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.

osirisx69 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I've done so.
effectively must mean the same thing as is.

No you posted your opinion which is incorrect. You never sited ( like the OP did) RAW that a tank is no longer a tank when it becomes wrecked.

That needs to be cited or else you are just posting opinions again. just because you feel the word effectively mean "all encompassing and must be totally" doesn't make the rule you interpret as right.

It makes it at BEST a RAI.

It very clearly is not a Tank. A Tank with zero hull points left becomes a Wreck. It is no longer a vehicle that Blessing would allow you to repair. Blessing does not repair Wrecks.

Pg 74 BRB
The model is left in place and becomes a wreck.

A wreck =/= a tank.
Find permission to repair a wreck so that it effectively becomes a tank using BotO. Cite pages and paragraph please.

 Mywik wrote:
Pg 74 BRB
The model is left in place and becomes a wreck.

A wreck =/= a tank.
Find permission to repair a wreck so that it effectively becomes a tank using BotO. Cite pages and paragraph please.

Ahh and that's the rule that kills the argument. Can a wreck be repaired, is there a permission to repair a wreck?

I don't see any at all...

osirisx69 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:So you actually think that RAW Pistols cannot be fired, Skimmer/Flyer bases cannot be ignored, and more?

I have no idea why you are making up ideas or words for me but please stop.

Nothing in this post is relevant to the topic at hand please. Please bring it back to topic.

I'm not making up words for you.
You said that effectively != is.
If you actually think that, then using the rules that I posted (that you LOLed at instead of actually reading) a Pistol cannot fire as it is not actually Assault 1.
Everything in that post is relevant to the topic at hand. I'm trying to address your misunderstanding of the rules.

osirisx69 wrote:

 Mywik wrote:
Pg 74 BRB
The model is left in place and becomes a wreck.

A wreck =/= a tank.
Find permission to repair a wreck so that it effectively becomes a tank using BotO. Cite pages and paragraph please.

Ahh and that's the rule that kills the argument. Can a wreck be repaired, is there a permission to repair a wreck?

I don't see any at all...

Okay I will settle this with RAW, not that it already hasn't been. on page 74 under wrecked vehicles it says that "A vehicle that is reduced to 0 hull points is immdiately wrecked..... The model is left in place and becomes a wreck."

At this point we need to find out what kind of terrain a wreck isluckily for us they have defined what a wreck is on page 105 under battlefield debris. Wreckage/Rubble. "Wreckage and rubble are area terrain."

osirisx69 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Narlix wrote:
"wrecked vehicles are left on the table and effectively become
a piece of terrain" page 74 BRB

effectively is not the same as actually

As far as 40k is concerned, it is.
treated as == effectively == counts as == is. If you assume otherwise the rules break in spectacular ways.

No you are making up rules again.

You have not posted a page or cited any reliable reference.

Again against the forums rules.

Please stop posting your opinions as actual rules.

This is a valid question and per RAW looks like it can be done.

You seem to be making a mistake regarding the use of the word effectively.

If something is effectively something else then it ceases to be the thing it was according to the 40k rules.

The BRB does not define every word so we have to use the common British English definitions of said words to be able to understand the rules at all.

How is this post not locked?

BTW Ork Mek's should definitely be able to repair any non-exploded wrecked vehicle on the field since they are masters of looting and refitting.

I didn't think it could be done, but it has finally come to pass; someone on Dakka that isn't actually arguing about rules..because they can't...because they don't understand the meaning of common English words. This thread should be stickied as a horrifying example to warn people away from posting in this part of the forums.

Let's assume just for a moment (even though I think that it does) that the "vehicle becomes terrain" argument doesn't hold any water. You still don't have permission to fix the Wrecked status. On page 74 we're told that a vehicle that is "reduced to 0 Hull Points" is immediately wrecked. Nothing says it magically becomes Unwrecked by restoring one.

So, congratulations! You have a Wrecked vehicle with one Hull Point, that... still... can't... er... do, well, anything.

 Windir83 wrote:
I didn't think it could be done, but it has finally come to pass; someone on Dakka that isn't actually arguing about rules..because they can't...because they don't understand the meaning of common English words. This thread should be stickied as a horrifying example to warn people away from posting in this part of the forums.

No, no one should be warned away from posting here. Ever.

It's a shame this got resolved.... I was interested in seeing how a vehicle that is like terrain but still a vehicle would get to move. I was getting excited about mobile LoS-blocking terrain.... Oh well!

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
I was getting excited about mobile LoS-blocking terrain.... Oh well!

That would be... a normal vehicle. Great use has been made of Land Raiders' line of sight blocking capabilities.