FlingitNow wrote:

In the case of a blast, the blast would normally target every model in under the marker.

No the blast targets the unit. It simply generates hits by counting the models under the template from each unit that is under the template.

In the case of the void shield it is under the marker and receives a single hit, no model ever receives more than one hit allocated to it by a single weapon.

Void shield is not a model so you clearly haven't read the thread or the rules in question. If you believe that you recalculate the hits the blast does after it has hit the unit by assuming it covers the shield and only the shield then the blast does no hits as there are no models under the template. Though it is impottant to note you have no permission to recalulate the number of hits the shooting attack generates. That is not a good idea if yyou want your argument to have weight. As for the 2nd part say I shoot a unit of 1 model with a punisher cannon (heavy 20) you're telling me that the unit can not take more than 1 hit? Non-sense.

So to assume that a blast marker that would have hit say 5 models will instead inflict 5 hits on a void shield is following the RaW.

FTFY.

This is all kinds of wrong.

1. You do not work out the number of hits prior to the Void Shield intercepting hits. You declare the unit to be shot at, if a Void Shield is present all shots are resolved against it. IF the shot is a blast the blast is resolved against the shield and the shield alone, nothing in the rule directs you to work out shots at the initial target.

 Inquisitor Lord Cuthbert wrote:
First, I have a copy of stronghold and probably understand its contents better than you.

Second, I have been playing this game of army guys for 23 years and likely longer than you and many others have been alive. I understand how this game has evolved and play multiple armies and see the game frommultiple perspectives.

Third, your blatant disregard for how the actual game mechanic for how shooting is resolved is astounding.

Lastly, you have no clue on how to offer a proper rebuttal in a debate, don't take this too hard 80% of the morons on this thread have the same problem.

This is clearly an issue of asserting your opinion as fact for your own benefit.

 FlingitNow wrote:

You have made an assumption that you "must continue resolving the shooting attack against the AV12 shield". The RaW states your shooting attack Hits the shield. Not that the number of Hits you've determined transfer.

If we don't continue the shooting attack we have to either:

A) stop the shooting attack. We have no permission to do so.
B) restart the shooting attack from a different point. We have no permission to do so.

 Inquisitor Lord Cuthbert wrote:

 Therion wrote:
Thanks everyone for the contributions. I think this has been resolved.

Better not bunch up inside your void shields! Might be hard though considering some weapons have 10" (or bigger) blasts

Left over shots from a unit that drops a void shield does not in fact translate to the intially targetted unit no matter how bad some poeple want it to. Other units may freely target the newly exposed unit however.

In the case of a blast, the blast would normally target every model in under the marker. In the case of the void shield it is under the marker and receives a single hit, no model ever receives more than one hit allocated to it by a single weapon. So to assume that a blast marker that would have hit say 5 models will instead inflict 5 hits on a void shield is crazy.

rigeld2 wrote:
Let me cut you off there. I don't run Void Shields. I don't plan on running Void Shields. I don't expect my opponents to run Void Shields. I have no dog in this fight and insinuating bias is rude at a minimum.

Additionally, many people in this forum debate the rules without a bias. That's what it's here for. If you have actual rule citations to support your arguments, that would be the correct way to debate.

PanzerLeader wrote:
Per the VSG rules, "if all the projected void shields have collapsed, further hits strike the original target instead." We are told explicitly that leftover hits DO roll over.

But you have not proven how you pass on the hits you generated to the shield. Or is that an assumption on your part because you cannot A) and cannot B)?

 FlingitNow wrote:
Well actually I have. The VSP rules tell us to move the shooting attack over to the shield after hits are determined. Since we are not told to recalculate or do anything with the number of hits the shooting attack has generated therefore we can't. It is a permissive ruleset. The number of hits stays the same unless you can show permission to change it. See how everything I've written is based on actual rules. And I note you still won't answer my question on what rules you are using to determine how many hits a blast does on a special rule. Which tells me you know that your interpretation is not based on RaW.

Now, i'll even go as far as quoting Building RaW for you:

Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacks against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield.

Notice the red part? notice the word ANY? and the "instead hit"?

I have just proved to you that a Blast Weapon which scores X hit on a building with Void Shields will score X hits on the Shield itself. Please provide the same for VSG, but i would wager that you can't

 BlackTalos wrote:
Please actually give me a quote of the rule which transfers hits?

 BlackTalos wrote:
Please actually give me a quote of the rule which transfers hits?

 BlackTalos wrote:
Please actually give me a quote of the rule which transfers hits?

What rule are you basing this on? i see no quotes and references at all? It is indeed a permissive Ruleset and you have not shown me you permission to transfer the Hits.

If you scroll back a few pages of post you will see i have based many times the origin of the VSG hit from the RaW of the VSG. But currently we are looking at you argument and proving your point is still breaking the RaW, or is that not what you were applying to myself for the previous 8 pages of posts?

Please actually give me a quote of the rule which transfers hits? I've actually shown you how to prove it on the building VS rule:

Anyway, if a target is hit within the shield... Resolve the hit INSTEAD against the shield. So a blast that would normally scatter off of my poorly placed clumped up mob has no effect. But the second shot of the Hypotheticannon which is S7 Assault 2; blast would hit 4 of my Boyz. BUT the hit is instead resolved against the shield Av 12. My unskilled cheese listed lucky SOB opponent rolls 1d6 (not 4d6). Of course he rolls a 6 causing it to fizzle out. Leaving my Boyz as naked as the day they were born, or hatched, or spored. Or whatever.

 Inquisitor Lord Cuthbert wrote:
The rules are clear on how void shields work, it isn't even difficult or a gray-area.

Proven? I dare say you are mistaken sir.

And I have read the thread...

It's ok to be nice online, by the way.

 Ouze wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Cuthbert wrote:
The rules are clear on how void shields work, it isn't even difficult or a gray-area.

The 10 previous pages call that into question.

 Ouze wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Cuthbert wrote:
The rules are clear on how void shields work, it isn't even difficult or a gray-area.

The 10 previous pages call that into question.

Once the final position of a shooting attack (blast) that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone has been determined, and it hits a target within the Void Shield Zone, the blast hits the projected void shield instead.

 FlingitNow wrote:

"The VSP rules tell us to move the shooting attack over to the shield after hits are determined (SHA pg31). Since we are not told to recalculate or do anything with the number of hits the shooting attack has generated therefore we can't (SHA pg31. It is a permissive ruleset. The number of hits stays the same unless you can show permission to change it (you need permission to change so no rule here as there is no permission). See how everything I've written is based on actual rules."

BRB p33 wrote: Once the final blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with it's base fully or partially beneath the blast marker.

 grendel083 wrote:
Still awaiting a rule quote that lets you discard the hits generated and re-calculate them.
Been waiting many pages for it, and it's pretty essential to your case. No rush.

extremefreak17 wrote:Myself and others have made this point many times now and you have failed to respond or disprove it.

FlingitNow wrote:And I note you still won't answer my question on what rules you are using to determine how many hits a blast does on a special rule. Which tells me you know that your interpretation is not based on RaW.

Everything i write is also based on the actual VSG Rules. But back to your point: The highlighted Red is EXACTLY why you cannot apply those hits to the VS.

Notice the emphasis again. A shield or 3 layers of shield would remove 3 hits (at minimum). This is breaking Blast Rules RaW: The unit suffers a set number of hits. You cannot reduce this in any way or you are breaking the RaW... This does not happen in our example.

The past 3 pages of thread was me trying to prove how the RaW worked as defined. Then most of you just pointing here and there saying "it breaks RaW", such as we the rule says "the attack Hits the shield", which, if you tell me "this attack hits a tank" i can resolve both in the exact SAME way, but no, this is breaking RaW.

So, applying a relatively more mature approach than "you say mine breaks RaW, so i say (proved) yours breaks RaW",

Phase 1 wrote:Nominate Unit to shoot
(No need to clear)

Phase 2 wrote:Choose a target.
(Fully within the void shield, here)

Phase 3 wrote:Roll to hit.
Roll a D6 for each shot fired. Notice emphasis.
Blast Rule: When firing a blast weapon, models do not Roll To Hit. (lets notice here, as this is a Special Rule a weapon has, that weapon is still a e.g. Heavy 1, so 1 shot, weapon.) Once the final blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with it's base fully or partially beneath the blast marker.
We have determined hits for various weapons. This has followed all RaW to hit for ALL weapons.

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule. Not a "To Hit" stage where Blast Weapons rules count many models. In this step we have a hit portion, a "Roll to pen" portion and an allocation of Hits portion.
The Rule, from SHA:

Spoiler:

A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield. It can be upgraded to include additional layers of void shielding.

