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.

 Jancoran wrote:
They are not a Monstrous Creature so therefoe the permission to fire more than one is not given.

The Rulebook wrote:Gargantuan Creatures are Monstrous Creatures that have the additional rules and
exceptions given below.

It's also the natural reaction of gamers to nerf their enemies using any rationale they can find. It happens every time a new unit comes out. Every. single. Time.

Pretty sure its the natural reaction of gamers to seek out loopholes and exploits in ambiguous rules to create unbeatable combos. It happens every time a new unit comes out. Every. Single. Time. /wink

SJ

I once again find myself disagreeing with Jancoran and agreeing with insaniak.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

It's also the natural reaction of gamers to nerf their enemies using any rationale they can find. It happens every time a new unit comes out. Every. single. Time.

Pretty sure its the natural reaction of gamers to seek out loopholes and exploits in ambiguous rules to create unbeatable combos. It happens every time a new unit comes out. Every. Single. Time. /wink

SJ

Touche. Albeit not in this case, as the GW letter provided indicates. So there's that.

I don't trust GW to interpret a road sign, though. Much less in an unofficial letter.

Martel732 wrote:
I once again find myself disagreeing with Jancoran and agreeing with insaniak.

You do it out of habit. But that's cool.

GW seems to have made it pretty clear in their response. i think it was obvious from the word go. But even if it wasn't... what are we debating now really? Even if it wasn't clear, they've come out and said it does.

You're essentially suggesting that Gargantuans fire less than flyers. A lot less. Why would it? I know that rules don't have to be based in any kind of realistic comparisons (boy do I know) but...

Now if you asked me a different question... say... 'Do you think that this many shots per round is a bit more killy than the norm" I'd agree whole heartedly. Then again, i can get more shots from a combo if Fire Warriors and Broadsides more reliably for that many points and be more MSU. So there's that. But yeah, as one unit firing its a lot. not cheap. Not without a down sids. but its a lot because the D-Weapons are unique to it (the benefit, so to speak, of not being able to split it into more units perhaps is that you get that added utility.) other than its D-Weapons, no one would pay that much for it with the ranges it has w/ some of it.

Still It's a powerful war machine. And since everyone thinks Castigators and Baronial Courts are "no big deal", and Lynx's are 'fine', while touting how stupid anyone is for not allowing Forge World, I am probably not going to be overly sympathetic when someone bitches and moans about firing four weapons, which wont be able to fight worth a damn when it gets tied up with its pylons down as they inevitably will be.

Tau Empire does well in movement and shooting. Its what they have. GW has confirmed what was...or wasn't...obvious. So. onward and upward I guess. Your disagreement aside, we now know how it works.

 insaniak wrote:

 Orock wrote:
I have yet to see ONE PERSON explain to me when you would EVER use the twin linked burst cannon on the stormsurge..

Probably the same sort of situation in which you would use a space marine biker's bolt pistol...

In meelee to grant an extra attack? Try harder

Martel732 wrote:
I don't trust GW to interpret a road sign, though. Much less in an unofficial letter.

 Orock wrote:

In meeker to grant an extra attack? Try harder

Marine bikers don't get an extra attack in melee. They start with a bolt pistol. They can swap that bolt pistol for a chainsword (which is even more useless). They can't have both at the same time.

A commander Liberian and chaplain can all have bikes. Apothecaries have pistols too. Do they get an extra attack? Are they allowed bikes?

 Orock wrote:
A commander Liberian and chaplain can all have bikes. Apothecaries have pistols too. Do they get an extra attack? Are they allowed bikes?

Yes?

I'm not sure how that's affects regular marine bikers.

Also Sargent upgrades can benefit from purchasing a power weapon or lightning claw, or even the useless chainsword.

 Orock wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Orock wrote:
I have yet to see ONE PERSON explain to me when you would EVER use the twin linked burst cannon on the stormsurge..

Probably the same sort of situation in which you would use a space marine biker's bolt pistol...

In meelee to grant an extra attack? Try harder

Your logic is incorrect, unlike a Pistol, the Burst Cannon does not grant an extra attack in combat.

So when shooting with a SM bike, why would you use a Bolt Pistol?

EDIT: actually why is this thread here? It really should be in YMDC (it's certainly shifted that way) and even then, the Gargantuan Shooting question has been asked before.

