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.

Do jetbikes count as being skimmers, so like for example if I'm behind a building, can everyone see me because I'm "up in the air", or does LOS still apply for lets say Deffkoptas or elder jetbikes ???

True Line of Sight applies in all cases, to everything in 40k. This is why it is important to include the correct flying bases on any models supplies with them.

So what your saying is that, they only can see me if they can see my true height of what the flying base gives?

They can only see you if they can draw LoS to the model from the firing models.

Skimmers float close to the ground, not high in the air. And even for the Valkyrie LOS applies.

Basically, if the opponent can see the hull they can shoot it.

I'm not going to go into the depths of cover saves for skimmers as I'm betting I've got 4th Ed rules for skimmers and cover rattling around in my head. Unless someone mentions it here I'll do so when I get hold of my BRB

deffcoptas are not skimmers

Jetbikes and skimmers can do a lot of similar things, but they are slightly different. (turbo boosting vs. Flat out and gaining a cover save)


LOS is always based on whether you can see the actual physical model. tThat is why bases, flying stands, and poses are important.

"Modeling for Advantage" is often done to change the profile of a model to either gain LOS to other things, or to keep it out of LOS of other things

EX: really tall skimmer stands so you can shoot over terrain.
EX: Snipers lying down so they can not be seen.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/280663.page

svendrex wrote:deffcoptas are not skimmers

Jetbikes and skimmers can do a lot of similar things, but they are slightly different. (turbo boosting vs. Flat out and gaining a cover save)


LOS is always based on whether you can see the actual physical model. tThat is why bases, flying stands, and poses are important.

"Modeling for Advantage" is often done to change the profile of a model to either gain LOS to other things, or to keep it out of LOS of other things

EX: really tall skimmer stands so you can shoot over terrain.
EX: Snipers lying down so they can not be seen.

i find DE vehicles to be really annoying as to what counts as "Hull" there are so many blades, sails, and chains and some of them look important. ex: the rudder is a huge blade, probably important but not hull. wth does the sail do? What about all those fins on the old model that looks like it provides shade but then again might be aerodynamically important. the running boards and gangplanks?

much more difficult than say a rhino or chimera

I'd favor just counting the hull proper, since the sails don't make a whole lot of sense on anything but an aesthetic level, considering the five engines mounted in the back. The side turrets on a ravager should probably be considered part of the hull, and probably the shield around the front gun. Anything else, including the blades on the bottom, should be considered decoration.

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:I'd favor just counting the hull proper, since the sails don't make a whole lot of sense on anything but an aesthetic level, considering the five engines mounted in the back. The side turrets on a ravager should probably be considered part of the hull, and probably the shield around the front gun. Anything else, including the blades on the bottom, should be considered decoration.

turrets are never hull. in the rull book it shows an ork trukk and the turret, dozer blade, and accessories are not hull. same goes for de and anyone else. id say the entirety of the "ship" design, meaning the part that looks like a normal boat. sails, spikes, turretts, shields, all extra pieces. this is why i built my csm army w/o spikes, some one tried to bs me so i took em all off after that, not like i cared really anyway it worked bette with my nurgle and tzeench to not have em on.

anyway, unless it specifies "skimmer" in the model type its not.

Rogueyopants wrote:Do jetbikes count as being skimmers,

No, they count as being jetbikes.

Rogueyopants wrote:so like for example if I'm behind a building, can everyone see me because I'm "up in the air", or does LOS still apply for lets say Deffkoptas or elder jetbikes ???

No people see you if they can see you. There is no "up in the air" for jetbikes or skimmers. The model is where it is.

kenzosan wrote:

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:I'd favor just counting the hull proper, since the sails don't make a whole lot of sense on anything but an aesthetic level, considering the five engines mounted in the back. The side turrets on a ravager should probably be considered part of the hull, and probably the shield around the front gun. Anything else, including the blades on the bottom, should be considered decoration.

turrets are never hull..

Interesting. I'll have to remember that.

