules which say if 50% of a unit is in cover the whole unit has a cover save.

I'm quite confident then that RAW in this situation is that if 50% or more of the unit counting both artillery pieces and crew models can be considered in cover, all of them are in cover/obscured.

Drunkspleen wrote:Just a note guys, although it's not exactly the same situation, if 50% or more of a vehicle squadron is considered in cover then all vehicles in the squadron get a cover save, just like an infantry squad.

Also most people accept that a monstrous creature accompanied by non-MC models (such as a Hive Tyrant and Tyrant Guard) would get a cover save from having the majority of the unit in cover, while you randomize who is hit between the artillery and the crew I think that's no reason to not follow the normal rules which say if 50% of a unit is in cover the whole unit has a cover save.

I'm quite confident then that RAW in this situation is that if 50% or more of the unit counting both artillery pieces and crew models can be considered in cover, all of them are in cover/obscured.

The difference between the vehicle squadron/MC situation is that you do not roll to see which model is hit, nor is there a rule involved that "treats the gun as a vehicle".

Yup, Kaloran is right here, a Vehicle Squadron is all vehicles, and if 50% of the vehicles have 50% concealment then the Squadron rules kick in and all the tanks get cover.

However, artillery is not a vehicle squadron so does NOT use those rules. They are a mix of Vehicle and Infantry Models. Nowhere does it say the Vehicles in an artillery unit use the squadron rules, so we must use the normal rules for vehicles, that is, if the gun is not 50% obscured then it cannot claim a cover save

KaloranSLC wrote:The difference between the vehicle squadron/MC situation is that you do not roll to see which model is hit, nor is there a rule involved that "treats the gun as a vehicle".

The hits are still allocated to vehicles in a vehicle squadron, it's just done by the defending player rather than by a random dice roll, and in this situation there is definitely a rule treating them as a vehicle... Why does the randomization of the target have such a large impact on how cover saves work when there's nothing in the rules saying it does?

Drunkspleen wrote:

KaloranSLC wrote:The difference between the vehicle squadron/MC situation is that you do not roll to see which model is hit, nor is there a rule involved that "treats the gun as a vehicle".

The hits are still allocated to vehicles in a vehicle squadron, it's just done by the defending player rather than by a random dice roll, and in this situation there is definitely a rule treating them as a vehicle... Why does the randomization of the target have such a large impact on how cover saves work when there's nothing in the rules saying it does?

See Gwar's posts above and below. Also, it's the mix of vehicles and infantry that make the squadron rules not make sense to apply. Please disregard the terrible sentence structure.

Because it has additional rules as part of a squadron. The Artillery gun has no such rule

then lets ignore the vehicle squadrons, since the artillery unit is a subset of normal units, just like jump infantry, or bikes, it's clearly listed in the same "Unit Types" section. Why then doesn't the artillery unit default to the same cover rules as these other units default to, given that the rules for artillery units give no special stipulations on the handling of cover saves?

Because it specifically says they are treated as vehicles.

Because Artillery Guns are counted as vehicles, which means for any purpose not spelled out in the Artillery Rules you use the rules for vehicles.

As the Artillery Unit type rules do not deal with the cover situation, we have to use the only rules available to us, that is, the rules for Infantry Models in cover and the rules for Vehicles in cover. To use anything else is just making up rules.

EDIT: Emperors bowels, I cannot Speel!

EDIT2: Kaloran stop Ninjaing me! It makes me look Like I cannot be arsed typing out my own argument and am just rehashing yours with typical convoluted British wordiness

EDIT3: Added Sadfaec

Yes, they are treated as vehicles, so thier model is only considered to be in cover if 50% of the facing is obscured, then beyond that, they default to the remainder of the normal cover rules which say if 50% of a unit is in cover, the entirety of the unit is entitled to a cover save.

Gwar! wrote:As the Artillery Unit type rules do not deal with the cover situation, we have to use the only rules available to us, that is, the rules for Infantry Models in cover and the rules for Vehicles in cover. To use anything else is just making up rules.

I think it's just as bad to leave rules out, like the rules for multiple model units which are partially in cover, why we are suddenly ignoring these continues to baffle me.

But as stated in the vehicle rule section, the 50% rule takes priority over the other rules for cover when dealing with a vehicle or MC, so would also need to be satisfied to claim a cover save.

I think 3 am isn't the best time for me to be discussing this and we seem to be at a lock.

You both obviously feel that the vehicle rules which say a vehicle is entitled to a cover save only if it's 50% obscured work entirely seperately to the earlier rules.

I think in this case since the Artillery unit is a subtype of the earlier unit types rules the vehicles 50% requirement simply replaces the more lenient requirements that a space marine model would have to fulfill to count towards the squads 50% requirement.

Obviously we aren't going to be agreeing anytime soon, and I get the grounds for your argument now even though I still consider it a leap to dismiss the earlier rules. But given that we don't appear to be getting anywhere, I think I will agree to disagree on this.

Don't worry Sweetie, you cant win every time. Now gb2kitchen and make me a sandwich!

Just wondering, is this covered in the INAT FAQ? if not, throw it into the new FAQ request thread (I would but I already got a Post there and don't want to Clutter it up)

Gwar! wrote:Don't worry Sweetie, you cant win every time. Now gb2kitchen and make me a sandwich!

Just wondering, is this covered in the INAT FAQ? if not, throw it into the new FAQ request thread (I would but I already got a Post there and don't want to Clutter it up)

Yep it is:

RB.55C.01 – Q: How is cover for Artillery unitsdetermined from enemy shooting?
A: Just like an infantry unit, artillery units get a cover save if at least half of their models are in cover. A gun model only counts as being ‘in cover’ if at least 50% of the model is
physically obscured from the firers (although gun models that aren’t 50% obscured can still utilize a cover save if the majority of the unit is ‘in cover’) [clarification].

I can't help but smile

Drunkspleen wrote:I can't help but smile

The INAT ruling is (as always) just an opinion.

But for myself, the rules read that cover is always determined on a unit by unit basis. If the unit is "in cover" then the models get a cover save, if it isn't then they don't.

The artillery rules don't specify that cover is handled any differently than how it is presented in the basic rules, so therefore you follow those rules; i.e. if half or more of the models in the artillery units are "in cover" from the point of view of the majority of the firing models then the unit gets cover saves.

Of course, gun models are vehicles and therefore for them to be considered "in cover" 50% of the actual model has to be obscured. But again, this is just to determine whether individual models are in cover or not. When it comes down to whether or not the UNIT gets cover saves only half of the models have to be in cover for the unit to get its cover save.


This is most certainly a clarification based on rules that are rather unclear in this situation, but the alternative, that individual models in the unit get or don't get cover saves is found nowehere else in the game so it would seem highly strange (to me) to suddenly start applying that principle.