The Battle for 2nd edition

[tturen]

Yep, those are rules and as well the changes I know a number of groups have made the last being an initiative roll to engage vehicles moving over 10" and a refusal to allow heavy weapons to be used in CC.

(Note: the formula used is the same step by step one I posted awhile back in this thread.)

[Charly]

if that rule only applies to ranged weapons used in CC with vehicles, y under that table does it give an example of a term with power fist penetrating a vehicle?

We use over 10" take initiative test or take a ram value hit also.

[Adoni-Zedek]

Which rule, Charly? The one about the strength based die roll? It applies to any weapon used in close combat, not just ranged ones. The dedicated close combat weapons already have it included in their profiles, however, and don't get it again. Ranged weapons normally don't get it, and so the rules state you must factor it in when they are used in close combat.

[Charly]

grenades also seem to include it already. the bit where it says attacks receive a bonus to their armour penetration role according to their strength etc.. isnt related to ranged weapons used in combat, its just combat with vehicles generally. granted it is badly punctuated
'..worked out exactly as hits from shooting. however, when attacking a vehicle or dreadnought it is possible to place a blow more accurately than when you are shooting it.'

the rules dont state that u get a bonus penetration role when using a ranged weapon in combat anywhere. it simply says its possible to be more accurate. ie u dont have to role to hit! the only paragraph that even mentions ranged weapons simply states that they may be used in combat as long as they are not move or fire weapons.

also the effect of ranged weapons at shorter range is also increased in another way, a rule we often neglect in OGC (rulebook pg80) that shots from over 24" range have -1 to the penetration role, over 48" -2, and so on.

i dont think we've interpreted the rule in an incorrect way, nor have we purposefully altered it, i personally think that we play it as the rules intended.

[Simon]

charly said:

also the effect of ranged weapons at shorter range is also increased in another way, a rule we often neglect in OGC (rulebook pg80) that shots from over 24" range have -1 to the penetration role, over 48" -2, and so on.

Funnilly enough I always used to remember that rule when it was convenient for me

[Charly]

its a rule we all should always remember!

[tturen]

"its a rule we all should always remember!"

Arn't tanks tough enough already? We do use that rule ourselves though. Well most of the time anyway.

"grenades also seem to include it already."

---Only the meltabomb a dedicated CC weapon already includes it.

'..worked out exactly as hits from shooting. however, when attacking a vehicle or dreadnought it is possible to place a blow more accurately than when you are shooting it.'

---You left off the next sentence: "however, when attacking a vehicle or dreadnought it is possible to place a blow more accurately than when shooting at it. Accordingly attackers recieve a bonus on their armour penetration dice roll against vehicles or dreadnoughts according to their Strength or the Strength of the weapon they are using."

Yep, thats right this applies to all weapons used in CC against vehicles. No exceptions. Its pretty clear that this is a basic CC rule here.

"the only paragraph that even mentions ranged weapons simply states that they may be used in combat as long as they are not move or fire weapons."

Isn't anything with a 'gun barrel' a ranged weapon? You might recall the "push his gun barrel through hatches, etc" part in the second paragraph that introduces CC against vehicles. Then recall that GW has clearly stated that the improved accuracy is reflected in the Strength based bonus dice. Even a bolt pistol gets the bonus dice just as all CC weapons do in the same situation. No exceptions to this rule are noted and the introduction clearly includes ranged weapon attacks in CC.

[Charly]

"Arn't tanks tough enough already?"

- tanks never seem to dominate our games too much, saying that we do often forget the negative effects of range on penetration, but most shots are likely to be within 24" anyway.

"Only the meltabomb a dedicated CC weapon already includes it."

- that does seem to be so, but one could argue that thats because the melta bomb is specifically designed to blow up armour.

"---You left off the next sentence: "however, when attacking a vehicle or dreadnought it is possible to place a blow more accurately than when shooting at it. Accordingly attackers recieve a bonus on their armour penetration dice roll against vehicles or dreadnoughts according to their Strength or the Strength of the weapon they are using."

-thats the whole issue right there i guess, im still not certain that those bonus' were meant to be applied to ranged weapons in CC, mainly because the example below gives a weapon which already has the bonus included in it in the table. that could just be badly worded though.

"Isn't anything with a 'gun barrel' a ranged weapon? You might recall the "push his gun barrel through hatches, etc" part in the second paragraph that introduces CC against vehicles. Then recall that GW has clearly stated that the improved accuracy is reflected in the Strength based bonus dice. Even a bolt pistol gets the bonus dice just as all CC weapons do in the same situation. No exceptions to this rule are noted and the introduction clearly includes ranged weapon attacks in CC."

