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.

What set of rules currently govern these units?
The included rules?
Stronghold Assault?
7th Edition rulebook?
All?

Stronghold Assault.

 pretre wrote:
Stronghold Assault.

So they don't have hull points even though the 7th rulebook talks about buildings and hull points?

The 7th edition rulebook tells you how to figure out Hull Points based on the size of the building.

This is the same question i have been asking , No the 7th ed dose not give you the hull point it is not a small medium or large building it is an impassable building

Hmm, currently they seem to have no hull points right now. Good call. Hopefully they'll FAQ it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I would count it as 3.

The FAQ mentions nothing about it and they where updated 2 or 3 days after 7th I hope its in the faq for the entire 7th Rule book, Now one thing to remember with the battery though is the gun emplacement dose have a profile so they can shoot the gun at t 7 AV 3 W 2.

ChapertMasterRagnaValick wrote:
Now one thing to remember with the battery though is the gun emplacement dose have a profile so they can shoot the gun at t 7 AV 3 W 2.

It has an emplaced gun which I believe is different from a gun emplacement

Yep.

Weapons: One emplaced punisher gatling cannon.

If it has no hull points listed then it doesn't work RaW. You can't choose to ignore hull points.

So you can either go with the previous editions classification (the edition their rules were written in), and treat it as a small building, or house rule something with your opponent.

And as above, it's an Emplaced Weapon, not a Gun Emplacement. So it does not have a seperate profile.

The 7th rules only talk about buildings with capacity having hull points.
The VWB has no capacity to hold units.

 minigun762 wrote:
The 7th rules only talk about buildings with capacity having hull points.
The VWB has no capacity to hold units.

Invulnerable!

 minigun762 wrote:
The 7th rules only talk about buildings with capacity having hull points.
The VWB has no capacity to hold units.

Not true.
It says buildings have hull points and a capacity.

There's also a rule for Impassible Buildings.
So while the capacity is irrelevant, the Hull points are not.

No rule allows you to ignore hull points.

 grendel083 wrote:

 minigun762 wrote:
The 7th rules only talk about buildings with capacity having hull points.
The VWB has no capacity to hold units.

Not true.
It says buildings have hull points and a capacity.

There's also a rule for Impassible Buildings.
So while the capacity is irrelevant, the Hull points are not.

No rule allows you to ignore hull points.

But the VWB isn't listed as a small, medium or large building, so how do you know how many HP it has?

That's the central question here. lol

 minigun762 wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 minigun762 wrote:
The 7th rules only talk about buildings with capacity having hull points.
The VWB has no capacity to hold units.

Not true.
It says buildings have hull points and a capacity.

There's also a rule for Impassible Buildings.
So while the capacity is irrelevant, the Hull points are not.

No rule allows you to ignore hull points.

But the VWB isn't listed as a small, medium or large building, so how do you know how many HP it has?

Strict RaW you don't know what size it is. So they don't work.

However you could apply a little common sense. It's rules were written in 6th where a small building was classed as anything up to 6"x6". As the model is 4"x4" it certainly fits into the small category.

in the chart there are 2 ways to tell 1 the type (small medium or large ) or 2 the capacity , the weapon battery has nether of thes in its profile. Please go to the buildings section in the core rules this is word for word

"Building Size and Hull Points
Just like a Transport vehicle, buildings have a Transport Capacity and a number of Hull Points, which relate to the building’s size. A building’s size will be listed on its terrain datasheet. If a building’s datasheet does not list its Transport Capacity or Hull Points, consult the following chart to work out the Transport Capacity and Hull Points it has"

the battery literally is in nether of thes categories in addition this dose not say a building MUST have hull points its says they do have hull points. in strong hold assault it states the upgrades that are available to each type of building (small medium or large) and this corresponds to data sheet for each telling you you can take sertin upgrades, well the battery is not able to take any of the BUILDING classed upgrades. this seems to me that the battery is NOT a building at all.

 grendel083 wrote:
Strict RaW you don't know what size it is. So they don't work.

However you could apply a little common sense. It's rules were written in 6th where a small building was classed as anything up to 6"x6". As the model is 4"x4" it certainly fits into the small category.

They work, they just have an indeterminable amount of Hull points.

ChapertMasterRagnaValick wrote:
this seems to me that the battery is NOT a building at all.

