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.

Yesterday I was playing a game and my opponent had a FW Fire Raptor with Hellstrike Missles (amongst other weapons).

We couldn't find anything overruling the Ordnance rule for vehicles and thus never fired them.

Did we play it right? Had he fired a Hellstrike Missles (which has Ordnance USR), would every other weapon still fire snaps?

Unless it's a Superheavy, there's nothing overruling it.

Yep. It's one of the downsides of ordnance missiles.

Fire raptors do not have, in the final rules, ordnance weapons.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Fire raptors do not have, in the final rules, ordnance weapons.

Where are they found?
I'm still seeing Hellstrikes listed on the FW page.

 grendel083 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Fire raptors do not have, in the final rules, ordnance weapons.

Where are they found?
I'm still seeing Hellstrikes listed on the FW page.

Imperial armour II volume 2, it even had to errata the option to take the side autocannons back in

 grendel083 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Fire raptors do not have, in the final rules, ordnance weapons.

Where are they found?
I'm still seeing Hellstrikes listed on the FW page.

Ia2 2nd edition

Ah nice one. Cheers all.
Strange they still have the experimental rules up. They normally disappear once proper rules are published.

Chaos don't feature in the ia2 rules

Ah of course, it still has some relevence then.

All flyer missles have their own rules.

So he would be able to fire 2 missles regardless of them being ordnance. However anything else he shot that turn would still be snap shots since it does not override that rule.

If they're blast weapons he can only fire one since then he'd have to snap fire the other.

Couldn't you still fire all the weapons at full BS? The quad bolters fire independently and don't count towards the number of weapons being fired whilst the avenger bolt cannon would get PotMS so could fire fine as well.

One thing to keep in mind here is that FW have mentioned on facebook that the "independent targeting" rule lets the side turrets avoid the ordnance penalty. So either someone doesn't know how the rules work, or the intent of the "independent targeting" rule was that the side turrets are completely independent, as if they were separate vehicles. Obviously this doesn't change anything RAW (which makes it incredibly annoying that they don't seem to see the problem), but if you care about RAI it may change your opinion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Couldn't you still fire all the weapons at full BS? The quad bolters fire independently and don't count towards the number of weapons being fired whilst the avenger bolt cannon would get PotMS so could fire fine as well.

The problem isn't the number of weapons, it's the fact that the ordnance rule explicitly forces all other weapons to snap fire. So you can fire one hellstrike at full BS, one other weapon (not including a second hellstrike) at full BS with POTMS, and then everything else has to snap fire.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wagguy80 wrote:
So he would be able to fire 2 missles regardless of them being ordnance.

No you can't. Each missile forces all other weapons to snap fire, including other missiles. If you POTMS a second missile to avoid the BS penalty from the first missile the second missile's ordnance rule will just force the first missile back down to BS 1 and you don't gain anything.

Well thats pants. Although I suppose they tried to make up for it by trying to make it play that way with their independent targeting clarification.