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.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Since Stomps can only occur during combat, are a special type of attack that is resolved in fight subphase, and cover saves are not allowed for attacks during combat, it is safe to assume that no cover saves are allowed for getting stepped on by an oversized boot. In order to receive a cover save, you have to prove that a Stomp is a shooting attack and that the target is obscured. Neither condition can be met.

SJ

Cover saves can only be taken against shooting attacks? Page reference for that please.
Or, is it more the case that Close Combat Attacks are specificallly stated as not allowing cover saves.

Yep, thats it, thats the way round the rules actually work...

Shooting PhaseCover Saves
Often, you’ll find enemy models are partially hidden or obscured by terrain, which is also known as being in cover. Cover shields troops against flying debris and enemy shots, enabling them to get their heads down or crawl amongst the ruins and (hopefully) avoid harm. Where this is the case the model will be entitled to a cover save.

Assault PhaseCover Saves
Models do not get cover saves against any Wounds suffered from close combat attacks, and for obvious reasons, cannot Go to Ground – there is nowhere to hide!

STOMP
Super-heavy Walkers engaged in combat may make a special type of attack called a Stomp attack. The Stomp attack is made in addition to the Super-heavy Walker’s normal attacks. Stomp attacks are resolved during the Fight sub-phase at the Initiative 1 step. This does not grant the model an additional Pile In move at the Initiative 1 step.

So, in order to get a cover save, the attack needs to be a shooting attack, and the target needs to be obscured, neither of which apply to a combat attack being used in the fighting sub-phase.

SJ

Do you get cover saves from a vehicle explosion?

Yes or no.

If the unit is in terrain it's obscured.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If the unit is in terrain it's obscured.

Not always true. If you disagree, rules quote needed.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Charistoph wrote:
How else do you work out being obscured? Stomp says nothing about changing this, so it would use the standard methods.

Please define the "standard method" yo uare using

Note, you cannot reference a "firing model" when using this "standard method" due to the utter absence of any firing model.

You take a view from the Stomping Model generating the Stomping Attacks after you fire off the Stomp Attacks.


No "firing model"

jeffersonian000 wrote:Since Stomps can only occur during combat, are a special type of attack that is resolved in fight subphase, and cover saves are not allowed for attacks during combat, it is safe to assume that no cover saves are allowed for getting stepped on by an oversized boot. In order to receive a cover save, you have to prove that a Stomp is a shooting attack and that the target is obscured. Neither condition can be met.

A couple problems. Cover Saves are not allowed against close combat attacks, not attacks in close combat. It is a fine distinction, as it has not been proven that all Attacks during the fight sub-phase are close combat attacks. And that is something I keep asking for, but certain parties are assuming it is the definition and refusing to even research to provide it.

Also Stomps can hit targets outside of Combat, and residing in Cover, and it is at this point that things get glitchy in determining what Saves a model can get. If the target is not in combat, why does it qualify as a close combat attack? If a model in close combat is hit by a Scattered Blast, does he get a Cover Save, or is that one a close combat attack as well? I'm not saying those Engaged with the Super-Heavy are able to be obscured from it, but that Stealth Suit Squad in the Ruins 6" away is a different story.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Shooting PhaseCover Saves
Often, you’ll find enemy models are partially hidden or obscured by terrain, which is also known as being in cover. Cover shields troops against flying debris and enemy shots, enabling them to get their heads down or crawl amongst the ruins and (hopefully) avoid harm. Where this is the case the model will be entitled to a cover save.

Assault PhaseCover Saves
Models do not get cover saves against any Wounds suffered from close combat attacks, and for obvious reasons, cannot Go to Ground – there is nowhere to hide!

STOMP
Super-heavy Walkers engaged in combat may make a special type of attack called a Stomp attack. The Stomp attack is made in addition to the Super-heavy Walker’s normal attacks. Stomp attacks are resolved during the Fight sub-phase at the Initiative 1 step. This does not grant the model an additional Pile In move at the Initiative 1 step.

So, in order to get a cover save, the attack needs to be a shooting attack, and the target needs to be obscured, neither of which apply to a combat attack being used in the fighting sub-phase.

SJ

So, assumption is that if it is Special, it cannot be Shooting. That if it is not Shooting, it cannot be fired. If it happens in close combat, it must be a close combat attack.

Do I have that right?

Explain how to allocate wounds if there is no "firing model"



If there is no "firing model" you cannot allocate wounds and the wound pool will be emptied.

