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.

I know i know , people say it'll make vehicles over powered and stuff ,
but really , wouldnt it be just more fun if we can aim at different things -_-?

I want to ordnance a group of terminators!
while the front lascanon shoot tanks!
and heavy bolter sponson shoots infantry!

How about a BS penalty for multiple targets? -1 for all shots if shooting at 2 targets, -2 for 3 targets, etc.

I was thinking maybe a leadership check , passed = fire at different targets , fail = all same target.

Sort of representing the crews inside scrambling to adjust target.

Play Tau?

Jack

Jackmojo wrote:Play Tau?

Jack

This. And for Apoc, the Baneblade can do that. And it's horrifying.

Anyways, it would be fun, but it just can't work. As Jack said, if you really want to do that, play as Tau.

LunaHound wrote:I was thinking maybe a leadership check , passed = fire at different targets , fail = all same target.

Sort of representing the crews inside scrambling to adjust target.

Would represent the worth of vehicles better and in fluff is the way to go.

But, GW already screwed the sci fi part of 40k in favor of the fantasy part with shouting and toting cc weapons and throwing magic
spells ( psi ) instead of firepower.

In all honesty, I don't see why vehicles can't just do this with no penalty or leadership check. I mean, come on, that's why tanks were invented, so they could rumble around shooting at everyone!

Basically, it has to do with coordinating your resources (troops/crew). In the Infantry, it's pretty easy, everyone can see the same things, see and hear their leaders, and they are trained to focus on a group objective. With a vehicle, it's far more difficult. Crew communications is limited to an inter-vehicle comms system, or just shouting. Fields of view are extremely restricted and trying to say "over there!" is of little help inside a vehicle. Even more specific commands like "ten degrees port/road/left/driver, 100m" can still be difficult for a crewman to locate. Lastly, it's not like their ammo is limited. Tanks carry a butt-load of bullets.

Agreed. With as bad as vehicles have been nerf hammered in some armies they need some killy back.

Whom ever though up of the rule that h2h always hits rear armour needs to be given a sledgehammer and told to charge a M1 Abrams head on...

i think at least the defensive weapon should be allowed to fire at anything...i mean why would a guy on a heavy stubber start shooting at a huge heavy tank when he could swival around and shoot infantry closing in on the tank while the big guns take care of the armor.

Pintle mounted weapons should just count as crew, firing as an embarked unit would. That would be pretty fair (except maybe for LRCs...).

Well, if this change was created it would make vehicles OP, but i can see where you're coming from and it would fit in with fluff, i think you should be allowed to fire defensive weapons at a different target that you fired your main weapons at.

Eldar Own wrote: i think you should be allowed to fire defensive weapons at a different target that you fired your main weapons at.

QFT. If the main gunner is aiming at one thing, there's no reason the guy on the stubber up top shouldn't be able to swing around and shoot at something else. He's operating pretty much independently, and doesn;t need to confer with the rest of the crew as to where to shoot.

Plus, it would make having defensive weapons more practical. If you take a Las Pred or the Leman Russ Vanquisher (I think that's the tank hunter variant) you're going to be shooting at vehicles pretty much the whole time, and any defensive weapon would be wasted. But f the storm bolter could shoot at that infantry squad bearing down on the tank with a meltagun... well, then it could actually be a defensive weapon.

I'll agree to with Eldar Own and Commander Endova. Defensive weapons should have seperate targets, this wouldn't be OP because you're only allowing S:4 weapons to fire at ONE other group of units not like you're firing lascannons at four differant targets. As for the LRC it's a powerful tank but by limiting it to fire at only one additional target you're not giving it too much more.

As for the leadership roll to determine if you can fire at seperate targets, I think this should be an army specific ability and all or nothing is the way to go. Example you pick three targets to fire your LR weapons at, you roll a Ld test, if you pass you roll for each shot like you normally would but if you fail your shots automatically miss, blast weapons have no effect and the unit still counts as having fired so no turbo boost or walker running after the fact. How would you decide which unit a Dread is allowed to assault given these rules?

Double posted somehow. Damn.

Commander Endova wrote:

Eldar Own wrote: i think you should be allowed to fire defensive weapons at a different target that you fired your main weapons at.

QFT. If the main gunner is aiming at one thing, there's no reason the guy on the stubber up top shouldn't be able to swing around and shoot at something else. He's operating pretty much independently, and doesn;t need to confer with the rest of the crew as to where to shoot.

Plus, it would make having defensive weapons more practical. If you take a Las Pred or the Leman Russ Vanquisher (I think that's the tank hunter variant) you're going to be shooting at vehicles pretty much the whole time, and any defensive weapon would be wasted. But f the storm bolter could shoot at that infantry squad bearing down on the tank with a meltagun... well, then it could actually be a defensive weapon.

Agreed. I mean the point of a defensive weapon is for the guy to look around and see things the tank driver and gunner cant see and take out anything threatening the tank(like humvee's going through alley's in Iraq the guy on top makes sure to kill any guys with RPG's before they can shoot it.

