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.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
I have the Printed Codex, I have no Rule to look to.

Grendel has the iBook version, his special rule includes the first sentence(he has shown you proof of this)

You have the epub version it has a different special rule.

3 Books, no agreement.

Which is it, does my order do nothing because no rule exists?

Does Grendel have to roll 6s for his unit?

To say this for the dozenth time. The epub and ibook do not conflict. Neither of them need to roll 6's if the unit has precision shot to begin with. The omission from the printed version is easily amended because you can refer to the section in the BRB, because nothing has really changed.

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
I have the Printed Codex, I have no Rule to look to.

Grendel has the iBook version, his special rule includes the first sentence(he has shown you proof of this)

You have the epub version it has a different special rule.

3 Books, no agreement.

Which is it, does my order do nothing because no rule exists?

Does Grendel have to roll 6s for his unit?

To say this for the dozenth time. The epub and ibook do not conflict. Neither of them need to roll 6's if the unit has precision shot to begin with. The omission from the printed version is easily amended because you can refer to the section in the BRB, because nothing has really changed.

Proof is on page 13, but I will show it to you again.



For the Dozenth time, yes the iBook is different.

And no I cannot check the brb because that is just a subheading, not a rule, you said so yourself.


New rules in codices will be listed in their codices, this wasn't a rule before according to you, so it is still not a rule.

Even if it does "become a rule" I have to use the whole rule.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Proof is on page 13, but I will show it to you again.

For the Dozenth time, yes the iBook is different.

And no I cannot check the brb because that is just a subheading, not a rule, you said so yourself.


New rules in codices will be listed in their codices, this wasn't a rule before according to you, so it is still not a rule.

Even if it does "become a rule" I have to use the whole rule.

Different =/= conflicting.

They would conflict if they had rules that function differently.

They do not. The epub has the same rule details as the ibook. Characters still make precision shots on 6's, because that line is still true and still in the BRB.

The ibook version has the line in that it doesn't really need. Because if you've issued Take Aim!, you have precision shot, and don't need to be a character and roll a 6. But the line remains true, that still happens.

And you can look at the BRB as a matter of simplicity, to save hassle, if you do not own the versions with it in the glossary. That's just a matter of convenience.


So it was not a special rule. It is now a special rule. And using the whole rule still does not need units under the effect of Take Aim! to roll a 6.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
I have the Printed Codex, I have no Rule to look to.

Grendel has the iBook version, his special rule includes the first sentence(he has shown you proof of this)

You have the epub version it has a different special rule.

3 Books, no agreement.

Which is it, does my order do nothing because no rule exists?

Does Grendel have to roll 6s for his unit?

To say this for the dozenth time. The epub and ibook do not conflict. Neither of them need to roll 6's if the unit has precision shot to begin with. The omission from the printed version is easily amended because you can refer to the section in the BRB, because nothing has really changed.

Proof is on page 13, but I will show it to you again.



For the Dozenth time, yes the iBook is different.

And no I cannot check the brb because that is just a subheading, not a rule, you said so yourself.


New rules in codices will be listed in their codices, this wasn't a rule before according to you, so it is still not a rule.

Even if it does "become a rule" I have to use the whole rule.

A month in and folks are still debating this. To me, it seems to be a willful misreading of the rule.

In the iBooks version, it says that it grants the Precision Shot Special Rule. Then, two lines down, it says "if any of your character's shots roll 6 To Hit, these are Precision Shots." It does NOT say, that the ordered unit makes a shooting attack and all shots count as precision shots. It links to the rule, specifically stating that you need to roll a 6 to hit to allocate those shots.

The intent is clearly that your unit now fires as if it were full of characters. I.e. 6's to hit may be allocated as precision shots.

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Proof is on page 13, but I will show it to you again.

For the Dozenth time, yes the iBook is different.

And no I cannot check the brb because that is just a subheading, not a rule, you said so yourself.


New rules in codices will be listed in their codices, this wasn't a rule before according to you, so it is still not a rule.

Even if it does "become a rule" I have to use the whole rule.

Different =/= conflicting.

They would conflict if they had rules that function differently.

They do not. The epub has the same rule details as the ibook. Characters still make precision shots on 6's, because that line is still true and still in the BRB.

The ibook version has the line in that it doesn't really need. Because if you've issued Take Aim!, you have precision shot, and don't need to be a character and roll a 6. But the line remains true, that still happens.

