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.

Ahh yes but that terrain is classified as a "fortification" as it was purchased as part of an army.

 Prophet40k wrote:
Ahh yes but that terrain is classified as a "fortification" as it was purchased as part of an army.

Is it in a fortification?

If I have a fenced in yard, are you in the fence if you're in the yard?

Also seeing now a model has a statline. So the ADL by itself is not an enemy model/unit.

strengthofthedragon2 wrote:

 Unyielding Hunger wrote:
Well, this is a rather tricky question, however, I think this may help. If you look at the Skyshield landing pad, you will note that even if it is purchased by one army, if the opponent reaches it first, they can dictate what position it is in, by the fact that they are "In control" of the equipment. Now, if two different armies are in base to base contact with it, No change in position is given, as they are contesting it. This seems to set a principle that regardless of who buys it, it can still be used by the opposition, since they have in effect claimed it from you. Now, in regards to the aegis defense line, anyone touching or inside it can claim the 4+ cover save, because they are in the area and have the ability to quickly take cover behind it. Now, in regards of being in base to base, if the enemy has taken your aegis defense line and quad gun, and do not destroy it, then they have every right to fire it, until you can take back the position. Now, if you have 2 units in assualt around the quad gun, as there is no other way to have units from two armies touching the quad gun, then consider the quad gun to be contested and unable to be fired, as the guards manning it would have far more important issues on their hand at the present time. Sound fair?

This is kind of my thinking in starting this thread... It seems the skyshield has set a precedence that was not clearly written into the quad gun... definately liking the awesome referenecs being given...

Your welcome, and it's always surprising what happens when people get caught up on the simple things. Also, I think logically, and when I look at an amazing fortification that I paid for, but my buddy can screw over just by getting into contact with it, then I tend to think that this happens elsewhere. Also, think of it from the point of the attackers. They just assualted this really well defended position, and found a super shiny new toy. Why ignore it or blow it up, when you can use it yourself?

Prophet - yet you CAN infiltrate inside an enemy-bought fortification. It cannot therefore be an enemy unit.

Your premise is wrong, meaning your conclusions are

@ Nos. I appreciate your opinion. Can you back it with something from the book?

The "you are wrong because I said you are wrong is getting old."

Your premise is that the building is an enemy model; making it an enemy unit, meaning you could shoot at it when empty (you cant) and you could not infiltrate inside it - which you can.

This suggests your premise is wrong

Can you always shoot an enemy unit?

No

There are exceptional conditions that prevent you from shooting enemy units. The empty building rule is just another exceptional condition.

----

OK. Are you ready for it? I am tired of hearing the excuse I am wrong cause everyone says I am wrong.

I'll go ahead and answer the OPs question and stop playing the role of difficult opponent.

This section answers everything.

 Prophet40k wrote:
Can you always shoot an enemy unit?

No

There are exceptional conditions that prevent you from shooting enemy units. The empty building rule is just another exceptional condition.



OK. Are you ready for it?

I found where it says you can not infiltrate in an enemy fortification. This section clears up alot of the argument.

Page 121. Under get this...

"Deploying within a Fortification"

Wow did you not finish the sentence.

It really does clear it up though.

"is only considered to be an enemy unit if it is occupied at the time of redeployment."

So ... if it's not occupied I can infiltrate into your stuffs.

man JD gimme a second to edit.

sheesh

look at edited post. LOL

So the quote shows it is only an enemy unit when occupied. A quad gun cannot be occupied, so is never an enemy unit. So yes, you are wrong.

Maybe as a house rule? I think it would be so much more realistic and fun to just rambo some ones quad.

"The only difference between buildings and actual vehicles is that they can't move and ether side can go inside" So even if you buy a fortification as a building ether side can use it
"Many building have built-in weapons .... If the building is occupied, a model within can choose to fire one of the emplaced weapons instead of his own ..." So we see that unmanned guns can be fired by ether side
"... If a building is occupied, each emplaced weapon not being fired manually automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range" Now while you could say it meant the enemy of the owner i think its fair to say its the enemy of the models inside, as it ownly fires when occupied.
"Battlefield Debris: the basics unless otherwise noted Battlefield Debris is difficult terrain" Now i bring this up because 99% of us (ok not nids) have tanks and once a tank is wrecked it become ... a piece of difficult terrain were it to still count of an enemy model you would not ever be able to move within 1" and we could wall the enemy i with turn one drop pods
"Gun emplacements: though once abandoned to the tides of war, this gun still functions and will serve the cause of carnage once again for anyone who can get to it" .... sure you can call it fluff but lets be frank it also tells us exactly who can use it. Anyone
We also have rules for shooting and assaulting it for times when it is being manned (well i guess that you could shoot it unmanned but only a nid player would do that) ...