If it's not a building, then the Sentry Defence System rule can't apply. So it can never fire it's gun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
Strict RaW you don't know what size it is. So they don't work.

However you could apply a little common sense. It's rules were written in 6th where a small building was classed as anything up to 6"x6". As the model is 4"x4" it certainly fits into the small category.

They work, they just have an indeterminable amount of Hull points.

If it suffers a glance, and therefore a loss of hull point, what is the total reduced to?

If your answer is "I don't know" then you're doing something that the rules don't support.

I'm personally ok with 3 hp but I'd prefer to have an actual answer so as to skip any potential rule argument mid game m

 grendel083 wrote:

ChapertMasterRagnaValick wrote:
this seems to me that the battery is NOT a building at all.

If it's not a building, then the Sentry Defence System rule can't apply. So it can never fire it's gun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
Strict RaW you don't know what size it is. So they don't work.

However you could apply a little common sense. It's rules were written in 6th where a small building was classed as anything up to 6"x6". As the model is 4"x4" it certainly fits into the small category.

They work, they just have an indeterminable amount of Hull points.

If it suffers a glance, and therefore a loss of hull point, what is the total reduced to?

If your answer is "I don't know" then you're doing something that the rules don't support.

it is reduced to full HP -1

Easy enough.

Currently, since we do not know how many they have, they can never be reduced to 0 HP's.

 DeathReaper wrote:
it is reduced to full HP -1

Easy enough.

Currently, since we do not know how many they have, they can never be reduced to 0 HP's.

No, it means it can, but you don't know when it happens.
If you cause 5 HP's to be removed, is it wrecked?
Much like the law, ignorance is no defence.

This seems like a correct ruling to you?
Or is there a rule somewhere that lets you ignore hull points?

 grendel083 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
it is reduced to full HP -1

Easy enough.

Currently, since we do not know how many they have, they can never be reduced to 0 HP's.

No, it means it can, but you don't know when it happens.
If you cause 5 HP's to be removed, is it wrecked?
Much like the law, ignorance is no defence.

This seems like a correct ruling to you?
Or is there a rule somewhere that lets you ignore hull points?

It seems like it needs an FAQ.

But currently those buildings still work in the ruleset.

No one knows when they lose all of their HP's as it currently stands, but that does not mean those buildings do not function.

Absolutely an FAQ is needed.

But they can't practically function without a value for the hull points. Necrons can easily score several glances. If it looses all it's hull points, but hasn't been removed (because you don't know the value) then a rule has certainly been broken.

Almost seems like more hassle then its worth. High chance for an argument over it.

 grendel083 wrote:
Absolutely an FAQ is needed.

But they can't practically function without a value for the hull points. Necrons can easily score several glances. If it looses all it's hull points, but hasn't been removed (because you don't know the value) then a rule has certainly been broken.

But, even if it suffers 10 glances, it has not lost all of its hull points, because the value is not able to be determined.

Full HP -10 is still Full HP -10

 DeathReaper wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
Absolutely an FAQ is needed.

But they can't practically function without a value for the hull points. Necrons can easily score several glances. If it looses all it's hull points, but hasn't been removed (because you don't know the value) then a rule has certainly been broken.

But, even if it suffers 10 glances, it has not lost all of its hull points, because the value is not able to be determined.

Full HP -10 is still Full HP -10

Not true.
It does have a value. You just don't know what it is.
The rules don't allow for it to NOT have a value.

It can loose all it's hull points. You just don't know when that happens.
In order to function practically, the value must be known.

 minigun762 wrote:
Almost seems like more hassle then its worth. High chance for an argument over it.

I dont know about that. In the game i played last night I ran one with the battle cannon and it killed 1/3 of the players army (this is normaly the results I get from them).

And we just resided to run them with 3 hull points but even after explaining this conundrum to my opponent he even said this is a really tricky question.

Right, it has a value but the value is undefined.

It can lose all of its HP's, but no one knows when this happens, so the building will never suffer a Total Collapse damage result from glancing hits.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Right, it has a value but the value is undefined.

It can lose all of its HP's, but no one knows when this happens so you never remove the building from glancing hits.

And as soon as it looses all of it's HP's and it ISN'T removed, you've broken a rule.
Never removing it is not following the rules.

Building have a number of hull points. To ignore this is not following the rules.