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.

Units with the keywords VEHICLE and HEAVY SUPPORT should be able to fire their weapons normally when engaged in close combat, just not at enemy units within 1".

So fighting with a tank becomes no more dangerous for the charging unit, and they can still inhibit it's movement, but it's ability to shoot at other units is purely down to the damage it takes.

A tank shouldn't have to stop firing because some poxwalkers are banging on the side...

If Vehicles can do so, why not Terminators? Why can a Land Raider do so but not a Carnifex?

Because hitting a living (even armoured) being is likely to distract it from shooting or otherwise occupy the limbs being used to shoot. The driver of a heavy support vehicle might be distracted but there's no reason the gunner can't still shoot. Any damage done by the assailants will damage the vehicle and reduce it's ability to shoot that way.

Would humbly suggest a tank (or similar) with enemy infantry (or similar) crawling all over it would be a tank with a crew who were slightly more concerned with their immediate problems.

personally I'd let them fire all "defensive" weapons at stuff within 1".

And then have a list defining what such weapons are, stuff like bolters, heavy bolters, heavy stubbers, auto guns, flamers, heavy flamer etc - i.e. close in defensive weapons, but not the primary heavy guns which would likely be unable to target stuff that close

 Brother Castor wrote:
Because hitting a living (even armoured) being is likely to distract it from shooting or otherwise occupy the limbs being used to shoot. The driver of a heavy support vehicle might be distracted but there's no reason the gunner can't still shoot. Any damage done by the assailants will damage the vehicle and reduce it's ability to shoot that way.

A Carnifex is driven by the Hive Mind. There's no way it would let itself be distracted by petty things like imminent death. And it's got to be as strong as mechanical parts.

 Brother Castor wrote:
Because hitting a living (even armoured) being is likely to distract it from shooting or otherwise occupy the limbs being used to shoot. The driver of a heavy support vehicle might be distracted but there's no reason the gunner can't still shoot. Any damage done by the assailants will damage the vehicle and reduce it's ability to shoot that way.

A exocrine is a creature enslaved by it's bioplasmic cannon. It's body is literally driven by the weapon.

 Brother Castor wrote:
Units with the keywords VEHICLE and HEAVY SUPPORT should be able to fire their weapons normally when engaged in close combat, just not at enemy units within 1".

So fighting with a tank becomes no more dangerous for the charging unit, and they can still inhibit it's movement, but it's ability to shoot at other units is purely down to the damage it takes.

A tank shouldn't have to stop firing because some poxwalkers are banging on the side...

Maybe not a poxwalker, but what if a Dreadnought or Carnifex were trying to tear the tank's side off? Might want to limit it when engaging INFANTRY (or DRONES) in close combat.

Besides HEAVY SUPPORT VEHICLES, may want to also expand it to TRANSPORTS (so a Rhino or Razorback can do it), TITANIC and MONSTERS, seem like they could momentarily ignore man-sized infantry to get a shot off. Maybe impose a -1 to hit to indicate a distracted state.

leopard wrote:
Would humbly suggest a tank (or similar) with enemy infantry (or similar) crawling all over it would be a tank with a crew who were slightly more concerned with their immediate problems.

personally I'd let them fire all "defensive" weapons at stuff within 1".

And then have a list defining what such weapons are, stuff like bolters, heavy bolters, heavy stubbers, auto guns, flamers, heavy flamer etc - i.e. close in defensive weapons, but not the primary heavy guns which would likely be unable to target stuff that close

Yep, I like this. Means these weapons behave exactly as they should.

Countering the ability of tanks and other heavy vehicles to fire when they are in CQC is a key part of the game. It makes both mechanical and fluff sense. It represents the crew panicking as a super human/hulking green brute/swarm of infected zombies start tearing at the armour to find weaknesses and make entry.

If tanks etc are still able to fire in CQC there is no downside to them getting caught in close combat and no need to screen.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Countering the ability of tanks and other heavy vehicles to fire when they are in CQC is a key part of the game. It makes both mechanical and fluff sense. It represents the crew panicking as a super human/hulking green brute/swarm of infected zombies start tearing at the armour to find weaknesses and make entry.

If tanks etc are still able to fire in CQC there is no downside to them getting caught in close combat and no need to screen.

Seconded this, your just removing one of the counter plays to massed armour spam.
Additionally most LoW already have rules to either shoot certain weapons or fall back and do as they like anyway, rolling these rules out to smaller and smaller vehicals is a bad idea.

I would simply make the following changes, maybe not together but it's a start. .

- Any model with S7 or higher ignores the move + Heavy weapon penalty.

- Vehicles may fall back from combat and shoot with a -1 modifier, unless having a rule already allowing them to do so. (Ultramarines ignore the -1 penalty)

- Any weapon of S5 or less mounted on a Vehicle or Monster adds +1 to its overwatch hit rolls.

Not being able to shoot in close combat reflects the enemy has closed within the blind angle for ranged weapons.

Even the world's most powerful cannon is useless if you've stepped in beyond the muzzle. It will just simply shoot past you.

I disagree because it'd be pretty hard for a Predator to fire its Autocannon at a Gretchin trying to clobber it. Certain vehicles SHOULD be able to fall back and shoot/charge, but not all of them.

The proposed rule wasn't to be able to shoot at units within 1".

I'd say let vehicles and monsters fall back and shoot instead. And not any vehicles, but some of the larger ones like a Predator, Russ etc.. basically anything with 10+ wounds as a guideline. And even then not all of them (artillery comes to mind).
The idea being that they are large enough to just roll/walk away without too much hindrance. But smaller vehicles such as sentinels/dreadnoughts are less sturdy and would be easy to bog down.

That, and the act of falling back can force you to leave an advantageous spot, thus rewarding the melee units somewhat, instead of just ignoring them.

Would it hurt to just bring back the old "Death or Glory!" Rules?

ah hah! these gretchin will stop that baneblade! *Squelch*.

or simply have it that the vehicle moves, and everything in its way takes, for example, a S5 -1AP hit. if they take a wound, the vehicle moves through them (if they're still there). if any model doesn't take a wound, they have stopped the vehicle.

so you can drive over things, and get away from them, and damage them in so doing, and terminators are much more likely to hold your tank up than a grot. You can still charge vehicles, and by surrounding them with lots of models prevent them from moving, but not with a lone guardsman, or some strung out perfectly to fill a gap, but only 1 has to die to let you out.

Maybe have this move instead of fighting in CC. you can move in the movement phase, but only if you didn't fight in CC last turn.