Each projected void shield has a 12" area of effect (measured from any point on the Void Shield Generator building), known as a Void Shield Zone. Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield. If a unit is within 12" of more than one Void Shield Generator, and so within more than one Void Shield Zone when it is hit, randomly determine which of the buildings’ projected void shields is hit.

Each projected void shield has an Armour Value of 12. A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a projected void shield causes it to collapse. If all the projected void shields have collapsed, further hits strike the original target instead. At the end of each of the controlling player’s turns, roll a dice for each projected void shield that has collapsed; each roll of 5+ instantly restores one shield.

Notice emphasis.
Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.
If 3 Shots hit from an Assault 20 weapons, then 3 shots hit the VS instead.
If 1 Shot hit from a Heavy 1, Blast weapon, then 1 Shot hits the VS instead.
If 2 Shots hit from an Assault 3, Tesla weapon, then 2 Shots hit the VS Instead.
Now, certain Special Rules trigger when a shot Hits a target, such as Rending and Tesla on 6. Right above, I have shown that the attack hits the shields: Those Rules trigger (INCLUDING the Blast Special Rule - but the Special Rule says it right there above:"A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield." What can a blast do on a single VS? 1 Hit. If you do not agree because "the VS is not a model", then the Blast Special Rule does not apply, but you still have the 1 shot, in green above, that the VS Special Rule, as Written:"Any shooting attack instead hits the projected void shield" says you have. It does not say "roll to hit again, calculate hits again or transfer hits", but "Instead Hits" - you HAVE a hit, you cannot say "i have 0 hits", its says you have one.
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

Then, those hits given to you above, move to the next part: "A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a projected void shield causes it to collapse"
So you resolve the Armour Penetration until all of your shields are down.
Then:
" If all the projected void shields have collapsed, further hits strike the original target instead."
This part discards you extra Tesla Hits, for example, as they are not a "further hit" but originate from 1 hit on the shield. Just as you discard wounds from shots that are out of range when half a unit dies.
Those hits are then INSTEAD hitting the original target, so at this point of the phase, we are left with a number of hits on the target.

Phase 4 wrote:Roll to Wound.
You will have noticed, this is the Wounding Phase. Anything to do with the VSG Rule is now non-existant.
I quote the BRB:"For each shot that Hit, roll again(...)" These shots that hit are what is left of the attack that made through. A Heavy 1, Blast, that interacted with the shield is long gone and forgotten by this stage. As are any other shots that hit the VS, like 3 out of the Assault 5 that all hit, or a Heavy 1, Beam, etc

1) How do you calculate the number of hits a blast marker does once you count the marker being over the shield and only the shield?

SA: Page 47:
"Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacs against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield."

BRB: Page 93
"Units may shoot or charge an occupied building as if it was a vehicle."

Because the blast does not actually hit the unit, it hits the void shield.

I disagree Flinginow.

You have not categorically proven anything, i dont think either side has. When the shooting attack is transferred their is no basis to say it brings the number of hits with it, but also no basis to say it doesn't.

I wasn't going to post again, but ahh, it's hard to walk away.

 nutty_nutter wrote:

as a blast weapon doesn't roll to hit and has a special rule that dictates how many times it has hit we use that process to determine that number of hits.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase 3 wrote:Roll to hit.
Roll a D6 for each shot fired. Notice emphasis.
Blast Rule: When firing a blast weapon, models do not Roll To Hit. (lets notice here, as this is a Special Rule a weapon has, that weapon is still a e.g. Heavy 1, so 1 shot, weapon.) Once the final blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with it's base fully or partially beneath the blast marker.
We have determined hits for various weapons. This has followed all RaW to hit for ALL weapons.

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule. Not a "To Hit" stage where Blast Weapons rules count many models. In this step we have a hit portion, a "Roll to pen" portion and an allocation of Hits portion.
Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.

What can a blast do on a single VS? 1 Hit. If you do not agree the because "the VS is not a model", then then Blast Special Rule does not apply, but you still have the 1 shot, in green above that the VS Special Rule, as Written:"Any shooting attack instead hits the projected void shield" says you have.

 nutty_nutter wrote:

being hit instead is not = to re-calculating hits, the void shield rule does not state you do so and thus there is no permission for you to do it, the number of hits have already been generated.
where are you given permission to alter an already determined number of hits? (saying that that they are transferred to single target is not true as the target is never changed, the unit is still the target of the attack)

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule. Not a "To Hit" stage where Blast Weapons rules count many models. In this step we have a hit portion, a "Roll to pen" portion and an allocation of Hits portion.
Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.
I have shown the attack hits the shields: Those Rules trigger (INCLUDING the Blast Special Rule - but the Special Rule says it right there above:"A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield." What can a blast do on a single VS? 1 Hit. If you do not agree the because "the VS is not a model", then then Blast Special Rule does not apply, but you still have the 1 shot, in green above that the VS Special Rule, as Written:"Any shooting attack instead hits the projected void shield" says you have. It does not say "roll to hit again, calculate hits again or transfer hits", but "Instead Hits" - you HAVE a hit, you cannot say "i have 0 hits", its says you have one.

 nutty_nutter wrote:

you are also applying special rules for other shooting attacks differently, like the tesla weapon, note that a tesla weapon increases the number of hits generated on the to hit roll, not afterwards, so in your world they can only ever hit once. in mine they work normally.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:If 2 Shots hit from an Assault 3, Tesla weapon, then 2 Shots hit the VS Instead.
Now, certain Special Rules trigger when a shot Hits a target, such as Rending and Tesla on 6.
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And by applying the VSG special rule you must have the entire shooting attack instead hit the VSG. Correct?
Are the hits generated in step 3 part of the shooting attack?

Not Correct, and yes, they are.
If "you must have the entire shooting attack instead hit the VSG" by definition you apply the Phase 4 and 5 to the shield. Good luck applying the Wounds of the unit to the shield

I suppose what you actually want to hear here is: Shooting attack = Shots, as we cannot apply the Entire shooting attack

rigeld2 wrote:
Except that's not what the rules actually say. You're making an assumption unsupported by the rules. You absolutely can apply the entire shooting attack up to this point. And you are - except for Blasts. For them you are making an exception.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.
If 3 Shots hit from an Assault 20 weapons, then 3 shots hit the VS instead.
If 1 Shot hit from a Heavy 1, Blast weapon, then 1 Shot hits the VS instead.
If 2 Shots hit from an Assault 3, Tesla weapon, then 2 Shots hit the VS Instead.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, and the SHOOTING ATTACK has 10 hits

Thanks for accepting your error

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Except that's not what the rules actually say. You're making an assumption unsupported by the rules. You absolutely can apply the entire shooting attack up to this point. And you are - except for Blasts. For them you are making an exception.

No assumption at all, i'm following the VSG SR.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.

RaW wrote:"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

 grendel083 wrote:
So you're saying you have NO RULE that lets you discard the hits generated in step 3 of the shooting attack?
And NO RULE to recalculate?

Because NO RULE is what you continue to re-post.
Look what you just posted. NO RULES. some opinion, but no rule.

 BlackTalos wrote:

RaW wrote:"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

If this part need clarification for the 2 of you:

We have a shooting attack, so far containing what?
1)A shooting unit
2)A target unit
3)A nb of Shots
4)A nb of Hits

"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

1) is unchanged
2) is defined, 4) is defined

Oh look, 2) and 4) have been changed by the Rule

What is left in "shooting attack"? 1) 3)

rigeld2 wrote:
So why are you not advocating to re-roll tohits for non blast weapons? You've said that they do not re-roll but you're invalidating the hits using this logic.
And the location of the hits has been changed, but the number has not.
And I still see literally zero words that support your assertion that shooting attack = shots.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:
Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.
If 3 Shots hit from an Assault 20 weapons, then 3 shots hit the VS instead.
If 1 Shot hit from a Heavy 1, Blast weapon, then 1 Shot hits the VS instead.
If 2 Shots hit from an Assault 3, Tesla weapon, then 2 Shots hit the VS Instead.

 BlackTalos wrote:
If 1 Shot hit from a Heavy 1, Blast weapon, then 1 Shot hits the VS instead.

 grendel083 wrote:
The number if hits previously calculated? Where does it say to RECALCULATE that?
It doesn't. You've made that up.

 grendel083 wrote:
And you're not changing it for non-blast weapons.
What rule says to re-calculate for blast and nothing else?

