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.

Can't seem to find anything closer to this than the 7th edition 40k FAQ; describing how you, measure "diagonally" for range of a weapon when firing at an enemy unit on a lower/higher floor of ruins or a tall hill/forest.
However, my issue seems more complex, Fought a game with Orks against a tau player who parked his 6 "flamer happy" battle suits on the 3rd floor of a ruins, (each ruin floor is 3 inches to vertically move to the next floor for non-jump/fly units)
Before the game began, we agreed on the WMS for my orks to make it onto the same floor i.e Base to Base contact with them due to lack of floor space. (made it a point to decide on this gray area every game since I'm rarely shooting the target off higher ground)
BUT, when I go to charge his units just outside of 8 inches trying to avoid his flamers over-watch (3 inches away from the ruins, AND subtracting 2 inches to my roll for attempting to charge into cover) My opponent measures the shooting range of his flamers diagonally and sadly the loss in range due to that slightly tilted firing arc is nowhere near the 6 inches my boyz need to climb. This in turn artificially increased the range of his flamers in terms of needing less vertical distance; the boys need to cover 5 or so more inches of space that the flamer is more or less ignoring.

- We are having trouble coming up with a house rule that seems fair both ways for this, would a flamer unit get an advantage in range due to being on a higher floor? I don't see ranged weapons normally subtracting 3 inches from their weapons range for each difference in floor of a unit they are shooting at. You could even argue a unit on the first floor is out of LOS of a unit on say the 4th floor. If that is the right way of thinking, does that make a flamer unit on 2nd + floors impossible/much harder to avoid its over-watch? seems unfair to me....

- I found one forum with a good idea of ruling overwatch as being different than a ranged attack. In overwatch you compare the range of the weapon to the range of the attempted charge i.e. if the unit is 9 inches away (counting vertical distance) trying to make a 8 inch charge, (-1 for mele range) then any weapon with a range of 8 inches or less is "out of range." this make sense however it is still not following the reality of the models distance on the table.... feels like we have missed something important....any help to clarify would be appreciated.

- On a side thought, how would deep striking and vertical distance be measured? A unit on the 3rd floor measuring 9 inches diagonally to a deep striking unit on ground floor puts that unit further away from the ruins/hill than if you just measured 6 inches down (3 inches for each floor) and 3 inches horizontally. One feels more fair than the other but is this clearly written/FAQ'ed somewhere for 8th?

- WAAAAGGHHH!!!!!!

So, when you measure range, you do it exactly from one model to another, diagonally if one unit is above another. But for movement, you have to measure along the ground, and then up the floors. So it is just fine and quite possible to be in flamer range but need more than an 8" charge. This is an advantage to being in a building.

KillerOfMany wrote:
Can't seem to find anything closer to this than the 7th edition 40k FAQ; describing how you, measure "diagonally" for range of a weapon when firing at an enemy unit on a lower/higher floor of ruins or a tall hill/forest.
However, my issue seems more complex, Fought a game with Orks against a tau player who parked his 6 "flamer happy" battle suits on the 3rd floor of a ruins, (each ruin floor is 3 inches to vertically move to the next floor for non-jump/fly units)
Before the game began, we agreed on the WMS for my orks to make it onto the same floor i.e Base to Base contact with them due to lack of floor space. (made it a point to decide on this gray area every game since I'm rarely shooting the target off higher ground)
BUT, when I go to charge his units just outside of 8 inches trying to avoid his flamers over-watch (3 inches away from the ruins, AND subtracting 2 inches to my roll for attempting to charge into cover) My opponent measures the shooting range of his flamers diagonally and sadly the loss in range due to that slightly tilted firing arc is nowhere near the 6 inches my boyz need to climb. This in turn artificially increased the range of his flamers in terms of needing less vertical distance; the boys need to cover 5 or so more inches of space that the flamer is more or less ignoring.

- We are having trouble coming up with a house rule that seems fair both ways for this, would a flamer unit get an advantage in range due to being on a higher floor? I don't see ranged weapons normally subtracting 3 inches from their weapons range for each difference in floor of a unit they are shooting at. You could even argue a unit on the first floor is out of LOS of a unit on say the 4th floor. If that is the right way of thinking, does that make a flamer unit on 2nd + floors impossible/much harder to avoid its over-watch? seems unfair to me....

- I found one forum with a good idea of ruling overwatch as being different than a ranged attack. In overwatch you compare the range of the weapon to the range of the attempted charge i.e. if the unit is 9 inches away (counting vertical distance) trying to make a 8 inch charge, (-1 for mele range) then any weapon with a range of 8 inches or less is "out of range." this make sense however it is still not following the reality of the models distance on the table.... feels like we have missed something important....any help to clarify would be appreciated.

Its the rules. You measure from base to base for weapon ranges (which means measuring at an angle between models on different vertical levels. When you move (including charging) you measure the path that models actually have to move. So yes, if the models you are trying to charge are higher or lower up, you will need to be closer to them to make the charge, which will put more of their weapons within range of your charging models. The same thing happens with any of the terrain that subtracts 2" from your charge distance (craters, etc).

It only seems unfair because you're the one wanting to make the charge. If you're the one getting charged and using terrain to your advantage, then it seems perfectly fair. Having terrain actually affect game strategy is a GOOD thing, not an unfair thing. Perhaps include a few more shooty units in your army and shoot those enemy units that are packing flamers instead of trying to charge them?

- On a side thought, how would deep striking and vertical distance be measured? A unit on the 3rd floor measuring 9 inches diagonally to a deep striking unit on ground floor puts that unit further away from the ruins/hill than if you just measured 6 inches down (3 inches for each floor) and 3 inches horizontally. One feels more fair than the other but is this clearly written/FAQ'ed somewhere for 8th?

- WAAAAGGHHH!!!!!!

As always, range is measured between the bases of the models involved (unless they don't have a base or have an ability that tells you to measure from something else besides their base). So yes, if your unit is up on a higher level, they restrict units arriving from within 9" measured from their bases (measured at an angle if the arriving models are arriving at ground level).

Darn, will need to rethink what units soak up the over-watch being in or as close to the terrain's 1st floor a possible, and hope to roll better for my orks shooting; at least my flamers will be measured the same direction shooting up lol.

KillerOfMany wrote:
Darn, will need to rethink what units soak up the over-watch being in or as close to the terrain's 1st floor a possible, and hope to roll better for my orks shooting; at least my flamers will be measured the same direction shooting up lol.

Maybe you can move them below the enemy first. If there is no LOS when the charge is declared, there is no overwatch fire if I recall correctly. So a group on top of a building has the advantage of flamers when the charging models are outside when they try to charge. but could be at a disadvantage if the charging models are a floor below and out of LOS.

^ I agree ^ Would put that under "as long as me and my opponent talk about it before the game starts."
Alot of terrain would have these blind spots; similar to charging behind a vehicle... definitely smell a bit of cheese in a few situations....
hmmm...

Just charge him from outside the building. Now he can't overwatch because he can't see you but you can still charge him because LOS isn't required.

KillerOfMany wrote:
^ I agree ^ Would put that under "as long as me and my opponent talk about it before the game starts."
Alot of terrain would have these blind spots; similar to charging behind a vehicle... definitely smell a bit of cheese in a few situations....
hmmm...

I'm not sure there's anything to talk about. Charging doesn't require LoS but overwatch does.

Charging around a corner to catch a unit of flamers by surprise works from a rules, tactics and fluff perspective.