It only empties if there are no firing models within Los or range. If you have no firing models you cannot process this rule, as it is not relevant to you.

Random allocation would apply here, at a guess. Hilariously.

Christoph - FULLY read your own quote. Note it requires at least one "firer" (which would be a model that is firing, or a "firing model"). You don't have a firer. Please, show how you can be obscured when there is no firing model. Page and graph.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It only empties if there are no firing models within Los or range. If you have no firing models you cannot process this rule, as it is not relevant to you.

It's definitely very relevant if you cannot allocate wounds to the models being Stomped. That would make Stomp fairly weak as it would only do something on a roll of 6.

So trying to process Stomp as a shooting attack leads to critical steps you cannot complete.

You can however process Stomp fully as a close combat attack and resolve wound allocation.

When it comes to wound allocation an attack must be processed as a shooting attack or a close combat attack unless the attack includes its own rules for wound allocation.

What? Stomp is a special kind of attack, that uses a small blast template. It does not use a WS nor is it designated as a CC attack of any sort. It simply happens at I1 during the fight subphase.

If you conclude that it is an attack, im sorry but then you might as well conclude things that happen in accordance with attacks and sub effects to those attacks as things that you cannot take cover from.

Good example being the Lord of Change while equip with Staff of Change. When a model loses it's last wound during combat it explodes, placing the small blast template over it dealing X to everyone underneath it.

Now by this logic because this said attack originated because of a CC attack from the staff you cannot claim a cover save from the Blast. Which, I'm sorry, simply isn't true.

If you are placing a blast template of any sort over a model that model can and is able to gain Cover Saves so long as a special rule isn't forbidding it (IE Ignores Cover)

Stomp is no different. It is not a CC attack, it is a "Special attack" that happens at I1, nothing more, nothing less.

HoW does not use WS either . And it is a special too .

 GoliothOnline wrote:


Stomp is no different. It is not a CC attack, it is a "Special attack" that happens at I1, nothing more, nothing less.

Your argument would work if a GMC could stomp while not in close combat.

A GMC must be in close combat to Stomp, so a Stomp is not merely a "'Special attack' that happens at I1, nothing more, nothing less"

Stomp is a (special) "attack in close combat"

Further, since Stomp is an "attack in close combat" and has not been identified as a shooting attack, we are required to use the rules for wound allocation from the fight sub-phase section and empty the wound pool at each initiative step.

We need permission to access any of the rules in the shooting phase since its at that time models have the permission to nominate a shooter and a target, select weapons, and deal with hits, wounds, cover saves, etc.

For example, here are the rules for Overwatch that gives permission to use those rules.



Stomp does not identify itself as a shooting attack nor does it say to resolve like a normal shooting attack. We have no recourse but to use the rules for wound allocation and saves that we have access to (which are those in the fight sub-phase section).

nosferatu1001 wrote:Christoph - FULLY read your own quote. Note it requires at least one "firer" (which would be a model that is firing, or a "firing model"). You don't have a firer. Please, show how you can be obscured when there is no firing model. Page and graph.

And read the rest of what I typed. I guess you missed what the Orkmoticons were for.

col_impact wrote:Your argument would work if a GMC could stomp while not in close combat.

A GMC must be in close combat to Stomp, so a Stomp is not merely a "'Special attack' that happens at I1, nothing more, nothing less"

Stomp is a (special) "attack in close combat"

Further, since Stomp is an "attack in close combat" and has not been identified as a shooting attack, we are required to use the rules for wound allocation from the fight sub-phase section and empty the wound pool at each initiative step.

We need permission to access any of the rules in the shooting phase since its at that time models have the permission to nominate a shooter and a target, select weapons, and deal with hits, wounds, cover saves, etc.

For example, here are the rules for Overwatch that gives permission to use those rules.

Spoiler:

An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the
enemy’s Assault phase) and uses all the normal rules for range, line of sight, cover saves
and so on.

Stomp does not identify itself as a shooting attack nor does it say to resolve like a normal shooting attack. We have no recourse but to use the rules for wound allocation and saves that we have access to (which are those in the fight sub-phase section).

Your argument would have more weight if it ONLY affected close combat. Yes, it starts there, this has not been in argument at any point. However, close combat attacks are restricted to the unit you are Engaged with, and Stomp can not only affect units that are Engaged in other combats, but units not Engaged in combat at all.

