Edited by Manchu

paidinfull wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Weaken Resolve isn't a set value. INAT isn't official.

What's your point?

Do you have a specific instance where an ability makes a unit's LD value a set value?

No, so lets move this back to Ballistic Skill.

If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify
a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any
additions or subtractions,and finally apply any set values.

Setting you to BS1 is not a reduction - it's a Set Value. A reduction would be a subtraction.
The fact that the set value is lower or higher is irrelevant.

rigeld2 wrote:

paidinfull wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Weaken Resolve isn't a set value. INAT isn't official.

What's your point?

Do you have a specific instance where an ability makes a unit's LD value a set value?

No, so lets move this back to Ballistic Skill.

If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify
a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any
additions or subtractions,and finally apply any set values.

Setting you to BS1 is not a reduction - it's a Set Value. A reduction would be a subtraction.
The fact that the set value is lower or higher is irrelevant.

Except the FAQ states that the codex specific SET VALUE takes priority.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

paidinfull wrote:
The RAW is quite clear

Yes it is.

"Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures."

is firing at BS 5 firing a Snapshot? (No).

Then it can not hit.

It absolutely is. Dont try to take the stance that a codex or FAQ cannot override the BRB. We all know that is not true.

When the vehicle fires the missile as a snapshot, it fires at BS5 per FAQ.

Is HTH a Snap Shot. Yes.

Then it fires at BS5

Unless you missed it, snap shots at flyers are resolved at BS1, not 5.

"Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures." is from an FAQ

And you missed the FAQ that states the missile is BS5.

This shooting is resolved normally in all regards at an assumed ballistic skill of 5

This tells us the model is assumed to be BS5 for the Seeker missile shot (Even if shaken or stunned).

Set values are applied after everything else.

So:
Starting BS 5' No positive or negative modifiers, Finnaly a set value of 1 when firing at Flyers because of snapshot.

Starts with BS5. Ends with a set value of 1

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Except the FAQ states that the codex specific SET VALUE takes priority.

You mean this?

Q: If a vehicle is reduced to Ballistic Skill 1 (because it is Shaken,
Stunned, for example) do its seeker missiles fire at Ballistic Skill 1 or
Ballistic Skill 5? (p29)
A: Ballistic Skill 5.

By the literal rules, Shaken and Stunned don't reduce your Ballistic Skill either, so the examples are incorrect.
An example that would reduce is Paroxysm (Tyranid power - states that it reduces the BS and WS to 1)

rigeld2 wrote:

Setting you to BS1 is not a reduction - it's a Set Value. A reduction would be a subtraction.
The fact that the set value is lower or higher is irrelevant.

I've already disproved this point.

Let's start over. Again.

Is Snap Shot reducing the Ballistic Skill? You say No, it's setting it to a "set value".
Unfortunately for you, GW says "Yes".

Again, that's not *me* that's GW.

Where does GW say that? In the Tau FAQ.

Q: If a vehicle is reduced to Ballistic Skill 1 (because it is Shaken,
Stunned, for example)

"Wait!" you say "It's only talking about Shaken & Stunned! Not Snap Shot or Hard to Hit!"

Actually, it isn't. When we look up the rules for Shaken and Stunned we discover that all they do in fact is make a vehicle "fire only Snap Shots".
Per this FAQ it quite clearly is saying that when you are firing a Snap Shot you have had your Ballistic Skill reduced to 1.

I'm sorry you and yours do not want to admit you are wrong, but you have absolutely no ground to stand on.

The Ballistic Skill of the vehicle was 3 and has been set to 1. 1 is less than 3, ergo the ballistic skill has been *reduced*. However it got there, through negative modifiers, complex calculus or freaking ninjas it doesn't matter. The value has been reduced.

paidinfull wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Setting you to BS1 is not a reduction - it's a Set Value. A reduction would be a subtraction.
The fact that the set value is lower or higher is irrelevant.

I've already disproved this point.

Let's start over. Again.

Is Snap Shot reducing the Ballistic Skill? You say No, it's setting it to a "set value".
Unfortunately for you, GW says "Yes".

Again, that's not *me* that's GW.

Where does GW say that? In the Tau FAQ.

Q: If a vehicle is reduced to Ballistic Skill 1 (because it is Shaken,
Stunned, for example)

"Wait!" you say "It's only talking about Shaken & Stunned! Not Snap Shot or Hard to Hit!"

Actually, it is. When we look up the rules for Shaken and Stunned we discover that all they do in fact is make a vehicle "fire only Snap Shots".
Per this FAQ it quite clearly is saying that when you are firing a Snap Shot you have had your Ballistic Skill reduced to 1.

I'm sorry you and yours do not want to admit you are wrong, but you have absolutely no ground to stand on.

The Ballistic Skill of the vehicle was 3 and has been set to 1. 1 is less than 3, ergo the ballistic skill has been *reduced*. However it got there, through negative modifiers, complex calculus or freaking ninjas it doesn't matter. The value has been reduced.

Cite the rule that shows Snap Shots are a reduction. You've shown an incorrect example. The best you could use that for would be intent. How it got there absolutely matters as GW tells us it does in the multiple modifiers section.

edit: I'll even post the Snap Shot rule here for you.

If a model is forced to make Snap Shots
rather than shoot normally, then its Ballistic Skill is
counted as being 1 for the purpose of those shots.

I don't see the word "reduce" in there anywhere.

A set value can increase or reduce a statistic, that's just how the English language works.

Banshee masks increase the initiative stat to 10, even though it is a set modifier.

An increase or decrease, as far as multiple modifiers are concerned, is a +1 or -1 to your characteristic.

Snapshots are not an increase or decrease of +1 or -1 to the stat, they are a set value of BS 1

rigeld2 wrote:

Cite the rule that shows Snap Shots are a reduction. You've shown an incorrect example. The best you could use that for would be intent. How it got there absolutely matters as GW tells us it does in the multiple modifiers section.

I have not shown an incorrect example. That is the FAQ and very much what GW has outlined. There is no intent, it's RAW.
When you are shaken/stunned you can only fire Snap Shots, that FAQ clearly equates "count as", "set value", etc. as reducing the BS to 1.
I'm sorry you don't like it, but that's a fact.

Even in your Tyranid example it supports my point. It's setting it to a set value of 1. The fact that it is explicitly saying "reduces" is irrelevant because the simple fact that the current number is less than the original is evidence enough that it has been "reduced".

 DeathReaper wrote:
A set value can increase or reduce a statistic, that's just how the English language works.

Not true. Setting a value doesn't require math. Increasing or reducing it does.

 DeathReaper wrote:
A set value can increase or reduce a statistic, that's just how the English language works

Banshee masks increase the initiative stat to 10, even though it is a set modifier.

An increase or decrease, as far as multiple modifiers are concerned, is a +1 or -1 to your characteristic.

Thank you.
As you can see rigeld you're alone in your assertion.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Snapshots are not an increase or decrease of +1 or -1 to the stat, they are a set value of BS 1

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here since the above is exactly what I've been saying and this seems to conflict with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
A set value can increase or reduce a statistic, that's just how the English language works.

Not true. Setting a value doesn't require math. Increasing or reducing it does.

It's a point of comparison.

When you set a value from one value to a different one. You are either reducing it or increasing it.
That's a fact.

paidinfull wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Cite the rule that shows Snap Shots are a reduction. You've shown an incorrect example. The best you could use that for would be intent. How it got there absolutely matters as GW tells us it does in the multiple modifiers section.

I have not shown an incorrect example. That is the FAQ and very much what GW has outlined. There is no intent, it's RAW.
When you are shaken/stunned you can only fire Snap Shots, that FAQ clearly equates "count as", "set value", etc. as reducing the BS to 1.
I'm sorry you don't like it, but that's a fact.

