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.

My friend and I have a bit of a question because we are at ends for this. the Gauss Flayer array is salvo 5/10 and the ghost ark has 2... so if it moves it can shoot 10 and if it doesn't move it can shoot 20? He thinks it means 5 if it moves and 10 if it doesn't. I just want to clear this up.

Vehicles are relentless, so it can always fire 10 shots from each flayer array regardless of it moving or not.

Also each flayer array can shoot at a different target, so the ghost ark can move and shoot 20 shots if both arrays can draw LOS to a target.

As they're on opposite sides, it'll be extreamly rare that you can fire both at the same target.

 grendel083 wrote:
As they're on opposite sides, it'll be extreamly rare that you can fire both at the same target.

They have independant targetting, so they can fire at two targets. 10 shots each, up to 24 inches, at two seperate targets. Filled with ten warriors, another 10 shots, or 20 shots at 12 inches.

Could be up to 40 shots of gauss on a 13/13/11 assault vehicle (with right decurion rules has move through cover, relentless, 4+++ (infantry) and ignores 3- on VDC (vehicles), whole thing can move 12 inches, and jink).

Right good, that thing. Brutal in pairs if you want to go "rear to rear" to protect weaker armour. I want to try it with a three point star...

Decidedly, Ghost Arks are better in pairs when you can take them.

I also totally agree with the interpretation of Salvo and Relentless that vehicles get automatically.

Ffyllotek wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
As they're on opposite sides, it'll be extreamly rare that you can fire both at the same target.

They have independant targetting, so they can fire at two targets. 10 shots each, up to 24 inches, at two seperate targets. Filled with ten warriors, another 10 shots, or 20 shots at 12 inches.

Yep, all true.
I was just pointing out you need to take fire arcs into account as there was a lot of talk of "20 shots"

 grendel083 wrote:

Ffyllotek wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
As they're on opposite sides, it'll be extreamly rare that you can fire both at the same target.

They have independant targetting, so they can fire at two targets. 10 shots each, up to 24 inches, at two seperate targets. Filled with ten warriors, another 10 shots, or 20 shots at 12 inches.

Yep, all true.
I was just pointing out you need to take fire arcs into account as there was a lot of talk of "20 shots"

Frankly for 235 pts I can't think of another platform that can do this. Potential for 40 shots that auto-wound on a 6...

Ffyllotek wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

Ffyllotek wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
As they're on opposite sides, it'll be extreamly rare that you can fire both at the same target.

They have independant targetting, so they can fire at two targets. 10 shots each, up to 24 inches, at two seperate targets. Filled with ten warriors, another 10 shots, or 20 shots at 12 inches.

Yep, all true.
I was just pointing out you need to take fire arcs into account as there was a lot of talk of "20 shots"

Frankly for 235 pts I can't think of another platform that can do this. Potential for 40 shots that auto-wound on a 6...

How about 2 Ghostarks for 210 points same 40 shots but always to the full 24". Or 3 Broadsides. Also 210 points granted only 36 shots but longer range still wounds everything that is not a LoW on a 6+ and does significantly more damage to most things. Don't get me wrong Ghostarks are good, ghost ark with warriors is very good, but there is a lot of Bs about how good the necrons actually are.

Can someone tell me the actual arc of sight of those weapons? How far an enemy unit must be so both weapons could target it?

As I see it, you'd almost never get a single model that's big enough to be hit by both arrays, it'd most likely be a large unit that's pretty much surrounded the Ghost Ark.

The enemy unit would have to be huge or to curve around the ghost arc. It's less about distance than poor placement by an opponent.

 grendel083 wrote:
that auto-wound on a 6...

You must face a lot of Wraithknights if that leaps out as particularly special to you.

The glancing bit is nice though.

 Vector Strike wrote:
Can someone tell me the actual arc of sight of those weapons? How far an enemy unit must be so both weapons could target it?

It is a fixed weapon, so it has a 45 degree arc from the side of the vehicle. Past FAQ ruled that each side was a single weapon, so if one flayer can draw line of sight the whole array can draw sight.

Sorry to hijack this one but the warriors are snap shooting if the Ghost Ark moves over 6" aernt they?