So, that is why we are insisting that it does not follow the same rules, because it doesn't. It starts in close combat, but it reaches beyond. It does things that no standard close combat attack can do. So, unless we can tie something else besides timing and location to lock it in as a close combat attack, it remains in a legal grey area.

Charistoph wrote:
Your argument would have more weight if it ONLY affected close combat. Yes, it starts there, this has not been in argument at any point. However, close combat attacks are restricted to the unit you are Engaged with, and Stomp can not only affect units that are Engaged in other combats, but units not Engaged in combat at all.

So, that is why we are insisting that it does not follow the same rules, because it doesn't. It starts in close combat, but it reaches beyond. It does things that no standard close combat attack can do. So, unless we can tie something else besides timing and location to lock it in as a close combat attack, it remains in a legal grey area.

More than timing and location lock it in as an "attack in close combat" since the GMC is definitively "in close combat."

When you Stomp you have access to the rules for Stomp and the rules from the fight sub-phase section.

You do not have access to the rules from the Shooting sequence.

The Stomp rule is in the position of specifying to use the rules for cover save from the Shooting sequence in order for the models affected to get to use that rule. However, Stomp makes no specification.

So resolve a cover save with the rules you have - which RAW means you don't get a cover save, unless you house rule it.

col_impact wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It only empties if there are no firing models within Los or range. If you have no firing models you cannot process this rule, as it is not relevant to you.

It's definitely very relevant if you cannot allocate wounds to the models being Stomped. That would make Stomp fairly weak as it would only do something on a roll of 6.

So trying to process Stomp as a shooting attack leads to critical steps you cannot complete.

You can however process Stomp fully as a close combat attack and resolve wound allocation.

When it comes to wound allocation an attack must be processed as a shooting attack or a close combat attack unless the attack includes its own rules for wound allocation.

So you quote snip and ignore where I pointed out you would therefore use random allocation. Oh wait, that's rather dishonest...

I fully explained the holes in your argument, and therefore RAW you gain non-Los dependent cover saves.

I love how you skip over the close combat requirements as if they don't matter.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

col_impact wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It only empties if there are no firing models within Los or range. If you have no firing models you cannot process this rule, as it is not relevant to you.

It's definitely very relevant if you cannot allocate wounds to the models being Stomped. That would make Stomp fairly weak as it would only do something on a roll of 6.

So trying to process Stomp as a shooting attack leads to critical steps you cannot complete.

You can however process Stomp fully as a close combat attack and resolve wound allocation.

When it comes to wound allocation an attack must be processed as a shooting attack or a close combat attack unless the attack includes its own rules for wound allocation.

So you quote snip and ignore where I pointed out you would therefore use random allocation. Oh wait, that's rather dishonest...

I fully explained the holes in your argument, and therefore RAW you gain non-Los dependent cover saves.

I love how you skip over the close combat requirements as if they don't matter.

Where do you get permission to access the rules from the Shooting Sequence?

When the GMC is stomping away in the fight sub-phase he only has access to the Stomp rules and the fight sub-phase rules.

It is not the shooting phase. Stomp has not been designated as a shooting attack. You do not have permission to use rules from the Shooting sequence.

Its rather odd to claim that stomp is not a Close combat attack because the blast marker can affect models not engaged.

Shooting an unit with a blast marker can shoot models that are not a designated target, however no one questions that it is still a shooting attack. So there is no reason to believe that being able to hit something with a blaster marker during close combat would also not be a close combat attack still.

Unless models hit by scattered blasts were not hit by shooting attacks, since they weren't the selected as a target.

Does it state anywhere that stomp is not a close combat attack?

col_impact wrote:More than timing and location lock it in as an "attack in close combat" since the GMC is definitively "in close combat."

The "in close combat" is the location...

col_impact wrote:When you Stomp you have access to the rules for Stomp and the rules from the fight sub-phase section.

And that is the timing.

col_impact wrote:You do not have access to the rules from the Shooting sequence.

And did we claim it was a shooting attack that used the shooting sequence?

col_impact wrote:The Stomp rule is in the position of specifying to use the rules for cover save from the Shooting sequence in order for the models affected to get to use that rule. However, Stomp makes no specification.

Now that much is true. It does not say one can take Cover Saves from a Stomp Attack. Nor does it say it is a Shooting Attack (any more than it is a close combat attack).

col_impact wrote:So resolve a cover save with the rules you have - which RAW means you don't get a cover save, unless you house rule it.

