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'm trying to work out page 34. Please tell me if I am correct, or if it works otherwise.

-Barrage weapons have the option at firing at models out of LOS or within minimum range, which is called indirect fire If they do, they scatter a full 2D6 unless a hit is rolled. Otherwise they can fire directly which is normal subtract firer's BS from the scatter roll.

-For determining cover, use the hole at the centre of the template as direction of the shot. This is always done regardless if you use the above indirect fire, or you had LOS to target and were able to fire direct.

-Always pinning regardless of Direct or Indirect fire.

-Always scatter multiple shots from barrages in the same way regardless of whether they fired indirectly or directly.

You have it correct.

Thanks. I've been matching with some players that are under the impression that only indirect firing enabled the new cover direction and multiple scatter, and I couldn't reconcile it with the rules.

Halfpast_Yellow wrote:
Thanks. I've been matching with some players that are under the impression that only indirect firing enabled the new cover direction and multiple scatter, and I couldn't reconcile it with the rules.

They're probably thinking of how it used to work in 5th, where direct/indirect meant something completely different.

Halfpast_Yellow wrote:
Thanks. I've been matching with some players that are under the impression that only indirect firing enabled the new cover direction and multiple scatter, and I couldn't reconcile it with the rules.

Matching?

"Playing" could be considered old and traditional, and apparently therefore not "hip" enough to use any more.
"Gaming" could be an acceptable alternative.
But "Matching", as a word, already has another meaning, and as such really shouldn't be used in this context.
Don't get me started on "Versing" which is just completely made up by 1337-speaking morons.

God, I feel old now.

Steelmage99 wrote:

Halfpast_Yellow wrote:
Thanks. I've been matching with some players that are under the impression that only indirect firing enabled the new cover direction and multiple scatter, and I couldn't reconcile it with the rules.

Matching?

"Playing" could be considered old and traditional, and apparently therefore not "hip" enough to use any more.
"Gaming" could be an acceptable alternative.
But "Matching", as a word, already has another meaning, and as such really shouldn't be used in this context.
Don't get me started on "Versing" which is just completely made up by 1337-speaking morons.

God, I feel old now.

Look at his country of origin before ranking about his word usage.

SJ