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.

Can flyers be intervening and give cover even though they're swooping or zooming?

Potentially for another flyer but not for ground forces, the only ones that could do that would be the Flying Monstrous creatures that are still on the ground.

 gmaleron wrote:
Potentially for another flyer but not for ground forces, the only ones that could do that would be the Flying Monstrous creatures that are still on the ground.

Oh, so it depends on the position of the model when it comes to flying monstrous creatures?

 gmaleron wrote:
Potentially for another flyer but not for ground forces, the only ones that could do that would be the Flying Monstrous creatures that are still on the ground.

Why not for ground forces?

If the flyer blocks line of sight, then it will give a cover save just like any other unit...

they can give cover it just might be hard to get cover since you can draw line of sight from any point on the shooting model

25% is 25% no matter where it comes from

Yeay, it could happen if you have infantry on top of a building or something of the likes. I think the whole thing comes down to our good old True Line Of Sight argument. That's the only way to resolve it.

danny1995 wrote:
Yeay, it could happen if you have infantry on top of a building or something of the likes. I think the whole thing comes down to our good old True Line Of Sight argument. That's the only way to resolve it.

I agree.

The key here is, yes the flyer (or FMC) can provide cover if the flyer itself provides cover. Do not use the flying base to determine cover as it is not technically part of the model.

chanceafs wrote:
The key here is, yes the flyer (or FMC) can provide cover if the flyer itself provides cover. Do not use the flying base to determine cover as it is not technically part of the model.

Are you sure that the base is not a part of the model?

"Remember that a model’s base is counted as being part of the model itself, so all a template or blast marker has to do to cause a hit is to cover any part of the target’s base." (GENERAL PRINCIPLES chapter, BLAST MARKERS AND TEMPLATES section).

 DeathReaper wrote:

chanceafs wrote:
The key here is, yes the flyer (or FMC) can provide cover if the flyer itself provides cover. Do not use the flying base to determine cover as it is not technically part of the model.

Are you sure that the base is not a part of the model?

"Remember that a model’s base is counted as being part of the model itself, so all a template or blast marker has to do to cause a hit is to cover any part of the target’s base." (GENERAL PRINCIPLES chapter, BLAST MARKERS AND TEMPLATES section).

Which being in the general rules section applies primarily to infantry models, quote the relevant rules for vehicles if you're going to make an argument. Besides, whether it is part of the model or not is irrelevent, skimmer bases, and flying bases are both clear, which means they do not block LoS anyway, as you can see through them. I believe there are rules telling you to ignore them anyway, but I am at work without my BRB to confirm.

chanceafs wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

chanceafs wrote:
The key here is, yes the flyer (or FMC) can provide cover if the flyer itself provides cover. Do not use the flying base to determine cover as it is not technically part of the model.

Are you sure that the base is not a part of the model?

"Remember that a model’s base is counted as being part of the model itself, so all a template or blast marker has to do to cause a hit is to cover any part of the target’s base." (GENERAL PRINCIPLES chapter, BLAST MARKERS AND TEMPLATES section).

Which being in the general rules section applies primarily to infantry models, quote the relevant rules for vehicles if you're going to make an argument. Besides, whether it is part of the model or not is irrelevent, skimmer bases, and flying bases are both clear, which means they do not block LoS anyway, as you can see through them. I believe there are rules telling you to ignore them anyway, but I am at work without my BRB to confirm.

So things in the General Principles section only apply to infantry?

So walkers never have to take Strength Tests?

But sure here is the quote about vehicles "In the case of multiple blasts, the vehicle will be hit once each time any part of a blast marker ends up over the vehicle or its base." (Vehicles Chapter, Blast Weapons Section).

So yes General Principles apply to all models unless there is a more specific rule.

P.S flyer bases are not totally clear, the stem is clear, but not completely transparent, they are more translucent than anything, and they distort models due to light refraction.

Ergo your claim is incorrect.

P.P.S. the Flyers and Measuring section has that bit about the base being ignored, but with Line of Sight you are not measuring to the vehicles base, you are drawing Line of Sight, so TLoS still applies.

