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.

The ruling says: if your opponents makes an attack on your front arc. Does that mean that barrage weapons in front of the vehicles (but making indirect fire) would still be affected?

Via the GWS FAQ

"Regarding Barrage weapons and vehicles – how do you
determine which side is hit?
A: Assume the shot is coming from the centre of the
blast marker and hits the nearest side."

Barrage hits count as if the model was firing from the center of the blast marker, not where the model that fired it actually is. So flare shields will only be effective on shots where the center hole is in the front arc, or if the hole is directly on the vehicle but still closer to the front hull.

The answer is no, unless of course the centre of the barrage blast scatters off the front of the vehicle but the marker is still touching as it then comes up against the shield. If it is anywhere else on the vehicle or partially on the side/rear nope.

I think your best bet is to read the new FAQ on Imperial Knights there is a question in there about barrage weapons and the ion shields

is this an errata and not a. faq than? I don't have my rulebook handy but I'm pretty sure barrage is resolved on the side armour per faq

Knights faq does not apply here
It only covers direct hits and which of the two sides is hit for the ion shield
If the center hits the vehicle it hits the side av meaning no flare shield
If the center doesnt hit but the blast does the center of the marker is the origin of the hit and determines facing

 Fruzzle wrote:
is this an errata and not a. faq than? I don't have my rulebook handy but I'm pretty sure barrage is resolved on the side armour per faq

That may be true (since 40k doesn't have a "top" facing for vehicle armour), but the question is slightly different; the Flare Shield only operates against a single facing in any turn. Even if an attack is always resolved against a specific armour value, you still need to know which facing it actually comes from.

The latest FAQ ruling follows that idea:

Q: How do you determine which side of an Imperial Knight is hit by a Barrage weapon (which are always resolved against a vehicle’s side armour) for the purposes of determining if the Knight gets an ion shield save?
A: Use the direction of the firing model to determine the facing of the attack for the purposes of the Knight’s ion shield, but resolve the attack against its side armour as normal.

Resolved against side armor with -2S from flare shield.

HandofMars wrote:
Resolved against side armor with -2S from flare shield.

The likelyhood of that happening is low, it would have to scatter far enough for the centre to go off the front of the vehicle and yet still have the template centre draw a direct line towards the front arc. Due to the lengths of front, side and rear of a spartan its going to hit side or rear a hell of a lot more often.

That's not consistent with the ion shield ruling, unless I'm missing something.

At a bare minimum it would happen 33% of the time when you roll a direct hit, but the ruling suggests it always happens.

But ion shields aren't flare shields so why are we even bringing that up?

They each have their own rules. I believe PrivateLucky had it right since that's part of the rules for barrage and not part of any particular shield rules.

You're not familiar with the concept of precedent? A directional shield and barrage vs a directional shield and barrage?

You're not familiar with the concept of precedent?

No, but I am familiar with GW games where similarly named things can have completely different rules because internal consistency is not high on the writers priority list.

If an opponent argued I have to use the graviton rules out of the 7th ed book because both had the word graviton in it (and they're both guns that shoot gravity waves - precedent!) I'd tell them where they could stick their rulebook.

 ScarletRose wrote:

You're not familiar with the concept of precedent?

No, but I am familiar with GW games where similarly named things can have completely different rules because internal consistency is not high on the writers priority list.

If an opponent argued I have to use the graviton rules out of the 7th ed book because both had the word graviton in it (and they're both guns that shoot gravity waves - precedent!) I'd tell them where they could stick their rulebook.

But it's not for the names, but the circumstances upon which they work. For all intents and purposes, a flare shield should trigger the same times upon which an ion shield placed in the front arc, because the phrasing is the exact same in both cases, just swap 4++ for -1/2s

 ScarletRose wrote:

You're not familiar with the concept of precedent?

No, but I am familiar with GW games where similarly named things can have completely different rules because internal consistency is not high on the writers priority list.

If an opponent argued I have to use the graviton rules out of the 7th ed book because both had the word graviton in it (and they're both guns that shoot gravity waves - precedent!) I'd tell them where they could stick their rulebook.

Your example is irrelevant, considering the graviton items in question have specific rules how they work. There is no core rule that explains how directional shields and barrage work, the FAQ gives us GW's intent in this circumstance.

Also if you're that confrontational when discussing the rules you yourself have derided as inconsistent, I'm pretty sure no one is playing with you anyway.

But it's not for the names, but the circumstances upon which they work. For all intents and purposes, a flare shield should trigger the same times upon which an ion shield placed in the front arc, because the phrasing is the exact same in both cases, just swap 4++ for -1/2s

I totally agree that they should work the same, I'm not arguing that. I'm simply saying rules as written don't support that yet. If the FAQ was expanded or clarified that would be fine, but cross-inference from different pieces of kit is not a direction I'd care to go with 30/40k considering the vast swathes of similarly named stuff.

Your example is irrelevant

It's exactly parallel - two similarly named items, with similar fluff mechanics but working differently on the tabletop. I know analogies can be tough sometimes.

 ScarletRose wrote:

But it's not for the names, but the circumstances upon which they work. For all intents and purposes, a flare shield should trigger the same times upon which an ion shield placed in the front arc, because the phrasing is the exact same in both cases, just swap 4++ for -1/2s

I totally agree that they should work the same, I'm not arguing that. I'm simply saying rules as written don't support that yet. If the FAQ was expanded or clarified that would be fine, but cross-inference from different pieces of kit is not a direction I'd care to go with 30/40k considering the vast swathes of similarly named stuff.

Your example is irrelevant

It's exactly parallel - two similarly named items, with similar fluff mechanics but working differently on the tabletop. I know analogies can be tough sometimes.

Raw is a 40k thing, it does not belong in 30k, gw has presented a faq that clearly resolves this situation in a almost identical manner, the rules themselves are less important that the resolution and agakn, gw has shown how it resolves directional attacks and facing bonuses.

If I was to always go by the silliness of raw then I get mastery level 3 librarians in 30k....

 ScarletRose wrote:

But it's not for the names, but the circumstances upon which they work. For all intents and purposes, a flare shield should trigger the same times upon which an ion shield placed in the front arc, because the phrasing is the exact same in both cases, just swap 4++ for -1/2s

I totally agree that they should work the same, I'm not arguing that. I'm simply saying rules as written don't support that yet. If the FAQ was expanded or clarified that would be fine, but cross-inference from different pieces of kit is not a direction I'd care to go with 30/40k considering the vast swathes of similarly named stuff.

Your example is irrelevant

It's exactly parallel - two similarly named items, with similar fluff mechanics but working differently on the tabletop. I know analogies can be tough sometimes.

We are not talking about the name, we are talking about their mechanical function on the tabletop.

Analogies are indeed tough, since you presented a simile rather than an analogy, and a poor one at that.

we are talking about their mechanical function on the tabletop.

Yes, and as I've repeatedly pointed out, failing at using inference to do so. There's no basis whatsoever to think two pieces of gear work the same except in game fluff (they're both directional shields), which is not a supportable method for making rules.

But hey, I know enough to walk away when the only reply I get is just a fancy "nuh-uh!". Have fun.