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.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
You are extrapolating examples that are not in the FAQ. Can you please give me the rules that support your argument.

Is the blast an attacking unit?
Is the hole a unit?
If either of these are not true, your example dose not work.

The hole is equated to the firing unit because that is where we are told the shot comes from.

So where is Night Fighting measured from?

Since the rules equate the firing unit with the center of the hole, the center of the hole.

This is because you use the center of the blast marker to determine cover saves, Giving the unit stealth or shrouded is a part of determining what cover save the unit has.

That does not matter though "As has been pointed out multiple times so far, LOS is not required for casualty removal from Blasts." (insaniak)

This is false. "If a shooting attack scatters, the distance from the firing unit to the original target is used to determine what effect Night Fighting has." Page 731 of the iBook version.

I am sorry, but you are TFG if you insist on hitting targets on top and bottom of the Skyshield.

PanzerLeader wrote:
This is false. "If a shooting attack scatters, the distance from the firing unit to the original target is used to determine what effect Night Fighting has." Page 731 of the iBook version.

Thats great for the Ibook, but not everyone has access to that.

That is literally the first time I have even seen this mentioned.

 DeathReaper wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
This is false. "If a shooting attack scatters, the distance from the firing unit to the original target is used to determine what effect Night Fighting has." Page 731 of the iBook version.

Thats great for the Ibook, but not everyone has access to that.

That is literally the first time I have even seen this mentioned.

It is in the "Mission Special Rules" section under the "Night Fight" rules (subheader "Picking a Target and Night Fighting"). I only have the phone at work to look it up on so I can't give you a better page reference.

Getting in late to this but I believe that some of the people that are arguing for the right to fire giving permission to allocate wounds argued the opposite concerning Doom Scythe's Death Ray.

PanzerLeader wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
This is false. "If a shooting attack scatters, the distance from the firing unit to the original target is used to determine what effect Night Fighting has." Page 731 of the iBook version.

Thats great for the Ibook, but not everyone has access to that.

That is literally the first time I have even seen this mentioned.

It is in the "Mission Special Rules" section under the "Night Fight" rules (subheader "Picking a Target and Night Fighting"). I only have the phone at work to look it up on so I can't give you a better page reference.

Its on Pg124, and worded exactly the same. Its not something new in the iBook.

 DeathReaper wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
This is false. "If a shooting attack scatters, the distance from the firing unit to the original target is used to determine what effect Night Fighting has." Page 731 of the iBook version.

Thats great for the Ibook, but not everyone has access to that.

That is literally the first time I have even seen this mentioned.

Page 124, last two sentences under Night Fighting (right before Reserves):


If a shooting attack scatters,
the distance from the firing unit to the original target is used
to determine what effect Night Fighting has.This means that a
unit that is over 36" away can still potentially be hit.

Page 34 tells you to use the rules for blasts , with some exceptions. One is that instead of using the firing unit to work out Los or casualty removal, you use the centre of the blast marker. Meaning that, when you read the FAQ you get to the part about the firing unit, and replace that with the centre of e blast. As was already pointed out to you,

 DeathReaper wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
This is false. "If a shooting attack scatters, the distance from the firing unit to the original target is used to determine what effect Night Fighting has." Page 731 of the iBook version.

Thats great for the Ibook, but not everyone has access to that.

That is literally the first time I have even seen this mentioned.

That's priceless. I remember a poll I did a while ago about night fighting, which you were quite vocal in, and yet you've never read the rules for night fighting? Nor the thread you were posting in as that point was also made there.

How can you answer questions about a rule, when you've never bothered to read the rule?

sirlynchmob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
This is false. "If a shooting attack scatters, the distance from the firing unit to the original target is used to determine what effect Night Fighting has." Page 731 of the iBook version.

Thats great for the Ibook, but not everyone has access to that.

That is literally the first time I have even seen this mentioned.

That's priceless. I remember a poll I did a while ago about night fighting, which you were quite vocal in, and yet you've never read the rules for night fighting? Nor the thread you were posting in as that point was also made there.

How can you answer questions about a rule, when you've never bothered to read the rule?

I read them, However those rules are more general than the ones for barrage.

The Barrage rule is more specific about the shot coming from the center of the marker, so that rule has zero impact on barrage.

Not true, as the rules for nightlight and shrouded / stealth kick in before you get to barrage rules. They do not override here

 DeathReaper wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
This is false. "If a shooting attack scatters, the distance from the firing unit to the original target is used to determine what effect Night Fighting has." Page 731 of the iBook version.

Thats great for the Ibook, but not everyone has access to that.

That is literally the first time I have even seen this mentioned.

That's priceless. I remember a poll I did a while ago about night fighting, which you were quite vocal in, and yet you've never read the rules for night fighting? Nor the thread you were posting in as that point was also made there.

How can you answer questions about a rule, when you've never bothered to read the rule?

I read them, However those rules are more general than the ones for barrage.

