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.

Fragile wrote:
Only if you disregard all the other rules for shooting with walkers.

Walkers rotate in the shooting phase when they fire.

However, if they are immobilized, as I stated, then they are limited to the firing arc of their weapons.

By your arguments, since Ork Walker weapons have a ball joint, they have a 360 degree weapon arc, even when immobilized.

In regards to this constantly quoted piece from the rulebook:

On some models, it will actually impossible to literally move the gun and point it towards the target because of the way the model is assembled or because the gun has been glued into place

I find it surprising so many are jumping to this as irrevocable evidence to prove their cause. I always, and increasingly so rereading it, saw this as a way to get around how players built their models, rather than how models were designed. If you read it as specifying how models are designed, you're opening a massive can of worms in regards to a plethora of other seemingly static weapons in games, that people assumed were hull mounted.

 Kharrak wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Only if you disregard all the other rules for shooting with walkers.

Walkers rotate in the shooting phase when they fire.

However, if they are immobilized, as I stated, then they are limited to the firing arc of their weapons.

By your arguments, since Ork Walker weapons have a ball joint, they have a 360 degree weapon arc, even when immobilized.

In regards to this constantly quoted piece from the rulebook:

On some models, it will actually impossible to literally move the gun and point it towards the target because of the way the model is assembled or because the gun has been glued into place

I find it surprising so many are jumping to this as irrevocable evidence to prove their cause. I always, and increasingly so rereading it, saw this as a way to get around how players built their models, rather than how models were designed. If you read it as specifying how models are designed, you're opening a massive can of worms in regards to a plethora of other seemingly static weapons in games, that people assumed were hull mounted.

But you must be aware of the fact that many necron players are "damaged" by the fact that their codex overrules/overruled so many BRB rules. And because of that it seems that they in some wierd way believes much of their stuff to be able to disregard BRB rules without a clear rule/text to support it.

Since no other weapon in the game either have a text which says "you must have LOS to fire it at your target" I just assume that the same BRB rules that works for all other weapons also applies for necron weaponry unless specifically stated that it ignores LOS.

 Kharrak wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Only if you disregard all the other rules for shooting with walkers.

Walkers rotate in the shooting phase when they fire.

However, if they are immobilized, as I stated, then they are limited to the firing arc of their weapons.

By your arguments, since Ork Walker weapons have a ball joint, they have a 360 degree weapon arc, even when immobilized.

In regards to this constantly quoted piece from the rulebook:

On some models, it will actually impossible to literally move the gun and point it towards the target because of the way the model is assembled or because the gun has been glued into place

I find it surprising so many are jumping to this as irrevocable evidence to prove their cause. I always, and increasingly so rereading it, saw this as a way to get around how players built their models, rather than how models were designed. If you read it as specifying how models are designed, you're opening a massive can of worms in regards to a plethora of other seemingly static weapons in games, that people assumed were hull mounted.

Again your trying to Strawman. To do those things requires breaking clearly stated rules.

The question is "Is the weapon turret mounted or hull"

The answer is from a rule on Pg 72.

Rigeld thinks it is not and gave his reasons. I think it is and gave mine. Pulling out strawman arguments does nothing to this discussion.

Except the power cables are not long enough to wrap aaround

So the issue is NOT the way the model is *assembled*, but with the way the model is *designed*. those two are very different in meaning.

The power cable is dorsal to the weapon... It has no influence. You're clutching at straws now.

Sigh

The way it is attached to the hull means that, when it tries to spin round they will tighten, preventing it turning any further.

Then you have the Tesla weapons in the way, which will prevent it from rotating past

Finally you have that the only allowance is when a model is assembled such that it cannot move. Not where the model is DESIGNED so that it cannot spin

Not clutching at straws when youre right.

The tesla destructors in no way impede the rotation of the death ray weapon. Your reply regarding the cable... Like I said - clutching for the straws now.

Odd, on my model they definitely would do.

do you have an argument?

I have the model.

I don't need the model.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/475679.page#4770588
The picture in that post clearly shows cables that would prevent turning.

Ha ha, so while away I see this thread has side stepped. It is obvious that there is no rule to overide out of sight so now we have arguments about the mounting? To argue that this is a turret is laughable for all the obvious reasons already pointed out.

"But it has a ball joint?" Yea, so do most joints in the human skeleton, can your elbow free rotate 360 degrees? If so, please see a physician, and fast. Clearly the tesla destructors and the cables prevent it from free rotation.
.........................................................................................................

