Speeder Fire Arc

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Deuce11**

What is the arc of fire for the weapons on a SM landspeeder? Most importantly, the underslung armament?

I understand the rules for figuring out arc of fire is more or less whatever the model looks like it has. I play it as 360 defrees but as I proxy the model so I was unable to be sure.

I ask because one of my speeders was immobilised by a pack of stealers and I wanted to roast those aliens down to crispy critters with my heavy flamer but was unsure if my armament had the arc of fire required to fire the template out the rear of the speeder.

**Gwar!**

Depends on how it is mounted, since GW fail to tell us how it is supposed to be mounted.

My best bet would be that it counts as Hull mounted though.

**rednekgunner**

PG. 59 main rule book......hull mounted weapons fire in a 45 degree arc from theit mounting point.

**Deuce11**

even the underslung weapon?
Okay, if that is the way it is played then so be it

thanks for the guidance as usual

**Valkyrie**

I would say the main weapon is pintle mounted, as the weapon is mounted on a sliding rail and not fixed directly to the hull. Obviously it dosent have a 360 degree fire arc but if the weapon could (theoritically) point at it then it should be able to shoot it.

**insaniak**

Deuce11 wrote:even the underslung weapon?

Specifically the undersling weapon.

The gunner's weapon has a definite swing, as it slides along the mounting rail. The underslung weapon is just bolted directly to the hull.

**The Dragon**

You know, I've never actually seen an up-close picture of it, I thought it looked from a distance like a hanging turret-mounted weapon.

So I played the manned one as a 45 degree arc and the one underneath as 180 ( I figured the pilots couldn't see behind themselves).

Guess I was wrong.... say, does anyone have a picture or a link to a picture with the speeder with its hanging weapon. I'd like a better look at it.

**Scott-S6**

As has been said, depends how it's modelled. As it comes in the box, it appears to be hull mounted.

Mine are mounted lower and aligned with the pilot's head (like the chin gun on the Apache).

**rednekgunner**

The model is equipped with a hull mounted assault cannon (or whatever weapon you decide to switch it out with).

**yakface**

See GW online rulebook FAQ for their recommendation on how to play this.

Since the codex doesn't specify how the weapon counts as being mounted that FAQ reference is your best bet.

And to paraphrase what the ruling says:

If the weapon looks like it should be able to pivot and shoot a direction, then it can. So the underslung weapon on a Landspeeder would be able to fire in any direction underneath the bottom of the speeder.

**Scott-S6**

rednekgunner wrote:The model is equipped with a hull mounted assault cannon (or whatever weapon you decide to switch it out with).

Actually no. It's armed with an assault cannon (or whatever). There's no specification of how to mount it.

If you want the assault cannon on the gunner's mount and the melta underneath then that's just fine.

**broxus**

yakface wrote:
See GW online rulebook FAQ for their recommendation on how to play this.

Since the codex doesn't specify how the weapon counts as being mounted that FAQ reference is your best bet.

And to paraphrase what the ruling says:

If the weapon looks like it should be able to pivot and shoot a direction, then it can. So the underslung weapon on a Landspeeder would be able to fire in any direction underneath the bottom of the speeder.

The problem is Yak, it doesnt look like a pintle mounted weapon but a Hull Mounted weapon. I belive that the Assault Cannon is Hull Mounted and the Heavy Bolter has 180 degree firing arc. Giving the guns anything but this is a huge advantage to the SM's and I dont think its accurate.

**Scott-S6**

I don't agree that it's a "huge advantage". Given that speeders have 10 armour all round it really makes little difference what the arcs of the weapons are - you'll always be able to shoot your intended target.

And since the gunner's weapon has an extremely limited arc you need to be pointed almost directly at your target to fire both, regardless of the under-slung weapon's arc of fire.

**yakface**

broxus wrote:

The problem is Yak, it doesnt look like a pintle mounted weapon but a Hull Mounted weapon. I belive that the Assault Cannon is Hull Mounted and the Heavy Bolter has 180 degree firing arc. Giving the guns anything but this is a huge advantage to the SM's and I dont think its accurate.

