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.

I've looked through the book and it doesn't seem to say that you can't park a tank over an objective.

So in theory I can deny an objective by parking some stuff over it right?

 Makutsu wrote:
I've looked through the book and it doesn't seem to say that you can't park a tank over an objective.

So in theory I can deny an objective by parking some stuff over it right?

Yes, as the objectives are just markers (P. 121 tells us this) therefore they do not block movement, so you are free to park a vehicle on top of one.

so what happens when the tanks blow up?
They become difficult terrain and hence my opponent can walk over them?

 Makutsu wrote:
so what happens when the tanks blow up?
They become difficult terrain and hence my opponent can walk over them?

If they blow up they are removed as per the explodes result.

If they are wrecked they become Difficult and Dangerous terrain as P. 74 tells us.

ok, good we were having discussions about that since my partner decided to ram the troops off an objective and be on top of it.
Thanks

It works, though the range for the objective is 3 inches so depending on the tank you might still be able to get within the range for the objective. (this also depends on the size of your objective markers. i think they are supposed to be 40mm bases) but the ones with the dice are 20mm (i think) squares

But note that as its just a marker, if the vehicle is wrecked the marker will just move on top of the wreck(which is now Diff/Dangerous terrain)

If a vehicle is large enough it is possable to make an objective uncapturable/uncontestable due to being unable to get within 3" of it. Unless the vehicle itself is scoring for some reason.


That was a strategy with Land Raiders in 5th. Stick a scoring unit inside, park the LR on an objective, and your opponent wouldn't ever be able to contest the objective without killing the LR. Or you could just use the LR to deny an objective, especially useful if your opponent didn't have much that could hurt a LR.

 Grey Templar wrote:
if the vehicle is wrecked the marker will just move on top of the wreck(which is now Diff/Dangerous terrain).

Citation needed.

There is nothing I have found that says this.

Yes, if it's wrecked the marker should stay under the wreck. If it explodes I usually put the crater/area of difficult terrain under the marker, though.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Yes, if it's wrecked the marker should stay under the wreck. If it explodes I usually put the crater/area of difficult terrain under the marker, though.

This,.. though I can't think of a non FW vehicle it would make that much of a difference for.

jegsar wrote:It works, though the range for the objective is 3 inches so depending on the tank you might still be able to get within the range for the objective. (this also depends on the size of your objective markers. i think they are supposed to be 40mm bases) but the ones with the dice are 20mm (i think) squares

To my knowledge, the Necron Monolith is the only vehicle that can completely cover the full range of the objective. Which used to be amazing back when it could hold objectives and was nigh-indestructible.

Interesting Idea for Big Guns Never tire... the monolith width is 6 inches +11mm (based on size of objective that holds dice that GW put out) though? that seems very large.

you'd have to park the vehicle to either block a narrow passageway or be a freakin Landraider or Monolith because 3inches is pretty hard to block with most vehicles. Yea, he cant be closer than 1 inch, but my Trukks for instance are pretty narrow, so he'd still get in that 3inch range.

Sometimes just placing a vehicle so that it blocks 3 sides is enough to grant cover to your scoring units and make the enemy go around the vehicle. This could certainly buy you another round of holding it.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Yes, if it's wrecked the marker should stay under the wreck. If it explodes I usually put the crater/area of difficult terrain under the marker, though.

Why though? A wreck becomes area terrain and there is nothing in the rules allowing anything to be "under" area terrain. Except maybe more area terrain I guess, such as if the vehicle was wrecked while in a crater.

jegsar wrote:Interesting Idea for Big Guns Never tire... the monolith width is 6 inches +11mm (based on size of objective that holds dice that GW put out) though? that seems very large.

The Monolith is very large. It's just over 6x6 inches. It doesn't even fit inside the official GW army transports.

 Kevin949 wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Yes, if it's wrecked the marker should stay under the wreck. If it explodes I usually put the crater/area of difficult terrain under the marker, though.

Why though? A wreck becomes area terrain and there is nothing in the rules allowing anything to be "under" area terrain. Except maybe more area terrain I guess, such as if the vehicle was wrecked while in a crater.

Is it area? I thought it was just difficult and dangerous. An exploded vehicle turns into area; a crater.

A wreck is not area terrain.

Pg 74. "wrecked vehicles are left on the table and effectively become a piece of terrain (conferring a 5+ cover save), counting as both difficult and dangerous terrain."

Pg 75. "Forging a Narrative" - The destruction of a
vehicle is usually a spectacular event that
can totally change the course of the game,
and vehicle wrecks become important pieces of terrain unto
themselves.


That says it all to me, personally.

So ok, it's not "area" terrain, but it is terrain. And again, I don't know of anything that allows markers, of any kind, to be under terrain.

 Kevin949 wrote:
So ok, it's not "area" terrain, but it is terrain. And again, I don't know of anything that allows markers, of any kind, to be under terrain.

So you can not have an objective on the ground floor of a ruin if there is a 2nd floor above it?

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
So ok, it's not "area" terrain, but it is terrain. And again, I don't know of anything that allows markers, of any kind, to be under terrain.

So you can not have an objective on the ground floor of a ruin if there is a 2nd floor above it?

