Tank and it's sponson weapons

[SeattleDV8]

Sorry I'm not buying that LOS can be seperated from cover. as per pg. 21 "when any part of the target model's body (...) is obscured from tthe POV of the firer, the target is in cover."

It is LOS that determines cover.

If you want a better example , you have a wrecked predator , one model is on top of the wreck, the other two are by the sponsons. LOS for the one on top is clear, the sponson models can only see 4 of the ten total models in the unit.

LOS is blocked by the wreck.If all fire cover is given. the only difference between a squad and a vehicle firing is the 'own unit' rule.

In order for the exception to work , you would be able to see and shoot though the vehicle.

The specific rules for vehicle shoting do not allow that, you can have 'blind spots', your arc of sight is limited unlike the exception.

The only place in the vehicle shooting rules that allow the exception is in squadrons.

[nighthawks]

I fully agree that a vehicle can have blind spots, and that LOS and cover are inextricably linked. however, I also believe that the cover rules for vehicles shooting require the models to be in cover first, in the more accepted sense of "something is in the way" and THEN the units partially in cover rules are applied. when gauging a tank v. firing line in the open (or similar situation) one need simply check to establish LOS to THE UNIT to determine a weapons eligibility to fire. following that, check for cover from the elected and able firing weapons, and refer to the rule son P. 22 if necessary to determine cover. "blocked by terrain or models" is pretty basic language for cover. you'll also notice that these rule precede the rules for firing arcs, which seems to me to matter but I'm having trouble with expressing why.

 

yes, this is RAW.

 

not RAW (but good red meat) is the rule where ones own unit cannot block LOS (except for vehicles' weapons' arcs of sight) and cannot grant a cover save. while there are rules that would make an exception here as well, they ONLY can be considered after cover has been determined to, at minimum, possibly exist (and thus warrant investigation) between the firing vehicle and target unit.

 

a 3rd option - proposed by a friend and very much NOT RAW: have the clear LOS weapons roll separately from the hull-obscured shots and allow cover saves for those. assign all wounds and whatnot as if all firing was from one unit (as it is).

 

It seems fully absurd to me to allow a cover save over open ground without the target having a special rule or having gone to ground. Certainly in need of a FAQ or direct answer from a responsible grownup at GW. That, or a friendlier, less litigious approach to gaming where we can all see the sillyness that RAW can provide from time to time and find a sensible, consistent solution.

 

I have added this to the grey areas thread, but there is no need to shut down the topic so long as it remains civil and useful. I would very much like to read other members' input on the issue.