- i dont think anything in this whole section is that clearly noted, no exclusions are noted, but no inclusions are really noted either. i dont see a need for discrepency in the table on pg 81, ud think there would be some note of the ranged weapons not including the strength dice bonus, or an extra dice in brackets.
the paragraph which describes the gun barrels being pushed through hatches etc is in relation to accuracy, ie attacks automatically hit, and the attacker may choose (within reason) the location of the attack. also pushing gun barrells through hatches etc would only possible if the vehicle was moving very slowly / was stationary, which i think the bonus D6 against stationary vehicles covers perfectly acceptably.

i must say this is a good healthy debate, just pure rules talk, nothing personal. i think its good to discuss different aproaches on rules, gives us all a better grasp of the game. so thanks for keeping this up!

[El Capitan]

A Rhino flies by at 25" ready to deliver its cargo, little did it know a amrine was waiting behind a nearby rock. As the Rhino approaches the amrine takes its chance....charging it passes its inititive test and rolls a 6 and a 5 to penetrate the track. Then rolls a 6 on damage. As the rhino drives by at top speed the marine rushes out, punts the rhino and it flips into the air.

That cetianly shouldnt happen. However the more I think about it, bonuis penetration dice against vehicles wouldnt really hurt me to much, as i only have a pair of predators as floating sweepers and it would bring the standard tactical marine into the game a lot more.

[Adoni-Zedek]

Hormagaunts can do it too. All it really does, is give vehicles a weakness that basic troops (if they can make it into hand-to-hand with it) can exploit. Not even Baneblades are immune, and even AR 30 bunkers can be kraked open by basic troopers. Just another reminder to keep infantry between your tanks and the enemy, if possible.

On another note, I hope you're Rhino isn't planning on delivering its cargo this turn. Everyone so 'delivered' would take a Str 10 hit as soon as they 'stepped' out.

[Simon]

They don't really hurt me either, what with my walking, living, breathing tanks and all that...

[Adoni-Zedek]

Yeah, Simon. Sit back and gloat!

Even your Biotanks (Malefactors, Haruspexes, Exocrines, etc) can fight back, so only melta-bombs and dedicated close combat weapons can be used against them. And meltabombs are worthless against all other tyranids. Just have to bring in those Land Speeders and Jet bikes against the bugs. ;D

Mike said "It certainly would bring the standard tactical marine into the game a lot more"
Anything that gives the basic troopers a bigger role is a big plus in my book.

[tturen]

In the domain of a rules debate a GW rule book has no equal simply because they are so poorly written. Nice debate though and it does cause one to think. Thats always healthy for both the individual and the game.

As to why the powerfist is used in the example I think A CC weapon is used to explain how the bonus dice is already built into CC weapons already and it explains the game mechanic as well the rational. Heck if they used a ranged weapon example instead I could just see people debating the bonus application to CC only weapons instead! Be nice if they made things a little more clear though.

[Charly]

yeah, we only have to look at the warhammer rulebook to see how bad gw can be a writing rules in a straight forward, logical manner. i think the failings of that rulebook probably have lead to the lack of fantasy games that take place in ogc. its always just such a slog to find out any rules that you dont know.

[James 40K Champ ***]

So what are we going to go with OGC? I would be happy with the extra D6 in combat.

Even with that tanks are still hardcore, 4 out of 5 of my melta bombs failed to penetrate yesterday (even with it included).

Its not very often that people engage tanks in combat, its a bit of a desperate situation, and if they want to risk trying to pull it off, fair enough.

and lets face it, even with the extra dice, without anything above a basic weapon, your clutching at straws!

[Adoni-Zedek]

True.. take the example of the marine vs the rhino. He's got a 2-in-3 chance of passing his initiative check, a 1in 12 chance of penetrating the armor, and a 1in6 chance of killing the tank, for a net 1-in-108 chance of killing the thing. He's only got a 1-in-18 chance of even penetrating the armor. So while it's possible, it's exceedingly unlikely. Anyone with a strength of less than 4 can completely forget it, unless they're carrying krak grenades or melta bombs.

With regards to the complaint about the guardsman blowing the front turret armor on the demolisher, he could anyway in OGC rules, he just needs double sixes, and it penetrates anything, right? (of course, there's still the matter of actually reaching the turret....)

So going with the strength-based table won't really have a huge impact. Just add a little more ability to the lowly troops

[tturen]

In all the years I've played I can't recall a sittuation that saw a ranged weapon use the strength based CC bonus dice to penetrate a tank. I've had hormagounts track one of my Lemans once but that was with a claw and it took lots of them to do even that and they needed double 6's. So I tend to agree that we are talking about a rare occurance anyway.

I also agree that short of Nid's and purpose equiped CC troops that attacking tanks in CC is a desperate measure as well. Troops that try just tend to die. If an opponent allows basic troops to charge his vehicle in the first the place he should pay the price for putting the vehicle in the sittuation.