If for no other reason then there's a specific exception for that.

 Kevin949 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
So ok, it's not "area" terrain, but it is terrain. And again, I don't know of anything that allows markers, of any kind, to be under terrain.

So you can not have an objective on the ground floor of a ruin if there is a 2nd floor above it?

If for no other reason then there's a specific exception for that.

So a bridge then, you can never have an objective under a bridge?

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
So ok, it's not "area" terrain, but it is terrain. And again, I don't know of anything that allows markers, of any kind, to be under terrain.

So you can not have an objective on the ground floor of a ruin if there is a 2nd floor above it?

If for no other reason then there's a specific exception for that.

So a bridge then, you can never have an objective under a bridge?

I could be mistaken, but I don't know of any terrain bridges that are placed as part of the rules for placing terrain. Maybe if someone did that, then they'd have to discuss this special case scenario pre-game. Might be missing it but I don't see bridges classified in the BRB either, so under normal circumstances I'd have to say that bridges are part of the battlefield and not part of terrain.

I know of a few pieces of random terrain I've seen that would allow for placement of the objective under it. But those are things like, as you said, a bridge or a length of piping. A wrecked vehicle directly on the battlefield is no different then a crater on the battlefield. So is your opinion that I could take an objective and place it under a tree? Or under a wall? Or is it just easier to say that objectives can only go where they would feasibly be able to be? Such as under a bridge, some high piping, under floors of a ruin...etc.

I guess my question is, does this all depend on what you use for a marker? What if you use actual items, such as ammo crate stash or maybe a computer console, instead of just a coin or flat piece of whatever. In those situations where you can't place a model on top of it and you're not allowed to (or, not supposed to) move objectives...do you just wobbly model the unit AND the wreckage at that point?

Personally this is why I've always found it easiest to agree with my opponents that objectives are impassible. But that's just our games.

The whole battlefield is classified as terrain.

Plus there is no allowance to move the marker once placed.

The only restrictions on placing objective markers is on page 121.

"No objective can be placed within 6" of any battlefield edge or within 12" of another objective." (121)

"No objective can be placed in, or on, impassible terrain, buildings or fortifications." (121)

DR's right. There are lots of types of terrain which could potentially have an objective placed under them. Bridges, rock overhangs, pipes, walkways, etc. There's no reason to think that an objective can't be under something. It just can't be placed in a building or impassible terrain.

Wrecks are terrain, but they're not area terrain. It's an important distinction. Most types of terrain are not area terrain. Area terrain has special rules which don't pertain to other types.

You can park the vehicle on top of it, but it doesn't count as a denial unit, BRB pg. 123. Vehicles are neither scoring, nor denial units unless you're playing Big Guns Never Tire or the Scouring, in which case it's up in the air because the rules state that a vehicle IS NOT a scoring or denial unit. But parking a Monolithe on top of an objective would deny any chance of scoring because of it's size.

If you can park a vehicle on a objective, in the relic mission does that mean that I could potentially deny my enemy from lifting it as they have to remain an inch away?

Pyreguard wrote:
If you can park a vehicle on a objective, in the relic mission does that mean that I could potentially deny my enemy from lifting it as they have to remain an inch away?

Yes, as the enemy unit could not come into contact with the relic.

RAW for tournament play, this is indeed a legal - and highly viable scenario. Park a Monolith or Land Raider on the objective marker and your enemy has to explode it in order to remove it and claim the objective. In my friendly games, however, I prefer to use actual objects as my relic or objectives, purely because I like to think i'm fighting over something meaningful or worthwhile, not just a flat piece of meaningless plastic. Generally these are things like crashed tanks (where the narrative is that the objective is the equipment or technology left inside) or a weapons platform, or statue etc... Just makes more sense to me that way and is far more fun.

Aleph-Sama wrote:
You can park the vehicle on top of it, but it doesn't count as a denial unit, BRB pg. 123. Vehicles are neither scoring, nor denial units unless you're playing Big Guns Never Tire or the Scouring, in which case it's up in the air because the rules state that a vehicle IS NOT a scoring or denial unit. But parking a Monolithe on top of an objective would deny any chance of scoring because of it's size.

Only if the objective is 0" in diameter. The monolith is just slightly over 6" wide, an objective should be 1-2" in diameter which means you can keep enemies from it in one or two directions, but not all directions as they would just have to get into base contact or possibly within 1" of the monolith to be denying it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mannahnin wrote:
DR's right. There are lots of types of terrain which could potentially have an objective placed under them. Bridges, rock overhangs, pipes, walkways, etc. There's no reason to think that an objective can't be under something. It just can't be placed in a building or impassible terrain.

Wrecks are terrain, but they're not area terrain. It's an important distinction. Most types of terrain are not area terrain. Area terrain has special rules which don't pertain to other types.

I guess "under something" isn't the right word, but can objectives and terrain occupy the same space? It would seem, to me, that once a wreck happens it becomes terrain which becomes part of the battlefield, right? So would that not then mean that the terrain and objective are occupying the same place?

It matters less in this scenario but what if a vehicles explodes and leaves a crater? Is the crater placed on top of the objective or is the objective on top of the crater?