TrentL Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Lothlann wrote:line of sight for models is defined by what the model can see if you stand behind him and look forward, so if you want just turn all your models around, nowhere does it say models see 360, it says in the shooting phase they can rotate for free to face there target. so you just face all your models away from the enemy, they then move as normal, then if you want to shoot you face them towards the target in the shooting phase. but then next turn they will rage towards that unit (or one that is closer) since you are already looking at them. Ignore the name that's a local fella, but the above seems to me mega wrong, you just rotate your model and ignore whatever is closest? Someone else said that people use the above method to avoid shooting their own troops with Chaos Dreadnoughts... I don't know it doesn't seem to be the intention of Rage to just turn your head and ignore the closest thing... opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarakin Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 That is really cheesy imo. Lets face it, our fearsome death company aren't going to be jogging backwards, are they? They aren't going to run forwards then turn and face the other way and say to the marine next to them, " Hey, did you see anything over there?" "Nope... not a thing mate, honest...". If someone tried to play this against me, even in a friendly game, they'd get smacked upside the back of the head. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malus the Destroyer Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Infantry has a 360 field of vision, however, I think some shenanigans can be pulled off with a DC Dread close to this because he is not infantry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DokSnyder Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Ugh... "nowhere does it say models see 360°" Nowhere does it say they see only 180° either, or 194° or whatever you want respectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malus the Destroyer Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I could of swore I saw it somewhere, lemme get back to you on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eberious Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Well, it does say in the rule book that units/models with rage have to move towards the closest "visable" enemy. However I think what happened with yourself is just someone trying to control their DC with a possible blackspot or as I call it cheating. As the whole turn your unit to face an enemy you are going to shoot at for reasons of LOS are for the LOS shooting rules, not making a rage unit "look away". If you were shooting at the enemy its not as if you would look the other way and then fire backwards over your shoulder. However saying that, its a very tricky one. Some will probably say yes can be done. But I would imagine this is not a viable thing you can do. I know if wouldnt fly with me and any of my gaming folks. LOS rues and rage rules appear very different but I can see how some would use the wording for both to thier advantage. I could be wrong. But if ones to incorperate the fluff it never says the DC simply looked the other way to avoid the charge, as if to say they were scared of a tide of green or any other enemy was coming at them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ancient god Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Infantry have 360° vision, Dreadnoughts have 180°. So the rules would permit doing this with a Dread and exposing his low rear armour all the while, but I would call BS on anyone doing that in my presence. You can't get much lower than that and stay within the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakobus Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I'm pretty sure the 45degree arc disappeared with 2nd Ed. Poorguy is living in the past, only thing I can find in the book with fire arcs are on vehicles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kollar Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Infantry have 360° vision, Dreadnoughts have 180°. So the rules would permit doing this with a Dread and exposing his low rear armour all the while, but I would call BS on anyone doing that in my presence. You can't get much lower than that and stay within the rules. Not that it matters, but wouldn't the fact that he's exposing his rear armour, aka making him vulnerable to a stray bolter shell, actually make up for this...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattsama Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I don't know it doesn't seem to be the intention of Rage to just turn your head and ignore the closest thing... Ding ding ding!!! It's not the intention of the rule. If you're there to just beard the guy until you win, fine. But it's a friendly game, and you should be following the INTENT of the rules... You know, the intent of the GAME is to have FUN. You sir, are correct, and I applaud you for not running with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamaNagol Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Infantry models have a 360' fire arc. So no, this does not hold up in the RAW court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ancient god Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Infantry have 360° vision, Dreadnoughts have 180°. So the rules would permit doing this with a Dread and exposing his low rear armour all the while, but I would call BS on anyone doing that in my presence. You can't get much lower than that and stay within the rules. Not that it matters, but wouldn't the fact that he's exposing his rear armour, aka making him vulnerable to a stray bolter shell, actually make up for this...? Sure, it might. But the whole contemplation is the essence of uncool so I'll just resent that whole notion. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Man I Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I'm shocked, SHOCKED to find out people are trying to use "creative interpretations" of the rules to get an edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shatter Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 It, rage, is LOS to model, not firing arcs. All mentions of 180, 360 and what have you are specific for firing. Just because there's a downside to a method of cheating doesn't make it acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astorath the Grim Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Its kind of sad really, that people go so far out of their way to get around the rules of the game, rather then just playing the game. I mean this doesn't even sound believable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kollar Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Sure, it might. But the whole contemplation is the essence of uncool so I'll just resent that whole notion. :) Oh, I wouldn't dream of it. Was more thinking that if my opponent tried to pull it, I'd just go "...ok" and shoot the backside with my bolters ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacefrisian Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I know the chaos trick of turning it with the back to frienldy units, next time this happens to you look at p40 of chaos dex, the dread actually must pivot on spot to the nearest visible unit (friend or foe) at the start of the shooting phase when it goes into firefrenzy. And as said before normal inf models have 360 view so turning it backwards doesnt help. And if they state the model cant see them than they are correct its plastic and doesnt have eyes. If one pulls this off than he might as well stop shooting as those models cannot see something either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Fury Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Infantry have 360° vision, Dreadnoughts have 180°. So the rules would permit doing this with a Dread and exposing his low rear armour all the while, but I would call BS on anyone doing that in my presence. You can't get much lower than that and stay within the rules. I was in this camp of thought as well, until I tried to look it up and prove it. This is not the case RAW. Firing for infantry models is actually done from the models eyes, but because they are allowed to be moved 360 degrees in the shooting phase they are treated as having 360° of LOS, although they do not. Vehicles, and Dreads, have NO rule governing there 'sight' just what the weapons can shoot at. Firing is done with a firing arc and los from each individual weapon system. I don't really mean to play devils advocate here, but here is my real point: If you are raging towards an infantry squad over, say two turns and then finally get to about 9 inches away ready to charge next turn. Then your opponent zooms up a land raider 5 inches behind your squad of dc. By this 360° sight interpretation, you must turn around and move towards the LR that you have no chance of hurting and ignore the squad that you have been clawing to get at. I'd like to play with a 180° field of vision for both units in the direction that they moved or shot at with out any option to moonwalk or stick their head in the sand after moving. I think this would be the closest thing to RAI in my opinion. Although this does bring up the situation of rageing towards a unit accross the board and completely ignoring the dreadnought that just drop podded in right behind you... -Fury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesI Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Red Fury, in my mind part of the point of rage is you may have to go towards something you can't hurt, like a Land Radier or a Wraithlord. Just because you've been charging full out towards one enemy, when another appears closer, the raging unit will veer off to deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oloff Hammeraxe Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Red Fury, in my mind part of the point of rage is you may have to go towards something you can't hurt, like a Land Radier or a Wraithlord. Just because you've been charging full out towards one enemy, when another appears closer, the raging unit will veer off to deal with it. And this is the exact reason why I pay the points to give my Chappo some Meltabombs, and put a Fist on one of my angry boys. A lot of good it did me in Ardboyz, though, as I was tied up for the last four turns of game 2 slowly breaking apart a Land Raider... It was literally everything but Wrecked by dice down, but still enough of a target for my guys to Rage at. Still, if it wasn't a Land Raider, and was anything else, my little bit of insurance would have paid off. But I digress. The idea that one can successfully play Peek-A-Boo with psychotic Super Soldiers is rather silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isryion Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Red Fury, in my mind part of the point of rage is you may have to go towards something you can't hurt, like a Land Radier or a Wraithlord. Just because you've been charging full out towards one enemy, when another appears closer, the raging unit will veer off to deal with it. And this is the exact reason why I pay the points to give my Chappo some Meltabombs, and put a Fist on one of my angry boys. A lot of good it did me in Ardboyz, though, as I was tied up for the last four turns of game 2 slowly breaking apart a Land Raider... It was literally everything but Wrecked by dice down, but still enough of a target for my guys to Rage at. Still, if it wasn't a Land Raider, and was anything else, my little bit of insurance would have paid off. But I digress. The idea that one can successfully play Peek-A-Boo with psychotic Super Soldiers is rather silly. Same reason I've been contemplating the infernus pistol and need to assemble my TH DC.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
servitob Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Haha 10/10 for creativity, 0/10 likelyhood he's gonna get away with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shatter Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 If you're really having trouble controlling rage, ask old edit: And I repeat, rage does not tell you to use firing mechanics (limitations) to determine LOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamaNagol Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 LOS is the same as Firing Arc when it comes to 40k. If you can see it you can target it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shatter Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Nahh, firing weapons has extra specific constraints mentioned under shooting. These are not mentioned under rage. And, (drawing line of) sight/visibility are not a GW terms. They're merely used in a few places. It's common English. The guy trying to cheat believes (line of) sight/visibility is a universal rule in 40k as it's utilized by shooting. Seriously, go read the rage rule and tell me where it says to use a weapon arc line of sight or reference to any part of shooting rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.