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.

BlueDagger wrote:Not a valid comparison. The Typhoon missile launcher is just a single entry and has no wording to the nature of 2 missile launchers. Therefor you would draw LoF to one of the barrels and fire the full volley. Any LoS descrepency between the two sides is merely fluff at that point.

That's like saying an Eldar wave Serpent with a TL EML that has one of it's EML barrels blocks no long counts as TL.

Not really. As I said in a previous post TL weapons are different because the main rules clearly state on page 31 under twin-linked weapons, "A set of twin-linked weapons count as a single weapon of that type..."

And a single weapon that never states that it is multiple weapons such as the Typhoon Launcher would be counted as multiple weapons why.....?

Getting back to the discussion the Gauss Flux Array is a unique weapon because up until now (that I know of) there hasn't been any weapons that were a single entry, but clearly stated they are 5 guns.

BlueDagger wrote:And a single weapon that never states that it is multiple weapons such as the Typhoon Launcher would be counted as multiple weapons why.....?

Getting back to the discussion the Gauss Flux Array is a unique weapon because up until now (that I know of) there hasn't been any weapons that were a single entry, but clearly stated they are 5 guns.

Hurricane Bolter? "3 twin linked bolters fired as a single weapon"

Anyone that has the cron and SM dexes acan you confirm the wording is the same between hurricane bolters and Gauss flux arc?

BlueDagger wrote:Anyone that has the cron and SM dexes acan you confirm the wording is the same between hurricane bolters and Gauss flux arc?

SM Codex page 82, "each hurricane bolter consists of three twin-linked bolters, fired as a single weapon."

Necron Codex, page 53, "The Ghost Ark has two separate arrays of five gauss flayers - one along each flank - enabling it to 'broadside' enemy units. The two arrays can shoot at different targets, although all guns in the same array must shoot at the same target."

Nothing there states that the array is a single weapon, or that LOS need only be traced along the barrel of one of the five gauss flayers.

As I had said, this will definately require a FAQ because there are no current rules regarding multiple weapon systems like the GF array.

The Wargear entry on the Ghost Ark says it has 2 Flayer arrays, which I would interrupt to mean it's a single weapon.

Mannahnin wrote:

time wizard wrote:@Mannahnin - I just re-read BarBoBot's post. He actually said;

BarBoBot wrote:Definitely not 180 . I have the arks, and if the flayers could actually tilt they would have about a 45 degree ark at most.

So he said "if the flayers could actuall tilt" so the flayers on the model probably can't. And in that case they are hull mounted and they would have a maximum fire arc of 45° by rule.

Sure, but I believe he meant his are glued. I've handled the model and IIRC they can swivel.

Hang on a second.

Sure the model can be glued together in such a way that the weapons can actually move. I have zero problem with that.

The problem arises when one realizes that they (the weapons) can only move up and down. They cannot, glued or unglued, swivel from side to side.
Even when looking closely at the mounting they don't appear ever to have been designed, in the 40k-universe, to be able to swivel sideways.

So in my mind, I believe the Gauss Flayers should be treated as hull-mounted with a corresponding 45 degree fire arc (which is rather wide as it starts at the front-most gun and ends at the rear-most).

Yeah if the war gear entry declares them as a "Gauss flux array" I personally would take that as a single weapon and thus declare LoS from any one of the barrels.

It goes back to the old Calgar "2 Powerfists" or "Gaunlets of Ultramar" debate.

Though if someone wants to play, "barrel of the array doesn't have LOS and can't shoot, but 'weapon destroyed' takes out the whole array" who am I to argue? At least that interpretation puts them at a disadvantage, and if 6th ed rules it that only one weapon needs LOS, then hey, their vehicle just got (slightly) better. If it gets ruled that each weapon needs LOS (for its shot) then no one will be able to say he won by 'cheating'

I just think that if you want to have the advantage of firing all five gauss flayers, you should be required to draw LOS from each barrel.

If you have 5 warriors, you can only fire the weapons of the ones that can 'see' the enemy.

Now I know that a unit of 5 warriors is not the same as a vehicle, so don't go jumping all over me here!

All I'm saying is that I would like to see something official from GW (I know, fat chance) about how you play the array.

Because I could see Necron players hiding the Ghost Ark behind a building or a ruin to gain a 4+ cover save where only one barrel of the array can draw LOS to my unit and say they get all 5 shots.

To my thinkig, if you want to shoot with all 5 gauss flayers, then you should be able to draw LOS to me with all 5.

And yes, nothing in the current rules or codex backs this up 100%, so it's just my opinion of how it should work.

The Wargear supports it as a single weapon, it would be treated as a single weapon for weapon destroyed results, so why would we not treat it as a single weapon when drawing LoS?

Sasori wrote:The Wargear supports it as a single weapon, it would be treated as a single weapon for weapon destroyed results, so why would we not treat it as a single weapon when drawing LoS?

Okay, so which mounting point do you measure range from? Which barrel do you draw LOS along? If it's a single weapon, then maybe the easiest way to do it is to use the center barrel as the firing point, measure range and draw LOS from that barrel.

time wizard wrote:

Sasori wrote:The Wargear supports it as a single weapon, it would be treated as a single weapon for weapon destroyed results, so why would we not treat it as a single weapon when drawing LoS?

Okay, so which mounting point do you measure range from? Which barrel do you draw LOS along? If it's a single weapon, then maybe the easiest way to do it is to use the center barrel as the firing point, measure range and draw LOS from that barrel.

Any of them.

time wizard wrote:I just think that if you want to have the advantage of firing all five gauss flayers, you should be required to draw LOS from each barrel.