I know its FW but Remora Stealth Drones use regular stems on the board. Certainly they're low enough to get cover in a lot of situations.

 thecapn226 wrote:
25% is 25% no matter where it comes from

What about in odd cases, such as a flyrant. The wings are not counted as a wound-able part of the model. However, the wings are certainly large enough to provider cover to something behind them. In cases like this, what's the most fair ruling?

 thecapn226 wrote:
25% is 25% no matter where it comes from

This is the long and short of it.

The models actual position is what matters.


Flyers that go into Hover Mode don't actually get moved closer to the table, they remain on their flight stand exactly like they are when Zooming. If that location happens to block 25% of another model it will give cover. They also gain cover exactly like any other model.

It depends entirely on the terrain you have on the board and what angles are involved. If you've got nothing over 6" tall, its unlikely. If you've got plenty of 12" tall terrain, its entirely possible. Is there a large building some guys are on top of and the flyer is between then and some guys on the ground, they'll gain cover.

Flyers are certainly less likely because of them being on that tall flight stand and all, but nothing in the rules is special about them and cover. They gain it and give it like everybody else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 victorydeluxe wrote:

 thecapn226 wrote:
25% is 25% no matter where it comes from

What about in odd cases, such as a flyrant. The wings are not counted as a wound-able part of the model. However, the wings are certainly large enough to provider cover to something behind them. In cases like this, what's the most fair ruling?

The wings block LoS and thus can give cover even though they aren't a targetable part of the model.

Think of the wings as being distracting like they would be in real life. Shooting them might not cause any real damage, and you'd likely just miss, but trying to shoot through them could definitely throw off your aim.

Since Fliers never actually change elevation PHYSICALLY, it's hard to say. As for if their base provides cover, regardless of it's speed, I'm not so sure. I could have sworn I read somewhere in the book that Flier bases do not provide cover for shooting purposes.

From a logical standpoint, a zooming or even hovering flier wouldn't provide cover of any kind to foot bound soldiers. Zoomers are too high and flying too fast, while hovering would be like a Chopper hovering high over the field to get precise shots, while now being more vulnerable to gunfire.

HIWPI is if a Hovering flier would block sight to a unit on elevated terrain, then in that case, yes. But infantry who were base to base with the flier would not get cover against equal elevation models. Zoomers give no cover at all, regardless of elevations.

Melevolence wrote:
Since Fliers never actually change elevation PHYSICALLY, it's hard to say. As for if their base provides cover, regardless of it's speed, I'm not so sure. I could have sworn I read somewhere in the book that Flier bases do not provide cover for shooting purposes.

You did not read that in the 40K rulebook.

From a logical standpoint, a zooming or even hovering flier wouldn't provide cover of any kind to foot bound soldiers. Zoomers are too high and flying too fast, while hovering would be like a Chopper hovering high over the field to get precise shots, while now being more vulnerable to gunfire.

Never bring logic into an abstract ruleset, it never ends well.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Melevolence wrote:
Since Fliers never actually change elevation PHYSICALLY, it's hard to say. As for if their base provides cover, regardless of it's speed, I'm not so sure. I could have sworn I read somewhere in the book that Flier bases do not provide cover for shooting purposes.

You did not read that in the 40K rulebook.

From a logical standpoint, a zooming or even hovering flier wouldn't provide cover of any kind to foot bound soldiers. Zoomers are too high and flying too fast, while hovering would be like a Chopper hovering high over the field to get precise shots, while now being more vulnerable to gunfire.

Never bring logic into an abstract ruleset, it never ends well.

It works well enough for our playgroup. When a rule seems to be so ambiguous that you can't find a clear cut ruling, we do what sounds logical and works best.

On a whole, it would seem stupid that a flier would block line of sight. I don't think any game out there has such rules. Even Heroclix has rules for how characters with Flight worked when it came to LOS. Perhaps we just need an FAQ if the book is that unclear. I'll have to check my rulebook when I get home from my shift in a few hours.

