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.

 Galef wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
There is nothing else on the Tesla Sphere which could realistically be a barrel and resembles the barrel of the tesla carbine/cannon/destructor.

If we are basing how a weapon "looks" to determine how far it can swivel, then the Spheres clearly have a 270 degree arc. It doesn't matter that those pieces are "set in place" since Necron vehicles are made of "Living metal" and those pieces could easily morph away Terminator 2 style.

-

Except the barrel is on a track which does not move.

The 'barrel' is the sphere.

Google up Tesla Sphere.

You trace LOS from the center of the sphere to any point on the exposed surface of the sphere.

 Ghaz wrote:
There is nothing else on the Tesla Sphere which could realistically be a barrel and resembles the barrel of the tesla carbine/cannon/destructor.

And my point was that the tesla sphere may not actually need or have a barrel. It's only an assumption that the cross shaped piece is a barrel rather than part of the sphere housing.

And again, why would what looks like a barrel on every other Tesla weapon not be a barrel on a Tesla Sphere? You want to have a weapon with absolutely no barrel and draw line of sight from any part of the weapon without a rule to support that interpretation.

The "barrel" may only move up & down the "track", but the whole Sphere can move side to side....ya know, like a sponson

 Galef wrote:
The "barrel" may only move up & down the "track", but the whole Sphere can move side to side....ya know, like a sponson

And again, please support your claims with actual rules. Where does being listed as a 'sponson' suddenly mean that it can turn further than physically possible. Page and paragraph please.

 Ghaz wrote:
And again, why would what looks like a barrel on every other Tesla weapon not be a barrel on a Tesla Sphere? You want to have a weapon with absolutely no barrel and draw line of sight from any part of the weapon without a rule to support that interpretation.

Because it doesn't actually look like a barrel? And it looks nothing like the barrels of the other tesla weapons. In fact the tesla sphere looks nothing like the other tesla weapons, or any other weapon for that matter.

And there we disagree. It looks more like a barrel than the blank side of the sphere.

If it were a barrel the tesla sphere would be a weapon that does not have skyfire, yet is physically incapable of shooting ground targets due to the angle of the Obelisk's upper surface and the model's height.

The metallic section at the top center of the sphere most definitely looks like the barrel of other Tesla weapons. The blank side of the sphere does not. Whether it can shoot at ground targets or not doesn't matter.

Why would the faq call out the sphere as a sponson weapon rather than hull mounted if it doesn't change the intended arc of fire? Especially given the rarity of sponson mounts on xeno vehicles.

And as I asked Galef, please support your claims with actual rules. Where does being listed as a 'sponson' suddenly mean that it can turn further than physically possible. Page and paragraph please.

Torquar wrote:
Why would the faq call out the sphere as a sponson weapon rather than hull mounted if it doesn't change the intended arc of fire? Especially given the rarity of sponson mounts on xeno vehicles.

why didn't they say it was turret mounted if they wanted to give it the full range of LoS?

 CrownAxe wrote:

Torquar wrote:
Why would the faq call out the sphere as a sponson weapon rather than hull mounted if it doesn't change the intended arc of fire? Especially given the rarity of sponson mounts on xeno vehicles.

why didn't they say it was turret mounted if they wanted to give it the full range of LoS?

Because they didn't intend for 360 arc. The arc is limited by the hull as is the case with sponson-mounted turrets.

Torquar wrote:

And my point was that the tesla sphere may not actually need or have a barrel. It's only an assumption that the cross shaped piece is a barrel rather than part of the sphere housing.

If it doesn't have a barrel, there is no way provided by the rules to draw LOS with it.

The metallic section is the muzzle. The green sphere is the barrel.

You shoot the Tesla Sphere.

You are not shooting a Tesla cannon mounted on a Tesla Sphere.

Torquar wrote:
Why would the faq call out the sphere as a sponson weapon rather than hull mounted if it doesn't change the intended arc of fire? Especially given the rarity of sponson mounts on xeno vehicles.

Probably because whoever wrote the FAQ didn't look closely enough at the model.



I would suspect that it was intended to rotate freely in its mount in the original concept discussions, but the model just didn't actually turn out that way. But the end result is a model that functions extremely poorly under 40K's rules for vehicle shooting.

It's certainly not alone there ... see 'roof-mounted, short-ranged heavy weapons on the roof of stormravens' as exhibit A in similar silliness...

 insaniak wrote:

Torquar wrote:

And my point was that the tesla sphere may not actually need or have a barrel. It's only an assumption that the cross shaped piece is a barrel rather than part of the sphere housing.

If it doesn't have a barrel, there is no way provided by the rules to draw LOS with it.

