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.

insaniak wrote:

The Green Git wrote:I have the vehicle LOS rules and the Infiltrate rules to support the supposition that the vehicle must draw LOS from it's weapon mounts. I didn't have to make anything up.

Well, yes, you do. You need to make up a rule that allows the enemy unit to turn and face the infiltrators.

Otherwise, the rules simply don't cover how to draw LOS to a target that is not directly in front of you unless you are about to shoot at it.

I didn't make up "Infiltrators may be set up anywhere on the table that IS more than 12" from any enemy unit, as long as no deployed enemy unit can draw a line of sight to them." That's a rule that tells me to check LOS when the Infiltrator is deployed. Just so we are clear.

The rules tell me EXACTLY how to draw LOS to a target that is not directly in front of my vehicle and it doesn't involve the vehicle moving one whit. It involves moving weapons along their arcs of movement and tracing a line from the mount to the target along the barrel and checking for intervening terrain.

BGB Pg 58: wrote: VEHICLE WEAPONS & LINE OF SIGHT

Just like infantry, vehicles need to be able to draw a line of sight to their targets in order to shoot at them. When firing a vehicle's weapons, point them against the target and then trace the line of sight from each
weapons ' mounting and along its barrel, to see if the shot is blocked by terrain or models.

Just so I understand your argument... are you saying I can't check LOS because that only happens in the shooting phase? Are you are saying I can't move the vehicles weapons along their firing arcs to check LOS because it's not the shooting phase? Since I showed the pages in the rule book that tell me to check LOS for Infiltrators and I showed the pages in the rulebook that tell me how to do that for a vehicle, what part am I making up?

SlaveToDorkness wrote:Exactly, there is no LOS defined for vehicles at all. Just the arc of fire from the weapons.

Actually, it's not arc of fire that's defined for weapons, it's arc of sight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:In practice, (at least from my experience) people tend to draw LOS from the model's head rather than specifically from their eyes, and an arc of vision in most cases doesn't matter because the model can usually be turned to face the target... so people either turn the models or leave them as is and assume a 360 degree arc of sight.

Bear in mind that humans have 360degree arc of sight without moving their feet.

If we were to make the same assumption as for vehicle models (that things which are glued are actually flexible mounts) then infantry ought to have 360degree LoS.

The Green Git wrote:Just so I understand your argument... are you saying I can't check LOS because that only happens in the shooting phase?

No, I'm saying the rules don't give you any way of doing that unless the infiltrating unit is directly in front of the weapons barrel.

Are you are saying I can't move the vehicles weapons along their firing arcs to check LOS because it's not the shooting phase?

Nope, I'm saying that you can only move a vehicle's weapons 'when firing a vehicle's weapons',, which is what it says in the rule you just quoted.


That's why this requires a house rule. The only time you are given permission to move the vehicle's weapons is when firing them. At other times where the rules ask you to draw a LOS, you would have to draw that LOS from the model as it is positioned, because the rules don't give you the option to do otherwise.


Bear in mind here that I'm not for a moment suggesting that this is how it should be played. I believe that we're supposed to assume that the vehicle's weapons can rotate, or that non-vehicle unit can turn in the required direction. It simply isn't actually in the rules, though.

insaniak wrote:Nope, I'm saying that you can only move a vehicle's weapons 'when firing a vehicle's weapons',, which is what it says in the rule you just quoted.

OK that's different than "you can't pivot the tank" but I'll roll with it.

So if we are to say that you can't check LOS because you can't move the weapons along their mounts then how do we get to "I can draw LOS to an Infiltrator from the tip of my fender"?

You have to admit we at least have a lot of rules and inferred understanding on LOS with one argument and not a shred of rules for the other. You said earlier:

insaniak wrote:But if we're having to make up rules anyway, drawing LOS from any part of the tank for this specific purpose is equally as valid a way of playing it as drawing LOS from the weapons.

From where I sit it is NOT equally valid to claim you can draw LOS from a fender. There's no rule that says this under any circumstances. There *ARE* rules that say you must draw LOS from weapon mounts in the shooting phase and it's stated in the Infiltrator rules you draw LOS to determine how close Infiltrators can get to you. In the absence of any other LOS rule saying I draw it from a fender, I fall back to rules that tell me where to draw it from.

The Green Git wrote:OK that's different than "you can't pivot the tank" but I'll roll with it.

I never referred to pivoting the tank.

So if we are to say that you can't check LOS because you can't move the weapons along their mounts then how do we get to "I can draw LOS to an Infiltrator from the tip of my fender"?

I would assume that the logic is along the lines of 'since the normal LOS rules don't pply, we just determine whether or not we can draw a line between the two models'... But it wasn't my argument to begin with, so that's just a guess.

