Joined
·
1,210 Posts
Do al close combat attacks ona vehical hit the rear armor ?
Why ... why would a guy with his powerfist standing in a Predators front hit the rear armor ?Do al close combat attacks ona vehical hit the rear armor ?
You seriously need to chill. There is no reason to get this upset with someone for asking a simple question that, when you think about it, isn't all that silly.Why ... why would a guy with his powerfist standing in a Predators front hit the rear armor ?
*supresses urge to hurt someone and hits the wall*
What makes you think that ?
What makes you think weird things about Avatars ?
Probably right, that's the reason I hit the wall.You seriously need to chill. There is no reason to get this upset with someone for asking a simple question that, when you think about it, isn't all that silly.
So, if i had terminators coming from the front lets say 3" away, they would hit on the front of the vehicle, if i charged 6" to the side?You seriously need to chill. There is no reason to get this upset with someone for asking a simple question that, when you think about it, isn't all that silly.
Now, take a moment to think of some of the wacky, fucked up rules in 40k and ask yourself, "Does that make any less sense?" Why do you always hit a walker in the front armor, even though it couldn't possibly turn to face everyone all at once? Why would a team of anti-tank commandos, when presented with a juicy, slow-moving target, launch every single attack they have against one point when they could move around and hit a weak spot?
Now, take a moment and look up the actual rule on p71
The rule says that units charging a vehicle without a WS attack the side of the vehicle they were facing at the start of their charge and NOT the side of the vehicle they happen to be facing at the end of their charge.
So your powerfist guy could be facing the front of the tank when the charge is declared, but his charge could take him past the front of the actual vehicle (let's say a couple of guys moved up first and block the front, so he has to move further forward to contact the hull, but still within his charge range). So now, at the end of his charge, he's facing the side of the vehicle.
He winds up, he swings...he hits the FRONT because that's the side that was pointing at him when they decided to rush the vehicle.
How does this poster's innocent question make any less sense than the actual rules currently in place?
Fact of the matter is, in the real, honest to god rules you could end up duplicating the exact same concept (facing one side of a vehicle but hitting against the other) that you found so violently stupid. So before you go berserk on someone, take a moment to put things in perspective and ask yourself if it;s really that dumb of a question.
Seriously, it's a game. Games sometimes have stupid rules.
And chanced are in 5th edition, this guy's notion is going to be the correct one.
Why? Because it's a game, and sometimes games ave stupid rules.
yeah.. but you can move around the vehicle in other movement shooting/assault phases because technically your not in combatSo, if i had terminators coming from the front lets say 3" away, they would hit on the front of the vehicle, if i charged 6" to the side?
Yep, the rules clearly state that you attack the armor of the side you were facing when you *started your charge* so yes, you can charge around to the side of the tank and still have to resolve penetration against the front.So, if i had terminators coming from the front lets say 3" away, they would hit on the front of the vehicle, if i charged 6" to the side?
Cool, im gonna start deep striking my terminators behind tanks now :grin::grin:Yep, the rules clearly state that you attack the armor of the side you were facing when you *started your charge* so yes, you can charge around to the side of the tank and still have to resolve penetration against the front.