I've been scouring the rule books for something about this:

If you are occupying the same space as a terminal can you attack it with your ranged attack or reach melee attack?

It seems that according to the rules you should be able to although strangely it seems you won't be able to use a regular melee attack.

Page 6 Rules Reference 2nd column "Attacking Objects"

If a figure is in the same space as the token, the figure and token are targeted for attacks independently. Neither the figure nor the token block line of sight to the other.

I'm still not clear on it. Maybe I'm interpreting the wording incorrectly. The way I read the rule just cited is that if a figure is on top of a terminal another figure can choose to target the figure or the terminal. As in a third figure elsewhere has line of sight to both targets and can only attack one at a time.

I don't think that wording applies to a figure who is occupying the same space as the terminal that they are wishing to attack.

I don't see any rule that suggests whether or not a figure with a ranged attack or reach melee attack can attack a terminal occupying the same space as the figure.

Without any explicit rules I'm assuming this is allowed but it seems weird to me.

Why would you be 'on' the terminal if you are wanting to attack it, Melee can attack it from 2 spaces away and ranged attacker can do so from range with the accuracy test

As the Imperial player I protected the final terminal in the first mission by literally creating a ball of Stormtroopers around it so that no one had line of sight to it.

Hypothetically, I wanted to know if a Rebel player could spend his movement to move through the troopers into the same space as the terminal and then attack it.

Hmm only thing about same space is

To get an attack you must be able to draw a line from 1 of your squares corners to 2 of the target, if your stood directly on top of it then you can't draw the line so that would mean NO you can't attack the target whilst directly on top of it

It says in the rule book that you can draw LOS through yourself. So I imagine you might be able to trace from one corner of the space to two of the opposite corners. Again it sounds weird to me but still...

Or you could just say "Sure, you can attack something in the same square as the model"

Not only can you draw LoS through yourself, but you can also draw LoS through the target's square to get to the far corners. Aere this not the case, ranged figures would not be able to attack adjacent figures. Because you can draw LoS through both yourself and the target, you can hit an object when occupyong that object's space. Simply drawa line from an attacker's corner to N adjacent corner and another line to the opposite corner.

To get an attack you must be able to draw a line from 1 of your squares corners to 2 of the target, if your stood directly on top of it then you can't draw the line so that would mean NO you can't attack the target whilst directly on top of it

Of cours You can and may do so.

1) When attacking with ranged weapons you draw two lines from one of your corners to any 2 adjacent corners of the target's square

2) the passage I quoted says that neither "you" nor the object block LoS for each other.

3) Finally: I rfer you to the section "Line of sight" page 16, 2 column, penultimate paragraph:

A figure does not block line of sight to itself. The target figure also does not block line of sight.

To get an attack you must be able to draw a line from 1 of your squares corners to 2 of the target, if your stood directly on top of it then you can't draw the line so that would mean NO you can't attack the target whilst directly on top of it

It says in the rule book that you can draw LOS through yourself. So I imagine you might be able to trace from one corner of the space to two of the opposite corners. Again it sounds weird to me but still...

q.e.d.