Heldrake double whammy legal?

[RTFRB]

Okay guys, been seeing on other forums and especially chaos orientated blogs the notion that a heldrake can perform a vector strike during its zoom move, followed by the baleflamer during the shooting phase. All based on the assumption that zooming flyers can fire 4 weapons...no one is disputing the vector strike counts as having fired one weapon. The assumption is 4 -1 = 3 weapons left to fire, thus you're free to fire the baleflamer as one of those remaining three. BUT -that assumption is wrong in my opinion. The RB says " can fire UP to four of their weapons " (pg 80). That means you can fire UP TO four weapons, but only if you had four or more to fire to begin with! ( my emphasis ) You certainly cannot fire a weapon you don't have. No where -RB, codex, FAQ, etc, does it state the Heldrake suddenly has four weapons to fire, and thus uses one to vector strike instead leaving 3 for later. My argument: the Heldrake when vector striking uses that 1 weapon listed in the codex and thus has no other weapon left in the shooting phase.

[RGilbert26]

What are you on about?

I'm sorry but you don't make any sense.

Stormtalon only has two weapons, is classed as a flyer and so can "fire up to four weapons" - does your weird logic then mean we can only fire one weapon?

Once a Stormraven fires all of its missiles does that then mean it can only fire one gun because it only has three left?

Just because it says fire up to four weapons, does not mean you have to have four weapons in order to fire more than one. Urgh.

[Denzark]

The only problem is that your emphasis is found nowhere in books. Your interpretation is wrong. Read a WD battle report, email the FAQ guys. It shall be wrong for ever more.

[RTFRB]

Okay...let me make it simple.

A flyer has 1 weapon. How many can it fire? 1
A flyer has 2 weapons. How many can it fire? 2
A flyer has 3 weapons. How many can it fire? 3
A flyer has 4 weapons. How many can it fire? 4
A flyer has 5 weapons. How many can it fire? 4
A flyer has 100 weapons. How many can it fire? 4

Assume while "zooming". ( pg 80 )

now...the rule says.... " up to four" correct? ( At full BS, to be more precise) So....simple enough.

A. The Heldrake has _____ number of shooting weapons? 1
B. How many many shooting attacks are used when conducting a vector strike? 1


A-B = number of shooting attacks left. 1 - 1 = 0

BTW -A stormraven can't conduct a vector strike, so I have no idea why you brought that into the picture.

Lets look at a flying hive tyrant, which CAN conduct a vector strike....FMC get how shooting attacks? 2 ( pg 48 )

How many shooting attacks does the flying hive tyrant have after conducting a vector strike? 2 -1 = 1 shooting attack left.

Apply logic to Heldrake. It has a choice - do a vector strike or use the baleflamer attack during the shooting phase. It cant do both because it only has a single shooting weapon.

[RGilbert26]

Flyers can fire up to four weapons, baleflamer counts as one weapon - the Heldake can also vector strike which is normally restricted to FMC but it has been given a special rule which allows it to VC, this also happens to 'count as' a shooting attack. As the codex clearly states the Heldake is a VEHICLE and so the VC uses another of its "up to four" shooting attacks.

I mentioned the stormtalon and Stormraven because with the 'logic' you are using then you'd also say that neither of those two flyers can use their guns as they don't have at least four (SR only has three after all four missiles are fired) weapons.

Still as Denzark said you're interpretating the rules incorrectly.

[Sly]

"A flyer has 1 weapon. How many can it fire? 1"

Incorrect.

Your mistake springs from this mistaken assumption. A Flyer can fire up to 4 weapons. If it has less than 4, clearly it can't fire more than it has. But that's a separate limitation caused by its wargear, not an inherent limitation for its class.

An infantry model can fire one weapon. If it doesn't have a weapon, it's still allowed to fire one weapon.

By your definition, Horrors could not perform shooting attacks because they have no weapons. Wracks have no shooting weapons, therefore they cannot fire a Quad Gun. A Terminator Chaplain with two melee weapons cannot fire a Quad Gun because it has no shooting weapons, but a Terminator Chaplain with a Storm Bolter can fire the Quad Gun.

That's where the mistaken assumption springs from... the number of weapons that a model can fire is limited SEPARATELY by how many weapons it has and by what kind of model it is. A Flyer has a 4-weapon limitation, and a separate limitation based upon how many weapons it actually has. So if it's a situation where it acquires a weapon that it has not fired (perhaps by some Psychic Power from a future Codex), and it hasn't fired 4 weapons that Shooting Phase... it can fire the weapon. Even if that means that it fires more weapons than it started the game with.

[Nabterayl]

Just to be clear, are you suggesting that "up to X" means, as a matter of grammar, "up to X but no more than one has?" If you are, I disagree with you.

EDIT: I agree with Sly. You seem to be taking a logical implication (if one has X things to do, it follows as a matter of logic that one cannot do more than X things unless one somehow acquires more things) and treating it as a grammatical rule. It is not. "Up to X" does not mean "up to X but no more than one has."

[Magpie]

Okay...let me make it simple.

A flyer has 1 weapon. How many can it fire? 1

A Helldrake has how may weapons that count as shooting attacks? 2 (Vector Strike + Baleflamer) How many can it fire in a turn? 4.

1+1=2 which means you have 2 shooting attacks left, which you can't use as you've run out of weapons.
Vector Strike doesn't subtract from the number of shooting weapons you are equipped with, just the number of attacks you are allowed to make.

If you have 3 actual shooting weapons, doing a vector strike doesn't mean you can only now fire 2 of those weapons in the shooting phase. You can fire all 3 and the Vector Strike and you have used the full amount of 4 shooting attacks you are allowed.

[Caitsidhe]

Basically what has happened is somebody did a Vector Strike on his vehicle, toppled his people out and then killed them with the Baleflamer. :) This seemed so cosmically unfair to him that he spent a good couple of hours trying to figure out some Bizarro World logic to prove it is illegal. :)

[gcsmith]

Basically what has happened is somebody did a Vector Strike on his vehicle, toppled his people out and then killed them with the Baleflamer. :) This seemed so cosmically unfair to him that he spent a good couple of hours trying to figure out some Bizarro World logic to prove it is illegal. :)

Wouldn't it make more sense to try the "Can't target two different units in the same turn logic"? Would still be wrong since vector strike doesn't stop you shooting a different target but would still be a more sensible way to try and stop it.

[Magpie]

Basically what has happened is somebody did a Vector Strike on his vehicle, toppled his people out and then killed them with the Baleflamer. :) This seemed so cosmically unfair to him that he spent a good couple of hours trying to figure out some Bizarro World logic to prove it is illegal. :)

Ah ok. He's out of luck I 'fraid, the VC attack followed by the Baleflamer is totally legit.

[whargoul666]

The question here is poorly worded and as such you guys are answering it poorly. The contention that the OP is making is that at the end of the vector strike rules it states:

A model that made a Vector Strike
in its Movement phase counts as
having already fired one weapon in its
following Shooting phase. However, any
additional weapons it fires that turn can
choose a different target to that of the
Vector Strike.

The OP feels that since he already made an attack in his movement phase, he has already fired his baleflammer/autocannon that turn, and so can not fire it again in the shooting phase. This is where he is wrong as that the vector strike (counting as firing one weapon) is actually a hand to hand attack so the gun is still free to track what it likes. This isn't an unreasonable mistake, but look at the picture that accompanies the helldrake entry in the codex (pg. 52), it illustrates what is happening fairly well (it vector striked (struck?) that flier with its talons in the movement phase, and is now baleflaming it in the shooting phase!).

[Nabterayl]

The OP feels that since he already made an attack in his movement phase, he has already fired his baleflammer/autocannon that turn, and so can not fire it again in the shooting phase.
Yeah, I got that. But it still assumes that "counts as having already fired one weapon" means that it counts as having fired a specific, identifiable weapon that the model is actually armed with. That's not a warranted assumption.

[Magpie]

The question here is poorly worded and as such you guys are answering it poorly. The contention that the OP is making is that at the end of the vector strike rules it states:

A model that made a Vector Strike
in its Movement phase counts as
having already fired one weapon in its
following Shooting phase. However, any
additional weapons it fires that turn can
choose a different target to that of the
Vector Strike.

The OP feels that since he already made an attack in his movement phase, he has already fired his baleflammer/autocannon that turn, and so can not fire it again in the shooting phase. This is where he is wrong as that the vector strike (counting as firing one weapon) is actually a hand to hand attack so the gun is still free to track what it likes. This isn't an unreasonable mistake, but look at the picture that accompanies the helldrake entry in the codex (pg. 52), it illustrates what is happening fairly well (it vector striked (struck?) that flier with its talons in the movement phase, and is now baleflaming it in the shooting phase!).

Fully aware of what the OP is asking and I do not think anyone here has answered it "poorly"

The rule says the Hellchicken "counts as having fired one weapon in its following shooting phase" it does NOT say it "counts as having fired one of its weapons in the following shooting phase"

[RGilbert26]

I agree with the above :)

Either way i wouldnt be surprised if this thread was started by what Caitsidhe said.

