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.

Hello all,

I may be late to the party, but I just picked-up the IG Codex and I cannot find the answer…

The Basilisk and the Medusa can both “direct" fire. Yes?
(Griffon and Colossus No; in the teeny tiny print)
Q)
Does the Basilisk have to abide by the “minimum” range (36") when it “direct" fires?
Or is the minimum range only for "indirect" fire?

Thanks, and always reference page numbers are greatly appreciated!

Yes, they may direct fire (in fact, isn't the medusa direct only, or is that something else?).
They ignore minimum range per the main rulebook on Ordnance barrage firing directly, page 58.

Thank you for page reference # Don Mondo!!!

don_mondo wrote:(in fact, isn't the medusa direct only, or is that something else?)

That is correct; the Medusa can not fire indirect.

rexscarlet wrote:Thank you for page reference # Don Mondo!!!

Note: It is possible to "scatter" back onto the firing vehicle...

Che-Vito wrote:

Note: It is possible to "scatter" back onto the firing vehicle...

Indeed it is. Ever had a Bassie blow itself up because it fired at the Orks clustered right in front of it?

They used to reason that the rounds were actually "bouncing" off the ground before detonating, which was why you could potentially mushroom cloud yourself. It didn't make much sense, and the fact that they haven't done anything about it is a bit annoying, but in all honesty it comes up so rarely for me and when it does it is usually so entertaining that I don't really care too much about it.

Skinnattittar wrote:They used to reason that the rounds were actually "bouncing" off the ground before detonating, which was why you could potentially mushroom cloud yourself. It didn't make much sense, and the fact that they haven't done anything about it is a bit annoying, but in all honesty it comes up so rarely for me and when it does it is usually so entertaining that I don't really care too much about it.

Not sure why they'd go to all that effort to explain it, when they could just say that it was a misfire in the gun itself. It's not entirely uncommon with modern (20th/21st century) artill.

Che-Vito wrote:

Skinnattittar wrote:They used to reason that the rounds were actually "bouncing" off the ground before detonating, which was why you could potentially mushroom cloud yourself. It didn't make much sense, and the fact that they haven't done anything about it is a bit annoying, but in all honesty it comes up so rarely for me and when it does it is usually so entertaining that I don't really care too much about it.

Not sure why they'd go to all that effort to explain it, when they could just say that it was a misfire in the gun itself. It's not entirely uncommon with modern (20th/21st century) artill.

Indeed. If it happened to WW2 Artillery, it happens to 40k Artillery