Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/03 20:14:53
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Gargantuan Gargant
|
Happyjew wrote:
So which rules do I use for my Blood Angels Rhinos, the one in the Blood Angel codex, or the one in the Space Marine Codex (which was released afterwards)? After all they share the same model, and according to you I'm supposed to use the latest rules for that model.
They share the same model, but they are not the same army, so you use what ever profile is for the army you are currently playing.
This is more like trying to play Orks with shootas from 5th edition, that cost a point less than Orks with Shootas from 7th edition.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/03 20:27:19
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord
|
adamsouza wrote: Happyjew wrote:
So which rules do I use for my Blood Angels Rhinos, the one in the Blood Angel codex, or the one in the Space Marine Codex (which was released afterwards)? After all they share the same model, and according to you I'm supposed to use the latest rules for that model.
They share the same model, but they are not the same army, so you use what ever profile is for the army you are currently playing.
This is more like trying to play Orks with shootas from 5th edition, that cost a point less than Orks with Shootas from 7th edition.
Happyjew is trying to point out the insanity of the statement that 1 model - 1 set of rules statement.
|
Gwar! wrote:Huh, I had no idea Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines posted on Dakka. Hi Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can I have an Autograph!
Kanluwen wrote:
Hell, I'm not that bothered by the Stormraven. Why? Because, as it stands right now, it's "limited use".When it's shoehorned in to the Codex: Space Marines, then yeah. I'll be irked.
When I'm editing alot, you know I have a gakload of homework to (not) do. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 05:23:05
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Gargantuan Gargant
|
I still think my description is more accurate.
The OP wants to use an old version of the Chimera because it's stripped down and cheaper.
I want to use the old version of a Shoota boy because he's cheaper and has better Mob Rulez.
No competitive, or RAW, player is going to let me use the old Ork Boyz profile with my new codex army list.
The FAQ ruling is there to cover things like there being 4 versions of Blood Thristers and 2 versions of Wolf Priests, or Army lists that don't have an updated version.
There is a general undestanding that new versions replace the old, but 7th edition has now created some alternate versions, and the alternate versions are usually pointed out as such.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 05:51:19
Subject: Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Liche Priest Hierophant
|
Actually he wants to use the other Chimera version because it has the option for an Autocannon, something the codex option lacks.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 06:30:06
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Tough Traitorous Guardsman
|
@adamsouza. I wonder if you have read the actual arguments made in this thread. It is not a matter of an old version versus a new and updated version (like it is in your irrelevant example of the Ork Boyz). We are talking of an alternative FW profile (that was created, by the way, when there was already a GW chimera, hence the concept of alternative profile). The fact that GW updates its chimera profile does not cancel out the alternative chimera profile of IA1. Yeah, maybe FW should have made an errata since 2014 and adjust the price of their chimera, but FW did not. This is what counts as rules as written : they did not change the profile of their chimera. Maybe it's unfortunate, maybe they are careless authors, etc. but this as nothing to do with RAW. If FW was to published an Imperial armour 1 third edition, then you would be in a situation involving an updated chimera profile. But even then, there would still be a FW chimera (a new updated alternative one) and a GW one, both being valid. Sure the idea of FW books and GW books being two separate, parallel lines is difficult to understand for some people, and we might want FW to adjust the price of the IA1 chimera, but considering the rules as they are written and the game mechanics, this FW chimera is absolutely valid. Then a TO can do whatever he wants (ITC has made what is equivalent to an errata). But in a casual game with an unknown opponent, you do not need the latter's agreement to play (edit : to legally include in your list) that chimera, provided you were both okay with FW material in the first place.
|
This message was edited 12 times. Last update was at 2016/08/04 07:32:54
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 07:28:01
Subject: Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
Actually, your opponent does have the right to refuse to play against a unit too - as much as you can say "I'll take this", they can say "I don't want to fight this". As agreed upon in the army building section of the BRB, AFAIK.
Regarding this case, I can see both arguments. For me, if OP wanted to use the FW Chimeras, I'd:
1) Let them use only units that would have been appropriate at the time of IA1's writing. This is the one I'm least happy on, but gives the guard player an overall better codex (5th was better, y'all)
2) Let them take autocannons on their Chimeras, which is their stated goal, but treat the base cost and stats of the actual Chimera as the same as that of C:AM. If the autocannon is an X point upgrade, pay X to upgrade it onto the current Chimeras.
