Switch Theme:

Question about Night Scythe?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




So I was doing some reading and noticed that the Night Sythe has a Tesla Dest. Now the thing is glued in place but in the book it says that it's turret mounted. So would that mean it has a 360 degree radius with it's gun?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/11/24 08:29:56


 
   
Made in nz
Longtime Dakkanaut



New Zealand

Where in the book does it say that it is turret mounted?
   
Made in za
Mutilatin' Mad Dok





It's mentioned in the *fluff* that it's a turret, not in the rules.

There's a general debate about this (though it seems to have calmed as of late), but the majority consensus is that it can't move on the model, and as such is hull mounted, and thus has a frontal 45 degree line of sight.
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

Turret Mounted does NOT mean 360 degree field of fire. No matter how its mounted, the arc is still how much it can rotate.
A turret mount that can only rotate 45 degrees, has a 45 degree arc.
Typically a turret would give 360 by design, but not always.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 grendel083 wrote:
Turret Mounted does NOT mean 360 degree field of fire. No matter how its mounted, the arc is still how much it can rotate.
A turret mount that can only rotate 45 degrees, has a 45 degree arc.
Typically a turret would give 360 by design, but not always.


the brb disagrees with you. see page 72.

you might be thinking sponson mounted.
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




The brb also say that it doesn't mater if a piece is glued in place. If the piece is glued in place and still needs it still has it's 360. That is if it's turret mounted.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/11/24 15:31:14


 
   
Made in ca
Grisly Ghost Ark Driver





On the model itself they extend straight out from the bottom hull of the 'scythe, to the left and right of the pilot. It is no way attached to some form of turret unless the entire bottom of the vehicle is a cleverly disguised turret of some sort. That said, they are described as being turret-mounted in some descriptive text.


I'd say viewing the actual model to determine it's arc of fire would take precidence over some flavour text.



This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/11/24 16:19:51


 
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

40k-noob wrote:
 grendel083 wrote:
Turret Mounted does NOT mean 360 degree field of fire. No matter how its mounted, the arc is still how much it can rotate.
A turret mount that can only rotate 45 degrees, has a 45 degree arc.
Typically a turret would give 360 by design, but not always.


the brb disagrees with you. see page 72.

you might be thinking sponson mounted.

No it doesn't.
The diagram is an example of a turret that gives 360 deg. Most turrets do, but not all.
The rule is to point the weapon at the target and trace LOS down the barrel (assuming it isn't glued in place).
If a turret mount doesn't give 360 deg, then it doesn't get 360 deg.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Neorealist wrote:
I'd say viewing the actual model to determine it's arc of fire would take precidence over some flavour text.

That's exactly what the rule says to do.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/11/24 15:45:33


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 grendel083 wrote:
40k-noob wrote:
 grendel083 wrote:
Turret Mounted does NOT mean 360 degree field of fire. No matter how its mounted, the arc is still how much it can rotate.
A turret mount that can only rotate 45 degrees, has a 45 degree arc.
Typically a turret would give 360 by design, but not always.


the brb disagrees with you. see page 72.

you might be thinking sponson mounted.

No it doesn't.
The diagram is an example of a turret that gives 360 deg. Most turrets do, but not all.
The rule is to point the weapon at the target and trace LOS down the barrel (assuming it isn't glued in place).
If a turret mount doesn't give 360 deg, then it doesn't get 360 deg.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Neorealist wrote:
I'd say viewing the actual model to determine it's arc of fire would take precidence over some flavour text.

That's exactly what the rule says to do.


You didn't bother to read the page did you?

   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





40k-noob wrote:
You didn't bother to read the page did you?

Page 72 doesn't have the word turret anywhere but the example Arc of Sight 4. So the 360 turret is an example, the actual rule says to look at the model.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




As above. Not sure why this is causing so many issues.

Being glued in place only matters if, otherwise, the model should be able to rotate. There is absolutely no way these guns rotate.
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

I did read the page (not just look at the pretty pictures).
The rules were clear, and my post accurate.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





rigeld2 wrote:
40k-noob wrote:
You didn't bother to read the page did you?

Page 72 doesn't have the word turret anywhere but the example Arc of Sight 4. So the 360 turret is an example, the actual rule says to look at the model.


The man put a 45 degree rotation on a turret mount and that is incorrect.
for Line of sight it says to assume the weapons can rotate.

Also where in shooting with vehicles does it say look at the model?


lastly i am not advocating the NS has a turret mount. I was just saying the his turret mount LOS rotation definition is incorrect.
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




it says they can rotate, based on the mounting. For the mounting it says to look at the model. The model doesnt have a turret, it has a hull mount.
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

40k-noob wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
40k-noob wrote:
You didn't bother to read the page did you?