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
So why are you not advocating to re-roll tohits for non blast weapons? You've said that they do not re-roll but you're invalidating the hits using this logic.
And the location of the hits has been changed, but the number has not.
And I still see literally zero words that support your assertion that shooting attack = shots.

Where does your assertion that shooting attack = hits come from?

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
The number if hits previously calculated? Where does it say to RECALCULATE that?
It doesn't. You've made that up.

"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
It does not say "recalculate", it says " instead hits". Now do you need grammar lessons on the phrase above? it's meaning should be clear...?

 grendel083 wrote:
Hits are part of a shooting attack, you know that you quoted it earlier.
Step 3 of making a shooting attack. P12

That one shot has ALREADY generated several hits.

 grendel083 wrote:
Now what rule lets you ignore step 3 then re-calculate it?

This is made up and unsupported by any rule. Why do you keep repeating it without a single rule to back it up?
That one shot has ALREADY generated several hits.
Again what rule lets you ignore them?
What rule lets you re-calculate?

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule. Not a "To Hit" stage where Blast Weapons rules count many models.
Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
So why are you not advocating to re-roll tohits for non blast weapons? You've said that they do not re-roll but you're invalidating the hits using this logic.
And the location of the hits has been changed, but the number has not.
And I still see literally zero words that support your assertion that shooting attack = shots.

Where does your assertion that shooting attack = hits come from?

I've never said that - ever.
Hits are part of the shooting attack. The shooting attack is what instead hits the shield. Therefore the hits hit the shield.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
The number if hits previously calculated? Where does it say to RECALCULATE that?
It doesn't. You've made that up.

"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
It does not say "recalculate", it says " instead hits". Now do you need grammar lessons on the phrase above? it's meaning should be clear...?

 grendel083 wrote:
And you're not changing it for non-blast weapons.
What rule says to re-calculate for blast and nothing else?

Please stop making up stuff, quote my post if you disagree with it anywhere

 BlackTalos wrote:
Shots are part of the shooting attack. The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield. Therefore the shots hit the shield.
Corrected

 BlackTalos wrote:
Shots are part of the shooting attack. The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield. Therefore the shots hit the shield.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
It does not say "recalculate", it says " instead hits". Now do you need grammar lessons on the phrase above? it's meaning should be clear...?

Yes, it is clear. The 10 hits the blast weapon generated instead hit the shield.
Yes, it is clear. The shot of 10 hits the blast weapon generated instead hit the shield.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
It does not say "recalculate", it says " instead hits". Now do you need grammar lessons on the phrase above? it's meaning should be clear...?

Yes, it is clear. The 10 hits the blast weapon generated instead hit the shield.
Yes, it is clear. The shot of 10 hits the blast weapon generated instead hit the shield.
Also corrected

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Shots are part of the shooting attack. The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield. Therefore the shots hit the shield.
Corrected

Yay! The hits that were generated hit the shield. Thank you for admitting your stance was incorrect.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:If 1 Shot hit from a Heavy 1, Blast weapon, then 1 Shot hits the VS instead.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
It does not say "recalculate", it says " instead hits". Now do you need grammar lessons on the phrase above? it's meaning should be clear...?

Yes, it is clear. The 10 hits the blast weapon generated instead hit the shield.
Yes, it is clear. The shot of 10 hits the blast weapon generated instead hit the shield.

Also corrected

I didn't say that - might want to fix it.
I'm confused as to your post - are you sticking with your stance? Or have you changed it?

 BlackTalos wrote:
"The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield." The hits Instead hit the shield: one Hit instead of "the hits"

 BlackTalos wrote:
Shots are part of the shooting attack. The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield. Therefore the shots hit the shield.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
"The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield." The hits Instead hit the shield: one Hit instead of "the hits"

Oh - so you'll apply this to non-blast weapons as well? So all weapons hit a single time?

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Shots are part of the shooting attack. The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield. Therefore the shots hit the shield.
Corrected

Yay! The hits that were generated hit the shield. Thank you for admitting your stance was incorrect.

Guess the addition wasn't clear: "Therefore the shots hit the shield"

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:If 1 Shot hit from a Heavy 1, Blast weapon, then 1 Shot hits the VS instead.

 nutty_nutter wrote:
please define shots.

there isn't one in the BRB.

BRB,p50 wrote: Number of Shots
Some shooting weapons fire multiple shots. Where this is the case, the number of shots a weapon fires is noted after it's type.

 BlackTalos wrote:
All shots hit a single time, correct!

 nutty_nutter wrote:
also not true at all, not all shots hit a single time.

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
All shots hit a single time, correct!

Totally false!
How can you even think this?

Template: 1 attack, 1 shot: many hits
Blast: 1 attack, 1 shot: many hits
Tesla: 1 attack, 1 shot: up to 3 hits

That's just 3 examples showing this is WRONG.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 nutty_nutter wrote:
also not true at all, not all shots hit a single time.

Please expand?

 BlackTalos wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Shots are part of the shooting attack. The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield. Therefore the shots hit the shield.

=> Shooting attack & Hits are Instead "Hit the shield" because there is "Hit the shield" and Shots are part of the shooting attack, you are left with "shots"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
"The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield." The hits Instead hit the shield: one Hit instead of "the hits"

Oh - so you'll apply this to non-blast weapons as well? So all weapons hit a single time?

All shots hit a single time, correct!

I think you are getting this!

 BlackTalos wrote:
No that is 3 examples of you applying a Special Rule: Template, Blast, and Tesla

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Shots are part of the shooting attack. The shooting attack, and hits is what instead hits the shield. Therefore the shots hit the shield.
Corrected

Yay! The hits that were generated hit the shield. Thank you for admitting your stance was incorrect.

Guess the addition wasn't clear: "Therefore the shots hit the shield"

Shots are a means to to an end to generate hits. Where are shots mentioned? The Attack is transferred. Hits are part of the Attack.
The shots part has already be calculated and tuned to hits.
This is another part you're re-calculating without a rule telling you too.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.
(...)
(INCLUDING the Blast Special Rule - but the Special Rule says it right there above:"A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield." What can a blast do on a single VS? 1 Hit. If you do not agree because "the VS is not a model", then the Blast Special Rule does not apply, but you still have the 1 shot, in green above, that the VS Special Rule, as Written:"Any shooting attack instead hits the projected void shield" says you have. It does not say "roll to hit again, calculate hits again or transfer hits", but "Instead Hits" - you HAVE a hit, you cannot say "i have 0 hits", its says you have one.
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

Then, those hits given to you above, move to the next part: "A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a projected void shield causes it to collapse"

 BlackTalos wrote:
No that is 3 examples of you applying a Special Rule: Template, Blast, and Tesla

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
No that is 3 examples of you applying a Special Rule: Template, Blast, and Tesla

Thats 3 examples of a single shot causing more than one hit.

And "template" is not a special rule. See page 52.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
No that is 3 examples of you applying a Special Rule: Template, Blast, and Tesla

Thats 3 examples of a single shot causing more than one hit.

And "template" is not a special rule. See page 52.

Nope, it's a Rule (just not special), that replaces "To hit" rolls. But that weapon still fires 1 Shot.
Or just read the 1st Phrase of the Rules below:
Multiple Templates
If a unit is firing more that one shot with (...)

Case in point.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
No that is 3 examples of you applying a Special Rule: Template, Blast, and Tesla

You had already said that Tesla gets to have 3 hits; now you are saying because it is a special rule it doesn't? just so you can Claim you are right through your made up RAW?

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:
Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.
If 2 Shots hit from an Assault 3, Tesla weapon, then 2 Shots hit the VS Instead.
Now, certain Special Rules trigger when a shot Hits a target, such as Rending and Tesla on 6.
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

 grendel083 wrote:
Wow the VSG rule said all that?
No it didn't.
I've read that before, it was wrong then, as was pointed out then.

Now will you admit that 1 shot can generate more than one hit? So we can progress?
Instead of re-posting incorrect statements?

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
No that is 3 examples of you applying a Special Rule: Template, Blast, and Tesla

Thats 3 examples of a single shot causing more than one hit.

And "template" is not a special rule. See page 52.

Nope, it's a Rule (just not special), that replaces "To hit" rolls. But that weapon still fires 1 Shot.
Or just read the 1st Phrase of the Rules below:
Multiple Templates
If a unit is firing more that one shot with (...)

Case in point.

Yes. I clearly stated it fires one shot.
And one shot can generate more than one hit.
Something you incorrectly said couldn't happen.

 grendel083 wrote:
It's been shown wrong.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Oh, are you talking about Units with 10 Models? Why of course all of those weapons can generate multiple hits on those!

