Vector strike, ruins and line of sight.

[Eric French]

Vector strike:
First question concerning vector strike. When flying "over" a model are the wings on a stock built heldrake what is used to determine whether or not it flies "over" or is it the flyer base and just exactly how far "over" the model does it need to fly? For instance if my wings land on top middle of an unengaged model it's it flown "over" or does any part of the hull of the drake need to pass completely "over/passed" the model? Please quote the rule book for any suggestion on where to find a definitive answer.

Ruins:
If my infantry model is standing on a wall that was agreed upon that it counts as ruins. Does the model still need to be obscured in order to get the 4+ cover save? Or is the cover save granted because of the 'ruins' terrain type? There seems to be a case for each scenario in the rule book considering true line of sight game play.

Thanks.

[Anggul]

Terrain only grants cover if the model that the wound is being allocated to is actually obscured by the terrain.

Area terrain is something different, and is always 5+. For example if the model in your example is obscured by a piece of ruin it gets the 4+ save, but let's say another unit wounds him from another angle where he isn't obscured, but is in area terrain, then he would only get the 5+ cover save for being in area terrain. It really makes you think about where to place your models, and makes fast movement and deep striking a lot more valuable.

[Eric French]

Terrain only grants cover if the model that the wound is being allocated to is actually obscured by the terrain.

Area terrain is something different, and is always 5+. For example if the model in your example is obscured by a piece of ruin it gets the 4+ save, but let's say another unit wounds him from another angle where he isn't obscured, but is in area terrain, then he would only get the 5+ cover save for being in area terrain. It really makes you think about where to place your models, and makes fast movement and deep striking a lot more valuable.

Makes sense, I've played it wrong for so long I need to drill it in :-)

[Tynskel]

Page 43 – Special Rules, Vector Strike.
Change the second paragraph to read “When Swooping, this model may savage its prey. At the end of the Movement Phase, nominate one unengaged enemy unit the model has moved over that turn. This unit may even be an enemy Flyer. That unit takes D3+1 hits, resolved at the model’s unmodified Strength and AP3, using Random Allocation. Against vehicles, these hits are resolved against the target’s side armour. No cover saves are allowed against these hits.”

[Nabterayl]

Regarding what "over" means, I don't believe there's any definitive answer. Personally I am inclined to include the wings, though, on the theory that wings are considered "hull" and not extraneous bits. It seems a bit odd to me that a Heldrake should be one size for purposes of targeting it, but another size for purposes of determining what it is "over." That's just my intuition, though - there's no text on this subject at all as far as I know.

[Eric French]

Page 43 – Special Rules, Vector Strike.
Change the second paragraph to read “When Swooping, this model may savage its prey. At the end of the Movement Phase, nominate one unengaged enemy unit the model has moved over that turn. This unit may even be an enemy Flyer. That unit takes D3+1 hits, resolved at the model’s unmodified Strength and AP3, using Random Allocation. Against vehicles, these hits are resolved against the target’s side armour. No cover saves are allowed against these hits.”

So are you in the "moved over any part of a model" camp or the "completely passed over a model" camp? After all if I end up "over" a model (on to of) then I did indeed move "over" it.

For the sake of debate and clarity I am in the camp that assumes any part of a model that the drake covers, whether or not it totally flew passed the entire model (for instance a tank) constitutes the model being vectored. So if I stop my swooping move with a wing tip positioned in the middle of a tank and more than 1" above the tank hull, then it is vectored. It's there any wording or phrasing in BRB that would suggest otherwise?

[Pssyche]

Big Rulebook Page 8.

"Sometimes, all that will be visible of a model is a weapon, banner or other ornament he is carrying.
In these cases, the model is not visible.
Similarly, we ignore wings and tails, and antennae even though they are technically part of a model's body."


The fairest way of determining it is if the model's base has passed over the target model during its movement.
That's how we play it.

[Eric French]

Big Rulebook Page 8.

