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 have been wondering due to an earlier post and looking through the rulebook.

I shall use the avenger strike fighter as an example as it is a model i own. Although the BRB P72 has:

(...) Assume that guns can swivel vertically up to 45°, even if the barrel on the model itself cannot physically do that! Additionally, assume all hull-mounted weapons can swivel horizontally up to 45°.

This implies that tanks, e.g. Predator's Autocannon can fire from 0° up to 45°. Does this then imply that my Lascannons can fire from 0° (at other flyers) up to 45° to the ground?
Then, as the Avenger is modelled on the A10 link if you don't know:

The primary gun must be fired in a form of strafing run (rule the Flyer actually has) where you point the nose at the target, which you can't really do on the board.

Now i could just shave off the stand and put the Flyer at a 45° angle, but that would be modelling for effect.

What's Da Call? How close can an enemy be before it's "too close"?

It's a 22.5 degree angle up and down - 45 degrees total.
How big of a blind spot that creates varies depending on the model.

So that would assume most tanks can only swivel 22.5° up?

I would read *up to* meaning from 0, to 45° in the downwards direction...

Although the picture on p72 of the hull weapon is 45° total and says *up to* as well...

Guess i'll make sure the Flyer sits nicely towards the ground...

So, you;'ll make sure you model to gain an advantage you wouldnt otherwise have?

I'm not modelling for the advantage, but to be true to the nature of the unit.

It flies pointing at the target, then shoots. It's not a marauder bomber... If you have ever seen an A10 in action you would understand how I want to fly it :p

nos, for ease of transport, I do not glue my crimson hunter to the stand. Depending on which way I position it on the stand, it will either sit perpendicular to the table or at an angle.

However, based on height when perpendicular, the weapons cannot target the ground within (roughly) 12"of the base, and despite being able to target models closer, I treat the 12" as a minimum range.

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'm not modelling for the advantage, but to be true to the nature of the unit.

It flies pointing at the target, then shoots. It's not a marauder bomber... If you have ever seen an A10 in action you would understand how I want to fly it :p

You are modeling for advantage. You don't get to change the height or angle of the model for personal advantage to 'be true to the nature of the unit'. That is called 'cheating' or minimally being a poor sport.

How real life works or how you want to fly it is irrelevant. If you modify the model to change how it interacts with the rules, then there is a problem.

Flyers have blindspots. Learn to maneuver and play better and win with tactics, not cheating and modifying your models.

By RAW, vehicle weapons may only angle up. This means most flyers are incapable of actually shooting at ground targets.
No one will ever play it like this, if they respect the spirit of the game.
Ground vehicles have permission to elevate their weapons up 45 degrees (not 22.5 up or down). It stands to reason that a flyer should have similar permission to aim 45 degrees down. This will still limit what can be shot at with crippling the unit.
Granted, this is more of a How I Would Play It thing. But, as I said before, the rules don't even let you aim down to begin with.

 Fafnir13 wrote:
By RAW, vehicle weapons may only angle up. This means most flyers are incapable of actually shooting at ground targets.
No one will ever play it like this, if they respect the spirit of the game.
Ground vehicles have permission to elevate their weapons up 45 degrees (not 22.5 up or down). It stands to reason that a flyer should have similar permission to aim 45 degrees down. This will still limit what can be shot at with crippling the unit.
Granted, this is more of a How I Would Play It thing. But, as I said before, the rules don't even let you aim down to begin with.

That's not RAW at all. At no point do the rules restrict the pivot to elevation only. The only rule is that if the model can't actually pivot them, assume they can "swivel vertically up to 45 degrees". So a vertical arc of 45 degrees, 22.5 up and 22.5 down.

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'm not modelling for the advantage, but to be true to the nature of the unit.

It flies pointing at the target, then shoots. It's not a marauder bomber... If you have ever seen an A10 in action you would understand how I want to fly it :p

It would be modeling for advantage if you alter the proper assembled angle at which the model normaly sits in the stand in relation to its base. That being said the proper assembly should be with the neck of the flyer stand swooping forward resulting in the nose of the model being angled down at the table ever so slightly.

The 22.5 degree dip would represent the pilot angling down to try and bring its guns to bare on the target. Considering how fast the units are supposed to be moving you can imagine they wouldn't want to angle to far down or risk an unscheduled and uncontrolled landing.

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'm not modelling for the advantage, but to be true to the nature of the unit.

It flies pointing at the target, then shoots. It's not a marauder bomber... If you have ever seen an A10 in action you would understand how I want to fly it :p

No, you are MFA. Literally, you are making a change to the model to give you an in game advantage you would not otherwise have.

I understand how you WANT to fly it, and would have no problem with you modelling it dynamically, but you play it as a stock model

I do believe that the "stock model" built StormTalon or Ork bomber point at about 10-20* down from a true Horizontal (which would give any "Horizontal" Flyer a 12" minimum) giving them a 8" minimum at the highest.

Also, as @Happyjew said, my Flyer, set up "as is" on its stand can either sit Horizontal (12" Min) or angled down. Less than the above 2 examples but still reducing the Minimum range.

What is taken as rules then? It would be on it's stock base, so completely "unmodified"...?

