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:
1) You claim to have rebutted but have never produced a single rule to support your position. I have posted or referenced many.

I have rebutted it with nothing because nothing exists to support your statement as the final point of the case. Please present where NOT shooting anything is sufficient to resolve a Shooting Attack that you targeted. My claim is that it doesn't exist. Prove me wrong.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
2) not flickerjump; gets hot and weapons that do not roll to hit. Flickerjump was used as an example of a rule triggered on targeted by a shooting attack. Gets hot is a rule that specifies no shot is fired. The 2 together prove you can target, and then not fire and have everything resolve properly. I could have just as easily used Jink with a skimmer as the targeted unit before the plasma cannon on the sentinel resulted in a gets hot and no shot was fired.

I don't see anywhere that Flickerjump alone resolves a Shooting Attack. Care to actually use a quote?

I don't see anywhere that being out of range resolves a Shooting Attack, all I see is that it prevents you from shooting. Care to actually share a quote?

I don't see anywhere that a target Jinking resolves a Shooting Attack at all. Care to actually share a quote?

In order to roll Gets Hot, you have to commit to the Attack. It is in that space after you have Checked Range and before you "Roll To Hit" by placing placing the marker and rolling the scatter dice. If you have not committed to the Attack and attempting to fire, then why are you rolling Gets Hot?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
3) Again addressed multiplie times in that that is not what I am arguing. I ammended the first statements with the procedure. It is not Targeting then done. It is targeting, selecting a weapon, choosing all models with that weapon to not fire, then done. I have even broken down the resolving of the 0 to hit rolls attempted results in 0 to wound rolls attemted, results in 0 saves needing to be attempted, results in 0 wounds applied.

You have used targeting numerous times as sufficient, and continue to do so with numerous other cases.

There is no difference in Selecting A Weapon and Selecting A Target as being sufficient to resolve a Shooting Attack. And again, you have provided no support that this is sufficient to resolve a Shooting Attack in either case.

No Shooting, No Attack. No Attack, your 0 To Hit Rolls from choosing that no models shoot are the same as if you have never selected the unit to shoot in the first place because just as much actually happened, short of specific cases like Flickerjump.

BUT, those special cases do not apply here since the Breacher Squad has no such rule that is based on being targeted.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
4) Your case has been disproven.

Sure, because you have been arguing against the wrong case, it makes it easy to disapprove. After all, I have never suggested or promoted, "it says you must shoot with a weapon in order to target." Or do you want me to prove I didn't say it just like you want me to prove that nothing states permission for no model to shoot is sufficient to resolve a Shooting Attack?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
4a) for the 3rd time in my last 3 posts: that is not what the charge restriction says. I will quote it for you again:

"In addition to the above, a unit that fired in the shooting phase can only charge the unit that it targeted during that turn's shooting phase."

Due to split fire the guardsmen unit did fire in the shooting phase. They therefore can only charge the unit they TARGETED in the shooting phase. Targeting does not require shots fired as shown.

The UNIT did not fire though, just the model did.

And to bring up a previous point, how do I know you targeted if you didn't really shoot at it?

So, again, If I choose to target one unit, and then change my mind and shoot at another, would you allow me to Charge that first unit I targeted? This is no different.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
4b) Never was called into question. It has been shown to you that a shooting attack can be resolved without any shots fired using the rules.

You have shown nothing about how to a resolve a shooting attack that never even attempts to shoot.

You have shown how you don't need to shoot, but that is not in argument, but it is also not pertinent.

You have shown that targeting is sufficient to activate some Special Rules, but again, not in argument, nor really pertinent in establishing a Shooting Attack resolution.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
4c) This is where you need to produce a rule. Also completion is mentioned in the begining of the shooting phase rules; I quoted it to you several days ago. That lone Sentinel with a plasma cannon that rolls a gets hot is again an example of a unit being selected to make a shooting attack, choosing a target for that attack, choosing a weapon with which to make the attack, but then not being able to fire due to another rule's involvement. The end result is that the sentinel resolves its shooting attack with no shots fired. It is further proven that the shooting attack did still occur as of step 2 when the warp spiders or skimmer was targeted by the shooting attack and made use of their abilities.

I need to produce a rule that says a Shooting Attack requires shooting? Can you demonstrate how the defining word in this is not needed in order to accomplish this?

Do you not remember what I said about completion in the first paragraph? Apparently not. "You can choose any order for your units to shoot, but you must complete all the firing by one unit before you move on to the next." What needs to be completed? "firing". What classifies as firing? Selecting a Target and a Weapon and then not shoot? I think not.

Gets Hot is a special situation which, like Flickerjump, has its own rules for resolving the situation outside the basic rules which are not supported or addressed by Split Fire.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
5) No I would not accept you charging at the unit you ultimately did not target. That is also not what I am asking you to accept. I am asking you to accept a charge declared on a unit that was targeted, but 0 models fired at it. If the breachers were not targeted, then the unit could not charge them. Your example of switching targets has nothing to do with this discussion; everything laid out is following the rules as written.

