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.

In another thread, the idea of tank shocking a gun emplacement came up. (here)

A gun emplacement is a model and does have a stat line. It can be shot at and attacked in close combat. So, it stands to reason it can be tank shocked as well.

My question revolves around whether the Gun Emplacement would be allowed to make a Death or Glory attack. If so, how would this work out as the gun does not have a leadership value? I'm assuming it simply auto fails the morale check and therefore can't make the attack. Although an Artillery unit (I know, not exactly the same thing) does have permission to make such an attack.

If not, is it simply auto destroyed when a tank shock occurs? After all, it can't move out of the way as an emplacement has no permission to move and is hit automatically in any CC attacks.

The situation I'm thinking about is a DE Raider w/Aethersails tank shocking a Quad gun. This would be a fantastic way of taking out the quad gun on turn 2. The raider would have a 12" + 2D6" move, giving it a potential range of 14" to 24".

clively wrote:
A gun emplacement is a model and does have a stat line. It can be shot at and attacked in close combat. So, it stands to reason it can be tank shocked as well.

This is a leap unsupported by rules as far as I can tell.
edit: Can you tank shock Terrain?

As rig said.

A gun emplacement is not a model, it is terrain.

Models have a unit type, the gun emplacement does not have a unit type so it is not a 40k defined model. (Roundabout page 3 holds confirmation of this).

Agreed with all above it is classified as Difficult Terrain per the BRB, if it was an Emplaced Weapon on a Bastion or some such and you could attack the Building itself, otherwise no luck.

Interesting Idea though, I'd definitely request an FAQ on it. Perhaps asking if you could execute a RAM against it's Toughness.

if a unit is manning the emplacement, and you tank shock the unit and use a distance that places your tank on top of the emplacement, what happens then?

I suppose we could say the tank simply drives over the thing, leaving it unharmed. but trying to imagine how that makes sense is beyond me.

Mark_Autarch wrote:
but trying to imagine how that makes sense is beyond me.

You shouldn't try and make sense of things. Walking through walls by planting grenades or Kool-Aid man-ing through and leaving no hole behind is even more strange.

Definitely seems silly, but per the terrain rules, yes the tank would simply sit on top of the gun, this would still keep a model from shooting it though! It is somewhat hard to get into base with the gun when a Land Raider is parked on it.

The 'Crunch!' rule only triggers when "enemy models from the enemy unit" being tank shocked can't move out of the way. The gun isn't an enemy model, except for some specific purposes, even if it is manned.

So no - only enemy units may be targeted by a tank shock, and only enemy models are removed if they can't be moved.

 Bobaram wrote:
Definitely seems silly, but per the terrain rules, yes the tank would simply sit on top of the gun, this would still keep a model from shooting it though! It is somewhat hard to get into base with the gun when a Land Raider is parked on it.

That depends on how tall the firing model is. The LR has to sit on top of the gun, so it's theoretically possible for a short enough model to be in base contact with the gun and still be 1" below the LR. Of course depending on where you're shooting and where exactly the LR is the LR might offer a 5+ cover save, or even block LOS completely.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Bobaram wrote:
Definitely seems silly, but per the terrain rules, yes the tank would simply sit on top of the gun, this would still keep a model from shooting it though! It is somewhat hard to get into base with the gun when a Land Raider is parked on it.

That depends on how tall the firing model is. The LR has to sit on top of the gun, so it's theoretically possible for a short enough model to be in base contact with the gun and still be 1" below the LR. Of course depending on where you're shooting and where exactly the LR is the LR might offer a 5+ cover save, or even block LOS completely.

I must now strive to place a unit of Ratling Snipers underneath an LR on top of a Quad-Gun!

LR's can quite easily squish tyranid mycetic spoors however.

Heh. Land Raider on top of a quadgun. Talk about Wobbly Model Syndrome!

Eihnlazer wrote:
LR's can quite easily squish tyranid mycetic spoors however.

Won't the spore get an automatic hit at S10 AP2 first, though?