I understand not shooting within about 6" till maybe 10" with a Flyer, but measuring the exact 22.5?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fafnir13 wrote:
By RAW, vehicle weapons may only angle up. This means most flyers are incapable of actually shooting at ground targets.
No one will ever play it like this, if they respect the spirit of the game.
Ground vehicles have permission to elevate their weapons up 45 degrees (not 22.5 up or down). It stands to reason that a flyer should have similar permission to aim 45 degrees down. This will still limit what can be shot at with crippling the unit.
Granted, this is more of a How I Would Play It thing. But, as I said before, the rules don't even let you aim down to begin with.

And that is exactly how I read it by the way: a Predator firing 22.5* down? O_o"

 BlackTalos wrote:


And that is exactly how I read it by the way: a Predator firing 22.5* down? O_o"

If it couldn't, it becomes worthless as soon as you put it on a hill. Makes perfect sense to me.

 grrrfranky wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:


And that is exactly how I read it by the way: a Predator firing 22.5* down? O_o"

If it couldn't, it becomes worthless as soon as you put it on a hill. Makes perfect sense to me.

Not only that, most models can fit under the main gun. If it can't aim even slightly down...

worth noting that MFA is not an actual rule in the rulebook.

But it doesn't make sense for a Flyer, designed to aim at ground target to aim at the ground?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nutty_nutter wrote:
worth noting that MFA is not an actual rule in the rulebook.

True but i don't want to be "one of them" =P

 nutty_nutter wrote:
worth noting that MFA is not an actual rule in the rulebook.

True. But neither is sportsmanship. Or politeness.
But most opponents and tournaments will require them.

 nutty_nutter wrote:
worth noting that MFA is not an actual rule in the rulebook.

Agreed. However neither is "your opponent has to play you even when you are looking to cheat"

The game is a social contract. Trying to gain an advatnage you are not entitled to - even by diminishing a disadvantage - tends to break that for the majorty of players, friendly or tournament.

 BlackTalos wrote:
But it doesn't make sense for a Flyer, designed to aim at ground target to aim at the ground?

How much sense does it make for an assault dropship to have a short range melta weapon mounted on the roof where it will rarely have a target? Yay, Storm Raven!


Essentially, GW have never really put a lot of thought into how the 3rd dimension affects the game. 2nd edition had rules covering shooting from and at elevation (added by White Dwarf FAQ, rather than a part of the core system) but since then they have pretty much ignored the fact that models won't always be standing on a flat table, except where Ruins are concerned.

As a result, there are situations where things get a little weird. And flyers fall smack bang into one of those big, weird situations... Their gigantic base makes them fit really badly into the rules as a whole, and while GW have patched some of the issues (like measuring for disembarking) they still have a way to go before flyers are actually properly functional in the 40K ruleset.

Honestly, I can't complain about the missile pods on the Tau fighters given the fact the sisters have some sort of tank which has the weapons pointing straight up?

I am with Insaniak on this one, I do not think the third dimension was even planned for during any stage of development. Only during play testing did some questions get raised as to elevation, I wouldn't be surprised if one was 'how far upwards can I shoot with a tank,' and only then did they give it more then a shrug and a passing glance. This is probably most evident but that they felt it necessary to state that you would rarely ever have to use the 45 degree vertical rule they just penned. In my experience, 'rarely' means you won't have a game where you do not have to use this rule at some point.

JinxDragon wrote:
the sisters have some sort of tank which has the weapons pointing straight up?

I completely forgot about that, but I play one....

Since my Exorcist can fire at you, so can my Avenger! lol

 BlackTalos wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
the sisters have some sort of tank which has the weapons pointing straight up?

I completely forgot about that, but I play one....

Since my Exorcist can fire at you, so can my Avenger! lol

By that logic, all my Orks can deep strike, just because Drop Pods can.

Bringing up the Exorcist tank with barrels pointed upwards wasn't to try and claim some sort of 'because this tank can shoot 90 degrees upwards, other tanks can' status. It was to ask the legitimate question of 'how the hell do these things work in the first place?' If the barrel can only be 'imagined' to have a vertical angle of 45 degree, with 0 based on the resting point of the barrel, then it would be near impossible to draw line of sight from this weapon. One would need to park the damn tank almost directly underneath the unit to be fire at, and hope nothing is in the way blocking line of sight as often is the case at the angles we are talking, or else this rule could be evoked to prevent the weapon from targeting in the first place.

My post was just evidence supporting that the third dimension is given little to no consideration by Game Workshop.

Sorry, and I meant to reply that, as no consideration was given to the third dimension, i don't see why I would agree to someone turning up with a 22.5* templalte for my plane and just use the same common sense i use for other models who also have third dimension issues...

The problem is the Rule Book does contain rules detailing vertical firing arcs, so your opponent has the ability to demand you honor these rules and there is nothing you can do about it bar forfeit and walk away. It doesn't matter that I, personally, believe these rules to be slapped on at the last minute just as if it wouldn't even matter if they where slapped together at the very last minute. The fact remains that we do have a rule, that rule restricts us from drawing line of sight outside of a set arc, so we have no ability to simply ignore the rule on the excuse that the third dimension makes flyers harder to utilize.

Although I also feel that relating a model that is broken as the rule are concerned...and finding a way to make this model in question work......shouldn't suddenly invalidate the rules as written for other units.

For instance:

I'm going go pretend the eyes are here on the Wraithlord, where they should be...so that the shooting phase isn't broken for this unit.

-Does not equate to-

I'm going to place eyes wherever I want on all models to make it so that I can draw lines of sight otherwise different from what the model originally had.

^ Did someone just use common sense in YMDC? Pinch me, I must be dreaming.