[Tynskel]

The logic of the original poster was not bad. The issue is the assumption: does 'count as' firing a weapon replace one of your current weapons.

I think almost everyone would agree that 'count as' firing a weapon does not physically replace one of your available weapons. It replaces one of the weapons that could be fired, up to the maximum allowed.

[Chris*ta]

Basically what has happened is somebody did a Vector Strike on his vehicle, toppled his people out and then killed them with the Baleflamer. :) This seemed so cosmically unfair to him that he spent a good couple of hours trying to figure out some Bizarro World logic to prove it is illegal. :)


Wouldn't it make more sense to try the "Can't target two different units in the same turn logic"? Would still be wrong since vector strike doesn't stop you shooting a different target but would still be a more sensible way to try and stop it.

I'm not convinced that the can't attack two different targets rule would be much of an argument either. Compare the ability to pop a transport in the shooting phase and then assault the contents in the assault phase.

[Defenestratus]

Basically what has happened is somebody did a Vector Strike on his vehicle, toppled his people out and then killed them with the Baleflamer. :) This seemed so cosmically unfair to him that he spent a good couple of hours trying to figure out some Bizarro World logic to prove it is illegal. :)

Indeed.

Projected rules interpretation if I've ever seen it.

[Tynskel]

Indeed.

Projected rules interpretation if I've ever seen it.

I disagree. His logic is sound. It comes from an assumption being made: 1) 'count as' weapon fired replaces an actual weapon.

If this were the case, it must be applied to all situations, and would only be modified by explicit rules.
On the other hand, you can make the assumption: 2) 'count as' weapon fired does not replace an actual weapon.

Again, this would need to be applied everywhere, and an exception would have to be explicitly stated.

1) means you must have a weapon to fire to be able to replace with the 'count as'.
2) means you do not have to have a weapon to fire to be able to replace with 'count as'.

Applying this logic would mean that under 1) a bloodletter could not use the Aegis Defense Line cannon. Nor can they use any stationary weapons. Furthermore, they would not be able to fire the cannon on their chariot.
Oh, that's not good–why have a cannon on their chariot that they cannot fire?

2) means that you do not have to have a physical weapon to be able to fire the weapons. This means that the same bloodletter could use the Aegis Defense Line cannon, and fire the weapons on their chariot, etc.

This reasoning, unless otherwise stated, should be applied to everything in 40k, unless there is an explicit exception. The Helldrake, by this reasoning, is not replacing their gun. It is just 'firing' one of their weapons up to their limit of available weapons.

[RGilbert26]

Either way doesn't matter, the guy is wrong, discussion over.

[Saint_Anger]

Okay guys, been seeing on other forums and especially chaos orientated blogs the notion that a heldrake can perform a vector strike during its zoom move, followed by the baleflamer during the shooting phase. All based on the assumption that zooming flyers can fire 4 weapons...no one is disputing the vector strike counts as having fired one weapon. The assumption is 4 -1 = 3 weapons left to fire, thus you're free to fire the baleflamer as one of those remaining three. BUT -that assumption is wrong in my opinion. The RB says " can fire UP to four of their weapons " (pg 80). That means you can fire UP TO four weapons, but only if you had four or more to fire to begin with! ( my emphasis ) You certainly cannot fire a weapon you don't have. No where -RB, codex, FAQ, etc, does it state the Heldrake suddenly has four weapons to fire, and thus uses one to vector strike instead leaving 3 for later. My argument: the Heldrake when vector striking uses that 1 weapon listed in the codex and thus has no other weapon left in the shooting phase.

I agree with Sly. Your interpretation is wrong. The rulebook just says flyer can fire up to 4 of its weapons, not up to X of its X weapons. If you have problem with the vector strike to blow up transport and get your passengers burnt by baleflamer, use any transport that side armour is 14, and unit that got 2+ armour save or any invulnerable save.

[Daemonette666]

It mentions that it can fire up to 4 of its weapons at "FULL BALLISTIC SKILL" so in effect it could fire more if it had them, but with Snap shots only. Under Vector Strike in the BRB special rules section it does not say it replaces one of the flyers weapons, It says it counts as having already fired a weapon in the shooting phase and since you can shoot up to 4 weapons at full BS, you can therefore fire the Bale Flamer as well.

GW are likely to put out a FAQ on this anyway, and the Helldrake should have been given a second weapon like a TW/L Plasma gun/plasma Cannon profile anyway for a little bit of a points increase.

[RGilbert26]

I just wish the flamer wasnt a ruddy turret, so annoying :(

[Demonus]

Do you play at stores or with friends? If the latter, house rule that it is on a 180 degree front arc, drop the price by 10pts, and call it a day.

[Caitsidhe]

I just wish the flamer wasnt a ruddy turret, so annoying :(

Annoying but that is what the Helldrake was really designed to do, i.e. it is a highly specialized air-to-ground infantry killer. It is mediocre with the cannon (which is why so few take it), and the Vector Strike while useful in AA, it is still really best at cracking open cans so the dragon can eat the tender vittles inside.

I use two Helldrakes in my standard all comer lists below 2000pts because they do the job I need them to do. I won't use three not only because I have other strategic goals beyond slaughtering infantry, but also because against certain opponents three would be so brutal and unfun that it amounts to animal cruelty. Two Helldrakes can be dealt with, albeit with difficulty, but three for certain factions cannot.

Games Workshop intended for the Helldrake to be an actual mechanical dragon. The head can turn any direction, the wings appear to flap, and in theory at least some of that flaming could have been happening as it zoomed over you. There are countless cinematic ways to describe it and that is key. The funny thing about the Helldrake is it is hardest on a Chaos Space Marine player. Our Terminators aren't that great. Most of our 2+ is Obliterators and/or the odd special character. We rely very heavily on Power Armor. As a result I don't like fighting the Helldrakes anymore than any of you do. :)

1. AA is your friend. You should have at least two overlapping forms of AA. I like to use an Aegis w/Quad and my own Helldrakes.
2. Twin-Linked weapons statistically are your pal. There is 1/3 chance any twin-linked shot will hit. I use Obliterators.
3. If you get a shot at the rear, why not take it. Shoot every damn Bolter shot you can. So what if you need a 6 to hit/damage.

Obviously when facing someone with a Helldrake (or any potentially nightmarish flyer) it is better to go second when you are bringing your own birds in. It also pays to reset your immediate goals and position yourself to wait until his/her birds are in. Make him stretch to make those first kills. It does you no good to surge forward and have him cut off valuable units in passing. You will end up being taken apart in detail. Never forget the weird cheese of placement. A restrained, going second army can brick up to make landing areas bad and somewhat (every little bit counts) control where the Helldrake must stop to do its thing. Also, the Helldrake may ignore cover but it does not ignore line of sight. Keep terrain in mind for emergency disembarks or early placement since a solid wall can mean that you cannot be flamed.

I tend to keep a lot of Drop and Pop units in my lists for options. A standard Termicide unit is great utility and when I have to face an opponent also using Helldrakes, I actually start them at the table and manning my Quad Gun. I might as well put the basic CSM unit in reserve and increase the amount of time it lives and the Quad keeps firing.

[ted1138]

I've had this argument with people, and as far as I see, until GW come out and make a clear statement on the issue(something they seem to avoid doing whenever possible), it's never going to be resolved. Both side's points are equally valid, so either you roll a dice to see who's interpretation is used, or you walk away.

PS, it's always worth remembering, if a rule interpretation helps you avoid having to do something you don't want to do, or it helps you get extra effects from that rule, then chances are you're breaking that rule(ie, 'if i read this rule my way, then the rule has no effect on me')...

[Denzark]

Yeah but it is clear. Fliers can fire up to 4 weapons at full BS. VS counts as having fired one weapon. 4-1 = 3 weapons the Heldrake could should, if it had them.

[Tynskel]

You are having trouble reading the rules. You need to look at the assumptions. One of them is flawed, because if it is applied consistently, it prevents all sorts of models from shooting.

[ted1138]

Does Vector striking prevent you from moving Flat-Out? I was once told by an opponent that they could. His argument was something like, 'VS counts as having fired one weapon, but since it didn't actually fire a weapon, it doesn't count as having fired a weapon, thus I can do whatever I want, including firing weapons, or moving flat-out'... :confused:

[rtmaitreya]

Counts as having fired one weapon. Hard to argue with that. It ain't fluff, it's rules. If you fire a weapon, you can't move flat out. Heldrake vector striking counts as having fired a weapon. It did, right there, fired a weapon. Right in the rules. Not fluff text, rules.

[Nabterayl]

Does Vector striking prevent you from moving Flat-Out? I was once told by an opponent that they could. His argument was something like, 'VS counts as having fired one weapon, but since it didn't actually fire a weapon, it doesn't count as having fired a weapon, thus I can do whatever I want, including firing weapons, or moving flat-out'... :confused:
Well, I don't see anything in the rules specifically addressing this question. I'm inclined to say that Vector Strike precludes moving Flat Out, though. The BRB FAQ says:


Q: If a Transport vehicle has a unit embarked upon it, and that unit makes a shooting attack, can the vehicle then move Flat Out in the same Shooting phase? (p78)
A: No.

