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 have never been happy with the "Weapon destroyed" result, and it partly stems from the fact that your opponent chooses the weapon that is removed. Now, this probably isn't going where you expect, so bare with me.
Say we've got Jimmy the firewarrior standing next to a hammerhead with a Baal predator on the other side. Now, Jimmy can only see the tread of this Predator, none of it's gun's are in his view. He fires, and-yes!-it penertrates! Jimmy then procedes to roll a "3" on the damage chart, which destroys a weapon.
Here's my point-how in the name of the warp is hitting a tank's tread with your pulse round going to rip of it's assault cannon, lets say? If there's some obvious fact I'm missing here then let me know, but right now it seems silly. So i propose that only weapons that can be seen by the model firing can be removed if the firer can see it. If they cannot draw line of sight to it, the shot is moved down to a "crew-stunned" result. Let me know what you think.

well, like it says in the rulebook the in-game world isn't supposed to be as static as being turn based. the Hammerhead coud have waited 8 seconds after (or before in some cases) everyone else shot to make to hit so the predator would poke its turret out. or the gunship may have moved to the side a bit to fire and slid back, probably not a good thing to do with a railgun but the pilot probably just had some crazy skills.

besides, you should get a cover save anyway

I suppose you're right. It just...irritates me, thats all. And all notions of Tau having "Crazy skills", or indeed skills of any variety except sucking is Heresy.

If you need to make the rule believable, keep in mind that several results through rules don't mean black and white something happened.

A Blood Angel hit by a Bright Lance who survives because of Feel-No-Pain doesn't necessarily *survive* the battle. He just survives long enough that he doesn't become useless before the battle's end.

That said, as for a weapon system, you DONT have to blow the turret off the vehicle. It's sufficient that the shot damages the internal cabling sufficiently that the crew can't fix it by spraying coolant and duck taping it. I mean, it could be sufficient simply destroying the sighting system for it.

Alright, MekanobSamael, Star Cannon, then...

It could mean the crew man tasked with firing that weapon is instead tasked with repairing the damage on wherever the hit struck. Or it could represent the vagaries of the target’s electronics system. Or it could represent a shot that was taken a second later when another part of the vehicle was exposed, and that the portion of the vehicle shown is an abstraction of the portion of the vehicle visible over a minute or so of tracking and targeting.

At the end of the day, 40K isn’t about simulating every minute detail of combat. While there games systems that do this, including earlier editions of 40K, you have to sacrifice a lot to achieve that. Even if you accept the greater rules density, longer resolution time, and likely loss of strategy, and likely increase of cheesy behaviour, there’s no guarantee you’ll end up with a more realistic final resolution.

Even if you do a very good job, there’s every chance that other people will perceive it as unrealistic, because their own understanding of combat will differ, as will their understanding of exactly what a dice roll represents.

Really, what’s best is to get a consistent level of abstraction across the whole game, and spell out exactly what that level of abstraction is. 40K doesn’t do this very well, it’s one of the system’s bigger problems.

it doesn't have to be that the weapon actually got ripped off and destroyed.

the shot could have cut the power feed, killed the gunner, or jammed an ammo belt inside the tank.


it is for this reason that some races are able to repair their vehicles.

if a techmarine repairs a vehicles gun, the gun probably wasn't destroyed(like the gun getting fused in place by a melta shot), just disabled. he replaces a part, unsticks an ammo belt, or gets the machine spirit to coperate again.

Mahtamori wrote:A Blood Angel hit by a Bright Lance who survives because of Feel-No-Pain doesn't necessarily *survive* the battle. He just survives long enough that he doesn't become useless before the battle's end.

For the record, he doesn't survive because Bright Lances, as AP 2 weapons, don't allow the FNP save to be made

and its Str8, instant death.

Shot penetrates the tank low down (through the track) but doesn't cause any significant damage to it. However it does manage to cut power lines and completely destroy control mechanisms for one of the tank's weapons.

well,

it could have exploded some ammo inside the tank killing or injuring the gunner.

it could have shorted a power line to the treads or grav plates and the Tank commander diverted power from the weapons to the motility system to keep moving.

Look. the Dice Gods decide that instead of immobilising the tank one of its weapons gets destroyed.

*chuckles* I both like and dislike the chosing part myself. It essentially makes you hate any penetrating hit if your vehicle has single purposes. (Unlike weapon upon weapon gunships)

Just my point of view , but I always felt that weapons should be chosen at random because one can not pin point a Sergeant with a Sniper rifle but you can pick out the main gun on a vehicle . Where 's the consistency ?

*chuckles* How about both players chose a weapon then rolloff for it.

i wish that was how it worked.

some sort of quick roll off system would make it a little more random.

yes, the attacker would be aiming at a specific part, but he might not hit exactly where he wanted too.

If someone pops my TL Shuricat instead of my TL EML, I'm happy. Why the opponent choses is simply to make the result mean something instead of a "roll off to see if I really cared". It's supposed to be a worse result than not being allowed to shoot or move for a turn, after all.

Shaken + virtually invalidates the points spent on a weapons platform/Vehicle(At least for 1 turn,,)

My pet hate is 'Immobilised'. It still shoots at me. yuck lol

Only Titans are exempt, IMO.

Just for the record, the ATTACKER chooses what weapon is destroyed.