Okay what's the firing arc on a Obelisk?

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.

**Sinful Hero**

Well, the tracks on a rhino don't move either, but we assume they would move the model forward if they did.

Looking at the pictures, the rail is modeled inside the mounting. The mounting covers the sides of the rail. It can't slide to the left or right, or the mounting would have to move with it, which it can't or it would be caught on the sides. Nothing obstructs the rail from sliding up or down within the mountings at the top or bottom.

**Hollismason**

Yeah that's my point it looks like it swings side to side not just up and down, there's even little "stoppers" on the right and left of that.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sinful Hero wrote:
Hollismason wrote:
It says it can move on it's mountings. That to me looks like it can spin IE that bar would be lateral or could be moved laterally.

If you mean the entire cage moves-

When the cage moves horizontally, the upper and lower mountings will catch on the wall of the obelisk, and if you move the entire cage vertically the left and right mountings will catch as well.

The barrel is mounted on a rail- why don't we assume that rail moves up and down? If the barrel was intended to move 360 degrees, it would be mounted on the ball. That seems to me to be the most sensible thing.

Not really, look at the pick, if it moves vertically and then horizontally then that would cover the entire surface of that ball.

Ugh, this is really hard to explain with out closer pictures.

**BrotherGecko**

Ask and I can provide pictures from any angle.

Of course they will still get willfully ignored to forge the narrative.

**Hollismason**

Honestly just some front views would be great so I can draw a picture on it to show what I mean.

**BrotherGecko**

Well i did a page back. But I can do some more.

**Hollismason**

I mean just a front view straight on or like a weird side view. I can probably do it with one of those hold on.

**Sinful Hero**

Here, I cropped BrotherGecko's picture.

The rail can't move out from under the mounting, and the mounting appears to me to be too big to move left or right.

**Hollismason**

Like so..

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Everything Bronze Rotates Clockwise or Counter Clock Wise. If it for example using the bar as hands on a clock were now at 12 and 6 , then if it rotated it would be horizontal at 3 and 9.

**CrownAxe**

Do you not see that the the corner of the obelisk cutting into the gun? That makes it impossible to rotate the gun.

**Sinful Hero**

The problem with that is, the upper and lower mountings are not lined up with the left and right mountings. The upper and lower stick out farther than the sides.

**BrotherGecko**

Hollismason wrote:

Like so..

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Everything Bronze Rotates Clockwise or Counter Clock Wise. If it for example using the bar as hands on a clock were now at 12 and 6 , then if it rotated it would be horizontal at 3 and 9.

Its hard to see with my pictures but that ring isn't a circle. Its a wedge and oviod. It wouldn't spin.

**BrotherGecko**

A few more pics I guess.

**Hollismason**

It still to me looks like it can spin?

**Happyjew**

Hollismason wrote:
It still to me looks like it can spin?

How? The top and bottom "tabs" are locked in place around the corner. The track is locked in place by the top and bottom "tabs". It looks as though the track would be able to move vertically, but the track cannot rotate around the "ball".

**BrotherGecko**

Hollismason wrote:
It still to me looks like it can spin?

Unfortunately there are no rules for what it looks like it could do. Only what it does or used to do before alteration.

As someone who spent the $160 on the darn thing I would like it to be just that slightly better. But it isn't (unless FAQ'd), as of right now I implore you to not purchase an Obelisk under the pretext that the spheres are turrets. Not many people will give you the benefit of the doubt as they can't and never could move.

**Sinful Hero**

Hollismason wrote:
It still to me looks like it can spin?

If you look at the pictures, you can see the corner of the obelisk cuts into one of the mounts. It's hard to tell without it in front of you, but the "bowl" isn't a perfect circle. To rotate it would have to be a more spherical bowl, but as it is it's a weird oval shape that's also bent in the middle. It doesn't have a good...bracket?... to rotate in. The bowl is oval shaped and angled.

**Oberron**

Sinful Hero wrote:
Well, the tracks on a rhino don't move either, but we assume they would move the model forward if they did.

That is a strawman argument. The rules for movement aren't based on if the physical model's tracks or legs or w/e can physically move or not. Shooting from a vehicle is dependent on it's profile saying what it is, or (paraphrasing here) when assembled correctly can move. The obelisk when assembled per it's instructions can not move.

**Sinful Hero**

Oberron wrote:
Sinful Hero wrote:
Well, the tracks on a rhino don't move either, but we assume they would move the model forward if they did.

That is a strawman argument. The rules for movement aren't based on if the physical model's tracks or legs or w/e can physically move or not. Shooting from a vehicle is dependent on it's profile saying what it is, or (paraphrasing here) when assembled correctly can move. The obelisk when assembled per it's instructions can not move.

Okay, so what are you assuming the firing arc of the Obelisk is? Is it treated as hull-mounted or a turret, and why?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Also as the image above shows, the barrels appear to be in different positions along the rail, even though the model itself cannot move. Much like rhino tracks, we can assume it would move.

**BrotherGecko**

We do assume it moves 45° left/right and 45° up/down as per the rules for Hull Mounted in the BRB.

Furthermore all barrels are in the same position. There are little tick marks under the barrels on the rail. All the same ones are visible.But the barrel can be glued at different angles if you so choosed to. That being said the barrels are designed to be glued in the same spot as there is a groove it fits into.

Much like a Rhino tracks there are zero rules governing tracks on a Rhino. Much like vehicle weapons there are rules. Which strictly depend on the weapons original mobility.

**Wolfedi**

Since Tesla is like lightning and it does not have to follow the path of the barrel I always use it as, if the barrel can see the target then it can hit the target.