That suggests to me that the prohibition on moving Flat Out should be relatively broad.

EDIT: Actually, what am I saying? rmatreya is right. It doesn't "count as" firing a weapon for some specific set of purposes. It counts as firing a weapon for all purposes.

[ted1138]

But, if the "counts as" bit only applies to how many weapons it can theoretically fire(as it applies to it's category of vehicle, and not to the weapons it actually has), then he's right, isn't he? :confused:

[Nabterayl]

But, if the "counts as" bit only applies to how many weapons it can theoretically fire(as it applies to it's category of vehicle, and not to the weapons it actually has), then he's right, isn't he? :confused:
Well sure, but why would it? It counts as firing a weapon. When you go to move Flat Out, you must ask yourself, "Have I, up until this point in this turn, fired a weapon?" Vector Strike says yes, you count as having fired a weapon.

What your friend would need to find to prevail is to find a rule that says that Vector Strike only counts as firing a weapon for specific purposes - for instance, you count as having fired a weapon for purposes of determining how many weapons you can fire in the subsequent Shooting phase, or for purposes of determining which unit(s) the vehicle can shoot its remaining weapons at, or for purposes of making cupcakes. I don't think he'd be able to, though. Vector Strike counts as firing a weapon, for any time you need to know whether you've fired a weapon.

[Caitsidhe]

My question is does this Flat Out question even matter? Since I've been playing 6th Edition I have never once gone Flat Out or had an opponent go Flat Out with a Flier.

[Magpie]

Well, I don't see anything in the rules specifically addressing this question. I'm inclined to say that Vector Strike precludes moving Flat Out, though. The BRB FAQ says:


Q: If a Transport vehicle has a unit embarked upon it, and that unit makes a shooting attack, can the vehicle then move Flat Out in the same Shooting phase? (p78)
A: No.

That suggests to me that the prohibition on moving Flat Out should be relatively broad.

EDIT: Actually, what am I saying? rmatreya is right. It doesn't "count as" firing a weapon for some specific set of purposes. It counts as firing a weapon for all purposes.

The key there is "in the same shooting phase". Vector Strike occurs in the movement phase.

The rules for flat out do not say "a vehicle may move flat out if it hasn't fired a weapon", it says it "may move flat out instead of firing a weapon". So really it is a choice of actions fire or move, what has gone on in the previous phase doesn't come into it.

[Nabterayl]

Yeah, the transport thing is not a good precedent. But I don't really see much of a way around, "A model that made a Vector Strike in its Movement phase counts as having already fired one weapon in its following Shooting phase."

[ted1138]

So, if you're allowed to VS and fire a weapon, then surely you can choose to not fire, and move flat-out instead?

[Tynskel]

you are missing the point: vector strike means that you have fired a weapon in the shooting phase.

Think of it this way, you can only go so fast and be able to grab things with your 'talons'. Just watch videos of falcons attacking other airborne birds, or ground targets. They always slow down right before the hit.

[Caitsidhe]

Can someone please tell me when going Flat Out would even be a tactically sound call for a Helldrake? The only thing I can think of is if someone wants to just come in Vector Strike and then go off the far side board edge. That would mean giving up a Balefire attack, even if it worked. I happen to agree with those who say you can Vector Strike and go Flat Out, but I'm honestly not seeing any tactical advantage in doing so.

[Tynskel]

you can't 'happen' to agree with vector strike and go flat out. The rules are explicit.

[Magpie]

One can happen to do anything they want.
I'm glad you find the rules so clear, for others it is not so. There are good cases for either interpretation.

I am in the camp that says having already fired a weapon in the movement phase doesn't preclude you from choosing the flat out option in the shooting phase.
You count as having fired one but can still fire the others, if it were a strict "you've already fired this phase" then you can't do anything else.

As you still have a choice to fire the other weapons and in the shooting phase you have the choice between firing or moving, it stands to reason that you can forgo that firing for the sake of flat outing as normal.

[Caitsidhe]

you can't 'happen' to agree with vector strike and go flat out. The rules are explicit.

Two things...

1. I can "happen" to agree or disagree with anything I want. My agreement or disagreement doesn't have to jive with fact. :)

2. The rule says: "I vehicle can elect to move flat out instead of firing in the SHOOTING PHASE, immediately moving up to....". Do you see why I quoted that? Vector Strike says you are treated as firing a weapon. It does not say anything about which phase it happened in. The rule involving Flat Out is phase specific. Thus, since the weapon considered to have been fired happened in a phase OTHER than the shooting phase, the RAW indicates that for now you can Vector Strike and go Flat Out.

All that being said, I see little value in ever going Flat Out with a Helldrake short of very weird circumstance. I also happen to agree that a Faq may change it to say RAI that you can't stop to savage a unit and then go Flat out. :) Be careful Tynskel. I'm always very specific, and I always have a good reason for saying things.

[Nabterayl]

Vector Strike says you are treated as firing a weapon. It does not say anything about which phase it happened in.
Sure it does. As page 43 says, "A model that made a Vector Strike in its Movement phase counts as having already fired one weapon in its following Shooting phase."

To my mind, this situation is analogous to somebody who fires one of their vehicle's multiple weapons during the Shooting phase, and declares a Flat Out move on the grounds that the vehicle is foregoing shooting its other weapons. When you declare a Flat Out move, you ask yourself, "Have I fired one or more weapons this Shooting phase?" If the answer is yes, then you cannot go Flat Out. Vector Strike certainly reads to me like it makes the answer yes.

[Tynskel]

Two things...

1. I can "happen" to agree or disagree with anything I want. My agreement or disagreement doesn't have to jive with fact. :)

2. The rule says: "I vehicle can elect to move flat out instead of firing in the SHOOTING PHASE, immediately moving up to....". Do you see why I quoted that? Vector Strike says you are treated as firing a weapon. It does not say anything about which phase it happened in. The rule involving Flat Out is phase specific. Thus, since the weapon considered to have been fired happened in a phase OTHER than the shooting phase, the RAW indicates that for now you can Vector Strike and go Flat Out.

All that being said, I see little value in ever going Flat Out with a Helldrake short of very weird circumstance. I also happen to agree that a Faq may change it to say RAI that you can't stop to savage a unit and then go Flat out. :) Be careful Tynskel. I'm always very specific, and I always have a good reason for saying things.

No, you can't 'happen' to agree with stuff. You can justify your position, which you haven't, because you count as shooting if you vector strike.

So your 'happen' to agree with something is meaningless. I 'happen' to think the sun is 'blue'. It just so 'happens' that I am wrong.

[Caitsidhe]

Sure it does. As page 43 says, "A model that made a Vector Strike in its Movement phase counts as having already fired one weapon in its following Shooting phase."

To my mind, this situation is analogous to somebody who fires one of their vehicle's multiple weapons during the Shooting phase, and declares a Flat Out move on the grounds that the vehicle is foregoing shooting its other weapons. When you declare a Flat Out move, you ask yourself, "Have I fired one or more weapons this Shooting phase?" If the answer is yes, then you cannot go Flat Out. Vector Strike certainly reads to me like it makes the answer yes.

Then yes, Tynskel is quite correct. I must eat crow. That will teach me not to go directly to the book and double check. I make notes to myself and use them for fast reference. Foolishly I had left off that part, and thus assumed it wasn't there. The rule is quite explicit and you cannot Vector Strike and go Flat Out. I'm still not even sure WHY someone would want to do this anyway?

[Caitsidhe]

No, you can't 'happen' to agree with stuff. You can justify your position, which you haven't, because you count as shooting if you vector strike.

So your 'happen' to agree with something is meaningless. I 'happen' to think the sun is 'blue'. It just so 'happens' that I am wrong.

Again, whether or not someone agrees or disagrees with something doesn't have anything to do with accuracy (as proven already by this case). Are you now trying to argue about whether or not someone has the right to be wrong? :D

[Tynskel]

Again, whether or not someone agrees or disagrees with something doesn't have anything to do with accuracy (as proven already by this case). Are you now trying to argue about whether or not someone has the right to be wrong? :D

No, you don't have the right to be wrong. In the case of 40k, if you play wrong, you are playing 'house rules', and you should state that you are doing so.

[Caitsidhe]

No, you don't have the right to be wrong. In the case of 40k, if you play wrong, you are playing 'house rules', and you should state that you are doing so.

No. In this it is a matter of me being mistaken, making a fool of myself, and admitting to the mistake. What part of "you were right" did you not get? :D Nobody is playing this rule wrong because NOBODY, at least not in my META has ever done such a silly thing as go Flat Out with a Helldrake. I'm going to assume you haven't had your coffee or I'm getting some anger transference here. Ease back there turbo... learn to win graciously. :)

[Magpie]

Sure it does. As page 43 says, "A model that made a Vector Strike in its Movement phase counts as having already fired one weapon in its following Shooting phase."

To my mind, this situation is analogous to somebody who fires one of their vehicle's multiple weapons during the Shooting phase, and declares a Flat Out move on the grounds that the vehicle is foregoing shooting its other weapons. When you declare a Flat Out move, you ask yourself, "Have I fired one or more weapons this Shooting phase?" If the answer is yes, then you cannot go Flat Out. Vector Strike certainly reads to me like it makes the answer yes.

