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.

This has probably been asked a couple times, but do the Castellan templates stack? If yes, what kind of templates do you use to represent the minefields while not making the battlefield look overly confusing?

To me this question seems to be the decisive factor whether Whirlwinds are useful or not.

I don't think they would stack or get larger, I think it would be just more mines in that space?

No the mines rules state specifically that minefields CAN overlap, meaning that if you walk in an area that overlaps, you are suffering potentials from two minefields, not just one. The template you use can be anything, BUT remember that it has to be the same size as an ordinace blast template ( I use four dice and imagine a circle for the field). The other great part is that whirlwind mines STILL COUNT AS ORDINANCE, meaning that a vehicle that runs over hit not only takes it on the rear armor, it also gets to roll 2d6 and choose the highest for penetration (very nice). At strength 6, thats a very nice chance you can blow apart most light to medium vehicles. Also they take the mine test every time they move around in the mine field. So....lets say that you fire a mine in front of your guys and you get assaulted. All the assaulters that enter the field must take a check, every 4+ causes a str6 wound. if you win and your opponent has to fall back, then they once again have to suffer a wound for every model falling back on a 4+ (this is potentially very dangerous once there are overlapped minefields).

Hope this gives you some ideas for your whirlwind.

Now that sounds more like it.

One other side note is that mines DO NOT hurt your own unit and since you can either target a unit or a space on the ground, it becomes very easy to stop assaulting troops from running into your front lines by mining the space in between your models.

ALSO note that mine fields are difficult to remove, AFAIK only orcs and IG who have mine defusers can get rid of mines. After that the mines stay there for the entire game.

I don't know if Castellans count as Ordnance. It says Ordnance Barrage in the description, but that's just to prevent people from moving and firing it. The description also has "n/a" listed for Strength. Once the mines are deployed, hostiles moving over it take Strength 6 AP- hits on a 4+, but it's not from an Ordnance Barrage weapon (it's a minefield marker).

On the flip side, it's stackable so you can double up the hits, although it's not specifically stated AFAIK.

I think Castellan mines are the sUXXOr. they shuld give marines an extra +4 save (for EACH minefield if their overlapp) so we can just sit in the minefields are DARE anyone to assult us hehehehe.

That wuld be DA BOMB!!!

Oh yeah and they shuld rend too. But only the bad gusy (not us).

I agree. Rending ability might see more people using minefields.

Statistically, a unit of gaunts would be practically destroyed fleeting+moving ove a mine template. (8/10 dead)

Posted By ATIRage on 08/28/2006 7:26 PM
One other side note is that mines DO NOT hurt your own unit and since you can either target a unit or a space on the ground, it becomes very easy to stop assaulting troops from running into your front lines by mining the space in between your models. 

Excuse me, but.... where from the rules or codex do you get that mines do not hurt your own units?

p.39 "Any enemy model moving over the minefield trigger a mine on a roll of 4+ "

cant get any clearer.

I think Castellan mines are the sUXXOr. they shuld give marines an extra +4 save (for EACH minefield if their overlapp) so we can just sit in the minefields are DARE anyone to assult us hehehehe.

That wuld be DA BOMB!!!

Oh yeah and they shuld rend too. But only the bad gusy (not us).

Looper, I know that you hate Castillian mines, but it isn't much different than the fact that spore mines don't go off for other 'nids, or that plague marines aren't hurt by their own rot etc.

Posted By Banesword on 09/04/2006 7:34 AM
p.39 "Any enemy model moving over the minefield trigger a mine on a roll of 4+ "

cant get any clearer.

I thought that it was impossible for GW to make such a BIG translation error... but GW can always surprise you?.

Nope... no surprise here.

So minefield are not ordnance then ?

Posted By santanero on 09/04/2006 9:51 AM

Posted By Banesword on 09/04/2006 7:34 AM
p.39 "Any enemy model moving over the minefield trigger a mine on a roll of 4+ "

cant get any clearer.

Sorry, but if that is the English RAW for castellan missiles we have a problem...

So minefield are not ordnance then ?

What gives you that idea? The whirlwind launcher is ordinance so they are ordinance, meaning rolling for pin checks and 2d6 pick highest for AP

Posted By happypants on 09/04/2006 8:01 AM

Looper, I know that you hate Castillian mines, but it isn't much different than the fact that spore mines don't go off for other 'nids, or that plague marines aren't hurt by their own rot etc.

