40k Skimmers and glancing hits

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.

**Valakar**

Skimmers moving over 6 inches count all shooting hits as glancing. That much is clear. Do they get the same bonus in close combat or can that thunder hammer that roles a 6 to penetrate a falcon grav tank roll on the penetrating hit table?

**MadEdric**

All penetrating hits are downgraded to glances. Even Assault hits.

**mughi3**

even better all hits no matter the source- even AP1 and special effect weapons all get reduced to simple glancing if a skimmer moves over 6"

**thelosttau**

Valakar, see page 69 of the BGB, "Any hits that beat the armor value of a mobile skimmer moving more than 6" in its last movement phase count as glancing."

Mughi3, there is still much debate over the AP1 aspect of this because an AP1 weapon can penitrate on a glace equaling the armor value of a vehicle. If a hit equals the armor value it does not beat it therefore the fast moving skimmer rule does not apply. Now one could argue the intent of the rule is to prohibit any penitrating hit, but that is not how the rule is written. Thus an AP 1 weapon could only penitrate a fast moving skimmer on a glancing roll.

And here we go again parsing the language of a rule in the book.

**Agamemnon**

@ Thelosttau:

pg 66 the new rulebook under the AP1 section: "this can be reduced to a glancing hit"

So the penetrating hit done by the ap1 weapon is reduced afterwards.

**onlainari**

Agamemnon, thelosttau is quite right in what he is saying.

He is saying an AP1 weapon equalling the armour value on an armour penetration roll penetrates, however an AP1 weapon beating the armour value on an armour penetration roll is downgraded to a glancing as per the SMF rule.

Just another obvious mistake in the writing of the rules.

**mughi3**

Posted By thelosttau on 04/18/2006 9:48 PM
Valakar, see page 69 of the BGB, "Any hits that beat the armor value of a mobile skimmer moving more than 6" in its last movement phase count as glancing."

Mughi3, there is still much debate over the AP1 aspect of this because an AP1 weapon can penitrate on a glace equaling the armor value of a vehicle. If a hit equals the armor value it does not beat it therefore the fast moving skimmer rule does not apply. Now one could argue the intent of the rule is to prohibit any penitrating hit, but that is not how the rule is written. Thus an AP 1 weapon could only penitrate a fast moving skimmer on a glancing roll.

And here we go again parsing the language of a rule in the book.

actually there is no debate where i am at. we have 50+ local players who have no issue with it. and as per the eldar 4.1 FAQ explaning how specialized eldar weapons work against ALL skimmers it specifies that all hits against things classified as skimmers moving over 6" are always reduced to glancing no matter the effect or source of the weapon in question and they included an AP1 weapon in the example.