Potms whirlwind squad

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.

**Forcast**

Mr. Shine wrote:
Forcast wrote:
It does not "strictly" deal with Ballistic Skill

How many weapons can you fire? one more than normally permitted.

At what ballistic skill? Full ballistic skill.

At what target? CAN be fired at a different target unit...

Failing to see how you have you have a degraded ballistic skill in order to trigger the above. You can't use this in other phases because you follow "the normal rules for shooting

And the normal rules for shooting require all same-named weapon groups to be chosen and fired together.

You are twisting the wording of Power of the Machine Spirit. It does not say you may fire one more weapon than is normally permitted, and that you may fire it at full Ballistic Skill. It says that you may fire one more weapon at full Ballistic Skill than normally permitted.

What that means is it does not increase the number of weapons you can fire simpliciter. It increases the number of weapons specifically at full Ballistic Skill you may fire.

Which the "number of weapons specifically at full Ballistic Skill you may fire" is increased by one right? I am specifically firing 1+1 weapons at full ballistic skill (resolved at the same time), not seeing a problem.

**Mr. Shine**

Forcast wrote:
Which the "number of weapons specifically at full Ballistic Skill you may fire" is increased by one right? I am specifically firing 1+1 weapons at full ballistic skill (resolved at the same time), not seeing a problem.

Which has everything to do with the Ballistic Skill at which you fire the weapon and nothing to do with the way in which you're still required to fire them together.

**Forcast**

So we are arguing:

You may fire one more (weapon at full Ballistic Skill than normally permitted.)

or

You may fire one more weapon (at full Ballistic Skill) than normally permitted.

**Mr. Shine**

Forcast wrote:
So we are arguing:

You may fire one more (weapon at full Ballistic Skill than normally permitted.)

or

You may fire one more weapon (at full Ballistic Skill) than normally permitted.

Yes, but I think you're butchering the reading of the rule when in fact the wording of your argument as I understand it to be would correctly need to be, "May fire one more weapon than normally permitted, at full Ballistic Skill."

Given vehicles may always fire all weapons though and the issue is simply at which Ballistic Skill they do so, I submit that's further evidence it relates only to Ballistic Skill.

**barnowl**

Charistoph wrote:
Forcast wrote:So you are saying that a Land Raider that doesn't move can't fire its Lascannons at separate targets?

We are saying the rules are saying that a Land Raider can only fire its Lascannons at separate targets if one of them would normally be Snap Firing or otherwise be reduced BS.

RageofBlack wrote:How about this situation: a squad of 2 landraiders, each one only fires one TL lascannon, could they fire at different units?

Only if one of them would be Snap Firing or otherwise be reduced BS.

Keep in mind what the actual rule say, "this weapon can be fired at a different target unit to any other weapons..."

I thin Raw this probably correct. However, given the legacy of the POTMS and land raiders, I believe most events would indeed rule a squadron of two godhammer Land Raiders could target 3 targets thanks to POTMS whether it had moved enough to snap-fire or not. I suspect this was an unintended change in the rule from previous editions.

Still leaves it as pretty useless on Whirlwinds.

**Mr. Shine**

barnowl wrote:
I thin Raw this probably correct. However, given the legacy of the POTMS and land raiders, I believe most events would indeed rule a squadron of two godhammer Land Raiders could target 3 targets thanks to POTMS whether it had moved enough to snap-fire or not. I suspect this was an unintended change in the rule from previous editions.

Still leaves it as pretty useless on Whirlwinds.

I'm inclined to agree that Power of the Machine Spirit is meant to function in some way other than it is written. I suspect its intended function would better match something like:

"...the vehicle can fire one weapon at a different target unit to any other weapons, subject to the normal rules for shooting. In addition, this weapon can be fired at the vehicle's full Ballistic Skill."

**CrownAxe**

malamis wrote:
RageofBlack wrote:
I meant to say a squadron of landraiders. So what i am getting from this, is that if i go cruising speed i could then use PotMS and target 3 different units with my squadron of whirlwinds?

Correct. It's arguable you could even go flat out.

