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.

Spellbound wrote:
Doesn't the FAQ say to use the base for range and LOS measurement?

Yes all measurements are from the edge of the base nearest the target unit. So 360 LOS.

 Drunkspleen wrote:

Spellbound wrote:
Doesn't the FAQ say to use the base for range and LOS measurement?

no

Treat the Heldrake’s ranged weapon as a Turret Mounted
Weapon, measuring all ranges from the edge of the Heldrake’s
base nearest to the target unit.

So would you measure the 45 degrees from it's mouth or it's neck? I would say it's neck as that is the point of articulation unless his neck is immobile.

 Drunkspleen wrote:
Off the top of my head, the Baneblade has one in a shallow recess that limits its rotation.

edit: oh and the Land Raider's front weapon on all variants.

Those arn't turrets, those are hull mounted weapons.

Kevlar wrote:

Spellbound wrote:
Doesn't the FAQ say to use the base for range and LOS measurement?

Yes all measurements are from the edge of the base nearest the target unit. So 360 LOS.

Except LOS isn't a measurement of range.

Eldarain wrote:So would you measure the 45 degrees from it's mouth or it's neck? I would say it's neck as that is the point of articulation unless his neck is immobile.

I'd say the neck, I'd also be more generous than 45 degrees since the neck clearly should give it some increased range of movement.

Grey Templar wrote:Those arn't turrets, those are hull mounted weapons.

How do you determine that? They are upward protrusions that sit in circular mounting holes which they can swivel in, why aren't they turrets? why are they hull mounted? what's the difference between those weapons and say, a Predator's main gun?

Thats just it, we have no way of telling within the rules.


IRL, a hull mounted weapon is one that is built into the hull. A turret has its own super structure that is outside the main hull of the tank.

By that definition, the LR forward gun is most definitly hull mounted.

 Grey Templar wrote:

IRL, a hull mounted weapon is one that is built into the hull. A turret has its own super structure that is outside the main hull of the tank.

By that definition, the LR forward gun is most definitly hull mounted.

It pretty obviously isn't. Even cursory examination of LR model shows that the front gun is 100% separate from the hull. Also LR front gun has 100% same mounting as Razorback gun does. So according to you, "Razorback gun is hull mounted".

The thing has a neck that clearly can pivot to look In any direction... If it wasn't for the FAQ, it would have to follow normal rules for vehicles.

However, even though its a vehicle, its weapon has been FAQ'd to be a turret that measures distance from the part of the base that's closest to the target.

How anyone can still claim the heldrake can't swivel it's neck and fire in any direction is beyond comprehension.

The FAQ is clear. The heldrake can place its template anywhere within 12" of any point on its base and still have LoS. Period.

 Eiluj The Farseer wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
And your argument is factually incorrect, as it is a vehicle in about 5 times the ways it is an MC. Fact.

OMG what is it with you and fact, have you ever heard of scientific theory, do you know hypothesis, fact, theory... Take a chill pill.. You can state your opinions, whether they are fact well that is a matter of your opinion just as everyone is entitled too. But you fact monger, I am glad you have all the answers you must be god...

Yes, and your hypothesis has been proven wrong with.... facts. My H0 is that it is a vehicle with exceptions, you have yet to prove H1.

Your opinion is, factualy, wrong. You are entitled to it, does not alter that it is wrong. And no, I am not "god", however you dont have to be to look at a set of factual statements and determine a truth value. Unless you are claiming some kind of divine intervention on this? Lol.

 BarBoBot wrote:

How anyone can still claim the heldrake can't swivel it's neck and fire in any direction is beyond comprehension.

The FAQ is clear. The heldrake can place its template anywhere within 12" of any point on its base and still have LoS. Period.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, some people here just like to troll.

The turret on the front of the Landraider is certainly a turret. And it does have a substantially limited firing arc, due to its placement and the hull blocking it in most directions.

I had the same reaction as Drunkspleen when I first read the Heldrake ruling, actually. Turret does not automatically equal 360 firing arc; the vehicle's own hull can certainly block it.

That being said, I believe the clear intent with the Heldrake is 360, due to using the base for measurement. If they had left that part out, and just said LOS is like a turret, I'd probably be playing it with 180 degrees to the front, as that's about the max the next could traverse without running into its own hull.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Eiluj The Farseer wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
And your argument is factually incorrect, as it is a vehicle in about 5 times the ways it is an MC. Fact.

OMG what is it with you and fact, have you ever heard of scientific theory, do you know hypothesis, fact, theory... Take a chill pill.. You can state your opinions, whether they are fact well that is a matter of your opinion just as everyone is entitled too. But you fact monger, I am glad you have all the answers you must be god...

Yes, and your hypothesis has been proven wrong with.... facts. My H0 is that it is a vehicle with exceptions, you have yet to prove H1.

Your opinion is, factualy, wrong. You are entitled to it, does not alter that it is wrong. And no, I am not "god", however you dont have to be to look at a set of factual statements and determine a truth value. Unless you are claiming some kind of divine intervention on this? Lol.

Edited for Rule #1 MT11
It is classified as a vehicle, but it has abilities as a MC, making it different than normal vehicles.

Both of you should drop it. It's a useless argument in the first place.

true my apologies

Man - indeed, the fact you are told to use the base for meaurement certainly indicates 360, but nothing states this exactly. However locally we will play as 360, as this seems to be roughly what theyre aiming at, best as we can tell.