Like the Monolith's Particle Whip?

 Charistoph wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Torquar wrote:

And my point was that the tesla sphere may not actually need or have a barrel. It's only an assumption that the cross shaped piece is a barrel rather than part of the sphere housing.

If it doesn't have a barrel, there is no way provided by the rules to draw LOS with it.

Like the Monolith's Particle Whip?

Thanks. Added a comment to the Facebook page asking for clarification on how to draw line of sight and what the firing arc is for the particle whip.

col_impact wrote:
The metallic section is the muzzle. The green sphere is the barrel.

You shoot the Tesla Sphere.

You are not shooting a Tesla cannon mounted on a Tesla Sphere.

weapon name =/= rules, or else a heavy flamer would be a heavy type weapon. Its called a tesla sphere but it isn't a physical sphere at all.

Also muzzle is the end of the barrel, so you are admitting you measure from the metallic section now since you measure "....along its barrel to see if the shot is blocked by intervening terrain or models."?

Oberron wrote:

col_impact wrote:
The metallic section is the muzzle. The green sphere is the barrel.

You shoot the Tesla Sphere.

You are not shooting a Tesla cannon mounted on a Tesla Sphere.

weapon name =/= rules, or else a heavy flamer would be a heavy type weapon. Its called a tesla sphere but it isn't a physical sphere at all.

Also muzzle is the end of the barrel, so you are admitting you measure from the metallic section now since you measure "....along its barrel to see if the shot is blocked by intervening terrain or models."?

The barrel is the Sphere. The metallic stuff is the muzzle so you measure along any vector within the green sphere and you can freely rotate the sphere within the mountings.

col_impact wrote:

Oberron wrote:

col_impact wrote:
The metallic section is the muzzle. The green sphere is the barrel.

You shoot the Tesla Sphere.

You are not shooting a Tesla cannon mounted on a Tesla Sphere.

weapon name =/= rules, or else a heavy flamer would be a heavy type weapon. Its called a tesla sphere but it isn't a physical sphere at all.

Also muzzle is the end of the barrel, so you are admitting you measure from the metallic section now since you measure "....along its barrel to see if the shot is blocked by intervening terrain or models."?

The barrel is the Sphere. The metallic stuff is the muzzle so you measure along any vector within the green sphere and you can freely rotate the sphere within the mountings.

Proof?

col_impact wrote:

Oberron wrote:

col_impact wrote:
The metallic section is the muzzle. The green sphere is the barrel.

You shoot the Tesla Sphere.

You are not shooting a Tesla cannon mounted on a Tesla Sphere.

weapon name =/= rules, or else a heavy flamer would be a heavy type weapon. Its called a tesla sphere but it isn't a physical sphere at all.

Also muzzle is the end of the barrel, so you are admitting you measure from the metallic section now since you measure "....along its barrel to see if the shot is blocked by intervening terrain or models."?

The barrel is the Sphere. The metallic stuff is the muzzle so you measure along any vector within the green sphere and you can freely rotate the sphere within the mountings.

Proof the sphere is the barrel? Name =/= rule. You are saying the muzzle is the metallic circle, meaning it is the barrel. you don't measure along the sphere, you would measure along the barrel, since you had said the metallic stuff is the end of the barrel that means that the tube connected to the sphere is the barrel, which is what is measured along. you don't measure from the sphere part at all.

Oberron wrote:


Proof the sphere is the barrel? Name =/= rule. You are saying the muzzle is the metallic circle, meaning it is the barrel. you don't measure along the sphere, you would measure along the barrel, since you had said the metallic stuff is the end of the barrel that means that the tube connected to the sphere is the barrel, which is what is measured along. you don't measure from the sphere part at all.

I shoot the thing called a Tesla Sphere. Do you see anything else on the Obelisk that is a sphere?

A muzzle is just the very end of the barrel and is not the barrel itself. The sphere is the barrel.

Since its spherical you can project vectors from within the sphere through the muzzle onto a fairly large 120 degree cone, and if you add the 45 degrees you get for free with the rules that's 210 degrees.

And if you rotate per the Tesla Sphere being defined as a sponson, which is a side-mounted turret you get more along the lines of 270 degrees.

So I should simply model mine with just the spheres ?

That would completely bypass this argument.

See those green spheres ? Those are the Tesla Spheres.

col_impact wrote:

Oberron wrote:


Proof the sphere is the barrel? Name =/= rule. You are saying the muzzle is the metallic circle, meaning it is the barrel. you don't measure along the sphere, you would measure along the barrel, since you had said the metallic stuff is the end of the barrel that means that the tube connected to the sphere is the barrel, which is what is measured along. you don't measure from the sphere part at all.

