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 this came up in a game last night: A landspeeder that gets the supporting fire SR is able to provide over-watch for a Ravenwing unit that is up to 24" away. Said RW has a charge declared against it by a unit that is 10" away from it, the assaulting unit is now 34" away from the landspeeder that wishes to supporting fire. The landspeeder is equipped with a heavy flamer. Does it make sense that it should be able to extend it's range to nearly 40" to use WoF when it's nominal range is in fact around 8"? We decided to put a limit of 12" on WoF for the purposes of moments like this, but it isn't necessarily clear in the rules if this is correct.

What is people's take on this? We also ruled that a unit providing supporting fire must also be within its max range for its shooting attacks.

I think wall of death is to represent the models getting flamed whislt they are almost ontop of there enemy . Im not at my books but is wall of death defined as overwatch .?

The rulebook FAQ explicitly says that range should be ignored for wall of death, making it infinite range, even with supporting fire.
I agree it doesn't make sense, but the rules are clear on that.

The rules are clear, for when the wielder is being assaulted.
It is Supporting Fire that needs updating to reflect range.

 Skinnereal wrote:
The rules are clear, for when the wielder is being assaulted.
It is Supporting Fire that needs updating to reflect range.

This is exactly what I thought. For an instance when the unit is firing at something 12" away its pretty clear, bu what if they are 36" away. It doesn't follow logic.

whirlwindstruggle wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:
The rules are clear, for when the wielder is being assaulted.
It is Supporting Fire that needs updating to reflect range.

This is exactly what I thought. For an instance when the unit is firing at something 12" away its pretty clear, bu what if they are 36" away. It doesn't follow logic.

I don't have the rule for your land speeder's supporting fire, but in the tau codex, it says that supporting fire allows a unit to "fire overwatch as if they were also targets of the charge".
So it's pretty clear that the rules for supporting fire are the same as for "normal" overwatch. The FAQ says that there is no range limit for the wall of death rule, therefore you can use them for supporting fire, no matter how far the assaulting unit is.

There's no arguing that it doesn't make any sense from a "realistic" point of view (the same way that it doesn't make sense that a guy at the back of the squad can overwatch with a flamer through his buddies, but can't do that in the shooting phase), but I think the rules are clear.

fresus wrote:
There's no arguing that it doesn't make any sense from a "realistic" point of view (the same way that it doesn't make sense that a guy at the back of the squad can overwatch with a flamer through his buddies, but can't do that in the shooting phase), but I think the rules are clear.

People can start using sense to interpret other aspects of unreality are removed, like when a 45 model Imperial Guard Infantry Squad having to target Lasguns and Lascannons at the same target.