Even in your Tyranid example it supports my point. It's setting it to a set value of 1. The fact that it is explicitly saying "reduces" is irrelevant because the simple fact that the current number is less than the original is evidence enough that it has been "reduced".

You have - GW used an incorrect example.
And the Tyranid example does not support your point - Snap Shots do not say that your BS is reduced to 1, it says that it's set to 1. Multiple Modifiers tells us there's a difference.
If a set modifier was a reduction (or addition) there would be no reason to have a "set modifier" in the order for multiple modifiers.

rigeld2 wrote:

paidinfull wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Cite the rule that shows Snap Shots are a reduction. You've shown an incorrect example. The best you could use that for would be intent. How it got there absolutely matters as GW tells us it does in the multiple modifiers section.

I have not shown an incorrect example. That is the FAQ and very much what GW has outlined. There is no intent, it's RAW.
When you are shaken/stunned you can only fire Snap Shots, that FAQ clearly equates "count as", "set value", etc. as reducing the BS to 1.
I'm sorry you don't like it, but that's a fact.

Even in your Tyranid example it supports my point. It's setting it to a set value of 1. The fact that it is explicitly saying "reduces" is irrelevant because the simple fact that the current number is less than the original is evidence enough that it has been "reduced".

You have - GW used an incorrect example.
And the Tyranid example does not support your point - Snap Shots do not say that your BS is reduced to 1, it says that it's set to 1. Multiple Modifiers tells us there's a difference.
If a set modifier was a reduction (or addition) there would be no reason to have a "set modifier" in the order for multiple modifiers.

Whether or not you "feel" they used an incorrect example, that is what they did.
In doing so, they very clearly have made the assertion that Snap Shots "reduce ballistic skill".

You can argue semantics about reduce versus set or resolve versus actual all you want. The only thing that matters is the FAQ and thereby the RAW support what I'm saying, not what you're saying. So... you're wrong.

Edit: Multiple Modifiers in this case isn't pertinent. Whether one modifier or multiple. The bottom line is that the original value has been reduced.
Come on man. This is getting absurd. It's like asserting that 2 is not less than 4 because some magical thing set it to 2.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
A set value can increase or reduce a statistic, that's just how the English language works.

Not true. Setting a value doesn't require math. Increasing or reducing it does.

I was saying that a set value of 1 has reduced a stat that starts at 4, but that is the English definition and not the definition of Multiple modifiers in the BRB on P.2.

In plain English going from BS 4 to something saying you have a BS of 1 is a reduction (But not a subtraction as defined by the BRB).

In the BRB that is what they call a set modifier.

In the BRB a +1 BS is what they call an addition.

paidinfull wrote:
In doing so, they very clearly have made the assertion that Snap Shots "reduce ballistic skill".

Reduction, yes. (As far as the English language is concerned).

Subtraction as noted on P.2 Multiple modifiers, No.

It is a Set value according to the BRB, as nothing in Multiple modifiers says anything about a reduce, just subtract.

 DeathReaper wrote:
[

paidinfull wrote:
In doing so, they very clearly have made the assertion that Snap Shots "reduce ballistic skill".

Reduction, yes.

Subtraction as noted on P.2 Multiple modifiers, No.

It is a Set value according to the BRB, as nothing in Multiple modifiers says anything about a reduce, just subtract.

We're on the same page and it seems you're on board with what I'm saying now.

Since it's a "reduction", that qualifies it for the FAQ.

Q: If a vehicle is reduced to Ballistic Skill 1 (because it is Shaken, Stunned, for example)

When Snap Shot sets the vehicle's BS to 1 is it reducing it? According to you, myself and the FAQ: Yes.

So since the vehicle is reduced to ballistic skill 1 by Snap Shot "do its seeker missiles fire at Ballistic Skill 1 or
Ballistic Skill 5? A: Ballistic Skill 5."

No, as reduction in the English language means that it is not as high as it was before.

In the 40k rules Snapshots are a Set value, not a reduction.

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, as reduction in the English language means that it is not as high as it was before.

In the 40k rules Snapshots are a Set value, not a reduction.

I am sorry to inform you that are wrong.
I've pointed this out before but I'll do so again.

Is Snap Shot reducing the Ballistic Skill? You say No, it's setting it to a "set value".
Unfortunately for you, GW says "Yes".

Again, that's not *me* that's GW.

Where does GW say that? In the Tau FAQ.
Q: If a vehicle is reduced to Ballistic Skill 1 (because it is Shaken,
Stunned, for example)

"Wait!" you say "It's only talking about Shaken & Stunned! Not Snap Shot or Hard to Hit!"

Actually, it isn't. When we look up the rules for Shaken and Stunned we discover that all they do in fact is make a vehicle "fire only Snap Shots".
Per this FAQ it quite clearly is saying that when you are firing a Snap Shot you have had your Ballistic Skill reduced to 1

You continue to refer to pg2 for Multiple Modifiers
Let's look at what it says there.

If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values.

Okay how does this work in our case?

If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic,

Okay we do. We have the Seeker Missile rule and the Snap Shot rule making it subjective to this.

first apply any multipliers,

No multipliers, so let's skip this.

then apply any additions or subtractions,

No additions or subtractions here either so let's skip this (remember "assumed BS5" ) so let's skip this too

and finally apply any set values.

Okay! Now we have two set values. BS1 from Snap Shot and BS5 from the Codex
Which takes precedence?
"Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules." p7
Okay, so the Markerlight rule (specific) overrides the basic rule(Snap Shot). That's one instance.

"On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rules printed in the codex always take precedence. "
Okay, so here's a second instance telling us Codex > BRB.

So what order do we apply the set values? Well according to p7 we apply the basic rule from the BRB Snap Shot, making the BS1, and next we apply the BS5 of the Seeker Missile (and FAQ) to override that per page 7.

Do you see it now? I've gone through tons of different examples. Hopefully one of those gets through.

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, as reduction in the English language means that it is not as high as it was before.

In the 40k rules Snapshots are a Set value, not a reduction.

Well, that's not what the FAQ says. And, what's that you say? It's official and written by GW themselves? And they say a snap shot REDUCES your BS to 1. Wow, they do know their own rules don't they?!!

It's settled, as far as I'm concerned. Resolving a shot as snap fire reduces your ballistic skill to 1. "Reduce" is not a defined game turn, so we must use the definition of the word in english. The tau FAQ indicates that in situations where a vehicle's BS is reduced to 1, they still fire seeker missiles at BS 5. This would not be the RAW if the FAQ did not exist, but it does.

If a vehicle is shaken or stunned, it is reduced to bs1 for that turn, if you are shooting at a flyer it is a set value, as if you choose not to shoot at the flyer, its your normal BS. Thats why HTH is a set value, and thats why being shaken or stunned is a reduction

MarkyMark wrote:
If a vehicle is shaken or stunned, it is reduced to bs1 for that turn, if you are shooting at a flyer it is a set value, as if you choose not to shoot at the flyer, its your normal BS. Thats why HTH is a set value, and thats why being shaken or stunned is a reduction

dont really see where you're getting this fact from.

Thinking about it, the most suitable comparsion to this would b power of the machine spirit right?, allows you to fire a extra weapon at your full BS, and guess what you cant use your full BS to fire at a flyer....

Mega_Nob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, as reduction in the English language means that it is not as high as it was before.

In the 40k rules Snapshots are a Set value, not a reduction.

Well, that's not what the FAQ says. And, what's that you say? It's official and written by GW themselves? And they say a snap shot REDUCES your BS to 1. Wow, they do know their own rules don't they?!!

No, you are incorrect. The question is not GW saying ANYTHING. The questions in FAQ are posed by the general public.

The answer, is what GW says.

MarkyMark wrote:
If a vehicle is shaken or stunned, it is reduced to bs1 for that turn, if you are shooting at a flyer it is a set value, as if you choose not to shoot at the flyer, its your normal BS. Thats why HTH is a set value, and thats why being shaken or stunned is a reduction

So what's the difference between a stunned vehicle reducing its BS to one for that turn *because it has to fire snap shots* and a vehicle firing at a flyer that has its BS reduced to 1 *because it has to fire snap shots*?