I don't see it like that. Having already fired a weapon or not isn't the test. Rather you simply elect to fire or move.

As you still have the ability to fire I can't see why you can't flat out.

[Tynskel]

you have already elected to fire by using Vector Strike.

[Kevlarshark]

Sure it does. As page 43 says, "A model that made a Vector Strike in its Movement phase counts as having already fired one weapon in its following Shooting phase."

To my mind, this situation is analogous to somebody who fires one of their vehicle's multiple weapons during the Shooting phase, and declares a Flat Out move on the grounds that the vehicle is foregoing shooting its other weapons. When you declare a Flat Out move, you ask yourself, "Have I fired one or more weapons this Shooting phase?" If the answer is yes, then you cannot go Flat Out. Vector Strike certainly reads to me like it makes the answer yes.

Indeed, I would draw a parallel with the Flying Monstrous Creature rules (because they are the only other things that use vector strike). FMCs cannot run and vector strike in the same turn, because Vector strike counts as using a weapon in the following shooting phase...So the Vehicle equivalent of running (flat out) should follow a similar system. Even Tanks cannot flat out on the same turn they tank shock.

So my current reading under RAW is no flat out after vector strike.

Chariots however, do seem to be able to make sweep attacks and still flat out/shoot normally with no extra penalties (besides those for moving and firing with vehicles) in the shooting phase.
So if it comes to a FAQ there is a slight possibility GW could go completely against RAW.

[Magpie]

Indeed, I would draw a parallel with the Flying Monstrous Creature rules (because they are the only other things that use vector strike). FMCs cannot run and vector strike in the same turn, because Vector strike counts as using a weapon in the following shooting phase...So the Vehicle equivalent of running (flat out) should follow a similar system. Even Tanks cannot flat out on the same turn they tank shock.

So my current reading under RAW is no flat out after vector strike.

Chariots however, do seem to be able to make sweep attacks and still flat out/shoot normally with no extra penalties (besides those for moving and firing with vehicles) in the shooting phase.
So if it comes to a FAQ there is a slight possibility GW could go completely against RAW.

The rules for running tho' are written in the same context, that it is a choice between running or firing. The Vector strike doesn't preclude firing.

Tank shock is a particular type of movement that specifically prohibits flat out so I don't really see that gives us much to go on in regards of the Vector Strike.

[Kevlarshark]

The rules for running tho' are written in the same context, that it is a choice between running or firing. The Vector strike doesn't preclude firing.

Tank shock is a particular type of movement that specifically prohibits flat out so I don't really see that gives us much to go on in regards of the Vector Strike.

You seem to be implying that if a vehicle can shoot more than one weapon (say two like fast vehicles moving at cruising speed), that it can elect shoot one and then opt to use its other shooting attack to move flat out?

[Magpie]

You seem to be implying that if a vehicle can shoot more than one weapon (say two like fast vehicles moving at cruising speed), that it can elect shoot one and then opt to use its other shooting attack to move flat out?

No because once you actually fire a weapon in the shooting phase you can't fire another, there is no "other shooting attack" any more.

The rules for Power of the Machine Spirit seems to support this by specifically excluding going flat out.

[Tynskel]

but you have fired a weapon in the shooting phase: vector strike counts as firing a weapon.

[Magpie]

but you have fired a weapon in the shooting phase: vector strike counts as firing a weapon.

You still have the option of fire or move. Having already fired one isn't a test for being able to flat out or run, you only have to be in the position of being able to shoot.
Nothing in the run or flat out rules say that you cannot do either if you have already fired a weapon, only that you have the choice to fire or move. "choose to run instead of firing" and "move Flat Out instead of firing"

That's why PotMS specifically excludes using it if you want to flat out, other wise by RAW you could flat out and then use PotMS to shoot (if you want to be a douche).

[Tynskel]

??
your logic is weird.

You have fired a weapon in the shooting phase, because vector strike states that you have count as using a weapon in the shooting phase.

[Magpie]

??
your logic is weird.

You have fired a weapon in the shooting phase, because vector strike states that you have count as using a weapon in the shooting phase.

You're making the mistake of thinking that firing a weapon in the shooting phase automatically stops you from going flat out, it doesn't.

If you have the ability to shoot in the shooting phase then you have the ability to choose between shooting or moving, despite having "already fired one weapon" you still have the ability to make a shooting attack. The rules for flat out and run say that you can choose to give up this shooting and move.

[Tynskel]

How can you give something up if you have already used one of the options?

You have already begun to fire by using vector strike. You can choose not to fire additional weapons.

However, you cannot choose to fire 1 weapon, AND go flat out.

[Magpie]

Ah I see where you're getting confused.
Forget it being the number of weapons you can fire, it isn't that, it is the number of firing attacks you can make.
All units can only make one attack in the shooting phase (except in special cases) and they can, if they wish, forgo that to move.

The Helldrake's ability to make a shooting attack in the shooting phase has not been affected beyond the number of weapons it can fire, it still has it's one shooting attack which it can use to fire 1 to 3 weapons (instead of the usual 4) OR it can choose to give up that shooting attack go flat out.

[Tynskel]

no, it isn't about number of weapons you can fire. It is about whether or not you have fired a weapon.

Vectored Strike counts as firing 1 weapon. i.e. you have fired. You cannot undo firing.

the qualifier for Flat Out (or run) is whether or not you have fired. Not whether or not you have extra weapons to fire.

[Magpie]

no, it isn't about number of weapons you can fire. It is about whether or not you have fired a weapon.

Vectored Strike counts as firing 1 weapon. i.e. you have fired. You cannot undo firing.

the qualifier for Flat Out (or run) is whether or not you have fired. Not whether or not you have extra weapons to fire.

Nothing in the flat out rule says that if you've already fired you can't flat out.
It simply says in the shooting phase you can choose to fire or move.

If still have the ability to fire in the shooting phase, you can fire or you can move flat out and nothing prohibits that.

[Tynskel]

Oh my. You have already chosen to fire. You don't get to choose to fire again. You are not firing twice. The vectored strike counts as firing 1 of the available weapons. So you have chosen to fire in the shooting phase.

Hence why I said, you have already fired. You have already made the conscious decision to fire your weapons. You cannot undo firing.

Your viewpoint on the rules is very skewed. What you are implying is that I could then fire additional weapons. Then decide, well, I have only fire some weapons, so I can flat out now.

[Magpie]

If it were a blanket "you have already fired" then you'd not be able to fire at all, a the unit can only make one shooting attack in the shooting phase and all weapons must fire at the same target. The Vector Strike rule makes it very clear this is not the case.

You can fire and you can fire at any eligible target, the only thing you can't do is fire 4 weapons.
You have the ability to fire in the Shooting Phase and that ability can be given up to go flat out, simple as that.

If you think that means I am saying you can then fire additional weapons then perhaps I am explaining it badly and you'd be better off reading the rules themselves a bit more carefully and then you may understand.

[Tynskel]

If it were a blanket "you have already fired" then you'd not be able to fire at all, a the unit can only make one shooting attack in the shooting phase and all weapons must fire at the same target. The Vector Strike rule makes it very clear this is not the case.

You can fire and you can fire at any eligible target, the only thing you can't do is fire 4 weapons.
You have the ability to fire in the Shooting Phase and that ability can be given up to go flat out, simple as that.

If you think that means I am saying you can then fire additional weapons then perhaps I am explaining it badly and you'd be better off reading the rules themselves a bit more carefully and then you may understand.

All the vector strike rule is an exception to the normal firing rules. However, it still means you have fired. There is no rule in the vector strike that states that you have not fired. It is quite explicit: it counts as one of your weapons being fired. You are not firing twice.

When you activate the shooting on the helldrake, you don't all of the sudden go from firing 0 weapons to firing 2 weapons. You are going from firing 1 automatically (vector strike) to 2 weapons.

[Magpie]

All the vector strike rule is an exception to the normal firing rules. However, it still means you have fired. There is no rule in the vector strike that states that you have not fired. It is quite explicit: it counts as one of your weapons being fired. You are not firing twice.

Nothing in the rules supports that. I given you the explanation and supported it with other examples. You've only offered opinion. Unless you can find some supporting evidence I don't see you have a case.

[Power Klawz]

Magpie you are so obviously wrong and this thread is incredibly painful to read.

[daboarder]

I really really wish people stopped trying to argue "counts as" does not equal "actually doing that"

When GW writes "counts as" they mean use all the rules and mechanics associated with the action. Every time this idiot interpretation gets raised it is at some point FAQ's.

[Magpie]

So why does the rule book not actually say you can't go flat out, when for a Bombing run it does, despite being a similar situation?

Why put it in the rule when a specific prohibition isn't needed Why put it in Bomb Run and PotMS but not Vector Strike?

Because with VS you can go flat out and with Bomb Run and PotMS you can't that's why.

[Tynskel]

So why does the rule book not actually say you can't go flat out, when for a Bombing run it does, despite being a similar situation?