Page 72 doesn't have the word turret anywhere but the example Arc of Sight 4. So the 360 turret is an example, the actual rule says to look at the model.


The man put a 45 degree rotation on a turret mount and that is incorrect.
for Line of sight it says to assume the weapons can rotate.

Also where in shooting with vehicles does it say look at the model?


lastly i am not advocating the NS has a turret mount. I was just saying the his turret mount LOS rotation definition is incorrect.

That's not what I said.
I said that if a turret can only rotate 45 degree, then that's all it can rotate. It doesn't automatically get 360 deg. Not all turret models can physically move 360 deg.

It says to look at the model in "Vehicle Weapons & Line of Sight", where it says to point the actual weapon at the target
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 grendel083 wrote:
I did read the page (not just look at the pretty pictures).
The rules were clear, and my post accurate.


Really? where did you get 45 degree for a turret mounted weapon from?
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





40k-noob wrote:
 grendel083 wrote:
I did read the page (not just look at the pretty pictures).
The rules were clear, and my post accurate.


Really? where did you get 45 degree for a turret mounted weapon from?

He was saying the potential exists for a turret mount to only be able to rotate enough for a 45 degree arc. If that's what the model is restricted to, that's the arc - per page 72. He's not saying that any current vehicle has that restriction, just that it is possible.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 grendel083 wrote:
40k-noob wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
40k-noob wrote:
You didn't bother to read the page did you?

Page 72 doesn't have the word turret anywhere but the example Arc of Sight 4. So the 360 turret is an example, the actual rule says to look at the model.


The man put a 45 degree rotation on a turret mount and that is incorrect.
for Line of sight it says to assume the weapons can rotate.

Also where in shooting with vehicles does it say look at the model?


lastly i am not advocating the NS has a turret mount. I was just saying the his turret mount LOS rotation definition is incorrect.

That's not what I said.
I said that if a turret can only rotate 45 degree, then that's all it can rotate. It doesn't automatically get 360 deg. Not all turret models can physically move 360 deg.

It says to look at the model in "Vehicle Weapons & Line of Sight", where it says to point the actual weapon at the target

again i think you have confused turret mounted with sponson mounted. I dont know of any turret mounted weapon that can only rotate 45
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

40k-noob wrote:
 grendel083 wrote:
I did read the page (not just look at the pretty pictures).
The rules were clear, and my post accurate.


Really? where did you get 45 degree for a turret mounted weapon from?

It was an example.
A turret that can only physically move 45 deg, has a 45 deg fire arc.
A turret that can only physically move 90 deg, has a 90 deg fire arc.
A turret that can only physically move 360 deg, has a 360 deg fire arc.
Etc etc...
The point being you look to the model to see how far it can rotate, simply being mounted on a turret does not automatically give 360 deg arc.
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





40k-noob wrote:
 grendel083 wrote:
40k-noob wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
40k-noob wrote:
You didn't bother to read the page did you?

Page 72 doesn't have the word turret anywhere but the example Arc of Sight 4. So the 360 turret is an example, the actual rule says to look at the model.


The man put a 45 degree rotation on a turret mount and that is incorrect.
for Line of sight it says to assume the weapons can rotate.

Also where in shooting with vehicles does it say look at the model?


lastly i am not advocating the NS has a turret mount. I was just saying the his turret mount LOS rotation definition is incorrect.

That's not what I said.
I said that if a turret can only rotate 45 degree, then that's all it can rotate. It doesn't automatically get 360 deg. Not all turret models can physically move 360 deg.

It says to look at the model in "Vehicle Weapons & Line of Sight", where it says to point the actual weapon at the target

again i think you have confused turret mounted with sponson mounted. I dont know of any turret mounted weapon that can only rotate 45

Show me a sponson with only a 45 degree rotation.
He gave a possible scenario, he didn't advocate that one exists.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





rigeld2 wrote:
40k-noob wrote:
 grendel083 wrote:
I did read the page (not just look at the pretty pictures).
The rules were clear, and my post accurate.


Really? where did you get 45 degree for a turret mounted weapon from?

He was saying the potential exists for a turret mount to only be able to rotate enough for a 45 degree arc. If that's what the model is restricted to, that's the arc - per page 72. He's not saying that any current vehicle has that restriction, just that it is possible.


he said a turret mount can ONLY rotate 45, has 45 arc.

that is a definitive statement. That leaves no room for "potential."
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

40k-noob wrote:
he said a turret mount can ONLY rotate 45, has 45 arc.

that is a definitive statement. That leaves no room for "potential."

