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.

So, 5th ed made Vehicles Pillboxes again, woo hoo.

Now, I admit, the S6 Defensive weapon malarkey was a bit much, so how's about this:

Stationary Vehicles and Combat Speed Remain the same.

Vehicles (Fast or otherwise) moving at combat speed can fire S5 weapons as Defensive Weapons at -1BS. Furthermore, it suffers -1 Shot, to a minimum of 0 (So a Heavy 3 weapon fires only 2 shots, and an Assault 1 weapon cannot fire)

Vehicles moving at Cruising speed can fire a single Defensive Weapon (S4 or less) and may be fired at -1 shot (to a minimum of 0) and -1BS. Fast Vehicles may fire a S5 and lower weapon as a defensive weapon in the same manner (-1BS -1Shot) when moving at Cruising Speed.

Or am I just blathering? Perhaps a 1/2 shots rounded up would work better? For 2 and 3 shot weapons it stays only -1 but it stops things like the Punisher cannon getting out of hand.

I think weapons listed as options in a vehicle's entry should just have a defensive trait (or not) regardless of strength.
So that the Heavy Bolters on a Russ and the Shuriken Cannons on a Wave Serpent could be 'Defensive' while maintaining the Multi-laser on the Chimera and the Assault Cannons on the Razor Back would not.
Switching the defensive ability from a general stat-based rule to one which is a basic rule reflected in the unit entry would allow greater diversity between units while not adding more complexity to the phase.

Specifically on your take... I like the -1 as opposed to the 1/2ing the shots.
Though I think it should either be -1 shots or BS, but not both.

May I ask if there is a problem with S5 weapons being classified as Defensive?

Aside from Vulture Punisher, um punishment... not much.
But just setting at that (S5) does leave Eldar in the cold.

Belphegor wrote:Aside from Vulture Punisher, um punishment... not much.
But just setting at that (S5) does leave Eldar in the cold.

So what S6 weapons would be brought into play? Tau have a few, yes?

Skinnattittar wrote:

Belphegor wrote:Aside from Vulture Punisher, um punishment... not much.
But just setting at that (S5) does leave Eldar in the cold.

So what S6 weapons would be brought into play? Tau have a few, yes?

S5 would cover the generic Burst Cannons that are on many of the vehicles.

What would be the end result of allowing a vehicle to fire all (non barrage) weapons at combat speed, and one at cruising speed, with fast vehicles being able to fire all at cruising speed?

I can see this making vehicles too powerful/mobile, but perhaps you could change the rules for hitting moving vehicles to take away some of this advantage.

leave it at s4=defensive and maybe have other weapons suffer from a nightfighting-like effect to simulate lower accuracy of fast moving vehicle? other wise I think it's fine

the half shot idea is difficult to work with. would you have to figure it out before or after you fired? and what about just increasing it so they fired at half their BS (so SM would fire at BS2, guard would fire at BS 1-2?)

I think S4 is good, but I can't see a vehicle thats guns are ALWAYS stable not being able to fire.

I think it's stupid.

My 2 and a half cents.

It makes no sense for Tau defensive weapons to be S4 their basic side arm is S5! Making a burst cannon not defensive is the same as making the storm bolter on a SM marine vehicle not defensive it just doesn't make sense!

I think weapons listed as options in a vehicle's entry should just have a defensive trait (or not) regardless of strength.
So that the Heavy Bolters on a Russ and the Shuriken Cannons on a Wave Serpent could be 'Defensive' while maintaining the Multi-laser on the Chimera and the Assault Cannons on the Razor Back would not.
Switching the defensive ability from a general stat-based rule to one which is a basic rule reflected in the unit entry would allow greater diversity between units while not adding more complexity to the phase.

QFT the same weapon may even be considered defensive for some vehicles but not for others. Like the Heavy Bolter on a LR makes snse to be defensive but an a Razorback or Leamn Russ sponsons it doesn't.

This would make the most sense to me.

Gwar correct me if I'm wrong but I thought in 4th ed S5 weapons were defensive not S6.

Flingitnow.

Very good point especially in regards to Tau makes no sense that none of their weapons are defensive! A defensive weapon characteristic for each tank would not only streamline things like GW wants but also makes allot of sense. wow that is a really good idea.

dumplingman wrote:Gwar correct me if I'm wrong but I thought in 4th ed S5 weapons were defensive not S6.
Flingitnow.
Very good point especially in regards to Tau makes no sense that none of their weapons are defensive! A defensive weapon characteristic for each tank would not only streamline things like GW wants but also makes allot of sense. wow that is a really good idea.

