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.

So you have a model with 2 weapons I.e. Fusion Blasters on a crisis suit.
They're attached to the arms and the suit happens to be at and exact corner of the armour facings. The line from the barrels would go into each facing.
Would you resolve one against each side or do something differently?

Page 73 (that talks about facings) doesn't mention what to do with models that straddle 2 facings. It only talks about units that have models in different facings (where you have to split the fire).

Normally though you measure range from models with a base from the closest point on the base to the closest point on the hull of the vehicle.

You don't measure from weapons/gun barrels for infantry-type models. (see page 4)

LoS is from eyes to any part of the hull, again not from gun barrels or anything. (see page8)

Line of sight for non vehicles is taken from their eyes mot the weapon.

On a vehicle los comes from each weapon so I'd say you could hit different facing with each.

Quite likely on something like a Land Raider.

a warhound titan could straddle two facings with its weapons as could any other vehicle.

infantry use the model itself and not the weapons, although if you do end up dead centre the rulebook does give you an answer on which facing you would shoot at.

Another situation this occurs in is a vehicle ( Lehman Russ is a good example of this) fires a barrage weapon on a vehicle and sponsons and a hull mounted, barrage is against side, all the others could be against whatever facing.

danny1995 wrote:
Another situation this occurs in is a vehicle ( Lehman Russ is a good example of this) fires a barrage weapon on a vehicle and sponsons and a hull mounted, barrage is against side, all the others could be against whatever facing.

No Leman Russ of any type has a barrage weapon. Other than that you're right.

 Peregrine wrote:

danny1995 wrote:
Another situation this occurs in is a vehicle ( Lehman Russ is a good example of this) fires a barrage weapon on a vehicle and sponsons and a hull mounted, barrage is against side, all the others could be against whatever facing.

No Leman Russ of any type has a barrage weapon. Other than that you're right.

for now ......

What happens when your on the exact corner of a tank, say a rhino. You are equally distant from both armour facings, so which do you shoot at?

We don't know.

Non-vehicles draw their perspective from true LOS... generally determined by the model's eyes. Mathematically speaking, you're measuring from a "point".

Given how it would be impossible for a "point" to be microscopically, atomically, exactly, on the centre line of a given vehicle's AV facing, the problem is not with the rules, but with the ability of a human to accurately determine which facing the attacking non-vehicle originates in.

Since the problem lies not in the rules, but with human capabilities, coming to an agreement with your opponent is what you need to do... which is technically what you do even when the positioning is clear. If you can't agree with your opponent, the rulebook suggests you dice off until someone is determined to be the "winner", and that person chooses the AV facing that will be attacked by that model, with both of their weapons.