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.

Grey Templar wrote:also, Autocannon dreds can have LoS over a Rhino if they used the Aegis defense line Autocannons as the upper barrel will most certaintly have a clear visual to the target.

and double barreled weapons are not covered by the rules so only one needs to have clear LoS for no cover to be given.

This is subject to debate. I think it is just as likely to be interpreted as both barrels need to be cleared for there to be clear LOS. If one barrel is blocked the other common interpretation is to give cover to the target.

If someone is setting up their models to use Rhinos to give cover to the Dreads while claiming clear LOS for the Dreads, I think they're going to quickly run into Modeling for Advantage territory.

apple1988218 wrote:Here's the situation, my enemy's dread is a little higher than the chimera but the auto cannons are not.

He claims that since the dread has base contect with the chimera it can ignor the chimera and has a clear shot.

I don't think so, but I still allowed him to do that --- to make the game continue.

And tabled his henchmen with Draigo and, my dreads

I believe he was thinking of this rule in the main book page 22

"Firing over a barrier: Models that are in base
contact with a linear piece of terrain they can see
over, such as a low wall, barricade, tank trap or a
fence, can fire at enemies on the other side without
the barrier getting in the way of their shots."

If the chimera was a destroyed wreck left on the table and the gun was able to see over it, then it might be arguable but an operational chimera is not terrain by any means.

Mannahnin wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:also, Autocannon dreds can have LoS over a Rhino if they used the Aegis defense line Autocannons as the upper barrel will most certaintly have a clear visual to the target.

and double barreled weapons are not covered by the rules so only one needs to have clear LoS for no cover to be given.

This is subject to debate. I think it is just as likely to be interpreted as both barrels need to be cleared for there to be clear LOS. If one barrel is blocked the other common interpretation is to give cover to the target.

If someone is setting up their models to use Rhinos to give cover to the Dreads while claiming clear LOS for the Dreads, I think they're going to quickly run into Modeling for Advantage territory.

I used my razorbacks as mobile cover for my dreads during all 7 rounds of the BAO this year and didn't get a single complaint or question. Although the dreads were admittedly not getting cover a good 60% of the time or more. These were normal dreads with aegis ac btw not contemptors,

If you weren't getting cover straight-on, then no wonder no one had a problem.

Mannahnin wrote:If you weren't getting cover straight-on, then no wonder no one had a problem.

I just wasn't getting one all the time. I think the fact I was playing it correctly and being honest about it helped truly shocking I know...

Mannahnin wrote:Nos is right. Per the rules you draw LOS "along" the barrel, so you have to be able to point it at the target. You can't point the barrel up in the air like a periscope and then claim to draw LOS in whatever direction you like at any angle from the tip.

Generally speaking, IME if the dread is tall enough to get clear LOS over the Rhino with autocannon arms to a unit which is on the ground (not up on a hill or on a Valkyrie base), then most or all of its torso is going to be exposed and it probably won't have cover itself either. If the dread has been specially-converted with its arms up high to get clear LOS with them, while still hiding part of the body and claiming cover from a Rhino, it's probably going to constitute modeling for advantage.

I'm seeing a double standard here then, if I can only fire at targets along TLOS along the barrel then I can't claim to aim up with my dreads at a valk that is just overhead.
I'd be like : "Sorry, your arms are pointing forwards towards the ground. Glued in place to look cool? too bad, can't rotate so can't shoot at me." Don't think that would be a clear interpertation.

Also, the BRB says LOS is traced from the model's eyes. Where does it say the barrel is the eyes? I don't see that line in the book.

The BRB also says that, for vehicles, the weapon is assumed to be able to rotate on its mount.

And the tracing along the barrel is in the vehicle section. Dreadnaughts and other vehicles don't shoot from the models eyes.

The barrel is not eyes, but Vehicles have a different mechanic for drawing LoS. See Page 58 'Vehicle weapons & line of sight'

sudojoe wrote:I'm seeing a double standard here then, if I can only fire at targets along TLOS along the barrel then I can't claim to aim up with my dreads at a valk that is just overhead. [
I'd be like : "Sorry, your arms are pointing forwards towards the ground. Glued in place to look cool? too bad, can't rotate so can't shoot at me." Don't think that would be a clear interpertation.

Also, the BRB says LOS is traced from the model's eyes. Where does it say the barrel is the eyes? I don't see that line in the book.

Go check out the rules for vehicles drawing LOS. They state that...

1) Weapons have the traverse they physically traverse, HOWEVER, if glued in place you play them as if they weren't. So if the Dread arms could point up if they weren't glued in place, then you play them as being able to point up. See page 59.
1a) For fixed, hull-mounted weapons, you get to place them as having a 45 degree arc of fire to either side.
1b) Dreadnought weapons each have a 45 degree side to side traverse, but if the target is in LOS of one of them, then as soon as the target is declared the dread pivots (assuming it hasn't been Immobilized) directly toward said target, and thus can get both arms on target. This is in the Walkers Shooting rules, page 72.
1c) Weapons not physically able to traverse up or down are assumed to be able to do so up to 45 degrees. Also page 59.
2) That LOS for vehicles is drawn from the weapon, traced down its barrel toward the target. Pages 58-59.

OverwatchCNC wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:also, Autocannon dreds can have LoS over a Rhino if they used the Aegis defense line Autocannons as the upper barrel will most certaintly have a clear visual to the target.

and double barreled weapons are not covered by the rules so only one needs to have clear LoS for no cover to be given.

