Skyshield and vehicles deployment - do you allow it?

[Bigred]

So traveling about from place to place, I've seen two major camps on this.

Some places have no issue letting folks deploy vehicles atop Skyshields, and they sit there the whole game unmoving with the extra protection. In other places its a major no no. How do you handle it?

I believe the "fuzzy" part of the rules is whether the "Reaching the Roof" part of the Battlements rules apply, or not.

[Nabterayl]

I have no problem with ground vehicles being deployed atop a Skyshield. To me, it feels perfectly natural for a commander to look at a nearby landing pad and say, "Wait a minute - don't those things have shield generators? Let's figure out a way to get this tank up there!" Whether it's by heavy lifter, a temporary ramp erected for the purpose, or whatever, it seems like the sort of thing an enterprising commander could do before the battle.

I only have a problem with them trying to move on or off the thing during the game.

[Mr.Pickelz]

I don't mind if the vehicle was deployed there, but if that vehicle tried to leave the pad I think it should take a penetrating hit at AP2 or something as it hits the ground.
This shows it slamming into the ground as it jumps off Dukes of Hazzard style.

[mathhammer]

if leaving the skyshield I would say.
-) sides have to be down
-) use natures elevator rules.

or

House rue the elevator pad in the center of the pad.

[ElectricPaladin]

Honestly? It's not a great strategy. It's certainly not game-breaking. They put their big expensive tank on a skyshield and now... I know exactly where it is, and I can always hide from it. This is not a problem.

[TB0N3]

You can deploy on top, but if you go down, take an auto-penetrating hit, or an S10 hit in your back armour... Or maybe a dangerous terrain test at -2 (immobilized in 1, 2 or 3). It has to be unfurled, also...

[ACE01]

Voted yes due to airlift, but moving off is a no-no unless the thing has a modelled exit physically big enough.

[sukigod]

Rules state moving on or off the Skyshield counts as difficult terrain. Although physically, you can put things under the Skyshield model, there isn't anything stating how "high" it actually is. A landing pad could conceivably be 2'-3' off the ground and still be moved onto or off without a lot of fuss. I know my M1A1 tank could make that easy. :)

[Nabterayl]

Rules state moving on or off the Skyshield counts as difficult terrain. Although physically, you can put things under the Skyshield model, there isn't anything stating how "high" it actually is. A landing pad could conceivably be 2'-3' off the ground and still be moved onto or off without a lot of fuss. I know my M1A1 tank could make that easy. :)
I agree that, depending on how the thing is modeled, I'd have no problem with ground vehicles moving on and off in-game. I'm curious, though - the Skyshield kit as sold has a platform that is 3" above the ground. Using 28mm = 72 inches, that equates to a fall of 16 feet and change. Would you drive your Abrams off a 16 foot cliff? I actually have no idea how it would handle that. Does a 1/6 chance of immobilizing the tank feel about right to you? Too forgiving? Too severe?

[Wolfshade]

Of course you can deploy on it, you can deploy anywhere as long as it isn't impassable terrain!

It is not just Skysheilds where I have deployed atop of but the old imperial landing pad also.

As for the damage that they take, don't forget BA land raiders get dropped from Thunderhawks from a much higher area and don't take impact damage.

I don't think that you should be able to move off easily, perhaps a very dangerous terrain test?

But if you do stop tanks deploying on places that they can't get to I hope you also do this with artillery peices that can't move up or down terrain as well.

[Nabterayl]

Sir! Are you implying that my gretchin can't lug those kannon up the ladders? I'm offended at the very suggestion!

[chicop76]

You can have cranes and also break the tank down, etc. How they get cars that is too big to fit in the elevators in some buildings, or that big show boat dangling from the ceiling. It's all magic.

Anyway since when I do use the shield my skimmers, or Tau skimmers to be more precise are on top of them. Since they can simply float on top I don't see a problem. Two tanks and 3 sides would cost me over 100 points for that type of save. Throw in drones the skyshield is very well costed.