"Sometimes, all that will be visible of a model is a weapon, banner or other ornament he is carrying.
In these cases, the model is not visible.
Similarly, we ignore wings and tails, and antennae even though they are technically part of a model's body."


The fairest way of determining it is if the model's base has passed over the target model during its movement.
That's how we play it.

That's fair enough if the attacking model is for example a screamer of Tzeentch because it has wings and or tentacles. But the drake and other flyers are vehicles, which have hulls and are treated as such are they not? Even a Daemon Prince has wings so I can see using it's base, but not flying vehicles.

[chicop76]

Big Rulebook Page 8.

"Sometimes, all that will be visible of a model is a weapon, banner or other ornament he is carrying.
In these cases, the model is not visible.
Similarly, we ignore wings and tails, and antennae even though they are technically part of a model's body."


That is covering non vehicle models. I argued that when people want to shoot the wings off a vendetta and the wonderful FAq stated you can do so.

In all honesty it moves far enough to where it really doesn't matter anyway. I tend to vector strike directly over the model in the middle to kill any arguments.

However angles and distance is important with flyers, especially if vector striking can get you to fly off the board.

I have a question.

Can you vector strike a unit at a bottom of a 3 story building and you have two other units on each other floor.

The fairest way of determining it is if the model's base has passed over the target model during its movement.
That's how we play it.


Big Rulebook Page 8.

"Sometimes, all that will be visible of a model is a weapon, banner or other ornament he is carrying.
In these cases, the model is not visible.
Similarly, we ignore wings and tails, and antennae even though they are technically part of a model's body."



That is covering non vehicle models. I argued that when people want to shoot the wings off a vendetta and the wonderful FAq stated you can do so.

In all honesty it moves far enough to where it really doesn't matter anyway. I tend to vector strike directly over the model in the middle to kill any arguments.

However angles and distance is important with flyers, especially if vector striking can get you to fly off the board.

I have a question.

Can you vector strike a unit at a bottom of a 3 story building

The fairest way of determining it is if the model's base has passed over the target model during its movement.
That's how we play it.

Test

[wh14sxb]

Here's how I play:

I first verify what someone thinks is able to shoot at and deal pen hits to. If my opponent says if all he can see is wing and that's a viable target to pen my drake, then it's hull enough to meteoric strike his models. If they say meh all I can see is wing, that's not a part of the hull, fair game I shant be striking his models with just wing.

Communicate with your opponent of anything in question. Play fair and don't dbag people. Sometimes Im winging vehicles other times im moving completely over with my base, but it's always equal grounds for my opponent and I.

[boonballer]

Big Rulebook Page 8.

"Sometimes, all that will be visible of a model is a weapon, banner or other ornament he is carrying.
In these cases, the model is not visible.
Similarly, we ignore wings and tails, and antennae even though they are technically part of a model's body."


The fairest way of determining it is if the model's base has passed over the target model during its movement.
That's how we play it.

i believe this is a quote for shooting at infantry. The dragon is a vehicle, which in that case the models wings now count as part of the hull. IE you can shoot at them. With your logic i couldnt shoot at ANY fliers wings.

[Nabterayl]

That's fair enough if the attacking model is for example a screamer of Tzeentch because it has wings and or tentacles. But the drake and other flyers are vehicles, which have hulls and are treated as such are they not? Even a Daemon Prince has wings so I can see using it's base, but not flying vehicles.
Wings are counted as hull. They just aren't counted as body. As page 73 says:


Note that, unlike for other models, a vehicle's wings are not ornarnental and are a part of its hull.

[Eric French]

Here's how I play:

I first verify what someone thinks is able to shoot at and deal pen hits to. If my opponent says if all he can see is wing and that's a viable target to pen my drake, then it's hull enough to meteoric strike his models. If they say meh all I can see is wing, that's not a part of the hull, fair game I shant be striking his models with just wing.

Communicate with your opponent of anything in question. Play fair and don't dbag people. Sometimes Im winging vehicles other times im moving completely over with my base, but it's always equal grounds for my opponent and I.