I shoot the thing called a Tesla Sphere. Do you see anything else on the Obelisk that is a sphere?

A muzzle is just the very end of the barrel and is not the barrel itself. The sphere is the barrel.

Since its spherical you can project vectors from within the sphere through the muzzle onto a fairly large 120 degree cone, and if you add the 45 degrees you get for free with the rules that's 210 degrees.

And if you rotate per the Tesla Sphere being defined as a sponson, which is a side-mounted turret you get more along the lines of 270 degrees.

Still no proof the sphere is the barrel but you're still saying A muzzle is still part of the barrel, the end of the barrel in fact, where objects shoot out from. This is where you measure from, NOT from the sphere. You're statement that the sphere is the barrel has no proof to it and is incorrect, and even if the sphere is part of the barrel you still have to measure along the barrel to the muzzle which means you STILL measure from the silver part. "....along its barrel to see if the shot is blocked by intervening terrain or models." If you aren't measureing along the barrel to the "muzzle" you aren't measuring along its barrel.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 adamsouza wrote:
So I should simply model mine with just the spheres ?

That would completely bypass this argument.

See those green spheres ? Those are the Tesla Spheres.

Except now you are modeling for advantage which is cheating at that point.

Oberron wrote:


Still no proof the sphere is the barrel but you're still saying A muzzle is still part of the barrel, the end of the barrel in fact, where objects shoot out from. This is where you measure from, NOT from the sphere. You're statement that the sphere is the barrel has no proof to it and is incorrect, and even if the sphere is part of the barrel you still have to measure along the barrel to the muzzle which means you STILL measure from the silver part.

Per the fluff description

Yet wonder turns swiftly to horror as the Obelisk’s weapons cycle up, glowing tesla spheres irising open to spit crawling skeins of lightning that reduce those nearby to blackened, twitching husks

You have no choice but to point to the sphere as the actual weapon (as the 'barrel') and the LOS vectors being drawn from the back wall of the sphere through the iris/sphinctor.

As already pointed out this provides a 120 degree cone all its own and the 90 degrees on top of that make it 210 degrees.

And if you further take the directive of the FAQ to treat the Tesla Sphere as sponson-mounted, then you can rotate the Tesla Sphere in its 'eye socket'.


So my proof far outweighs your zero proof.

col_impact wrote:

Oberron wrote:


Still no proof the sphere is the barrel but you're still saying A muzzle is still part of the barrel, the end of the barrel in fact, where objects shoot out from. This is where you measure from, NOT from the sphere. You're statement that the sphere is the barrel has no proof to it and is incorrect, and even if the sphere is part of the barrel you still have to measure along the barrel to the muzzle which means you STILL measure from the silver part.

Per the fluff description

Yet wonder turns swiftly to horror as the Obelisk’s weapons cycle up, glowing tesla spheres irising open to spit crawling skeins of lightning that reduce those nearby to blackened, twitching husks

You have no choice but to point to the sphere as the actual weapon (as the 'barrel') and the LOS vectors being drawn from the back wall of the sphere through the iris/sphinctor.

As already pointed out this provides a 120 degree cone all its own and the 90 degrees on top of that make it 210 degrees.

And if you further take the directive of the FAQ to treat the Tesla Sphere as sponson-mounted, then you can rotate the Tesla Sphere in its 'eye socket'.


So my proof far outweighs your zero proof.

Fluff isn't a rules source.

You can't rotate the tesla sphere at all so you can't pretend that its rotating in its socket

 CrownAxe wrote:

Fluff isn't a rules source.

You can't rotate the tesla sphere at all so you can't pretend that its rotating in its socket

The weapon is a tesla sphere and not referred to with proper noun usage (as Tesla Sphere) so it really is a physical sphere.

So until you start dealing with it as a physical sphere you have no argument.

You can trace LOS from the inner wall of the sphere through the iris sphinctor. That's a sizeable cone which is going to give you 210 degrees of firing arc.

col_impact wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Fluff isn't a rules source.

You can't rotate the tesla sphere at all so you can't pretend that its rotating in its socket

The weapon is a tesla sphere and not referred to with proper noun usage (as Tesla Sphere) so it really is a physical sphere.

So until you start dealing with it as a physical sphere you have no argument.

You can trace LOS from the inner wall of the sphere through the iris sphinctor. That's a sizeable cone which is going to give you 210 degrees of firing arc.

No, the weapon is called a Tesla Sphere. Nothing proving that it is just a sphere. Still no proof that the sphere is the barrel of the gun