That is very true if you cannot fire off a Stomp Attack.

blaktoof wrote:Its rather odd to claim that stomp is not a Close combat attack because the blast marker can affect models not engaged.

I'm saying that if it starts in close combat, but can affect things outside of close combat, than it doesn't really fill all of a close combat attack's definitions, now does it.

blaktoof wrote:Shooting an unit with a blast marker can shoot models that are not a designated target, however no one questions that it is still a shooting attack. So there is no reason to believe that being able to hit something with a blaster marker during close combat would also not be a close combat attack still.

Where is a case of one these that does not involve a Shooting Weapon?

Where is a case of a Weapon provides Stomp Attacks with the Melee type?

blaktoof wrote:Unless models hit by scattered blasts were not hit by shooting attacks, since they weren't the selected as a target.

Shooting Weapons provide Shooting Attacks. Or were you referencing something else?

blaktoof wrote:Does it state anywhere that stomp is not a close combat attack?

Where does it say that it is? Can you provide the connections? You have yet to in this thread, nor the one before.

col_impact wrote:
If there are no "firing models" how are you allocating wounds to the unit? Being in range of a firing model and being able to draw line of sight from a firing model is required.

Spoiler:

If none of the firing models are in range of a particular model in the target
unit, then Wounds cannot be allocated to it.

If none of the firing models can draw a line of sight to a particular model in
the target unit, then Wounds cannot be allocated to it.

At a quick glance, I don't see why you couldn't use the rules given in the close combat section, as they're not close combat attack-specific in terms of rolling to and allocation of wounds, but are there to cover wound allocation for a given initiative step seemingly regardless of the nature of the attack.

"To determine how many casualties are caused at a particular Initiative step, you will need to allocate the Wounds caused and resolve any saving throws the target is allowed."

It seem that Stomp attacks on a unit not engaged in the close combat would create an exception to the process of allocating to models in base contact etc. though this is covered by the line:

"Wounds are allocated and resolved starting with the closest model, just like in the Shooting phase."

This would still allow cover saves from the likes of ruins or Jink from a previous turn, as only specifically close combat attacks (rather than attacks during or generally in close combat) disallow cover saves.

Unfortunately, Wounds are allocated directly to the models covered by the templates, and not in the manner of close combat attacks or shooting attacks.


So, there is no "out of range" Wounds for Stomp Attacks, either.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

col_impact wrote:
If there are no "firing models" how are you allocating wounds to the unit? Being in range of a firing model and being able to draw line of sight from a firing model is required.

Spoiler:

If none of the firing models are in range of a particular model in the target
unit, then Wounds cannot be allocated to it.

If none of the firing models can draw a line of sight to a particular model in
the target unit, then Wounds cannot be allocated to it.

At a quick glance, I don't see why you couldn't use the rules given in the close combat section, as they're not close combat attack-specific in terms of rolling to and allocation of wounds, but are there to cover wound allocation for a given initiative step seemingly regardless of the nature of the attack.

"To determine how many casualties are caused at a particular Initiative step, you will need to allocate the Wounds caused and resolve any saving throws the target is allowed."

It seem that Stomp attacks on a unit not engaged in the close combat would create an exception to the process of allocating to models in base contact etc. though this is covered by the line:

"Wounds are allocated and resolved starting with the closest model, just like in the Shooting phase."

This would still allow cover saves from the likes of ruins or Jink from a previous turn, as only specifically close combat attacks (rather than attacks during or generally in close combat) disallow cover saves.

Which rules for Cover Saves are you referring to? The rules in the Shooting Sequence or the rules in the Fighting Sub-phase? If you are using the rules for Cover Saves from the Shooting Sequence you will need to explain how you got permission to use those rules, since Stomp is not a shooting attack.

Remember, you are granted permission to take saves. Being able to take a Cover Save is something you have to have permission to take. The Shooting Sequence allows you to take a Cover Save. The Fight Sub-phase does not.

col_impact wrote:
Which rules for Cover Saves are you referring to? The rules in the Shooting Sequence or the rules in the Fighting Sub-phase? If you are using the rules for Cover Saves from the Shooting Sequence you will need to explain how you got permission to use those rules, since Stomp is not a shooting attack.

Remember, you are granted permission to take saves. Being able to take a Cover Save is something you have to have permission to take. The Shooting Sequence allows you to take a Cover Save. The Fight Sub-phase does not.