The Barrage rule is more specific about the shot coming from the center of the marker, so that rule has zero impact on barrage.

nos is correct. You determine the distance when you select target and then based on the distance, the targetted unit gains stealth, shrouded or neither. The center of the hole matters only for seeing what type of base cover save would apply in this case.

No nos is not correct, The center of the marker is used to determine what? A: Cover saves for the target unit... Guess what stealth and shrouded are... cover saves.

But that debate has nothing to do with the Skyshield so how about we not continue with this Off Topic tangent.

 DeathReaper wrote:
No nos is not correct, The center of the marker is used to determine what? A: Cover saves for the target unit... Guess what stealth and shrouded are... cover saves.

But that debate has nothing to do with the Skyshield so how about we not continue with this Off Topic tangent.

And how do you know if stealth grants a cover save, or improves one, if you don't first determine what cover save they have. like pg 18 tells us how to do. have you read that page? "determining cover saves" Does distance matter in determining cover saves? no, see pg 18

Secondly how can you equate "instead of" to mean "equal to in every way"

I rode my daughters bicycle to work today instead of a Lamborghini, so by your logic my daughters bike is a Lamborghini. Want to buy a Lamborghini, slightly used?

instead of the firing unit means it is not the firing unit, and as the center of the blast is not in any way the firing unit, we use the original distance measured, between the firing unit, and the target unit, even if the shot scatters.

This does relate to the OP as I'm still making the case that blasts just wound either whats on the skyshield, or what's under it, not both. So apparently we need to address blast markers in general as people seem to be confused on how they work.

sirlynchmob wrote:

And how do you know if stealth grants a cover save, or improves one, if you don't first determine what cover save they have. like pg 18 tells us how to do. have you read that page? "determining cover saves" Does distance matter in determining cover saves? no, see pg 18

It doesnt matter if stealth grants a cover save, or improves one, Stealth is used in the calculation to determine a models cover save, and the barrage rules are specific on how to handle cover saves, which override the more basic rules.

But that debate has nothing to do with the Skyshield so how about we not continue with this Off Topic tangent.

 DeathReaper wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

And how do you know if stealth grants a cover save, or improves one, if you don't first determine what cover save they have. like pg 18 tells us how to do. have you read that page? "determining cover saves" Does distance matter in determining cover saves? no, see pg 18

It doesnt matter if stealth grants a cover save, or improves one, Stealth is used in the calculation to determine a models cover save, and the barrage rules are specific on how to handle cover saves, which override the more basic rules.

But that debate has nothing to do with the Skyshield so how about we not continue with this Off Topic tangent.

It matters a lot, how do you know if stealth grants or improves a cover save?
Either show me on pg 18 where stealth or range is used in determining cover, or mark your argument your own house rule. or actually show by page number and paragraph where stealth is used to determine cover saves, or range between units.

 DeathReaper wrote:
No nos is not correct, The center of the marker is used to determine what? A: Cover saves for the target unit... Guess what stealth and shrouded are... cover saves.

But that debate has nothing to do with the Skyshield so how about we not continue with this Off Topic tangent.

Except Stealth and Shrouded are USRs that modify cover saves gained at a specific time in the targeting process when Nightfight is in effect. Which was rigeld's on topic point a page ago.

 DeathReaper wrote:
No nos is not correct, The center of the marker is used to determine what? A: Cover saves for the target unit... Guess what stealth and shrouded are... cover saves.

But that debate has nothing to do with the Skyshield so how about we not continue with this Off Topic tangent.

Actually I am, as every thread on this proved in the part. Whether the unit has stealth or shrouded is worked out at check range, well before barrage kicks in

 xscoutsniperx wrote:
+1 vote for hitting the models on top not both. but theres always TFG whos gotta try to bend and make rules only make sense to themselves.

Common sense would be nice but its rare now an days.

But if somebody is bringing a SSLP and placing models under and on top....more than likely doing something 'TFG' to them is just evening the playing field. Obviously there are exceptions, but most SSLPs are fielded with malicious intent.

They don't even make decent sniper platforms....

JinxDragon wrote:
They don't even make decent sniper platforms....

They are excellent sniper platforms...just not for snipers. An Imperial Knight or several offensive tanks can be a huge threat with a 4++ giving them a good measure of safety from enemy attacks.

In general, my advice is to not take the Skyshield. It leads to a lot of balance and logic problems (i.e.: How would a tank even roll up the thing?) that can be solved RAW-wise but definitely aren't satisfying for at least one side.

The tank got air dropped onto the skyshield?

 Nilok wrote:
The tank got air dropped onto the skyshield?

Talked about tanks driving onto the platform after the game has started. Makes zero sense logically but is allowed RAW.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
The tank got air dropped onto the skyshield?

Talked about tanks driving onto the platform after the game has started. Makes zero sense logically but is allowed RAW.

Real World Common sense/Real World Logic/how it works in the real world has no bearing on the 40k Ruleset.

Remember: The rules were not written to be "Modern day real world" logical.

The rules are an abstract system used to simulate a battle in the year 40,000.

