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.

So I've been told the missiles in the current plastic manticore kit are a turret weapon??
How is this? Looks like fixed weapon to me. I bring this up because of strange deployments
and vehicle facings while still being able to fire 360 degrees??

Nope, the new kit clearly has the missiles on a hull mount. The FW kit was a turret mount.

The codex does not specify (as with all the 5th edition codexes) so as per the BRB FAQ, the weapon's arc is as per the model.

I would agree that it is a hull-mounted weapon (max angle 45)

my interpertaion wud be its a missile so by nature you cud target anything on the table in front ,behind or side as the missile will fire into the air and then head 2wards its target. so i wud give it 360 degress arc of fire to represent this.

Dark Angels champion wrote:my interpertaion wud be its a missile so by nature you cud target anything on the table in front ,behind or side as the missile will fire into the air and then head 2wards its target. so i wud give it 360 degress arc of fire to represent this.

Thanks for that but there is absolutely nothing in the rules to support that. Nor do we have a fluff description of the missile having that level of manoeuvrability. Also, a weapon like that would not be able to fire direct and manticores are able to do so.

All weapons have an arc of sight. The BRB FAQ tells us how to handle this when it isn't defined.

Q: The rules for the arc of fire of pintle-mounted (or bolton)
weapons address those mounted on turrets and those
mounted directly on the hull. But what about those
mounted on smaller structures (like a Rhino’s cupola) that
look like they can rotate 360º, even though they aren’t
proper turrets? (p59)
A: Remember that the rule is: if it looks like you can point
the gun at it, then you can, even if it’s glued in place’. The
rest is just a set of guidelines about the arcs of fire of
weapons glued in place, and does not cover all possible
weapons mounting and vehicles. If the structure the gun is
pintle-mounted on is obviously capable of rotating 360º,
like in the case of a Rhino’s cupola, then it should be
treated as having a 360º arc of fire. However, if you mount
the same storm bolter on a Razorback, even though it still
can rotate 360º, it won’t obviously be able to fire through
the Razorback’s main turret, and so it will have a ‘blind
spot’. In the same way, the shuriken catapult mounted
under the hull of a Wave Serpent, Falcon, etc. looks like it
can rotate 360º, but it does not look like it can be fired
through the main hull right behind it, so we normally play
that it can be fired roughly in the 180º to the vehicle’s front,
which seems like an acceptable compromise.

Dark Angels champion wrote:my interpertaion wud be its a missile so by nature you cud target anything on the table in front ,behind or side as the missile will fire into the air and then head 2wards its target. so i wud give it 360 degress arc of fire to represent this.

Not all missiles work that way ! Not all missiles are "smart" missiles ! There are missiles that have a certain arc of operation.

Pantso wrote:There are missiles that have a certain arc of operation.

All missiles have an arc of operation. For most it's pretty small. (and 40K missile tech seems to be worse than current)

I've never seen the new model, been using a scratch built one, and it's a turret. Oh well guess mine's better =)

Problem is you're modeling for advantage now that there is a model out for it.

If you have forge world ones, then use those. If not, you'll need the plastic hull-mounted ones.

Not entirely true; you can use whatever model you have, He built his before the "official" Plastic one came out, and likely built it based on the FW version, or the illustration in the codex.

Even if I went out today and scratch built a turret-mountd version nothing would be illegal about that, there is a FW version with a turret and the picture in the codex has a turret.

if im honest when i do my small guard detachment i think il push the limits and buy the FW version just because its half decent looking.

It is a barrage weapon if i am not mistaken. That means it doesn't need LOS Correct? It also states that if the model can draw LOS to the target then you can reduce the distance. Seems pretty strait forward. fire at whatever you want reducing scatter if you can see the target. with range restrictions considered. also even if you could only shoot 45 degrees you can always pivot

Ckilleen wrote:It is a barrage weapon if i am not mistaken. That means it doesn't need LOS Correct? It also states that if the model can draw LOS to the target then you can reduce the distance. Seems pretty strait forward. fire at whatever you want reducing scatter if you can see the target. with range restrictions considered. also even if you could only shoot 45 degrees you can always pivot

Barrage weapons don't need LOS... but as per the vehicle shooting rules, hull mounted weapons can only fire in a 45 degree arc. Whether or not they have or need LOS has no effect on that fire arc.

And non-walker vehicles can only pivot in the movement phase.

I figured this guy is just being weird.
He would deploy his manticore with it's rear armour
up against LOS blocking terrain and then claim to have 360 Arc of fire and insist on shooting with his rear armour facing
a wall/large rock formation.

It was strange. Just really strange.

Show him the BRB FAQ that I quoted.

Ask him to show you how the launcher pivots.

Would you be OK with him firing in a 360 if he built a turret? Or used the extant model that has a turret?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This is probably an interesting enough question that it deserves it's own thread, since there are multiple vehicles that have different models with different arcs.

Hull mounted weapons do have defined firing arcs, which are considerably more restricted than turrets. So yes, the hull mounted version will have a smaller firing arc. However, both models are produced by GW companies so both models are legal for play...there is no defined fire arc for the manticore in general. For tournements one would expect to go with however the model on the table can fire...but for friendly games one might well have to talk about a hull manticore proxying for a turret manticore. Talk it over before the game, its really going to come down to what the players decide.

Both are legal variants, but some tournements dont allow forge world models so take that into consideration as well.


Sliggoth

There are tournaments that wouldn't let you use DKOK infantry?

Sliggoth wrote:Both are legal variants, but some tournements dont allow forge world models so take that into consideration as well.

Really, which tournaments would those be?

There are plenty of tournaments that don't allow FW rules but I've never seen one that doesn't allow FW models. What do those tournies expect players to do for those units where there is no GW model?

e.g. manticore before the GW model was released? Are you suggesting that some events allow scratch builds and conversion but not FW? Or that units with no GW model were simply forbidden?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MikeMcSomething wrote:Would you be OK with him firing in a 360 if he built a turret?

In general, modelling a weapon into a more advantageous arc would be considered modelling for advantage. However, given that there are official models with both turret and hull mount then both would be reasonable candidates for conversion models.

Modelling a Redeemer with turret mounted flamestorms would not. (unless they updated the official model like that in which case get converting those old ones!)

I know it isn't an official gw faq, but i'll just mention the INAT faq says it's turret mounted (if I recall correctly)
People that say it's hull mounted though do have a big point

Darien13 wrote:I know it isn't an official gw faq, but i'll just mention the INAT faq says it's turret mounted (if I recall correctly)
People that say it's hull mounted though do have a big point

And was that written before or after the new model came out?