I thought we were discussing Void Shield Generators?

 grendel083 wrote:
Why are you still re-posting this?
And why are you quoting it as the VSG rule. You're mis-quoting. It does not say that.

 BlackTalos wrote:

This is my last contribution here and just a description of the RaW and how they are applied. If any questions arise, i will quote the relevant section of this post to reply.
Thank you for any input to clear up this Rule, i have tried to include all aspects in my post.

 grendel083 wrote:

1. What rule lets you discard the hits generate at step 3 of the attack?
2. What rule lets you re-calculate the hits?
3. Can a single shot generate more than 1 hit?

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

1. What rule lets you discard the hits generate at step 3 of the attack?
2. What rule lets you re-calculate the hits?
3. Can a single shot generate more than 1 hit?

Going round in circles, i have answered all 3 already.
1. and 2. are in my previous post. (the one where I describe the RaW for VSG)
3. is literally 2 posts above.

Oh, are you talking about Units with 10 Models? Why of course all of those weapons can generate multiple hits on those!

I thought we were discussing Void Shield Generators?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
When your description of the RAW has to change and ignore the points being made, you are not Citing RAW.

That is not what the rule actually says(and thus not RAW)

 FlingitNow wrote:

Oh, are you talking about Units with 10 Models? Why of course all of those weapons can generate multiple hits on those!

I thought we were discussing Void Shield Generators?

And how many models does a PVS contain?

VSG Special Rule wrote:A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield. It can be upgraded to include additional layers of void shielding.

 FlingitNow wrote:
And how many models does a PVS contain?

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:INCLUDING the Blast Special Rule - but the Special Rule says it right there above:"A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield." What can a blast do on a single VS? 1 Hit. If you do not agree because "the VS is not a model", then the Blast Special Rule does not apply, but you still have the 1 shot, in green above, that the VS Special Rule, as Written:"Any shooting attack instead hits the projected void shield" says you have. It does not say "roll to hit again, calculate hits again or transfer hits", but "Instead Hits" - you HAVE a hit, you cannot say "i have 0 hits", its says you have one.

 grendel083 wrote:
1. What rule lets you discard the hits generate at step 3 of the attack?
2. What rule lets you re-calculate the hits?
3. Can a single shot generate more than 1 hit?

 grendel083 wrote:
1. What rule lets you discard the hits generate at step 3 of the attack?
2. What rule lets you re-calculate the hits?
3. Can a single shot generate more than 1 hit?

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
1. What rule lets you discard the hits generate at step 3 of the attack?
2. What rule lets you re-calculate the hits?
3. Can a single shot generate more than 1 hit?

1. VSG Special Rule
2. VSG Special Rule
3. Of course

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:INCLUDING the Blast Special Rule - but the Special Rule says it right there above:"A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield." What can a blast do on a single VS? 1 Hit. If you do not agree because "the VS is not a model", then the Blast Special Rule does not apply, but you still have the 1 shot, in green above, that the VS Special Rule, as Written:"Any shooting attack instead hits the projected void shield" says you have. It does not say "roll to hit again, calculate hits again or transfer hits", but "Instead Hits" - you HAVE a hit, you cannot say "i have 0 hits", its says you have one.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Seems weird that the blast would become a blast, wouldnt it be intercepted by the sheld first?

I know this is arguing "logic" here (as in what would happen in real life), but wouldnt a blast hit a shield once since it failed to 'blast' on its intended unit being intercepted by the shield first?

If the two editions are that funk would probably just play a blast makes one hit on the shield, because it wouldnt get through the shield to drop the template on the unit itself.

The whole hitting the transport only, and not the guys inside thing.

 grendel083 wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Seems weird that the blast would become a blast, wouldnt it be intercepted by the sheld first?

I know this is arguing "logic" here (as in what would happen in real life), but wouldnt a blast hit a shield once since it failed to 'blast' on its intended unit being intercepted by the shield first?

If the two editions are that funk would probably just play a blast makes one hit on the shield, because it wouldnt get through the shield to drop the template on the unit itself.

The whole hitting the transport only, and not the guys inside thing.

Logically, yes. You're a absolutly right.
And it's a perfectly acceptable house rule, and one I'd encourage people to adopt.
It's just not what the rules actually say. <= Very debatable indeed
And this is a rules debate.

 BlackTalos wrote:
RaI i think we are all clear on that's for sure. I'm sure GW will put up a FAQ someday saying something like "treat it as a model or transport", but until that day, we are stuck with one line people just read differently, and i guess that all in all it comes down to the grammar of that one Sentence which is clear to me and holds the same meaning to others, but they have long since abandoned the debate.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
RaI i think we are all clear on that's for sure. I'm sure GW will put up a FAQ someday saying something like "treat it as a model or transport", but until that day, we are stuck with one line people just read differently, and i guess that all in all it comes down to the grammar of that one Sentence which is clear to me and holds the same meaning to others, but they have long since abandoned the debate.

If you're ever given models, instead give that model to Bob.

If I give you 2 Storm Talons, how many models will you give Bob?

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
RaI i think we are all clear on that's for sure. I'm sure GW will put up a FAQ someday saying something like "treat it as a model or transport", but until that day, we are stuck with one line people just read differently, and i guess that all in all it comes down to the grammar of that one Sentence which is clear to me and holds the same meaning to others, but they have long since abandoned the debate.

If you're ever given models, instead give that model to Bob.

If I give you 2 Storm Talons, how many models will you give Bob?

Nope the rule reads:

If you are ever given a Storm Talon box, instead give A Storm Talon to Bob.

If you give me 2 Storm Talon boxes, I'll give bob 2 Storm Talons. What if 1 of my boxes actually contains 3 Storm Talons? still only giving 2 to the guy =)

rigeld2 wrote:
And you're also changing the question to fit your view - don't do that.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And you're also changing the question to fit your view - don't do that.

Yeah, it was that or just not answering the trick question....

Guess i'll just follow your advice, not answering any more questions that are trying to debunk by getting you to say something =P

rigeld2 wrote:
It's not a trick question - it's a question designed to simulate the rule and prove to you that the "hit" being singular in the latter half of the sentence does not mean all results must be singular.
I don't understand how you can't see that you're being inconsistent with the rules - allowing hits from a normal weapon to go through without re-determining them, but hits from a blast must be re-evaluated.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And you're also changing the question to fit your view - don't do that.

Yeah, it was that or just not answering the trick question....

Guess i'll just follow your advice, not answering any more questions that are trying to debunk by getting you to say something =P

"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
No singluar-ness?

Maybe you wanted it to read shooting attackS?

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It's not a trick question - it's a question designed to simulate the rule and prove to you that the "hit" being singular in the latter half of the sentence does not mean all results must be singular.
I don't understand how you can't see that you're being inconsistent with the rules - allowing hits from a normal weapon to go through without re-determining them, but hits from a blast must be re-evaluated.

But that's just it: they all follow the same system. If to you Instead = "re-determining them" then they are all "re-determining them", because they are all "instead".

That "instead" is just what it means: *Hits on a Target* are instead *Hit on the VS*

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And you're also changing the question to fit your view - don't do that.

Yeah, it was that or just not answering the trick question....

Guess i'll just follow your advice, not answering any more questions that are trying to debunk by getting you to say something =P

"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
No singluar-ness?

Maybe you wanted it to read shooting attackS?

So a shooting attack is each roll to hit correct?
No, it's each shot and Hits that ensue. Shots and their hits
And blasts and Templates place their markers or template instead of rolling to hit correct?
Indeed

So each roll to hit that scores a hit instead hits the shield correct?
Indeed

Blasts and Templates are capable of scoring multiple hits per shooting attacks based on where the Template or marker falls correct?
Multiple hits per shot, yes

So each hit determined by the placement of the Marker or template instead hits the Shield.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It's not a trick question - it's a question designed to simulate the rule and prove to you that the "hit" being singular in the latter half of the sentence does not mean all results must be singular.
I don't understand how you can't see that you're being inconsistent with the rules - allowing hits from a normal weapon to go through without re-determining them, but hits from a blast must be re-evaluated.

But that's just it: they all follow the same system. If to you Instead = "re-determining them" then they are all "re-determining them", because they are all "instead".

That "instead" is just what it means: *Hits on a Target* are instead *Hit on the VS*

Except you've asserted that they do not all follow the same system. One of them (blasts) changes the amount of hits. Other weapons do not.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
and this continuing - maybe call it a day?