[Angelofblades]

I've not so much an issue of people putting units up on top of it, as people putting units under it.

The pad is just low enough to prevent MC's / walkers from fitting underneath, and therefore able to prevent those same MC's/ walkers from charging those units underneath. Funnily enough, I think the rules allow for the MC/ Walker to declare the charge, suffer the overwatch fire, but since they cannot physically fit under there, they cant make base to base.

Im of the opinion that there shouldn't be an underneath to the thing. It should be closed off, impassable area.

[gensu11]

I agree with sukigod that an M1 could take a 2 to 3 foot drop. Someone earlier posted that a landing pad on the provided legs was 3" tall, representing about 16 feet. Found some pics on the web, if any of my tank commanders did this to their tanks, I would have killed them.542054215422

[Nabterayl]

I agree with sukigod that an M1 could take a 2 to 3 foot drop. Someone earlier posted that a landing pad on the provided legs was 3" tall, representing about 16 feet. Found some pics on the web, if any of my tank commanders did this to their tanks, I would have killed them.542054215422
Based on those pictures, driving off a 16 foot cliff looks like it would basically always be a mission kill (i.e., a wreck).

[DarkLink]

They could take more than a 3 ft drop. Modern main battle tanks are not the lumbering behemoths people think they are. They're frikin fast. But a 16' drop is still pretty unreasonable.

[Joe TwoCrows]

I do *so* enjoy my paper ai, errr, raiders, ravagers and venoms.

However, rather than just poking fun at ground-pounding armies, it seems to me deploying on a skyshield makes the same sense as a Siskorski SkyCrane (CH-54) deploying a HumVee or other 'light' vehicle to a detached location. So, no worries there. Then the rules are explicit, it's difficult to get down from, so a vehicle moving off is gonna have to take a test just like moving over any other difficult terrain. Getting on to the thing is the reverse: take a test, start shooting while 'waiting for transport'.

Now, a LandRaider, I'm not so sure about, 'cuz even with Promethium I'm struggling a bit for V/STOL cargo aircraft to move one. However, if you allow one, it's unusual for the game to not allow all.

Of course, if I spend a hundred points, I get 4 more bikes, with a blaster and a 4 or 3+ cover save, so , oh, sorry I'm making fun of the (not-so) Mobile Infantry again.

[Tynskel]

Based on those pictures, driving off a 16 foot cliff looks like it would basically always be a mission kill (i.e., a wreck).

yeah, I would make it impassible for vehicles.
If you are gunny put vehicles up there, there has to be a way on and off.

[Lord Krungharr]

I like putting Defilers, Forgefiends and Soul Grinders on Skyshields, and Dreadnoughts too. Great firebase to protect objectives in my zone, and blast stuff out of my zone and on the way in...a Tzeentchy Warpsmith up there is good too :)

[TimmyPowerGamer]

Deploying on the Skyshield shouldn't be a problem (said tank was airlifted in before the battle). Leaving it is the problem.

But don't forget, most weapons on vehicles only have a 45º vertical arc of fire - if you can get close enough they can't shoot you ;)

[Denzark]

If you see those pictures, you will see that, whilst there are several ingenious ways battlefield engineers could get a tank up the height of 16' - said ramp or crane or whatever tool, would be needed to ge tit down again. It is very unlikely a tank could drive off a sheer 16' drop safely - without a runup bigger than what the skyshielf would allow.


The question is though, in terms of 40K rules. The Skyshield is unique terrain I believe, or if not, the top ain't battlements (OK could be wrong rulebook not to hand). As pointed out the only restriction is that it is difficult terrain. Ergo your tank/vehicle has a 1/6 chance of becoming disabled, other than that it can crack on at will.

And obviuosly a vindicator with big shovelly thing will likely not care about the 16' drop...

[Houghten]

Hiding a Battlewagon on a big static platform with a force field so it can be better protected: not very orky.

Ramping that same Battlewagon off that same platform to crush the unsuspecting beakies below: SO ORKY.