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.

VTOL aircraft are assumed to be pitching and yawing in order to hit their targets , Stormravens , storm talons and the Vendetta/
Valkyrie. Are all considered VTOL aircraft where as opposed to the Dakka jet , Necron flyer which are strictly " fixed wing "*

In 40k, they aren't. Unless you count the 45 degree total horizontal angle for their fixed guns.

Can't see the rules for VTOL anywhere in the rulebook...

They have the " hover " rule and are generally assumed to retain the VTOL. Ability as most imperial gunships have obvious vertical thrusters . Mostly left up to the person you are playing , but think Apache gunship

 Kasrkin229 wrote:
They have the " hover " rule and are generally assumed to retain the VTOL. Ability as most imperial gunships have obvious vertical thrusters . Mostly left up to the person you are playing , but think Apache gunship

That's all very good fluff-wise, but has no bearing in the rules at all.
Flyer or skimmer the fire arcs are the same.

Yeah there is no difference between a hull mounted gun on a flyer or a hull mounted gun on a tank, it is always 45 degree cone of fire.

You know what my be useful?

A list of minimum distances for targeting for stock flyers so people don't have to fight about abusive modeling or fake arc templates. If we basically get exact measurements of how far each model's fixed downward arc can see, we can say:

A marine height model within X" of a dakkajet's base cannot be targeted.

Having pre-measured min distances for 'ease of use' is better than arguing about arcs or fighting about MFA when people make every flyer pointing at the ground at a 45 degree angle.

 Kasrkin229 wrote:
They have the " hover " rule and are generally assumed to retain the VTOL. Ability as most imperial gunships have obvious vertical thrusters . Mostly left up to the person you are playing , but think Apache gunship

Think if you allowed yourself more than a 45 degree, you'd be cheating based off of nonsense/fluff.

RAW the storm raven can't rapid fire it's hurricane bolters at a ground target because it's going to have a minimum range >12". Reminds me of how Baal preds couldn't legally fire their flame gun until a faq said a vehicle's flame template can be partially over it's own hull.

 schadenfreude wrote:
RAW the storm raven can't rapid fire it's hurricane bolters at a ground target because it's going to have a minimum range >12". Reminds me of how Baal preds couldn't legally fire their flame gun until a faq said a vehicle's flame template can be partially over it's own hull.

It can shoot at targets closer than 12"

 schadenfreude wrote:
RAW the storm raven can't rapid fire it's hurricane bolters at a ground target because it's going to have a minimum range >12". Reminds me of how Baal preds couldn't legally fire their flame gun until a faq said a vehicle's flame template can be partially over it's own hull.

Shooting through your own hull and ignoring established fire arc restrictions is nothing like the placing flamer templates issue. Having an exception to fire your flamer doesn't allow you to shoot through your stormraven at an illegal angle to hit targets on the ground.

Blindspots are part of the game.

nkelsch wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:
RAW the storm raven can't rapid fire it's hurricane bolters at a ground target because it's going to have a minimum range >12". Reminds me of how Baal preds couldn't legally fire their flame gun until a faq said a vehicle's flame template can be partially over it's own hull.

Shooting through your own hull and ignoring established fire arc restrictions is nothing like the placing flamer templates issue. Having an exception to fire your flamer doesn't allow you to shoot through your stormraven at an illegal angle to hit targets on the ground.

Blindspots are part of the game.

So you agree that a storm raven can only shoot it's hurricane bolters at targets that are about 13 to 24" away, and the blind spot includes 100% of the weapon's rapid fire range.

No, not at all. Youre a) assuming other models are always at ground level and b) that models are never taller than a marine.

Two really, really bad assumptions to make. Try again.

 schadenfreude wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:
RAW the storm raven can't rapid fire it's hurricane bolters at a ground target because it's going to have a minimum range >12". Reminds me of how Baal preds couldn't legally fire their flame gun until a faq said a vehicle's flame template can be partially over it's own hull.

Shooting through your own hull and ignoring established fire arc restrictions is nothing like the placing flamer templates issue. Having an exception to fire your flamer doesn't allow you to shoot through your stormraven at an illegal angle to hit targets on the ground.

Blindspots are part of the game.

So you agree that a storm raven can only shoot it's hurricane bolters at targets that are about 13 to 24" away, and the blind spot includes 100% of the weapon's rapid fire range.

I shoot at the rear end of a Vendetta 6" away ^^

http://www.1728.org/trig.htm

Height of the hurricane bolters 6.5", model height 1.5", difference =5". The blind spot forms a perfect right triangle 5" tall, 12.1" long, and with a hypotenuse of 13.1" and angles are 22.5, 67.5, and 90.