The problem stems from the fact that they are listed in the wargear as a single weapon. To enforce this you would have to tell every player with a gun that is Twin link or mentions it's more then one gun (ah la Stormbolter) that they have to check LoF from every barrel or subtract shots.

Sasori wrote:

time wizard wrote:

Sasori wrote:The Wargear supports it as a single weapon, it would be treated as a single weapon for weapon destroyed results, so why would we not treat it as a single weapon when drawing LoS?

Okay, so which mounting point do you measure range from? Which barrel do you draw LOS along? If it's a single weapon, then maybe the easiest way to do it is to use the center barrel as the firing point, measure range and draw LOS from that barrel.

Any of them.

Well, that's the open question. The rules don't cover it. If we're trying to make the rules simulate some kind of fantasy quasi-reality, being able to fire a weapons array with five barrels to full effect when four of them are blocked seems highly counterintuitive, at least to me. Now, GW could certainly rule that it works like that. The game certainly has a lot of abstractions. But given the way LOS works, having to check each gun on a vehicle with multiple weapons, and each firing model in unit of multiple guys, I suspect that they'd lean towards each barrel needing LOS. If we're going to pick one, the center one seems like a cleaner and fairer abstraction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BlueDagger wrote:

time wizard wrote:I just think that if you want to have the advantage of firing all five gauss flayers, you should be required to draw LOS from each barrel.

The problem stems from the fact that they are listed in the wargear as a single weapon. To enforce this you would have to tell every player with a gun that is Twin link or mentions it's more then one gun (ah la Stormbolter) that they have to check LoF from every barrel or subtract shots.

Alternately, GW could just rule that if half or more of the barrels of a given weapon are blocked, shots from that weapon count as Obscured, thus granting cover. That would be a nice clean and simple ruling, and compatible with the rest of the LOS and cover rules.

Well, that's the open question. The rules don't cover it. If we're trying to make the rules simulate some kind of fantasy quasi-reality, being able to fire a weapons array with five barrels to full effect when four of them are blocked seems highly counterintuitive, at least to me. Now, GW could certainly rule that it works like that. The game certainly has a lot of abstractions. But given the way LOS works, having to check each gun on a vehicle with multiple weapons, and each firing model in unit of multiple guys, I suspect that they'd lean towards each barrel needing LOS. If we're going to pick one, the center one seems like a cleaner and fairer abstraction.

So we get the Disadvantage of it being a single weapon (It being destroyed from one weapon destroyed result) and we get the Disadvantage of each barrel ha counting as it's own weapon? THAT seems counter intuitive to me.

Alternately, GW could just rule that if half or more of the barrels of a given weapon are blocked, shots from that weapon count as Obscured, thus granting cover. That would be a nice clean and simple ruling, and compatible with the rest of the LOS and cover rules.

Why are we getting penalized for having a large weapon?

I don't understand why people are trying to stick the Disadvantages for both weapon types on this. I could understand if each Flayer counted as a separate weapon, but it doesn't.

So it's more fair for one barrel to peek out and shoot five or ten times while more than half the vehicle is hidden for cover saves?

I'm not trying to hurt the flayer here. Personally I want to start Necrons. I'm trying to figure out a way to deal with an issue that also arises with several other models. Namely, everything with a twin-linked gun, and Typhoon Missile Launchers, among other things.

It's an open question how we're supposed to handle these weapons when one (or more, in the case of those with more than two) barrels are blocked.

Mannahnin wrote:So it's more fair for one barrel to peek out and shoot five or ten times while more than half the vehicle is hidden for cover saves?

I'm not trying to hurt the flayer here. Personally I want to start Necrons. I'm trying to figure out a way to deal with an issue that also arises with several other models. Namely, everything with a twin-linked gun, and Typhoon Missile Launchers, among other things.

It's an open question how we're supposed to handle these weapons when one (or more, in the case of those with more than two) barrels are blocked.

I consider it fair, since it comes with the Disadvantage of one weapon destroyed result knocks out the entire flayer array.

On a vehicle that also has the disadvantage of being AV 13 on all sides until it takes a penetrating hit.

time wizard wrote:On a vehicle that also has the disadvantage of being AV 13 on all sides until it takes a penetrating hit.

You mean an Open Topped Vehicle, that is only AV 13 on the Front and sides until it takes a penetrating hit?

I suppose what it comes down to is opinion (or FAQ) Either they can be treated as a separate weapon, in which case only the specific guns can fire, this will mean however, to knock out all the weapons on the vehicle you need 10 weapon destroyed results... So, are you gunna let them have their shots, or are you going to give it MORE resilience on top of Quantum Shielding..

I'm with Sasori on this one. The statline shows that there are only 2 weapons on the Ark. That should definitively solve the issue of how many 'weapon destroyed' results are required.

And isn't there already a rule with twin-linked guns, wherein if one barrel has LOS, then both are considered to have LOS? I think that same principle should apply here.

So yes, if you want to park your massive Ghost Ark behind cover and snipe with your GAUSS FLAYERS from your 115 POINT VEHICLE, then by all means, go ahead and waste a -ton of points to do so. I don't think anyone will have any difficulty beating a player that thinks this is a good allocation of points.

1. Yes, there's no question that each array is treated as one weapon. The way they are listed in the unit entry is clear.

2. There is no rule for twin-linked guns covering what happens if one barrel is blocked. Likewise there is no rule for single weapons with multiple barrels like the Typhoon Missile Launcher.

Game balance or whether a unit is worth its points, or a good tactical application, really doesn't bear on a rules discussion.