Split Fire - Transport

[outrider]

Didn't see it covered anywhere so apologies if it was.

 

Can you destroy a transport with split firing model and then shoot at disembarked passengers?

 

In my oppinion NO.

 

My take is this: "(..) a squad cannot wreck a Transport and then fire at its ocupants (..)" [40kRB page 80]. Even though the split firing models shooting has to be resolved first he is still a member of the same squad. 

 

To take it further, since the disembarked squad can be assaulted by the unit which destroyed the transport [40kRB page 80, same paragraph] and "(..) a unit that fired in the shooting phase can only charge the unit it targeted (..)" [40kRB page 20], therefore passengers and their transport are the same target. Split Fire rule on the other hand explicitly prohibits shooting at the same targets.

 

Your thoughts?

[Grey Mage]

All shooting done by a squad is simultaneous.

[outrider]

I disagree, Split Fire creates an exception on a basis of resolving split firing model's attack first. Resolution in this case means: pick a target, hit, destroy, passengers take damage and disembark. Now moving on to the rest of the squad...

Simple argument against squad's simulaneous firing is an example of two enemy squads, one in front of the other. For simplicity let's say a split firing terminator wipes out the entire front squad of 4 ( A ) with his assault cannon. Now the rest of the terminators target the squad at the back ( B ). Can the squad ( B ) claim cover save from being behind squad ( A )? Of course not, the cassualties were already removed and there is no interposing squad anymore.

I'm sure many people disagree because page 80 says so, but consider this. What if terminators want to do focus fire now? How do you determine who's in cover or not? You don't put models back on a table that's for sure and definitely don't leave them there either.

During shooting phase individual units complete the "Shooting Sequence" one after another [40kRB page 12]. As a result at the end of each unit's firing the situation on a tabletop inadvertently changes. Split Fire as a special rule simply creates an additional, temporary unit, that has to follow the same rules, although with a restriction to when this "unit" is selected to fire.

Back to my point, if a transport and its passengers can be proven to be the same target, then the whole argument above, true or not, can't be applied and don't cloud the issue. This is why I avoided it in my original post.

[dswanick]

I disagree, Split Fire creates an exception on a basis of resolving split firing model's attack first. Resolution in this case means: pick a target, hit, destroy, passengers take damage and disembark. Now moving on to the rest of the squad...

 

Simple argument against squad's simulaneous firing is an example of two enemy squads, one in front of the other. For simplicity let's say a split firing terminator wipes out the entire front squad of 4 ( A ) with his assault cannon. Now the rest of the terminators target the squad at the back ( B ). Can the squad ( B ) claim cover save from being behind squad ( A )? Of course not, the cassualties were already removed and there is no interposing squad anymore.

 

I'm sure many people disagree because page 80 says so, but consider this. What if terminators want to do focus fire now? How do you determine who's in cover or not? You don't put models back on a table that's for sure and definitely don't leave them there either.

 

During shooting phase individual units complete the "Shooting Sequence" one after another [40kRB page 12]. As a result at the end of each unit's firing the situation on a tabletop inadvertently changes. Split Fire as a special rule simply creates an additional, temporary unit, that has to follow the same rules, although with a restriction to when this "unit" is selected to fire.

 

Back to my point, if a transport and its passengers can be proven to be the same target, then the whole argument above, true or not, can't be applied and don't cloud the issue. This is why I avoided it in my original post.

Nope.  Split Fire changes nothing :

Shooting Phase :

1. Nominate unit to shoot.  (This is where you select the unit with "Split FIre")

2. Choose a target.  (At this time, you can not nominate the Embark squad as the target of shooting because it is still embarked.  You can not proceed until you have chosen a target)

3. Roll to hit.  (This is the point where Split Fire kicks in.  Before rolling to hit, the unit must make a Leadership test.  Pass and one model can shot at a different target to the previously selected one.  However, you still can't select the embarked unit as it is still embarked).

4. Roll to wound/Roll Armor Penetration.  (Now it's way to late to be selecting the embarked unit to shoot at, and they still haven't been forcibly disembarked from the Transport).

 

The problem with what you want to do, is that you must designate the "Primary" target before using Split Fire, and must resolve the Split Fire before resolving the shooting at the "Primary" target.  There is no way to delay any shots from the selected unit until the vehicle has been destroyed and the embarked unit disembarked.

[outrider]

I don't have to designate anything, Split Fire rule does not force any target selection prior to its execution, but only indicates that the target has to be different. Therefore the following sequence is also valid:

1. Nominate unit to shoot.
2. Take a leadership test (passed).
3. Nominate "unit" (model) to split fire.
4. Select a target for the "unit" (transport).
5. Resolve shooting against it.
6. "Unit's" shooting ends with a condition.
5. Select a target for unit from valid targets, i.e. different to one targeted by "unit" (passengers).
6. Resolve against it.
7. Unit's shooting ends.

