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.

Valkyrie Heavy Bolter upgrade firing arc can they fire straight forward?

The way they have the door gunners they fire to the left and right and the guy is almost hanging out of the aircraft if you swivel them to fire directly forward.

Sounds like a bad upgrade if they can't fire directly forward. Since they can't fire at independent targets then the Valkyrie's main guns which face forward.

Are you allowed to model the heavy bolters differently like a chin mounted pair of bolters or wing mounted so they can fire forward?

Kirika wrote:Valkyrie Heavy Bolter upgrade firing arc can they fire straight forward?

They count as sponsons, so have whatever arc of movement they physically have on the model.

Are you allowed to model the heavy bolters differently like a chin mounted pair of bolters or wing mounted so they can fire forward?

While modifying your models to suit yourself is something that GW encourage in their modeling articles, there are no actual rules that allow it.

That, and modifying your models just to give yourself some sort of advantage on the table (even if it's just a perceived advantage) is practically guaranteed to make you unpopular at the table.

Kirika wrote:Valkyrie Heavy Bolter upgrade firing arc can they fire straight forward?

The way they have the door gunners they fire to the left and right and the guy is almost hanging out of the aircraft if you swivel them to fire directly forward.

Really depends how they're build on the model, if it appears that they could do so, they can fire forward. If the gunner is almost hanging out, I'm sure it's fine, surely he's got a harness and safetyline attached inside.

Sounds like a bad upgrade if they can't fire directly forward. Since they can't fire at independent targets then the Valkyrie's main guns which face forward.

As much of a bad upgrade as sponson weapons that can't fire to the rear while the main weapon can, or hull mounted weapons that fire straight ahead when the main weapon is on a turret and can turn 360 degrees. It is what it is, if you don't like it, don't take em. If the main guns are hull mounted, they still have a 45 degree field of fire and could fire to one side, allowing one of the sponsons to join in. Sponsons are limited in their field of fire, otherwise they wouldn't be sponsons, might as well mount everything on one point, or at advantageous positions. All weapons on a tank in its turret, for flyers several turrets that guarantee the best field of fire.

Are you allowed to model the heavy bolters differently like a chin mounted pair of bolters or wing mounted so they can fire forward?

Chin mounted or wing mounted isn't sponson mounted. You'd be modeling to give yourself an advantage, you'd have to agree with your opponent, I myself would not allow it unless we came up with a fair amount to increase the points cost with.

Well they physically can rotate to fire forward but the poor guy firing it is literally hanging out of the door and people I played with said he can't fire forward because he would fall out.

If you look at the points cost, the valkyries' sponsons cost half that of a leman russ tank. Same weapons, but the Valk's are less likely to have a target, thus the "discount".

If they can physically rotate out on the model without any modification (they can with the GW model) they can fire through their arc of movement.

If you look at the points cost, the valkyries' sponsons cost half that of a leman russ tank. Same weapons, but the Valk's are less likely to have a target, thus the "discount".

Although it may seem sensible, this is not an argument. A heavy flamer costs 20 points for an IG vet squad, but is free on a chimera. IG power weapons are 10 points, while Space Marine power weapons are 15. The Valk's HB sponsons could be cheaper because it's an AV12 chassis, because it can't move 12 and fire or, in the case of a Vendetta, HB aren't useful against the targets that a lascannon would shoot at.

Owch, so much for that... I thought it was solid reasoning.
Sure shows me for thinking that the points are priced fairly... lol.

Yeah it's a good try, but GW doesn't do very well at that sort of internal balance. Why, for example, is a plasmagun on a regular guardsman 15 points--the same as a Tactical Marine?

He'll hit 16% less, and will kill himself twice as often on Overheat results.

Specials should be significantly cheaper on less durable/effective options.

at least it doesn't cost 40 points, just because its capable of killing a terminator.
Oh! but it could kill a Venerable Dreadnought too!

OT, I guess the Valk sponsons have to be taken "as-is" (or not at all...)

Valk HBs can physically point forward, so they can fire straight forward. Very simple.

sourclams wrote:Why, for example, is a plasmagun on a regular guardsman 15 points--the same as a Tactical Marine?

He'll hit 16% less, and will kill himself twice as often on Overheat results.

I would suspect that the costing in this case reflects the fact that, as Guardsmen are cheaper than Marines, you can get a lot more of those plasma guns into the army.

It's an extension of the same reasoning that has heavy weapons costing more for Devastators than for Tactical Marines. Able to get more of them = higher points cost.

Looking at costs on various weapon options is often an exercise in futility. While many units do seem to take into account things such as BS, rarity, "flavor" etc.....other units seem to have upgrades that were just thrown in.

As long as the weapon can aim (or even looks like it could aim, if its glued) at a target, it can fire at the target. Thats RAW pure and simple.

Fluffwise...there are several possible ways the guns could pivot to fire forward:

1) Its the IG, if the gunner falls out he is incompetent and we will replace him. If a guardsman doesnt want to lean too far out of the valk the commisar will convince him.

2) There is a simple locking mechanism so that the gun can point straight forward and be fired.

3) The valk is a technological marvel for the IG, it could well have some simple joystick control so that it can be remotely aimed.


Take your pick, but the arcs are not layed out strictly on any diagram, its just where the weapon can be aimed.