And you can look at the BRB as a matter of simplicity, to save hassle, if you do not own the versions with it in the glossary. That's just a matter of convenience.


So it was not a special rule. It is now a special rule. And using the whole rule still does not need units under the effect of Take Aim! to roll a 6.

If Take Aim Creates a Special rule out of a Former Subheading; the Codex must have that rule listed(otherwise we have no rule to look to). The iBook lists that rule, part of that rule is that only when characters roll a 6 on their to-hit is the shot a precision shot.

That is part of the rule as proven in the image.

The Epub version leaves out that first line making everything under the rule a precision shot.

That is conflicting. That is the 2 rules functioning differently.

The ibook's version requires a character and a roll of 6, the epub does not; those are different functions of the same rule within 2 productions of the same book.

And as you say: the sub heading in the BRB is not a rule, therefore there is no rule in the BRB to look to, you have a Codex that calls upon a new rule that does not exist outside of the elctronic versions(and even those conflict).

The Precision Shots special rule is listed under the Characters section of the BRB. The wording is identical between the BRB and the linked text in the iBooks AM book. There is no conflict.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
If Take Aim Creates a Special rule out of a Former Subheading; the Codex must have that rule listed(otherwise we have no rule to look to). The iBook lists that rule, part of that rule is that only when characters roll a 6 on their to-hit is the shot a precision shot.

That is part of the rule as proven in the image.

The Epub version leaves out that first line making everything under the rule a precision shot.

That is conflicting. That is the 2 rules functioning differently.

But they don't. Rolling a 6 to hit with a character generates a precision shot in either version.

Having precision shot allows you to allocate your wounds in either version.

We can illustrate this with the second sentence in the rule. The one that, in the BRB, is in bold. And describes the mechanics of precision shot.

Wounds from Precision shots are allocated against a model (or models) of your choice in the target unit,...

The ibook's version requires a character and a roll of 6, the epub does not; those are different functions of the same rule within 2 productions of the same book.

The ibook version requires a character that does not have precision shot to roll a 6 to get them.

As before, if a model is not listed as having a special rule, it does not have it.

Sniper tells us that 'If a weapon has the sniper special rule, or is fired by a model with the sniper special rule...' It means things with sniper.
Rending tells us that 'If a model has the rending special rule, or is attacking with a melee weapon with the rending special rule...' Again, things with rending.
Shred says 'If a model has the shred special rule...' Things with shred.


Precision shot line one begins with 'If any of your characters roll a 6 to hit,'. Not 'If any of your characters with the precision shot special rule'. Not 'Character have precision shot'. Not 'Models with precision shot that roll a 6 to hit.'

Characters don't have the rule. Line 1 says how they get it. The text in bold is the actual description of the mechanics of special shot. They even wrote it in bolt to make it clear.

The bold text starts with 'Wounds from Precision Shots.'

Does Take Aim! give precision shots? Yes.

Ergo, are they wounds from precision shot? Yes.

Ergo, no need to roll a 6.

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
If Take Aim Creates a Special rule out of a Former Subheading; the Codex must have that rule listed(otherwise we have no rule to look to). The iBook lists that rule, part of that rule is that only when characters roll a 6 on their to-hit is the shot a precision shot.

That is part of the rule as proven in the image.

The Epub version leaves out that first line making everything under the rule a precision shot.

That is conflicting. That is the 2 rules functioning differently.

But they don't. Rolling a 6 to hit with a character generates a precision shot in either version.

Having precision shot allows you to allocate your wounds in either version.

We can illustrate this with the second sentence in the rule. The one that, in the BRB, is in bold. And describes the mechanics of precision shot.

Wounds from Precision shots are allocated against a model (or models) of your choice in the target unit,...

rolling a 6 with a character generates a Precision shot true, that is part of the rules for precision shots, that is an effect. That is how characters get to use their subheading just like Jet Pack models need to not be engaged to use their thrust moves.

They have the subheading, these are the situations in which they can use the subheading.

The Precision shots in the bolded section are the results of the character rolling a 6 to hit with a shooting attack, thius is explicitely stated in the first sentence.

The ibook's version requires a character and a roll of 6, the epub does not; those are different functions of the same rule within 2 productions of the same book.

The ibook version requires a character that does not have precision shot to roll a 6 to get them.

As before, if a model is not listed as having a special rule, it does not have it.

The iBook version is presenting the whole of the special rule, under Take aim, the character gains the Precision shots Special rule. The Preciosion shots special rule in the iBooks version only effects characters and then only has an effect when that character rolls a 6 to hit on a shooting attack.