I totally agree with the whole spirit of making sure you are as transparent as possible but I am chasing down that unicorn called a rule-set ;)

[DarkLink]

Grammatically, the wording includes the possibility of currently being on top of the target.

[Angelofblades]

But technically, fliers arent allowed to end their movement ontop of enemy units.

[Eric French]

Grammatically, the wording includes the possibility of currently being on top of the target.

Again I see that as perfectly acceptable as well. Then when playing a horde of guard or ork or zombies and I only fly "over" one model in the unit and argue that the model represents the whole unit with a square footprint of 18" or so, I convince my opponent to allow it. Then in the same game I try and savage my prey in a subsequent zooming phase, that being a single tank, and I try to say only "part" of the particular model needs to be hovered over. Am I being the aforementioned D-2-the-bag?

[Eric French]

But technically, fliers arent allowed to end their movement ontop of enemy units.

As long as their hull and base can fit and are more than 1" away they actually can. FAQ I believe about moving under a flyer.

[Nabterayl]

I don't think so, no. If you have a wing that extends over the base, and part of your wing is over part of the enemy tank's hull at the end of your movement, you can absolutely Meteoric Strike that sucker in my book.

[DarkLink]

Just their base, I believe.

[crazy_irish]

The base has to partly fly over the unit. Even the flamer is measured from the base.

So movement and weapons are measured from the base. If I wanted to attack a hovering storm raven, I'd have to get to his base, not under his wings. So if I want to vector strike with a chicken, I use the base. Deal with it :-)

[Nabterayl]

If I wanted to attack a hovering storm raven, I'd have to get to his base, not under his wings.
That's consistent, but where do you get that? Page 80 says:


However, distances are still measured to and from the Flyer's hull, with the exceptions of the vehicle's weapons and Fire Points, which all work as normal. The base of a Flyer is effectively ignored, except for when:

. The Flyer is being assaulted, in which case models may move into contact with the vehicle's hull. its base or both.

. Models are embarking or disembarking from the Flyer, in which case the base of the Flyer is used as the Access Point.

[Eric French]

That's consistent, but where do you get that? Page 80 says:

Ok for my part I'm totally on board with Nab's whole page 80 input for the hull being what vector strikes.
However the last little bit that I'm stuck on is whether or not I absolutely NEED to go over an entire model in order to vector it. I obviously started all of this because a game hinged on it. I landed with my wings on top of an attack bike that was on the 4 point objective so it was do or die because I could not have denied him I needed to kill him. D3 plus 1 later I get 3 and hit 2 and poof. Winner winner turkey dinner. So it became the major point of contention: albeit a friendly one, of the outcome. He would have won had I not been "able" to end my move partially "over" his attack bike.

[Nabterayl]

If by "need to go over an entire model" you mean that the Heldrake must have passed over the target unit, then no, I don't think that's a requirement. As DarkLink has observed, Vector Strike only says "enemy unit the model has moved over." That does not require, as a matter of English, that the model no longer be over the enemy unit. There are ways to require that (for instance, "enemy unit that model has passed over"), but what is actually written does not require that the Heldrake have cleared the enemy unit when a Vector Strike is declared.

[Eric French]

If by "need to go over an entire model" you mean that the Heldrake must have passed over the target unit, then no, I don't think that's a requirement. As DarkLink has observed, Vector Strike only says "enemy unit the model has moved over." That does not require, as a matter of English, that the model no longer be over the enemy unit. There are ways to require that (for instance, "enemy unit that model has passed over"), but what is actually written does not require that the Heldrake have cleared the enemy unit when a Vector Strike is declared.

Thanks to everyone who took part in this. I'm going with true LoS in ruins and vector striking with heldrake wing tips. So on a 6' board with hammer & anvil deployment, nothing on my table half is safe if of course I have room to land within an inch etc etc. Thanks again. Until the next quandary!