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.

Beside Line of Sight, do vehicle generally provide cover?

For example, if your infantry unit stand behind an Eldar vehicle, because it seem unlike typical vehicle like Rhino which entirelyl block LOS, Eldar vehicles only cover part of model's body due to being "hovering" tank

No. Not at all. If they totally block LOS they totally block LOS, but don't grant cover (unless via a special rule).

what about hovering tank vehicle? Repulsorr, Raider, Landspeeder, Fire Prism. How's their LOS work?

The same way. If you can see any of the target, you have LOS, if you can't, you don't. Essentially hovering vehicles will normally not block LOS as you can draw LOS under the tank.

Typically, shooting is from any part of a model to any other part of a model. Depending on the angle, floating vehicles like repulsors and fire prisms could block LOS, but smaller things like landspeeders would be unlikely to do so.

But like johnnyhell said, vehicles provide no cover bonus in any way, shape, or form. They can only help if they completely block LOS.

To gain cover.

In or on terrsin for infantry.

In or on terrain and 50% obscured for vehicles.

You standing behind a wall does nothing.
Conversely standing on the wall would give you cover. (If infantry

ItsPug wrote:
The same way. If you can see any of the target, you have LOS, if you can't, you don't. Essentially hovering vehicles will normally not block LOS as you can draw LOS under the tank.

That's the thing, there is no written rule in the book. So what about if the player intentionally leave the model with no "hovering flying base" thus you can't see his model, and therefore you can't draw LOS to his model.

Warzone Atlanta has changed their cover rule to be:
If all models of the targeted unit are 50% obscured from the attackers, they gain +1 armor save.


Very simple change and very reasonable.

We have a house rule where if the whole unit is atleast "in combat" (within 1 inch) of a terrain piece you are in cover. I.e. a cliff edge, as if you are hugging the wall to gain cover. Also with vehicles we just say 50% obscured, doesn't need to be in terrain.

Rules as written vehicles block Los and can prevent shooting but don't grant cover. Real world, discuss the board and rules with your opponent before playing.

darrekbaal wrote:

ItsPug wrote:
The same way. If you can see any of the target, you have LOS, if you can't, you don't. Essentially hovering vehicles will normally not block LOS as you can draw LOS under the tank.

That's the thing, there is no written rule in the book. So what about if the player intentionally leave the model with no "hovering flying base" thus you can't see his model, and therefore you can't draw LOS to his model.

So what? You can probably now see over it in places. LOS is so easy to get this edition.

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:
To gain cover.

In or on terrsin for infantry.

In or on terrain and 50% obscured for vehicles.

You standing behind a wall does nothing.
Conversely standing on the wall would give you cover. (If infantry

Bolded for emphasis, but this is only true if you aren't using the Advanced Terrain rules. Those state that Infantry models behind and within 1" of a wall are considered to be in cover.

Do you mean barricades?

Sure but a wall (ie a ruins wall) does not.

Now a lot of people give ruins a foot print so being behind it is generally fine.

Aegis defence lines and such have rules as such ofc too.

darrekbaal wrote:

ItsPug wrote:
The same way. If you can see any of the target, you have LOS, if you can't, you don't. Essentially hovering vehicles will normally not block LOS as you can draw LOS under the tank.

That's the thing, there is no written rule in the book. So what about if the player intentionally leave the model with no "hovering flying base" thus you can't see his model, and therefore you can't draw LOS to his model.

Model the skimmer going through tall grass.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

darrekbaal wrote:

ItsPug wrote:
The same way. If you can see any of the target, you have LOS, if you can't, you don't. Essentially hovering vehicles will normally not block LOS as you can draw LOS under the tank.

That's the thing, there is no written rule in the book. So what about if the player intentionally leave the model with no "hovering flying base" thus you can't see his model, and therefore you can't draw LOS to his model.

So what? You can probably now see over it in places. LOS is so easy to get this edition.

Well .... then the LOS would apply differently on each player, that would be chaotic. The player with flying stern base floating vehicle will have LOS, and other player will intentionally have no hovering base to use vehicle to block LOS. It's not like a Rhino, is a Rhino

Pink Horror wrote:


Model the skimmer going through tall grass.

That would be an example, now suddenly there is no LOS, on same model

darrekbaal wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

darrekbaal wrote:

ItsPug wrote:
The same way. If you can see any of the target, you have LOS, if you can't, you don't. Essentially hovering vehicles will normally not block LOS as you can draw LOS under the tank.

That's the thing, there is no written rule in the book. So what about if the player intentionally leave the model with no "hovering flying base" thus you can't see his model, and therefore you can't draw LOS to his model.

So what? You can probably now see over it in places. LOS is so easy to get this edition.

Well .... then the LOS would apply differently on each player, that would be chaotic. The player with flying stern base floating vehicle will have LOS, and other player will intentionally have no hovering base to use vehicle to block LOS. It's not like a Rhino, is a Rhino

Pink Horror wrote:


Model the skimmer going through tall grass.

That would be an example, now suddenly there is no LOS, on same model

This is what we get with stupid TLOS. Abstracted LOS would solve this and remove all this modeling for advantage thing. And give you more easily terrain that actually has influence on game.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:
To gain cover.

In or on terrsin for infantry.

In or on terrain and 50% obscured for vehicles.

You standing behind a wall does nothing.
Conversely standing on the wall would give you cover. (If infantry

Bolded for emphasis, but this is only true if you aren't using the Advanced Terrain rules. Those state that Infantry models behind and within 1" of a wall are considered to be in cover.

They don't.

Now, Barricades do, if within 1" and behind the barricade from POV of the firer, but nothing so catch-all as 'walls'.

Apologies, in my mind when I see "wall" my mind jumps to low brick walls (barricades), rather than the wall of a building/ruin, especially when someone talks about being able to stand on said wall.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Apologies, in my mind when I see "wall" my mind jumps to low brick walls (barricades), rather than the wall of a building/ruin, especially when someone talks about being able to stand on said wall.

No worries - terrain is quite loose now so being specific is important.