Sniper tells us that 'If a weapon has the sniper special rule, or is fired by a model with the sniper special rule...' It means things with sniper.
Rending tells us that 'If a model has the rending special rule, or is attacking with a melee weapon with the rending special rule...' Again, things with rending.
Shred says 'If a model has the shred special rule...' Things with shred.

Yep absolutely correct, but as you are so fond to point out those are special rules, not sub headings.

Precision shot line one begins with 'If any of your characters roll a 6 to hit,'. Not 'If any of your characters with the precision shot special rule'. Not 'Character have precision shot'. Not 'Models with precision shot that roll a 6 to hit.'

Characters don't have the rule. Line 1 says how they get it. The text in bold is the actual description of the mechanics of special shot. They even wrote it in bolt to make it clear.

And as with all subheadings they are in the nature of the overarching rules; Jet pack models do not have the rule thrust move, they have nothing within the subheading thrust move to give them thrust move, it is inherent to their type. Thrust move tells you when and how they get to make a thrust move.

Precision shots is a sub heading in the overarching rules for characters, it tells you when and how characters get to make precision shots.

The bold text starts with 'Wounds from Precision Shots.'

Does Take Aim! give precision shots? Yes.

No it gives a non-existent(according to you) Precision Shots Special rule.

Ergo, are they wounds from precision shot? Yes.

depends on the version of the book you have. The printed has no Special rule. The iBooks Special rule requires characters to roll a 6 to-hit to have their shooting attacks become "Precision Shots". Under the epub version, yes the wounds are precision Shots

 Kommissar Kel wrote:


rolling a 6 with a character generates a Precision shot true, that is part of the rules for precision shots, that is an effect. That is how characters get to use their subheading just like Jet Pack models need to not be engaged to use their thrust moves.

They have the subheading, these are the situations in which they can use the subheading.

Misconception. They have a subheading, they have a condition (usually), and they have details of what they are allowed to do.

Unengaged Jet Pack models can do what the text permits them to do. Characters that roll 6's get Precision Shots.

The Precision shots in the bolded section are the results of the character rolling a 6 to hit with a shooting attack, thius is explicitely stated in the first sentence.

Uh... no? The bolded section is what Precision Shots does with no qualifiers at all. Which is why Sniper and Sharpshooter and all other precision shot listings refer to that page.

The result of a character rolling a 6 is that the character in question has precision shots. No more, no less. Fresh sentence and everything. That period is important.

The iBook version is presenting the whole of the special rule, under Take aim, the character gains the Precision shots Special rule. The Preciosion shots special rule in the iBooks version only effects characters and then only has an effect when that character rolls a 6 to hit on a shooting attack.

Again, not even close to true. It effects anything with Precision shot.. Characters that roll a 6 come under the effects of it too.

And as with all subheadings they are in the nature of the overarching rules; Jet pack models do not have the rule thrust move, they have nothing within the subheading thrust move to give them thrust move, it is inherent to their type. Thrust move tells you when and how they get to make a thrust move.

Thrust Move the subheading tells you how and when you are allowed to move outside of normal movement rules. It does not confer the 'thrust move' rule. It just means they can move under certain conditions.

Precision shots is a sub heading in the overarching rules for characters, it tells you when and how characters get to make precision shots.

It tells us when characters have Precision Shot at all.

No it gives a non-existent(according to you) Precision Shots Special rule.

Previously advanced rule. Now special rule.

depends on the version of the book you have. The printed has no Special rule. The iBooks Special rule requires characters to roll a 6 to-hit to have their shooting attacks become "Precision Shots". Under the epub version, yes the wounds are precision Shots

The printed not having it is a problem that will be addressed on the 24th, and probably omits it for that reason.
The epub version does indeed agree with me.


So does the ibook.

The iBooks Special rule requires characters to roll a 6 to-hit to have their shooting attacks become "Precision Shots"

And C:AM gives us a rule and weapon that have their shooting attacks become precision shots. Three sources, one result.

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:


rolling a 6 with a character generates a Precision shot true, that is part of the rules for precision shots, that is an effect. That is how characters get to use their subheading just like Jet Pack models need to not be engaged to use their thrust moves.

They have the subheading, these are the situations in which they can use the subheading.

Misconception. They have a subheading, they have a condition (usually), and they have details of what they are allowed to do.