I can see your point though. Using my previous example it would be natural for me to say that my terminators are going to target unit ( B ) and then declare split fire against unit ( A ). However, I don't see anything in the rules that forces me to do this and I definitly would not allow a cover save, since there are no models left at the end of split fire.

[dswanick]

I don't have to designate anything,

...

However, I don't see anything in the rules that forces me to do this .

There is, it's found in the Split Fire rule:

 

"When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule shoots, one model in the unit can shoot at a different target to the rest of the unit.", BRB, pg.42

 

A unit isn't "shooting" until the Shooting phase steps are being performed.

A model can't shoot at a different target from the rest of its unit unless you have designated a target for the unit.

This requires that Split Fire occur between steps #2 & #3.

It can't be performed prior to step #1, because the unit has not been selected as the shooting unit.

And it can't be performed prior to step #2, because you can't then state that the model is firing at a different target to the rest of the unit.

 

The only way to legally perform a Split Fire is to:

1. Nominate a unit to shoot.  "When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule shoots,"

2. Choose a Target.

3. Perform the Split Fire.  "one model in the unit can shoot at a different target to the rest of the unit." (different from the target identified in step #2)

[Raeven]

But the Split Fire rule changes the order of operations for a regular shooting attack, doesn't it? 

 

Order of Operations for Split Fire

1.  Choose Unit to Shoot with.

2.  Take Leadership Test to determine if Split Fire is possible.

3.  Test Failed, "unit shoots as normal".

4a.  Test Passed, "choose one model and immediately make a shooting attack with it."

4b.  Resolve shooting attacks from rest of unit, "which must be at a different target". 

 

Normal Order of Operations for a Shooting Attack

1.  Choose Unit to Shoot with.

2.  Check range and designate Target.

3.  Resolve shooting attacks.

[outrider]

"When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule shoots, one model in the unit can shoot at a different target to the rest of the unit.", BRB, pg.42

 

I see this part as a general statement of purpose which can be achieved by either method. I agree it pushes the interpretation more in your direction dswanick.

 

To avoid beating a dead horse, let's assume for argument's sake that I'm right in my 7 step interpretation above and both transport and passengers can be targeted. Would the logic from my original post, about them being the same target, stand in court?

[dswanick]

But the Split Fire rule changes the order of operations for a regular shooting attack, doesn't it?

No, because of the rule stating that the Split Fire shot being resolved at "a different target". This requires that there be a target for you to then designate a "different target". Thus it must follow step #2, not step #1 as in your example.

 

To avoid beating a dead horse, let's assume for argument's sake that I'm right in my 7 step interpretation above and both transport and passengers can be targeted. Would the logic from my original post, about them being the same target, stand in court?

OK, if you can somehow refute the timimg implicit in the Split Fire RAW, then we can theorize as follows:

To take it further, since the disembarked squad can be assaulted by the unit which destroyed the transport [40kRB page 80, same paragraph] and "(..) a unit that fired in the shooting phase can only charge the unit it targeted (..)" [40kRB page 20], therefore passengers and their transport are the same target. Split Fire rule on the other hand explicitly prohibits shooting at the same targets.

No, the two units are not "the same target". They are always two separate and distinct units which would qualify as "different" for Split Fire as well. The quoted rule does not somehow make them the same unit, it overrides the prohibition on assaulting a unit other than the one shot at within the specific context of a destroyed transport and its now disembarked contents.

[Leonaides]

Surely this fails at the point where all of a units shots must be resolved at the same time??? The actual order you happen to roll the dice is immaterial since all the shooting is considered as simultaneous.

[Raeven]

Mind you, I'm not at all arguing that a units shooting attack doesn't happen at the same moment.  So you cannot target a unit that isn't on the board when that particular units shooting attack begins.

 

No, because of the rule stating that the Split Fire shot being resolved at "a different target". This requires that there be a target for you to then designate a "different target". Thus it must follow step #2, not step #1 as in your example.

 

I don't see the rule indicating that targets must be declared before the shooting happens, just that the unit must shoot at a different target than the individual/individual must shoot at a different target as the unit.  It is implied, but not strictly RAW.

 

Either way the individual makes and resolves his shot before the rest of the unit.  So you have to at least declare and test for Split Fire before shooting and, regardless of the result of the individuals shot, the rest of the unit must shoot at a different target.