Pne more reason that the valk/ vendetta is an underpriced amazing vehicle.


Sliggoth

Well riddle me this then...

Would it be acceptable to use a Forgeworld Vulture in place/counts as a Vendetta if I take the Heavy Bolter upgrade for 10pts? I realize I won't be transporting any troops with this model and I am giving up one heavy bolter however, the vulture does have a chin mounted Heavy Bolter, not 2 side door guns.

What do you think?

How about "he has a safety harness?" Door gunners on modern helicopters have straps that allow them to lean out of the craft to engage targets, so it stands to reason that Valkyrie door gunners can do the same thing.

Really I think it's as simple as "can the door guns be rotated/swivelled to point straight ahead without altering the model?"

In this case, the answer is yes.

Thus, strafe away.

Ruleslawyery.

The rulebook states that "bolt on" weapons are able to fire in a 45 degree arc from their mounting point (pg 59).

It's not a sponson, hull mounted, or turret, so that just leaves bolt on.

The army list at the back of the book makes it pretty clear that they're sponsons.

Fetterkey wrote:How about "he has a safety harness?" Door gunners on modern helicopters have straps that allow them to lean out of the craft to engage targets, so it stands to reason that Valkyrie door gunners can do the same thing.

... sort of brings this to mind ...

Tri wrote:... sort of brings this to mind ...

Glad to know that was not just me.

Kirika wrote:Well they physically can rotate to fire forward but the poor guy firing it is literally hanging out of the door and people I played with said he can't fire forward because he would fall out.

Show 'em this picture of a Pavehawk door gunner:

grankobot wrote:The army list at the back of the book makes it pretty clear that they're sponsons.

Not having the book, I bow to your book-fu.

Then they can shoot 180 degrees; kinda a funny image that some guy would be dangling out the door to do it though.

agnosto wrote:

grankobot wrote:The army list at the back of the book makes it pretty clear that they're sponsons.

Not having the book, I bow to your book-fu.

Then they can shoot 180 degrees; kinda a funny image that some guy would be dangling out the door to do it though.

Just to be clear here, being sponsons doesn't automatically mean a 180 fire arc.

Sponsons have whatever arc the weapon physically has on the model (rulebook, page 59). So Predator and Land Raider sponsons have somewhat more than 180 degrees. Leman Russ sponsons have quite a bit less.

insaniak wrote:

agnosto wrote:

grankobot wrote:The army list at the back of the book makes it pretty clear that they're sponsons.

Not having the book, I bow to your book-fu.

Then they can shoot 180 degrees; kinda a funny image that some guy would be dangling out the door to do it though.

Just to be clear here, being sponsons doesn't automatically mean a 180 fire arc.

Sponsons have whatever arc the weapon physically has on the model (rulebook, page 59). So Predator and Land Raider sponsons have somewhat more than 180 degrees. Leman Russ sponsons have quite a bit less.

The book also states that if the weapon is unable to move because it's glued in place, it's assumed that it is able to fire the full arc of its weapon type.....sooooo, just glue your weapons in place and avoid argument.

agnosto wrote:The book also states that if the weapon is unable to move because it's glued in place, it's assumed that it is able to fire the full arc of its weapon type

...which, in the case of sponsons, is: whatever arc the weapon actually moves through.

So gluing your sponsons in place won't give them a different arc. They still have whatever the model would have if they weren't glued in place.

insaniak wrote:

agnosto wrote:The book also states that if the weapon is unable to move because it's glued in place, it's assumed that it is able to fire the full arc of its weapon type

...which, in the case of sponsons, is: whatever arc the weapon actually moves through.

So gluing your sponsons in place won't give them a different arc. They still have whatever the model would have if they weren't glued in place.

Eghads Book-fu'd yet again!

Ok then, mod your sponson so a full rotation is possible.

agnosto wrote:Ok then, mod your sponson so a full rotation is possible.

Ignoring for a moment that it's already been pointed out that the sponsons being asked about here already have a full rotation, modifying your models to give yourself an advantage won't make you popular at the table.

And, as was also already pointed out, there are no rules that actually allow it.

insaniak wrote:

agnosto wrote:Ok then, mod your sponson so a full rotation is possible.

Ignoring for a moment that it's already been pointed out that the sponsons being asked about here already have a full rotation, modifying your models to give yourself an advantage won't make you popular at the table.

And, as was also already pointed out, there are no rules that actually allow it.

Ok, no levity then. I'll just sit here in my straight-jacket and quietly bump my head up against the rubber lining of my room.

No offense, but it would be funnier if it wasn't offered up as the answer to [insert model-based rules issue here] so often.

Too many people seem to actually think that as there are no rules specifically forbidding you from modeling for advantage it's acceptable (or at least a valid solution) to do so.

Apologies for being a killjoy

They can fire directly in front of the valk as the rules state in the 40k rulebook for sponsons. (well as long as wings and mounted weapons not block the HB's line of sight) there mount is designed to lean rotate out the door as blackhawks rotary cannons do, so they can fire forwards. Even if HB is glued well inside the valks doorway and being held by the gunner it is assumed that the gunner can lean out and blast away. You don't need to mod it, that would be like fixing a landraiders lascannon in place facing forward then saying it can't fire to the left or right of it etc.

Thread is being locked due to thread necromancy.