This is subject to debate. I think it is just as likely to be interpreted as both barrels need to be cleared for there to be clear LOS. If one barrel is blocked the other common interpretation is to give cover to the target.

If someone is setting up their models to use Rhinos to give cover to the Dreads while claiming clear LOS for the Dreads, I think they're going to quickly run into Modeling for Advantage territory.

I used my razorbacks as mobile cover for my dreads during all 7 rounds of the BAO this year and didn't get a single complaint or question. Although the dreads were admittedly not getting cover a good 60% of the time or more. These were normal dreads with aegis ac btw not contemptors,

Yes, normal dreads with aegis ac have a chance to shoot over a rhino or razorback.
But they still can't shoot over a chimera, right?

My 5 cents:

Friendly units that stand in the way doesnt give cover to enemy units if you fire past/through them, but they are not ignored when comming to LOS, so basically if you can see the enemy unit, you can fire, if not you cant.

There could be a situation like the original posts where the dread is on a hill or some other arrangement. The answer is that cover is not always reciprocal.

There can be cases where the dread is more than 50% covered but has clear sight to an enemy model. So in this case, you get a cover save, but the opponent doesn't. This cover can be from a rhino, intervening models, enemy models, anything really. The point is he doesn't get a cover save just because you do.

Aegis AC arms are placed too high compared to the citadel (FW) autocannon arms, so shouldnt be played that high as they do gain an advantage.

Why?

Both are equally valid representations as GW doesn't provide us with what Autocannons are supposed to look like.

Yes they do - FW make them. Owned by GW.

I have to agree with nosferatu here. MkV autocannon arms are available from Forgeworld and is 40k-compatible.

If you want them cheaper, puppetswar has them in a similar positioning as well. If discrepancy comes up in games, TO should definitely rule against this tactic.

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/MK-V-DREADNOUGHT-AUTOCANNON.html

The Aegis ones aren't too much higher, if at all.

http://www.40korigins.com/pics/rifleman-dreadnought01.jpg

Actually, it is way higher. The top barrels are as tall as the dreadnought.

... I evidently mis-remembered what the Aegis arms look like.
Nevermind - that ~1/2 inch could make a marked difference.

It can and does make a difference - hence why we have a rule of no shooting over rhinos, unless youre shooting a vehicle rhino or bigger, or shooting upwards. Saves shenanigans like this

@nosferatu1001:

So Razorback stacking behind rhino are fine, I assume?

I think I need one of those laser pointer.

Yes, IF you can sight down the barrel and see your target. It depends on how they are positioned of course - as the turret is on the back it makes a difference

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yes they do - FW make them. Owned by GW.

Generally speaking in the US the rule of thumb is that if GW, not FW, supplies a model or bit then that is the standard. Most tournaments state that the model must be comprised of 50% GW parts. GW =/= FW, simply because FW makes a Dreadnought DP doesn't require us to buy FW Drop Pods to use with dreads, nor does it mean we have to model our plastic GW drop pods so they match the size of a FW one.

They are the same company, making the same product

If you dont wish to purchase FW parts, when no GW own brand are available, then you should be aware that they exist and model approproiately

AC arms are also very long.



Those are mounted on an old school short chaos dread making the model tall enough to see over a Rhino or Chimera.

The way they're pointed all you're going to be shooting is skimmers on large oval bases.

You trace LOS along the barrel, not from the tip.

Schaden - reread how vehicles draw LOs. Its ALONG the barrel.

Dracoknight wrote:My 5 cents:

Friendly units that stand in the way doesnt give cover to enemy units if you fire past/through them, but they are not ignored when comming to LOS, so basically if you can see the enemy unit, you can fire, if not you cant.

Uhm, that's supposed to be "friendly models in the same unit don't give cover to the enemy...." but if you have two squads and one is in front of the other and your rear squad fires through your front squad to shoot me, I'm getting cover.

Not sure why 'along the barrel' is so hard for people. You can't model long guns and point them up and shoot over things like a periscope.

And if you do any conversion, prepare for people to reject your cover save if you roof-mount the guns.

Sorry about the previous pictures. The models were posed at the time like they were shooting at skimmers.





Depending how the TLAC is mounted and basing material used any modern dreadnaught model can be as tall as or taller than the sentinel.

Here is where the situation gets sticky.

The top AC have a very clear LOS to nearly anything.
Most targets will be 50% or more obscured to the bottom AC.
The problem is the top and bottom AC are the same gun (Twin linked)
How the hell do you resolve that?

Example. A rhino is 100% visible to the top barrel of the TLAC and 90% obscured to the bottom barrel.

The only thing I can think of is to average them out. 0%+90% dived by 2=45% obscured ie no cover.

That is however so close upon revaluation one could argue a single MEQ in front of a rhino obscures 11% of the rhino from the top gun bringing to total to 50.5% cover ie a 4+ cover save. The easy fix would be to place 2 rhinos/Chimera in front of the dreadnaught with a crack in between them the size of the AC. Position the dread with the bottom AC of one gun poking directly though the crack and it's a clear shot by 3 out of the 4 guns so no cover. That would however require a lot of forethought during the movement phase, and if the dreadnaught's player changed his mind and switched targets the new one would almost certainly gain a cover save.