Why put it in the rule when a specific prohibition isn't needed Why put it in Bomb Run and PotMS but not Vector Strike?

Because with VS you can go flat out and with Bomb Run and PotMS you can't that's why.

Those are just rules clarifications. In every case, you cannot go flat out whether you have 'pretended' to fire or not. In every case, a weapon HAS been fired. Power of the Machine Spirit allows you to override rules to fire more weapons, hence why it is specifically is stated not to be used with flat out.


I don't know what kinda crack you are smoking- the rulebook explicitly states that you have fired a weapon if you use vector strike. Period. Flat Out specifically states you cannot perform this action if you shoot. Ergo, you cannot vector strike and go flat out.

[DarkLink]

So why does the rule book not actually say you can't go flat out, when for a Bombing run it does, despite being a similar situation?

Why put it in the rule when a specific prohibition isn't needed Why put it in Bomb Run and PotMS but not Vector Strike?

Because this is GW. There's not really a reason. It also doesn't change the fact that the rules prohibit what you're talking about.



Because with VS you can go flat out and with Bomb Run and PotMS you can't that's why.

Or because GW likes to include extra unnecessary text and clarifications in their rules, but just because the prohibition isn't directly referred to locally doesn't mean it doesn't still exist globally.

[daboarder]

Actually I wanted to clarify my position

the rule states


A vehicle can elect to move Flat out instead of firing in the
Shooting phase, immediatelv moving up to 6"; this move triggers
dangerous Terrain tests as normal. A Tank cannot move Flat out
in the same turn that it performs a Tank Shock.

Vector strike, while counting as firing a weapon, counts as firing a weapon in the movement phase. As such it is clear that a Heldrake can vector strike and then flat out, and a FMC can vector strike and run....

I mean you wouldn't expect casualties from vector strike to count towards the 25% in the shooting phase just because its a shooting attack would you?

note: take bladevanes as another example, screamers too.

[DarkLink]

I haven't really read the rules either, I just wanted to say that if you're going to argue this you'll probably want to take daboarder's approach, instead of the vague "it doesn't say you can't" thing.

[Kevlarshark]

Actually I wanted to clarify my position

the rule states



Vector strike, while counting as firing a weapon, counts as firing a weapon in the movement phase. As such it is clear that a Heldrake can vector strike and then flat out, and a FMC can vector strike and run....

I mean you wouldn't expect casualties from vector strike to count towards the 25% in the shooting phase just because its a shooting attack would you?

note: take bladevanes as another example, screamers too.

I actually think you have misquoted the bit about "counts as fireing a weapon in the movement phase" Vector strike "counts as fireing a weapon in the preceding shooting phase". Even though the attack takes place during the movement phase.

[daboarder]

I actually think you have misquoted the bit about "counts as fireing a weapon in the movement phase" Vector strike "counts as fireing a weapon in the preceding shooting phase". Even though the attack takes place during the movement phase.


So it does,


A model that made a Vector Strike
in its Movement phase counts as
having already fired one weapon in its
following Shooting phase. However, any
additional weapons it fires that turn can
choose a different target to that of the
Vector Strike.

In that case I rescind my previous stance and believe it is pretty cut and dry that you cannot VS and FO. You are "counting as" shooting a weapon in the shooting phase.

[ted1138]

From What I've picked up here, there are two options, either you apply the "counts as" to the number of weapons the category of model can fire per turn, thus allowing it to still fire or move flat out, or, you apply the "counts as" to the weapons on the model, in which case you can't fire or move Flat-Out. I can't see how you can mix'n'match them without breaking the rule in some way...

[Magpie]

In that case I rescind my previous stance and believe it is pretty cut and dry that you cannot VS and FO. You are "counting as" shooting a weapon in the shooting phase.

The only thing with that is that having already fired a weapon in the shooting phase doesn't matter, so long as you are able to fire in the shooting phase you can give that shooting attack up and move.

The RULE for flat out says without reservation that in the shooting phase you can move instead of firing, having previously fired does not come into it. If a unit has the ability to make two shooting attacks in the shooting phase it can forgo one of them to move. I don't know of any unit that can make two shooting attacks however outside of Vector Strike.

So on one hand we have the flat out rule that says "give up shooting to move" and the Vector Strike rule that says "attack in the movement phase and you can still make a shooting attack in the shooting phase but with one less weapon"

On the other hand we have a belief that somehow having already made one "counts as" shooting attack in the shooting phase you can't then sacrifice the subsequent shooting attack for movement, despite nothing in the rules saying this but they do say quite the opposite. We also explain away the differences with other rules that are very similar as "it's GW"

One case is supported by the rules in the rulebook the other by ........ I don't know what, certainly nothing you can give a page reference for.

[daboarder]

The only thing with that is that having already fired a weapon in the shooting phase doesn't matter, so long as you are able to fire in the shooting phase you can give that shooting attack up and move.

The RULE for flat out says without reservation that in the shooting phase you can move instead of firing, having previously fired does not come into it. If a unit has the ability to make two shooting attacks in the shooting phase it can forgo one of them to move. I don't know of any unit that can make two shooting attacks however outside of Vector Strike.

So on one hand we have the flat out rule that says "give up shooting to move" and the Vector Strike rule that says "attack in the movement phase and you can still make a shooting attack in the shooting phase but with one less weapon"

On the other hand we have a belief that somehow having already made one "counts as" shooting attack in the shooting phase you can't then sacrifice the subsequent shooting attack for movement, despite nothing in the rules saying this but they do say quite the opposite. We also explain away the differences with other rules that are very similar as "it's GW"

One case is supported by the rules in the rulebook the other by ........ I don't know what, certainly nothing you can give a page reference for.

Except vector strike says that you "counts as having already fired a weapon in the following shooting phase"

You cannot give up and action that you have already taken, has been fully resolved and potentially had casualties removed from.

Your entire premise is wrong, vector strike counts as firing a weapon, if you may only fire two weapons (like say a flying hive tyrant) and you vector strike a unit, you do not have the option to fire BOTH of those weapons as you have already fired one of them

And this?


If a unit has the ability to make two shooting attacks in the shooting phase it can forgo one of them to move.

I don't even know where to start responding to this....NO YOU DO NOT GET TO FIRE 1 OF YOUR TWO WEAPONS AND STILL RUN....you forgo shooting to run/flat out you forgo ALL shooting, it has no limiter and is an absolute.

[Magpie]

Except vector strike says that you "counts as having already fired a weapon in the following shooting phase"

Page 72
"A vehicle can elect to move Flat Out instead of firing in the Shooting phase....."
Nothing further is mentioned, nothing about prior actions nor ALL shooting. Your right there is no limiter, if it can fire it can flat out.

Can a unit fire in the shooting phase after making a Vector Strike ? YES

So instead of firing it can move flat out.

[daboarder]

Page 72
"A vehicle can elect to move Flat Out instead of firing in the Shooting phase....."
Nothing further is mentioned, nothing about prior actions nor ALL shooting. Your right there is no limiter, if it can fire it can flat out.

Can a unit fire in the shooting phase after making a Vector Strike ? YES

So instead of firing it can move flat out.


sigh, Ok I'll try again if you fire a weapon then, did you shoot? at all? ever?

hint: you did!

therefore how can you complete and action that can only be done "instead of shooting"

[Magpie]

and we're done here people. Let it die as Magpie just does not seem to get the core concept behind the rules.

This from a guy who thinks I'm talking about an ability to fire two weapons.

[daboarder]

This from a guy who thinks I'm talking about an ability to fire two weapons.

yeah...I already quoted where you were...sooooooooo

[Magpie]

yeah...I already quoted where you were...sooooooooo

You mean this?

"If a unit has the ability to make two shooting attacks in the shooting phase it can forgo one of them to move."

Perhaps you'd best go and study up on how "two shooting attacks" is a fundamentally different concept to "firing two weapons" ?

[Learn2Eel]

I've been playing it (falsely) that you could move flat out/run after vector striking, though as Caitsidhe mentioned earlier, it is rare that one would need to do that - specifically in the case of the Heldrake. Thanks for the clarification guys.

[Kevlarshark]

Page 72
"A vehicle can elect to move Flat Out instead of firing in the Shooting phase....."
Nothing further is mentioned, nothing about prior actions nor ALL shooting. Your right there is no limiter, if it can fire it can flat out.

Can a unit fire in the shooting phase after making a Vector Strike ? YES

So instead of firing it can move flat out.

It took me a really long time to work out your logic, but I think I get what you are saying... The dispute is more about the word/term "fireing". Is Moving Flat out with the 'drake like running where you forego all shooting/fireing or is it more like an 'action' where you can choose to fire or run or both (if you have enough actions)?

By mixing the flying MC rules and the Flyer rules GW have really got everyone in a muddle.

You do seem to be saying its possible to vectorstrike with one of the drakes 4 shots, shoot with another and then flat out with shot 3 and still have one left over?

The problem is that nothing else in 40k works like this.