It's not supported by any rules, but should leave all non-FW-hating parties happy.
|
They/them
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 07:35:59
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Chosen Baal Sec Youngblood
|
Happyjew wrote: Gingerwerewolf wrote: RenegadeKorps wrote: Wait thats exactly what Im saying. So you would Agree were this book published now if it reprinted it, it would be the same as the Current Astra Millitarum book?
No. On the contrary, I suggested that FW feels very confortable to update its own units without considering the GW version.
I'm saying that in 2012 FW published a different chimera profile for the one already existing since 2008 in the GW codex. As the two were coexisting then, so the two coexist now, and so would they in the future (except in the event that FW update its book and delete altogether the alternative profile). So the two profiles are valid then and now and for ever regardless of how many times GW updates its chimera.
Absolute rubbish! Stating that the Forge World Chimera and the Imperial Guard Chimera are different when they share the same model is absolutely rubbish. 1 Model = use the latest rules.
So which rules do I use for my Blood Angels Rhinos, the one in the Blood Angel codex, or the one in the Space Marine Codex (which was released afterwards)? After all they share the same model, and according to you I'm supposed to use the latest rules for that model.
Then by your and RenegadeKorps explanation, my Blood Angels can't use their Sanguinary guard and Priests, Specialist Dreadnoughts, and Deathcompany. As their Coex has been replaced. Brilliant Ill start painting up my BA Centurions then.
OK so if this is what you are basing Alternative profile on, that is a very fair point. Different Codecies breed differing rules. Got it. I agree. 1 point to you.
But where Forge World Muddy the waters is with their units that can be taken out of a different army list to directly replace the same unit. So, that list, if you were just using that FW list to make your Army, then I would have no problem with using those rules for Chimeras - Choosing from a Single Source "Codex". But what you are saying there is by using Forge World Chimera's as a Loophole to get the Old Style Chimera in a New Imperial Guard Force. It doesnt sit will with me. Its like saying, Oh Im going to have Damocles Command Rhino in my Blood Angel Force, but since its a BA one its got the Fast Vehicle type. Its mixing and matching rules from 2 different sources in a way that can confuse your opponent for an advantage.
Imagine going to a Tournament, and facing an Imperial Guard list that had that. It is perfectly justifiable to expect all normal Chimeras in an Imperial Guard Force to be exactly the same and out of the codex. Then discovering that they have used old rules because of a loophole like this? You would be somewhat cheesed off at an amount of imbalance. Im willing to go as far as to say that you would probably approach a tourney organiser and ask for clarification.
So this is nothing more than a cheap trick to exploit badly written rules. You all know it is and no amount of high ground will make it otherwise.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 07:55:30
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Drop Trooper with Demo Charge
|
You keep ignoring the part about autocannon chimeras. Hence they are an alternative profile. So you're telling me that before C: AM was released, I would be allowed to take other units like centaurs from IA1 but not chimeras? Strong logic bro. And let's be real. Not like Astra Militarum have a chance in competitive tournaments in any case. Automatically Appended Next Post: Gingerwerewolf wrote: Happyjew wrote: Gingerwerewolf wrote: RenegadeKorps wrote: Wait thats exactly what Im saying. So you would Agree were this book published now if it reprinted it, it would be the same as the Current Astra Millitarum book?
No. On the contrary, I suggested that FW feels very confortable to update its own units without considering the GW version.
I'm saying that in 2012 FW published a different chimera profile for the one already existing since 2008 in the GW codex. As the two were coexisting then, so the two coexist now, and so would they in the future (except in the event that FW update its book and delete altogether the alternative profile). So the two profiles are valid then and now and for ever regardless of how many times GW updates its chimera.
Absolute rubbish! Stating that the Forge World Chimera and the Imperial Guard Chimera are different when they share the same model is absolutely rubbish. 1 Model = use the latest rules.
So which rules do I use for my Blood Angels Rhinos, the one in the Blood Angel codex, or the one in the Space Marine Codex (which was released afterwards)? After all they share the same model, and according to you I'm supposed to use the latest rules for that model.
Then by your and RenegadeKorps explanation, my Blood Angels can't use their Sanguinary guard and Priests, Specialist Dreadnoughts, and Deathcompany. As their Coex has been replaced. Brilliant Ill start painting up my BA Centurions then.