It's in the first line of 'Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties':

"To determine how many casualties are caused at a particular Initiative step, you will need to allocate the Wounds caused and resolve any saving throws the target is allowed."

@Mr. Shine:

your quote doesn not permit cover saves...
it just says IF you have one you can use it. but. there is not any word that tells you that you have a cover self at all.

 _ghost_ wrote:
@Mr. Shine:

your quote doesn not permit cover saves...
it just says IF you have one you can use it. but. there is not any word that tells you that you have a cover self at all.

This is what allows cover saves:

"Sometimes, a model will have a normal Armour Save and a separate invulnerable save – a good example is a Space Marine Captain, who is protected by both power armour and a force field from his iron halo. As if this wasn’t enough, the model might be in cover as well. In these cases, a model only ever gets to make one saving throw, but it has the advantage of always using the best available save." (The Shooting Phase Chapter, Models With More Than One Save section).

coupled with the part about Wounds being allocated and resolved starting with the closest model, just like in the Shooting phase, we see that, unless explicitly disallowed, a model can take a cover save.

 _ghost_ wrote:
@Mr. Shine:

your quote doesn not permit cover saves...
it just says IF you have one you can use it. but. there is not any word that tells you that you have a cover self at all.

What if the model has Stealth or Shrouded?

so what?

then the quotet part still does not say anything about saves at all. it only tells you " if you have any you can use it"

Stealth or Shrouded GIVES you a cover sase. so this is totaly a different story

 _ghost_ wrote:
so what?

then the quotet part still does not say anything about saves at all. it only tells you " if you have any you can use it"

Stealth or Shrouded GIVES you a cover sase. so this is totaly a different story

That's kind of the point we're discussing. The premise is that the model must have been granted a cover save from the likes of ruins, Shrouded or Stealth, or Jink. Or anything else that simply gives a model a cover save without requiring it to be obscured.

I don't think anyone here is arguing that a model can always take a cover save against a Stomp attack for no particular reason.

col_impact wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

col_impact wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It only empties if there are no firing models within Los or range. If you have no firing models you cannot process this rule, as it is not relevant to you.

It's definitely very relevant if you cannot allocate wounds to the models being Stomped. That would make Stomp fairly weak as it would only do something on a roll of 6.

So trying to process Stomp as a shooting attack leads to critical steps you cannot complete.

You can however process Stomp fully as a close combat attack and resolve wound allocation.

When it comes to wound allocation an attack must be processed as a shooting attack or a close combat attack unless the attack includes its own rules for wound allocation.

So you quote snip and ignore where I pointed out you would therefore use random allocation. Oh wait, that's rather dishonest...

I fully explained the holes in your argument, and therefore RAW you gain non-Los dependent cover saves.

I love how you skip over the close combat requirements as if they don't matter.

Where do you get permission to access the rules from the Shooting Sequence?

When the GMC is stomping away in the fight sub-phase he only has access to the Stomp rules and the fight sub-phase rules.

It is not the shooting phase. Stomp has not been designated as a shooting attack. You do not have permission to use rules from the Shooting sequence.

Oh that old nonsense again.

You can use the rules from the shooting phase, as they are the first time they are mentioned. Because the game goes move, shoot, assault, so the first time you are likely to use an armour save in the game, is during the shooting pahse

Or will you now claim you cannot make armour saves in close combat, because they are in the shooting phase?

PLease, try to use something less half baked as an argument.

So, again. Prove it is a Close Combat Attack. Page and grapgh. You failed to do so in the other thread, and as only a Close Combat Attack inherently denies cover saves, you MUST do this, otherwise your argument falls flat here as well.

So, until then I will just follow the written rules, and non-LOS based cover saves may be taken against the 2 - 5 result on stomp. I also wont play Stomp as being AP2 when from a GMC either as it is not a close combat attack.

This is all proven until you disprove it

So, actual rules please.

Agreed. Just because something happens in the assault phase, it does not automatically pick up the 'generic' rules for close combat attacks - hammer of wrath, for example, is most usually associated with monstrous creatures, but doesn't benefit from smash.

Toxic Miasma feels it needs to explicitely state it has the Ignores Cover special rule.

In a more narrative example - not that narrative drives rules debates, but some degree of fair play should be - given that the victim of a stomp could be a unit 6" away, not locked in the assault, in area terrain, behind an intervening unit, with stealth and shrouded, it's not unreasonable that said unit might expect a cover save.

Can you use a cover save for a Vector Strike? Or a Hammer of Wrath?

SJ