4th it was S6, I'm pretty sure.

It has been long suggested for weapon mounts to receive Deffensive or not attributes. The main problem with this happening is that it would either require a rules update or every army. Something GW would find abhorrent to do! Another issue I see with this is that Codex writers would undoubtedly make many mistakes (imagine Land Raider Twin-Linked Lascannnons being "defensive?!") or outright no sense! This, however isn't a big concern.

Bumping back up to S5 or even S6 weapons being Defensive isn't a horrendous fate to befall 40k. Dictating which weapons on individual tanks are to be Defensive wouldn't be the end of the game either (I would love my Leman Russ' Sponsons to be Defensive, as that is the purpose of sponson). It WOULD cause a game wide cartwheel of over powered tanks (Leman Russ, for instance), and would make Tanks monster machines crewed by easily disoriented gerbils.

4th it was S6, I'm pretty sure.

It has been long suggested for weapon mounts to receive Deffensive or not attributes. The main problem with this happening is that it would either require a rules update or every army. Something GW would find abhorrent to do! Another issue I see with this is that Codex writers would undoubtedly make many mistakes (imagine Land Raider Twin-Linked Lascannnons being "defensive?!") or outright no sense! This, however isn't a big concern.

Bumping back up to S5 or even S6 weapons being Defensive isn't a horrendous fate to befall 40k. Dictating which weapons on individual tanks are to be Defensive wouldn't be the end of the game either (I would love my Leman Russ' Sponsons to be Defensive, as that is the purpose of sponson). It WOULD cause a game wide cartwheel of over powered tanks (Leman Russ, for instance), and would make Tanks monster machines crewed by easily disoriented gerbils.

Really it was 6? wow I could have sworn it was 5 that is crazy.

And I understand where you are coming from. The idea of a defensive attribute would require a rules update and allot of micromanging. As for the landraider while I don't think it would hapepn that the lascannons would be defensive I could see another problem that being the turret weapon being considered defensive which would in essence allow the land raider to move and fire every weapon.

I personally don't think sponsons should be defensive weapons so I just don't know you do raise some good points but so dose flingitnow with tau. Their basic gun is S5 which is a problem.

I think it was 5 in 3rd edition. Then the Eldar players complained.

I've been suggesting for years (since 5th came out) that there's no such thing as a "defensive weapon"; you can fire any weapon "definsively", at -1 shots (excepting template weapons and assault weapons, which fire to full effect).

I like the simple elegance of it. Dealing with Strength Values is just too messy for me.

Lorek wrote:I've been suggesting for years (since 5th came out) that there's no such thing as a "defensive weapon"; you can fire any weapon "definsively", at -1 shots (excepting template weapons and assault weapons, which fire to full effect).

I like the simple elegance of it. Dealing with Strength Values is just too messy for me.

I like that. Though I still think it should be -50% (Rounding Down). 3 Shot Assault Cannons still rule if you can move and fire them AND all your Bolters AND your MM. 2 Shots, not so much.

How about you get shots at half range with all weapons assuming it moved? Something similar to the psycannon.

Let each vehicle have one main weapon and one defensive weapon defined in the vehicle's codex entry.

Gwar! wrote:So, 5th ed made Vehicles Pillboxes again, woo hoo.

Now, I admit, the S6 Defensive weapon malarkey was a bit much, so how's about this:

Stationary Vehicles and Combat Speed Remain the same.

Vehicles (Fast or otherwise) moving at combat speed can fire S5 weapons as Defensive Weapons at -1BS. Furthermore, it suffers -1 Shot, to a minimum of 0 (So a Heavy 3 weapon fires only 2 shots, and an Assault 1 weapon cannot fire)

Vehicles moving at Cruising speed can fire a single Defensive Weapon (S4 or less) and may be fired at -1 shot (to a minimum of 0) and -1BS. Fast Vehicles may fire a S5 and lower weapon as a defensive weapon in the same manner (-1BS -1Shot) when moving at Cruising Speed.

Or am I just blathering? Perhaps a 1/2 shots rounded up would work better? For 2 and 3 shot weapons it stays only -1 but it stops things like the Punisher cannon getting out of hand.