HTH states only snap shots can hit flyers, FAQ confirms snap shots are a reduction in BS via the examples.

so GW doesn't write the question in the easiest and most commonly phrased way? They don't even proofread it?

MarkyMark wrote:
If a vehicle is shaken or stunned, it is reduced to bs1 for that turn, if you are shooting at a flyer it is a set value, as if you choose not to shoot at the flyer, its your normal BS. Thats why HTH is a set value, and thats why being shaken or stunned is a reduction

Come. On.
You are completely wrong and I've illustrated it multiple times. Simply scroll up and read my last post to Reaper.

Look at the BRB. Shaken/Stunned is effectively Snap Shot. You could effectively write the FAQ as follows:

Q: If a vehicle is reduced to Ballistic Skill 1 (because of Snap Shot, for example) do its seeker missiles fire at Ballistic Skill 1 or Ballistic Skill 5? (p29)
A: Ballistic Skill 5.?

MarkyMark wrote:
If a vehicle is shaken or stunned, it is reduced to bs1 for that turn, if you are shooting at a flyer it is a set value, as if you choose not to shoot at the flyer, its your normal BS. Thats why HTH is a set value, and thats why being shaken or stunned is a reduction

Where is that in the rules?

Where does ot say that the snap shot from hard to hit works differently?

Please don't underline the word resolved unless you have an argument for what resolved means (not a description of opinion, an argument with evidence)

40k-noob wrote:

Mega_Nob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, as reduction in the English language means that it is not as high as it was before.

In the 40k rules Snapshots are a Set value, not a reduction.

Well, that's not what the FAQ says. And, what's that you say? It's official and written by GW themselves? And they say a snap shot REDUCES your BS to 1. Wow, they do know their own rules don't they?!!

No, you are incorrect. The question is not GW saying ANYTHING. The questions in FAQ are posed by the general public.

The answer, is what GW says.

And GW says it fires @BS5 when answering the general public in the FAQ.

Hard to Hit = Snap Shot
Stunned = Snap Shot
Shaken = Snap Shot
Snap Shot = Reduced Ballistic Skill to 1
Seeker Missile FAQ Overrides that.

Q: If a vehicle is reduced to Ballistic Skill 1 (because it is Shaken, Stunned, for example) do its seeker missiles fire at Ballistic Skill 1 or Ballistic Skill 5? (p29)
A: Ballistic Skill 5.

So you see... GW has already said how it works.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
so GW doesn't write the question in the easiest and most commonly phrased way? They don't even proofread it?

I doubt it, but I cannot say for sure. For expediency sake, I am willing to be that the pick the simpliest version of a question and take that and post it to the FAQ.

Never the less it wouldn't matter if they edited the question or not. A FAQ by its very nature is what others ask of GW and the answer is what GW says in response.

So those point at the question as somehow being a official position that GW holds is completely without merit.

The answer is a different matter.

MarkyMark wrote:
Thinking about it, the most suitable comparsion to this would b power of the machine spirit right?, allows you to fire a extra weapon at your full BS, and guess what you cant use your full BS to fire at a flyer....

This isn't a remotely comparable point.

40k-noob wrote:

Mega_Nob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, as reduction in the English language means that it is not as high as it was before.

In the 40k rules Snapshots are a Set value, not a reduction.

Well, that's not what the FAQ says. And, what's that you say? It's official and written by GW themselves? And they say a snap shot REDUCES your BS to 1. Wow, they do know their own rules don't they?!!

No, you are incorrect. The question is not GW saying ANYTHING. The questions in FAQ are posed by the general public.

The answer, is what GW says.

Yes, and GW saw fit not to change the wording of the question, Being "If my BS is reduced to 1, do I fire my seeker at BS1 or BS 5?" And answered it by saying the seeker fires at BS5.
So, official GW ruling as per the FAQ is that the seeker fires at BS5 in any situation where the vehicles BS is reduced to one. Eg any time it has to make a snap shot.

paidinfull wrote:

then apply any additions or subtractions,

No additions or subtractions here either so let's skip this (remember "assumed BS5" ) so let's skip this too

So reductions aren't additions or subtractions?

So, by that logic then all FAQs are rendered irrelevant because the question is not an official statement by GW, therefore the answer to a question which doesn't exist (Because it's not GW's word) is held pointless.

There! I disproved FAQs forever!

rigeld2 wrote:

paidinfull wrote:

then apply any additions or subtractions,

No additions or subtractions here either so let's skip this (remember "assumed BS5" ) so let's skip this too

So reductions aren't additions or subtractions?

Good grief. That was your "Gotcha moment?"
It's referring to the specific mathematical function. You know, Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication...
You can reduce a value either by subtraction, division, squareroot or a myriad of other methods.
When setting a value that is less than the original you are not declaring how you are reducing it, merely that you are.

If I have 5 and I reduce it to 1, I've not told you how I did it, but you know that it's reduced.

Come on now.
It's obvious now that you're wrong and simply persisting because you're unwilling to admit you're wrong. Pretty stubborn if you ask me, especially when the facts are 100% in support of my argument.

paidinfull wrote:
It's obvious now that you're wrong and simply persisting because you're unwilling to admit you're wrong. Pretty stubborn if you ask me, especially when the facts are 100% in support of my argument.

I can assert the exact same thing.

And I've admitted when I'm wrong in YMDC before. I'm not infallible and I've never claimed to be.

paidinfull wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

paidinfull wrote:

then apply any additions or subtractions,

No additions or subtractions here either so let's skip this (remember "assumed BS5" ) so let's skip this too

So reductions aren't additions or subtractions?

Good grief. That was your "Gotcha moment?"
It's referring to the specific mathematical function. You know, Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication...
You can reduce a value either by subtraction, division, squareroot or a myriad of other methods.
When setting a value that is less than the original you are not declaring how you are reducing it, merely that you are.

If I have 5 and I reduce it to 1, I've not told you how I did it, but you know that it's reduced.

Come on now.
It's obvious now that you're wrong and simply persisting because you're unwilling to admit you're wrong. Pretty stubborn if you ask me, especially when the facts are 100% in support of my argument.

The underlined is not true, even though you are asserting it as truth.

The assumed BS of 5 is the characteristic, not a set value.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
So, by that logic then all FAQs are rendered irrelevant because the question is not an official statement by GW, therefore the answer to a question which doesn't exist (Because it's not GW's word) is held pointless.

There! I disproved FAQs forever!

The questions are not irrelevant but to assert that the question or how it is worded, is the official position of GW is false.

Just because in a question someone used "reduced to BS1" and GW decided to answer that question does not mean that GW is now saying that Snapshots "reduce your BS"

oh and what you have proved is that you can jump to unfounded conclusions.

40k-noob wrote:
The questions are not irrelevant but to assert that the question or how it is worded, is the official position of GW is false.

Just because in a question someone used "reduced to BS1" and GW decided to answer that question does not mean that GW is now saying that Snapshots "reduce your BS"

It's produced by GW with no accredidation to any person or entity. GW has sole responsibility in the production and distribution of FAQs. It's GWs word as much as the answer. If the question didn't make sense, then they would have worded it differently. If the question was asked multiple times in a confusing manner, they ask the question in the simplest of terms.

Either all FAQs are invalid, or they are produced by GW with fan input, but that does not remove ownership/responsibility/liability from GW.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The underlined is not true, even though you are asserting it as truth.

The assumed BS of 5 is the characteristic, not a set value.

You can't possibly believe that (underlined). It's functionally identical to Snap Shot.

What's the BS of the Vehicle?
We know that the vehicle is firing the seeker missile, so what's the BS of the vehicle?