From where I sit it is NOT equally valid to claim you can draw LOS from a fender. There's no rule that says this under any circumstances. There *ARE* rules that say you must draw LOS from weapon mounts in the shooting phase and it's stated in the Infiltrator rules you draw LOS to determine how close Infiltrators can get to you. In the absence of any other LOS rule saying I draw it from a fender, I fall back to rules that tell me where to draw it from.

And if that's what works for you, that's fine. The point was that the moment you have to create a house rule, you're going to have to discuss it with your opponent. At that point, any rule the two of you agree to use is how it will be played.

The simple fact is that no amount of discussion on these or any other boards is going to produce the 'right' way to play it, as the rules just don't cover it. If a house rule is required to play the game, then which way is 'right' is entirely a matter of personal preference, and not automatically anything to do with what the rules actually say in other similar situations.

Scott-S6 wrote:
Bear in mind that humans have 360degree arc of sight without moving their feet.

No, they don't. We play it that way, but the rules actaully say something about pivotting infantry models to shoot at a target. So set up 12" behind them, and you're out of LOS, according to the shooting LOS rules. So do we use those or do we all start deploying 2nd ed style, in a herringbone looking in all directiosn (Back then you could deploy ANYWHERE out of LOS, so 1" behind those guys was fine).

So, if we're going to give infantry 360 degree LOS for non-shooting purposes, why not vehicles? And since it's not shooting, then weapon arc of sight does not apply, just whether or not the vehcile can 'see' the enemy unit.

insaniak wrote:

The Green Git wrote: So if we are to say that you can't check LOS because you can't move the weapons along their mounts then how do we get to "I can draw LOS to an Infiltrator from the tip of my fender"?

I would assume that the logic is along the lines of 'since the normal LOS rules don't pply, we just determine whether or not we can draw a line between the two models'... But it wasn't my argument to begin with, so that's just a guess.

Yep, that would be my argument. The normal shooting LOS rules do not apply, so basically if you can draw a line between the two units and it's not blocked. they can be 'seen'.

The Green Git wrote: From where I sit it is NOT equally valid to claim you can draw LOS from a fender. There's no rule that says this under any circumstances. There *ARE* rules that say you must draw LOS from weapon mounts in the shooting phase and it's stated in the Infiltrator rules you draw LOS to determine how close Infiltrators can get to you. In the absence of any other LOS rule saying I draw it from a fender, I fall back to rules that tell me where to draw it from.

And yes, there are rules that say you draw LOS from the weapons WHEN SHOOTING in the shooting phase. Is this shooting? No. Is this in the shooting phase? No. So why do those rules apply? Basically, there are no rules that tell us how to determine LOS when not shooting. Does Infantry have a 360 degree LOS when not shooting? Are vehciles limited to weapon Arc of Sight when not shooting? I consider it 'equally valid' to say that the infiltrators can be seen from the fender as you and others are saying that infantry can see something behind them.

well thanks for the view points guys after reading it start to finish I think I have enough to make a house rule for our game group.. you have all been very helpful

don_mondo wrote:Yep, that would be my argument. The normal shooting LOS rules do not apply, so basically if you can draw a line between the two units and it's not blocked. they can be 'seen'.

All right, since the consensus is that the rules don't cover this and you would need a house rule I would find it easier to use the existing rules for LOS in the shooting section and assume the unit has the same field of view it would in the shooting phase (e.g. units can pivot in place, turrets can swivel). Since the shooting line of sight rules are the only place where LOS is mentioned why go outside this structure and make a house rule where tanks tread or carnifexs' hoof could spot my unit? The shooting rules just make more sense.

Just thought I would point out a little something it says on page 16 under LOS rules.

Line of sight must be traced from the eyes of the firing model to any part of the body of at least one of the models in the target unit.

With this little nugget of RAW, you could make an argument for infiltrating 12" behind infantry.

Ummm, yeah, that's been pointed out a couple of times already.................

Simple solution. Have infantry models all facing outwards from the center of the unit and have it near the vehicle. The unit would then have it's 360 LoS and infiltrating 12" behind becomes a bit more difficult.

zeshin wrote:Since the shooting line of sight rules are the only place where LOS is mentioned why go outside this structure and make a house rule where tanks tread or carnifexs' hoof could spot my unit?

Because you want to be purposefully obtuse and can get longer internet arguments out of it that way.

Oh wait... that was rhetorical wasn't it?

The Green Git wrote:

zeshin wrote:Since the shooting line of sight rules are the only place where LOS is mentioned why go outside this structure and make a house rule where tanks tread or carnifexs' hoof could spot my unit?

Because you want to be purposefully obtuse and can get longer internet arguments out of it that way.

Oh wait... that was rhetorical wasn't it?

Fair enough.

