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 vehicles get the ADL's 4+ cover save if they are behind it and 25% or more is obscured from a firing unit's view? I was told no yesterday in a tournament by my opponent and the TO. They stated vehicles cover saves are quite clear and wouldn't listen when I pointed out the rules for the ADL. Was I wrong?

You would be correct if they were obscured from the firer.

TO is the final rules authority at a tournament though.

On what basis were they saying that vehicles wouldn't benefit?

I am curious as well, for as long as the facing that is being shot is more then 25% covered the rules are clear.

were you using a skimmer vehicle? they wouldnt because they sit so high up, other vehicles are definately covered though.

Thats one thing about being a Tau player that irritates me. The terrain is either a straight up wall so i cant see over it or too short for skimmer based models lol

Yeah it's a shame about skimmers I'd like to play it as if they are at the high they wish for during the player turns, so they can either hide and not shoot or be shot by parking or just dropping lower down, or they can shoot and be shot at by hovering at the hight of the cover they are behind.

I guess the illustration on pg 75 is too difficult to understand?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zognob Gorgoff wrote:
Yeah it's a shame about skimmers I'd like to play it as if they are at the high they wish for during the player turns, so they can either hide and not shoot or be shot by parking or just dropping lower down, or they can shoot and be shot at by hovering at the hight of the cover they are behind.

I think its a pity that flyers have those tall bases and they can't hide behind a Land Raider...

/sarcasm

Seriously? Some days, you have to remember that not every model on the table is going to survive.

So, coming to that realization, we should be ok with the assertion that we must let them die then?

How is it annoying or wrong to want to save as many models as you can? For fluff reasons, or for the fact that you painted the damn things and want to keep looking at them, I think it's not a terrible thing to ask if they get the save.

Skimmers get a free save just for moving. Tau then add to that save

Not sure why they need an ADL

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
I guess the illustration on pg 75 is too difficult to understand?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zognob Gorgoff wrote:
Yeah it's a shame about skimmers I'd like to play it as if they are at the high they wish for during the player turns, so they can either hide and not shoot or be shot by parking or just dropping lower down, or they can shoot and be shot at by hovering at the hight of the cover they are behind.

I think its a pity that flyers have those tall bases and they can't hide behind a Land Raider...

/sarcasm

Seriously? Some days, you have to remember that not every model on the table is going to survive.

Was that really needed?!

I didn't even mention cover saves...

I was talking about movement mechanics just for the fun of more tactical game play.
My comment wasn't a complaint about how my stuff dies and doesn't instant win, don't be so damn rude please, we can have a chat about different mechanics with out resulting to the vail of Internet rudeness, after all it is such a cliche.

Apologies if I sounded harsh, but remember, not everything is going to survive. Cover saves happen if they happen, but ro lament that your skimmer is too tall to get one from an ADL is laughable. Sometimes, in a game, you have to take a calculated risk. Big vehicles are part of that risk. Not too many infantry models have the hitting power a Demolisher cannon.

To be fair to you my comment may have seemed out of context to how I ment it any way. I agree the cover save system is too generous to vehicles, it should only be in cover if 50% obscured not 25% IMO. And all I ment was it's a shame how static skimmers are, as if we can move over terrain/models it would be interesting if you could stay at that hight so you could see over things. I didn't mean you could dip down behind something smaller than the skimmer, I ment more to dip down behind objects that would totally obscure the skimmer or land like the old tau codex let you. I'm down with risk my main army is orks, I operate a policy of what would the army I'm playing as do lol! Often that get my orks into trouble when playing against the misses necrons or tau but idc it's fun lol.

This incident makes me kind of sad they took away the landing gear notes on Tau skimmers. If you had landing gear you could take it off the base and set it on the table directly and claim your cover since you are no longer 'floating high up'.

 Miri wrote:
If you had landing gear you could take it off the base and set it on the table directly and claim your cover since you are no longer 'floating high up'.

I would argue this, but it is irrelevant since the new Dex was released.

 insaniak wrote:
On what basis were they saying that vehicles wouldn't benefit?

My opponent and TO's basis was the rules for vehicles being obscured in the vehicle section. They stood on it even after I cited that the ADL had more specific rules and used the general term "models" meaning vehicles counted too.

The model being shot at was a Dreadnought. It was being fired on by a copula mounted MM on a Land Raider about 20" away. He was obscured up past his waist.

So were they saying that it wasn't sufficiently obscured based on the LOS from the firing weapon... or were they claiming it should get a different save instead of the ADL's 4+?

That it didn't get the ADLs 4+ because it was a vehicle and followed different rules for cover saves.

Mortikye wrote:
That it didn't get the ADLs 4+ because it was a vehicle and followed different rules for cover saves.

Which would be what exactly?

The only reason I can think of to deny the cover save is if the facing that is being shot at is not 25% obscured.

Mortikye wrote:
That it didn't get the ADLs 4+ because it was a vehicle and followed different rules for cover saves.

Vehicles don't follow different rules for cover saves, though. The rules for Obscured Vehicles quite specifically state that they receive the same saving throw as any other unit would.

I had a friend with a similar problem: he claimed that vehicles received a 5+ cover for being obscured, and couldn't get better than that (except with Shroud, Turbo-boosting, etc).

I solved his problem by pointing him to the illustrations in the BRBp75--specifically the text for "Picture 2," which says, "the Rhino is obscured and will receive 4+ cover save from the ruin."
It's quite clear, then, that all models (vehicle, infantry, FMC, etc) get the same value cover save from a piece of terrain. (With the exception of area terrain, and anything else explicitly stated to not apply to vehicles.)