Odd artillery interaction with dense terrain

[HallofStovokor]

As you you may be aware, dense terrain forces units to take a -1 to hit if the target is on the opposite side of the terrain. Seems logical enough, but there's no caveat for indirect fire weapons. As written basilisks, manticores, mortars and wyverns will need to draw line of sight not through the dense terrain on at least 1 model or they too will suffer a -1 to hit. This becomes more confusing as obscuring terrain has no affect on indirect fire weapons as they don't need LoS to shoot a target.

 

Has anyone heard if this rules oversight has gotten FAQd?

[sairence]

It's not in the FAQs released so far, I think... But I've e been wondering the same thing. It would be a pretty big nerf...maybe somewhat offset by the new mobility, but it would be good to know if this is intentional or just an oversight.

[duz_]

Double agree definitely need an FAQ

40KFAQ@gwplc.com

 

Because if they don't need LoS and the terrain said if LoS is obscured does it cancel itself out?

[Shamansky]

My bet it was an oversight which to save the face will become 'intentional' feature

[HallofStovokor]

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who was curious about it.

Double agree definitely need an FAQ

40KFAQ@gwplc.com

 

Because if they don't need LoS and the terrain said if LoS is obscured does it cancel itself out?

That's GW's email about rules questions, right?

[duz_]

Correct that is the faq email for 40k questions per the community website :tu:

[HallofStovokor]

Cool. I sent them an email.

[Phubar]

Maybe the faq is written in the rules appendix that we dont know yet.

[duz_]

That is possible... Doesn't hurt to ask incase it's not though :lol:

[domsto]

I might be wrong with this on as i don't know the exact wording on dense Terrain, but doesn't it only trigger when you drwa your line of sight throw it?

But Basilisks,... doesn't need to draw a line of sight so therefore the dense Terrain doesn't trigger?

[Shamansky]

... i don't know the exact wording on dense Terrain...

Here you are

[duz_]

Ugh that doesn't mentioned line of sight just how the rule activates... This is not good for our artillery :down:

BS4 with all these modifiers even with the cap isn't a great spot to be in <_<

[HallofStovokor]

Ugh that doesn't mentioned line of sight just how the rule activates... This is not good for our artillery :down:

BS4 with all these modifiers even with the cap isn't a great spot to be in <_<

Hence why clarification is needed

[Warhead01]

Ugh that doesn't mentioned line of sight just how the rule activates... This is not good for our artillery

BS4 with all these modifiers even with the cap isn't a great spot to be in

Yes it sounds very challenging. Or Bad if you prefer. 

It could be intended as a counter balance to the blast rule to protect MSU units. Playing into the favor of Space Marines. 

Just speculation on my part. 

[casb1965]

Late to this thread but doesn't Codex trump Rulebook and the rules for Mortars, Wyverns etc says " This weapon can target units not visible to the bearer" therefore cover negatives don't come in to the matter as the cover has no effect on visiblity if you can target units "not visible"

[sairence]

Late to this thread but doesn't Codex trump Rulebook and the rules for Mortars, Wyverns etc says " This weapon can target units not visible to the bearer" therefore cover negatives don't come in to the matter as the cover has no effect on visiblity if you can target units "not visible"

Problem is that the Dense-rule makes no mention of visibility as a criteria. It just talks about drawing a line between the models. Not that you actually have to be able to see along that line.

[duz_]

Problem is that the Dense-rule makes no mention of visibility as a criteria. It just talks about drawing a line between the models. Not that you actually have to be able to see along that line.

Yes this is where it gets murky

I think from a pure raw it's yes but that would pretty much rule out the need for artillery in 9 th between smaller boards and this penalty

Also seems counter to the intent of artillery

 

Best way is to have GW faq it

40KFAQ@gwplc.com

[casb1965]

Looking in the rulebook Dense Cover is a "Terrain Trait", any mention of visibility is in the "Terrain Type" section and each "Terrain Type" states "Models use normal rules to determineif the model is visible or not".

 

To me "dense Cover" doesn't change the visibility of a model (the Terrain type" determines that) so you don't suffer -1 to hit as all the weapons "can target units not visible"

[Hiroitchi]

Till an FAQ is released or till the codex comes out for AM regarding artillery then it’s a conversation to have with your opponent. I sent a question out to GW when 9th dropped and I am still waiting for a response lol.

[HallofStovokor]

Unfortunately, rules as written don't make any mention of artillery interactions with terrain. Artillery and mortars ignore obscuring, because they don't require LoS and all obscuring does is block LoS. Dense is different. It grants a -1 to hit, but doesn't affect a unit's LoS. So direct fire weapons can still shoot them. By forgetting how indirect fire weapons interact, they left a big question for everyone. It actually confirms to me that they didn't have any serious Guard players test 9th. Literally everyone brings mortars, basilisks or manticores, so any Guard player would have come across this and asked the rules team about it. I wrote to the FAQ team, but have received no answer.

[Hiroitchi]

I may have found the answer in the designer notes. Sadly till we get the new guard codex boys our glorious artillery is at a -1 to hit for one reason, there are no rules written at this time for the basilisk, manticore, medusa, and any artillery like pieces to have the rules ignoring the benefits of cover; we just ignore LoS so therefore we ignore obsuring and not dense cover.

 

if you have the Warhammer  40,000 app, under CORE BOOK - EXPANDED RULES; Terrain Features; Terrain Traits; 0. Designer Notes.

Edited September 19, 2020 by Hiroitchi