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:

kenzosan wrote:

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:I'd favor just counting the hull proper, since the sails don't make a whole lot of sense on anything but an aesthetic level, considering the five engines mounted in the back. The side turrets on a ravager should probably be considered part of the hull, and probably the shield around the front gun. Anything else, including the blades on the bottom, should be considered decoration.

turrets are never hull..

Interesting. I'll have to remember that.

i edited that post if you didnt read it after the edit. my point of reference is the ork trukk in the rule book (haha i typed bukk) the guns are all outlined while the "hull" is grey.

btw, reread this post twice and had to edit it for orks... i seriously started writting ork wording in it alot.

Alright thanks guy, just needed to check that really quickly cheers

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:

kenzosan wrote:

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:I'd favor just counting the hull proper, since the sails don't make a whole lot of sense on anything but an aesthetic level, considering the five engines mounted in the back. The side turrets on a ravager should probably be considered part of the hull, and probably the shield around the front gun. Anything else, including the blades on the bottom, should be considered decoration.

turrets are never hull..

Interesting. I'll have to remember that.

Better don't. Turrents ARE hull. The trukk is a bad example, because it does not have a turrent, but an ork holding a big shoota. The rules tell us to ignore gun barrels, not turrents.

those side mounts are not hull, just like the side sponsors are not hull on a imperium tank.

Raiders, being very similar to boats, are one of the few vehicles in 40K that could actually be considered to have a 'hull'.

Only if you go by the more restrictive meaning of the word, and try to apply it only to boats.

'Hull' is equally valid when referring to aircraft and land vehicles, particularly armoured vehicles.

kenzosan wrote:<picture>
those side mounts are not hull, just like the side sponsors are not hull on a imperium tank.

Side sponsons are hull, too. The rules for shooting at vehicles explicitly allows shooting at turrents. Only gun barrels and decorative stuff may not be shot at.

Jidmah wrote:

kenzosan wrote:<picture>
those side mounts are not hull, just like the side sponsors are not hull on a imperium tank.

Side sponsons are hull, too. The rules for shooting at vehicles explicitly allows shooting at turrents. Only gun barrels and decorative stuff may not be shot at.

but even by what you say the only part thats hull is the little part that the turret sits on. as i understand it, the hull is the non-optional / non-moving parts, thus turrets and side sponsors, and sorry bout the miss understanding, i ment the guns for the side sponsors, i just use short hand. "ss/side sponsor", with my friends a lot.

Uhm, no. You may shoot any part of the vehicle unless it's purely decorational or a gun barrel.
For your case: The eldar firing the gun may not be shot at, as he is definitly not part of the vehicle, but a decorational element. The gun barrel may not be shot at, but the gun shield and the part holding the gun in place is fair game.

kenzosan wrote:

Jidmah wrote:

kenzosan wrote:<picture>
those side mounts are not hull, just like the side sponsors are not hull on a imperium tank.

Side sponsons are hull, too. The rules for shooting at vehicles explicitly allows shooting at turrents. Only gun barrels and decorative stuff may not be shot at.

but even by what you say the only part thats hull is the little part that the turret sits on. as i understand it, the hull is the non-optional / non-moving parts, thus turrets and side sponsors, and sorry bout the miss understanding, i ment the guns for the side sponsors, i just use short hand. "ss/side sponsor", with my friends a lot.

Turrets are most certainly Targetable; While they are also definitely not "Hull" they are part of the Vehicle that is specified as a valid target BRB page 60, very first sentence.

The Dark Eldar Warrior on the Side Sponson is also fairly "hull"; the rules do not state that "decorative items" do not count, but rather "Decorative Banner poles".

The only things that really are not targetable is banner poles, Barrels, and antennas; I would assume Bagagge may be untargetable as well, but then one could MfA and cover everything on a vehicle that is not a gun barrel with baggage for an "invisible gun-boat of doom!11!"

There honestly isn't much on most vehicles that wouldn't count as target-able; at least that would stick out in any way as to be the only visible spot on the vehicle in all but 1% of situations(Basilisk/Vanquisher barrel is the only thing I can think of off hand that could easily stick out while the Vehicle itself is 100% hidden from LOS).

so what your saying is if i decide to model my vehicles w/o any actual infantry models on it then its better for game play?

also, how exactly does a person count into hull? thats just illogical. everything else i'v read in the rule book for los on infantry and vehicles and everything makes sense (guns and decorations dont count). so why would a person count for a tank's hull?