**CrownAxe**

Wolfedi wrote:
Since Tesla is like lightning and it does not have to follow the path of the barrel I always use it as, if the barrel can see the target then it can hit the target.

There is absolutely 0 rules support for this.

**BrotherGecko**

CrownAxe wrote:
Wolfedi wrote:
Since Tesla is like lightning and it does not have to follow the path of the barrel I always use it as, if the barrel can see the target then it can hit the target.

There is absolutely 0 rules support for this.

I actually think there might be -1 rules to support that.

**Hollismason**

How far off the ground is the Obelisk on it's Flying Stand, isn't that the base it comes with?

If someone could give me that data there's something slighting amusing about this argument.

I need a picture of the Oblesik perfect sideview on it's flying stand if anyone has that edit Got one.

Where do you measure the 45 degrees from the whole gun or the tip of the gun? Or the surface of the orb?

I'll post a picture soon.

MATH!!!

Yeah, so if the height of the gun is 12" off the ground it should at a 45 degree angle intersect at 24 inches, that seems right of course I have not done a line graft in 25 years. Now that's from the tip of the gun and not allowing it to traverse or move at all. So yeah if it's not allowed to move and you consider it "hull mounted" even though there is no support for that at all, the thing's functionally useless I think.

**Sinful Hero**

And what if the barrel can rotate on the rail down?

I believe that math was already done either at beginning of this thread, or in the Dark Eldar tactics thread, but the blind spot was about 9" for a basic infantry model, 6"? For a rhino, and then various stuff for anything over that.

**Hollismason**

I don't want to draw more graphs but yeah if it rotates up and down on the curve then it would have a different angle. Straight up like it is though is gives it this ridiculous blind spot.

It's going to definitively have a blind spot for the weapons as of course the weapons can not shoot through the thing itself.

**Sinful Hero**

Yeah, even the barrel was directly attached to the sphere and free to rotate it would still have huge blind spots.

**BrotherGecko**

There is no evidence of it being a turret mind you.

Nobody is arguing that it is a well designed model. It by fluff is an enormous AA platform so by that its guns are pointed in the right direction/elevation. Unfortunately it doesn't have skyfire for some unfathomable reason.

As far as model assembly goes the barrel can be mounted at any point on that rail. So it would be reasonable to believe it can track up and down. Or you just glue them all pointing down and problem solved.

Either way...dumb yes...but still not a turret*.

*unless GW FAQs it. Which I would gladly accept because my T. Vault is in the same boat.

**Oberron**

Hollismason wrote:
How far off the ground is the Obelisk on it's Flying Stand, isn't that the base it comes with?

If someone could give me that data there's something slighting amusing about this argument.

I need a picture of the Oblesik perfect sideview on it's flying stand if anyone has that edit Got one.

Where do you measure the 45 degrees from the whole gun or the tip of the gun? Or the surface of the orb?

I'll post a picture soon.

MATH!!!

Yeah, so if the height of the gun is 12" off the ground it should at a 45 degree angle intersect at 24 inches, that seems right of course I have not done a line graft in 25 years. Now that's from the tip of the gun and not allowing it to traverse or move at all. So yeah if it's not allowed to move and you consider it "hull mounted" even though there is no support for that at all, the thing's functionally useless I think.

Copy/paste from another thread. here is my math. This is assuming hull mounted (which IMO has the only RAW support)

Just measured the distance between two of the tesla spheres. They are 3.75 inches apart, 9.525 centimeters to those across the pond. With a height of 9 inches, 22.86 centimeters, to where the guns are (their midpoint).

They also have a 67.5 degree blindspot that's 9 inches tall. If my trig math is correct I am getting a length of 21.74 inches before a target is in LOS from the obelisk but that is if the target is paper thin on the floor so the taller a target is the closer you can shoot it from.
Height of model----------------Range
Marine at 1.5 inches = 18.11 inch range to hit from (46 centimeters)
models that are 2 inches like st celestine = 16.91 inches to hit (42.95 centimeters)
Rhino (I used my sob immolator) 3 inches = 14.49 inches (36.80)
Dreadnaught at 4 inch height(don't know if this is right just googled) = 12.07 inches (30.66 centimeters)
RIptide at 6.5 inches = 6 inches away (15.24 centimeters)

I hope someone can tell me my math is wrong in this case and is really much closer than what I have came up with, been forever since I've done trig. Also unable to hit the rhino with more than one tesla on the front.

Golden rule for more than one tesla from the obelisk is at 3.75 inches wide. Three on a single target is out of the question unless the unit is a green tide in a crescent formation

**Hollismason**

Yeah it's why I think you should draw line of sight not from the gun but front the middle of the sphere, it's just functionally a terrible weapon.

It's high off the ground and people thnk it's hull mounted.

Also RAW the rules specifically state you should assume a gun can move on it's mounting even though it physically can't.

So it's BLind spot is less than people think.

**BrotherGecko**

RAW is for a gun that could move but can't. Read the rules don't interpret rules to favorable results. Otherwise how do we come to decide if a weapon is hull mounted or not?

Otherwise there are no hull mounted weapons in current 40k. Vindicator demolisher...turret because it doesn't say hull mounted. Doomsday cannon...turret because it doesn't say hull mounted. Any Tesla Destructors...turrets because it doesn't say hull mounted. See where that goes? How about feels like it should line of thinking? Well we know space marine flyers can't fly so we should assume they are not flyers right? Or the tracks on a Rhino are too small so we should assume they can't move right? How about space marine bikers, they could not possibly turn as designed so we should assume they can't turn right?