What would happen in the modern day real world has nothing to do with the RAW, or the simulation of a battle fought 38,000 years from now. (and maybe not even on a planet with the same physical makeup as our earth, and probably different physics as well).

As such they need to have some compromises to make the game playable.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
The tank got air dropped onto the skyshield?

Talked about tanks driving onto the platform after the game has started. Makes zero sense logically but is allowed RAW.

Secret machine spirit power that makes the tank fly? I have no idea.

 Nilok wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
The tank got air dropped onto the skyshield?

Talked about tanks driving onto the platform after the game has started. Makes zero sense logically but is allowed RAW.

Secret machine spirit power that makes the tank fly? I have no idea.

It is actually a retractable ramp that is built into the Skyshield.

This is not a feature present on the miniature though.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
The tank got air dropped onto the skyshield?

Talked about tanks driving onto the platform after the game has started. Makes zero sense logically but is allowed RAW.

Real World Common sense/Real World Logic/how it works in the real world has no bearing on the 40k Ruleset.

Remember: The rules were not written to be "Modern day real world" logical.
.

My point exactly. It's just a thing because it irritates a lot of beginning players who aren't as familiar with the rules as we are.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Nilok wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
The tank got air dropped onto the skyshield?

Talked about tanks driving onto the platform after the game has started. Makes zero sense logically but is allowed RAW.

Secret machine spirit power that makes the tank fly? I have no idea.

It is actually a retractable ramp that is built into the Skyshield.

This is not a feature present on the miniature though.

Where in the rules is the permission to allocate wounds from a blast template to models on different levels of terrain?

If anyone jumps in and states that it doesn't have different levels, then there is no need to be on top of it to gain it's benefits as there is only one level. Being above it and below it would be the exact same and moving onto and off of it would require only a roll of a 1. It also causes the difficulty of models being underneath a vehicle, atop the base of other models, and all manner of issues. Would you gain a cover save from the top of the terrain? Would you gain a cover save from models that are on top of the terrain? Since it doesn't have levels, all blasts would hit every model under the template and you wouldn't have to declare which level you are targeting. Etc.etc.....

That being said. If it is the going consensus that the barrage template goes from heaven to the floor. Then it would also apply to ruins as well. As the rules for regular blasts specifically state that the wounds can only be allocated to the stated/declared level. You do not state which level when firing a barrage weapon.

 Idolator wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Nilok wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
The tank got air dropped onto the skyshield?

Talked about tanks driving onto the platform after the game has started. Makes zero sense logically but is allowed RAW.

Secret machine spirit power that makes the tank fly? I have no idea.

It is actually a retractable ramp that is built into the Skyshield.

This is not a feature present on the miniature though.

Where in the rules is the permission to allocate wounds from a blast template to models on different levels of terrain?

In the rules for Blasts, you hit everything under the blast marker. The only exception to this is for ruins.

That being said. If it is the going consensus that the barrage template goes from heaven to the floor. Then it would also apply to ruins as well. As the rules for regular blasts specifically state that the wounds can only be allocated to the stated/declared level. You do not state which level when firing a barrage weapon.

It would apply to ruins as well, if the ruin rules didn't specify otherwise.

 DeathReaper wrote:



In the rules for Blasts, you hit everything under the blast marker. The only exception to this is for ruins.

That being said. If it is the going consensus that the barrage template goes from heaven to the floor. Then it would also apply to ruins as well. As the rules for regular blasts specifically state that the wounds can only be allocated to the stated/declared level. You do not state which level when firing a barrage weapon.

It would apply to ruins as well, if the ruin rules didn't specify otherwise.

The rules do not specify otherwise. There are rules for blast that require you declare a level that is targeted with a furtherance that only those models on the level stated may have wounded. It goes further to state that if it scatters and doesn't hit the declared level what to do in those cases. There is no declaration of level for a barrage weapon to target, it uses different rules for ruins. If there is no requirement (permission) to declare a level to target, then the rules for what to do if you miss the declared level cannot apply. BUT....that's only if you require the rules to expressly give you permission in order to perform an action.

Now, back to the sky shield. It is completely how you want to play it. It's a unique piece of terrain that has no listed fire points, battlements, levels and very few rules. There are absolutely no rules for models underneath the top surface. It's not a building, nor is it any other type of terrain. Each time one is placed on the table, the opponents have to decide what is what and how it works, with the noted exceptions of the top surface being open terrain, moving on to top surface is difficult, and the furled/unfurled rules. There is nothing more subjective than terrain.

According to rules written, If you are playing it as having two levels, then the models underneath it would be on open ground with absolutely no cover save. The stanchions holding it up are not walls as they are part of a unique terrain feature and walls are not a unique terrain feature nor can the landing pad be placed over top of other terrain.

Were I playing, and someone insisted that that the template hits models under the terrain piece, I would carefully remove all my models from the top. and insist that he place the template over the models underneath first. You know, for accuracy. Hopefully, I wouldn't accidentally knock over a bunch of them and have to straighten them up. I am rather clutzy though.