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.

 grendel083 wrote:

 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.

Right, but since we do not know when to remove the building, you never can. Since you can not remove the building if it has HP's. you only remove it once it runs out of HP's and there is no way to determine when this happens, so you can never remove the building.

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

Right, Buildings do have a number of hull points. vengeance weapon batteries have a number of hull points as well. But no one is privy to that number.

Just because you don't know when a rule is broken, doesn't mean that the rule wasn't broken.

Or are you saying it's ok to break a rule, as long as you don't know you're doing it.
In other words ignorance is bliss?

Good times.

if they do not have HP's and have not been FAQ'd then it is either a House rule that sets the number of HP's or we use the Rules for VB's from Stronghold Assault and keep it simple. They can still be blown up through pens.

Pure Stronghold Assault rules would be the simplest

 minigun762 wrote:
Pure Stronghold Assault rules would be the simplest

Would classing it as a small building not be the simplest?

Their rules were written in 6th where they were classed as small.

Using one set of rules for one building, and another set for the rest (while ignoring the FAQ to NOT use those rules) is not the simplest. Even assigning it 5 hull points would be simpler (if slightly over the top).

 grendel083 wrote:
Just because you don't know when a rule is broken, doesn't mean that the rule wasn't broken.

Or are you saying it's ok to break a rule, as long as you don't know you're doing it.
In other words ignorance is bliss?

I am saying we have no way to know when the rule is broken since the number of HP's can not be determined.

I guess I was thinking relying on a single rulebook was easier than two.

 grendel083 wrote:

 minigun762 wrote:
Pure Stronghold Assault rules would be the simplest

Would classing it as a small building not be the simplest?

Their rules were written in 6th where they were classed as small.

Using one set of rules for one building, and another set for the rest (while ignoring the FAQ to NOT use those rules) is not the simplest. Even assigning it 5 hull points would be simpler (if slightly over the top).

They've never been classified as small.

It's also possible they forgot to put a line in for impassible buildings so it could either end up as 2 or 6. not likely, but possible

But I'd agree they do look like a small building.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 minigun762 wrote:
Pure Stronghold Assault rules would be the simplest

Would classing it as a small building not be the simplest?

Their rules were written in 6th where they were classed as small.

Using one set of rules for one building, and another set for the rest (while ignoring the FAQ to NOT use those rules) is not the simplest. Even assigning it 5 hull points would be simpler (if slightly over the top).

They've never been classified as small.

It's also possible they forgot to put a line in for impassible buildings so it could either end up as 2 or 6. not likely, but possible

But I'd agree they do look like a small building.

Stronghold Assault came out in 6th Edition. The VWB has a base of 4"x4". Per the 6th edition rulebook, any building 6"x6" or smaller are small buildings.

 Happyjew wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 minigun762 wrote:
Pure Stronghold Assault rules would be the simplest

Would classing it as a small building not be the simplest?

Their rules were written in 6th where they were classed as small.

Using one set of rules for one building, and another set for the rest (while ignoring the FAQ to NOT use those rules) is not the simplest. Even assigning it 5 hull points would be simpler (if slightly over the top).

They've never been classified as small.

It's also possible they forgot to put a line in for impassible buildings so it could either end up as 2 or 6. not likely, but possible

But I'd agree they do look like a small building.

Stronghold Assault came out in 6th Edition. The VWB has a base of 4"x4". Per the 6th edition rulebook, any building 6"x6" or smaller are small buildings.

Good call, I forgot about that rule already I was just looking at the insert and it was just an impassible building then as well.

sirlynchmob wrote:
They've never been classified as small.

They were classed as small.
In 6th (the edition the vengeance rules were written in) if a building was <= 6"x6" then it was small (vengeance is 4"x4" )
It was just redundant information, as it didn't need a transport capacity. There was no reason to every look the info up, but it is there in the building section.

Edit: slow typing today.

 grendel083 wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
They've never been classified as small.

They were classed as small.
In 6th (the edition the vengeance rules were written in) if a building was <= 6"x6" then it was small (vengeance is 4"x4" )
It was just redundant information, as it didn't need a transport capacity. There was no reason to every look the info up, but it is there in the building section.

Edit: slow typing today.

So now we are back to a three hull point small AV14 building that uses a mix of rules from Stronghold Assault and the Rulebook?

Can't you just compare the size of it to figure out what size it is?

I don't know my height in cm (I'd have to do the math).
But if a rule said:
150cm is short
151 to 180 is medium
181+ is tall
I could stand in a group of guys who do know their height, and figure out that I am tall.

It needs an FAQ, but I give it the 3HP because I'm a sensible human.