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.

this came up in another thread so i figured i'd post it here. i'm thinking about buying two valks but my preferred storage option is the GW case. If i want to fit them both in there, i have to clip off the tail boom permanently and make the wings removable. is this tail removal modelling for advantage? i can't think of any actual advantage (or disadvantage frankly other than storage) that the tail gives. it's not the hull so it is not used to measure distance for firing at nor is it used to gain a few extra inches in emergency disembarking. it's 5" up off the ground so it can't be charged unless immobilized (and even that is iffy). other than looking cool, the tail serves no in game purpose.

Use magnets to attach the tail and make the Valk able to be broken down to fit your preferred storage.

Then, it fits your case AND keep the cool-looking tail.

i don't have much faith in a pair of magnets keeping that long of a shaft in place. to much normal force.

warboss wrote:i don't have much faith in a pair of magnets keeping that long of a shaft in place. to much normal force.

A big enough magnet would do the job; my hammerhead turrets are magnetized and haven't had one fall off yet, not even if I hold it upside down and shake it.

i might try it.

for those voting yes, could you post a blurb about what advantage in game you actually get?

agnosto wrote:

warboss wrote:i don't have much faith in a pair of magnets keeping that long of a shaft in place. to much normal force.

A big enough magnet would do the job; my hammerhead turrets are magnetized and haven't had one fall off yet, not even if I hold it upside down and shake it.

This made me laugh.

It would just be too much without the word "turrets" though.

Instead of magnets, why not pin the tail in place with small metal sticks? Drill one or two small holes on both sides and attach metal rods on one side to act as anchors. ( Not sure if this comes across properly since I am improvising terminology. )

I think you'll find that whether or not the tail actually counts as hull is pretty rigorously debated. I'm in the "if it's not decoration it's hull" camp myself.

While I agree with the above, I would say it is in the spirit of the game to make variant vehicles out of standard vehicles.

The query is what unfair advantage might be gained by the procedure. Could it be considered the equivalent of turning your Land Raiders into low riders to minimise their target profile.

Personally I would not have a big problem with that. I think some strict players might get annoyed though.

Agree w/willydstyle. It's not clear that the tail section isn't "hull" as per the rules. Since the huge size of the valk is one of its disadvantages, it could be seen as modeling for advantage.

Which is why I didn't vote in the poll, as I think the first option is misleading.

Kilkrazy wrote:While I agree with the above, I would say it is in the spirit of the game to make variant vehicles out of standard vehicles.

The query is what unfair advantage might be gained by the procedure. Could it be considered the equivalent of turning your Land Raiders into low riders to minimise their target profile.

Personally I would not have a big problem with that. I think some strict players might get annoyed though.

I confess belonging to the "strict" school. The wings and tail are integral parts of the vehicle and as such are "hull". You can draw LOS and target them. But as always YMMV. If your local regular opponents are cool with it, no problem.

so if you think it's part of the hull, you'd have no problem with someone emergency diserbarking 2" from the tip of the tail?

warboss wrote:so if you think it's part of the hull, you'd have no problem with someone emergency diserbarking 2" from the tip of the tail?

Obviously. This is just one of many follow-up questions that result from the "hull or not hull"- debate. The door must swing both ways. If my opponent can target and shoot the wings and tail of my birds ( I´ve actually lost more Vendettas to Ordnance Blast shots than Lascannons or Missile Launcers ) the I get this small benefit.

A-P wrote:

warboss wrote:so if you think it's part of the hull, you'd have no problem with someone emergency diserbarking 2" from the tip of the tail?

Obviously. This is just one of many follow-up questions that result from the "hull or not hull"- debate. The door must swing both ways. If my opponent can target and shoot the wings and tail of my birds ( I´ve actually lost more Vendettas to Ordnance Blast shots than Lascannons or Missile Launcers ) the I get this small benefit.

There's no door in the back of the model. All other transports have doors, that why models are destroyed if the access points are blocked at the time the vehicle is destroyed.