Except for the whole specifically excluding flat out

**malamis**

CrownAxe wrote:
malamis wrote:
RageofBlack wrote:
I meant to say a squadron of landraiders. So what i am getting from this, is that if i go cruising speed i could then use PotMS and target 3 different units with my squadron of whirlwinds?

Correct. It's arguable you could even go flat out.
Except for the whole specifically excluding flat out

Well spotted >.<

**Lord Perversor**

barnowl wrote:
Charistoph wrote:
Forcast wrote:So you are saying that a Land Raider that doesn't move can't fire its Lascannons at separate targets?

We are saying the rules are saying that a Land Raider can only fire its Lascannons at separate targets if one of them would normally be Snap Firing or otherwise be reduced BS.

RageofBlack wrote:How about this situation: a squad of 2 landraiders, each one only fires one TL lascannon, could they fire at different units?

Only if one of them would be Snap Firing or otherwise be reduced BS.

Keep in mind what the actual rule say, "this weapon can be fired at a different target unit to any other weapons..."

I thin Raw this probably correct. However, given the legacy of the POTMS and land raiders, I believe most events would indeed rule a squadron of two godhammer Land Raiders could target 3 targets thanks to POTMS whether it had moved enough to snap-fire or not. I suspect this was an unintended change in the rule from previous editions.

Still leaves it as pretty useless on Whirlwinds.

Well considering Whirlwind weapons PotMS may allow to move 12 then shoot them at full BS, meaning you have now a very mobile weapon platform instead a sitting duck. Not the best but may come handy.

**Forcast**

So a punctuation issue.

God I'm glad I don't play in a gaming group with just dakka dakka people...

**Mr. Shine**

Forcast wrote:
So a punctuation issue.

God I'm glad I don't play in a gaming group with just dakka dakka people...

Sounds like a sore loser to me.

Remember there's a huge difference between arguing legalistic semantics on the internet and actually playing a game in real life for all involved to enjoy.

**barnowl**

Forcast wrote:
So a punctuation issue.

God I'm glad I don't play in a gaming group with just dakka dakka people...

Punctuation makes rules. And it is more than just the punctuation in this case.

**Forcast**

So how do you actually play it?

Also I'm still not convinced its even a legalistic issue.

I think this will just come down to you saying one thing and me saying another.

Especially when you can just drive in a 6" circle and and perform the same action I am suggesting you can do in the first place.

My ultimate opinion is that a simple rule is being way over analyzed to the point of a loss of rationale.

**Mr. Shine**

Forcast wrote:
So how do you actually play it?

Something like what I posted a copy of posts back.

Also I'm still not convinced its even a legalistic issue.

I think this will just come down to you saying one thing and me saying another.

Especially when you can just drive in a 6" circle and and perform the same action I am suggesting you can do in the first place.

My ultimate opinion is that a simple rule is being way over analyzed to the point of a loss of rationale.

It's not a legalistic issue, it's an issue of you reading the rule incorrectly on the basis of assuming it works in the way you wish/believe it to.

It is a legalistic discussion though, in that it needs to be broken down to explain why, the way it is written, it doesn't mean what you think it means.

**Forcast**

And you don't have any assumptions at all?

I still am waiting for that breakdown then. and just typing out the same words in the rule is apparently not working for me.

**barnowl**

Forcast wrote:
And you don't have any assumptions at all?

I still am waiting for that breakdown then. and just typing out the same words in the rule is apparently not working for me.

by the RAW, POTMS only kicks in if you are Snap-firing one or more weapons. How most folks play it is you can shoot a secondary target with one weapon AND/OR shoot one more weapon than normal at full BS.

**Mr. Shine**

Forcast wrote:
And you don't have any assumptions at all?

Considering I'm going by what the rule clearly says, no, I don't think so.

I still am waiting for that breakdown then. and just typing out the same words in the rule is apparently not working for me.

I have explained without simply repeating the wording of the rule. It's not really my problem if your reading comprehension isn't up to the task, I'm sorry.

**motyak**

Less trying to belittle other users contributions by going on about their "reading comprehension", more politely discussing it based on rules. Thanks