As a Tau player I can tell you that it's not 5. Since the vehicle is firing it, and it's BS is not 5, then it has to be a set value.
Vehicles that fire the Seeker missile are:
Devilfish (BS3/4)
Hammerhead (BS4)
Skyray (BS3/4)

Hell it could even be 1 if the vehicle has to fire via Snap Shot.

I have walked you through multiple explanations and disproved each and every assertion that you've made.
I broke down the resolve argument which was flawed. Hard To Hit requires Snap Shots to be fired, and the Tau FAQ clearly equates the use of Snap Shots to the reduction of ballistic skill
I broke down your multiple modifier argument with not one but two different instances that refute your point.

Time and time again I've disproved you, What is that's stopping you from admitting you're wrong? You have to realize it by now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

40k-noob wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
So, by that logic then all FAQs are rendered irrelevant because the question is not an official statement by GW, therefore the answer to a question which doesn't exist (Because it's not GW's word) is held pointless.

There! I disproved FAQs forever!

The questions are not irrelevant but to assert that the question or how it is worded, is the official position of GW is false.

Just because in a question someone used "reduced to BS1" and GW decided to answer that question does not mean that GW is now saying that Snapshots "reduce your BS"

oh and what you have proved is that you can jump to unfounded conclusions.

This is a huge pile of malarkey.

It's RAW. The logic is applicable. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant. If they did not intend it to function that way then they will need to release another FAQ clarifying. At this point, Seeker Missiles fire at Flyers @ BS5.

paidinfull wrote:
I broke down the resolve argument which was flawed. Hard To Hit requires Snap Shots to be fired, and the Tau FAQ clearly equates the use of Snap Shots to the reduction of ballistic skill

The bolded is incorrect.

Time and time again I've disproved you, What is that's stopping you from admitting you're wrong? You have to realize it by now.

I've stopped really arguing not because you've proven me wrong, but because either I'm failing to explain my point (possible - I'm on some interesting medication at the moment) or you're refusing to accept the possibility that you're wrong as well.

It needs an FAQ one way or the other.

rigeld2 wrote:

paidinfull wrote:
It's obvious now that you're wrong and simply persisting because you're unwilling to admit you're wrong. Pretty stubborn if you ask me, especially when the facts are 100% in support of my argument.

I can assert the exact same thing.

And I've admitted when I'm wrong in YMDC before. I'm not infallible and I've never claimed to be.

You've proved nothing, however.

Each time you've propped something up, I've knocked it down.

You're wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

paidinfull wrote:
I broke down the resolve argument which was flawed. Hard To Hit requires Snap Shots to be fired, and the Tau FAQ clearly equates the use of Snap Shots to the reduction of ballistic skill

The bolded is incorrect.

Actually it's not, but I didn't feel it necessary to rehash the Skyfire discussion since you and I already had that. It shouldn't be necessary for me to repeat myself time and again yet here I am.

rigeld2 wrote:

paidinfull wrote:

Time and time again I've disproved you, What is that's stopping you from admitting you're wrong? You have to realize it by now.

I've stopped really arguing not because you've proven me wrong, but because either I'm failing to explain my point (possible - I'm on some interesting medication at the moment) or you're refusing to accept the possibility that you're wrong as well.

It needs an FAQ one way or the other.

If you had stopped arguing I would not be responding to this post. You've persisted and regardless of whether you feel that you are, that's continuing to argue. You're not failing to prove your point, you simply don't have one to make.

There is no such thing as "resolving a Snap Shot without Firing"
Snap Shot reduces Ballistic Skill which makes it the FAQ applicable
and Multiple Modifiers supports the application of BS5 > BS1

Estas incorrecto muchaco.

paidinfull wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The underlined is not true, even though you are asserting it as truth.

The assumed BS of 5 is the characteristic, not a set value.

You can't possibly believe that (underlined). It's functionally identical to Snap Shot.

BS5 has to be the base stat.

This shooting is resolved normally in all regards at an assumed ballistic skill of 5

So we shoot a missile. We assume that the model is BS 5 for the purposes of this shot. So the base BS is assumed to be 5, but we are shooting at a flyer so the Snapshot sets the BS to 1 as per the Multiple modifiers rules on P.2 which overrides the base stat of BS5.

paidinfull wrote:
It's RAW. The logic is applicable. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant. If they did not intend it to function that way then they will need to release another FAQ clarifying. At this point, Seeker Missiles fire at Flyers @ BS5.

Just because you say that it is true does not make what you say true when I have shown rules to the contrary.

 DeathReaper wrote:

paidinfull wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The underlined is not true, even though you are asserting it as truth.

The assumed BS of 5 is the characteristic, not a set value.

You can't possibly believe that (underlined). It's functionally identical to Snap Shot.

BS5 has to be the base stat.

This shooting is resolved normally in all regards at an assumed ballistic skill of 5

So we shoot a missile. We assume that the model is BS 5 for the purposes of this shot. So the base BS is assumed to be 5, but we are shooting at a flyer so the Snapshot sets the BS to 1 as per the Multiple modifiers rules on P.2 which overrides the base stat of BS5.

Dude, you just admitted that the BS5 GETS REDUCED to BS1. And in this case how do we fire the seeker according to the FAQ? AT BS5!!

Dude, Reduce in english is not the same as subtract in the BRB.

Please learn the difference.

paidinfull wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

paidinfull wrote:
I broke down the resolve argument which was flawed. Hard To Hit requires Snap Shots to be fired, and the Tau FAQ clearly equates the use of Snap Shots to the reduction of ballistic skill

The bolded is incorrect.

Actually it's not, but I didn't feel it necessary to rehash the Skyfire discussion since you and I already had that. It shouldn't be necessary for me to repeat myself time and again yet here I am.

We didn't actually - I don't think so. Feel free to quote it.
My statement has nothing to do with Skyfire. HTH requires shots be be resolved as Snap Shots. I can quote the rule for you if you need me too.

There is no such thing as "resolving a Snap Shot without Firing"

There is, you just refuse to accept it.

Snap Shot reduces Ballistic Skill which makes it the FAQ applicable

It doesn't, you just refuse to accept it.

and Multiple Modifiers supports the application of BS5 > BS1

It doesn't, you just refuse to accept it.

Estas incorrecto muchaco.

No, me niego a tratar de discutir con alguien cuyo argumento se reduce a "Te equivocas". una y otra vez, en violación de los principios.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Dude, Reduce in english is not the same as subtract in the BRB.

Please learn the difference.

Using English: I have 5 apples, I eat 4 of these apples, I now have 1 apple. Have I reduced the amount of apples to 1 by eating them? Yes. Have I subtracted 4 apples by eating them? Yes. Same thing.

Is the BRB written in English? Yes, the one I have is.

Is BRB a language in its own right? No.

Reduce: To decrease size, amount, extent or NUMBER.

Subtract: To take away (something) from something else so as to DECREASE THE SIZE, AMOUNT, EXTENT OR NUMBER.

Mega_Nob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Dude, Reduce in english is not the same as subtract in the BRB.

Please learn the difference.

Using English: I have 5 apples, I eat 4 of these apples, I now have 1 apple. Have I reduced the amount of apples to 1 by eating them? Yes. Have I subtracted 4 apples by eating them? Yes. Same thing.

Is the BRB written in English? Yes, the one I have is.

Is BRB a language in its own right? No.

Reduce: To decrease size, amount, extent or NUMBER.

Subtract: To take away (something) from something else so as to DECREASE THE SIZE, AMOUNT, EXTENT OR NUMBER.

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

Just remember to reduce is not the same thing as subtract. They can mean the same thing sometimes, however that is not always the case.

Where is reduce in the Multiple modifiers section? (Hint it is not there).

"If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values."

So is the BS1 from a Snapshot a multiplier, an addition or subtraction, or a set value?

 DeathReaper wrote:
Where is reduce in the Multiple modifiers section? (Hint it is not there).

