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.

So I was playing against an IG player at a tournament this month and he loaded up a skyshield landing pad with 4 russ's and a decked out command squad basically filling the pad to capacity. If you're running a shooty army that would be ok except I was running my wraith wing cron list. Unfortunately the wraiths never made it to the pad but if they had how do you assault if there's no room to place the model on the pad? Can I assault? I'm thinking about switching one of my units of wraiths to scarabs&spyders which may or may not make a difference - I guess I'll have to see...

Unfortunately, this sounds about right. Skyshields should simply be disallowed at tournaments.

you need a vehicle, tank shock the infantry unit up there. they won't be able to move more than 1" from the vehicle. A bunch of models get removed from play. Aim for the important models.

Or more likely tank shock through the unit to hit a russ and still get the same result except you can get in closer to a russ to help you place your vehicle up there.

Secondly get your unit you want to assault with under the shield. Pop one guy out so you can see one of his figures. Declare your assault and you only risk losing that one figure. Roll for difficult terrain and claim wobbly model as you balance on the wall between 2 of his models. Everyone else piles in under your 1 model. Leaving room for him to do his pile moves by dropping off the shield

Oh and third, if you can blow up a vehicle he won't get the invul save from it. (debatable) is a friendly vehicle exploding counted as a "enemy shooting attack" I wouldn't think so.

unfortunately the skyshield rules are not clear on whether you should treat it as a ruin or not but those rules seem to fit it the best as it is clearly not a building or normal battllefield debris.

If that is the case you can use the rules for assaulting in a ruin found on page 101 which states that you are engaged if the head of your model is within 2" of the base of their model, it also states that you can assault by moving your model as close as possible and make sure your opponent knows you are in assault.

Best to agree beforehand that it should be treated as a ruin but the rules seem to work with it the best.

hhhmmmm....good points. He had to snake the CCS between the tanks. I probably should have called him on it though 'cause I think he had them snaking between two tanks that were part of one squadron. Can you do that?

After that match I started thinking about making substitute tokens for the wraiths for instances where they need to be under things like the skyshield which are way to short for them. Is that acceptable to do? Wraiths are also notoriously wobbly models - even on flat terrain. I was considering using 40mm bases with pictures of wraiths on them for instances where they will not stand up (which is all instances where the terrain is not completely flat).

How did he tanks up there did it have a ramp?

40k-noob wrote:
How did he tanks up there did it have a ramp?

You can deploy them up there. Plus as its not a ruin vehicles can move up and down from it with a dangerous terrain test.

40k-noob wrote:
How did he tanks up there did it have a ramp?

Yeah he had his entire army deployed on it and under it with one unit in some area terrain.

sirlynchmob wrote:

40k-noob wrote:
How did he tanks up there did it have a ramp?

You can deploy them up there. Plus as its not a ruin vehicles can move up and down from it with a dangerous terrain test.

Just because it is not a ruin doesn't mean the tank can fly up 3 inches.

I can see a tank being deployed up there but unless it had a ramp, a tank cannot "jump" up there.

Jumping tanks, eh? I can smell a new Leman Russ variant for whenever the IG codex is next re-done.

Lets leave logic and modeling out of this shall we and look at the rules eh?

"to move onto or off of the landing pad counts as moving through difficult terrain."

There you go, No restrictions based on model type, just make your test.

Or should we also say if you're model isn't big enough to fit through a hatch they can't get up there as well?

40k-noob wrote:


Just because it is not a ruin doesn't mean the tank can fly up 3 inches.

I can see a tank being deployed up there but unless it had a ramp, a tank cannot "jump" up there.

That is not true, Tanks can reach the top of the pad as sirlynchmob has said.

"To move onto or off of the landing pad counts as movlng through difficult terrain." P.115 BRB

So all that is needed is a Difficult Terrain test to move on to or off of it.

The way I've always seen it played is that if an assaulting unit has the range to get to base-to-base with a unit on the pad, it is considered in combat even if it can't fit up there. Granted, this may not be fully in accordance with the rules, but it seems to work.

WMS would kick in - there is no "up on" the landing pad in the rules; it is just terrain

nosferatu1001 wrote:
WMS would kick in - there is no "up on" the landing pad in the rules; it is just terrain

This would be my opinion.

Alternatively, wrecking one of the tanks would allow you to have room to get on there, a chaos demon player did this to me last tourney.

 DeathReaper wrote:

40k-noob wrote:


Just because it is not a ruin doesn't mean the tank can fly up 3 inches.

I can see a tank being deployed up there but unless it had a ramp, a tank cannot "jump" up there.

That is not true, Tanks can reach the top of the pad as sirlynchmob has said.

"To move onto or off of the landing pad counts as movlng through difficult terrain." P.115 BRB

So all that is needed is a Difficult Terrain test to move on to or off of it.

That doesn't mean anything. It just means you roll for distance or take a test upon getting on or off.