Unengaged Jet Pack models can do what the text permits them to do. Characters that roll 6's get Precision Shots.

The Precision shots in the bolded section are the results of the character rolling a 6 to hit with a shooting attack, thius is explicitely stated in the first sentence.

Uh... no? The bolded section is what Precision Shots does with no qualifiers at all. Which is why Sniper and Sharpshooter and all other precision shot listings refer to that page.

The result of a character rolling a 6 is that the character in question has precision shots. No more, no less. Fresh sentence and everything. That period is important.

The iBook version is presenting the whole of the special rule, under Take aim, the character gains the Precision shots Special rule. The Preciosion shots special rule in the iBooks version only effects characters and then only has an effect when that character rolls a 6 to hit on a shooting attack.

Again, not even close to true. It effects anything with Precision shot.. Characters that roll a 6 come under the effects of it too.

And as with all subheadings they are in the nature of the overarching rules; Jet pack models do not have the rule thrust move, they have nothing within the subheading thrust move to give them thrust move, it is inherent to their type. Thrust move tells you when and how they get to make a thrust move.

Thrust Move the subheading tells you how and when you are allowed to move outside of normal movement rules. It does not confer the 'thrust move' rule. It just means they can move under certain conditions.

Precision shots is a sub heading in the overarching rules for characters, it tells you when and how characters get to make precision shots.

It tells us when characters have Precision Shot at all.

No it gives a non-existent(according to you) Precision Shots Special rule.

Previously advanced rule. Now special rule.

depends on the version of the book you have. The printed has no Special rule. The iBooks Special rule requires characters to roll a 6 to-hit to have their shooting attacks become "Precision Shots". Under the epub version, yes the wounds are precision Shots

The printed not having it is a problem that will be addressed on the 24th, and probably omits it for that reason.
The epub version does indeed agree with me.


So does the ibook.

The iBooks Special rule requires characters to roll a 6 to-hit to have their shooting attacks become "Precision Shots"

And C:AM gives us a rule and weapon that have their shooting attacks become precision shots. Three sources, one result.

You simply do not understand the rules in question.

You cannot even keep a cohesive argument beyond the misconception that a part of a rule is somehow not a part of a rule.

The simple facts are that a rule can give an effect that has the same name. Unfortunately that confuses you.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
You simply do not understand the rules in question.

You cannot even keep a cohesive argument beyond the misconception that a part of a rule is somehow not a part of a rule.

The simple facts are that a rule can give an effect that has the same name. Unfortunately that confuses you.

The effect of the rule is the special rule. How is that hard to understand?

Here, let me cut out all the chaff and do a picture for you. Ignoring all context and giving you just the RAW, so you don't get confused.



Not so hard, is it?

May I make a suggestion?

The whole Precision Shot thing has been going for quite a few pages. As neither side is budging, can we just drop this? It clearly will not be resolved until either 7th edition is released or GW finally decides it is time to update the FAQs.

I've been using the order as per sniper rifles I.e. you get to allocate on a 6. You can argue about the wording down what is essemtially inflection but does anyone seriously think the writer intended all shots from an entire squad to be allocated? Not to mention heavy weapons squads like lascannons. That would be beyond broken!

We'll have to wait for the FAQ to come out and put it to rest but allocating on a 6 is where I'd put my tuppence worth.

 Jimmy_Sip wrote:
I've been using the order as per sniper rifles I.e. you get to allocate on a 6. You can argue about the wording down what is essemtially inflection but does anyone seriously think the writer intended all shots from an entire squad to be allocated? Not to mention heavy weapons squads like lascannons. That would be beyond broken!

We'll have to wait for the FAQ to come out and put it to rest but allocating on a 6 is where I'd put my tuppence worth.

Given GW's track record for breaking things? I'd say it's entirely possible.

Precision Shots with every shot is hardly more broken than a free pass for ignores cover on the same heavy weapons teams. You're still allowed Look out Sir! for characters, after all.

Now if it gave everyone deadshot. There's a scary prospect.

Agree with Happyjew,
It is undeniable that Precision Shots are badly written, to the point that only the authors will be able to answer these questions....

 Brachiaraidos wrote:
Precision Shots with every shot is hardly more broken than a free pass for ignores cover on the same heavy weapons teams. You're still allowed Look out Sir! for characters, after all.

I'd be tempted to agree if that order didn't require a Senior Officer, while the Take Aim can be issued by any Officer. That you consider a standard Order to be on par with a Senior Order, shows that something isn't right.