"If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values."

So is the BS1 from a Snapshot a multiplier, an addition or subtraction, or a set value?

s

As per the FAQ, the BS1 from a snap shot is a reduction, then it tells me to apply the set value of BS5. there, does that help?

Really? I do not see where GW says Reduction.

Plus the BS5 is not a set value, it is the value of the characteristic at which the shot is made.

We shoot a missile. We assume that the model is BS 5 for the purposes of this shot. So the base BS is assumed to be 5, but we are shooting at a flyer so the Snapshot sets the BS to 1 as per the Multiple modifiers rules on P.2 which overrides the base stat of BS5.

Edited by AgeOfEgos

 DeathReaper wrote:
Really? I do not see where GW says Reduction.

What can a vehicle do when it is shaken or stunned reference to shooting?

Mega_Nob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Where is reduce in the Multiple modifiers section? (Hint it is not there).

"If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values."

So is the BS1 from a Snapshot a multiplier, an addition or subtraction, or a set value?

s

As per the FAQ, the BS1 from a snap shot is a reduction, then it tells me to apply the set value of BS5. there, does that help?

No, it's just a snap shot.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

Mega_Nob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Where is reduce in the Multiple modifiers section? (Hint it is not there).

"If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values."

So is the BS1 from a Snapshot a multiplier, an addition or subtraction, or a set value?

s

As per the FAQ, the BS1 from a snap shot is a reduction, then it tells me to apply the set value of BS5. there, does that help?

No, it's just a snap shot.

That GW claims is a reduction in that FAQ

Fragile wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

Mega_Nob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Where is reduce in the Multiple modifiers section? (Hint it is not there).

"If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values."

So is the BS1 from a Snapshot a multiplier, an addition or subtraction, or a set value?

s

As per the FAQ, the BS1 from a snap shot is a reduction, then it tells me to apply the set value of BS5. there, does that help?

No, it's just a snap shot.

That GW claims is a reduction in that FAQ

So they use the exact word reduction than?

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
So they use the exact word reduction than?

Tau FAQ wrote:Q: If a vehicle is reduced to Ballistic Skill 1 (because it is Shaken,
Stunned, for example) do its seeker missiles fire at Ballistic Skill 1 or
Ballistic Skill 5? (p29)
A: Ballistic Skill 5

They use the word reduced. They don't use reduction as that would simply be repeating themselves.

If something is reduced, it is a reduction. No getting around that.

GW does not, the person that asked the question does.

Notice the difference.

5 to 1 is a reduction in normal English, but the BRB calls that a Set Value.

rigeld2 wrote:

There is no such thing as "resolving a Snap Shot without Firing"

There is, you just refuse to accept it.

What is the rules based difference between firing and resolveing, with rules arguments. I can't find anything that shows a difference.

rigeld2 wrote:

Snap Shot reduces Ballistic Skill which makes it the FAQ applicable

It doesn't, you just refuse to accept it.

GW FAQ disagrees with you, rigeld. They cite situations that cause a snap shot as examples of reductions in BS.

I've been convinced by the BS 5 guys pretty much. Still not sure if that is RAI and think an FAQ could go either way, but BS5 seems more like RAW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:
GW does not, the person that asked the question does.

Notice the difference.

5 to 1 is a reduction in normal English, but the BRB calls that a Set Value.

Right. And why are they mutually exclusive? Are you asserting that the FAQ has no effect ever?

Further are you claiming that GW chose an example question which did not line up with their own views on how snap shots work, or what is a reduction in BS. A reduction could come about by either subtraction, division or set values. The answer to the question and the question itself would indicate BS5 regardless of the type of reduction.

This boils down to the same thing that JoTWW does. FRP vs RFPaaC.

Firing a snap shot
Resolving as a snap shot.

At the end of the day.

RFP is not the same as FRPaaC
and
Firing a snap shot is not the same as resolving as a snap

 DeathReaper wrote:
GW does not, the person that asked the question does.

Notice the difference.

5 to 1 is a reduction in normal English, but the BRB calls that a Set Value.

GW posted the FAQ and put their logo, copyrights, and all else on it claiming that its their property. It's released on their site. They are the sole producer and publisher of Warhammer 40K FAQs and errata.

There is not a single quotation, citation, or credit given for any works other than GW. They are taking complete responsibilty and authority for the FAQ.

Do you honestly believe the question isn't GW's writing, verbiage, and understanding?

If the question is not official, the. The answer is meaningless, since the answer to an unofficial question is meaningless. What you are proposing invalidates every FAQ, and brings every document published by GW into question as "official" paperwork.

So please, tell me again why the wording in the question isn't valid.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
This boils down to the same thing that JoTWW does. FRP vs RFPaaC.

Firing a snap shot
Resolving as a snap shot.

At the end of the day.

RFP is not the same as FRPaaC
and
Firing a snap shot is not the same as resolving as a snap

So clarify the difference for me then, because currently the wording "resolve as a snap shot" has no real bearing the RAW of this situation.

And why is the seeker missile not a set value? It can't be modified in any other way. So how is it not a set value of a 2+ hit?

I don't understand the argument behind the "resolved" issue, probably because it has little weight like most arguments seen against the BS5. Resolved as a Snap shot means that it fires as a snap shot. Snap shots do not affect the set value of a seeker missile, as covered in the FAQ and repeatedly in this thread. Now unless someone provides a quote from the rule book or FAQ that specifically states that nothing EVER overrides snap shots, then this argument has been beaten to death.

Fragile wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
This boils down to the same thing that JoTWW does. FRP vs RFPaaC.

Firing a snap shot
Resolving as a snap shot.

At the end of the day.

RFP is not the same as FRPaaC
and
Firing a snap shot is not the same as resolving as a snap

So clarify the difference for me then, because currently the wording "resolve as a snap shot" has no real bearing the RAW of this situation.

Well than How else do you shoot a zooming flyer. The RAW does not tell you to snap fire does it?

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


Well than How else do you shoot a zooming flyer. The RAW does not tell you to snap fire does it?

I'm not sure what your point is. You use snap shots to shoot fliers.

All serious this time, sorry for the banter
I have been in this debate twice before so let me throw down here.

So you have your Devilfish with a Seeker, Your Pathfinders just lit up a Storm Talon with all of a single Markerlight.
The Devilfish fires the missile. This is 'Activation of a Special Ability' as in BRB p.9 The 'Fish now goes through the sequence:

Base Ballistic skill .....3
Targetting array.........+1
Trigger 'Snapshot'....Ignore above, set to '1'----Player choses this event to happen first as per 'Multiple Modifiers'
Trigger 'S. Missile'....Ignore above, set to '5'----Player ends the calculation here concluding 'Multiple Modifiers'
--------------------------
End result: BS 5 was the last set value. Thats the game logic version. (Albeit contestable) Was this unclear?

The FAQ shows that you do fire at BS 5. As you all know by now it uses the word 'reduced'. In math word problems that does mean subtract, yes. Here that is not it's purpose. Note that it cites 'Shaken' and 'Stunned' as examples? They are both set values and the whole point was to cite them as such. They are in the game identical to 'Snap Shots'! All three state you get the 'set modifier of 1'! So the FAQ does in fact mean that they fire at BS 5 irregardless of the games rules. Because Specificity rules end at the most specific example in said FAQ, and never go back to BRB after that.

And because you were mentioning it. The game only calculates the BS once! It does not calculate a value going into the roll and another when you finish rolling. You must lock in a stat before you roll and use that stat to determine results. Other wise it would be like 'I have a BS 3!' *rolls dice, gets all 3's* 'Oh wait this one rule says I have BS 4!' Too late buster, you rolled at BS 3. Really mean and a bad example but you see where the possibility for confusion/cheating creeps in?

It is worth note that someone cited a very analytical thread in this same forum earlier (on page one of this thread.) Quite honestly, every single possible point is made there. In the end we came down (litterally the last post) with a completely left field rule that calls in to question if you fire at BS 5, even over riding the BS 1, because you chose not to use the Snap Shot BS 1, it is illegal to hit the flyer! Weird right?

 Savageconvoy wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


Well than How else do you shoot a zooming flyer. The RAW does not tell you to snap fire does it?

I'm not sure what your point is. You use snap shots to shoot fliers.

No, RAW you resolve them as snap shots.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


Well than How else do you shoot a zooming flyer. The RAW does not tell you to snap fire does it?

I'm not sure what your point is. You use snap shots to shoot fliers.

No, RAW you resolve them as snap shots.

And how is that affecting the Seeker missile? Fire as if it were a snap shot? It still fires at BS5. I don't understand your point.

If a vehicle is shaken or stunned what is its BS?
If a vehicle fires at a Flyer what is its BS?
Hint: They are not the same (assuming normal situations).

Happyjew wrote:
If a vehicle is shaken or stunned what is its BS?
If a vehicle fires at a Flyer what is its BS?
Hint: They are not the same (assuming normal situations).

How so?
Hint: You're wrong.

At this point I am going to keep saying your wrong and you are going to keep saying I 'm and both our post counts will up.... Yay!!

I will start.

Your WRONG...you need 6's to hit Zooming Flyer.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

Happyjew wrote:
If a vehicle is shaken or stunned what is its BS?
If a vehicle fires at a Flyer what is its BS?
Hint: They are not the same (assuming normal situations).

How so?
Hint: You're wrong.

Let's edit a bit.

Shaken or stunned and attempts to shoot, what's its BS? BS of 1
Fires at a flyer, what is your bs. Normal however it must be resolved as a snap shot.

You do with marker lights. Then the seeker missile hits on a 2+.

You're mostly right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nobody has provided a single example of how RESOLVED is any different than FIRING AS

Even if it was different, the Seekers set value would over ride.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
You do with marker lights. Then the seeker missile hits on a 2+.

You're mostly right.

No, your wrong BS of Snap shot cannot be affected by a Merkerlight .

See BRB FAQ v1a

 Savageconvoy wrote:
You do with marker lights. Then the seeker missile hits on a 2+.

You're mostly right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nobody has provided a single example of how RESOLVED is any different than FIRING AS

Even if it was different, the Seekers set value would over ride.

well I'm sorry if you want to snap shot a flyer you cannot as there are no rules for it.

You are only allowed to resolve shots as snapfire against them.

oh by the way, you fire simply by choosing a target and rolling a d6.

You resolve by comparing your BS + D6 roll to the To Hit Chart to determine whether or not you hit your target.

That is the difference between "Firing" and "Resolved"

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
You do with marker lights. Then the seeker missile hits on a 2+.

You're mostly right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nobody has provided a single example of how RESOLVED is any different than FIRING AS

Even if it was different, the Seekers set value would over ride.

well I'm sorry if you want to snap shot a flyer you cannot as there are no rules for it.

You are only allowed to resolve shots as snapfire against them.

Actually there are rules for trying to fire a Snap shot at a Flyer. You cannot, as then you are choosing to fire a Snap Shot (which is disallowed).

40k-noob wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
You do with marker lights. Then the seeker missile hits on a 2+.

You're mostly right.

No, your wrong BS of Snap shot cannot be affected by a Merkerlight .

See BRB FAQ v1a

marker light isn't affecting the BS, its using a seeker missile which is a set value of 2+


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Happyjew wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
You do with marker lights. Then the seeker missile hits on a 2+.

You're mostly right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nobody has provided a single example of how RESOLVED is any different than FIRING AS

Even if it was different, the Seekers set value would over ride.

well I'm sorry if you want to snap shot a flyer you cannot as there are no rules for it.

You are only allowed to resolve shots as snapfire against them.

Actually there are rules for trying to fire a Snap shot at a Flyer. You cannot, as then you are choosing to fire a Snap Shot (which is disallowed).

Quote the rule then


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
You do with marker lights. Then the seeker missile hits on a 2+.

You're mostly right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nobody has provided a single example of how RESOLVED is any different than FIRING AS

Even if it was different, the Seekers set value would over ride.

well I'm sorry if you want to snap shot a flyer you cannot as there are no rules for it.

You are only allowed to resolve shots as snapfire against them.

I have no idea what you're saying. You can shot at a flier, using snap fire rules, but not fire at a flier using snap fire rules?

 Savageconvoy wrote:
marker light isn't affecting the BS, its using a seeker missile which is a set value of 2+

So then the BS5 is not a set modifier then? In that case there is no conflict. Seeker Missile fired at BS5, Snap Shot (Set modifier) overrides this. Seeker Missile resolved at BS1 against Flyers. Or it is a set modifier at which point a different FAQ comes into play.

40k-noob wrote:
oh by the way, you fire simply by choosing a target and rolling a d6.

You resolve by comparing your BS + D6 roll to the To Hit Chart to determine whether or not you hit your target.

That is the difference between "Firing" and "Resolved"

Then give a quote to show it. Other than making up random rules for GW wording.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Happyjew wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
marker light isn't affecting the BS, its using a seeker missile which is a set value of 2+

So then the BS5 is not a set modifier then? In that case there is no conflict. Seeker Missile fired at BS5, Snap Shot (Set modifier) overrides this. Seeker Missile resolved at BS1 against Flyers. Or it is a set modifier at which point a different FAQ comes into play.

Where do you get this from? The BS5 of the seeker is set in stone, and confirmed by the FAQ. The FAQ states that it overrides the results that would make it fire at BS1

 Savageconvoy wrote:

40k-noob wrote:
oh by the way, you fire simply by choosing a target and rolling a d6.

You resolve by comparing your BS + D6 roll to the To Hit Chart to determine whether or not you hit your target.

That is the difference between "Firing" and "Resolved"

Then give a quote to show it. Other than making up random rules for GW wording.

Show me a rule that allows you to snapshot a flyer, opposed to resolve it as such.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

Happyjew wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
You do with marker lights. Then the seeker missile hits on a 2+.

You're mostly right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nobody has provided a single example of how RESOLVED is any different than FIRING AS

Even if it was different, the Seekers set value would over ride.

well I'm sorry if you want to snap shot a flyer you cannot as there are no rules for it.

You are only allowed to resolve shots as snapfire against them.

Actually there are rules for trying to fire a Snap shot at a Flyer. You cannot, as then you are choosing to fire a Snap Shot (which is disallowed).

Quote the rule then

He said you could fire snap shots at Flyers. I said you could not:

Q: Can I choose to make a Snap Shot rather than a normal shot?
(p13)
A: No.

You can choose to fire at a Flyer resolving the shot as a snap shot, but you can not fire a snap shot at a flyer (unless you are already required to fire snap shots, i.e. being Stunned).

 Savageconvoy wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Happyjew wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
marker light isn't affecting the BS, its using a seeker missile which is a set value of 2+

So then the BS5 is not a set modifier then? In that case there is no conflict. Seeker Missile fired at BS5, Snap Shot (Set modifier) overrides this. Seeker Missile resolved at BS1 against Flyers. Or it is a set modifier at which point a different FAQ comes into play.

Where do you get this from? The BS5 of the seeker is set in stone, and confirmed by the FAQ. The FAQ states that it overrides the results that would make it fire at BS1

Lol nothing in this game is ever set in stone. Honest how I read the FAQ is: It tells us even though the seeker missile is on the vehicle the vehicle doesn't fire it. Does the Seeker missile have to target the same thing as the Tank/Vice Versa?

... That's it? That's your key argument? This is what you've been arguing the entire time?