 Orock wrote:
Also Sargent upgrades can benefit from purchasing a power weapon or lightning claw, or even the useless chainsword.

You seem to have somewhat missed the point...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frozocrone wrote:

Your logic is incorrect, unlike a Pistol, the Burst Cannon does not grant an extra attack in combat.

On regular marine bikers, neither does the pistol.

That was the original point: The fact that GW included a seemingly useless option on a model doesn't in itself mean that people are reading the rules incorrectly. Sometimes, GW just include useless options on models.

EDIT: actually why is this thread here? It really should be in YMDC (it's certainly shifted that way) and even then, the Gargantuan Shooting question has been asked before.

It started out as more of a games design discussion, and sort of morphed from there.

 Frozocrone wrote:

 Orock wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Orock wrote:
I have yet to see ONE PERSON explain to me when you would EVER use the twin linked burst cannon on the stormsurge..

Probably the same sort of situation in which you would use a space marine biker's bolt pistol...

In meelee to grant an extra attack? Try harder

Your logic is incorrect, unlike a Pistol, the Burst Cannon does not grant an extra attack in combat.

So when shooting with a SM bike, why would you use a Bolt Pistol?

EDIT: actually why is this thread here? It really should be in YMDC (it's certainly shifted that way) and even then, the Gargantuan Shooting question has been asked before.

My logic is fine. He was trying to prove the bolt pistols on bikes are pointless like the burst cannon on the stormsurge. I showed he was wrong with the Sargent and character upgrades.

And this isn't a ymdc. Because GW clarified it weather you want to accept it or not. It's become a thread about crappy editing skills held by their creative team.

Like assault grenades on I1 guys? Yes, I've seen that

My point was it was wrong to say the Pistol grants an extra CC attack when used in context with what you originally said (which was it was the same situation between bolt pistol on a bike vs the burst cannon).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orock wrote:
My logic is fine. He was trying to prove the bolt pistols on bikes are pointless like the burst cannon on the stormsurge. I showed he was wrong with the Sargent and character upgrades.

And this isn't a ymdc. Because GW clarified it weather you want to accept it or not. It's become a thread about crappy editing skills held by their creative team.

I can refuse it, because it's neither printed in the rulebook, or in the FAQ's, which are the only legit sources of rules.

 Frozocrone wrote:
Like assault grenades on I1 guys? Yes, I've seen that

Out of curiosity, what I1 unit(s) have you seen assault grenades on?

 Orock wrote:


My logic is fine. He was trying to prove the bolt pistols on bikes are pointless like the burst cannon on the stormsurge. I showed he was wrong with the Sargent and character upgrades.

And this isn't a ymdc. Because GW clarified it weather you want to accept it or not. It's become a thread about crappy editing skills held by their creative team.

You mean the sergeant and character upgrades that you can't take on regular bikers who are still stuck with their bolt pistols? Yes, your logic is fine.

Meganobz. They have Stikk Bombs, which count as Assault Grenades. They also have Power Klaws so it's like hey, maybe we can increase our initiative back to two and then let the multiple modifers kick in because Orks

I guess, if you really wanted to, you could use I2 Meganobz and have each one chuck a grenade in combat.

Yeah, Stikkbombs on meganobs at least became somewhat useful when GW added rules for throwing them back into the game...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orock wrote:

My logic is fine. He was trying to prove the bolt pistols on bikes are pointless like the burst cannon on the stormsurge. I showed he was wrong with the Sargent and character upgrades.

Yes, the fact that a different model has a use for the bolt pistol makes the bolt pistol on a marine biker not completely useless...

By that logic, the burst cannons on the stormsurge are perfectly fine, since you can take them on crisis suits...

Somewhat being the operative word there

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:
Does he only take out 1 invuln now? I know in their last edition it was all invuln save wargear in 1 shot.

A little late (I know), but Vindicares can no longer take out invuln saves. The shield breaker ammo just ignores invuln saves.

Bikers take bolt pistols. A biker can be upgraded to a Sargent. The Sargent fan get a Cc weapon. Barely useful does not equal worthless. Lysanders terminator invincible rarely gets used. But when a vindicate breaks his other two its nice to have. The burst cannon has zero purpose.

Burst Cannon can finish off a unit

"Barely useful does not equal worthless"

 Jancoran wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I once again find myself disagreeing with Jancoran and agreeing with insaniak.