Yes, I like the defensive weapon suggestion too. I mean as it is;

'Fire!'
*The gunner looks at his storm-bolter, looks at the distant landraider, looks at the meltacide squad that are eying up his tank, looks back at his stormbolter*
'Yessir!"
*Fires at out of range Land Raider. Then dies.*

I would also like to see the attacking players declaring what weapon is firing at what target before hits are worked out, so it would be harder to just say; yeah, I'll keep firing at unit A until it dies, then whatever guns are left over will hit unit B.

If you want to shoot at multiple targets w/ your vehicles, play tau. GG

I agree with Lunahound. Vehicles should be able to split fire. IRL thats the whole reason to have tank mounted machine guns to shoot infantry while the main gun shoots at other tanks.

IMO the whole 40k vehicle rules suck.

Following Lame things need to be fixed
1. Vehicles should be able to split fire like Lunahound Said

2. vehicles should not be hit on rear armor by assault you hit whatever side you assault on like jp400 said.

3. This defensive weapons being strength 4 so if you move your Leman Russ you can't shoot all those heavy bolter sponsons you paid points for needs to go so you can fire everything. You either lose a shot or if you have 1 shot you get -1 to hit for moving like flames of war when moving fixed.

mmmm target lock goodness. Too bad tau tanks are so limited. Blow up a tank with the rail gun then you've only got an SMS or BC...imagin fusion blaster or pulse cannon sponsons!

Yeah fire defensive weapons at different targets. they need to re-look at defensive wepaons too. Defensive weapons should be S4 across the board it should be the same strength as the standard fire arm of your infantry. So S3 for Guard, S4 For marines etc that makes the most sense.

This looks like a really good idea...to bad it won't affect Orks in any way. Still, it sounds nice.

FlingitNow wrote:Yeah fire defensive weapons at different targets. they need to re-look at defensive wepaons too. Defensive weapons should be S4 across the board it should be the same strength as the standard fire arm of your infantry. So S3 for Guard, S4 For marines etc that makes the most sense.

This got me thinking, for some reason.

Should defensive weapons be any weapon that has a certain strength? It sort of works, at the moment. But what about having 'Defensive Weapon' as a weapon type? I mean, I run the rare TL-Lascannon/HB Sponsons Predator. I really wish that I could fire those heavy bolters as defensive weapons, simply for the fact that heavy bolter shots aren't going to do much to many things a lascannon will. Or am I just wishing for something overpowered?

Yeah defensive weapons could be a weapon type or could be in a weapon definition. However if you run the woe TL-Las and Heavy Bolter Pred that is your own look out and try to ask for a rule to make such a poor loadout half way decent is a little much (why on earth would anyone pay 60 points for 1 Lascannon shot?). It would make the standard Pred a real snip at 85 points for Move 6" and fire EVERYTHING!

Hi all.
If you want a game to follow your expectations of reality,(make sense.) WHY THE SMEG ARE YOU PLAYING 40K?

I agree it would be far more satisfying if the units in 40k behaved how we expected them to, but that would lead to a simulationist type rule set which would make for a tacticaly rich straight forward game .
And this would mean actualy using the modifiers to dice rolls outlined on page 2 of the 40k rule book, instead of the reams of poorly defined special rules...

They tried this half way through 3rd, and it had mixed results. It made vehicles more powerful but not over the top. The only thing is vehicles are more powerful in 4th and 5th than compared to 3rd. So a little increase in power in 3rd was fine, but that same increase in 5th would tip the balance too much.

Think of the Twin linked Las cannon w/ Lascannon Sponsons going first. It could destroy 3 tanks in the first turn. Don't think thats balanced at all.

jbunny wrote:.

Think of the Twin linked Las cannon w/ Lascannon Sponsons going first. It could destroy 3 tanks in the first turn. Don't think thats balanced at all.

Three Broadsides with target lock can do that (one unit) and Tau can field 3 such units....of course then they get assaulted and killed to death.

I wouldn't want that.
IMO it's better to focus all fire on one target.
I'm pretty sure SM landraiders can shoot at multiple targets.

Since a few people have said "play Tau", I have to ask what could be given to the Tau to compensate? Mabey they could be given something to have there S5 weapons count as defensive weapons since nothing a Tau vehicle can equip is lower than that.

rocklord2004 wrote:Since a few people have said "play Tau", I have to ask what could be given to the Tau to compensate? Mabey they could be given something to have there S5 weapons count as defensive weapons since nothing a Tau vehicle can equip is lower than that.

Tau community wishes.

you can move 6'' and fire everything on a Hammer hear if you take a multi tracker

Devilfish + 2 gun drones + multi tracker can move 12'' and fire everything, as per tau codex pg 30 under gun drones it specifically states that they may fire in addition to any weapon permited to fire... can only fire 1 weapon? no biggie gun drones shoot also.

Thats drones only. What if you take smart missles or burst cannons? Both are S5 and even with a multi-tracker you can only fire 1 if you move 12 in. If they gave everybody the ability to shoot at multiple targets to keep the Tau from getting downgraded making them count as defensive weapons would let you move a hammerhead 12in and fire both weapons at different targets. Also if your devilfish takes the burst cannons they are 2 independant cannons so they cant both fire if it moves 6 inches without the multi tracker and can only fire one at a foot. Changing their defencive fire to S5 with an upgrade (replacing the target lock upgrade) would keep them as a unique shooting type army.

EDIT: Added detail to statement.