Actually, you are asking me to accept that: "I can choose to target one unit, and then change my mind and shoot at another, and then Charge that first unit I targeted." It targeted a unit. It did not fire at it. It then targeted another, and fired at it. According to you, I can then Charge either target I wish.

That is what happened in a Split Fire situation where the rest of the unit does not fire, even putting aside that it failed to resolve its Shooting Attack, that is exactly what it would look like to anyone looking on and to anyone you are playing against.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
1) You claim to have rebutted but have never produced a single rule to support your position. I have posted or referenced many.

I have rebutted it with nothing because nothing exists to support your statement as the final point of the case. Please present where NOT shooting anything is sufficient to resolve a Shooting Attack that you targeted. My claim is that it doesn't exist. Prove me wrong.

You rebutted it with nothing because there is nothing.

You are making up arbitrary conditions based on your own preconception that certain words used are more important that others; while ignoring any and all evidence to the contrary.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
2) not flickerjump; gets hot and weapons that do not roll to hit. Flickerjump was used as an example of a rule triggered on targeted by a shooting attack. Gets hot is a rule that specifies no shot is fired. The 2 together prove you can target, and then not fire and have everything resolve properly. I could have just as easily used Jink with a skimmer as the targeted unit before the plasma cannon on the sentinel resulted in a gets hot and no shot was fired.

I don't see anywhere that Flickerjump alone resolves a Shooting Attack. Care to actually use a quote?

I don't see anywhere that being out of range resolves a Shooting Attack, all I see is that it prevents you from shooting. Care to actually share a quote?

I don't see anywhere that a target Jinking resolves a Shooting Attack at all. Care to actually share a quote?

In order to roll Gets Hot, you have to commit to the Attack. It is in that space after you have Checked Range and before you "Roll To Hit" by placing placing the marker and rolling the scatter dice. If you have not committed to the Attack and attempting to fire, then why are you rolling Gets Hot?

I made no claims that flickerjump resolves the attack. Flickerjump proves that the spiders were targeted by a shooting attack, and that shooting attack was resolved without any weapon firing.

Out of Range was never even brought up. But since you did bring it up allow me to explain how out of range does resolve an attack: You have a platoon infantry squad with a sgt intact, you Nominate that unit to shoot. You then choose a target finding an Ork boyz unit to be within 12" of your Infantry squad and choose that target. You select the sgt's laspistol as the weapon to fire, and check range from that model only to discover that he is outside of 12". You may not fire that laspistol and the resolution of that laspistol's shooting attack is that it does not fire. So now you get sent to step 7, select another weapon

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
3) Again addressed multiplie times in that that is not what I am arguing. I ammended the first statements with the procedure. It is not Targeting then done. It is targeting, selecting a weapon, choosing all models with that weapon to not fire, then done. I have even broken down the resolving of the 0 to hit rolls attempted results in 0 to wound rolls attemted, results in 0 saves needing to be attempted, results in 0 wounds applied.

You have used targeting numerous times as sufficient, and continue to do so with numerous other cases.

There is no difference in Selecting A Weapon and Selecting A Target as being sufficient to resolve a Shooting Attack. And again, you have provided no support that this is sufficient to resolve a Shooting Attack in either case.

No Shooting, No Attack. No Attack, your 0 To Hit Rolls from choosing that no models shoot are the same as if you have never selected the unit to shoot in the first place because just as much actually happened, short of specific cases like Flickerjump.

BUT, those special cases do not apply here since the Breacher Squad has no such rule that is based on being targeted.

You keep claiming a correlation between Shoot, shooting, firing, and Shooting Attack. A Shooting attack is not the same thing as Firing/Shooting. Firing, Fired at, Fired, Shoot, and shooting are all used variously and interchangeably throughout the rules. Shooting attack is used in 3 instances: the Concept of units making a shooting attack, Being targeted by a shooting attack for certain special rules, and Certain other special rules that apply to "Making a shooting attack(generally with the additional caveat of "With a weapon that has this special rule")".

Once again, I didn't say simply selecting a target, nor simply choosing a weapon resolves the shooting attack. I said you have begun a shooting attack at least as early as selecting a target, and choosing a weapon then taking the option to not fire with every model will allow you to resolve that shooting attack.

You keep bringing up Flickerjump like it matters for the resolution. It does not. It merely illustrates that the unit has been targeted by a shooting attack; the resolution of which was that no shots were fired(especially in the case of the Plasma cannon sentinel getting hot).

Get's Hot and weapons that do not roll to hit says this:

For each roll of a 1, the weapon Gets Hot; that shot is not fired and the firing model immediately suffers a single Wound...