You do it out of habit. But that's cool.

GW seems to have made it pretty clear in their response. i think it was obvious from the word go. But even if it wasn't... what are we debating now really? Even if it wasn't clear, they've come out and said it does.

You're essentially suggesting that Gargantuans fire less than flyers. A lot less. Why would it? I know that rules don't have to be based in any kind of realistic comparisons (boy do I know) but...

Now if you asked me a different question... say... 'Do you think that this many shots per round is a bit more killy than the norm" I'd agree whole heartedly. Then again, i can get more shots from a combo if Fire Warriors and Broadsides more reliably for that many points and be more MSU. So there's that. But yeah, as one unit firing its a lot. not cheap. Not without a down sids. but its a lot because the D-Weapons are unique to it (the benefit, so to speak, of not being able to split it into more units perhaps is that you get that added utility.) other than its D-Weapons, no one would pay that much for it with the ranges it has w/ some of it.

Still It's a powerful war machine. And since everyone thinks Castigators and Baronial Courts are "no big deal", and Lynx's are 'fine', while touting how stupid anyone is for not allowing Forge World, I am probably not going to be overly sympathetic when someone bitches and moans about firing four weapons, which wont be able to fight worth a damn when it gets tied up with its pylons down as they inevitably will be.

Tau Empire does well in movement and shooting. Its what they have. GW has confirmed what was...or wasn't...obvious. So. onward and upward I guess. Your disagreement aside, we now know how it works.

No. I disagree with you because I think you are wrong. A whole lot. GMCs are completely overpowered even with a 2 weapon limit. The are basically immortal in a normal game of 40K, and immortality should cost. Too bad it doesn't for the WK.

Martel732 wrote:

GMCs are completely overpowered even with a 2 weapon limit. .

Maybe. But that wasn't the subject, was it?

Had you asked that question we might have agreed more...as aforementioned. I agree partially that some of them are just too much for their points. I don't have that feeling very strongly about the StormSurge at 380-430 points kitted out and depending on whether you do. It's enormously expensive compared to its Wraith brethren. But as a stand alone unit its about right.

 Jancoran wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

GMCs are completely overpowered even with a 2 weapon limit. .

Maybe. But that wasn't the subject, was it?

Had you asked that question we might have agreed more...as aforementioned. I agree partially that some of them are just too much for their points. I don't have that feeling very strongly about the StormSurge at 380-430 points kitted out and depending on whether you do. It's enormously expensive compared to its Wraith brethren. But as a stand alone unit its about right.

I'm disinclined to let my Tau opponent have the Stormsurge fire more than 2 weapons base. There is no room to "agree to disagree" on this. Sounds like the stormsurge already rules to fire more than two weapons anyway. People insisting on making GMCs worse than they already are sounds like people I don't need to play against. They are already almost an "autowin" button against many lists.

Martel732 wrote:

I'm disinclined to let my Tau opponent have the Stormsurge fire more than 2 weapons base. There is no room to "agree to disagree" on this. Sounds like the stormsurge already rules to fire more than two weapons anyway. People insisting on making GMCs worse than they already are sounds like people I don't need to play against. They are already almost an "autowin" button against many lists.

Time to adjust said lists then. As for your reticence to "allow" it, well... What can I say.

 Jancoran wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

I'm disinclined to let my Tau opponent have the Stormsurge fire more than 2 weapons base. There is no room to "agree to disagree" on this. Sounds like the stormsurge already rules to fire more than two weapons anyway. People insisting on making GMCs worse than they already are sounds like people I don't need to play against. They are already almost an "autowin" button against many lists.

Time to adjust said lists then. As for your reticence to "allow" it, well... What can I say.

It takes two to play, right? If people insist on making GMCs even worse than they already are, I can certainly go find something else to do. Because Tau don't need overpowered +1 when they already have overpowered.

 Orock wrote:
Bikers take bolt pistols. A biker can be upgraded to a Sargent. The Sargent fan get a Cc weapon.

That helps the sergeant. The pistols on the regular guys are still pointless.

So, again, the fact that the weapon is potentially useful on a different model is irrelevant. They're useless on the regular bikers.

And they're not the only example of that. The simple fact is that GW sometimes give units pointless stuff, for reasons that are not always apparent. So the fact that a given piece of gear seems useless is not proof that people are reading the rules incorrectly.