Vehicles going to ground

[armbarred]

The only rule to prevent it would be which facing are you shooting at? What is its AV? Since none is listed, does it count as 0? So my little Bolt Pistol will auto pen you...

[Tynskel]

Heh, you still can. No rules on the orientation your vehicles must take on the table. They can run around on their sides all you want. =P

bwahahah!
Are you saying we are playing RAI?

[Skragger]

Even so, I think logic and common sense would have said "no, a tank cant dive into the dirt and try desperately to dig a foxhole with nothing but its... um.. exhaust port.. for dear life"

A walker, I could maybe possibly see. But even then, the thing is so large it wouldn't really change the target much. And I think most walkers suffer from "I've fallen and I can't get up"

[Bean]

The only rule to prevent it would be which facing are you shooting at? What is its AV? Since none is listed, does it count as 0? So my little Bolt Pistol will auto pen you...

No, this is one of the most classic examples of flawed logic around--akin to the "if there's no price tag on it, it's free!" nonsense that you sometimes get in the retail business.

If an item in a store doesn't have a price tag on it, it's not free--it's just not for sale.

If a facing doesn't have an armor value, the armor value isn't zero--you just can't hurt the vehicle in that facing at all =P. There is actually no reason at all to equate a lack of an armor value to an armor value of zero.

Really, though, the facing system doesn't depend on the vehicle being oriented in any particular way. You draw the corner-to-corner lines along whichever face is pointing up, pick a facing to be the front, and extrapolate the sides and the rear from there. It doesn't matter whether the vehicle is right-side-up, up-side-down, or on its side--the mechanism provided in the book still works.

So, no. Everything you've said here is basically just wrong. Sorry =P.

Are you saying we are playing RAI?

Nope.

[addamsfamily36]

Oh my, i had just gotten over tanks cowering behind some shrubbery, now, sideways tanks. I think i might go back to bed lol

[fade_74]

No, this is one of the most classic examples of flawed logic around--akin to the "if there's no price tag on it, it's free!" nonsense that you sometimes get in the retail business.

If an item in a store doesn't have a price tag on it, it's not free--it's just not for sale.

If a facing doesn't have an armor value, the armor value isn't zero--you just can't hurt the vehicle in that facing at all =P. There is actually no reason at all to equate a lack of an armor value to an armor value of zero..

So, by your logic....If the bottom of a tank can't be hurt.....what happens if I take the bits I have (5 leman russ bottom hull sections) and create a tank out of just those and a turret? Is it unkillable?

Oh, if you see something in a retail establishment that doesn't have a price on it....go to the register, and say "Excuse me, there is no price on this item, can you scan it and tell me how much it is?" Just because there is no price on it doesn't mean it's not for sale.

[Kawauso]

Heh, you still can. No rules on the orientation your vehicles must take on the table. They can run around on their sides all you want. =P

This sounds suspiciously like an invocation of the 'Air Bud Clause'. Which is stupid. :P

[Bean]

So, by your logic....If the bottom of a tank can't be hurt.....what happens if I take the bits I have (5 leman russ bottom hull sections) and create a tank out of just those and a turret? Is it unkillable?

No. That isn't a rational extension of my logic at all. What I said was that if a section of a vehicle didn't have an armor value, you couldn't hurt it. I then went on to say that every section of the vehicle will always have an armor value, regardless of how the vehicle is oriented.

The armor value isn't attached to a particular bit or physical portion of the model of the tank, but to the area of the tank which falls between the corner-to-corner lines of whichever of its facings is pointing up.

So, if you'd actually bothered to read what I'd written, you'd have seen that what you're suggesting here is both wrong and something with which I don't agree.

Oh, if you see something in a retail establishment that doesn't have a price on it....go to the register, and say "Excuse me, there is no price on this item, can you scan it and tell me how much it is?" Just because there is no price on it doesn't mean it's not for sale.

Sometimes. Shelves aren't generally for sale, nor are the store's own cleaning supplies and office supplies and computing equipment, nor any number of other items you can routinely find without price tags in retail stores. Anyway, it was just an example. The point is that an item without a value doesn't have a value of zero--it just doesn't have a value. The two aren't the same at all, and the argument to which I was responding required the assertion that they are.

[Bean]

This sounds suspiciously like an invocation of the 'Air Bud Clause'. Which is stupid. :P

I have no idea what you're talking about, but the fact remains that it is perfectly legal to place your tank on its side and play it like that.

[SonicPara]

I can't decide if this is trolling or just one of the most appalling attempts at rules exploitation