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.

What are the firing angles of/what can I shoot at with:
- the laser arrays of a Chimera
- Fire points on a building e.g. Imperial bastion
- Leman Russ side sponson - the model and the picture in the BRB differs in that the side sponsons can shoot in a wider arc forward (so not 90°, but a bit more).

The laser arrays would fire at the directions it can be pointed at. They're in small ball sockets, right?

AFAIK, fire points will allow you to shoot at everything within their LoS - letting you measure from any part of the fire point to the enemy.

Leman Russ... dunno. If the sponson has a wider arc, be sure it wasn't modelled for advantage. Which sponson is it?

Some tournaments specify the angles of all vehicles very explicitly. Here's the one from ATC: http://whatc.org/PDFs/ATC20147EFAQ2pt1.docx

Zsolt wrote:
What are the firing angles of/what can I shoot at with:
- the laser arrays of a Chimera
- Fire points on a building e.g. Imperial bastion
- Leman Russ side sponson - the model and the picture in the BRB differs in that the side sponsons can shoot in a wider arc forward (so not 90°, but a bit more).

- Where ever you can point at least one of the array bits and then draw line of sight down the barrel of that array bit.
- Normal LoS rules, but instead of the firing model you use any part of the firing point (you and your opponent need to agree what the firing points are before the game. An example is in the BRB)
-The diagram in the book points out that the axis on which the side sponson swivels is not right up against the hull. There should be room on your properly assembled models to point a little but inward with those weapons.

 DJGietzen wrote:
-The diagram in the book points out that the axis on which the side sponson swivels is not right up against the hull. There should be room on your properly assembled models to point a little but inward with those weapons.

I believe the example in the rulebook is of a Space Marine Predator, not an Astra Militarum Leman Russ. Different vehicles are going to have different firing arcs.

I beleive its a lemon russ executioner with an lascannon and two plasma cannon sponsons.

And this ones a Predator:

 DJGietzen wrote:
I beleive its a lemon russ executioner with an lascannon and two plasma cannon sponsons.

And it is indeed slightly inaccurate, as the sponsons can turn slightly further back than is shown.

 insaniak wrote:

 DJGietzen wrote:
I beleive its a lemon russ executioner with an lascannon and two plasma cannon sponsons.

And it is indeed slightly inaccurate, as the sponsons can turn slightly further back than is shown.

I think BRB trumps the actual model. There's also a rule, that if a model is glued together a way that does not allow turning the weapons the way they are described in the BRB, the BRB takes precedence. Though this is not the case with model building, but the original model is unable to do it. Without this though there would be no way that a LRs weapons can all fire at the same smallish target in front of it (this is not necessarily a problem though).

So fire points have ~180° fire arcs (as they are mostly just a hole in the wall of a building)?

The picture is just an example. The actual rule is that the arc matches what the weapon can move through.

And that rule has nothing to do with fire points.

 insaniak wrote:
The picture is just an example. The actual rule is that the arc matches what the weapon can move through.

And that rule has nothing to do with fire points.

The picture is to clarify the rule, but it contradicts it? It's clearly a Leman Russ with it's sponsons, so it's not just a generic example.

RAW: It never identifies what that is. It could be a Leman Russ with Sponsons...but which variant is it? The one from Imperial Armor? The one from Codex: AM? Or it could be a heavily looted Ork something. Or it could be a new model. Without identification it is merely an example of a tank-like thing with a turret and sponsons showing the turret has a small blind area, as do those sponsons.

There are a number of models which don't clearly lay out what they are capable of.

The one I fall back on the most is the Falcon-chasis tanks of the Eldar. (ZOMG SO OP!!11! I RAGEQUIT...ok...we done now?) The Shuriken cannon or twin-linked catapults are on a mount that lets them turn but there is no description as to how much they are supposed to be able to. Because of the design of the belly the Catapults don't quite clear line-of-site for 360 fire, but they can go easily enough 180 degrees. The cannon sits slightly differently and with a little bit of deflection down (which the model allows) it can definitely clear about 270 degrees and with even more dramatic deflection the full 360. If you measure it out on the short base along the rear arc, the cannon will reach 24" (it's max range) before intersecting the ground on level terrain. (Incidently the side the cannon goes on is also different in Fire Prism kit instructions and Wave Serpent kit instructions.)

So is it a hull-mounted, turret mounted, or pintle mounted weapon? There is zero guidance in the BRB, the codex, or anything that states it ouright. So the rule of model comes into play. As you can guess...this causes a bit of controversy.

Zsolt wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
The picture is just an example. The actual rule is that the arc matches what the weapon can move through.

And that rule has nothing to do with fire points.

The picture is to clarify the rule, but it contradicts it? It's clearly a Leman Russ with it's sponsons, so it's not just a generic example.

Pretty much, yes.

I don't think there's been a single edition so far, since they started including pictures illustrating the fire arcs and disembarking zones, where they've actually got them correct.