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, GW can imagine models are busy crawling out of a destroyed transport, therefore they cant charge. Sounds pretty realistic to me. They can also imagine that a flyer, up high in the air, cant block movement on the ground. Sounds pretty realistic to me as well. But why can they imagine that infantry models, within 1" of the enemy, and within terrain, get the benefit of cover when shooting at each other with pistols ?? There is no benefit of cover when they hit each other with melee weapons.

Imagine your model is in base contact with an enemy model. Your model sees the white in your opponents eyes. He pushes his pistol in his opponents stomach, he shoots, and all of a sudden a piece of terrain appears between the gun and the body ?? WTF ?

Nono, this ridiculous rule needs to be removed No more benefit of cover when infantry models are within 1" of enemy models, and within terrain, when shooting with pistols.

Considering pistols are useless in melee anyway, this is just a rules bloat rule with no real purpose.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Considering pistols are useless in melee anyway, this is just a rules bloat rule with no real purpose.

Yeah, gotta agree with this. How often do you actually fire pistols?

And how often do they get saved because of cover?

Kind of agree with the others. The rule itself is more realistic and not broken, but it seems like its impact on gameplay would be so minor that it might not warrant the brain space required to keep track of another rule.

The rules bloat is that they get cover. Its counter intuitive.

 p5freak wrote:
The rules bloat is that they get cover. Its counter intuitive.

Getting cover against a shooting attack is the default. Making an additional rule to provide an exception to the more general rule is "bloat." Is it counter-intuitive? Yes. But not "bloat."

 p5freak wrote:
So, GW can imagine models are busy crawling out of a destroyed transport, therefore they cant charge. Sounds pretty realistic to me. They can also imagine that a flyer, up high in the air, cant block movement on the ground. Sounds pretty realistic to me as well. But why can they imagine that infantry models, within 1" of the enemy, and within terrain, get the benefit of cover when shooting at each other with pistols ?? There is no benefit of cover when they hit each other with melee weapons.

Imagine your model is in base contact with an enemy model. Your model sees the white in your opponents eyes. He pushes his pistol in his opponents stomach, he shoots, and all of a sudden a piece of terrain appears between the gun and the body ?? WTF ?

Nono, this ridiculous rule needs to be removed No more benefit of cover when infantry models are within 1" of enemy models, and within terrain, when shooting with pistols.

Well I imagine it as intense CQC resulting in pistol shots being wildly inaccurate do to all the moving, dodging and slashing going on. Just go to youtube and look at any CC fight scene from a movie that involves someone using fire arms and you'll see why this interpretation makes so much more sense. It isn't so much that they're hiding behind terrain, its just that the ranged attack is so inaccurate and clumsy in this situation. Trying to hit someone with a pistol from 200 feet away is hard. Trying to do it from 2 feet is also equally hard.

I never understood the whole cover thing with pistols in combat either. I use pistols all the time in combat. It's kinda the Seraphim signature.
It'd be easier just to talk to your opponent before hand and just agree that there's no cover from pistols in combat.

How about there is no cover save if in melee range? This covers things like my DW Vet with inferno pistols.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
How about there is no cover save if in melee range? This covers things like my DW Vet with inferno pistols.

But you run into this issue that in reality, shooting things from a foot or two away isn't that easy. Talk to any military veteran and they'll tell you being in that close, it can often be much harder to hit your target with a hand gun. It's too chaotic, having that save apply makes sense.

 Togusa wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
How about there is no cover save if in melee range? This covers things like my DW Vet with inferno pistols.

But you run into this issue that in reality, shooting things from a foot or two away isn't that easy. Talk to any military veteran and they'll tell you being in that close, it can often be much harder to hit your target with a hand gun. It's too chaotic, having that save apply makes sense.

Closeness is one thing, a full ob brawl /melee going on would be a huge nono to even use the gun.

On the one hand, I agree that units shouldn't get cover saves against pistols in melee.

On the other hand, I can't remember ever having fired a pistol in melee range, so I can't exactly say that it's spoiling my games.

.Out of interest, do you think it would be better if pistols could be fired during the fight phase, rather than typically having to spend 2 whole turns locked in combat before actually getting to the point where you can use them in the shooting phase while in melee?

 TheFleshIsWeak wrote:

.Out of interest, do you think it would be better if pistols could be fired during the fight phase, rather than typically having to spend 2 whole turns locked in combat before actually getting to the point where you can use them in the shooting phase while in melee?

It's an interesting idea that's been discussed before. Variants on it include letting the model make a single attack with the pistol (and the rest with its normal melee weapons) or letting the model trade all of its attacks to attack with the pistol. The idea has merit but potentially dramatically changes the melee potency of a model equipped with such a weapon. Harlequins with inferno pistols, for instance, would suddenly be swinging a melee melta gun at you. Or better yet, give a cheap IG sergeant a plasma pistol so that he can attack at strength 7 or 8 with good AP and possibly multiple damage. Storm Guardians would basically never swing their swords again if they could shoot strength 4 shuriken in melee instead.

So it's not a bad idea, but it would probably require a lot of adjustments.