Access points is what matters and that is on a per model basis. Can a tank climb up 3 inches? Infantry can climb and skimmers, flyers, jetbikes, jump and FMC's can "land" on the pad and take tests where applicable.

40k-noob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

40k-noob wrote:


Just because it is not a ruin doesn't mean the tank can fly up 3 inches.

I can see a tank being deployed up there but unless it had a ramp, a tank cannot "jump" up there.

That is not true, Tanks can reach the top of the pad as sirlynchmob has said.

"To move onto or off of the landing pad counts as movlng through difficult terrain." P.115 BRB

So all that is needed is a Difficult Terrain test to move on to or off of it.

That doesn't mean anything. It just means you roll for distance or take a test upon getting on or off.

Access points is what matters and that is on a per model basis. Can a tank climb up 3 inches? Infantry can climb and skimmers, flyers, jetbikes, jump and FMC's can "land" on the pad and take tests where applicable.

The sky shield has no access points.

Page 115 – Fortifications, Skyshield Landing Pad.
Ignore the reference to Access Points & Fire Points.

sirlynchmob wrote:

40k-noob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

40k-noob wrote:


Just because it is not a ruin doesn't mean the tank can fly up 3 inches.

I can see a tank being deployed up there but unless it had a ramp, a tank cannot "jump" up there.

That is not true, Tanks can reach the top of the pad as sirlynchmob has said.

"To move onto or off of the landing pad counts as movlng through difficult terrain." P.115 BRB

So all that is needed is a Difficult Terrain test to move on to or off of it.

That doesn't mean anything. It just means you roll for distance or take a test upon getting on or off.

Access points is what matters and that is on a per model basis. Can a tank climb up 3 inches? Infantry can climb and skimmers, flyers, jetbikes, jump and FMC's can "land" on the pad and take tests where applicable.

The sky shield has no access points.

Page 115 – Fortifications, Skyshield Landing Pad.
Ignore the reference to Access Points & Fire Points.

ah well never mind me then. Disregard my posts.

My tournament on saterday had a guard player load as many artillery he could on it. Manticores, basilisks, couldn't even hurt him. I lost horribly that game.

 undertow wrote:
The way I've always seen it played is that if an assaulting unit has the range to get to base-to-base with a unit on the pad, it is considered in combat even if it can't fit up there. Granted, this may not be fully in accordance with the rules, but it seems to work.

IIRC, this method is mentioned in the ruins rules.

 conker249 wrote:
My tournament on saterday had a guard player load as many artillery he could on it. Manticores, basilisks, couldn't even hurt him. I lost horribly that game.

You should have informed him that vehicles can't make invulnerable saves. Bet that would have gotten him flustered.

Kevlar wrote:

 conker249 wrote:
My tournament on saterday had a guard player load as many artillery he could on it. Manticores, basilisks, couldn't even hurt him. I lost horribly that game.

You should have informed him that vehicles can't make invulnerable saves. Bet that would have gotten him flustered.

Is that how I can start shooting my buddy's Raiders? Nope, no invuln save for that, its a vehicle.

Kevlar wrote:

 conker249 wrote:
My tournament on saterday had a guard player load as many artillery he could on it. Manticores, basilisks, couldn't even hurt him. I lost horribly that game.

You should have informed him that vehicles can't make invulnerable saves. Bet that would have gotten him flustered.

Why not?

Or is this that bs "Invunerable Saves against wounds only" Argument?

Kevlar wrote:

 conker249 wrote:
My tournament on saterday had a guard player load as many artillery he could on it. Manticores, basilisks, couldn't even hurt him. I lost horribly that game.

You should have informed him that vehicles can't make invulnerable saves. Bet that would have gotten him flustered.

Really, demon rule on chaos vehicles seem to strongly disagree

We are getting off topic. RAW only Bjorn can take invuln saves. No other vehicle can. No one actually plays this way.

 Happyjew wrote:
We are getting off topic. RAW only Bjorn can take invuln saves. No other vehicle can. No one actually plays this way.

That's because there are rules that overrule thie nonsense. Call Dark Eldar and tell them their flicker fields are against the rules.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
We are getting off topic. RAW only Bjorn can take invuln saves. No other vehicle can. No one actually plays this way.

That's because there are rules that overrule thie nonsense. Call Dark Eldar and tell them their flicker fields are against the rules.

Having them is not against the rules.
They simply don't do anything RAW. There's nothing to "overrule this nonsense".

Now that's just silly. That's like arguing that a model can throw a grenade and use a witchfire power in the same shooting phase, because throwing a grenade is not "firing a weapon". The intent is so clear that any other interpretation leads to madness.

reaper with no name wrote:
Now that's just silly. That's like arguing that a model can throw a grenade and use a witchfire power in the same shooting phase, because throwing a grenade is not "firing a weapon". The intent is so clear that any other interpretation leads to madness.

Please note that the default argument in YMDC is "Rules As Written", not "How I Would Play It". As noted several posts above, in this case RaW is indeed ludicrous and not how it is actually played.

What does an infantry model need to roll to get up on a skyshield landing pad?