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,



Sorry if this has been posted before, I did use the search feature and came up with nothing.


If a wave serpent with energy fields is hit with a deffrolla do the D6 S10 attacks become S8?


Thanks!

Well, it reduces the strength of weapons above 8 down to 8....

But the Deffrolla isn't a weapon, its wargear (and missing most of the requirements defined by the BRB to be a weapon). So I would say no, it doesn't get reduced to 8.

Ah not this again :(

It's unclear either way.

Sorry GWAR, I did search. Promise.

Does that also mean that when a Landraider rams it it can only ever get to S8?

The Eldar codex says: "Any ranged attacks against the wave serpent from the front or side arc with a strength of greater than 8 count as S8"

How can a tank shock be a ranged attack?

Are ramming or Deffrolla hits ever defined as ranged attacks?


There is your answer...

Alerian wrote:Are ramming or Deffrolla hits ever defined as ranged attacks?


There is your answer...

But are they ever defined as NOT Ranged attacks!

But yeah, I would say that Ramming and Deffrollas can go above S8, but as I said, others will argue otherwise.

Gwar! wrote:

Alerian wrote:Are ramming or Deffrolla hits ever defined as ranged attacks?


There is your answer...

But are they ever defined as NOT Ranged attacks!

But yeah, I would say that Ramming and Deffrollas can go above S8, but as I said, others will argue otherwise.

I'd love to see people LOGICALLY argue that those are indeed ranged attacks outside the nay sayings of 'my fist hit your face with the arm's range' nonsense

It's clear it doesn't, the deff rollla is wargear not a weapon.

Is it a weapon? No. A weapon has to fire something.

Is it a ranged attack? Not in the sense W40k means.

There is no requirement that the Deffrolla be a weapon for the energy field to function.

Now is something that inflicts a number of hits an attack? In some form or another probably, altho we are never given definitions for most terms in 40k.

Now the crux of the problem comes down to whether or not this is a ranged attack. The entry on the energy field seems to break all attacks down to either ranged or cc, so it would seem to come down to what sort of attack a ram is mose closely akin. Range or cc.




Sliggoth

as a ram requires touching the target, the energy field doesnt apply.

But the ram starts outside of the energy field, so fluffwise it could be slowed by the field. I'm not arguing either way just pointing that out.

The only thing I could see supporting that it is not a CC attack is the fact it doesn't hit rear armor (does it?) like other CC attacks. Of course it doesn't seem clear to me that it doesn't hit rear armor too. Perhaps it suggests a 3rd type of attack, one where hits just happen, that is distinct from the other two.

I could see people arguing it, though I would play it as Str10 against the armor facing, as a ram with extra bits.

Except DoG is always to the front armour, even if it is a close combat attack - so that doesnt work to differentiate it.

However as the Ram is clearly not ranged (it has no range; base contact is NOT a range of 0") then the protection afforded by the field does not operate, as it ONLY works on ranged attacks.

Its the ram thats the attack tho I suppose. Since ram is a type of tank shock, and tank shock is most definitely an attack.

The tank itself is being used as the weapon (from pg 68 rules). So the vehicle is aimed and then moved, much as if it is fired at the target. If the vehicle isnt aimed correctly or move far enough it misses the target, if it comes into contact then the attack hits.

This would seem to quite possibly be a ranged attack, since the vehicle itself is "fired" its movement range as a projectile.



Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:Its the ram thats the attack tho I suppose. Since ram is a type of tank shock, and tank shock is most definitely an attack.

The tank itself is being used as the weapon (from pg 68 rules). So the vehicle is aimed and then moved, much as if it is fired at the target. If the vehicle isnt aimed correctly or move far enough it misses the target, if it comes into contact then the attack hits.

This would seem to quite possibly be a ranged attack, since the vehicle itself is "fired" its movement range as a projectile.



Sliggoth

No. The vehicle is in no sense "fired".

Being "fired" presupposes a firer. What, exactly, is firing the vehicle?

I was using "fired" to indicate that the vehicle itself was the projectile/ weapon in this case, since the rules say that the vehicle is the weapon. I didnt use the term fired, I used the quotes to indicate that this was as close to a game term as we could seem to get for what is happening with the vehicle. We can call it apricot if you prefer. The vehicle is "apricoted" its movement range doesnt quite have the same flavor to it tho.


Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:I was using "fired" to indicate that the vehicle itself was the projectile/ weapon in this case, since the rules say that the vehicle is the weapon. I didnt use the term fired, I used the quotes to indicate that this was as close to a game term as we could seem to get for what is happening with the vehicle. We can call it apricot if you prefer. The vehicle is "apricoted" its movement range doesnt quite have the same flavor to it tho.


Sliggoth

But using "apricot" does make the point I intended, which is that there are key differences between a Ram and firing a ranged weapon. For instance, you never roll to hit with a Ram. You also never measure the range, you simply move a set distance and Ram (or Tank Shock) any enemy unit you touch.

These differences mean that no, you cannot consider a Ram to be a ranged weapon; it isn't. It does not do what ranged weapons do.

Since the energy field does not apply to anything but ranged weapons, it therefore does not apply to the Deff Rolla. What the attack IS, is actually immaterial; all we care about is that it is not a ranged weapon. We can show that by a simple comparison of the two.

As I said before, the energy field affects ranged ATTACKS. It could care less if the attack is being delivered by a weapon or indeed an apricot. Weapons are irrelevant to the energy field.

A ram certainly is an attack. The problem then comes down to trying to determine if its a ranged attack or not. We are told that the attack is delivered by the vehicle using its mass as a weapon. So the vehicle itself is the weapon here..altho as said, the weapon part isnt needed for the energy field.

It probably more falls under the heading of special attack, altho that still doesnt tell us if its a ranged attack or not.

The vehicle is aimed at its target, and then moved straight ahead (in tank shock its declared distance, in ram its full movement allowance). So the ram is definitely declared at a distance from the target, hence why the idea that it *might* be a ranged attack comes into play.

Unfortunately this is one of those areas that GW has left unclear, we really dont know in which category the ram attack should be placed.



Sliggoth

If a ram is a ranged attack then so is assaulting as in both situations the 'attack' started at a point where contact wasn't present.

Sliggoth wrote:A ram certainly is an attack. The problem then comes down to trying to determine if its a ranged attack or not. We are told that the attack is delivered by the vehicle using its mass as a weapon. So the vehicle itself is the weapon here..altho as said, the weapon part isnt needed for the energy field.

So if I make DoG attack and roll a "weapons destroyed" result on a tank without any other weapons left I destroyed the vehicle, as it is a weapon for that turn?


On a more serious note, Chris has a point about assault. Would you count that as a ranged attack too?

It doesnt tell you it is a ranged attack, so it isnt one.

Making contact fits the definition of close combat more than firing a weapon btw. Youre overcomplicating this Sliggoth!

So ramming is a cc attack?

Of course, ramming also misses if one doesnt aim the vehicle properly or if the target is out of range...which seems a lot like a ranged attack still.

My points are that ramming shares features with ranged attacks, and that we really arent given much at all thats defined as a ranged attack.

The only step at all that I can find involving range is when we check to see if models are within range. Otherwise attacks are called shooting or firing. So if the only time we have the term range come into play is to check and see if a mdoel is within range... then its the same as ramming where we check to see if a ram hits if the model is within range.

Im making it a bit complicated because its not nearly as easy as many people in this thread have made it out to be.

What is a ranged attack? We really dont know. Is a flamer a ranged attack? We would all think so, but its a bit difficult to prove it from the brb.


Sliggoth

There is no "roll to hit", the weapon has no "range" (you are equating the vehicle to a projectile here, not the firing weapon) and there is no profile - it very much looks like it cannotbe a ranged attack.

Except you DONT check to see if the model is in range - you measure a distance and move the vehicle along that line. IF it makes contact then a ram / normal tankshock occurs. At no point are you measuring range, as base contact is not the same as range.

A flamer is a ranged attack, you measure for range using the flamer template, it states you ignore the roll to hit, and has a profile with Strength and AP, and type of ranged weapon. It is EASY to prove it is ranged.

If the Deffrolla is neither a ranged nor a CC attack how does it do ANY damage? What mechanices are being used for those atatcks? Do infantry get cover saves against it?

Except that the movement range for the vehicle also fits the bill as far as the term range goes.

Ive been trying to find a place in the brb where range is used, but it seems that its only used in terms of measuring from the attacking unit to the target. So range has a very limited usage in he rules.

But...what makes an attack ranged? We have cc attacks and ranged attacks, so to which is ram more closely related? When the ram attck is launched the vehcile certainly isnt in btb contact with the target, altho a successful ram attack will end up with that as a possibility. But a failed ram attack will leave the models never having come into btb. So since we know from the ram rules that the vehicle itself is the weapon during a ram attack, is the vehicle launching itself at its target? Is the target within movement range of the vehicle?


Its unclear if a ram is a cc attack or a ranged attack. Neither is a perfect fit.



Sliggoth

PS The no rolling to hit isnt a problem, since flamers do not roll to hit only to wound or pen, as you stated. Rather like a ram attack actually. Other attacks also have an auto hit as well, however it appears that the autohit aspect is an arguement in favor of the ranged idea? Since a flamer is auto hit and is a ranged attack, while cc attacks roll to hit...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
PPs Im not at all happy with the idea of a ram being a ranged attack. But so far Im not seeing much at all that tells us what kind of attack it is or why it isnt a ranged attack; and Im even less happy with the idea that its a cc attack since it doesnt act like a cc either.

It doesnt have to be close combat, as the energy field ONLY works no ranged attacks - you simply have to show it isnt a ranged attck, you dont have to then define what type of attack it is.

A ram cetainly doesnt have range, as you dont declare a ram attack - you declare you will Ram instead of moving normally, but you certainly do not follow the no1 rule of shooting: picka target.

Flamers "autohit" because they tell you this is *instead of* rolling to hit - here it authoits because it tells you it does.

Also not all Close combat attacks roll to hit - DoG powerfist ,for example.

It doesnt have to be close combat, as the energy field ONLY works no ranged attacks - you simply have to show it isnt a ranged attck, you dont have to then define what type of attack it is.

If it is not a ranged attack nor a CC attack what mechanism are you using for determining what damage is done if at all?

I don't see how it can possibly be a CC attack therefore it must either:

a) Be a shooting (ranged) attack.

b) Be a new type of attack for which there are no rules to govern the effect so it does nothing.

You use the mechanism presented in the book....

How isnt it close combat? You are required to be in base to base? Check. There is no range or weapon profile? Check . There is no AP value given? Check. There is no *weapon* firing anything? Check. You havent given anything to supprot it not being close combat.

It is more CC than ranged, as it fails the number 1 item in shooting: pick a target, followed by the number 2: check range. And the number 3: has a weapon profile.

It still doesnt alter that it cannot be a ranged attack, meaning the Energy Field cannot work against it - and thus answering this thread.

If you want to start up a thread to show it is close combat or a 3rd way, do so. But this thread HAS been answered.

[How isnt it close combat? You are required to be in base to base? Check. There is no range or weapon profile? Check . There is no AP value given? Check. There is no *weapon* firing anything? Check. You havent given anything to supprot it not being close combat.

Does it occur in the assault phase? Does it occur at an Initiative value?

It doesn't require BtB either because a) Battlewagons don't bases and b) For vehciles BtB requires contact with the hull which is impossible if the vehicle has a Deahrolla on the front.