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.

I'm sure this has been answered somewhere but it came up in a game today and I cannot seem to find a definite answer. I was playing today against an Imperial Guard player running Vendettas and had range to his wing with my Long Fangs. He claimed the wing was not hull and so I did not have range to shoot, and a discussion followed where neither of us could point out any specific source that stated what exactly counts as hull. This also mattered because he moved the wings and tail over difficult terrain several times without testing for Dangerous Terrain.

I seem to remember this having been answered, and clearly stating that wings and tail are hull, but I can find nowhere that clearly defines what counts as "Hull" on vehicles other than the rulebook, which only mentions fire points and weapon mountings/turrets as being the point of origin for measuring firing range as opposed to "Hull". Can anyone point out an FAQ or section in a rulebook/codex that covers this? I've checked the Rulebook FAQ and Imperial Guard FAQ and have not found it, but I could be missing something.

Thanks!

I see it this way, whatever is not weapons or banners etc are hull. meaning tail, wings, landing gear, top exhaust port, etc, all hull.

However, only if skimmers are IN terrain do they need to test, hovering above it has no detrimental effects.

FOr "in" terrain you also count above, DR - given you ignore the base for nearly all purposes, you would, given a big enough stand (even the tall one) be able to claim a lot of skimmers are not in terrain, even when parked right in the middle.

Anything that is not excluded (decorative elements, weapons) is the hull - it is defined by saying what ISNT hull; everything else is.

And if they try to claim the wings arent hull, despite being a) not decoarative themselves and b) having non-decorative elements on them (weapon mounts) then they are attempting to cheat, strictly.

Think about it, if you shot a planes wings or engin its going to go down just as fast as if you shot its fusilage.

I agree that the wing should definitely count as part of the hull.

You'd really be surprised at the debates that went on in a few threads dealing with this very subject a year or so ago.

Planes usually have fuel in their wings, so it is kind of the best part to shoot anyways...

I agree with everyone in this thread but I think the problem that Aldarionn is trying to solve is WHERE does it outline what counts as hull?

We all know TFG that will argue till the sun goes down if it isn't outlined in the rules somewhere. Has GW ever FAQ'ed what counts as hull for the "flyer" models and whether tails and wings over dangerous terrain require them to check?

It outlines it by telling you what DOES NOT count as hull

Simple subtraction - find out what isnt hull on a vehicle, that tells you what IS hull.

Yeah but the way it's written is not overly clear and is almost a side note, they use etc in when listing what doesn't count, which doesn't help and leaves a window for TFG to add "wings" to the etc part of the list.

It's also unclear what counts as "in" terrain for the flyers since they use their base for some things and the actual model for others. GW has clarified a lot of it, I wish they would clarify this too.

No, reread the skimmer rules. You ignore the base for *everything* except assaults.

So, you dont use the base to determine if you are in terrain - you use the hull.

Simple.

They put an "etc" in there under "decorative elements". Is a wing a "decorative element" using common Engish parlance? Id *love* to see a plane where the wings are a nice to have, but not essential.

Anyone can argue anything, of course. However when you point out that if he ignores the wings he cannot fire (decorative elements are not weapons...) 2 of 3 lascannon, they may change their minds.

FOR CLARITY, THE BELOW QUOTED SECTION IS A HOUSE RULE FOR THE GW 2011 THRONE OF SKULLS TOURNAMENT IN LAS VEGAS. IT IS NOT AN OFFICIAL RULE ANYWHERE ELSE.

Throne of Skulls 2011 US clarifications wrote:How are you handling flying vehicles like Valkyries, Vendettas and Storm Ravens?

The majority of movement related distances should be resolved using the oval base supplied with the model. Moving a Valkyrie 6" onto a table from reserves allows the base to be completely on the board while having the tail section extend past the table edge by a few inches. This means these vehicles can come on from reserves and fire all their weapons provided they did not move more than 6". This is an exception to the rule that states that a model that cannot completely move onto the table counts as destroyed, and this exception is made to take into consideration the protruding wings and tail sections of the models in question.

Note that the base is also used in relation to enemy models, and as long as the Valkyrie, Vendetta or Storm Raven's base is not within 1" of enemy models at the end of its movement, it is perfectly legal to have enemy or friendly models, terrain, etc. underneath the wing, tail or nose of the vehicle.

For the purposes of contesting objectives and embarking/disembarking from a Valkyrie, Vendetta, or Storm Raven, also measure to and from the model's base.

However, when determining LOS to, shooting at, or assaulting a Valkyrie, Vendetta or Storm Raven, you should use the model itself, ignoring any vertical height the flying stand provides. This means melta guns can gain their added dice for armor penetration if within 6" horizontally of the model. The same holds true for template weapons. If in doubt, take the model from its flying stand and place it on the table to resolve such disputes.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/co...e=true&start=2

I think the entire thing would count as the hull personally. As many people said, wings typically have at least 2 fuel bladders in each, plus if someone shoots out your vertical/horizontal stab you'd have a very very very rough landing lol.... sadly though theres no reference because fliers didn't come out til a while into 5th

I play Blood Angels and count Wings as the hull. But I did have a guy in agame tell me that he could measure range to shot me using my wings, but my preist inside could not use the wings to measure his effects.

As far as Terrain, I have a hard time taking a dangerous terrain test because my wings are over a rock formation so small my marines can barely get 50% cover from, and the wing is a foot above it.