Personally i would say that terrain doesn't have a side its just terrain. After all if i infiltrate into your building you can't shoot at or assault a friendly model. That or SM players just dump drop pods and laugh as the wreck of them still forces you to go round.

 Tri wrote:
"Gun emplacements: though once abandoned to the tides of war, this gun still functions and will serve the cause of carnage once again for anyone who can get to it" .... sure you can call it fluff but lets be frank it also tells us exactly who can use it. Anyone
We also have rules for shooting and assaulting it for times when it is being manned (well i guess that you could shoot it unmanned but only a nid player would do that) ..

Gun Emplacements cannot be auto-fired, only Emplaced Weapons. As such, Nids cannot use them. Also, there are rules for attacking it close combat. Whether or not you can charge it has been debated.

 Happyjew wrote:
Gun Emplacements cannot be auto-fired, only Emplaced Weapons. As such, Nids cannot use them. Also, there are rules for attacking it close combat. Whether or not you can charge it has been debated.

I was being complete and commenting on all the ways a building could fire if a unit (friend or foe) was embarked. In the absence of definite answer look to where there is one, building are a type of terrain so we can compare them.

Shooting/Assaulting emplacements ... little odd, seeing as you can't do ether to building unmanned but meh those are the rules ... It's simply giving you the option to attack them or the unit manning it (assuming there is one). You know there's a good chance your flyers coming in next turn ... why risk it, destroy the gun.

does anyone bother to read the rules? look to page 121.

2nd paragraph under "Deploying withing a fortification"

"Units can never deploy inside an enemy fortification, nor can they use pre-game abilities (like scout redeployment) to embark in enemy fortifications before the first turn begins"

a direct quote from the BRB page 121,

Have you found anything out about a quad gun attached to a non-fortification, like an ADL, showing that it is an enemy unit?

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


"is only considered to be an enemy unit if it is occupied at the time of redeployment."

So ... if it's not occupied I can infiltrate into your stuffs.

I don't think this is correct; the key word in the rule part you quote is unit. The proximity or otherwise of enemy units has a bearing on the deployment of infiltrators, and that's what this rule part is telling us; if the enemy fortification is occupied, it counts as an enemy unit and infiltrators will have to deploy at least 12" away from it, maybe more depending on LOS; if it's not occupied, they can deploy right next to it, as long as they still obey the distance restrictions to any other nearby enemy units. They still don't have permission to deploy inside the fortification though, as the already quoted rule from earlier on pg 121 tells us. 'Course as soon as the first turn begins they can hot foot it inside if it's empty and show their asses from the windows if they like - just not before the first turn begins.

Which is the point - they are only an enemy unit when occupied; if you cannot occupy them they cannot be an enemy unit at any point

Quad Guns are gun emplacements (BRB pg 104-105), which are a form of battlefield debris, which are a form of terrain. So, they do not grant First Blood or VPs in Purge the Alien.

Regardless of who "owns" it (if such a thing is possible), there is no rule saying that both players cannot use it. Therefore, it is possible to shoot someone with the Quad Gun they purchased.

However, if we look at pg 8, we can see that ownership of a model is determined by the player who included it in his army. This means that an ADL and Quad Gun are in fact owned by the player who purchased them, even though the enemy can make just as much use of them as the controlling player (however counterintuitive the notion).

The final question, therefore, is whether or not you can shoot or attack your own Quad Gun. Pgs 12 and 20 says you can only shoot or charge an enemy unit. However, pg 105 says that gun emplacements can be shot and attacked. Since specific rules override general ones, gun emplacements can be shot at and attacked. Pg 105 does not explicitly grant the ability to charge at gun emplacements, but it does explicitly grant the ability to attack in close combat, which is not possible without first charging. Ergo, It must be possible to charge a gun emplacement.

Furthermore, pg 105 does not specify that you can only shoot or attack a gun emplacement that does not belong to you. Therefore, you can shoot or attack your own Quad Gun.

tldr; version: Yes, an ADL and Quad Gun are "yours", but they behave as if they are neutral.