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.

Hey, I did a quick search on this and didn't see anything that directly referenced it (or rather, the one I did didn't seem to list a lot of rules). Admittedly, it was a quick search and I felt a little lazy. So thanks for any help on this.

If my walker is immobilized, can it spin in place to fire? I'm drawing from two things here:

Pg61 - "An immobilized vehicle may not turn in place..."
Pg72 - "When firing a walker's weapons, pivot the walker on the spot so that it's guns are aimed at the target..." and then "This pivoting in the Shooting phase does not count as moving..."

So I take it as an immobilized vehicle is unable to move OR turn in place. The walker section specifies that the pivoting doesn't count as moving, but this doesn't matter because the vehicle damage section says that immobilized vehicles cannot turn in place.

Again, sorry if this has been addressed in greater detail. It came up the other day during a game and we all just agreed to say it couldn't pivot, but not everyone thought that was the correct interpretation.

Thanks.

It has come up. You played correctly.

It has been addressed, and IIRC the general idea was that though pivoting may not count as moving, an immobilised vehicle (walker) may not pivot BRB pg 57

Edit: spelling aaaaand Ninja'ed by kiranth (i now lay bleeding...)

Immobilised walkers cannot pivot at all ever in any way shape or form under any normal circumstances.

Note that all the Walker's weapon are still considered to have a 45 degrees fire arc though.

Wow, ive been playing it wrong then. I thought that if the walker can pivot on a joint (such as the join in a walkers legs and torso) it can rotate and fire. But the IG walker cant do this as it does not pivot in that fashion.

I guess it has to be all or nothing considering the number of walker types there are.

Alright.. let me throw a large GW monkey wrench into this dicussion and see what everybody has to say. Directly from the FAQ..

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.


Walkers are giant turrets mounted on legs, are they not?? ie. soul grinder..

Also, " This pivoting in
the Shooting phase does not count as moving and
represents the vastly superior agility of walkers in
comparison with other vehicles." pg. 72 pivoting granted exclusivly to walkers which overrides pg 57.

With regards to assaults... Are immobilized walkers still always hit on the front armor when being assaulted?

Camarodragon wrote:Walkers are giant turrets mounted on legs, are they not?? ie. soul grinder..

Sentinel, Ork Kan, Ork Dread, Penitent Engine, Eldar Warwalker... None of these have any real ability to swivel their main hull.

Also, " This pivoting in the Shooting phase does not count as moving and
represents the vastly superior agility of walkers in comparison with other vehicles." pg. 72 pivoting granted exclusivly to walkers which overrides pg 57.

...and is in turn over-ridden by page 61, which says that an immobilised vehicle can no longer turn in place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

s2ua7 wrote:With regards to assaults... Are immobilized walkers still always hit on the front armor when being assaulted?

Yes. Being immobilised simply reduces the walker's attacks.

insaniak wrote:

Camarodragon wrote:Walkers are giant turrets mounted on legs, are they not?? ie. soul grinder..

Sentinel, Ork Kan, Ork Dread, Penitent Engine, Eldar Warwalker... None of these have any real ability to swivel their main hull.

Perhaps that statment I made was a bit drastic. As the soul grinder is my only walker I got a lota love for it. To stimy it with a 45 deg arc after its been immoblized would be contrary to the FAQ. The chaos defiler even states that the battlecannon is in a turret. I would have to play it in a case by case basis for other walkers and would probably give them the benifit of the doubt.

While the general 'rule' in the FAQ (and you can't get more general than a GW FAQ ) might indicate that you can pivot a vehicle's weapon however it is articulated, the specific rule in the section on walkers restricts their LOS arcs to 45 degrees. If the CSM 'dex (don't have one myself) specifies that it also has a turret-mounted weapon, then that's fine, since it's specific ruling overcomes the general walker ruling on that weapon.

No walkers pivot 'at the hips' anymore - when you 'pivot the walker' you turn the whole model - this is also designed to eliminate any confusion over which way it's armour is facing in your opponent's turn. There is a certain amount of abstraction in the CC section, but it is has no bearing on the shooting phase, nor do you actually turn the model when it's assaulted.

Yup. This ain't Battletech. Walkers don't have any game ability to pivot at the hips; that's built into their regular LOS rules.

If a walker has a turret weapon it can fire 360 degrees.

Weapons mounted on a walker aren't assumed to be turret, mounted though. The torso of a walker isn't a turret, in game terms or even really in actual terms.

Orkeosaurus wrote:Weapons mounted on a walker aren't assumed to be turret, mounted though. The torso of a walker isn't a turret, in game terms or even really in actual terms.

Well, the Defiler has a turret in its fluff. It just doesn't have the weapons defined in its actual rules.

Aren't all Walker weapons assumed to have a 45 degree line of sight?

Yeah, that was imprecise of me. Was still on my first coffee of the morning.

What I should have said is that the defiler, despite being referred to as having a battlecannon in a turret in the fluff, has no specific mounting listed in the actual rules, or any other rule that would over-ride the normal walker fire arc.

I don't know, the defiler cannon is pretty clearly turret mounted.

The defiler is the exception that proves the rule.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:I don't know, the defiler cannon is pretty clearly turret mounted.

Sure... but it's a turret that only has a 45 degree fire arc, because that's what the rules say the fire arc is for all walker weapons.

The preditor, whirlwind, nor razorback (just to name a few) have nowhere listed in their profiles that they are turret mounted. Are we to assume that they are hull mounted and can only fire in a 45 deg arc?

However the Tau hammerhead does list a turret mounted system in its profile...

Now if we were to ASSUME that GW didn't make mistakes then turret mounted would be described as such and played as such. And there would be an awfuly bunch of mad Space marine players out there. But GW knowing that theyve made some errors thoughout the years released the FAQ. Which basicly states "If it looks like you can shoot it, you can... sorry we didn't put turrets, gangly arms, coupalas, and pintle mounts in all the possible codex's. " Does it look like a preditor can swivel to shoot something 90 deg to the side. Of course.. Does it look like the whirlwind can shoot something 90 deg to the side.. of course.. does it look like the soul grinder with gangly arms can shoot something 90 deg to the side... Of course...



From insaniak --- ""but it's a turret that only has a 45 degree fire arc, because that's what the rules say the fire arc is for all walker weapons.""

Previous to the FAQ fine.. but FAQ overrules that previous rule.