Stormraven Deepstrike and other models, mishap?

[Thiazi]

I a recent game my oppent deepstruck his storm raven. The base was less than an inch away from one of my rinos. He argued that it did not matter since skimmer bases dont count for anything other than assaults. So i aruged that his hull was over top of my rino. If we had taken the storm raven off its stand and set it down it would have been on top of the rino. His counter was that he his hull was still more than 1 inch away from the rino, which it was due to the storm ravens stand. We ended up rolling a dice to see to settle the argument.
So who was right?

[DrLove42]

Skimmer rules state bases are ignored, and you use the hull.

And since a skimmer blocks LOS you imagine it on the ground

It also depends what you call the "hull" of the vehicle, the actual superstructure or the stubby wings as well. Any part of the these go other terrain it counts as dangerous (depending on what you're playing as "the aircraft") so counts the same as stuff on ground. You can't deploy your units under it either...

Either way, whatever you use, unless he could put the model down in some orientation that wasn't within 1" of your stuff its a mishap. My reading on it anyway

P.S These new flying stands for models are more hassle than they're worth in terms of rules dilemnas....

[Tynskel]

Quasi rules! Whee!

The base becomes a problem for models that can assault-- the base cannot touch anything. However, the guy's right, the hull measurement is what needs to be made to check distance, unless the base is touching 'impassable terrain' (ie enemy model).

[Thiazi]

Either way, whatever you use, unless he could put the model down in some orientation that wasn't within 1" of your stuff its a mishap. My reading on it anyway


This was my interpretation of the rules, but I could not find anything that actually stated this. And while it makes the most sense. I learned long ago that 40ks rules dont always make sense when it comes to what is actually written.

Also it was the front assualt ramp area that was over the vechile.




However, the guy's right, the hull measurement is what needs to be made to check distance, unless the base is touching 'impassable terrain' (ie enemy model).


I figured this was the case. I just seems wrong...

[SotonShades]

The way I like to look at it (though even I don't stick to it hard and fast...) when the vehicle gets immobilised it has to be put on the table without it's flying base. If that can't be done, then the model cannot be put there, similar to infantry/non-skimmers not being able to pass through gaps smaller than the base or hull of the model.

So, in your case, the Stormraven would have had to have been placed on top of the Rhino if it had subsequently been immobilised, so wouldn't be able to be placed there, and thus forcing a mishap test.

[Tynskel]

The way I like to look at it (though even I don't stick to it hard and fast...) when the vehicle gets immobilised it has to be put on the table without it's flying base. If that can't be done, then the model cannot be put there, similar to infantry/non-skimmers not being able to pass through gaps smaller than the base or hull of the model.

So, in your case, the Stormraven would have had to have been placed on top of the Rhino if it had subsequently been immobilised, so wouldn't be able to be placed there, and thus forcing a mishap test.

however, the rulebook does make exceptions for not removing the base. the gav generator still works, but the thrusters don't, ect.

[BuFFo]

The way I like to look at it (though even I don't stick to it hard and fast...) when the vehicle gets immobilised it has to be put on the table without it's flying base.

I believe you are incorrect sir.

Removing the flying stand is a choice you have. It is not a requirement.

[SotonShades]

The rulebook makes an exception if it is not possible to remove the base, not if you don't want to. I don't think I've seen a skimmer, on either the old skimmer or new flyer bases, for a few years that couldn't be removed from its base. Whilst I suppose some people might be tempted to stick the base on permenantly to avoid having to do this, and also being able to place their models above their own or thei opponants, in my experience this would practically ensure breakages, not to mention making it much more difficult to transport models (especially with the flying stands!)

Were I, in some moment of insanity or more likely intoxication, to attach a base permenantly to a skimmer in such a way, I would still place the model as described before (as if I could remove the base when immobilised) to be fair to my opponant. For the sake of a dab of glue, you could equally argue that turrets and moving spons that got glued in place could only fire in that direction, rather than being able to fire in the intended arc in the manner described in the rulebook.

[Sam]

Well here's the issue with claiming you ignore the base outside of assault. The Storm Raven uses the same base as the Valkyrie, and the Valkyrie was FAQ'd so the distances (disembarking, contesting objectives, etc.) are measured from the base, not the hull.

"Q. How do you treat the Valkyrie base for
gaming? Due to its height it seems that it is
impossible for a Valkyrie to contest an objective,
or for troops to disembark/embark normally.

A. Follow the rules in Measuring Distances in the
Skimmers section in the Warhammer 40,000
rulebook with the following exception: For the
purposes of contesting objectives and
embarking/disembarking from a Valkyrie or
Vendetta, measure to and from the model’s base.
For example, models wishing to embark within a
Valkyrie can do so if at the end of their
movement, all models within the unit are within
2" of the Valkyrie’s base." - IG FAQ

[Tynskel]

The valkyrie rules just followed the main rulebook, but the rules for the stormraven are explicit. They detail how to get in n' out of the bird.

[Tynskel]

The rulebook makes an exception if it is not possible to remove the base, not if you don't want to. I don't think I've seen a skimmer, on either the old skimmer or new flyer bases, for a few years that couldn't be removed from its base. Whilst I suppose some people might be tempted to stick the base on permenantly to avoid having to do this, and also being able to place their models above their own or thei opponants, in my experience this would practically ensure breakages, not to mention making it much more difficult to transport models (especially with the flying stands!)

Were I, in some moment of insanity or more likely intoxication, to attach a base permenantly to a skimmer in such a way, I would still place the model as described before (as if I could remove the base when immobilised) to be fair to my opponant. For the sake of a dab of glue, you could equally argue that turrets and moving spons that got glued in place could only fire in that direction, rather than being able to fire in the intended arc in the manner described in the rulebook.

Actually, due to the nature of the elevated model, there are many reasons to not remove the flying stand, even if you could. Example, you don't want to muck up the paint job.