Why dear lord do you want to make vehicles more powerfull. Isn't 5th edition enough?

I am almost positive that St5 was defensive in 4th. It's been a while since I read my 3rd ed book, but i don't remember defensive weapons in 3rd.

TO the OP, I thought Str 5 was a great value for Defensive Weapons. St 4 made heavy Flamer Sponsons even more pointless than they already were.

jbunny wrote:I am almost positive that St5 was defensive in 4th.

Page 63 4th ed BGB:

Vehicles can mount a frightening array of weapons.
These can be divided into four categories:
• Ordnance weapons
• Ordnance Barrage weapons
• Main weapons (Strength 7 or greater)
• Defensive weapons (Strength 6 or less)

Sadly, your "almost Positive" is wrong

It's been a while since I read my 3rd ed book, but i don't remember defensive weapons in 3rd.

Nope. Vehicles moving 6" fired exactly ONE weapon.

Gwar! wrote:

jbunny wrote:I am almost positive that St5 was defensive in 4th.

Page 63 4th ed BGB:

Vehicles can mount a frightening array of weapons.
These can be divided into four categories:
• Ordnance weapons
• Ordnance Barrage weapons
• Main weapons (Strength 7 or greater)
• Defensive weapons (Strength 6 or less)

Sadly, your "almost Positive" is wrong

It's been a while since I read my 3rd ed book, but i don't remember defensive weapons in 3rd.

Nope. Vehicles moving 6" fired exactly ONE weapon.

Correct again Gwar. I think Jbunny may be thinking of one of the Chapter Approved Books that came out around the middle to end of 3rd that said S5 and lower was considered defensive.

I agree that you should be able to move and should but suffer a penalty.

Also, it would add balance if each vehicle had different defensive options. Of course people would get confused and flame wars would ensue; I can see it now. "Why are the TL Heavy Bolters on your landraider defensive, but the Heavy Bolters on my Leman Russ offensive."

Setting it at S5, makes sense in a lot of ways. Yes, we point to the armies that have a lot of light weapons on their vehicles and say well that gives them an unfair advantage. Well, when you think about it, the advantage of having light weapons on your vehicles is to enhance mobility. This would do just that. Maybe, tau would perform better if they could move and shoot more.

Too bad I can't suggest it as a house rule in my group... They play 'Nids mostly... No vehicles anyway...

On the topic, yes it's a stupid question, but I have been trying to sort something out for the past few days. I may be wrong but in 4th a Walker could move 6" and fire two weapons right? I was reading through 5th the other day and it states that walkers can only fire one after a 6" move. Am I reading that wrong? How did I miss that last time I read through 5th? Or is there a serious typo/printing error? I can scan the page if you are in disbelief? I won't have access to 'MY' rulebook for a few months, so this is driving me nuts. Thank you.

It has been long suggested for weapon mounts to receive Deffensive or not attributes. The main problem with this happening is that it would either require a rules update or every army. Something GW would find abhorrent to do!

I don't think it would require a re-write. Keep it as is for any weapon that does not state it is defensive or primary. So a weapon will be defined as defensive if it says so in the vehicle entry or if it is S4 or below and states nothiing in it's vehicle entry. Likewise primary for S5 and above...

So yeah older codexes would be damaged, hardly something GW would worry about and give them new cheesing chances with the new codexes (so a SM Landraider would have Heavy bolters as defensive weapons but a Space Wolf Landraider would have all it's weapons as defiensive weapons and would cost less points, well hat's how it normally works with these things...)

Captain Solon wrote:the half shot idea is difficult to work with. would you have to figure it out before or after you fired? and what about just increasing it so they fired at half their BS (so SM would fire at BS2, guard would fire at BS 1-2?)

I think S4 is good, but I can't see a vehicle thats guns are ALWAYS stable not being able to fire.

I think it's stupid.

My 2 and a half cents.

Says the kid who makes a Plasma weapon with 30+ different types of firing modes.

personally i think a blanket statement like this...

Lowest str weapon fieldable by your basic troops

that is the highest your defensive weapon should be

your guys fire str 3? well str 3 is your defensive weapon
you fire str 5? well your defensive weapon can be str 5


it would keep the different races..well..different w/o overpowering vehicles.. at most it would give 1-2 races a str 5 gun

TopC wrote:personally i think a blanket statement like this...