OK so if this is what you are basing Alternative profile on, that is a very fair point. Different Codecies breed differing rules. Got it. I agree. 1 point to you.
But where Forge World Muddy the waters is with their units that can be taken out of a different army list to directly replace the same unit. So, that list, if you were just using that FW list to make your Army, then I would have no problem with using those rules for Chimeras - Choosing from a Single Source "Codex". But what you are saying there is by using Forge World Chimera's as a Loophole to get the Old Style Chimera in a New Imperial Guard Force. It doesnt sit will with me. Its like saying, Oh Im going to have Damocles Command Rhino in my Blood Angel Force, but since its a BA one its got the Fast Vehicle type. Its mixing and matching rules from 2 different sources in a way that can confuse your opponent for an advantage.
Imagine going to a Tournament, and facing an Imperial Guard list that had that. It is perfectly justifiable to expect all normal Chimeras in an Imperial Guard Force to be exactly the same and out of the codex. Then discovering that they have used old rules because of a loophole like this? You would be somewhat cheesed off at an amount of imbalance. Im willing to go as far as to say that you would probably approach a tourney organiser and ask for clarification.
So this is nothing more than a cheap trick to exploit badly written rules. You all know it is and no amount of high ground will make it otherwise.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/08/04 07:56:43
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 08:31:22
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Tough Traitorous Guardsman
|
Then discovering that they have used old rules
The are not old rules : they are current. Imperial armour 1 second edition is not an old book like all those that have been updated. It's a book having current authority. It is not obsolete like previous editions of a codex are. Its mixing and matching rules from 2 different sources
Well, that's what FW books and supplements in general do. You seem to have a problem with Imperial armour stating that « x unit can be used as an x choice in x army ». Stated otherwise : in my view, there is no difference between the FW Chimera, the FW quad launcher, the FW medusa, etc. 1. The latest rules are determined on a book basis, not on a same-model basis or same-name basis (unless otherwise stated). Of course, an erratum or a FAQ can single out particular units for update. It also means that GW makes its own updating, and FW theirs. 2. These units are in a current edition of a FW book (the 2014 Imperial armour 1). I'm using the latest rule update for this book (not IA1 first edition). 3. These units are stated to be usable as an x choice in a GW Imperial guard/Astra militarum army (the renaming of this faction is an another issue not relevant here). So where is the problem? I'm very open-minded to arguments that will suggest otherwise. But for the moment, no one has made an objection on an RAW or game mechanics level against my point. (Note that an objection is attacking a premiss of the interlocutor's reasoning, not attacking its conclusion by just stating the opposite.) Some gentlemen have said something like : ''oh, both side have good points, etc." No, for the moment, only mine.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2016/08/04 08:34:41
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 08:33:51
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran
Ankh Morpork
|
Gingerwerewolf wrote:So this is nothing more than a cheap trick to exploit badly written rules. You all know it is and no amount of high ground will make it otherwise.
Don't suppose you have any comment on this, do you?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 08:37:19
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Tough Traitorous Guardsman
|
I hope no one takes this personal. I'm just looking for the truth, so was Naix I guess.
(It doesn't personally concern me : we only play with ITC rules in my meta anyway.)
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 09:13:53
Subject: Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
RenagadeKorps, what say you on my proposition?
Allowing you to take autocannons on your Chimera at the upgrade price listed in IA1, but the base Chimera profile (Hull Points, Lasgun arrays, point cost) being the same as C:AM.
|
They/them
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 09:39:59
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Tough Traitorous Guardsman
|
Allowing you to take autocannons on your Chimera at the upgrade price listed in IA1, but the base Chimera profile (Hull Points, Lasgun arrays, point cost) being the same as C:AM.
This is how imo it should be addressed in an erratum, yes, and it's what ITC said (not that we shall do whatever ITC decides, but I think ITC has the most comprehensive FAQ, the most balanced missions and army list composition, plus their Imperial armour Index is priceless).
I'm not making a point for 'how I would play it' though.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 09:44:47
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
RenegadeKorps wrote:Allowing you to take autocannons on your Chimera at the upgrade price listed in IA1, but the base Chimera profile (Hull Points, Lasgun arrays, point cost) being the same as C:AM.
This is how imo it should be addressed in an erratum, yes, and it's what ITC said (not that we shall do whatever ITC decides, but I think ITC has the most comprehensive FAQ, the most balanced missions and army list composition, plus their Imperial armour Index is priceless).