[Denzark]

Can someone please tell me when going Flat Out would even be a tactically sound call for a Helldrake? The only thing I can think of is if someone wants to just come in Vector Strike and then go off the far side board edge. That would mean giving up a Balefire attack, even if it worked. I happen to agree with those who say you can Vector Strike and go Flat Out, but I'm honestly not seeing any tactical advantage in doing so.


When you are playing a long table deployment and you can't VS or BF an opponent 1st turn of entry.

[Caitsidhe]

When you are playing a long table deployment and you can't VS or BF an opponent 1st turn of entry.

Hammer & Anvil? You might not be able to Vector Strike but there still isn't much of a reason to go Flat Out. The normal 36" puts you at the half way point able to hit ANY point on the opposing side on your next turn, i.e. options. Going FLat Out moves you in closer and narrows your effect directional bubble and how many points on that remaining half of the board you can hit. There isn't any value in it. It just increases the chance someone can move forward to get an aft shot at you.

This is kind of why I think of it as a temptest in a teapot. The only reason to ever go Flat Out is if you want OFF the board and you can generally manage that most of the time anyway just by turning the right direction. Flat Out with a Helldrake is just... well... silly.

*And you can Vector Strike someone if they infiltrated far enough forward for you. ;)

[ted1138]

If a zooming flyer has five weapons, how many can it use in the shooting phase after it has performed a vector strike?

[Nabterayl]

Three.

[Tynskel]

Hammer & Anvil? You might not be able to Vector Strike but there still isn't much of a reason to go Flat Out. The normal 36" puts you at the half way point able to hit ANY point on the opposing side on your next turn, i.e. options. Going FLat Out moves you in closer and narrows your effect directional bubble and how many points on that remaining half of the board you can hit. There isn't any value in it. It just increases the chance someone can move forward to get an aft shot at you.

This is kind of why I think of it as a temptest in a teapot. The only reason to ever go Flat Out is if you want OFF the board and you can generally manage that most of the time anyway just by turning the right direction. Flat Out with a Helldrake is just... well... silly.

*And you can Vector Strike someone if they infiltrated far enough forward for you. ;)

When it comes down to it, Flat Out is for Apocalypse, where the board is large enough where you would want to reposition.

[Magpie]

You do seem to be saying its possible to vectorstrike with one of the drakes 4 shots, shoot with another and then flat out with shot 3 and still have one left over?

No what I am saying is that you can Vector Strike and then in the Shooting Phase fire 1 to 3 of your weapons in a single shooting attack OR forgo that shooting attack and go flat out.

[Tynskel]

see, that doesn't make sense. You have already chosen to fire by using Vector Strike, because the weapon states that it counts as firing a weapon in the shooting phase.

[Magpie]

see, that doesn't make sense. You have already chosen to fire by using Vector Strike, because the weapon states that it counts as firing a weapon in the shooting phase.

But you can still make another shooting attack or not as you see fit.

The rule for flat out says you can, instead of firing, go flat out.
The rule doesn't say "a unit that has not already fired can, instead of firing, go flat out"

[daboarder]

But you can still make another shooting attack or not as you see fit.

The rule for flat out says you can, instead of firing, go flat out.
The rule doesn't say "a unit that has not already fired can, instead of firing, go flat out"

Alright. We all agree vector strike counts as firing a weapon, so lets take it out of the equation for now.

A storm raven with hurrican bolters.

Has 4 guns and 4 missiles, may fire 4 weapons a turn. (5 with PotMS)

Magpie is I think, arguing that you can fire 3 of those weapons and then forgoe firing the 4th in order to flat out.

Except, then you are shooting, so how can you "give up shooting" and still shoot?

[Tynskel]

But you can still make another shooting attack or not as you see fit.

The rule for flat out says you can, instead of firing, go flat out.
The rule doesn't say "a unit that has not already fired can, instead of firing, go flat out"

This is what I do not understand. Where does it say you are making a 'second shooting attack'. There is nothing in the text that states this. All the text states is that you may target something other than the Vector Strike target. Which is very similar wording to Power of the Machine Spirit. You are not making a second attack with Power of the Machine Spirit.

Furthermore, how is making your first attack not count as shooting?

[Magpie]

This is what I do not understand. Where does it say you are making a 'second shooting attack'. There is nothing in the text that states this. All the text states is that you may target something other than the Vector Strike target. Which is very similar wording to Power of the Machine Spirit. You are not making a second attack with Power of the Machine Spirit.

Furthermore, how is making your first attack not count as shooting?

There doesn't need to be anything stated in the text. You have fired at one target then a phase later you can make a another attack that is in no way related to the first other than the first having "used up" a weapon.

PotMS is the same. You have made one shooting attack with all of your other weapons and PotMS allows you to make another at a different target, if that isn't two shooting attacks what is it?

The first attack does count as shooting but that has no bearing on the ability to go flat out.

[daboarder]

There doesn't need to be anything stated in the text. You have fired at one target then a phase later you can make a another attack that is in not way related to the first other than the first having "used up" a weapon.

PotMS is the same. You have made one shooting attack with all of your other weapons and PotMS allows you to make another at a different target, if that isn't two shooting attacks what is it?

The first attack does count as shooting but that has no bearing on the ability to go flat out.

Except...you can't....which is why Vector strike requires the exception that allows you to target another unit.

both VS and PotMS are not additional shooting attacks, they are components of the same shooting attack that can merely target a different unit.

As with all shooting it occurs simultaneously, you cannot fire a LR at a transport, kill it and then use PotMS to fire at the unit inside.

[Tynskel]

There is only one model that I am aware of that can shoot twice: The Riptide. Even then, it really doesn't fire twice (i.e. it cannot target a new unit), really all it does is double the output of the weapons.

There is nothing in the rulebook that implies that the Vector Strike is a separate attack, distinct from the shooting phase. Everything that is implied is that it is a shooting phase attack, but due to mechanics of the game, it must occur in the movement phase.

[Magpie]

There is nothing in the rulebook that implies that the Vector Strike is a separate attack

The process occurring in a different phase at a different target with different weapons or optionally not at all, is a pretty big implication?

You are right tho' there are very few units that can make two shooting attacks in a turn. PotMS is one, Vector Strike and Bombing Run are the others that I know of.

The Riptide as you say is just allowing a doubling of the shots, not attacks.

[daboarder]

The process occurring in a different phase at a different target with different weapons or optionally not at all, is a pretty big implication?

You are right tho' there are very few units that can make two shooting attacks in a turn. PotMS is one, Vector Strike and Bombing Run are the others that I know of.

The Riptide as you say is just allowing a doubling of the shots, not attacks.


In a turn in which the vehicle neither moves Flat Out nor uses smoke
launchers, the vehicle can fire one more
weapon at its full Ballistic Skill than
normally permitted. In addition, this
weapon can be fired at a different target
unit to any other weapons, subject to the
normal rules for shooting.

Not an additional attack...


A model that made a Vector Strike
in its Movement phase counts as
having already fired one weapon in its
following Shooting phase. However, any
additional weapons it fires that turn can
choose a different target to that of the
Vector Strike

Not an additional attack...


A flyer can drop up to one bomb in its Movement phase. If it does
so, it counts as having already fired one weapon in its following
Shooting phase, however, any additional weapons it fires that
turn can choose a different target to that of the bomb.

Not an additional attack....

your points were?

[Magpie]

You do realise all of your "telling quotes" ALL contain the either words "fire one more" or "additional" ?

If shooting a weapon at one target is a shooting attack what can firing an additional weapon at a different target possibly be ?

[daboarder]

the same shooting attack simply targeting a different target.

Look this is ridiculous your constantly BSing your argument around just to twist and destroy the clear wording of the rules to fit your own delusions, enjoy your game.

[Magpie]

"It's the same but different" ? Master stroke.

[Tynskel]

"It's the same but different" ? Master stroke.

These additional attacks are not different, they are all part of the same fire mechanism. There is nothing in the rulebook that states that when you are shooting that the attacks are independent. In fact, it goes to say that 'all shooting happens at the same time'. Vector Strike rules are a part of this, and the execution is only such that because of the way the game is designed, you roll the dice in the movement phase, but the act of the shot is in the shooting phase.

The only rulebook that exists that has exactly what you are talking about is apocalypse. There it explicitly states that Super Heavies have separate attacks. Furthermore, on certain models, they can forgo SOME shooting, and do both a run and shoot move, and that is because the weapons are completely independent of each other.

[Learn2Eel]

http://replygif.net/i/767.gif

[ted1138]

I find it hard to see how a model with only one weapon can "count as" having fired one weapon and still get to fire that weapon. All I hear is 'it counts as firing, but it didn't fire, so can still fire, but it can't FO because it counts as fired'. You would need a flyer to have 4 or more weapons before this rule would have an effect(and the rule is there to have an effect). The reason people are interpreting the VS rule the way they are is purely to avoid losing the Heldrakes shooting attack. If the Heldrake had two weapons instead of one this probably wouldn't have ever come up...

[daboarder]

I find it hard to see how a model with only one weapon can "count as" having fired one weapon and still get to fire that weapon. All I hear is 'it counts as firing, but it didn't fire, so can still fire, but it can't FO because it counts as fired'. You would need a flyer to have 4 or more weapons before this rule would have an effect(and the rule is there to have an effect). The reason people are interpreting the VS rule the way they are is purely to avoid losing the Heldrakes shooting attack. If the Heldrake had two weapons instead of one this probably wouldn't have ever come up...

