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.

So this came up with the new leman russes,
A squad of lemans got assaulted, 1 has rear armor 11, the other 10. Which armor am i trying to peirce?
now assume the squad that assaulted has only touched the armor 10 tank...
Is there a majority armor rule?(no there isn't cause Gw had thought about this stupid mixed armor squadron yet)

No majority armour rule: consensus seems to be to roll against the vehicle you are in contact with / within 2" of as normal.

(no there isn't cause Gw had thought about this stupid mixed armor squadron yet) is the correct answer

Gwar! wrote:(no there isn't cause Gw had thought about this stupid mixed armor squadron yet) is the correct answer

Thats what i was afraid of

logically, since you use the armour value of the closest visible facing when there are mixed AVs, I think you would roll against the rear armour of the closest vehicle too (i.e. the one you are in base contact with, or which you are within 2" of someone in base contact with.)

Although the rules don't strictly support this idea, it seems the closest to the shooting rules (which you are meant to follow for assaults, the BRB refers you back to them).

Another option would be to allocate hits instead of penetrating hits or glancing hits, so they are allocated before an AV is attacked and therefore some will be against the AV11 and some against the AV10, however there's no real foundation in the rules for this and it could cause issues with getting multiple pen results on a single vehicle and failing to even glance the others (which should be impossible if you are shooting).

Drunkspleen wrote:Another option would be to allocate hits instead of penetrating hits or glancing hits, so they are allocated before an AV is attacked and therefore some will be against the AV11 and some against the AV10, however there's no real foundation in the rules for this and it could cause issues with getting multiple pen results on a single vehicle and failing to even glance the others (which should be impossible if you are shooting).

Madgod likes this very much yes he does. Do this. It is fair, works well and will keep both players happy.

There is no gold star on here to give you but here is an aquila and a thumbs up

when you assault a unit with equal numbers of different armor saves, don't you use the better? if so, then following that precedent, i'd say you use the better one. if no clear RAW, go with RAI via precedent.

warboss wrote:when you assault a unit with equal numbers of different armor saves, don't you use the better? if so, then following that precedent, i'd say you use the better one. if no clear RAW, go with RAI via precedent.

Do you have any idea how wound allocation works? Each Model uses their own armour save.

oops, i was thinking toughness. no need to get all offensive and reportable about it.

warboss wrote:oops, i was thinking toughness. no need to get all offensive and reportable about it.

How is that offensive? If I had said "Do you have any idea how wound allocation works you dumb **** and **** and **** *** ** ** ** * *" then yes, that would be offensive. All I asked was if you had any idea how wound allocation works, because what you stated was incorrect.

lol, that got a response fast. even you make mistakes, gwar. asking if someone has any clue about the rules instead of simply pointing out their mistake IS offensive. it may not be bannable like your follow up example but it's certainly not pleasant.

See p.64 of the rulebook.

"Shooting Phase
If the vehicles in the squadron have different Armour Values on different facings, use the Armour Value of the facing of the closest visible vehicle."

Generalizing this shooting rule to the close combat rules: the AV10 tank is the closest, use its Armour Value.

If both were 'closest', and had models in close combat with them, then roll to hit and penetration against each individual "closest" tank and spread the damage throughout the squadron.

had this same problem yesterday against a guy with a punisher/vanquisher squadron (wierd mix, I know)

I assaulted, got 4 hits with krak grenades against the two tanks. I didn't really think about it at the time, and because they both had different armor values, I just said these two dice are on the AV11 rear and these two dice are on the AV10 rear...

seems to make the most sense to me.

close combat with squadrons IMO needs a seperate section of the rules... its freaking crazy.

Except the close combat rules already tell you to follow the shooting rules.

Nurglitch wrote:Except the close combat rules already tell you to follow the shooting rules.

Except they don't.

fire4effekt wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:Except the close combat rules already tell you to follow the shooting rules.

Except they don't.

Errm, yes. They do.

Page 39, BRB wrote:wounds are allocated against the target unit by the controlling player, exactly like the fire of a single enemy unit during the Shooting phase (refer back to page 25).

Page 64, BRB wrote: Damage results [...] are allocated against the squadron at each Initiative value, in the same way as a normal combat.