You definitely sound butt-hurt. CSM have ONE thing that is amazing in their codex. Everything else is "good" at best. Let them have that one thing that makes them competitive.

Oblits
Helldrake
Havoks with AC
Zombies

Really strange "one thing" this.

 Eldarain wrote:

Cheesedoodler wrote:
/rant on

Turret. TURRET.

Why in the world do so many people either:
A) Spell the word with an "n" I.E. Turrent
B) Think that the word is torrent!?

Why is this a thing!?

/rant off

Where is the question here...? It sounds like a complaint thread.

The Baleflamer uses the special rule "Torrent" to resolve it's shot.

Wow. And now don't I feel silly. You've got me this time, but I stand by my rant.

 Pyriel- wrote:

You definitely sound butt-hurt. CSM have ONE thing that is amazing in their codex. Everything else is "good" at best. Let them have that one thing that makes them competitive.

Oblits
Helldrake
Havoks with AC
Zombies

Really strange "one thing" this.

You missed out Spawn and Bikers.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 Pyriel- wrote:

You definitely sound butt-hurt. CSM have ONE thing that is amazing in their codex. Everything else is "good" at best. Let them have that one thing that makes them competitive.

Oblits
Helldrake
Havoks with AC
Zombies

Really strange "one thing" this.

You missed out Spawn and Bikers.

Ya that is the strangest one thing I have ever seen

All of those are good, but not really amazing. Except possibly Nurgle Spawn. Those are pretty amazing too.

Oblits with MoN come close to amazing, but miss, because a) they have to switch weapons turn to turn now, and b) (more importantly) we don't have Lash anymore to make plasmacannons insanely good.

Don't forget they're Ld 8 and non-Fearless.

OH NOES THIS THING CANT INSTA GIB WITH EASE QUICK GET MATT WARD

That is how you sound and all it takes is some tactics to make each and every one of these units extremely scary and I would say that noise marines should now join that list of "one amazing unit" if you want to use your oblits optimaly effective field 2 squads and alternate targets that's all it takes or just focus fire on units so that they can move onto another target with a weapon that would be more effective against that unit for example popping a transport with lascannons then taking down the squishies inside with plasma cannons

Ah... How has Dakka gotten by all these years without such wise council as "shoot different stuff...HUURRRR"

Seriously?

I know its pretty basic isnt it? So whats the problem?

The problem is that we're off topic, and we were as soon as someone complained about a unit's rules, and someone else resorted to speculating about a=the person's motivations.

Seriously, the difference between a "good" unit and an "amazing" unit is really subjective and your mileage will vary from others'. It's also nothing to do with discussing how the rules work, which is the province of You Make Da Call.

yea as OP, can I ask that a Mod lock this thread? Its gotten Heavily off Topic and is quickly devolving into a flame war....

Sorry original poster I want to zoom in! (Or hover in as it's my first turn).

Heldrake is a fantastic miniature and IMO (now) about right in terms of points. As it come on from reserve some forces can try and counter this through special characters making the role harder and other can just go shooting to take it out.

The problem with the original rules for it is that it was being treated like a fixed wing aircraft and not the metal dragon it is. The original rule didn't really appreciate this and made it a little expensive (IMO). I imagine these things to be dropping off ships like bats, twisting turning through the air, clawing and bounding off other flyers as they go. The FAQ on the firing arc just about get to this; and at least they haven't FAQ'ed (think there is a pun in there) it too far and made its movement freer than a flyers basic zooming options; or made it fast (which would have been OTT).

[Slight aside: I think the problem with considering good units in the CSM codex is that you need to have a SM codex along side to compare. The heldrake outclasses the SM equivalent. Bikes are similar or a little worse for the lack of an attack bike; havocs similar; oblits have their uses. The only other things which stand out (DP, other demon engines) then suffer through high points.]

I thought the FAQ would stop the arguing. Apparently theres no way of pleasing everyone but the argument table side is gone. Its a turret has 360 firing arc and wounding ability.

I like the idea of flying over a rhino vector striking popping it open then flaming the content in the following shooting phase. Fits the role of this flyer perfectly.

Yes there will be TFG who will run as many as he can to WaaC and thats a shame but you dont have to play them in pick up games.

Have Fun

nosferatu1001 wrote:

clively wrote:

 Akar wrote:
It's the measuring from the Base and not the weapon that virtually every other vehicle in the game has to do. While not game breaking, was fairly unnecessary, other than to simplify when they do actually fire behind them. Firing out their tail end I think is going to become the more common method of shooting them now.

Where else would you measure from? The base is the only spot that makes sense.

The weapon mount, which is in the mouth. Like every other vehicle

Until you realize that, unlike most vehicles, the neck of the model is assembled in such a way as to prevent rotation even though it has the appearance to do such. Its not just a simple matter of someone gluing a turret in place but rather that without some decent modeling skills there is no other way to build it. Because of that you have to fallback to the rules governing firing arcs on a model whose turret is glued in place. Which is difficult to do because the neck sticks out so far... Which means the base is the only thing that provides an accurate enough surface to prevent range arguments. So I'm back to stating that the base is the only place that makes sense.

Reason I always thought it was weird is that the neck is bent and you cannot have it actually be straight. Name one other tank what wasn't symmetrical with turrets or having the main gun pointing straight forward if slightly off center.

I think the reason its stiff is because having a fully articulated neck would have been a difficult thing to make with the model.