Except it hasn't "counted as firing ITS weapon" its fire one of up to 4 weapons it MAY fire.

Look you and magpie can try twist the rules all you want, at the end of the day I feel sorry for the people you play against.

Look lets try this again.


A model that made a Vector Strike
in its Movement phase counts as
having already fired one weapon in its
following Shooting phase. However, any
additional weapons it fires that turn can
choose a different target to that of the
Vector Strike

So it has fired one weapon, it may then fire up to 3 more weapons as per the flier rules.

Its doesn't replace firing a weapon, its not instead of firing one of its weapons, it is merely firing ONE weapon, of which it can fire up to 4

[ted1138]

Except it hasn't "counted as firing ITS weapon" its fire one of up to 4 weapons it MAY fire.

Look you and magpie can try twist the rules all you want, at the end of the day I feel sorry for the people you play against.

Look lets try this again.



So it has fired one weapon, it may then fire up to 3 more weapons as per the flier rules.

Its doesn't replace firing a weapon, its not instead of firing one of its weapons, it is merely firing ONE weapon, of which it can fire up to 4



You're the one twisting the rules to avoid the effects of those rules. If the Heldrake had two weapons, one would "count as" having been fired, and the other would be able to fire(at the same target, or a different one). The "counts as" applies to the weapons on the model, not to the category of the model, doing that is twisting the rules...

[daboarder]

You're the one twisting the rules to avoid the effects of those rules. If the Heldrake had two weapons, one would "count as" having been fired, and the other would be able to fire(at the same target, or a different one). The "counts as" applies to the weapons on the model, not to the category of the model, doing that is twisting the rules...

Can I have whatever your smoking?

Must be melting marines right?

[ted1138]

Can I have whatever your[sic] smoking?

Must be melting marines right?

That's coffee you're smelling, you should wake up and try some... ;)

[Magpie]

You're the one twisting the rules to avoid the effects of those rules. If the Heldrake had two weapons, one would "count as" having been fired, and the other would be able to fire(at the same target, or a different one). The "counts as" applies to the weapons on the model, not to the category of the model, doing that is twisting the rules...

No that's not quite right.

All flyers have the ability to fire 4 weapons, regardless of how many weapons they actually have.

A Helldrake, armed with a single weapon can actually make 2 shooting attacks, one of those attacks is a Vector Strike, the other attack is with the Baleflamer.

Making a Vector Strike attack means that you have "used up" one of the 4 weapons you are allowed to fire, that only becomes an issue when you have more than 4 actual weapons.


Look you and magpie can try twist the rules all you want, at the end of the day I feel sorry for the people you play against.

I'll thank you to keep you comments to the subject at hand and not try and use insults to make your point.

[Magpie]

These additional attacks are not different, they are all part of the same fire mechanism. There is nothing in the rulebook that states that when you are shooting that the attacks are independent. In fact, it goes to say that 'all shooting happens at the same time'. Vector Strike rules are a part of this, and the execution is only such that because of the way the game is designed, you roll the dice in the movement phase, but the act of the shot is in the shooting phase.

Page 15
"When the Wound pool is empty, the shooting attack has been completely resolved. You can begin your next shooting attack,...."

That does seem to pretty definitively say that the attacks are independent, unless your holding over the wounds from the Vector Strike until after the shooting phase attacks?

I don't see the reference in the Apoc rules that you are talking about? All I can find is where they simply say each weapon can attack a different target on a Garg Creature and Super H Vehicle.

[Tynskel]

Page 15
"When the Wound pool is empty, the shooting attack has been completely resolved. You can begin your next shooting attack,...."

That does seem to pretty definitively say that the attacks are independent, unless your holding over the wounds from the Vector Strike until after the shooting phase attacks?

I don't see the reference in the Apoc rules that you are talking about? All I can find is where they simply say each weapon can attack a different target on a Garg Creature and Super H Vehicle.

Again this is incorrect. The mechanics of vector strike ARE different from NORMAL shooting, however, the weapon still counts as firing one of your weapons IN THE SHOOTING PHASE. Meaning, you havent finished firing.

Read the entry for the Warhound.

[Magpie]

Again this is incorrect. The mechanics of vector strike ARE different from NORMAL shooting, however, the weapon still counts as firing one of your weapons IN THE SHOOTING PHASE. Meaning, you havent finished firing.

I don't see how you can take a direct rule quote and say "Again this is incorrect."
Nothing in the Vector Strike rules overrides that basic principle.

The Warhound special rule actually supports my point quite nicely, remembering of course it is a 5th Edition thing so flat outing is a movement phase activity and cannot be done by most vehicles as it can in 6th, it does whoever lay some pretty firm ground work on the idea of "move or shoot".

The Warhound can fire all of it's weapons, the ones that can fire at different targets just like the Vector Strike rule allows, and not move or it can not fire one or more of it's weapons that it is eligible to fire and in surrendering that opportunity it gains the ability to move.

That is almost a carbon copy of what I am saying. The Vector Strike leaves the Flyer with the ability to fire which can either be used for moving or shooting.

[Tynskel]

I don't see how you can take a direct rule quote and say "Again this is incorrect."
Nothing in the Vector Strike rules overrides that basic principle.

The Warhound special rule actually supports my point quite nicely, remembering of course it is a 5th Edition thing so flat outing is a movement phase activity and cannot be done by most vehicles as it can in 6th, it does whoever lay some pretty firm ground work on the idea of "move or shoot".



The Warhound can fire all of it's weapons, the ones that can fire at different targets just like the Vector Strike rule allows, and not move or it can not fire one or more of it's weapons that it is eligible to fire and in surrendering that opportunity it gains the ability to move.

That is almost a carbon copy of what I am saying. The Vector Strike leaves the Flyer with the ability to fire which can either be used for moving or shooting.

No, the flyer has shot a weapon, IN THE SHOOTING PHASE. That is straight up from the rules. You cannot run if you have fired a weapon in the shooting phase.

[ted1138]

No that's not quite right.

All flyers have the ability to fire 4 weapons, regardless of how many weapons they actually have.

A Helldrake, armed with a single weapon can actually make 2 shooting attacks, one of those attacks is a Vector Strike, the other attack is with the Baleflamer.

Making a Vector Strike attack means that you have "used up" one of the 4 weapons you are allowed to fire, that only becomes an issue when you have more than 4 actual weapons.






Ok, so if I take a Heldrake, I can fire four(*) Baleflamers in my shooting turn? :confused:

Seriously, twisting and turning the rules to avoid having to do something you don't want to do, and then coming up with nonsense to justify your actions, is just mad! :(

(*three if I VS)



The rule for Flyers on page 80 of the BRB states "Zooming Flyers can fire up to four of their weapons using their full Ballistic Skill". It says nothing about being able to fire four weapons, it just says you can use your full BS on up to four weapons, and in the case of the Heldrake that's one weapon, as it only has the one.

The Vector Strike rule on page 43 of the BRB states "However, any additional weapons it fires that turn can choose a different target to that of the Vector Strike", ie, any weapons on the model in addition to the one that counts as having fired for the purposes of the VS attack, and now can't fire in the shooting turn.

[Caitsidhe]

I'm afraid I have to agree with Tynskel. A close read of both rulebook and codex (and not just my notes) shows that Vector Strike counts as having fired a weapon in the shooting phase. If you fired a weapon in the shooting phase, you cannot go Flat Out. There is no reason to get upset about this or fight/debate about it this long. I was on your side of the fence until I went back and looked after they corrected me. They are quite correct.

Let's put this in perspective. The odds of going Flat Out with a Helldrake ever being of any tactical value are extremely low. I would hazard a guess that it will never happen to most of us in our gaming careers. :) Is it really worth all this angst?

[ted1138]

Can someone show me where it says in the BRB that a zooming flyer can fire four weapons? I've checked, and all I can find is(on page 80) "Zooming Flyers can fire up to four of their weapons using their full Ballistic Skill", ie, a Heldrake has one weapon, thus it can fire one weapon at full BS. If it had five weapons it would be able to fire four at full BS and the other one at "snap shot". This whole argument about Heldrakes and Vector Strikes revolves around a rule that doesn't even exist...

[Tynskel]

I'm afraid I have to agree with Tynskel. A close read of both rulebook and codex (and not just my notes) shows that Vector Strike counts as having fired a weapon in the shooting phase. If you fired a weapon in the shooting phase, you cannot go Flat Out. There is no reason to get upset about this or fight/debate about it this long. I was on your side of the fence until I went back and looked after they corrected me. They are quite correct.

Let's put this in perspective. The odds of going Flat Out with a Helldrake ever being of any tactical value are extremely low. I would hazard a guess that it will never happen to most of us in our gaming careers. :) Is it really worth all this angst?

As I said before, the situation would primarily occur in Apocalypse. Staying on the board becomes vitally important when the map is big, and you can only enter from your own side.