The marker light is resolved as a snap shot, the token is used to fire a missile, missile resolved as a Snap shot and as such still hits on a 2+ because the FAQ states how a snap shot affects seeker missiles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

Lol nothing in this game is ever set in stone. Honest how I read the FAQ is: It tells us even though the seeker missile is on the vehicle the vehicle doesn't fire it. Does the Seeker missile have to target the same thing as the Tank/Vice Versa?

The Markerlight rules give it the exception to hit a model that has been marked.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
... That's it? That's your key argument? This is what you've been arguing the entire time?

The marker light is resolved as a snap shot, the token is used to fire a missile, missile resolved as a Snap shot and as such still hits on a 2+ because the FAQ states how a snap shot affects seeker missiles.

No the FAQ covers what happens when the vehicle has its BS reduced to 1. Resolving a Snap Shot does not reduce your BS to 1.

I'm still not seeing any proof for the "resolved" argument.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
... That's it? That's your key argument? This is what you've been arguing the entire time?

The marker light is resolved as a snap shot, the token is used to fire a missile, missile resolved as a Snap shot and as such still hits on a 2+ because the FAQ states how a snap shot affects seeker missiles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

Lol nothing in this game is ever set in stone. Honest how I read the FAQ is: It tells us even though the seeker missile is on the vehicle the vehicle doesn't fire it. Does the Seeker missile have to target the same thing as the Tank/Vice Versa?

The Markerlight rules give it the exception to hit a model that has been marked.

Again the FAQ tells you yada yada fire snapshots

not

Yada yada resolve as snaps.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I'm still not seeing any proof for the "resolved" argument.

The rule under Zooming. How to shoot flyers.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I'm still not seeing any proof for the "resolved" argument.

The BRB is not a dictionary.

If you do not know what is it "Resolve" as a snapshot well then...I can't help you and you probably should not play games that include resolving stuff.

40k-noob wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I'm still not seeing any proof for the "resolved" argument.

The BRB is not a dictionary.

If you do not know what is it "Resolve" as a snapshot well then...I can't help you and you probably should not play games that include resolving stuff.

Ok, ignoring the tone.

Resolved means that you act as if it were. Ok. I'll resolve my seeker missile as if it were a snap shot. BRB says I need a 6, and I will abide by that unless there is a related FAQ. There is. Seeker missiles hit on a 2+ if they are snap fired. So I'm resolving as if the seeker missile where snap firing as required.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

40k-noob wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I'm still not seeing any proof for the "resolved" argument.

The BRB is not a dictionary.

If you do not know what is it "Resolve" as a snapshot well then...I can't help you and you probably should not play games that include resolving stuff.

Ok, ignoring the tone.

Resolved means that you act as if it were. Ok. I'll resolve my seeker missile as if it were a snap shot. BRB says I need a 6, and I will abide by that unless there is a related FAQ. There is. Seeker missiles hit on a 2+ if they are snap fired. So I'm resolving as if the seeker missile where snap firing as required.

Actually if you resolve it they'd need 6's.

This is ridiculous. There's no point in arguing anymore. There's one group of people who insist that "resolving a shot as a snap shot" somehow has different properties than "firing a snap shot," and that "resolving a shot as a snap shot" does not result in your BS being "reduced," despite the fact that you roll to hit with a BS of 1, which is less, and therefore a reduction, than any BS value that is greater than 1.

Meanwhile, the other group uses common sense and the FAQ to arrive at the correct answer that the FAQ ruling makes seeker missiles fire at BS 5, even during snap shots (including those fired/resolved against flyers).

I will be playing the latter, correct interpretation and will pack up my models if anyone argues to the contrary.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

40k-noob wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I'm still not seeing any proof for the "resolved" argument.

The BRB is not a dictionary.

If you do not know what is it "Resolve" as a snapshot well then...I can't help you and you probably should not play games that include resolving stuff.

Ok, ignoring the tone.

Resolved means that you act as if it were. Ok. I'll resolve my seeker missile as if it were a snap shot. BRB says I need a 6, and I will abide by that unless there is a related FAQ. There is. Seeker missiles hit on a 2+ if they are snap fired. So I'm resolving as if the seeker missile where snap firing as required.

1st. Sorry about the tone.

2nd. No that is not what it means to "resolve", what you defined was essentially to "Count as"
To resolve in this game is to determine an outcome, for example, to "resolve" a charge you roll 2D6 and compare the results to the number of inches needed to reach BTB with your target.

How so? Where are you getting this bizarre concept from?
Snap fire has a different affect on seeker missiles. It's resolving as if it were snap firing, but it doesn't affect it still.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I know what resolve means. The definition you give still fits. And where do you get your definition btw? It's not in the BRB because as already stated, its not a dictionary.

What if you had a weapon that was assault, but when you fire it the rules state to resolve it as a heavy weapon shot.

But the. The unit also had relentless. Would that unit be able to charge?

 Savageconvoy wrote:
How so? Where are you getting this bizarre concept from?
Snap fire has a different affect on seeker missiles. It's resolving as if it were snap firing, but it doesn't affect it still.

See that is where you are getting this all wrong.

1st. Snapshot rules does not reduce or change the BS on anything. The rule says to "count as" BS 1.
So what happens when any unit that fires at a Zooming Flyer and does not have the Skyfire rule, for the purposes of those shots the BS is counted as 1 regardless of what their actual BS might be.

2nd. The charge thing was just an example, I dont want to get into a back and forth about charge scenarios.

40k-noob wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
How so? Where are you getting this bizarre concept from?
Snap fire has a different affect on seeker missiles. It's resolving as if it were snap firing, but it doesn't affect it still.

See that is where you are getting this all wrong.

1st. Snapshot rules does not reduce or change the BS on anything. The rule says to "count as" BS 1.
So what happens when any unit that fires at a Zooming Flyer and does not have the Skyfire rule, for the purposes of those shots the BS is counted as 1 regardless of what their actual BS might be.

And it's counted as Bs1 because of the snap shot rule. Seeker missile FAQ covers the Snap Shot rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And the charge example works because are you going to only look at the rules for Heavy weapons or the rules for relentless as well.

"Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping
Flying Monstrous Creatures."

Will somebody in the "resolved as is different from shot as" snap shot camp explain to me: If flyers can only be hit by snap shots, then how can anything (apart from a vehicle or a model with a heavy weapon that moved) shoot at a flyer? After all, resolving you shot as a snap shot isn't the same thing as actually snap shooting.

Schrodingers_Kitty wrote:
"Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping
Flying Monstrous Creatures."

Will somebody in the "resolved as is different from shot as" snap shot camp explain to me: If flyers can only be hit by snap shots, then how can anything (apart from a vehicle or a model with a heavy weapon that moved) shoot at a flyer? After all, resolving you shot as a snap shot isn't the same thing as actually snap shooting.

Enjoy waiting

I love the "resolved as" people. They keep ignoring the Resolved normally in the markerlight rules. As Snap shots and Hard to hit are exceptions to the normal shooting rules, and I am to resolve normally, They are still botching it. Where does that help? Well, my resolve in my codex still beats your resolve in the BRB. Codex rules beat BRB rules, Codex FAQ beats BRB FAQ. Where does that leave us? Seeker missiles hit fliers with a BS5.

If resolved as a Snap shot = Firing a Snap Shot, then you cannot choose to fire at a Flyer, as you can never choose to fire a Snap Shot.

It says choose to fire as a snap shot as opposed to firing normally. I.e. a unit with Skyfire can't choose to snap fire, hitting only on 6's, instead of rolling to hit normally.

Either way, we aren't choosing to fire it as a snap shot. We are firing and forced to handle it as a snap shot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And it still doesn't change the fact that we are firing normally, resolving as a snap shot, and still hitting on a 2+ because FAQ overrides the Snap Shot requirement of a 6.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
I love the "resolved as" people. They keep ignoring the Resolved normally in the markerlight rules.

And how is a models shot normally resolved when they are shooting at a flyer?


Also, the Tank firing the Seeker does so and we assume the Tank has a BS of 5 for this shot.