The Green Git wrote:I submit there is at least a rule to support the idea that LOS is drawn from vehicle weapon mounts for Infiltration purposes. The idea that it's simply to any point on the vehicle is not supported anywhere I can find in the rulebook, Gwar! notwithstanding.

There is no rule to support the idea that LOS is drawn from a vehicle weapon mount for determining infiltration distance. This is simply another hole in the rules and needs to be hashed out with the TO or Opponent. Vehicle weapon mounts have no interaction in this situation, furthermore, if there is an embarked unit, and the embarked unit section states that if you're trying to find a range to the embarked unit then you use the hull of the vehicle, thus, there would be a difference (in your view) between a transport with troops inside and the same vehicle with no troops inside, as the unit inside would somehow be closer to the infiltrator than a vehicle without anyone inside... because you would measure from the hull in the former case but measure from the weapon in the latter... I do not see the rules support you claim.

Again, this is a hole in the rules, check with TO or other players to see how they play it. I would play it that you measure to the hull because all other solutions tend to create contradictions and conflicting situations; I play by the rule of thumb of making the game as simple as possible.

I there anything about this in the INAT ?

visavismeyou wrote:There is no rule to support the idea that LOS is drawn from a vehicle weapon mount for determining infiltration distance.

Of course there is. The Infiltrators rules states that they can deploy at a certain distance "as long as no deployed enemy unit can draw a line of sight to them." The LOS rules for vehicles state you use the weapon mounts to determine the point of the vehicle you start tracing LOS to enemy units from.

There, I've just given you two rules that support the idea that LOS is drawn from weapon mounts to determine infiltration distance, the main one being the Infiltrators rule itself which invokes LOS in the deployment phase.

Do we think the use of the term "line of sight" in the Infiltration rule is an accident? Do we think all our units close their eyes and turn off their sensors until the shooting phase? This RAW exercise about LOS not existing until the shooting phase (especially when the Infiltrators rule tells us to use it) is IMHO just plain being literalistic and dense for arguments sake. If you're looking for a RAW exercise by all continue the mental self manipulation but it seems pretty clear that there are lots of rules to support the idea that LOS is used here. Is it iron clad? Well, GW isn't known for that. Can it be reasonably deduced? Yes. Do we expect GW to spell out Line Of Sight all over again in the deployment rules?

visavismeyou wrote:Vehicle weapon mounts have no interaction in this situation...

Except the Infiltration rules tell us to draw LOS and the vehicle LOS rules say to use them. Other than that...

visavismeyou wrote:furthermore, if there is an embarked unit, and the embarked unit section states that if you're trying to find a range to the embarked unit then you use the hull of the vehicle, thus, there would be a difference (in your view) between a transport with troops inside and the same vehicle with no troops inside, as the unit inside would somehow be closer to the infiltrator than a vehicle without anyone inside... because you would measure from the hull in the former case but measure from the weapon in the latter... I do not see the rules support you claim.

That's pretty funny. LOS and ranges are two different things dude. You check to see if LOS exists for the unit in the transport and then push back range (per the rules) from their transport. This imagined rules conflict you are trying to create here is just that... imagined. Oh, and you might want to read the rules section on vehicle fire points again (especially where it says range and LOS are drawn from the fire point itself).

visavismeyou wrote:Again, this is a hole in the rules, check with TO or other players to see how they play it. I would play it that you measure to the hull because all other solutions tend to create contradictions and conflicting situations; I play by the rule of thumb of making the game as simple as possible.

Hey... if you want house rules that's fine. I personally like my house rules to be based on the rulebook.

My way: "Let's base this situation on like kind situations in the rulebook. It says use Line Of Sight; there's a rulebook section called Line Of Sight so let's use that".

Other way: "This is too hard to figure out. Let's just make up a rule."

The Green Git wrote: The LOS rules for vehicles state you use the weapon mounts to determine the point of the vehicle you start tracing LOS to enemy units from.

There, I've just given you two rules that support the idea that LOS is drawn from weapon mounts to determine infiltration distance, the main one being the Infiltrators rule itself which invokes LOS in the deployment phase.

Nope, all you've told us is how to determine Arc of Sight when shooting a vehicle's weapons........

don_mondo wrote:

The Green Git wrote: The LOS rules for vehicles state you use the weapon mounts to determine the point of the vehicle you start tracing LOS to enemy units from.

There, I've just given you two rules that support the idea that LOS is drawn from weapon mounts to determine infiltration distance, the main one being the Infiltrators rule itself which invokes LOS in the deployment phase.

Nope, all you've told us is how to determine Arc of Sight when shooting a vehicle's weapons........