Being able to allocate every single shot on a unit that comprise of over 60 models, without the need to roll 6's, is definitely a step too far.

 grendel083 wrote:

 Brachiaraidos wrote:
Precision Shots with every shot is hardly more broken than a free pass for ignores cover on the same heavy weapons teams. You're still allowed Look out Sir! for characters, after all.

I'd be tempted to agree if that order didn't require a Senior Officer, while the Take Aim can be issued by any Officer. That you consider a standard Order to be on par with a Senior Order, shows that something isn't right.

Being able to allocate every single shot on a unit that comprise of over 60 models, without the need to roll 6's, is definitely a step too far.

Point, not something I'd considered on the officer side.

But on that note- the upper limit of guard squads is usually 50. And at least 70% of those guns are lasguns. If you're in range of all those lasguns, they'll probably just wipe the squad...

 Happyjew wrote:
May I make a suggestion?

The whole Precision Shot thing has been going for quite a few pages. As neither side is budging, can we just drop this? It clearly will not be resolved until either 7th edition is released or GW finally decides it is time to update the FAQs.

That was exactly what my last post was alluding to, I simply stopped arguing.

For the people who have been filibustering this thread going back and forth and preventing anyone else from speaking, take it to PM. Another post perpetuating this cycle will net you trouble.

Anyone sees trouble brewing again, hit the Yellow Triangle.

It's a good thing Dakka nuts don't make the faq's huh? Just play it the way you want to, explain it to your opponent and see if they agree.

Really when you look at it, a blob of fifty with prescience, and precision shots on a six is still way good. Roll the dice and see for yourselves. The other way is just broken and do we really need more broken in 40k.

Lungpickle wrote:
Roll the dice and see for yourselves.

50 Standard guardsmen, within 24" range, passing both LD checks for prescience and Take Aim! 330 points minimum for 5 guard squads, CCS and pskyer.

Shooting at, say, a Space Marine Commander

100 shots = 75 hits with prescience.
Majority Toughness 4 = 42 wounds with prescience.
Look out Sir! = 7 allocated to IC

3+ save = 2 wounds.
2+ save = 1 wound.


Oh no?

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

Lungpickle wrote:
Roll the dice and see for yourselves.

50 Standard guardsmen, within 24" range, passing both LD checks for prescience and Take Aim! 330 points minimum for 5 guard squads, CCS and pskyer.

Shooting at, say, a Space Marine Commander

100 shots = 75 hits with prescience.

I agree so far.

Majority Toughness 4 = 42 wounds with prescience.

Averages would be 25 Wounds. Prescience does nothing for To Wound rolls.

Look out Sir! = 7 allocated to IC

There are no models in the unit to LOS to.

3+ save = 2 wounds.
2+ save = 1 wound.

2+ save (as it is better then the 3+ save, where ever that came from, illegal LOS maybe?) leaves you with 4.167 Wounds

Oh no?

Oh, my.

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

Lungpickle wrote:
Roll the dice and see for yourselves.

50 Standard guardsmen, within 24" range, passing both LD checks for prescience and Take Aim! 330 points minimum for 5 guard squads, CCS and pskyer.

Shooting at, say, a Space Marine Commander

100 shots = 75 hits with prescience.
Majority Toughness 4 = 42 wounds with prescience.
Look out Sir! = 7 allocated to IC

3+ save = 2 wounds.
2+ save = 1 wound.


Oh no?

You'd use it to take out the squads specials, usually.

Also, you'll average anywhere from 6.5 to 11 wounds, meaning you'll knock out a normal tactical marine squad.

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

Lungpickle wrote:
Roll the dice and see for yourselves.

50 Standard guardsmen, within 24" range, passing both LD checks for prescience and Take Aim! 330 points minimum for 5 guard squads, CCS and pskyer.

Shooting at, say, a Space Marine Commander

100 shots = 75 hits with prescience.
Majority Toughness 4 = 42 wounds with prescience.
Look out Sir! = 7 allocated to IC

3+ save = 2 wounds.
2+ save = 1 wound.

Oh no?

lets assume you were targeting a unit of 10. 9+IC(4) or 13 wounds in the unit.

if you have a same save unit they're looking at (3+=14) wounds or (2+=7wounds) odds are any IC in the unit will be dead along with most if not all of the rest of the unit. Because the 35 wounds are going somewhere and they are going to remove models and either the IC will fail enough to die first, or the rest of the unit will die anyways along with the IC. The only way for your math to work is for the unit to have enough wounds to take all the wounds the IC transfers.

regardless it really just sounds tedious and painful to resolve that way as you're rolling a LOS & save for each model with no option to fast roll. 84d6 one at a time, no thanks.

