Assaulting vehicles

[EnglishInquisition]

Had one of those moments today, one of those where you go "hang on a minute......... does that mean....?"

Totally playing devils advocate here, and I've never seen it crop up in a game, OR even been discussed before so here goes: If an attack on a vehicle is made by an 'AP -' weapon it suffers a -1 to the Vehicle damage table.
If an attack is made by say a Marine, and they manage to glance/penetrate the armour, do they incur the -1 penalty as neither a close combat attack or a grenade has an AP value?
It does say in the characteristics section at the beginning of the rulebook that if a profile has no value then it is considered to be '0', or sometimes written as '-'

Have we been playing this wrong or do people actually play this way?
It would certainly make vehicles more durable against mundane attacks from infantry, as even marines trying to load out with lots of attacks and hoping to overwhelm a vehicle with glancing hits would incur a -3 on the vehicle damage chart. This means they would be more likely to then opt for the krak grenade attack at S6, which lets face it, is what they are meant to do!

Like I say, never been a problem in my gaming group, just one of those thoughts!
Thoughts anyone?

[Nabterayl]

Totally playing devils advocate here, and I've never seen it crop up in a game, OR even been discussed before so here goes: If an attack on a vehicle is made by an 'AP -' weapon it suffers a -1 to the Vehicle damage table.
If an attack is made by say a Marine, and they manage to glance/penetrate the armour, do they incur the -1 penalty as neither a close combat attack or a grenade has an AP value?
No, because the AP value of the attack is not "-." - is a specific AP value, not a fancy way of saying no AP value.

[Tynskel]

This rules relationship is similar to Feel No Pain (FNP):
Attacks that 'ignore armor' deny FNP saves--- but if you have 3+ armor and are hit by a weapon that is AP (3), you still get an FNP save, even though your armor is being 'ignored'. (it also helps that the rulebook specifically states AP1 and AP2)
Just as CC weapons don't have a bonus or negative on the damage penetration chart because the CC Weapon does not state AP(-).


I have to admit, it is a very ggrrrrrreeeeeeeey area of the Rulebook--- however, I have never met a single person that counts the attacks in CC as AP (-).
But if you look at a standard CC attack, everyone always gets their armor save, unless specifically noted.
I think nab's on the right track: The rulebook doesn't explicitly state CC weapons are AP (-). They either ignore armor or don't.

[heartbitt]

AFAIR Grenades are NOT weapons, they're WARGEAR that hurts !!!

[Tynskel]

As an aside, it really makes me sad that the Fleshhook is AP (-). AP(6) would have made them decent weapons at tank busting, but I guess that was the point-- if you want to bust open the tank, charge them.

Overall, though, it is nice that the lictor even has a gun, even if it can only 'shake' vehicles to death!

[BuFFo]

Unless stated by a special rule, close combat attacks have no AP value.

No AP value does not mean the same as - AP, as - is an AP value.

[DarkLink]

No, because the AP value of the attack is not "-." - is a specific AP value, not a fancy way of saying no AP value.

Bingo