No the rules don't tell you how to determine LOS in the infiltration step. LOS as determined by the shooting phase is the only place in the book that explains how to determine LOS. To use any other ideas though is just pulling something out of thin air. Now for house rules pulling something out of thin air is fine, but I prefer to ground my house rules in the closest existing analog in the current rules to keep things simple.

And to use those rules for anything other than shooting is just pulling something out of thin air as well.

don_mondo wrote:And to use those rules for anything other than shooting is just pulling something out of thin air as well.

You right, using the only LOS rules in the game to determine LOS makes no logical sense.

No, using LOS rules for shooting which say that an infantry model can't turn around and look behind him makes no logical sense.

Hypothetical situation: You have a vehicle 30" away from your back table edge. An enemy unit outflanks onto the board and is behind the vehicle so that it doesn't have "LoS" to them. Rather then shooting they run in the hopes of reaching some sort of cover. The vehicle has not "seen" the enemy unit or is aware of their presence, yet somehow can pivot and shoot at said outflanking unit.

How can that be that a vehicle which doesn't have a 360 degree view can pivot and shoot at units it has yet to see or been made aware it their existance? Similairly, would an opponent's infantry unit be denied it's shots because the target unit is behind them? Technically out of LoS?

Admiral-Badruck wrote:I there anything about this in the INAT ?

Doubtful. It's not worth the time of day.

Che-Vito wrote:

Admiral-Badruck wrote:I there anything about this in the INAT ?

Doubtful. It's not worth the time of day.

At this point in time, I believe that you have firmly established what your opinion of the INAT is.

Going forward, no further clarification will be necessary.

If you find yourself reading a thread where people want to use it, or discuss it, it is OK to just ignore that thread.

Infreak wrote:How can that be that a vehicle which doesn't have a 360 degree view can pivot and shoot at units it has yet to see or been made aware it their existance?

The rules don't require any sort of 'awareness test'... hence the ability of units to charge or fire Barrage weapons at an enemy that is out of their LOS.

You're right, but the fact that you could potentially charge or tank shock something directly behind you and out of los would suggest to me that they do have greater range of view then what is given in the rules for shooting.

That's how I'd personally play it though. If my opponent doesn't agree with me and insistent that we play it his way I'd let him have it. I'd just face my infantry outwards from the centre of the unit giving them the 360 los my opponent claims they don't have facing forwards. Place them sufficiently close to any vehicle I feel might be threatened and problem solved.

Infreak wrote:You're right, but the fact that you could potentially charge or tank shock something directly behind you and out of los would suggest to me that they do have greater range of view then what is given in the rules for shooting.

This really just isn't the case. By the same logic when a group of jump pack marines jumps over a wall that completely hid my scouts, which had never moved, to assault them, then they have had some magic way to see through the wall. The game takes into account that the player controls the action and has more information than any one unit or the whole army would know.

don_mondo wrote:And to use those rules for anything other than shooting is just pulling something out of thin air as well.

Except when the rules tell you to use them elsewhere. Like Infiltrators, for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Infreak wrote:How can that be that a vehicle which doesn't have a 360 degree view can pivot and shoot at units it has yet to see or been made aware it their existance? Similairly, would an opponent's infantry unit be denied it's shots because the target unit is behind them? Technically out of LoS?

Battlefield intelligence, radio in from a Thunderhawk overhead, lots of "explanations". The simple fact of the matter is the vehicle, troop unit or any other thing on the table doesn't do *ANYTHING* until you tell it too (without special rules to the contrary). The simple game mechanics of LOS are different than the game mechanism of player control of the army.

You = General. You have an overview of the battlefield and can order your troops around. You are omniscient. Your moves are unlimited except within the confines of the game rules.

Unit = Grunt. They only "see" what is in LOS and have to be ordered into a position to use their weapons. They are not omniscient and can only do what you tell them to do within the rules for their exact weapons and movement capabilities. They are in essence "dumb" and just respond to your orders even if they can't "see" what it is you are moving them towards or telling them to shoot (for indirect fire weapons).

The Green Git has made my point in a much more fluent manner. Thank you sir.

The Green Git wrote:

visavismeyou wrote:There is no rule to support the idea that LOS is drawn from a vehicle weapon mount for determining infiltration distance.

Of course there is. The Infiltrators rules states that they can deploy at a certain distance "as long as no deployed enemy unit can draw a line of sight to them." The LOS rules for vehicles state you use the weapon mounts to determine the point of the vehicle you start tracing LOS to enemy units from.

You know, when I was in the army putting up 40k directional antennas and we had to have LOS between the two dishes... not a single dish had a weapon mount... Funny... you can draw a line which is unobstructed by any intervening thing and thus would be able to be seen in a direct line from one point to another without having eyes or weapon mounts...

Fact, the rules do not cover this... stop acting like the rules do cover this.