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.

Image decoder:
Red square: Chimera
Blue circles: Firing unit
Turqoise arrows: Correct Line of fire?
Purple arrows: Incorrect Line of fire?

Problem:
Serveral discussions has been raised about this matter in our gaming group.
Some say that the purple arrows is an allow way of firing at the vehicle but I interpret the image at page 60 in the Core rulebook, that the turqoise arrows is the correct way to fire at the vehicles. By measuring the LoF to the vehicles midst, you easily can decide what armourfacing that the hits should be rolled against. In this case the turqoise arrows.

Any opinions about this?
Is thr purple LoF allowed or is the turqoise correct?

You fire at the facing you are "in" unless the firing unit cannot see any part of the facing they are in (front, side or rear), but they can still see another facing of the target vehicle.

So the Teal (Turquoise, Light Blue, The Right Hand Side line from each model for you Colour Blind Chaps!) lines in your Diagram are the correct way to go.

However, if, for example, the top left Model there could not see any of the front facing (it was behind a wall or another vehicle for example) but could see the side, it can fire at the side, granting a cover save to the vehicle as per page 62 of the Main Warhammer 40,000 rulebook.

So there's no 'choice' involved? I always played it (seemingly incorrectly now) that you could shoot any facing you could draw line of sight to, but if the facing is not the one you are in, 3+ cover save to the vehicle. In practice this comes up very seldom because i would not want to grant those 3+ saves.

tetrisphreak wrote:So there's no 'choice' involved? I always played it (seemingly incorrectly now) that you could shoot any facing you could draw line of sight to, but if the facing is not the one you are in, 3+ cover save to the vehicle. In practice this comes up very seldom because i would not want to grant those 3+ saves.

No. The "Shoot a different facing but grant a 3+ save" is ONLY if you cannot see any of the facing you are in.

Cheers for the quick answer!

Will it always be 4 triangles with 90 degree angle forming the square which is the vehicle? I've had some issues when it comes to armour face against my Mech Eldar mate. A wave serpent isn't exactly as easy as a tank to draw lines between front, side and rear armour.

Any tips on how people do it? Perhaps when you shoot at that kind of vehicles?

Zeroth wrote:Will it always be 4 triangles with 90 degree angle forming the square which is the vehicle? I've had some issues when it comes to armour face against my Mech Eldar mate. A wave serpent isn't exactly as easy as a tank to draw lines between front, side and rear armour.

Any tips on how people do it? Perhaps when you shoot at that kind of vehicles?

As per page 60, which gives the Predator as an Example, you measure to the "corners". Granted the Eldar Vehicles do not have a well defined Front and Side, but they DO have a well defined rear.

Zeroth wrote:Will it always be 4 triangles with 90 degree angle forming the square which is the vehicle?

As per the rulebook, yes. How that's supposed to apply to vehicles that aren't rectangular is anyone's guess.


I believe the normal method is to draw an imaginary rectangle around the vehicle and divide that.

Although it's not really that big an issue for Eldar vehicles, since the rear facing is nice and square, the there's no real need to differentiate between front and side armour, as they're the same.

I too have noticed that it rarely matters as the front and sides are often the same, however, how I play it (since the BRB picture example is biased to one type of vehicle, is that you draw 45 degree lines in from the back corners of the Eldar vehicles and that is the arc, yes, it is very small... But doesn't that make perfect sense? You only get a straight shot at such a small rear of a vehicle if it you are directly behind it.

And as others have stated, you do not choose, you figure out which sector you're in and that is the AV facing you are shooting at, otherwise you're at such a steep angle that your bullets will deflect off (that is the explanation for the 3+ save if you are unable to see your respective AV Facing.)

Yeah,u just yell at them until they get that its side armor.

best way i suggest is pick up a compass from the bfg set, and use that. it has the arcs and facings all nicley in the form of a small template. place one over the firing models center, and one over the targets center to get an idea of arc facing and AV.

That's fine for 3rd edition where the arcs were 90 degrees but the arcs are now corner to corner.

TBH, I've yet to find a good way of dealing with eldar vehicles for this.

Personally for serpents and prisims I go with corner to front wing tip but it is good to establish before the game starts.

corner to corner which really is starting to suck with my Battle wagons. Because they are so long it's really easy to get a side shot on them.


I've never seen the +3 rule about shooting a different facing can I get page number on that?

Page 62

P62 - It may rarely happen that the firing unit cannot see any part of the facing they are in but they can still see another facing of the target vehicle. In this case they may take the shot against the facing that they can see, but to represent such an extremely angled shot, the vehicle receives a 3+ cover save.