 BlackTalos wrote:
"All you said is wrong, we are right, you prove nothing, EVERYONE will now play 1 Blast = 9 Shields down and 1 kill"

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, my shooting attack - ALL OF IT - hits the shield. Ten hits, RAW

Your made up rules are not RAW. Your misquoting a rule is not RAW

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Please define Shooting attack?

My BRB says on p12: Once you have completed steps 1 to 5 for each unit in your army that you wish to make a shooting attack, (...)

Shooting attack: Steps 1 to 5.

Wow - you finally responded to it! Great!
Yes, a shooting attack consists of 5 steps. You complete 3 steps and then move the shooting attack over to the VSG.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And you're also changing the question to fit your view - don't do that.

Yeah, it was that or just not answering the trick question....

Guess i'll just follow your advice, not answering any more questions that are trying to debunk by getting you to say something =P

"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
No singluar-ness?

Maybe you wanted it to read shooting attackS?

So a shooting attack is each roll to hit correct?
No, it's each shot and Hits that ensue. Shots and their hits
And blasts and Templates place their markers or template instead of rolling to hit correct?
Indeed

So each roll to hit that scores a hit instead hits the shield correct?
Indeed

Blasts and Templates are capable of scoring multiple hits per shooting attacks based on where the Template or marker falls correct?
Multiple hits per shot, yes

So each hit determined by the placement of the Marker or template instead hits the Shield.

No, the shooting attack, containing shots and hits instead hits the shield. 2 words of "Hit", not the exact same "hit".

nosferatu1001 wrote:
KK - no, because that would be black talos misapplying the VSG and shooting rules consistently.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Again, stating things i have not said. They DO follow the same system. The one in that long post if you re-read it carefully.

Essentially, what i am applying *in a way*
Not saying this is as Written as it is not, but might clear things up:
"Each shot will hit the shield" is the conclusion reading the RaW.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
He is saying that the attack contains shots, and those shots get transferred if the unit is hit.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
He is saying that the attack contains shots, and those shots get transferred if the unit is hit.

No, that's right indeed the Heavy 3 example contains 3 shots and a number of hits. If the Shot hits, the VSG covers it, when it says "and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone" So if you hit with 2 shots, you have to resolve 2 hits on the shield instead. They could even be Tesla which would then (after they hit the shield) add hits per the Special Rule.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Again, stating things i have not said. They DO follow the same system. The one in that long post if you re-read it carefully.

Essentially, what i am applying *in a way*
Not saying this is as Written as it is not, but might clear things up:
"Each shot will hit the shield" is the conclusion reading the RaW.

So a single shooting attack can only consist of a single shot?
And does that mean an Assault 20 weapon will hit 20 times? Or do you resolve the rolls to-hit and then apply those hits?

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
He is saying that the attack contains shots, and those shots get transferred if the unit is hit.

No, that's right indeed the Heavy 3 example contains 3 shots and a number of hits. If the Shot hits, the VSG covers it, when it says "and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone" So if you hit with 2 shots, you have to resolve 2 hits on the shield instead. They could even be Tesla which would then (after they hit the shield) add hits per the Special Rule.

And a Blast shooting attack contains (for example) one shot that hits 10 times.
Evidence has been shown for permission to count those 10 hits prior to the shooting attack transferring.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Again, stating things i have not said. They DO follow the same system. The one in that long post if you re-read it carefully.

Essentially, what i am applying *in a way*
Not saying this is as Written as it is not, but might clear things up:
"Each shot will hit the shield" is the conclusion reading the RaW.

So a single shooting attack can only consist of a single shot?
And does that mean an Assault 20 weapon will hit 20 times? Or do you resolve the rolls to-hit and then apply those hits?

No a shooting attack is from any unit, the entire Unit's shots. Assault 20 is 20 shots, as per rules, so you resolve their to-hit, yes. Then transfer the shots that Hit, to hit the shield instead (still not the same "hit")

 BlackTalos wrote:
Agreed, completely. Then it transfers, and you have the Hit the VSG RaW says you have.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Again, stating things i have not said. They DO follow the same system. The one in that long post if you re-read it carefully.

Essentially, what i am applying *in a way*
Not saying this is as Written as it is not, but might clear things up:
"Each shot will hit the shield" is the conclusion reading the RaW.

So a single shooting attack can only consist of a single shot?
And does that mean an Assault 20 weapon will hit 20 times? Or do you resolve the rolls to-hit and then apply those hits?

No a shooting attack is from any unit, the entire Unit's shots. Assault 20 is 20 shots, as per rules, so you resolve their to-hit, yes. Then transfer the shots that Hit, to hit the shield instead (still not the same "hit")

So you resolve the number of hits prior to moving the shooting attack over to the shield. Correct?
How does a blast weapon determine the number of hits? When does that happen - before or after the shooting attack is moved to the shield?

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Agreed, completely. Then it transfers, and you have the Hit the VSG RaW says you have.

Yes - the shooting attack that has hit 10 times transfers, just like a shooting attack that has hit 3 times. I'm glad you finally agree.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Correct. 1)By placing the template when you hit the target 2)"Instead hits the projected void shield" Hitting the Void Shield. When does counting models under the template? before the shot is moved and scores a hit on the shield.

Correction - the shooting attack that has hit 10 times transfers the shot, not the 10 hits, just like a shooting attack that has hit 3 times with 3 shots.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Talos you still haven't answered my question ams to how many models does a Void Shield contain. Just a number as requested I know where the rules are so no need to quote them.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Look, when the Vector Strike SR says "That unit takes D3+1 hits(...)"

Do you roll to Hit? No

When the VSG rule says "hits the projected void shield"

Do you roll to hit? No

It's the same use of a Special Rule that states you hit something. One says "with Strength and AP3" the other "with the shot that hit the Target previously"

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Talos you still haven't answered my question ams to how many models does a Void Shield contain. Just a number as requested I know where the rules are so no need to quote them.

Why are you desperate to know how many models it contains? The rule never talks about models? It just says your shot hits the shield and you are to resolve it.

Why are you desperate to know how many models it contains? The rule never talks about models? It just says your shot hits the shield and you are to resolve it.

rigeld2 wrote:
Except the VSG rule doesn't say "with the shot". It says the shooting attack. As in, the entire thing. You're forcing Blasts to roll to hit again (except instead of rolling to hit you just count them as a single hit) but not forcing other weapons to do so. This. Isn't. Consistent.

Perhaps because, I dunno, blasts care about how many models the marker covers? Pesky rules getting in the way and all.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule. Not a "To Hit" stage where Blast Weapons rules count many models.
Now, the shots that scored Hits in Phase 3 (" Any shooting attack (...) and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone") INSTEAD Hits the Void Shield.
If 3 Shots hit from an Assault 20 weapons, then 3 shots hit the VS instead.
If 1 Shot hit from a Heavy 1, Blast weapon, then 1 Shot hits the VS instead.
If 2 Shots hit from an Assault 3, Tesla weapon, then 2 Shots hit the VS Instead.
Now, certain Special Rules trigger when a shot Hits a target, such as Rending and Tesla on 6. Right above, I have shown that the attack hits the shields: Those Rules trigger (INCLUDING the Blast Special Rule - but the Special Rule says it right there above:"A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield." What can a blast do on a single VS? 1 Hit. If you do not agree because "the VS is not a model", then the Blast Special Rule does not apply, but you still have the 1 shot, in green above, that the VS Special Rule, as Written:"Any shooting attack instead hits the projected void shield" says you have. It does not say "roll to hit again, calculate hits again or transfer hits", but "Instead Hits" - you HAVE a hit, you cannot say "i have 0 hits", its says you have one.
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

rigeld2 wrote:
It says the shooting attack. As in, the entire thing.

BlackTalos wrote:You cannot be applying - ALL OF IT - or you would be applying wounds you got on the models onto the VS.
You are applying what you have of it so far:
Shots that have produced hits. Sooooo... 3 shots and 16 Hits.

Then in comes the RaW:"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
Not "Your misquoting a rule" but pure RaW.
What does it say? that "3 shots and 16 Hits" INSTEAD Hits the VS. Ergo 3 shots hit the void shield. Why just shots? Because the Rule says you've hit with them, not that you transfer anything!

 FlingitNow wrote:

Why are you desperate to know how many models it contains? The rule never talks about models? It just says your shot hits the shield and you are to resolve it.