 Happyjew wrote:
Averages would be 25 Wounds. Prescience does nothing for To Wound rolls.

That's a very good point. Not sure how I pulled off that one when I was scribbling.

 Happyjew wrote:

Look out Sir! = 7 allocated to IC

There are no models in the unit to LOS to.

3+ save = 2 wounds.
2+ save = 1 wound.

2+ save (as it is better then the 3+ save, where ever that came from, illegal LOS maybe?) leaves you with 4.167 Wounds.

Sloppy writing. Assuming the commander was A) In a unit and B) Had either a 3+ or 2+ save.

With only 25 wounds slapped onto the squad, you're looking at said ~4 wounds allocated to the commander after LOS and around 1 going through, depending on his armour save value.

sirlynchmob wrote:
lets assume you were targeting a unit of 10. 9+IC(4) or 13 wounds in the unit.

if you have a same save unit they're looking at (3+=14) wounds or (2+=7wounds) odds are any IC in the unit will be dead along with most if not all of the rest of the unit. Because the 35 wounds are going somewhere and they are going to remove models and either the IC will fail enough to die first, or the rest of the unit will die anyways along with the IC. The only way for your math to work is for the unit to have enough wounds to take all the wounds the IC transfers.

regardless it really just sounds tedious and painful to resolve that way as you're rolling a LOS & save for each model with no option to fast roll. 84d6 one at a time, no thanks.

That was sort of the point I was trying to make. Precision shot would be a dangerous thing indeed if the guardsmen you could give it to were more dangerous themselves.

Most of the time you'll get a lot more damage out of First/Second rank fire! than you ever would from Take Aim! Even in a 50 man blob, the highest number of Heavy Weapons you can ever issue the order to is 5, and 5 specials. That's a massive investment to point at one target- and once you've brought that much firepower, odds are you're just going to level the squad wholesale and the wound allocation isn't going to matter.

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

That was sort of the point I was trying to make. Precision shot would be a dangerous thing indeed if the guardsmen you could give it to were more dangerous themselves.

Most of the time you'll get a lot more damage out of First/Second rank fire! than you ever would from Take Aim! Even in a 50 man blob, the highest number of Heavy Weapons you can ever issue the order to is 5, and 5 specials. That's a massive investment to point at one target- and once you've brought that much firepower, odds are you're just going to level the squad wholesale and the wound allocation isn't going to matter.

One would usually use precision shots to bypass multi-wounders. For example, I would go after the heavy weapon in a tac squad rather than the sergeant with used combi-weapon.

 Scipio Africanus wrote:
One would usually use precision shots to bypass multi-wounders. For example, I would go after the heavy weapon in a tac squad rather than the sergeant with used combi-weapon.

Fair point. It does let you pick out the more important members of the rank and file. The order does have a definite use, probably best invested into Heavy Weapon Squads with a trio of lascannons or Autocannons. But if it does end up needing a 6 to ping, that 3 man squad is going to be lucky if the order does anything that turn.

And if it's a huge squad, as before, just pump out more shots and get a much more tangible benefit.

 Brachiaraidos wrote:

 Scipio Africanus wrote:
One would usually use precision shots to bypass multi-wounders. For example, I would go after the heavy weapon in a tac squad rather than the sergeant with used combi-weapon.

Fair point. It does let you pick out the more important members of the rank and file. The order does have a definite use, probably best invested into Heavy Weapon Squads with a trio of lascannons or Autocannons. But if it does end up needing a 6 to ping, that 3 man squad is going to be lucky if the order does anything that turn.

And if it's a huge squad, as before, just pump out more shots and get a much more tangible benefit.

Completely agree. I'm never actually going to benefit from either though, I'll be honest.

I'm running vet squads.

 Scipio Africanus wrote:
Completely agree. I'm never actually going to benefit from either though, I'll be honest.

I'm running vet squads.

Honestly, for the most part, I usually do the same

Vet Mech army is my usual format for my army. And tank commanders only getting D3 on the warlord table give me a much better chance of getting the D3 outflanking units

Well, this DOES allow you to plop that 8 strength krak missile/melta-guns on the 4 toughness Chapter Master.