I definitely did not!
Go back and read again please.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 grendel083 wrote:
A turret mount that can only rotate 45 degrees, has a 45 degree arc.

Is what I said.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/11/24 16:39:19


 
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





40k-noob wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
40k-noob wrote:
 grendel083 wrote:
I did read the page (not just look at the pretty pictures).
The rules were clear, and my post accurate.


Really? where did you get 45 degree for a turret mounted weapon from?

He was saying the potential exists for a turret mount to only be able to rotate enough for a 45 degree arc. If that's what the model is restricted to, that's the arc - per page 72. He's not saying that any current vehicle has that restriction, just that it is possible.


he said a turret mount can ONLY rotate 45, has 45 arc.

that is a definitive statement. That leaves no room for "potential."


grendel083 wrote:Turret Mounted does NOT mean 360 degree field of fire. No matter how its mounted, the arc is still how much it can rotate.
A turret mount that can only rotate 45 degrees, has a 45 degree arc.
Typically a turret would give 360 by design, but not always.

You should re-read the bolded sentence. He never said what you think he said.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





so i missed the "that" in my retyping.

Point being is that, the book says you assume it can still rotate.

and a turret mount with a vertical 45 will be able to rotate around quite freely.
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





40k-noob wrote:
so i missed the "that" in my retyping.

Point being is that, the book says you assume it can still rotate.

and a turret mount with a vertical 45 will be able to rotate around quite freely.

The word "that" in his sentence changes the meaning entirely. It makes it an example rather than an assertion that all turrets are like that.
The book does not say you assume it can rotate. It says that if its glued, you assume it rotate - but that the design of the model can still limit the swivel.


My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in us
Loyal Necron Lychguard






nosferatu1001 wrote:
As above. Not sure why this is causing so many issues.

Being glued in place only matters if, otherwise, the model should be able to rotate. There is absolutely no way these guns rotate.


Just an FYI, the rulebook does make mention of weapons not being able to rotate "because of the way the model is assembled". Seems to me that covers situations where models are assembled in such a manner that it would be impossible for weapons to swivel even if they're supposed to.

That said, the night scythe is still a hull mounted weapon because they don't make mention of "turret mounted" in the actual rules and it's never been added to an FAQ. I just wanted to point out that just because it's glued in place due to the way the model is put together doesn't necessarily mean anything.
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

40k-noob wrote:
so i missed the "that" in my retyping.

Point being is that, the book says you assume it can still rotate.

and a turret mount with a vertical 45 will be able to rotate around quite freely.

That's for when it should be able to rotate, but can't (is glued for example).

I'm sure there are several examples of turrets that have less than 360 deg fire.
The Baneblade spring to mind. The Lascannon turrets and twin Heavy Bolter turret (not the sponsons, the turret on he front) can't rotate 360.
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





 Kevin949 wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
As above. Not sure why this is causing so many issues.

Being glued in place only matters if, otherwise, the model should be able to rotate. There is absolutely no way these guns rotate.


Just an FYI, the rulebook does make mention of weapons not being able to rotate "because of the way the model is assembled". Seems to me that covers situations where models are assembled in such a manner that it would be impossible for weapons to swivel even if they're supposed to.

That said, the night scythe is still a hull mounted weapon because they don't make mention of "turret mounted" in the actual rules and it's never been added to an FAQ. I just wanted to point out that just because it's glued in place due to the way the model is put together doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Which is what Nos said as well. So... Yeah.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in us
Loyal Necron Lychguard






rigeld2 wrote:
 Kevin949 wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
As above. Not sure why this is causing so many issues.

Being glued in place only matters if, otherwise, the model should be able to rotate. There is absolutely no way these guns rotate.


Just an FYI, the rulebook does make mention of weapons not being able to rotate "because of the way the model is assembled". Seems to me that covers situations where models are assembled in such a manner that it would be impossible for weapons to swivel even if they're supposed to.

That said, the night scythe is still a hull mounted weapon because they don't make mention of "turret mounted" in the actual rules and it's never been added to an FAQ. I just wanted to point out that just because it's glued in place due to the way the model is put together doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Which is what Nos said as well. So... Yeah.


Not really, he was much more emphatic about the fact they can't rotate on the model so there's no way they can rotate in the game. While true for the night scythe, I just wanted to point out that that method of reasoning is not necessarily the correct path to take to get to that conclusion.
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





Maybe I'm just used to reading Nos-speak (that's scary) but he didn't say what you think he said.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: