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.

Would anyone here consider moving the turret of a Flamestorm Baal Predator onto the front half of the tank modelling for advantage?

Yes, as you are gaining an extra couple of inches which can make a huge difference.

Just out of curiosity, but why would you move it other than to gain the advantage that Nos suggested?

The Flamestorm cannon cannot shoot forward as the model is produced. It is just too short and hits the front armor, meaning it has to turn funny to shoot it. So, the argument that it allows it to fire has been made. Still, to me, it seems like modelling for advantage.

If your moving a weapon that has been deemed unable to fire in a certain area to a position that it can, that is blatant modelling for an advantage.

Outside of RaW, everyone that I've chatted with about it would let it play as being able to shoot forward but you can't guarantee that at a tournament or playing TFG

This is in the context of 'Ard Boyz. Pretty much, I am going to call anyone I see doing that out on modelling for advantage. Honestly, moving it ~1-2" forward on the chassis is a big deal, I think.

Just because a gamer were to do this it's not necessarily for a gaming advantage although clearly they would gain an advantage.

G