Did you read the FAQ ruling I was paraphrasing from? I'll post it:

Q. On page 59, the rules for the arc of fire of pintle-mounted (or bolt-on) weapons address those mounted on turrets and those mounted directly on the hull. But what about those mounted on smaller structures (like a Rhino’s cupola) that look like they can rotate 360º, even though they aren’t proper turrets?
A. Remember that the rule is: if it looks like you can point the gun at it, then you can, even if it’s glued in place’. The rest is just a set of guidelines about the arcs of fire of weapons glued in place, and does not cover all possible weapons mounting and vehicles. If the structure the gun is pintle-mounted on is obviously capable of rotating 360º, like in the case of a Rhino’s cupola, then it should be treated as having a 360º arc of fire. However, if you mount the same storm bolter on a Razorback, even though it still can rotate 360º, it won’t obviously be able to fire through the Razorback’s main turret, and so it will have a ‘blind spot’. In the same way, the shuriken catapult mounted under the hull of a Wave Serpent, Falcon, etc. looks like it can rotate 360º, but it does not look like it can be fired through the main hull right behind it, so we normally play that it can be fired roughly in the 180º to the vehicle’s front, which seems like an acceptable compromise.

The Shiruken Catapult on the bottom of a Falcon is as much 'pintle-mounted' as the Assault Cannon on a Speeder is.

The point the FAQ makes, is that the guidelines in the rulebook are just guidelines. What is more important is whether it looks like the weapon could/can actually shoot in a direction since you're supposed to be drawing LOS from the weapon to the target.

And GW is obviously pretty much ignoring the guidelines in the rulebook now because the last few codexes (the only true 5th edition ones, SM & IG) don't bother referencing how any of the weapons are mounted in terms of 'hull', 'pintle', etc.

**broxus**

No where does it state that the Assault Cannon is pintle mounted. Even after your FAQ, it still seems to me that it is. I still think that the Assault Cannon is Hull mounted and the Heavy Bolter has 180 degree firing arc.

Also, yes it is a huge advantge to have a weapon 360 degrees. It gives the LS tactical flexibility to shoot at targets that could other wise be destroyed by other fire.

**brother_zach**

broxus wrote:No where does it state that the Assault Cannon is pintle mounted. Even after your FAQ, it still seems to me that it is. I still think that the Assault Cannon is Hull mounted and the Heavy Bolter has 180 degree firing arc.

Also, yes it is a huge advantge to have a weapon 360 degrees. It gives the LS tactical flexibility to shoot at targets that could other wise be destroyed by other fire.

I would have to agree with your entire statement. This arguement makes me think of the Apache and Cobra attack helicopters, theoridically their chainguns can turn 360 degrees, its impossible for the pilot to do the same(as the weapons targeting system is connected to the pilots optics).

I'd call the "underslung" weapon hull mounted, which would give you 45 degrees of movement.

**Deuce11**

brother_zach wrote: This arguement makes me think of the Apache and Cobra attack helicopters, theoridically their chainguns can turn 360 degrees, its impossible for the pilot to do the same(as the weapons targeting system is connected to the pilots optics).

I'd call the "underslung" weapon hull mounted, which would give you 45 degrees of movement.

I do not mean to be offensive but this comment has absolutely zero merit in a fantasy table-top wargame that has no basis in reality. Apache and Cobra attack helis...really...

**The Dragon**

Well....

That is a flaming bitchslap to the face.

**Lordhat**

Deuce11 wrote:
brother_zach wrote: This arguement makes me think of the Apache and Cobra attack helicopters, theoridically their chainguns can turn 360 degrees, its impossible for the pilot to do the same(as the weapons targeting system is connected to the pilots optics).

I'd call the "underslung" weapon hull mounted, which would give you 45 degrees of movement.

I do not mean to be offensive but this comment has absolutely zero merit in a fantasy table-top wargame that has no basis in reality. Apache and Cobra attack helis...really...

It has a lot of merit in a discussion which has already established that the rules don't cover the topic. We have drifted to what we think the fire arc should be, as directed by the faq. If Apaches and Cobra attack choppers influence how a person feels the weapon should be ruled, then the idea has just as much merit as the actual rules do.

**brother_zach**

Deuce11 wrote:
brother_zach wrote: This arguement makes me think of the Apache and Cobra attack helicopters, theoridically their chainguns can turn 360 degrees, its impossible for the pilot to do the same(as the weapons targeting system is connected to the pilots optics).

I'd call the "underslung" weapon hull mounted, which would give you 45 degrees of movement.

I do not mean to be offensive but this comment has absolutely zero merit in a fantasy table-top wargame that has no basis in reality. Apache and Cobra attack helis...really...

