Noob to AS advanced rules question: buildings.

[BiggRigg42]

My group is attacking a city tomorrow, and I just went over pages 83-86 of the Alpha Strike Core rule book.

I understand that if a unit targets a building, then the building gets a -4 to-hit mod for being an immobile target. I, also, understand that if a unit (outside of a building) is attacking a non-infantry unit (inside of a building), then the -4 to-hit mod does not apply because no additional to-hit mods for cover from the building apply while making this attack.

[QUESTION IS HERE]
Is it possible to miss a non-infantry unit (inside of a building) but still hit the building? My group will bring this up and consult the rule book tomorrow if I don't have an answer. Some of my players worship the RAW (Rules As Written); I don't see a RAW answer to this question. Is there one? I may make my below intuitve answer be a house rule if there is no RAW answer.

Intuitively, it feels like the answer should be as follows: if a unit targeting a non-infantry unit inside of a building misses its attack by a MoF of less than -4 (e.g. -5), then the attack misses both the building and the targeted non-infantry unit; however, if the MoF is equal to or greater than -4 (e.g. -3), then the attack hits the building but misses the unit inside the building.

[Spaceman]

The rules state:

Non-Infantry Units: Non-infantry units inside buildings
may be attacked directly, but the building will absorb damage
as shown on the non-infantry Damage Absorption column.
In this case, no additional to-hit modifiers for cover from the
building apply while making the attack, but the building’s
Damage Absorption effect must be subtracted from the
damage delivered, to a minimum of 0 points of damage
delivered to the target. Once again, the damage absorbed by
the building counts against its current CF.

This says to me that if you miss your shot at the unit in the building then the building takes no damage. The better strategy for you players maybe to just collapse the building. If you want to house rule a MoF, your idea sounds like a good solution to your problem.

[BiggRigg42]

Thank you for the speedy response.

I'm getting the feeling that if the rules don't say that something happens, then that something does not happen. This way no space gets taken up stating what does not happen.