How to place a wrecked raider?

This is an odd one I came into recently.

Quote :

For example, they can turn the vehicle, or just its turret, upside
down (but not sideways to gain extra cover!) - Wrecked Vehicles BRB Page 74

Quote :

If a skimmer is immobilised or wrecked, it's bace is removed if possible. - Skimmers and damage results BRB Page 83

Now with all the bits on the raider it's impossible not to place it on it's side. This rule was clearly written to stop imperial players placing their chimeras and rhinos on their sides, however it's a real pain if you run into an unpleasant player(they do exist especially in a competitive environment) who insists you can't place it on it's side.

Not to mention if you some how balanced a raider on it's blades it wouldn't even block line of sight for infantry, so imperial armies can block line of sight with their wrecks but Dark Eldar can't? The worst part is "but not sideways to gain extra cover!" because it makes any DE player who puts his raiders on it's side look like some crazy WAAC player (for want of a better word)!

Thoughts on this?

Maybe cut flying stands really low (so the underside blades of the raider or ravager just touches the table) for wreckage use,
solves the problem and gives you ample cover!

The rule prohibits you from turning it sideways to gain extra cover. I'm not actually sure that turning a raider sideways gives any extra cover as the raider is taller than it is wide, unlike a rhino or chimera.

Another easy solution could be to magnetise the blades below the hull and just remove them to place the raider on its belly

Mushkilla,

Maybe I don't understand your question, but IMHO the answer is in the exact same section on P83 you mentioned.

So my thoughts on this is that you can leave the wrecked Raider as is. On it's flight stand. It's now a "floating burning wreck" as it says right there in the same section on P83.

Are you concerned about the "If this is not possible" part? When they say "the base might have been glued in place" they give an example for the many reasons why it's not possible to remove it's base. You can simply say to your opponent that it's not possible to remove it's base because of the blades and bits. Simple.

Again, I might not understand your problem, but from my point of view you really don't have one.

I seriously don't have a problem, because my bases are in fact glued into place. Has to do with my awesome Tablewar displaycase.

I suppose the problem is that a Raider on flying base doesn't provide cover to infantry units, so enemies can still shoot at the infantry models by shooting below the Raider

It doesn't? I always play that my raider grants coversaves. There's an intervening model in the way. So I want my 5+ coversave. Nobody every gave my difficulties about this.

I might have to set this up at home and look with a laserpen exactly how much you can see of the infantry behind the Raider. But... Come on! If someone in a friendly game gives you problems about this, then you might want to find another opponent.

In our area raiders don't give cover saves as they don't obscure 25% of the infantry behind them. Also if you place it on it's side you can hide wyches from line of sight whych is really useful (and practical).

To be honest most of the time they explode, leaving a wreckage or a crater (interestingly the crater gives a 5+ save whereas wreckages/rubble give a 4+ save).

Unfortunately I don't have the luxury of choosing who I play.

I must be playing with different Raiders then, 'cause when I place them behind mine I can only see the legs. They confer coversaves IMHO.

I should get some smaller stands then

See, a Raider cannot really be placed sideways, only cocked in a 45 degree angle. So you're perfectly fine!

On a more serious note, just leave it on the stand if your opponent is of the particularly beardy kind.

After my opponent insisted I take an immobilised raider off the stand and place it on the table (at a 45 degree angle because of bladey bits) he actually complained a turn later that it "wasnt fair how it was placed and modeled" so it shouldnt fire now at his paladins because I couldnt "accurately" draw a line of sight!

Bottom line is, there is no pleasing some opponents. Agree at the start of the game how to place the models and go from there. ( I've found phrasing it as "when you blow up or wreck my raiders"... most opponents like the confidence boost and lulling them into complacency is a good thing )

Most players will be accommodating and as long as it is consistent they really cant complain, they will of course if they are that type of player, and then you dont have to play them again.

The thing is leaving it on the stand won't hide your models (yes I'm trying to get the most out of the raider). That being said most of the time I don't use it as cover and make the most of the 3" move that emergency disembarking gives you. I guess it is at 45* and not on it's side.

Look, I seriously don't understand where this is coming from. Don't want to be annoying, just want to help. Hear me out... Just go to P18 of the rulebook and see section "Intervening models": "If a target is partially hidden from the firer's view by models from a third unit (rnodels not from the firer's unit, or from the target unit), it receives a 5+ cover save in the same way as if it was behind terrain."

*Emphasis not even by me, but by the rulebook. It's also the most important part for my point.

Ofcourse we also have to look at "Determining Coversaves" section on the same page: "If, when you come to allocate a Wound, the target model's body (as defined on page eight ) is at least 25% obscured from the point of view of at least one firer, Wounds allocated to that model recelve a cover save."

*Emphasis by me, because it's important to make my point. And I changed the number 8 to the word eight.

What is target's model's body? Go to page 8 and see: "...any part of the target's body (the head, torso, arms or legs)."

Are your models partially hidden behind your Raider or not? Ofcourse they are! You can't tell me that there's not always 1 firer who can't see 25% of a model. 25% is achieved by only hiding a head, or a left leg, or whatever.

I could actually be done, but if you need more ammo to convince your opponents, look...

Mushkilla wrote:

I should get some smaller stands then

This remark is what I mean sort of. The stand has a ball joint right? Well i like to glue them at extreme angles. Furthermore I lke to place my models on resin bases which makes them a little higher. Also I haven't paid attention if I've used the higher stands or the lower stands. The Raiders that are extremely angled on the lower stand hide the Warriors so I only see their legs (up to the knee or mid-thigh). The higher stands like... up to their crotch. I have only 1 Raider that is glued straight on the ball joint and this one hides a little less. I can... like... see up to their tummies/lower part of chest.

See what I mean? You can model them all on the lowest stands and at an extreme angle just so some opponents are pleased with the factual LOS they can draw. Leaves less to creativity. But it's a game with miniatures. It's not real. I've had no problems with claiming coversaves.
Again page 8: "..., but players should always be generous and give their opponent the benefit of the doubt."

Conclusion:
It's right there in the rules, so they really can't give you problems for claiming 5+ coversave. Else they'll have to play another game, like Scrabble or something, and not WH40k.

Looks like I need to do some remodelling. But thanks for giving me enough ammunition to deal with the occasional rules lawyer (I think my list might be starting to annoy people).

I put a magnet on the base, a magnet on the raider, and blades on the bottom that were the same size. Once it is wrecked I pull the raider of the base and set it on the table. Problem solved.

[angrymode] There's no problem! You can leave your Raider on the base and have a coversave. It's in the rules! Period![/angrymode]

Sorry. Don't know what happened just there.

But if you leave it on the base it doesn't block line of sight so you can't use it as a shield!

This is the problem (DE need any edge they can get). It makes me sad that imperials can use their tanks to block line of sight but ours have big holes in them so they at best give us cover saves! Time to get bigger sails!

Oohhww... Is that the problem. You want to block LOS. Yeah, ok... Agreed. You can get the 5+ coversave, but nót block LOS with Raiders. It's a fact we'll have to deal with. Perhaps it's our penalty for being so fast.

On the bright side. Thanks to your post at least I will be getting a 5+ cover save from non wrecked raiders.

Exactly. Your welcome.

I know its from the previous edition, but here is an illustrated post how I place my models. I feel like a lot of the points that were brought up then are still relevant.

http://www.thedarkcity.net/t2370-shooting-under-skimmers

(I apologize if this is necro'ing a thread, but Ive been out of the hobby for several months and just getting back into it and feel like I can contribute to the discussions.)