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.

Okay had this come up in a deployment firing situation.

2 Rhinos with Long Fangs are rear to rear, with 2 razorbacks side by side behind them so that there fronts are against the side armor of the Rhinos blocking LOS to the hull. The Razorbacks are using TL LasC. In the shooting phase my opponent shoot the Long Fangs out of the rhinos and LasC out of the Razorbacks over the rhinos. During my shooting phase I wreck both Rhinos, with some shooting left I decide to shoot at the Razorbacks but my opponent claims that since I can only draw LoS to the Turret not the hull that I cannot shoot them. Is this correct? I know I was probably going to give a good cover save to him, but for him to shoot over the Rhinos without being able to return fire seems a lil unfair to me, or is this just a really good tactic?

If you can see 0.00001% of the vehicle's "hull or turrets" then you can shoot it.

Note, however, that certain parts are exempt from targetting: gun barrels, antenna, barrel poles, etc. (ETA dozer blades are also not considered hull)

He would only get a 4+ cover save in this instance.

Bah, I need to have more coffee. I am slow today.

As Scott said, so long as you can see even a tiny tiny portion of the hull etc. you can shoot at it, with a cover save if it is 50% obscured.

That's what I thought...they only thing that got me was that I couldn't see the hull, just the turret on top of the razorback, was going to give him a +3 save but ended up just targetting the SM that hopped out of the wrecked rhinos.

The rule is very clear on this, you need to be able to see "hull or turret".

I believe by RAW you are allowed to agree a better save (i.e 3+) if the target is heavily obscured and if both players concur. Don't have a codex so can't give a reference. Agree with everything else above.

Soup and a roll wrote:I believe by RAW you are allowed to agree a better save (i.e 3+) if the target is heavily obscured and if both players concur. Don't have a codex so can't give a reference. Agree with everything else above.

Only in two situations:
1. The obscuring object is a fortification (this is NOT a stone wall, this is a heavily reinforced stone wall).
2. You are using a special exception in the rules to shoot at a facing other than the one the model is in.

Now, if both players concur, that's a whole other situation.

Everyone forgets that the cover save for obscured vehicles depends on what's doing the obscuring. The save for other units is 4+. Even if the other unit is a landraider.