Ah yes, I've won so many games with Nurgle's Rot, let me tell you.
/sarcasm

And Nid mines aren't triggered by nids true; but the mines go away when they explode, and I believe nids can still bet damaged by the mines if an enemy sets them offf.

What I find offensive about Castellans is that the minefield remains for the whole game even if triggered, and that marines aren't even affected by mines that are exploding right underneath them - the teflon underoos thing.  In any non-VP mission that has objectives, there's no reason not to just stack multiple templates on top of the objectives.

Oh yes, and the ordnance barrage designation is for firing them (ie so that you can't move the Whirlwind and still fire), not for when they go off.  I don't believe they get the ordnance barrage effect when they go off.  If they did, then the text would say that "any model moving over the minefield gets an S# AP# ORDNANCE BARRAGE hit".  It doesn't say that.

Why the hell would you use castellens anyway? You could just be killing those guants on 2s straight away...

Oh yes, and the ordnance barrage designation is for firing them (ie so that you can't move the Whirlwind and still fire), not for when they go off. I don't believe they get the ordnance barrage effect when they go off. If they did, then the text would say that "any model moving over the minefield gets an S# AP# ORDNANCE BARRAGE hit". It doesn't say that.

It doesn't have to, I don't know of an ordinance weapon that is that specific. The weapon is ordinance so it follows ordinance rules.

The Whirlwind Multiple Missile Launcher is an Ordnance Weapon. The Castellan Minefield itself is not though.

When a Castellan shot lands, it leaves behind a minefield which inflicts S6 Ap- hits, etc. The minefield is a separate entity (since it remains on board) from the Whirlwind itself. The Castellan shot also has "n/a" listed for its strength, so it doesn't inflct any damage by itself.

Posted By happypants on 09/04/2006 7:04 PM
What gives you that idea? The whirlwind launcher is ordinance so they are ordinance, meaning rolling for pin checks and 2d6 pick highest for AP

The Castellan Missile is ordnance.  The minefield is not.

Page 39 Marine Codex:

Castellian: 12"-48" G St: N/A, AP: N/A Notes: Ordinance Barrage, large blast marker.

It then goes on to tell you exactly how the castellian mines work. (4+ to set them off etc)

I am at a loss here as to how anyone can say that it is not ordinance.

The shot is; the resulting minefield is not. Unless you prefer to retain the stat-line provided, in which case you get Ordnance hits of N/A strength.

But it says what the results are in the area below.

To be honest, I would play it either way and it NOT being ordinance is better for me because I barely play marines anymore in favor of Tau (for which these suck because your opponent can mine all your devilfish hiding spots)

I just don't see how you can make the jump that it is not ordinance by RAW.

I don't see how the jump can be made that the minefield IS Ordnance. The missile (which is not a minefield) is Ordnance; the shot is resolved, and a minefield, defined by separate rules and lacking the Ordnance tag, is emplaced. The Ordnance shot places the minefield, and that aspect is done. From then on, the minefield uses the rules given, not the emplacing-gun statline.

Pretty simple, and follows the RAW.

*Warning, this is fluff-tacular*

I kind of like the idea of the mine fields causing pinning. I mean, the pinning idea for snipers is from the thought that if one of your buddies suddenly got geeked by a sniper, everyone hits the deck until they know where the fire is coming from. I think if a buddy of yours stepped on a land mine and got blown to bits, it is sensible that the rest of the squad would freeze in place to make sure they weren't about to step on one, too.

Not sure about the game balance effect of it causing pinning, though. Might be a bit OTT.

Sal.

See the AdeptiFAQ (in News and Rumours) - I think this is a reasonable compromise. I'm willing to deal with mines getting ordnance stats (for fluff reasons given) as long as the minefields don't stack and you can only get nailed once per turn.

AdeptiFAQ rules! Can't wait for the post-beta version.

Whats an adepti faq?

AdeptiCon Beta-FAQ discussed in News & Rumors

http://www.dakkadakka.com/Forums/tabid/56/forumid/6/postid/102369/view/topic/Default.aspx