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.

Codex: Astra Copywritum, Page 118 wrote:This model may take either two sponsons, or four sponsons; each sponson is equipped with a lascannon and either a twin heavy bolter or twin heavy flamer.

To me this reads that each sponson can independently be given a twin heavy bolter or twin heavy flamer, the pairs of sponsons do not need to match. If they had to match it would say "each pair of sponsons" or something to that effect.

I checked the FAQ and there was no mention of this. Am I missing something or is the assumption they need to match simply edition lag?

Correct, nothing is forcing you to take matching sponsons.

Seems correct to me. And you can model 2 sponsons on one side of your Banblade if you want to make the model overall slightly narrower. It makes no difference to the rules.

 Kcalehc wrote:
Seems correct to me. And you can model 2 sponsons on one side of your Banblade if you want to make the model overall slightly narrower. It makes no difference to the rules.

ehh... that actually could be considered "Modeling to Advantage"

 zedsdead wrote:

 Kcalehc wrote:
Seems correct to me. And you can model 2 sponsons on one side of your Banblade if you want to make the model overall slightly narrower. It makes no difference to the rules.

ehh... that actually could be considered "Modeling to Advantage"

Not really. No more so than, say, crouching Fire Warriors would be IMHO. And even then, "modelling for advantage" isn't against the rules.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 zedsdead wrote:

 Kcalehc wrote:
Seems correct to me. And you can model 2 sponsons on one side of your Banblade if you want to make the model overall slightly narrower. It makes no difference to the rules.

ehh... that actually could be considered "Modeling to Advantage"

Not really. No more so than, say, crouching Fire Warriors would be IMHO. And even then, "modelling for advantage" isn't against the rules.

Or putting my Tiger Sharks on 10" flight stands. I LOLed when I did the math and realized I was only sacrificing 3" of range to do so.

The question seems to have been answered, so we'll lock it down before it descends any further into absurdity.