I'm not making a point for 'how I would play it' though.
In which case, you should discuss it with your TO, or opponent. Which still turns into HIWPI.
Of course, your opponent always has the right to ask that you don't take potentially advantageous benefits alongside the autocannon (namely the cheaper cost), so this can't always work even if you do take it straight from IA1. The right to deny a certain unit exists in the army building section of the BRB - at least, as far as I'm aware.
|
They/them
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 10:31:42
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Tough Traitorous Guardsman
|
I'm just talking about legally including a unit in an army list. Sometimes my opponent wants me to play the rules as written without any house ruling or HIYPI...
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/04 11:07:23
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 10:41:01
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Chosen Baal Sec Youngblood
|
Naix wrote:You keep ignoring the part about autocannon chimeras. Hence they are an alternative profile. So you're telling me that before C: AM was released, I would be allowed to take other units like centaurs from IA1 but not chimeras? Strong logic bro. And let's be real. Not like Astra Militarum have a chance in competitive tournaments in any case.
If it isnt obvious - I consider Forgeworld army rules to be an unbalanced mess. Their Rules are poorly written even comparing them to GW just to allow Treadheads to have lots of different tanks. Thus, in this case, they need a 3rd edition rulebook to sort out this rubbish.
They are lazy at producing updates, and when they do, their FAQs tend to ask more questions than they answer. Their rules are arbitrary and so short sighted its untrue. Forgeworld as a sub-company have, up until recently, have a tendency to almost work almost in competition with GW. I know that they have in the past had GW Games designers ( HQ or the main rule writers) play silly bugger games with them - The Trygon incident - that may have made it worse. It is almost as if, the two rules writers are operating in a vacuum to each other, and thats not a good way to work.
In this case, FW Copied the Codex entry for a Chimera, and just added their bit to the bottom without considering this sort of consequence of "Alternative Profiling". You are making it out as if the Rules writers there are all knowing. They are not. They wrote the rules at the time, and since then GW have updated theirs. Neither party cares what the other party has introduced.
I mean, if FW were so integrated, why did it take them 3-4 weeks to release their FAQ for Death From the Skies?
If they were slightly sensible about it, they would have designed their new turrets like the Legacies of Glory rules - As Upgrades for the Imperial Guard Units. So the Unit would be able to purchase additional upgrades - Make the different turret gun options an upgrade to the Chimera from the Imperial Guard Codex. But the Core rules would still be in the main Codex that they take the unit entry from.
So, in actual answer to your question, The Autocannon, if thats what you want, and this is the only way you can get it, just discuss it with your opponent first and hope that he's understanding. In my case Id take the idea above of the upgrade costing X, so apply that to the AM Codex version.
The change from 5 Fire-points to the Las Gun array is what I have a problem with. 5 Fire-points is FAR better than the Las-Gun array. Autocannon aside, a drop in points and 5 Firepoints is a very tasty upgrade, and one that GW deliberately NERF'd. This is obvious and the fact that FW havent updated their rules is the problem. No matter what you say, they never meant to have 2 different rules for the same Armies Unit.
But, where I draw the line is where I can see a Forgeworld unit's rules that havent been updated in 5 years, and were written for an edition that is two editions ago. I know in my gut feeling its wrong. Maybe Im arguing RAI V'd RAW - But even RAW is tenuous as this is the first time that within a single Armies choice, there are two, conflicting ways to run the same model.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Mr. Shine wrote: Gingerwerewolf wrote:So this is nothing more than a cheap trick to exploit badly written rules. You all know it is and no amount of high ground will make it otherwise.
Don't suppose you have any comment on this, do you?
Imperial Armour 13, the Storm Chimera - a uniquely named Tank.
THIS is how you do the Rules for "Alternatives" You make a brand new tank.
AND - its 75 Points, and what would you know it only has 2 Firepoints.
So what were you saying?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/04 10:49:04
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 11:00:18
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Tough Traitorous Guardsman
|
But even RAW is tenuous as this is the first time that within a single Armies choice, there are two, conflicting ways to run the same model.