@jy2- There is no need for RAI here. It worked one way in 5th, now it works another way in 6th. Further more all your examples from other books explicitly state that they fire outside LoS, so the comparison to the language explaining the DR is more damning then redeeming to your argument as it fails to even mention LoS.
YOU can house rule it to shoot 24" if you want but we are trying to address this by the book here.

-It has a 45 arc LoS

-It can only allocate wounds to models in LoS

-Use your shots wisely

It is not laughable. To read the poor response against it shows how weak is their position.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
It is not laughable. To read the poor response against it shows how weak is their position.

You're misunderstanding the cables that are being referenced - I can tell because you mentioned the dorsal ones.
Those aren't the ones I'm talking about. At all.
I'm talking about the ones on the side of the gun that go into the hull.
I'm sorry you feel that the position is weak - I'm not sure how better to explain it.
I've posted a picture where the cable is plainly visible. In it it's the black cable on the side, not the silver dorsal cables.

I have the model. I am having realiy hard time believing you would support that... I encourage everyone following this thread to take a good long hard look at the model. What you're saying carries absolutely no weight in my opinion.

Here's a much clearer view:


If that gun rotated, it would tear those cables right out.

Edit: Even without the cables, if it could rotate it would be lucky to move 45* before it hit the tesla cannons (you can see this even more clearly on the pic on page 4). There's no way that gun can rotate.

Cables are flexible which can't be accounted for with the plastic kit.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Cables are flexible which can't be accounted for with the plastic kit.

Assuming they are flexible (and I was assuming they were), they'd have to stretch at least twice their length just on a 90* rotation. They look flexible, but they don't look like thy can stretch at all, let alone that far.
And what about hitting the tesla cannons? You have the model, you can clearly see it would hit them.

Even stretching, that design couldn't swivel 180 degrees because of the placement of the cables.

rigeld2 wrote:
Even stretching, that design couldn't swivel 180 degrees because of the placement of the cables.

Agreed, not even close.
And that's assuming the tesla cannons aren't there.

The death ray is lower than the tesla destructors... It can easily pass underneath them... Take a side view photo.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
The death ray is lower than the tesla destructors... It can easily pass underneath them... Take a side view photo.

No it isn't. Not even close. I thought you said you had the model? Or is this the model you own?

From the thread posted earlier:


Top of the Death Ray is RIGHT between them! It would need a full 1/2 inch to come close to pass them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
How about the other image posted earlier?


They even had to REMOVE one tesla as it blocked the shot of the Death Ray, because half of its between them! You can see the position on the gun behind it.
There is no way you can own the model and claim it will pass underneath them.

 Red Corsair wrote:

@jy2- There is no need for RAI here. It worked one way in 5th, now it works another way in 6th. Further more all your examples from other books explicitly state that they fire outside LoS, so the comparison to the language explaining the DR is more damning then redeeming to your argument as it fails to even mention LoS.
YOU can house rule it to shoot 24" if you want but we are trying to address this by the book here.

-It has a 45 arc LoS

-It can only allocate wounds to models in LoS

-Use your shots wisely

Allow me to express my logic a little more clearly.

First of all:

BRB, p.72 wrote:
Vehicles need to draw a line of sight to their targets in order to shoot at them.

Ok, now how does the death ray work?

Necron codex, p.50 wrote:
To fire the death ray, nominate a point on the battlefield anywhere within the weapon's range, then nominate a second point within 3D6" of the first. Then, draw a straight line between the 2 points. Every unit (friendly or enemy) underneath the line suffers a number of hits equal to the number of models in the unit underneath the line.

Notice that it doesn't say "anywhere within its LOS". It just says anywhere. You understand the difference, right? With the exception that it has to be within 12" range of the gun, anywhere is unrestricted. "Anywhere within its LOS" is restricted and a direct conflict to anywhere.

Ok, I will go under the assumption that the death ray is hull-mounted and has a rather limited 45 degree frontal arc. Now how can you fire the death ray anywhere when you don't have LOS to do so? By the BRB, you can't fire it unless you have LOS but the codex gives you express permission to do so despite the lack of LOS. That just makes no sense, right? Well, in order to make the basic rules work with the codex, you need to make 1 of 2 basic assumptions. And you can do so because in the case of a conflict between the base rules and the codex, the codex-specific rules take precedence.

So in order to fire without LOS (because remember, you are firing the gun outside of your normal field of LOS), you have to make either the assumption that 1) you have LOS to the target with the death ray or 2) you don't need LOS to the target with the death ray.