Until I see a land speeder fly over my house, rotate its "underslung" weapon 360 degrees (unlike the attack helicopters mentioned) and shoot at me, this is the only example that helps me solve a problem like this.

Remember too, its a vehicle moving very fast high above the ground. it requires the greatest concentration to fly (that's why there's both a PILOT and a GUNNER). I doubt a pilot or a gunner could have time to worry about whats already behind him to turn the weapon 360 degrees and try to kill it. No, in this case, dogfighting and strafing tactics would most likely be used.

**DogOfWar**

If it's zooming along the ground at a great rate of knots, I would probably limit the firing arc to 180 degrees in front of the LS regardless of how it looks like it's mounted.

If it's gone haywire and is now immobilized in mid air with no way to turn, I think it's fair to say the gunner/pilot would definitely TRY and shoot at something behind them. Even if it is in desperation.

DoW

**brother_zach**

DogOfWar wrote:If it's zooming along the ground at a great rate of knots, I would probably limit the firing arc to 180 degrees in front of the LS regardless of how it looks like it's mounted.

If it's gone haywire and is now immobilized in mid air with no way to turn, I think it's fair to say the gunner/pilot would definitely TRY and shoot at something behind them. Even if it is in desperation.

DoW

Outstanding point. It would make an exelent house rule.

Regardless, if your land speeder is apart of a squadron and gets imobilized, it gets left behind. Or am I wrong here? I'm definately no guru at this.

**Gwar!**

Yup. In a Squadron Immobilised = Wrecked

**brother_zach**

Gwar! wrote:Yup. In a Squadron Immobilised = Wrecked

Aye, guess im not as dumb as I thought I was.

**yakface**

broxus wrote:No where does it state that the Assault Cannon is pintle mounted. Even after your FAQ, it still seems to me that it is. I still think that the Assault Cannon is Hull mounted and the Heavy Bolter has 180 degree firing arc.

Also, yes it is a huge advantge to have a weapon 360 degrees. It gives the LS tactical flexibility to shoot at targets that could other wise be destroyed by other fire.

By the rules the AC isn't pintle-mounted and it isn't Hull mounted. It isn't anything.

So there is no way to play it by the RAW. The only thing you have to go on is the FAQ, which clearly says that if it looks like the weapon could pivot around and fire, it can, which is exactly the case with the underslung weapon on a Land Speeder.

**broxus**

yakface wrote:
broxus wrote:No where does it state that the Assault Cannon is pintle mounted. Even after your FAQ, it still seems to me that it is. I still think that the Assault Cannon is Hull mounted and the Heavy Bolter has 180 degree firing arc.

Also, yes it is a huge advantge to have a weapon 360 degrees. It gives the LS tactical flexibility to shoot at targets that could other wise be destroyed by other fire.

By the rules the AC isn't pintle-mounted and it isn't Hull mounted. It isn't anything.

So there is no way to play it by the RAW. The only thing you have to go on is the FAQ, which clearly says that if it looks like the weapon could pivot around and fire, it can, which is exactly the case with the underslung weapon on a Land Speeder.

Yak, I agree with your assesment but disagree that it looks like the weapon under the LS looks like it can swivel. It looks like an obvious hull mounted weapon to me.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

yakface wrote:
broxus wrote:No where does it state that the Assault Cannon is pintle mounted. Even after your FAQ, it still seems to me that it is. I still think that the Assault Cannon is Hull mounted and the Heavy Bolter has 180 degree firing arc.

Also, yes it is a huge advantge to have a weapon 360 degrees. It gives the LS tactical flexibility to shoot at targets that could other wise be destroyed by other fire.

By the rules the AC isn't pintle-mounted and it isn't Hull mounted. It isn't anything.

So there is no way to play it by the RAW. The only thing you have to go on is the FAQ, which clearly says that if it looks like the weapon could pivot around and fire, it can, which is exactly the case with the underslung weapon on a Land Speeder.

**Dracos**

What, in your mind broxus, prevents it from rotating?

**The Dragon**

Do tell.

This is why I asked earlier for someone who actually has a model of it to post an up-close photo. From a distance, It looks like it can swivel just fine to me.

**Madgod**

I agree. It can certainly turn 180 degrees so it really would make no sense at all to impose a limit on the arc of fire for no actual purpose. If it can swivel 180 degrees theres no good reason why it cant go 360 degrees IMHO.

**The Dragon**

Seriously though, can't a guy get a picture here.