You will be sad to learn that the same thing happens also with the Manticore alternative profile in the same IA, which again makes it a bargain. You tend again to speak of the "same unit". i understand why, but as unfortunate as it may be, the profile in IA1 stands. It's really an alternative profile that is still valid. You feel that there is something wrong, as someone can sometimes feel that laws are unjust, that something "should not" be the way it, but it's still the law. When you are a legislator though (in this case, a TO or FW itself), you can make the laws to correspond to your feeling of what should be. So you are totally right, it should be a weapon upgrade only profile. They just sell the upgrades, after all. But still. Is it so hard to say : "okay, it is an exceptional case, it is due to a lack of communication and writing uniformisation between two companies, it is a little bit overpowered, but still, the rules as written and the game mechanics allow it, so use it" ? Automatically Appended Next Post: Yeah the five access points is another concern. Automatically Appended Next Post: Kenny P wrote:Inquisition Chimera is still the old profile (fire points and no lasgun arrays) and points even though it has been more recently updated than the Astra Militarum. This was also an excellent remark.
|
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2016/08/04 12:38:07
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 12:02:33
Subject: Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Chosen Baal Sec Youngblood
|
Very well said RenegadeKorps.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 12:31:32
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Tough Traitorous Guardsman
|
Putting aside RAW, I would say to the original poster that it seems fair to use the complete profile of IA1 with it's weapon options, but at the point cost of C:AS since it was not FW intention to create a discount of that unit at the time of the publication. This being said, I would allow it to have its five access points, which means that this chimera would have the same profile as some chimeras we still find in GW range, namely the ones from Codex:Inquisition. This is just a suggestion. Personally, though, I would let my opponent play the version he wants, so the strongest one, as long as I am informed at the beginning of the game so that it does not come up during the game as : "Surprise, surprise! Did I forget to tell you that my 5 plasma guns can shoot out of my chimera?" And was I to play it myself, I would feel comfortable to say : "hey, i'm using the profile of IA1 but I paid the 10pts increase suffered by its equivalent in Codex:Astra militarum, is it okay for you?".
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/08/04 12:40:03
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 13:46:36
Subject: Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Ship's Officer
|
The FW chimera profile is meant to be used in the ABG list, thus the slight discount; essentially the 2 chimeras are two different unit, one label AM chimera and the other FW chimera. Same thing with the hydra, manticore, vendetta etc.
I would say anything that is not already in the AM codex can be used from the IA 1 2nd ed. Think of it like only ABG have access to the specialized vehicles.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 14:08:39
Subject: Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Drop Trooper with Demo Charge
|
Big Mac wrote:The FW chimera profile is meant to be used in the ABG list, thus the slight discount; essentially the 2 chimeras are two different unit, one label AM chimera and the other FW chimera. Same thing with the hydra, manticore, vendetta etc.
I would say anything that is not already in the AM codex can be used from the IA 1 2nd ed. Think of it like only ABG have access to the specialized vehicles.
No that is not the case. It's separate from the ABG list. The points discount is because they did not anticipate the points being jacked up to push the Taurox 2 years done the line.
As for the issue, it seems to me that a 70 point autocannon chimera should be acceptable as anything else in the IA book with the discretionary 10 point increase, informing opponents about it of course. Thanks for the input from everybody.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 15:35:53
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Tough Traitorous Guardsman
|
The FW chimera profile is meant to be used in the ABG list, thus the slight discount; essentially the 2 chimeras are two different unit, one label AM chimera and the other FW chimera. Same thing with the hydra, manticore, vendetta etc.
After all we've been through, this irrelevant, already addressed comment is almost offensive. We are not talking of the profile on page 268.
Besides, the ABG army list does not have access to the Manticore, so clearly the FW Manticore profile is not meant for it, as you imply, and neither the chimera profile on page 64, which was in question here.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/08/04 21:17:58
Subject: Re:Astra Militarum FAQ - does this mean that I can do this?
|
 |
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran
Ankh Morpork
|
Gingerwerewolf wrote:Imperial Armour 13, the Storm Chimera - a uniquely named Tank.
THIS is how you do the Rules for "Alternatives" You make a brand new tank.
AND - its 75 Points, and what would you know it only has 2 Firepoints.
So what were you saying?
And yet it's not a 'Storm Chimera turret' but rather a 'Chimera autocannon turret', and a Storm Chimera is not defined as simply having an autocannon turret. The product page I believe also links to IA1, but not IA12.
So what I saying, which still holds, is that product reflects the existence of an autocannon Chimera turret option. It may also reflect part of converting a Storm Chimera, but it makes the former no less true.
|
|
 |
 |
|