Does it matter why I want to know? Just answer the question.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Yeah, it was that or just not answering the trick question....
Guess i'll just follow your advice, not answering any more questions that are trying to debunk by getting you to say something =P

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Except the VSG rule doesn't say "with the shot". It says the shooting attack. As in, the entire thing. You're forcing Blasts to roll to hit again (except instead of rolling to hit you just count them as a single hit) but not forcing other weapons to do so. This. Isn't. Consistent.

Perhaps because, I dunno, blasts care about how many models the marker covers? Pesky rules getting in the way and all.

All shots follow the same procedure that is the VSG Rule.
And you keep pointing at things already answered. Red highlights.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

"The VSP rules tell us to move the shooting attack over to the shield after hits are determined (SHA pg31). Since we are not told to recalculate or do anything with the number of hits the shooting attack has generated therefore we can't (SHA pg31. It is a permissive ruleset. The number of hits stays the same unless you can show permission to change it (you need permission to change so no rule here as there is no permission). See how everything I've written is based on actual rules."

Everything i write is also based on the actual VSG Rules. But back to your point: The highlighted Red is EXACTLY why you cannot apply those hits to the VS.

Now, Quoting BRB:

BRB p33 wrote: Once the final blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with it's base fully or partially beneath the blast marker.

Notice the emphasis again. A shield or 3 layers of shield would remove 3 hits (at minimum). This is breaking Blast Rules RaW: The unit suffers a set number of hits. You cannot reduce this in any way or you are breaking the RaW... This does not happen in our example.

Now show me how your blast weapon can inflict "one hit for each model with it's base fully or partially beneath the blast marker" if you are transferring and intercepting 1 or 2 of them?

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It says the shooting attack. As in, the entire thing.

BlackTalos wrote:You cannot be applying - ALL OF IT - or you would be applying wounds you got on the models onto the VS.
You are applying what you have of it so far:
Shots that have produced hits. Sooooo... 3 shots and 16 Hits.

Then in comes the RaW:"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
Not "Your misquoting a rule" but pure RaW.
What does it say? that "3 shots and 16 Hits" INSTEAD Hits the VS. Ergo 3 shots hit the void shield. Why just shots? Because the Rule says you've hit with them, not that you transfer anything!

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Except the VSG rule doesn't say "with the shot". It says the shooting attack. As in, the entire thing. You're forcing Blasts to roll to hit again (except instead of rolling to hit you just count them as a single hit) but not forcing other weapons to do so. This. Isn't. Consistent.

Perhaps because, I dunno, blasts care about how many models the marker covers? Pesky rules getting in the way and all.

All shots follow the same procedure that is the VSG Rule.
And you keep pointing at things already answered. Red highlights.

And you keep quoting inconsistent and irrelevant things.
Your "already answered" didn't answer anything except for the fact that you apparently still believe that shooting attack = shots. We've proven that wrong, I'm not sure why you keep saying it's correct.

The only way for a Blast weapon to generate hits is to count models under its marker. You're inventing a method to make your argument work.
The Blast weapon has already counted hits and you have not cited permission to rewind and do that again.
You are applying a new step solely to Blast weapons to generate a new number of hits - this is inconsistent.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It says the shooting attack. As in, the entire thing.

BlackTalos wrote:You cannot be applying - ALL OF IT - or you would be applying wounds you got on the models onto the VS.
You are applying what you have of it so far:
Shots that have produced hits. Sooooo... 3 shots and 16 Hits.

Then in comes the RaW:"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
Not "Your misquoting a rule" but pure RaW.
What does it say? that "3 shots and 16 Hits" INSTEAD Hits the VS. Ergo 3 shots hit the void shield. Why just shots? Because the Rule says you've hit with them, not that you transfer anything!

Wow - another incorrect quote that doesn't actually address the issue. Cool!
The entire shooting attack that exists so far.
So 16 hits are part of the shooting attack. The shooting attack instead hits the shield. Since the 16 hits are part of the shooting attack, why do they not hit the shieid again?

 BlackTalos wrote:
Now each shot will be applied to the shield. How? "instead hits the projected void shield."

 BlackTalos wrote:
For all weapons:
See how many hits you did in phase 3? Relevant to phase 3, and to Phase VSG SR as a trigger: "and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone" - - 5 hits

Now each shot will be applied to the shield. How? "instead hits the projected void shield." - - 5 Shots Hit? 5 Hits

your shot is applied, does this trigger special rules? (Tesla, Rending, ect -even blast-) apply them. - - None here

Resolve Penetration. - - 5 Pens

Consistent, same for every. single. shot. from. any. weapon.

 BlackTalos wrote:
For all weapons:
See how many hits you did in phase 3? Relevant to phase 3, and to Phase VSG SR as a trigger: "and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone" - - 25 hits from the 2 shots

Now each shot will be applied to the shield. How? "instead hits the projected void shield." - - 2 Shots Hit? 2 Hits

your shot is applied, does this trigger special rules? (Tesla, Rending, ect -even blast-) apply them. - - Blast, if it can hit something that is "not a model" but you say no here, so does not apply

Resolve Penetration. - - 2 Pens

Consistent, same for every. single. shot. from. any. weapon.

 BlackTalos wrote:
For all weapons:
See how many hits you did in phase 3? Relevant to phase 3, and to Phase VSG SR as a trigger: "and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone" - - 6 hits from the 4 shots (one 6, 1 miss)

Now each shot will be applied to the shield. How? "instead hits the projected void shield." - - 4 Shots Hit? 4 Hits

your shot is applied, does this trigger special rules? (Tesla, Rending, ect -even blast-) apply them. - - Tesla: +2 hits for that 6

Resolve Penetration. - - 6 Pens

Consistent, same for every. single. shot. from. any. weapon.

rigeld2 wrote:
You are again saying that shooting attack = shot when that has been proven to be incorrect.

 grendel083 wrote:
A shot cannot be applied to the shield. That's not how shooting rules work. And not what the rule says.

Why are you applying a shot? No rule says this.

The shield is AV12. Only HITS can roll armour pen.
If you're applying a SHOT to the shield you've done something wrong.

The VSG never ever say to apply a shot, or transfer a shot.
It says to apply an Attack. That includes hits.

Shots are NEVER applied to the shield.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Still Shot & Hits, until it says "hits a target", which uses up your Hits "instead hits the projected void shield"

I cannot add words to make it clearer, but:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits 25 times a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits once the projected void shield."
because of the words "and" and "instead" splitting up the sentence. Like:

Any Cat that comes from outside and eats olives instead eats cheese.

It does not matter how many olives he used to eat... because he now eats cheese. if another rule like Tesla says he has to eat cheese with butter, so be it....

 BlackTalos wrote:
Nope, indeed, it says the shot "instead hits the projected void shield." you apply that hit, see the word Hit? To the shield.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Still Shot & Hits, until it says "hits a target", which uses up your Hits "instead hits the projected void shield"

How does that "use up your Hits"? And why does that only apply to Blasts?

I cannot add words to make it clearer, but:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits 25 times a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits once the projected void shield."
because of the words "and" and "instead" splitting up the sentence. Like:

Any Cat that comes from outside and eats olives instead eats cheese.

It does not matter how many olives he used to eat... because he now eats cheese. if another rule like Tesla says he has to eat cheese with butter, so be it....

He eats the same amount of cheese as he did olives. Not some new, invented amount that only applies to Limburger cheese and other cheeses he eats the same amount.

And again, using your example, you are restricting blasts to a single hit, but an Assault weapon that shoots 25 times you are allowing to hit 25 times even though the sentence you crafted above says it should hit once.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Nope, indeed, it says the shot "instead hits the projected void shield." you apply that hit, see the word Hit? To the shield.

That's a lie. You've been corrected enough times that at this point it is deliberate.
No rule says the shot hits the void shield. Ever. You made that up and are trying to push that as the rules when it's not. Please stop.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Nope, indeed, it says the shot "instead hits the projected void shield." you apply that hit, see the word Hit? To the shield.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Sorry let me correct the original to be more accurate to what the rule says:

Any Cats that come from outside and eats olives instead eats cheese.

Because we did agree that "Shooting attack" was all the shots we had so far.

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Nope, indeed, it says the shot "instead hits the projected void shield." you apply that hit, see the word Hit? To the shield.

It says the Attack.
HUGE difference.
And a shot cannot generate a hit without rolling it (or equivalent rule in the case of blasts/templates).
And a hit is part of the attack.

Shots are never mentioned. Attacks are.
To say a shot is resolved against the shield is completely made up.
As is ignoring the hits generated in step 3 of the attack.
As is re-calculating those hits.

If you don't include those hits generated you are not transferring the entire attack.
If you are re-calculating those hits, you're doing so without a rule giving permission.
If you're applying a shot against a shield, then you're failing to follow the rules of shooting (p12).