[DarkGuard]

It is surely common sense itself that one chooses targets for both the unit and the split firing model when you choose targets for the unit as a whole, which is before rolling to hit/wound etc.

 

Therefore, there is no way you can shoot a transport and the unit within with the same squad, because only the transport was an eligible target at the time of targeting.

 

It seems absurd to suggest anything different, and very much looks like a bending of the rules.

 

Short story, my spider sense is tingling, this must be wrong! ;)

[outrider]

dswanick:

In other words an exception to a rule of assaulting only what you shot. Fair enough.

 

Leonaides:

That's correct unless you split fire, which introduces an interruption to the unit's shooting process. This interruption has to be fully resolved, including removal of any casualties, by the time the rest of the squad returns to happily killing whatever they planned to in the first place. I will be more than happy to accept your point if you give me a solid explanation as to how to resolve the focused fire issue from my example in my second post.

 

.. and before you say "because of the rule on page 80", let me say this: first of all it's in "Transport" section so I would argue it applies to shooting transports and its ocupants only. Even if we assume it is a main rule, Split Fire is a special rule, which half-quoting a rulebook is meant to break or bend these.

 

So as you can see, it's not so obvious .. at least not to me, but I was wrong in the past .. 8 hours ago to be specific. 

[Gentlemanloser]

Two points here.

 

1: The Split Fire shot occurs first, and isn't technically simultanious to the rest of the Squad;

 

 

Once
this shoodng attack has been resolved,
resolve the shooting attacks made by
the rest of the unit

 

Answering the Cover/Focus Fire question above.

 

2: Both targets *must* be chosen prior to the Ld roll;

 

 

one
model in the unit can shoot at a different
target to the rest of his unit. To do so,
the unit must first take a Leadership
test. If the test is failed, the unit shoots
as normal.

 

You;

 

Nominate target for the Unit.

Make Ld test

(If sucessful) One model can choose a different target to the target the rest of the unit has already chosen.

 

 

So no, can't split fire to blow up a transport, then shot the embarked unit with the rest of the Squad.

[outrider]

Gentelmanloser:

My example is refering to two units already on the table and one providing cover to the other. It proves in my mind that shooting doesn't happen simultaneously when split firing.

[Gentlemanloser]

Yes, I said that. ;)

[outrider]

Gentlemanloser:

Sorry, for some reason I read your last line of answer 1 as a beginning of answer 2 and it didn't make sense. Clearly it's pass my bedtime

[Dam13n]

I always saw it as:

- declare unit (x) as firing

- declare primary target (y)

- declare split fire into 2nd target (z) and take Ld test

- if passed, resolve the shooting in a similar way to a blast that hits multiple units in other words, cover determined from when shooting declared, not after removing any models etc.

- if failed, all shooting resolved against target (y)

 

Example:

 

I declare my unit of 5 Deathwing terminators to shoot at a unit of chaos marines with a split fire of their CML terminator into a helbrute. I then roll my Ld test and pass.

 

I then roll to hit with 8 stormbolter shots against the CSM unit AND 2 Krak missiles into the helbrute.

 

I then roll to wound AND penetrate as applicable.

 

Then those wounds/damage results are all allocated at the same time.

 

Saves (if applicable) are taken and models removed/damage results applied again all simultaneously.

 

(Note that "mixed/same saves" might cause the saves/allocation stages to be reversed)

 

Because the units shooting attacks all occur at the same time you couldn't destroy a transport then shoot the occupants with the remaining/split fire because they weren't on the board when you declared your targets, so couldn't have been selected.

 

Of course this is just my opinion and it's how I would resolve it (even to my detriment re cover saves) because it's the way that makes sense to me. I do see gentlemanloser's point of course and if someone wanted to resolve their split fire first then the rest of the squad I would be fine with that, even if it affected my cover saves

 

Laterz...

[Gentlemanloser]

 

Because the units shooting attacks all occur at the same time

 

They don't with Split Fire Dam13n.  You have to resolve the Split Fire, fully, before carrying on with the Squads other shooting.

 

If that means you've removed a whole unit that was screening your original target, your original target can no longer gain a cover save from them.

 

[Dam13n]

Like I said at the bottom of my post, I see that. The RAW interpretation does state that the split fire happens first.

 

I just prefer to resolve the attacks at once. I can't see a scenario where that would gain me an advantage, so can't imagine my opponent would have a problem with it.

 

However if my opponent wanted to use the RAW approach, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

[Gentlemanloser]

Ah! Soz. ;)

[Dam13n]

That's ok. The part you quoted was badly worded anyway and should've said "Because all the units shooting is declared before any shots are fired..."

 

The problem with working evening shifts and being unable to sleep in.