Melevolence wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Melevolence wrote:
Since Fliers never actually change elevation PHYSICALLY, it's hard to say. As for if their base provides cover, regardless of it's speed, I'm not so sure. I could have sworn I read somewhere in the book that Flier bases do not provide cover for shooting purposes.

You did not read that in the 40K rulebook.

From a logical standpoint, a zooming or even hovering flier wouldn't provide cover of any kind to foot bound soldiers. Zoomers are too high and flying too fast, while hovering would be like a Chopper hovering high over the field to get precise shots, while now being more vulnerable to gunfire.

Never bring logic into an abstract ruleset, it never ends well.

It works well enough for our playgroup. When a rule seems to be so ambiguous that you can't find a clear cut ruling, we do what sounds logical and works best.

On a whole, it would seem stupid that a flier would block line of sight. I don't think any game out there has such rules. Even Heroclix has rules for how characters with Flight worked when it came to LOS. Perhaps we just need an FAQ if the book is that unclear. I'll have to check my rulebook when I get home from my shift in a few hours.

The rulebook is pretty clear on this. Its just people making assumptions

 CrownAxe wrote:

Melevolence wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Melevolence wrote:
Since Fliers never actually change elevation PHYSICALLY, it's hard to say. As for if their base provides cover, regardless of it's speed, I'm not so sure. I could have sworn I read somewhere in the book that Flier bases do not provide cover for shooting purposes.

You did not read that in the 40K rulebook.

From a logical standpoint, a zooming or even hovering flier wouldn't provide cover of any kind to foot bound soldiers. Zoomers are too high and flying too fast, while hovering would be like a Chopper hovering high over the field to get precise shots, while now being more vulnerable to gunfire.

Never bring logic into an abstract ruleset, it never ends well.

It works well enough for our playgroup. When a rule seems to be so ambiguous that you can't find a clear cut ruling, we do what sounds logical and works best.

On a whole, it would seem stupid that a flier would block line of sight. I don't think any game out there has such rules. Even Heroclix has rules for how characters with Flight worked when it came to LOS. Perhaps we just need an FAQ if the book is that unclear. I'll have to check my rulebook when I get home from my shift in a few hours.

The rulebook is pretty clear on this. Its just people making assumptions

Only making assumptions on what I thought I remembered. Since I'm at work, I don't have the book in front of me to recheck. I really only skimmed the rules on fliers because I don't own any and this sort of thing has never really come up in our games before (Fliers tending to be fairly uncommon as a whole, so the chances for such instances to occur have been very scarce.)

 CrownAxe wrote:

Melevolence wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Melevolence wrote:
Since Fliers never actually change elevation PHYSICALLY, it's hard to say. As for if their base provides cover, regardless of it's speed, I'm not so sure. I could have sworn I read somewhere in the book that Flier bases do not provide cover for shooting purposes.

You did not read that in the 40K rulebook.

From a logical standpoint, a zooming or even hovering flier wouldn't provide cover of any kind to foot bound soldiers. Zoomers are too high and flying too fast, while hovering would be like a Chopper hovering high over the field to get precise shots, while now being more vulnerable to gunfire.

Never bring logic into an abstract ruleset, it never ends well.

It works well enough for our playgroup. When a rule seems to be so ambiguous that you can't find a clear cut ruling, we do what sounds logical and works best.

On a whole, it would seem stupid that a flier would block line of sight. I don't think any game out there has such rules. Even Heroclix has rules for how characters with Flight worked when it came to LOS. Perhaps we just need an FAQ if the book is that unclear. I'll have to check my rulebook when I get home from my shift in a few hours.

The rulebook is pretty clear on this. Its just people making assumptions

Indeed, the rule book is very clear, the rules about flyers specifically tell you to ignore the bases except in a couple specific situations. No where in those exceptions is anything about LoS, therefor, you ignore the flying base when determining Line of Sight.

chanceafs wrote:
Indeed, the rule book is very clear, the rules about flyers specifically tell you to ignore the bases except in a couple specific situations. No where in those exceptions is anything about LoS, therefor, you ignore the flying base when determining Line of Sight.

The rulebook is clear for flyers and measuring that you ignore the base when measuring.

You still take the base into account for Line of Sight though.