That is the tank's BS Characteristic as far as the Seeker missile is concerned.

Then along comes the Multiple Modifiers section that tells us the BS1 of a snapshot over-rides the base value of the model firing the shot, and we are shooting flyers at a BS of 1.

The BS5 is not a set value, it is the assumed Characteristic of the tank for the purposes of that shot.

To say that the BS of the shot is a set value is to argue that a Marine with a power fist has a Set value of 4 for his str score, and Power Fists do nothing. Which of course is not correct.

 DeathReaper wrote:

And how is a models shot normally resolved when they are shooting at a flyer?


Also, the Tank firing the Seeker does so and we assume the Tank has a BS of 5 for this shot.

That is the tank's BS Characteristic as far as the Seeker missile is concerned.

Then along comes the Multiple Modifiers section that tells us the BS1 of a snapshot over-rides the base value of the model firing the shot, and we are shooting flyers at a BS of 1.

The BS5 is not a set value, it is the assumed Characteristic of the tank for the purposes of that shot.

To say that the BS of the shot is a set value is to argue that a Marine with a power fist has a Set value of 4 for his str score, and Power Fists do nothing. Which of course is not correct.

Since you keep pretending the FAQ doesn't exist and ignoring that it answers the issue about its snap fire, you have nothing relevant to add to the discussion.

The FaQ only tells us what happens if the vehicle is forced to fire snapshots.

"Crew Shaken...The vehicle can only fire Snap Shots until the end of its next turn" (74)

Vs:

"Shots resolved at a Zooming Flyer can only be resolved as Snap Shots" (81)

Firing at a flyer is different, as you only resolve those as snap shots.

Notice the difference?

In the first one the vehicle is firing a snap shot because it can not make a normal shot due to its shaken condition.

In the second one the vehicle is capable of making a normal shot, but must resolve the shot as a snapshot due to the Hard to hit rule.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

Fragile wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
This boils down to the same thing that JoTWW does. FRP vs RFPaaC.

Firing a snap shot
Resolving as a snap shot.

At the end of the day.

RFP is not the same as FRPaaC
and
Firing a snap shot is not the same as resolving as a snap

So clarify the difference for me then, because currently the wording "resolve as a snap shot" has no real bearing the RAW of this situation.

Well than How else do you shoot a zooming flyer. The RAW does not tell you to snap fire does it?

Your avoiding the issue. You claim there is a difference between firing a snap shot and resolving a shot as a snap shot. Please clarify the difference.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The FaQ only tells us what happens if the vehicle is forced to fire snapshots.

"Crew Shaken...The vehicle can only fire Snap Shots until the end of its next turn" (74)

Vs:

"Shots resolved at a Zooming Flyer can only be resolved as Snap Shots" (81)

Firing at a flyer is different, as you only resolve those as snap shots.

Notice the difference?

In the first one the vehicle is firing a snap shot because it can not make a normal shot due to its shaken condition.

In the second one the vehicle is capable of making a normal shot, but must resolve the shot as a snapshot due to the Hard to hit rule.

And in all this you manage to say nothing. Both case the shooter is firing a Snap Shot. You have failed to show how "resolving" is its own unique form of a Snap Shot that is different from every other Snap Shot.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Second verse, same as the first.

You keep adding things in there. Remove the example from the FAQ (because you think it only applies to that specified situation) and it says the same thing. If a Seeker missile is fired using snap fire rules then it still hits in a 2+

If its resolved as a snap shot, the. It still hits on a 2+ since that's how a seeker missile would resolve a snap shot.

Look at my charge example. How would you handle that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And answer my question from earlier. Are the questions worded by GW employees and therefore approved, or are all FAQs invalidated?

The example is just that, it is not an exhaustive list of everything.

Anything resolves as a snap shot at a flyer the same as anything else.

"Only snapshots can hit a zooming flyer"

AkA BS1 so you need a6 to hit.

The questions from the rabble are just that Questions from people that do not work for GW. The questions are asked and GW provides their official response.

 DeathReaper wrote:
a little bit louder and a little bit worse.

You are ignoring the FAQ AGAIN! It resolves as a Snap shot. How do snap shots affect Seeker missiles as covered in the FAQ? BS5.

You keep quoting a general as if it overrides a specific.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The example is just that, it is not an exhaustive list of everything.

Anything resolves as a snap shot at a flyer the same as anything else.

"Only snapshots can hit a zooming flyer"

AkA BS1 so you need a6 to hit.

The questions from the rabble are just that Questions from people that do not work for GW. the questions are asked and GW provides their official response.

You still havent explained how a Snap Shot that is Resolved is any different than firing a regular SS. Unless you can make the two into different things, then the FAQ will override and make the missile BS5

Then you are saying that all FAQs are not legitimate. If GW does not approve the questions wording the. It may as well be blank. If the question is effectively blank the. The answer is a statement with no relevance. Is this why you ignore the FAQ? Because you don't recognize them as having any merit?

And the example stands. Would the unit be able to charge? Would their relentless override the "Resolved" heavy weapon effect.

Maybe you should stop misquoting me, and address that it says "Only snapshots can hit a zooming flyer"

Is the seeker fired as a snapshot? (Or have a specific exception like the Skyfire rule?).

Yes. It's firing a snap shot!

And I'd quote you right if you had something relevant to say.

Fragile wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The example is just that, it is not an exhaustive list of everything.

Anything resolves as a snap shot at a flyer the same as anything else.

"Only snapshots can hit a zooming flyer"

AkA BS1 so you need a6 to hit.

The questions from the rabble are just that Questions from people that do not work for GW. the questions are asked and GW provides their official response.

You still havent explained how a Snap Shot that is Resolved is any different than firing a regular SS. Unless you can make the two into different things, then the FAQ will override and make the missile BS5

Firing a snapshot means your vehicle has been Shaken, or you are firing overwatch, as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots.

Resolving as a snapshot means your vehicle has not been stunned, but you have to resolve the shots as a snap shot because of the Hard to hit Rule.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
And I'd quote you right if you had something relevant to say.

How about not breaking the rules of the forum, maybe we can start with that...

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Yes. It's firing a snap shot!

No, it is not, it is being resolved as a snap shot.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Firing a snapshot means your vehicle has been Shaken, or you are firing overwatch, as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots.

Resolving as a snapshot means your vehicle has not been stunned, but you have to resolve the shots as a snap shot because of the Hard to hit Rule...

That makes no sense. You're idea of "resolve" still means that its firing a snap shot. And how do seeker missiles handle a snap shot?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And you just said that snap shots are the only thing that can hit flyers, yet its not a snap shot because its "resolved" and not actually fired as a snap shot?!

And sorry if you're offended, but you've been saying the EXACT same wrong thing the entire day, and ignoring when everyone points to the contrary.

You still haven't explained how any FaQ is considered relevant. You still haven't answered how to bypass the FAQ which trumps the BS1 of snap fire, and you're just contradicting yourself now.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Firing a snapshot means your vehicle has been Shaken, or you are firing overwatch, as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots.

Resolving as a snapshot means your vehicle has not been stunned, but you have to resolve the shots as a snap shot because of the Hard to hit Rule...

That makes no sense. You're idea of "resolve" still means that its firing a snap shot. And how do seeker missiles handle a snap shot?

Just like every other model in the game, that is not shaken.

They fire at their full BS, but resolve those shots as Snap Shots.

The FAQ does not have a specific exception to the Hard to hit rule, are you claiming it has a specific exception to the Hard to hit rule? If so that is incorrect.

Firing a snap shot and resolving a snap shot are two different things, no contradiction there...

"any FaQ is considered relevant" because GW says these are the answers to the questions the rabble ask. (The FaQ answers are official as far as YMDC is concerned).

Note that there is a difference between a models characteristic value (Or assumed characteristic value) and a Set Value.

14 pages, going nowhere...