If you don't like the negatives that come with your bazillion lazcannon shots, don't use the unit in your games.

agnosto wrote:
There's no door in the back of the model. All other transports have doors, that why models are destroyed if the access points are blocked at the time the vehicle is destroyed.

If you don't like the negatives that come with your bazillion lazcannon shots, don't use the unit in your games.

. No offense, but you have lost me. No door in the back? Please elaborate. Last time I looked Valk/Vendys have three access point: left, right and back.

Actually, the bit about a unit being destroyed if the access points are blocked is false.

If a transport is destroyed, you disembark. Through the access points if they are clear, but via emergency disembark (anywhere within 2" of the hull) if the access points are not clear.

The access points on a Valk are meaningless anyway - all units disembark/embark by being within 2" of the base.

A-P wrote:

. No offense, but you have lost me. No door in the back? Please elaborate. Last time I looked Valk/Vendys have three access point: left, right and back.

My bad, it's been a while since I looked at one. Well, then of course you jump out the back. Makes you think though about jumping down that far, the same with devilfish and like skimmers...

I think your poll ignores the nature of the rule: that modeling for advantage is prohibited. Even if you gained an advantage, you're not seeking one any more than a person who builds their snipers to be prone.

Magnets can easily keep the tail in place if you wanted to go that route. Strength is definitely not a problem and it's not even that much work. The tails are hollow inside, so you just stick a little modeling putty into each side, push a magnet in and let it cure. Very easy. There are creases built into the tail that you can cut it on so it won't look fugly either, unless you use a really old saw or something.

As for "modeling for an advantage", I'm going to say the same thing I said in the other thread: by trimming down the tail, you're requiring the model to take up a lot less space than it would normally need. This lets you potentially move 6" onto the board without having to twist at an angle. That IS an advantage.

I know the INAT FAQ makes an exception for this, but that's a pretty obvious rules change, not a clarification. You can't be half on the table. Either you're on or you're off. Ever looked at the vendetta and gone "wow, 130 points for all that???"

well, this is why. The model is ginormous and there are disadvantages that come with that.

Actually, you can be half off the table. You are not moving off as prohibited by the FAQ, but rather moving on.

thebetter1 wrote:Actually, you can be half off the table. You are not moving off as prohibited by the FAQ, but rather moving on.

The rules are permissive. They don't need to have "you can't move off the table" in ink - the table is, for the purposes of your models, a 6x4 universe. There is nothing after the edge.

You're either on or you're off.

I own a few valks and I always consider shots from the rear hitting the tail to count. So shortening it could be considered for those that want a shot at rear armor with short range weapons (ie Melta guns).

grankobot wrote:

thebetter1 wrote:Actually, you can be half off the table. You are not moving off as prohibited by the FAQ, but rather moving on.

The rules are permissive. They don't need to have "you can't move off the table" in ink - the table is, for the purposes of your models, a 6x4 universe. There is nothing after the edge.

You're either on or you're off.

It's an area not covered by the rules. It says you must move on, but does not say that you must fully move onto the board. The INAT ruling is a good compromise.

so with all this talk of modeling for advantage...I can't use my demon prince that was put onto the bloodthirster round base because the small termy one just didn't seem right?

Daemon Princes are weird - some come with 60mm bases and others come with 40mm. Either would be fine.

warboss wrote:i don't have much faith in a pair of magnets keeping that long of a shaft in place. to much normal force.

Um, Normal force has nothing to do with it. I don't even think it is possible to have 'too much' normal force.

There may, however, be too much torque.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:The access points on a Valk are meaningless anyway - all units disembark/embark by being within 2" of the base.

unless it's immoblized, in which case (if you believe the tail is part of the hull), the embarked troops slip'n'slide down the tail and off back tips.

a pin mount with a pair of neodyium magnets will hold in place. if you are worried about magnet strength get the thicker ones that look like small cylinders.. they are extremely strong for their size.