Ok, I will give it to you that the codex does not tell you how to allocate wounds with the death ray. Which is why I am bringing up these particular units - Tyranid hive guard impaler cannon, Tau SMS missiles and grey knight purgation squad's Astral Aim. Now all 3 of these rules have 2 things in common. First of all, they all give you explicit permission to fire without the need for LOS. Secondly, just like the doom scythe's death ray, none of those 3 gives you express permission to allocate wounds outside of LOS. Then how are people allocating wounds with those units? Through logical assumption that if you don't need LOS to shoot at a target, then you can allocate wounds to them.

Hope you see what I am getting at?

Death ray works the same way. The rules for the death gives you permission to fire outside of its LOS. Thus, you have to assume that either you have LOS or you don't need it. If you assume that you have LOS, then it's easy-peasy. If you assume that you don't need LOS, then you are in the same boat as the hive guards, SMS and Astral Aim. You have to make the same logical assumptions as them. Otherwise, none of the above weapons should be able to wound outside of their LOS by pure RAW. Either they all work or they all don't.

And no, I am not basing my intepretation of the rules on 5th Edition rulings.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Ha ha, so while away I see this thread has side stepped. It is obvious that there is no rule to overide out of sight so now we have arguments about the mounting? To argue that this is a turret is laughable for all the obvious reasons already pointed out.

"But it has a ball joint?" Yea, so do most joints in the human skeleton, can your elbow free rotate 360 degrees? If so, please see a physician, and fast. Clearly the tesla destructors and the cables prevent it from free rotation.

Lol, if you have ball joints for your elbows, you need to see a physician. Try shoulder and hips, both of which have 360 rotation.

It is easy to see from this picture below that the death ray is lower than the Tesla destructors and it's rotation is not impeded by them.


]

Apart from the top of the death ray, which is at the same height as the middle of the destructors barrel.

If you believe that the death ray can swivel past, explain that. You cannot, but try.

Why did GW remove the tesla destructor in their photo? Because otherwise you could not see the death ray, because the teslas cover the upper portion of the death ray.

Your argument tha tthe cables would be "flexible" is irrelevant - they would have to STRETCH to twice their length simply to allow a 90 degree rotation..... which cannot happen because the tesla destructors are in the way

In short your argument comes down to "i have the model", and is belied by a) those who have the model and b) the pictures you posted above which show you are incorrect

Stating that it can't rotate past the Tesla must not ever wear anything on their belt, like a cell phone. Imagine your body is the hull your arm is the Death Ray. A ball joint would allow angled movement not just swivel. As someone else pointed out with the math the limited fire options using it as either a hull mount or a turret is hardly anywhere. Anyone who has seen "Real Genius" has an idea of what the movement of this weapon would be like with the targeting mechanism under the plane. How do we know how any of this works? Maybe the cables are made of Unbelievanium and can freakin be used for bungee jumping and handle the power of a sun running through them. The center of the cable has some type of connection or mechanical doohickey, could that be some type of expansion joint? Like many discussions here this is down to wait for a faq or run it like you want.

As I said - even if they stretch, the gun wouldn't be able to rotate past where the cable is mounted to the hull.

jy2- That is a matter of view do to vague writing, and this is why we need to resort to RAW. I read the anywhere as a very nonspecific term ie they wanted players to be able to place the line at any spot on the battlefield not on a models base but within the obvious restrictions laid out by the shooting rules.
Here is a map marking the location of your final destination, take any route you chose.
-While being a citizen you have basic civil laws in place and obviously you are free to go anywhere in your car while obeying traffic law. Like not driving down one ways, or an the shoulder of the road. Your arguing that in the abcense of restating laws that govern you already that you can ignore them.

Anywhere =/= anywhere outside LoS.

I don't appreciate the giant red letters if you can tell. I heard your argument and it is wrong. The rules tell us it's wrong. Your interpretation is your skewed interpretation, not rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
The death ray is lower than the tesla destructors... It can easily pass underneath them... Take a side view photo.

I now pray daily that you are not a civil engineer.

 Red Corsair wrote:
I now pray daily that you are not a civil engineer.

Not relevant. Dont attack a person, attack their argument.

I would tend to agree that this is a fixed gun. The only problem is that it dosent look like any "Hull Mounted" weapon I've ever seen before. It does more resemble a turret weapon than a fixed weapon but then there are the design flaws preventing this. I would say, for the purpose of shooting it could easily have an arc between 45-60'. Its a nice compromise. I think thats the way the model wsa intended as well.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
I now pray daily that you are not a civil engineer.

Not relevant. Dont attack a person, attack their argument.

They tried, he ignores it.