12.1" blind spot=stormraven gunships can never rapid fire their hurricane bolters against 1.5" tall infantry.

Is a Storm Raven perfectly level when assembled?
(I mean a default assembly, not altered)

 grendel083 wrote:
Is a Storm Raven perfectly level when assembled?
(I mean a default assembly, not altered)

Mine sure isn't it aims nose down a bit. A friends nose gos up though

The stormraven's top turret is about 8.5" off the deck, maybe 9.5". That puts it's effective range of the tlac to 17-24" for 8.5"off the deck, or 19.3"-24" if the gun is 9.5" from the table.

I'm not sure what you're saying - just stating facts?
Yes, you're correct.

Arguing that it can't be correct because of the blind spots?

rigeld2 wrote:
I'm not sure what you're saying - just stating facts?
Yes, you're correct.

Arguing that it can't be correct because of the blind spots?

That if we apply strict raw, bring a sextant or other vertical angle measurement tool to every game, and turn every game into a trigonometry class then some flyers can lose over half the effective range of their weapons.

Personally I think it's better for a TO/FLGS to establish a universal minimum range for flyers rather than asking players to argue the vertival angles of shots without a proper measuring tool.

You mean a piece of paper folded into a 45 degree angle?

rigeld2 wrote:
You mean a piece of paper folded into a 45 degree angle?

With laser beams!

 schadenfreude wrote:
http://www.1728.org/trig.htm

Height of the hurricane bolters 6.5", model height 1.5", difference =5". The blind spot forms a perfect right triangle 5" tall, 12.1" long, and with a hypotenuse of 13.1" and angles are 22.5, 67.5, and 90.

12.1" blind spot=stormraven gunships can never rapid fire their hurricane bolters against 1.5" tall infantry.

Unless, you know, you are shooting at stuff not on the ground.

Blind spots exist for a reason, called balance. Its actually quite difficult for a plane going quite fast to shoot something close to it on the ground.

rigeld2 wrote:
You mean a piece of paper folded into a 45 degree angle?

Works great when you can lay it on the table, not so much for vertical angles when it flops around like a wet noodle.

rigeld2 wrote:
You mean a piece of paper folded into a 45 degree angle?

No, a piece of paper with a 67.5 degree fold. That would make the paper the blind spot, and in front of the paper in line of sight.
If you try and free hand split a 45, you're going to run into more problems.
And I'm not too worried about the 22.5 degree elevations. It's uncommon to have anything taller.

Might not be a bad idea to make a template with the 67.5 degree/22.5/90 degree angles, that's tall enough to line up with the top turret of the storm raven (tallest gun on flyer).
That would give you the template for LOS from any flyer gun to anything as short as prone.

From a game design stand point, a simple 8" blind spot would work better; but that's not the rules we have.

-Matt

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:
http://www.1728.org/trig.htm

Height of the hurricane bolters 6.5", model height 1.5", difference =5". The blind spot forms a perfect right triangle 5" tall, 12.1" long, and with a hypotenuse of 13.1" and angles are 22.5, 67.5, and 90.

12.1" blind spot=stormraven gunships can never rapid fire their hurricane bolters against 1.5" tall infantry.

Unless, you know, you are shooting at stuff not on the ground.

Blind spots exist for a reason, called balance. Its actually quite difficult for a plane going quite fast to shoot something close to it on the ground.

I agree in theory, but don't think one flyer having a 12" or 18" blind spot and the next flyer having a 2 or 3" is what gw had in mind when the chose the angles a flyer is fixed to it's stand.

How come this wasn't an issue in 5th ed? True LOS existed then and so did the model for a SR.

It was an issue. Most people ignored it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:
http://www.1728.org/trig.htm

Height of the hurricane bolters 6.5", model height 1.5", difference =5". The blind spot forms a perfect right triangle 5" tall, 12.1" long, and with a hypotenuse of 13.1" and angles are 22.5, 67.5, and 90.

12.1" blind spot=stormraven gunships can never rapid fire their hurricane bolters against 1.5" tall infantry.

Unless, you know, you are shooting at stuff not on the ground.

Blind spots exist for a reason, called balance. Its actually quite difficult for a plane going quite fast to shoot something close to it on the ground.

Unless your flying an A-10 with Fuel Air/Cluster Munititons

 Kasrkin229 wrote:
Unless your flying an A-10 with Fuel Air/Cluster Munititons

In which case you're not shooting a target on the ground - you're shooting the ground. And it's easy to hit a target that big.