Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/06 05:09:17
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Painlord Titan Princeps of Slaanesh
|
Scenario: Vendetta moves 12" and fires at something on its turn.
On my turn, I move a meltagun next to it and immobilize it. Then I assault.
Do I hit automatically, rolling against an immobilized vehicle, or do I hit on 6's, against a vehicle that moved at cruising speed or greater during its previous turn?
I'm inclined to say I hit automatically, as the wording in the rulebook on the table is "against a vehicle that IS immobilized or WAS stationary during its previous turn."
The IS, discussing its current status, is the crux of my argument. Regardless of what it did last turn [dealt with in the next two categories of hitting], the first one says that if it is immobilized, I hit automatically.
|
40k Armies I play:
Glory for Slaanesh!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/06 05:12:18
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Tail-spinning Tomb Blade Pilot
All kinds of places at once
|
You hit automatically.
|
Check out my project, 41.0, which aims to completely rewrite 40k!
Yngir theme song:
I get knocked down, but I get up again, you're never gonna keep me down; I get knocked down...
Lordhat wrote:Just because the codexes are the exactly the same, does not mean that that they're the same codex. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/06 05:13:20
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Sslimey Sslyth
Busy somewhere, airin' out the skin jobs.
|
yes, autohit.
|
I have never failed to seize on 4+ in my life!
The best 40k page in the Universe
COMMORRAGH |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/06 07:38:49
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Yup, autohit... because it IS immobilised even though it moved at cruising speed last turn...
Edit: Changed combat speed to cruising speed
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2009/08/06 07:42:23
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/06 08:45:12
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Sacrifice to the Dark Gods
|
What if the vehicle gets immobilized during an assault.
For instance if it gets immobilized by an attack at initiative 6 would attacks made at initiative 5 or lower be automatic?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/06 09:07:53
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Fleshound of Khorne
|
Psynikal wrote:What if the vehicle gets immobilized during an assault.
For instance if it gets immobilized by an attack at initiative 6 would attacks made at initiative 5 or lower be automatic?
I'd be inclined to say yes every attack made after the immobilized result would auto-hit.
However, As there is no defending unit with an initiative (as this is a vendetta) Would you not have rolled all of your attacks at once regardless of initiative?
I believe that in order to keep play speed up, you probably wouldn't roll each attack separately for this combat, Hence it probably wouldn't matter if you immobilized it with the initiative 6 models!
If you turn around now and say that you are going to roll all of your attacks individually when assaulting vehicles. Then I'm not going to play with you  I'd rather have a nap
Is there a rule for this as ive had a look through the book an cant see anything pertaining to initiative and vehicles, so am i safe to assume all attacks are done at once, or am i about to eat my words?
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2009/08/06 09:08:55
= 2000+ 3W-0L-1D
= 2000+ 3W-2L-2D
= 2000+ 4W-2L-3D
======Begin Dakka Code======
DS:80S---G++M---B+IPW40K98+D+A+++/sWD120R++T(T)DM+
======End Dakka Code======
Why dont i ever fail psychic tests?
'My commisar's gun go pop!' |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/06 09:49:48
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
You folow all assault rules unless instructed otherwise, so yes you do use initiative when assaulting a vehicle without a WS characteristic. This is especially important when using weaponry with multiple Str/AP values; If you simply wreck a vehicle with a krak grenade on I4, then you no longer get the opportunity to explode it with a chainfist on I1.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2009/08/06 09:50:46
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/06 19:14:30
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Sneaky Sniper Drone
|
wait, a Vendetta moving 12" is moving at cruising speed not fast...
|
Curse you GW! GO Learn ENGLISH. Calling it "permissive" is no excuse for Poorly written Logic. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/07 05:57:30
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Bounding Assault Marine
|
I agree on the instant hit w/ the immobile result even though it moved. Just ask any person who uses drop pods--it's counted as immobile and gets insta-hitted even thought 'technically' it moved 6" in its turn.
Ditto on initiative effects on vehicles.
|
Gwar: "Of course 99.999% of players don't even realise this, and even I am not THAT much of an ass to call on it (unless the guy was a total dick or a Scientologist, but that's just me)"
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/08 11:16:11
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Lord of the Fleet
|
But surely if the Vendetta is immobilised it crashes because it is a skimmer?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/08 11:41:19
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Bounding Assault Marine
|
Skimmers count as wrecked when they get immolised if they moved Flatout ón their turn... If i recall correctly =P
|
Space Marines 6700pts Tyranids 5000pts Tau 2350pts Blood Angels 2850pts Orcs & Goblins 1350pts
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/08/09 08:09:12
Subject: Assaulting an Immobilized vehicle that moved fast during its turn
|
 |
Angered Reaver Arena Champion
|
Thunder555 wrote:Skimmers count as wrecked when they get immolised if they moved Flatout ón their turn... If i recall correctly =P
Yep
|
Sangfroid Marines 5000 pts
Wych Cult 2000
Tau 2000 |
|
 |
 |
|