I would measure effects like priest stuff from the passenger compartment, seeing as how that is where the priest it. It is just like how you measure range from the lascannon on the wing for the lascannon and from the auto cannon on the nose for the auto cannon.

The priest isn't in the wing, so it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to measure from it for his effects.

-cgmckenzie

maaksel - please dont post a FAQ for a local tournament run by GW events as if it actually mattered - or at leasty put some context to it. Otherwise you're being rather disingenuous.

You measure to / from the hull for embarked units, no exceptions.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You measure to / from the hull for embarked units, no exceptions.

Confused... Are you saying you use the wings to measure effects?

yes, as wings are a part of the hull

Just making sure.

I could have sworn there was precedent somewhere that only triggered DT if the base was in terrain, and allowed models to basically be "under" the Valks/Vends. Anyone know where this might have come from? I'ma go look for references.

I've always read the rules to be that as long as the base doesn't land on top of another model, you can place it. It is there to keep people from landing a landspeeder on top of a land raider and riding into battle. Any over hanging bits can have troops under them.

That said, terrain still affects the over hanging bits. Sorta stupid but that's what happens every now and then.

I personally believe skimmers shouldn't be effected by terrain unless embarking/disembarking, the only time they will really ever get low enough to the ground to matter.

-cgmckenzie

I'd say that wings and tails count (as a rocket taking the wing of in genna hurt) but weapons and banners and flashy bits do not.

That's how we'd play it, if any of us had those flying vehicles.

Models can be under the vehicle, no problem. If enemy they need to have bases more than 1" away.

Weapon mounts can also be added to the list of target-able things.

Weapon mounts(turrets and sponsons mainly) count but the weapon itself doesn't. Splitting hairs but an important distinction in a thread like this.

-cgmckenzie

The hull is every part of the model except weapons and decorative elements.

jbunny wrote: I play Blood Angels and count Wings as the hull. But I did have a guy in agame tell me that he could measure range to shot me using my wings, but my preist inside could not use the wings to measure his effects.

I play GK's so I use the Shrouding to cover all my Ravens. I tell all my opponents that I will be measuring from the wings for the effect. But with that said they may also shoot them if they see wings. It goes both ways.

Yup. Has to be consistent. jbunny's opponent was not playing fair.

The real grey area here stems from the fact that the rules don't specify exactly what it means for a vehicle to be 'in' terrain.

In the case of non-skimmers there is no question when a vehicle is actually in terrain because if the vehicle ends its move in terrain (or moves through it) the model is effectively 'touching' the terrain piece.

With a skimmer, and especially the flyer type skimmers you have a real grey area because the 'hull' of the model is vertically far off the table and potentially far above where the terrain below it actually is.

That's why, for example, a model can move underneath a Valkyrie, because doing so doesn't put its base within 1" of the Valkyrie's hull (as the hull is so high up).

But again, when it comes to terrain, we aren't given a frame of reference to measure from like we are with models (measure from base/hull).

Therefore, it is an entirely reasonable interpretation to say that for difficult terrain tests only if the actual base is in/on the terrain does the vehicle count as being in/on the terrain. As if the base is outside of terrain but, parts of the skimmer are over the terrain, it could be said that the model is actually ABOVE the terrain instead of being IN it.


This is, of course, a completely subjective interpretation, but frankly so is assuming that a skimmer counts as being IN terrain when its hull is OVER that terrain.

Well, per the rulebook if any part of a skimmers hull is vertically over terrain, it counts as being in terrain and must roll the test. That said, the rulebook was written before these models existed in a codex, and so GW likely did not consider them when writing the skimmer rules. I think due to the height of the flight stand and the size of the model, it's fair and reasonable from a balance standpoint to only count it in terrain if the base is in terrain, or the model just becomes unwieldy.**

But by that same note, I would call it fair to measure all distances to any part of the model that is not decorative, and wings/tails are definitely not decorative. Try flying a plane without wings or a tail and see how well it maintains stability or lift. This goes both ways. All distances should be measured to and from any part of the hull, which should include the wings. I think nosferatu1001's explanation is the best so far. Whatever is not listed as an exception is therefore considered hull, and while this creates a grey area for some people to argue to death due to the word "etc...", it's the cleanest description I can find.

**I know fluff and rules do not coincide, and should not be used to justify each other, but in this case I want to point out that fliers like a Valkyrie and Stormraven use jets on the wings and fuselage of the vehicle to hover in place. They are clearly modeled on both vehicles, and are used for stabilization during flight, and hovering in place similar to a Harrier jet. If a flying vehicle using jets in this manner flies over uneven terrain at a low altitude, the variation in downward thrust created by the uneven ground can destabilize the vehicle in flight and cause it to lose lift. Several Harriers have crashed because the pilot did not gain enough altitude before moving forward off the flight deck of an aircraft carrier. Basically, my point is that it makes sense for a skimmer like a Valkyrie/Vendetta/Stormraven to have to suffer a dangerous terrain test like any other skimmer, when any part of the hull is over any difficult terrain, but it's unrealistic to enforce it in a game setting that demands about 25-30% terrain coverage.

Aldarionn wrote:Well, per the rulebook if any part of a skimmers hull is vertically over terrain, it counts as being in terrain and must roll the test.

Is there a reference for this?

There isn't. Yak summed up the issue perfectly and it's the reason I really wish GW would just create a "flyer" vehicle type and outline all of these types of things.