If you're applying a shot against a shield, then you're failing to follow the rules of shooting (p12)

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Nope, indeed, it says the shot "instead hits the projected void shield." you apply that hit, see the word Hit? To the shield.

That's a lie. You've been corrected enough times that at this point it is deliberate.
No rule says the shot hits the void shield. Ever. You made that up and are trying to push that as the rules when it's not. Please stop.

Really? what does "hits the projected void shield." mean to you then?

 grendel083 wrote:
Please avoid word games. They are too easy to twist to whatever meaning you like.
A cat is nothing like a game defined attack.

 grendel083 wrote:

And yes, an attack includes the hits.
So why do you discard and recalculate (recalculating being impossible in the case of blasts as you cannot place the marker), when no rule says to do so?

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Nope, indeed, it says the shot "instead hits the projected void shield." you apply that hit, see the word Hit? To the shield.

That's a lie. You've been corrected enough times that at this point it is deliberate.
No rule says the shot hits the void shield. Ever. You made that up and are trying to push that as the rules when it's not. Please stop.

Really? what does "hits the projected void shield." mean to you then?

At no point, ever, does the rule in question say that the shot hits the projected void shield. You keep saying that it does and that's a lie.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

"The VSP rules tell us to move the shooting attack over to the shield after hits are determined (SHA pg31). Since we are not told to recalculate or do anything with the number of hits the shooting attack has generated therefore we can't (SHA pg31. It is a permissive ruleset. The number of hits stays the same unless you can show permission to change it (you need permission to change so no rule here as there is no permission). See how everything I've written is based on actual rules."

Everything i write is also based on the actual VSG Rules. But back to your point: The highlighted Red is EXACTLY why you cannot apply those hits to the VS.

Now, Quoting BRB:

BRB p33 wrote: Once the final blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with it's base fully or partially beneath the blast marker.

Notice the emphasis again. A shield or 3 layers of shield would remove 3 hits (at minimum). This is breaking Blast Rules RaW: The unit suffers a set number of hits. You cannot reduce this in any way or you are breaking the RaW... This does not happen in our example.

Now show me how your blast weapon can inflict "one hit for each model with it's base fully or partially beneath the blast marker" if you are transferring and intercepting 1 or 2 of them?

You never answered yours.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Because the Shooting attack (containing shots that hit) perform a "as a substitute or an equivalent" hit, new hit, yes. It's not a lie it's the definition of "Instead".

 BlackTalos wrote:
And it does say it actually: "Any shooting attack hits the projected void shield." Because that's how it turns out if you remove the "instead"

 BlackTalos wrote:
Those 2 "Hits" words are very different hits. One is of the weapons shooting at a target, the other if of the same weapons shooting a shield.
We are not ignoring the hits generated in step 3 of the attack, we are using them to confirm a hit on the shield.
Instead: adv. 1. In the place of something previously mentioned; as a substitute or an equivalent.
Replaced? yes probably by the definition above.

If you're applying a shot against a shield, then you're failing to follow the rules of shooting (p12)

How? the shot hit the target per Shooting RaW, which triggered VSG RaW and changed what the weapon actually hit.

 FlingitNow wrote:

Everything i write is also based on the actual VSG Rules. But back to your point: The highlighted Red is EXACTLY why you cannot apply those hits to the VS.

So what hits do you apply and where are you getting rules to calculate those hits?

 FlingitNow wrote:

Notice the emphasis again. A shield or 3 layers of shield would remove 3 hits (at minimum). This is breaking Blast Rules RaW: The unit suffers a set number of hits. You cannot reduce this in any way or you are breaking the RaW... This does not happen in our example.

You are given express permission to reduce the number of hits to zero because the shooting attack (which is made up of hits) is redirected (you then gave permission later to place other hits back on the unit).

Once the final blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with it's base fully or partially beneath the blast marker

 FlingitNow wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
And it does say it actually: "Any shooting attack hits the projected void shield." Because that's how it turns out if you remove the "instead"

Why are you continuing to post when you've already conceded? Why waste your time further proving yourself wrong?

 BlackTalos wrote:
There are less hits in your attack than models: RaW Broken

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Those 2 "Hits" words are very different hits. One is of the weapons shooting at a target, the other if of the same weapons shooting a shield.
We are not ignoring the hits generated in step 3 of the attack, we are using them to confirm a hit on the shield.
Instead: adv. 1. In the place of something previously mentioned; as a substitute or an equivalent.
Replaced? yes probably by the definition above.

A shooting attack that has hit. In game terms meaning has scored one or more hits at step 3 of the shooting sequence.

To then define the second term "hit" to mean anything other than the first, breaks the entire sequence. And it's something you're doing only for blasts and nothing else for unknown reasons.
To say something has hit, while ignoring step 3, you are transferring an unknown number of hits that you're assuming to be 1.

 grendel083 wrote:

If you're applying a shot against a shield, then you're failing to follow the rules of shooting (p12)

How? the shot hit the target per Shooting RaW, which triggered VSG RaW and changed what the weapon actually hit.

Hit the target with how many hits? A shot can be many hits. A shot is measly a means to generate hits.
Hits are required to roll armour pen, or wound.
You cannot do either with a shot. No rule allows this.

A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield.

 BlackTalos wrote:
If you can ever prove to me how 1 Shot of any weapons of your liking can produce more than 1 Hit on a building, You will have made a very good argument i cannot refute.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
There are less hits in your attack than models: RaW Broken

Hardly. The hits were already determined, they're just being applied somewhere else. Nothing is broken.

Oh, and even if you were correct - the VS isn't a model so your stance would still lead to that being broken.

JinxDragon wrote:
Other weapons also generate a random number of 'Hits' per shot, such as the Ork's Lootas I believe.

 BlackTalos wrote:
In the case of this RaW it cannot, because, quoting:

A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield.

If you can ever prove to me how 1 Shot of any weapons of your liking can produce more than 1 Hit on a building, You will have made a very good argument i cannot refute.

JinxDragon wrote:
Pulse Sub-munitions create 3 hits for each building under the marker for each shot.

 BlackTalos wrote:
However, all blast weapons have a profile, like Venom Cannon - Assault 1, Blast. If the blast doesn't affect it, the shield still suffers a hit from an Assault 1 weapon.

rigeld2 wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
Other weapons also generate a random number of 'Hits' per shot, such as the Ork's Lootas I believe.

Lootas generate a random number of shots that they then roll to hit with.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
Other weapons also generate a random number of 'Hits' per shot, such as the Ork's Lootas I believe.

Lootas generate a random number of shots that they then roll to hit with.

So no different to an Assault 20 creating 20 hits?
My exorcist is Heavy D6, that still "becomes" Heavy 3 for e.g.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
However, all blast weapons have a profile, like Venom Cannon - Assault 1, Blast. If the blast doesn't affect it, the shield still suffers a hit from an Assault 1 weapon.

Not possible - there's no hit involved in this case as the only way to generate hits cannot apply.
You're stretching your argument to the point where there isn't even pretend RAW to support it.

And you're taking a rule from step 3 (blasts hit models under the marker) and trying to apply it later - that doesn't work. Why are you revisiting step 3 solely for blast weapons again?

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule.
Now, certain Special Rules trigger when a shot Hits a target, such as Rending and Tesla on 6. Right above, I have shown that the attack hits the shields: Those Rules trigger
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

 grendel083 wrote:
Tesla Carbine. P82 of Codex Necrons.
This is an Assault 1 weapon.

One attack, one shot, one target, three hits.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
However, all blast weapons have a profile, like Venom Cannon - Assault 1, Blast. If the blast doesn't affect it, the shield still suffers a hit from an Assault 1 weapon.

Not possible - there's no hit involved in this case as the only way to generate hits cannot apply.
You're stretching your argument to the point where there isn't even pretend RAW to support it.

And you're taking a rule from step 3 (blasts hit models under the marker) and trying to apply it later - that doesn't work. Why are you revisiting step 3 solely for blast weapons again?

No, the method has a part you probably missed where all this comes in:

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule.
Now, certain Special Rules trigger when a shot Hits a target, such as Rending and Tesla on 6. Right above, I have shown that the attack hits the shields: Those Rules trigger
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

JinxDragon wrote:
Rigeld2,
I realized my mistake, why I corrected it within seconds of posting, but I did still name one other weapon which I know for sure does generate multiple hit's against buildings. Honestly, I find these types of weapons a little broken because of that. The model containing this weapon has two of the things, with permission to fire both, and these weapons are not just limited to additional damage against Buildings. On top of that, these weapons are also capable of being fired twice depending if a secondary Special Rule the model posses is evocable and on a 3+, it is.

