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.

The codex says that 1 in 3 models may take a fusion blaster. Until now I just assumed that it meant in order to have 2 fusion blasters you have to have 6 models, however now I'm not so sure. Could one have 2 fusion blasters with only 4 models in the unit ?

That's usually how people read that in my experience. 1 for 3, 2 for 4+.

I've had the exact opposite experience. Everyone around here (myself included) has always read that as a 1/3 ratio of fusion blasters to burst cannons. Even reading it now I can't see it the other way. Of course, flavious or someone else who has a better grasp on the english language than me can probably reveal how this is just another one in a long line of poorly phrased rules passages.

I read it the other way -- convert 1 out of 3 figures from burst to fusion means you need a unit of 6 to have 2 fusion.

Anyone else ?

I read it:

One in every complete set of three may have a fusion blaster, so you would need two complete sets of three to have two fusion blasters.

Four or five Stealthsuits only form one complete set of three (and one incomplete set), so could only have one fusion blaster.

I see it as a mathematical ratio in written form which requires a minimum (rather than a maximum) of three stealth suits to get one armed with a fusion blaster. Ergo, you can't get a second one until there are six stealth suits in the squad.

I agree with Cpl Saint and Nyarly.  A little clarification of my viewpoint would be to break up the squad into groups of three.  If you have four total models in the squad, the first group would have three models, so it could have a fusion blaster.  The second group would have one model, so it couldn't get the fusion blaster (it's a one in one, not a one in three).

For the mathematically inclined, think modulo.

I suppose this is the logic for another point of view.

Buy a squad of 6 stealth.
Convert a burst cannon to fusion.
You still have more than three burst cannons so do it again.
And again.
And again.
Now you only have two burst cannons left so you can't convert any more.

It might be an interesting unit to play with but I think there would be a lot of arguing with your opponent.

1. Burst cannon
2. Burst cannon
3. Fusion blaster
4. Burst cannon
5. Burst cannon
6. Fusion blaster


Though I do understand how people see it that you can take two for 4+, but my interpretation is that it infers a multiple of three.

Since we are dealing with a multiple of three, and 4 isnt a multiple of three, you must have six figs to use two fusion blasters.

Same thing with eldar jetbikes upgrading shuricannons, space wolf termie heavy weapons, etc.

Instead of 1-3 gets one fusion, 4-6 gets two fusion, I see it as 3-5 gets one fusion, 6-8 gets two fusion.

Posted By Iorek on 01/31/2007 7:57 AM
I agree with Cpl Saint and Nyarly.

 

Psssh!  Those guys are way off!  I think glaive and killkrazy are on the right track though.

Posted By Glaive Company CO on 01/31/2007 10:17 AM

Posted By Iorek on 01/31/2007 7:57 AM
I agree with Cpl Saint and Nyarly.

 

Psssh!  Those guys are way off!  I think glaive and killkrazy are on the right track though.

Nah those guys are n0obz. Hellfury is waaaay more right than those freaks. He is cooler as well.

"There was this one time, at band camp, where Salma Hayek asked me to pee in her butt....."