Yes

bodazoka wrote:
Sorry to hijack this one but the warriors are snap shooting if the Ghost Ark moves over 6" aernt they?

yup

 Anpu-adom wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:
Can someone tell me the actual arc of sight of those weapons? How far an enemy unit must be so both weapons could target it?

It is a fixed weapon, so it has a 45 degree arc from the side of the vehicle. Past FAQ ruled that each side was a single weapon, so if one flayer can draw line of sight the whole array can draw sight.

Ah, thank you... man, I proxied one to test it and thought they had 180º like predator's sponsons

 Vector Strike wrote:

 Anpu-adom wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:
Can someone tell me the actual arc of sight of those weapons? How far an enemy unit must be so both weapons could target it?

It is a fixed weapon, so it has a 45 degree arc from the side of the vehicle. Past FAQ ruled that each side was a single weapon, so if one flayer can draw line of sight the whole array can draw sight.

Ah, thank you... man, I proxied one to test it and thought they had 180º like predator's sponsons

Predators have a 180º arc because that's the arc that they will actually turn through. A Gauss Flayer Array on the other hand can not rotate.

 Ghaz wrote:

Predators have a 180º arc because that's the arc that they will actually turn through. A Gauss Flayer Array on the other hand can not rotate.

They can move vertically though, which might possibly be useful at some point.

Edit: If you don't include the "crew" you can actually rotate the flayers so far that they point back through the ribs on the opposite side of the Ark and fire both Flayer Arrays at the same target if it's within about 21". Your opponent may respond with violence though .

Torquar wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

Predators have a 180º arc because that's the arc that they will actually turn through. A Gauss Flayer Array on the other hand can not rotate.

They can move vertically though, which might possibly be useful at some point.

Edit: If you don't include the "crew" you can actually rotate the flayers so far that they point back through the ribs on the opposite side of the Ark and fire both Flayer Arrays at the same target if it's within about 21". Your opponent may respond with violence though .

LOL... I modeled for advantage without knowing it. Here I thought that I was just being too lazy to paint another entire squad of warriors. I'm also pretty sure that my opponent would find a piece of terrain made from cinder block to accidentally drop on each of my Ghost Arks if I were to try it.

Just to check I haven't missed some rules or something ... :


In the new codex if the ark moves only 1 array fires at full BS right ? The one on the other side can only snapfire yes ?

As far as I can tell there's no occasion in which one would use the lower number of shots -- the 5 from the 5/10 salvo -- as the vehicle is relentless, right ?


Suppose they might do a unit or model that could strip that rule away somehow in the future or something ..?

Yes, moving makes the other array snap fire.

on that vehicle use the higher number, possible a psychic power would remove relentless in the future?

 reds8n wrote:

...
Suppose they might do a unit or model that could strip that rule away somehow in the future or something ..?

nosferatu1001 wrote:

... possible a psychic power would remove relentless in the future?

That's my guess...

Who/what else can even take a Gauss Flayer Array? (that isn't relentless/SaP)
Or is there some kind of "weapon series" in the codex, so they're keeping it similar (I can't think of the proper words for this, sorry. But I mean in a similar manner to the Grav-guns.)

Salvo just sounds better for an Array, that is probably it.

Or, they just did not think of vehicles always being Relentless.

Kangodo wrote:
Salvo just sounds better for an Array, that is probably it.

This for instance Grab Cannons can only be carried by Centurions who are SnP. GW give weapon types that fit the weapon rather than based on in game effect. There are plenty of heavy weapons that can only be mounted on vehicles. Salvo is essentially an up gunned Rapidfire thematically speaking so I wouldn't be surprised if say Hurricane Bolters got shifted to salvo at some point. For vehicles salvo is always the bigger number of shots at full range.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Or, they just did not think of vehicles always being Relentless.

Or GW are preparing for 8th Edition

//Edge

A weapon destroyed result will kill the whole array, but the vehicle usually dies right after when the opponent screams 'Shields are down!' Vaguely remember there being some debate about this a long time ago.

I'm totally confused by something here.
What's the point of making the array salvo? If vehicles are relentless....then wouldn't making it salvo be redundant and cause confusion?

tanker19 wrote:
I'm totally confused by something here.
What's the point of making the array salvo? If vehicles are relentless....then wouldn't making it salvo be redundant and cause confusion?

You did read the rest of this thread where that's been discussed?