Lowest str weapon fieldable by your basic troops

that is the highest your defensive weapon should be

your guys fire str 3? well str 3 is your defensive weapon
you fire str 5? well your defensive weapon can be str 5


it would keep the different races..well..different w/o overpowering vehicles.. at most it would give 1-2 races a str 5 gun

This would MASSIVELY screw over IG and Eldar.
IG (S3) have no basic tank guns below S5, and only pintel mounts at S4
Eldar (S4) have no tank gun below S6 (except plasma missiles, but those hardly count)





I think the best way of doing it would be the Defensive/Primary attribute in a tanks profile.
However, this is highly unlikly as it would require a PDF for all races (bar Tyranids/CDaemons).

Any set S value will hurt someone/overpower another.

IE: S6 is needed for Eldar, S5 for Tau. BUT S6 would make IG ML defensive, which is too good.

I think if they did go down the "publish a PDF for all armies" route, then the following should be done:

All Ordiance/Barrage = Prim

IG:
All Pintels, HKM = Def
All Chimera-type Hull weapons = Def
All Chimera-type Turret weapons = Primary
All Chimera-type artilary mounts = Primary
All LR Turrets = Primary
All LR Hulls/Sponsons = Primary (except HBolters and HFlamers, which would be Def)
Valk-types HBolters, MLasers, MRP = Def
Valk-types Missiles, Lascannons = Prim

SM:
Storm Bolters, HKM = Def
Razor:
TL HBolter, TL Plasguns = Def
Lascannon, TL Lascannon, TL Asscan = Prim
Pred:
HBolters = Def
All others = Prim
LR:
TL HBolter, Hurricane Bolter Sponsons, Redemmer Cannons = Def
Other = Prim

Eldar:
TL SCatapults/SCannons, Falcan Pulse Laser = Def
All other = Prim

Tau:
All Burst Cannons, Seekers = Def
SMS (Devilfish) = Prim
SMS (Other) = Def
All Pirhna guns = Def

Orks:
Trukk -
Big Shoota = Def
Rokkit = Prim
Warbuggy/trakk-
All defensive
Battlewagon/Looted Tank -
Big Shoota = Def
All other = Prim

DE:
DLance, Dissy = Prim
Horrorfex = Def

WH:
All Storm Bolters, Flamer, Heavy Flamers, TL Heavy Flamers, HKM = Def
TL HBolter, TL MM, Exorcist Missile = Prim

DH:
All Storm Bolters, Hurricane Bolter Sponsons, TL HBolter, HKM = Def
TL Lascannons, TL Asscan = Prim

CSM:
TL Bolters, Combi-Bolters, Havok Launchers = Def
Pred:
HBolters = Def
All others = Prim
LR:
TL HBolter = Def
TL Lascannon = Prim

Black Antelope that looks pretty good but you forgot Hurricane bolters for Marine LR's they surely hAVE to be defensive?

And to Add

Tau:
Hammerhead - Burstcannons and SMS Defensive
All others primary
Devilfish - Burstcannons defensive, SMS Primary
Skyray - ML, Burstcannons and SMS defensive.


How about my idea of having all weapons without an attribute to default to S=<4 is defensive, S>4 Primary so they wouldn't have to pdf it all?

I've thought that movement should affect accuracy more than which weapon can fire, and accuracy could be represented by reduced rate of fire or penalties to hit. I mean, every gun in a vehicle is manned by a crew of some sort, it should be able to fire. It just may not be accurate in the jarring, bouncing movement of a vehicle over uneven terrain. Something like this:

Stationary: no adjustment
1-6" move: -1
7-12" move: -2
13-18" move: -3
19+: cannot fire

Assault weapons would either ignore the penalties to reflect that they are designed for moving and firing, or reduce them. Ordnance, due to the massive concussion of firing the gun, would probably still require the "no other weapons fired" rule.

Black Antelope wrote:

SM:
Storm Bolters = Def
Rhino = All Def
Razor:
TL HBolter, TL Plasguns = Def
Lascannon, TL Lascannon, TL Asscan = Prim
Pred:
HBolters = Def
All others = Prim
LR:
HBolter, Redemmer Cannons = Def
Other = Prim

But I like my defensive hurricane bolters!

JW7007,

I think you are right. I came in right before the trial Vehicle runs and Trial assault rules were in either a Chapter approved of WD.

But I knew there were no Defensive weapons in 3rd main book.