Q: Can a Mycetic Spore be subject to a Tank Shock and, if so, can it
still choose whether to Death or Glory or simply move out of the way?
(p54)
A: Yes, but it must choose to make a Death of Glory attack as it
cannot move for any reason once it has entered the battle

Pyrian wrote:
Heh. Land Raider on top of a quadgun. Talk about Wobbly Model Syndrome!

Eihnlazer wrote:
LR's can quite easily squish tyranid mycetic spoors however.

Won't the spore get an automatic hit at S10 AP2 first, though?

It would if it had S10 but sadly, it does not.

It is however a monstrous creature, so it has the Smash rule.
Since death or glory only gives you one attack anyway, there's no downside to using Smash to double that attacks strength.

...And it gets to re-roll failed armor penetration rolls via Smash Attack, as well. I think Mr. Land Raider had better have a really good reason to attempt this.

Pyrian wrote:
...And it gets to re-roll failed armor penetration rolls via Smash Attack, as well. I think Mr. Land Raider had better have a really good reason to attempt this.

Except the Spore is Str 4 base right?

Nope, it's Str 6.

Arson Fire wrote:
Nope, it's Str 6.

That must be its Toughness then, my fault.

Yeah, forgot abut smash. Yup S10 hit AP2, reroll failed pen.

and yes they are T4. Personally I think the other way around would make more sense as they drop in from orbit but that's what they wrote.

I didn't know those spores had any attacks...can't wait to see what that new giant spore will do in January.

Now to add to the tower of fun. Run a dual raider list and have the first raider get wrecked on top of the quad gun and have the second raider parked on top of the wreckage

icefire78 wrote:
Now to add to the tower of fun. Run a dual raider list and have the first raider get wrecked on top of the quad gun and have the second raider parked on top of the wreckage

This is why my friends and I play the Gun as impassible terrain. It is really the only way to do it that does not create ridiculous situations like this.

 DeathReaper wrote:

icefire78 wrote:
Now to add to the tower of fun. Run a dual raider list and have the first raider get wrecked on top of the quad gun and have the second raider parked on top of the wreckage

This is why my friends and I play the Gun as impassible terrain. It is really the only way to do it that does not create ridiculous situations like this.

Playing it as a model does the same.

Fragile wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

icefire78 wrote:
Now to add to the tower of fun. Run a dual raider list and have the first raider get wrecked on top of the quad gun and have the second raider parked on top of the wreckage

This is why my friends and I play the Gun as impassible terrain. It is really the only way to do it that does not create ridiculous situations like this.

Playing it as a model does the same.

except is it not a model, it is terrain.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

icefire78 wrote:
Now to add to the tower of fun. Run a dual raider list and have the first raider get wrecked on top of the quad gun and have the second raider parked on top of the wreckage

This is why my friends and I play the Gun as impassible terrain. It is really the only way to do it that does not create ridiculous situations like this.

Playing it as a model does the same.

except is it not a model, it is terrain.

And it is not impassable terrain, so you have traveled beyond RAW.

Fragile wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

icefire78 wrote:
Now to add to the tower of fun. Run a dual raider list and have the first raider get wrecked on top of the quad gun and have the second raider parked on top of the wreckage

This is why my friends and I play the Gun as impassible terrain. It is really the only way to do it that does not create ridiculous situations like this.

Playing it as a model does the same.

except is it not a model, it is terrain.

And it is not impassable terrain, so you have traveled beyond RAW.

And he stated it is how he plays it.

And I stated another way to play it, which he then argued.

Fragile wrote:
And I stated another way to play it, which he then argued.

Which was totally against the realm of the rules.

The Gun is terrain.

"Unless otherwise noted, battlefield debris is difficult terrain"

You can play it as Impassible, as that is the easy, and within the rules, workaround.

Treating it as a model has no basis in the rules, at all.

Difficult terrain is not impassable. You stating that it is, is in direct violation of the rules as you just cited.

The only difference between RAW and treating it as a model, is the lack of a "unit" type. Which is apparently not necessary to shoot or assault it. Unit Type : Gun Emplacement solves just as many rules conflicts as pretending it is impassable terrain.

Your arguing HIWPI at this point.