All in all, this one model is capable of firing four shots and generating 12 hits against a single building thanks to this one weapon type.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
However, all blast weapons have a profile, like Venom Cannon - Assault 1, Blast. If the blast doesn't affect it, the shield still suffers a hit from an Assault 1 weapon.

Not possible - there's no hit involved in this case as the only way to generate hits cannot apply.
You're stretching your argument to the point where there isn't even pretend RAW to support it.

And you're taking a rule from step 3 (blasts hit models under the marker) and trying to apply it later - that doesn't work. Why are you revisiting step 3 solely for blast weapons again?

No, the method has a part you probably missed where all this comes in:

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule.
Now, certain Special Rules trigger when a shot Hits a target, such as Rending and Tesla on 6. Right above, I have shown that the attack hits the shields: Those Rules trigger
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

Not a single thing you say there applies to the situation I'm talking about. It's like you're just copy/pasting random quotes from your post you said was RAW (which is false) that you think answer things when... they don't.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule.
Now, certain Special Rules trigger when a shot Hits a target, such as Rending and Tesla on 6. Right above, I have shown that the attack hits the shields: Those Rules trigger
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

If you can ever prove to me how 1 Shot of any weapons of your liking can produce more than 1 Hit on a building, You will have made a very good argument i cannot refute.

 grendel083 wrote:
Tesla Carbine. P82 of Codex Necrons.
This is an Assault 1 weapon.

One attack, one shot, one target, three hits.

Covered right here.

rigeld2 wrote:
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/R/Rvarna.pdf

"suffer 3 hits each if they are hit"

JinxDragon wrote:
Pulse Sub-munitions create 3 hits for each building under the marker for each shot.

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

Phase: VSG Special Rule wrote:First, you will notice how this is a step, a Special Rule step, where things happen according to the Special Rule.
Now, certain Special Rules trigger when a shot Hits a target, such as Rending and Tesla on 6. Right above, I have shown that the attack hits the shields: Those Rules trigger
So, the rules that trigger on Hit, such as Tesla, now triggers, and: Tesla adds 2 more hits.

I'm sorry, where in the VSG rules is this a quote from?
Because you're showing this as a verbatim quote of the VSG rule.
Are you infact showing your opinion here, and claiming it as a rules quote? Some might call this an outright lie.
This quote is also wrong, you're inventing a step, one that would trigger a rule twice, and have no permission to do so.

 grendel083 wrote:

If you can ever prove to me how 1 Shot of any weapons of your liking can produce more than 1 Hit on a building, You will have made a very good argument i cannot refute.

 grendel083 wrote:
Tesla Carbine. P82 of Codex Necrons.
This is an Assault 1 weapon.

One attack, one shot, one target, three hits.

Covered right here.

You asked, here it is. Exactly what you asked for.
The "covered" as you put it is a made up stage (not to mention a misquote).
I have supplied exactly what you ask for, can I accept your concession now, or do you have another reason why it "doesn't count"?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Rigeld Posted the RAW for those, You read the RAW for those, you just posted on the RAW for those.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Again, stating things i have not said. They DO follow the same system. The one in that long post if you re-read it carefully.

Essentially, what i am applying *in a way*
Not saying this is as Written as it is not, but might clear things up:
"Each shot will hit the shield" is the conclusion reading the RaW.

So a single shooting attack can only consist of a single shot?
And does that mean an Assault 20 weapon will hit 20 times? Or do you resolve the rolls to-hit and then apply those hits?

No a shooting attack is from any unit, the entire Unit's shots. Assault 20 is 20 shots, as per rules, so you resolve their to-hit, yes. Then transfer the shots that Hit, to hit the shield instead (still not the same "hit")

So you resolve the number of hits prior to moving the shooting attack over to the shield. Correct?
How does a blast weapon determine the number of hits? When does that happen - before or after the shooting attack is moved to the shield?

Correct. 1)By placing the template when you hit the target 2)"Instead hits the projected void shield" Hitting the Void Shield. When does counting models under the template? before the shot is moved and scores a hit on the shield.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Agreed, completely. Then it transfers, and you have the Hit the VSG RaW says you have.

Yes - the shooting attack that has hit 10 times transfers, just like a shooting attack that has hit 3 times. I'm glad you finally agree.

Correction - the shooting attack that has hit 10 times transfers the shot, not the 10 hits, just like a shooting attack that has hit 3 times with 3 shots.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Phase: VSG Special Rule, put it in a quote to split phases clearly. The entire post was just showing how i read the VSG Special Rule and don't understand why some people can read it the same but others don't.

I already agreed Telsa will add hits to your single shot? I concede that Tesla will Roll to Pen the Void Shield more times that it has shot.
Got it.

JinxDragon wrote:
You have already reviewed and misapplied them, without even realizing what you where misapplying.

Nothing within the Pulse Sub-munion Rules tells us how many hit's are generated against a Special Rule either. Given that the number of hits generated can be between 1-3 depending on what it hit's this weapon can not resolve through your interpretation of events. The lack of the Special Rule telling us to re-calculate based on the generator being hit, which you keep trying to get us to do, prevents us from knowing how many hits this Special Rule is generating.

Extremely Bulky and (...) targeted buildings and fortifications suffer 3 hits each

 BlackTalos wrote:
Is the VSG not a Fortification choice for your army? You would apply the SR to the hit on the shield and Pen 3 times, still?

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Phase: VSG Special Rule, put it in a quote to split phases clearly. The entire post was just showing how i read the VSG Special Rule and don't understand why some people can read it the same but others don't.

It's not a quote from the VSG rule, so don't put it as one.
It's the exact same as putting words in others mouths.
Express your opinion by all means, please do, but don't claim it's a quote from a rule.

 grendel083 wrote:

I already agreed Telsa will add hits to your single shot? I concede that Tesla will Roll to Pen the Void Shield more times that it has shot.
Got it.

Ok, so we now have more than one example that a single shot on a single target DOES NOT equal a single hit.
You are on board with this notion now, correct?

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Is the VSG not a Fortification choice for your army? You would apply the SR to the hit on the shield and Pen 3 times, still?

Why is that relevant? The VSG is not involved in the shooting attack, the shields are.

JinxDragon wrote:
You have already reviewed and misapplied them, without even realizing what you where misapplying.

Nothing within the Pulse Sub-munion Rules tells us how many hit's are generated against a Special Rule either. Given that the number of hits generated can be between 1-3 depending on what it hit's this weapon can not resolve through your interpretation of events. The lack of the Special Rule telling us to re-calculate based on the generator being hit, which you keep trying to get us to do, prevents us from knowing how many hits this Special Rule is generating.

. There are less hits in your attack than models: RaW Broken

 FlingitNow wrote:

. There are less hits in your attack than models: RaW Broken

No because we are told to transfer the attack (and therefore those hits too) to the shield. You are the one saying we reduce the number of hits not us. Unless you are claiming the unit still suffers the hits as well?

So again you concede because you won't give the answer. So again I ask why continue posting when you've already conceded?

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Is the VSG not a Fortification choice for your army? You would apply the SR to the hit on the shield and Pen 3 times, still?

Why is that relevant? The VSG is not involved in the shooting attack, the shields are.

Because you need to know for the "Cluster Fire" Special Rule

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

. There are less hits in your attack than models: RaW Broken

No because we are told to transfer the attack (and therefore those hits too) to the shield. You are the one saying we reduce the number of hits not us. Unless you are claiming the unit still suffers the hits as well?

So again you concede because you won't give the answer. So again I ask why continue posting when you've already conceded?

No I was simply applying your method. Correct me if I got it wrong:

Vindicator shot, Large Blast, covers 10 Models. You *transfer* the 10 Hits to your VSG, that has 4 shields. You Pen all 4 shields and re-assign the remaining hits (6) to the Unit.

You now have a Unit, covered by a Large Blast that covers 10 Models, but has 6 Wounds to Roll?

I do think the Blast RaW would disagree there....

No I was simply applying your method. Correct me if I got it wrong:

Vindicator shot, Large Blast, covers 10 Models. You *transfer* the 10 Hits to your VSG, that has 4 shields. You Pen all 4 shields and re-assign the remaining hits (6) to the Unit.

You now have a Unit, covered by a Large Blast that covers 10 Models, but has 6 Wounds to Roll?

I do think the Blast RaW would disagree there....