If not shooting means you never initiated and/or cannot resolve the shooting attack, then what happens when that sentinel gets hot after targeting a skimmer that then jinks? The weapon never fired, Get's Hot does not specify that you cannot try again(Choose a weapon actually does that), and your claims that you might as well have never selected the unit to shoot with anyways because just as much happened is also demonstrablely false: the Skimmer Jinked, or the spiders flickerjumped, or your split fire unit fired at a different target from the rest of the unit and the unit has fired(because any model firing means the unit fired) therefore may only charge the unit they targeted.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
4a) for the 3rd time in my last 3 posts: that is not what the charge restriction says. I will quote it for you again:

"In addition to the above, a unit that fired in the shooting phase can only charge the unit that it targeted during that turn's shooting phase."

Due to split fire the guardsmen unit did fire in the shooting phase. They therefore can only charge the unit they TARGETED in the shooting phase. Targeting does not require shots fired as shown.

The UNIT did not fire though, just the model did.

And to bring up a previous point, how do I know you targeted if you didn't really shoot at it?

So, again, If I choose to target one unit, and then change my mind and shoot at another, would you allow me to Charge that first unit I targeted? This is no different.

Units have fired as long as at least 1 model in the unit has fired. Or does a Tau battle suit commander with 2 shield drones never count as a unit firing? There is only 1 model with a gun, if it is just a model firing then it can assault any unit it wants right?

Second to last sentence in Choose a target:

Note that you may check the range and line of sight to multiple enemy units before deciding which one to shoot at and declaring it to your opponent

Technically once you declare a units target that is it, that is your unit's target. However, as a courtesy, most players will let you change your mind before any weapons are chosen, or shots are fired. But once you have declared your unit's target and shot at it or moved on to another unit you have only targeted the 1 unit.

The claim that selecting a target then changing your mind to shoot at another unit while trying to charge the initially selected unit is completely farcical and does nothing to support your position. Claiming that it is the same thing as Firing at that second target via Split fire shows that you do not understand anything of what we are discussing.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
4b) Never was called into question. It has been shown to you that a shooting attack can be resolved without any shots fired using the rules.

You have shown nothing about how to a resolve a shooting attack that never even attempts to shoot.

You have shown how you don't need to shoot, but that is not in argument, but it is also not pertinent.

You have shown that targeting is sufficient to activate some Special Rules, but again, not in argument, nor really pertinent in establishing a Shooting Attack resolution.

I broke down the steps in the post you are quoting.

that you do not need to shoot in order to target a unit with a shooting attack is the whole point of this thread.

Clearly not in argument but pertinent to how you resolve a shooting attack where there are no shots fired.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
4c) This is where you need to produce a rule. Also completion is mentioned in the begining of the shooting phase rules; I quoted it to you several days ago. That lone Sentinel with a plasma cannon that rolls a gets hot is again an example of a unit being selected to make a shooting attack, choosing a target for that attack, choosing a weapon with which to make the attack, but then not being able to fire due to another rule's involvement. The end result is that the sentinel resolves its shooting attack with no shots fired. It is further proven that the shooting attack did still occur as of step 2 when the warp spiders or skimmer was targeted by the shooting attack and made use of their abilities.

I need to produce a rule that says a Shooting Attack requires shooting? Can you demonstrate how the defining word in this is not needed in order to accomplish this?

Do you not remember what I said about completion in the first paragraph? Apparently not. "You can choose any order for your units to shoot, but you must complete all the firing by one unit before you move on to the next." What needs to be completed? "firing". What classifies as firing? Selecting a Target and a Weapon and then not shoot? I think not.

Gets Hot is a special situation which, like Flickerjump, has its own rules for resolving the situation outside the basic rules which are not supported or addressed by Split Fire.

There is no "Defining word" there is a game term. One that is poorly defined, but still a specific Term. A shooting attack is what you are doing with the nominated unit, When you choose your target, you are targeting that unit with a shooting attack, when you do not fire for whatever reason you still have made a shooting attack with that unit, it just happens that nothing much has happened.

If not Firing means you cannot complete then the game stops dead when my Sentinel's plasma cannon gets hot.

No, Gets hot contains no rules for for resolving the situation, you simply do not fire as quoted above.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
5) No I would not accept you charging at the unit you ultimately did not target. That is also not what I am asking you to accept. I am asking you to accept a charge declared on a unit that was targeted, but 0 models fired at it. If the breachers were not targeted, then the unit could not charge them. Your example of switching targets has nothing to do with this discussion; everything laid out is following the rules as written.

Actually, you are asking me to accept that: "I can choose to target one unit, and then change my mind and shoot at another, and then Charge that first unit I targeted." It targeted a unit. It did not fire at it. It then targeted another, and fired at it. According to you, I can then Charge either target I wish.

That is what happened in a Split Fire situation where the rest of the unit does not fire, even putting aside that it failed to resolve its Shooting Attack, that is exactly what it would look like to anyone looking on and to anyone you are playing against.

This has probably gone around enough for now...