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.

I've been playing with my LR crusader, and I noticed that it can phisically go behind the armour at it's back if it is pulled up.

I'm curious :

Assuming there is LOS, can a land raider attack with it's assault cannons with rear armour facings?

What?

If I assume you are referring to the hull mounted assault cannons being able to pivot 360-degree when elevated, technically you could target an enemy unit that is above the Crusader and to its rear. This is based on the rulebook stating that vehicle weapons should be treated as having the firing arcs they appear to be designed to have.

However, the rulebook also states that hull mounted weapons have 45-degree firing arc into the direction the weapon is facing.

In older Marines armies, the Crusader's assault cannons are listed as hull mounted and would therefore be restricted to a 45-degree cone to its front arc. New 5th edition Marine armies (i.e., Space Marines and Space Wolves) have no listing for how its weapons are mounted, allowing the player to use true line of sight with each weapon's actual 3D rotation to determine what can and cannot be shot at.

Does that fit what you were asking?

SJ

hey thanks. that is the answer I was looking for.

It's the rulebook FAQ that states that a weapon should be able to shoot if it looks like it can point at the target. The rulebook itself is actually rather nicely concise in it's rulings... that the FAQ then completely ignores. I hate it when GW replaces good rules with bad ones via "unofficial but everyone should play like this anyways" FAQs.

willydstyle wrote:It's the rulebook FAQ that states that a weapon should be able to shoot if it looks like it can point at the target. The rulebook itself is actually rather nicely concise in it's rulings... that the FAQ then completely ignores. I hate it when GW replaces good rules with bad ones via "unofficial but everyone should play like this anyways" FAQs.

I agree. It's so bad I actually think the INAT FAQ needs to have a "Please ignore this bit of the GW FAQ and play by the freaking rules please".

Sadly, they don't, so I did instead

I have no problem with that particular point - it goes nicely with the rulebook telling you to draw line of sight from the weapon mount.

As such, the LR's front weapon mount cannot fire to the rear or sides unless shooting at a highly elevated target.