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.

Am I the only one who thinks destroyer weapons are lame? My main problem with them isn't the insta pen or insta death mechanic, it's the ignoring cover or hull down that I can't stand. The reason is it makes an apoc game longer, trying to move vehicles and units so they're completely hidden, only to find out the next turn you can see a freakin mm of a tank or unit and as such they're as good as being in an open field. I would be happier if they worked just like barrage and could target anything in range, just because it would save time in the long run, you'd know that no matter what you do it can target you and you'll just have to deal with that.

I understand the fluff behind these weapons, but honestly, if you can get cover from a demolisher cannon, just how different should D weapons be in gaming terms?

RAI Destroyer weapons should not only destroy the model, they should hurt the opponent as well. For the younger players, the mandatory purchasing of refreshments for all those involved might be sufficient. For adult or veteran players, one naturally expects the loss of blood to be involved.

Ignoring all saves is just the weak public version that the editors made the writers replace the original rule with.