I honestly could not tell you, aside from game balance.

If you claim the Hanging warriors as "not-hull"; then you could just as easily model hanging warriors over every inch of the hull and have an invisible raider(you would not be able to see any of the actual hull and therefore could not ever gain LOS to it).

The only time I would allow hanging warriors as "not-hull", is when they are used purely to denote transported units(the models themselves can be dry-fit into place without need to be glued).

Again though, if the only part of the raider that can be seen is a single hanging warrior, or a model "on-deck" then the raider has a cover save anyways; so it is not like that is all that "game-changing" to begin with.

Kommissar Kel wrote:I honestly could not tell you, aside from game balance.

If you claim the Hanging warriors as "not-hull"; then you could just as easily model hanging warriors over every inch of the hull and have an invisible raider(you would not be able to see any of the actual hull and therefore could not ever gain LOS to it).

The only time I would allow hanging warriors as "not-hull", is when they are used purely to denote transported units(the models themselves can be dry-fit into place without need to be glued).

Again though, if the only part of the raider that can be seen is a single hanging warrior, or a model "on-deck" then the raider has a cover save anyways; so it is not like that is all that "game-changing" to begin with.

Superfluous decorations, like the hanging models, are ignored entirely for LoS and cover purposes, meaning they can't block LoS either, since they don't actually exist in game terms.

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:Superfluous decorations, like the hanging models, are ignored entirely for LoS and cover purposes, meaning they can't block LoS either, since they don't actually exist in game terms.

that was my point from the begging. the people on vehicles mean nothing, same as the decorations.

so i dont have a de codex and if those turret mounts are just like side sponsor weapons for imperium tanks then i'll accept them as hull, but no one has said that. to me they are decorative just like the eldar heavy weapons platforms in a guardian squad, its all part of the gun.

Maybe you want to actually check your BRB for tracing LoS? You may shoot any part of a vehicle unless it states otherwise.

The eldar weapon platform is neither a model, nor part of a vehicle.
"To me the the guns are decorative" is cheating, not more , not less. To me my battlewagon is decorative, you may not shoot it. Actually my whole army is decorative.

The gun is able to fire, so it has an impact on the game, so it's not purely decorative. You are allowed to shoot any part of a gun, except for it's barrel. The Eldar aboard the ship, as well as the skull poles and the chains underneath are decorative, and are ignored for LoS purposes, so you can trace LoS right throught them to another part of the ship. Anything else is fair game to be shot at.

Jidmah wrote:Maybe you want to actually check your BRB for tracing LoS? You may shoot any part of a vehicle unless it states otherwise.

The eldar weapon platform is neither a model, nor part of a vehicle.
"To me the the guns are decorative" is cheating, not more , not less. To me my battlewagon is decorative, you may not shoot it. Actually my whole army is decorative.

The gun is able to fire, so it has an impact on the game, so it's not purely decorative. You are allowed to shoot any part of a gun, except for it's barrel. The Eldar aboard the ship, as well as the skull poles and the chains underneath are decorative, and are ignored for LoS purposes, so you can trace LoS right throught them to another part of the ship. Anything else is fair game to be shot at.

quick question, what else on a tank that is a gun is not barrel? iv only seen barrels in terms of guns on tanks, so why are you arguing this?

A barrel is a part of the gun, not a type of gun. Lets take a fairly common used vehicle as example:



Shooting the tracks? Allowed.
Shooting the hatch in front of the main gun? Allowed.
Shooting the hand rails in the back? Allowed.
Shooting the gun shield with the 32 and the skills painted on? Allowed.
Shooting the circular thing with all the screws in it holding the gun? Allowed.

Shooting the round pipe with the fainting camo painting? Nope, this is the gun barrel.
Shooting the silver pipe atthe end of the above one? Nope, this the gun barrel.
Shooting the brown bag attached to the side? Nope, decorational. It does not block shots however.
Shooting the bolter peeking out the front? Nope, those are gun barrels.