[daboarder]

Actually happened to me last game, had lost the baleflamer on my drake and I wanted to VS a squad, zoom of the board and then come off next turn to do the same thing. such a shame the rules don't allow it.

[Magpie]

You cannot run if you have fired a weapon in the shooting phase.

What page is that rule on?


Ok, so if I take a Heldrake, I can fire four(*) Baleflamers in my shooting turn? :confused:


No of course not. A flyer can fire four, VS counts as one, the baleflamer makes two, that leaves two but it doesn't have any weapons left it can fire. You barking up the wrong tree there.

[Caitsidhe]

What page is that rule on?

I'm looking at the mini-book so I doubt the page numbers are the same: Page 72 in the Basic Rulebook (Mini) dealing with going Flat Out. Then flip back to page 43 in the same book and read the full entry of Vector Strike. This is in the Universal Rules section.

[Magpie]

I'm looking at the mini-book so I doubt the page numbers are the same: Page 72 in the Basic Rulebook (Mini) dealing with going Flat Out. Then flip back to page 43 in the same book and read the full entry of Vector Strike. This is in the Universal Rules section.

The page numbers are the same it seems.

The Flat Out rule simply says it may elect to move instead of firing. So all it needs to be able to do is fire, having already fired isn't mentioned.

For most units having already fired DOES disqualify them from going flat out, as once they have fired they can no longer fire. Not so with Vector Strike.

[Tynskel]

where? Where does the rule say that with Vector Strike.

It says that you have fired a weapon IN THE SHOOTING PHASE.

[Magpie]

where? Where does the rule say that with Vector Strike.

It says that you have fired a weapon IN THE SHOOTING PHASE.

But nothing anywhere says that doing so disqualifies you from going flat out.
The rule for flat out says you can elect to move instead of firing and the rule for Vector Strike says that despite counting as already firing you can still fire with your other weapons.

Nothing in the flat out rule nor the VC rule says that having already fired means you can't move flat out.
This is not the case for a bombing run which is a huge pointer that you can "use" the allowed shooting attack from VC to move.

[daboarder]

But nothing anywhere says that doing so disqualifies you from going flat out.
The rule for flat out says you can elect to move instead of firing and the rule for Vector Strike says that despite counting as already firing you can still fire with your other weapons.

Nothing in the flat out rule nor the VC rule says that having already fired means you can't move flat out.
This is not the case for a bombing run which is a huge pointer that you can "use" the allowed shooting attack from VC to move.

How do you not get that you cannot give up your shooting if you have already shot?

[Magpie]

How do you not get that you cannot give up your shooting if you have already shot?

How can you not get that having already "shot" with the Vector Strike the unit is still able to shoot with the other weapons, thus it enters the shooting phase with the ability to fire.

[daboarder]

How can you not get that having already "shot" with the Vector Strike the unit is still able to shoot with the other weapons, thus it enters the shooting phase with the ability to fire.

sure it does, but it already has fired one of its 4 weapons, all it gets to decide is wether it wants to fire its other one, not whether it wants to give up its shooting in order to vector strike, because by vector striking it has already made the decisions to fire in the shooting phase.

[Magpie]

sure it does, but it already has fired one of its 4 weapons, all it gets to decide is wether it wants to fire its other one, not whether it wants to give up its shooting in order to vector strike, because by vector striking it has already made the decisions to fire in the shooting phase.

That's not what the rulebook says. "elect to fire or move". It can fire, ergo it can move.

[daboarder]

That's not what the rulebook says. "elect to fire or move". It can fire, ergo it can move.

Vector strike says you "count as having fired a weapon in the shooting phase"

you cannot elect to move if you have already elected to fire

[Magpie]

Vector strike says you "count as having fired a weapon in the shooting phase"

you cannot elect to move if you have already elected to fire

You still have the choice to fire or not.

[daboarder]

You still have the choice to fire or not.

Only in the same way you have the choice not to fire a plasma gun in a tac squad when firing bolters.

the unit has still fired.


EDIT: tell you what, you are a special snowflake mate, and the rest of the board are just going to ignore you and play it the way we interpret it, you get to be the only person around playing it "correctly", feel good?

/thread

[Magpie]

Only in the same way you have the choice not to fire a plasma gun in a tac squad when firing bolters.

the unit has still fired.


That logic would mean the flyer cannot fire at all. A Tac Squad only gets one shooting attack, the Vector Strike rule allows for two.

Keep up the attempted insults mate, it shows your lack of argument not mine.

[Nabterayl]

So ... over here in the adult corner ...

Magpie, I think I understand your logic but I don't think I agree with your reading. Flat Out says, in relevant part, "A vehicle can elect to move Flat Out instead of firing in the Shooting phase." You seem to be reading that as saying, "A vehicle can forego firing in the Shooting phase to move Flat Out," but nowhere does the rulebook state that. Your statement is not equivalent to the one in the rulebook. The contrapositive of the rulebook statement, rather, is that a vehicle that fires in the Shooting phase cannot elect to move Flat Out.

Since a vehicle that fires in the Shooting phase cannot elect to move Flat Out (= a vehicle that does not fire in the Shooting phase can elect to move Flat Out), the fact that Vector Strike counts as firing in the Shooting phase precludes a vehicle that has made a Vector Strike from electing to move Flat Out the same turn.

[Magpie]

So ... over here in the adult corner ...

Magpie, I think I understand your logic but I don't think I agree with your reading. Flat Out says, in relevant part, "A vehicle can elect to move Flat Out instead of firing in the Shooting phase." You seem to be reading that as saying, "A vehicle can forego firing in the Shooting phase to move Flat Out," but nowhere does the rulebook state that. Your statement is not equivalent to the one in the rulebook. The contrapositive of the rulebook statement, rather, is that a vehicle that fires in the Shooting phase cannot elect to move Flat Out.

Since a vehicle that fires in the Shooting phase cannot elect to move Flat Out (= a vehicle that does not fire in the Shooting phase can elect to move Flat Out), the fact that Vector Strike counts as firing in the Shooting phase precludes a vehicle that has made a Vector Strike from electing to move Flat Out the same turn.

Yep I see that counter point for sure.
It all comes down to the phrase "elect to move instead of firing" which can be read as "elect to move and forgo all firing" or "elect to move and forgo firing"

When it can be read in two ways then looking somewhere else can aid in finding the RAI.

PotMS and Bombing Run specifically mention not being able to move flat out and the recently discovered Warhound ability permits the sacrifice of a varying number of available shooting attacks to gain a variable amount of movement; that points very strongly to "elect to move instead of firing" to mean that if you have the ability to fire, regardless of previous actions you retain the ability to sacrifice that attack for the sake of of movement.

[Tynskel]

Yep I see that counter point for sure.
It all comes down to the phrase "elect to move instead of firing" which can be read as "elect to move and forgo all firing" or "elect to move and forgo firing"

When it can be read in two ways then looking somewhere else can aid in finding the RAI.

PotMS and Bombing Run specifically mention not being able to move flat out and the recently discovered Warhound ability permits the sacrifice of a varying number of available shooting attacks to gain a variable amount of movement; that points very strongly to "elect to move instead of firing" to mean that if you have the ability to fire, regardless of previous actions you retain the ability to sacrifice that attack for the sake of of movement.

no. That's not the case.
Power of the Machine Spirit works to add extra firepower when normally one cannot. However, even with Power of the Machine Spirit, the vehicle is moving too fast to fire.

Bombing run is the same case: you cannot aim the bomb while going flat out.

"recently discovered warhound" ability? What is this nonsense: that is an exception to the rule. It has a SPECIAL ability, written specifically for the Warhound. Furthermore, as with all rules conflicts, the warhound rule specifically negates the normal run rules.

Vector Strike 1) is a Universal Special Rule. These rules work within the framework of the rulebook. 2) Vector Strike does NOT specifically conflict with the Flat Out rule. In fact, Vector Strike works with Flat Out rules, ie you commit to vector strike, you count as firing a weapon in the shooting phase, and therefore cannot move flat out.

[Nabterayl]

Yep I see that counter point for sure.
It all comes down to the phrase "elect to move instead of firing" which can be read as "elect to move and forgo all firing" or "elect to move and forgo firing"
Why would we add "all?" That is not ordinary behavior. We say that a unit is "firing" even if it does not make use of all of its available shooting attacks, and that a model is "firing" even if it does not shoot every weapon it can. "All" is not the default modifier for a gerund; "any" is.

[DarkLink]

Nab's right. The exact wording is "firing", not "all firing". You fire one weapon? You're firing. You fire two weapons, you're firing. Etc.

Even if you could interpret the sentence the way you want to, by implication it would mean that all flyers in the game could n-1 weapons and then Flat Out, because they're not firing all of their shots.

[Magpie]

Nab's right. The exact wording is "firing", not "all firing". You fire one weapon? You're firing. You fire two weapons, you're firing. Etc.

Even if you could interpret the sentence the way you want to, by implication it would mean that all flyers in the game could n-1 weapons and then Flat Out, because they're not firing all of their shots.

You're talking number of weapons, not the number of attacks that you can make.

Without a Vector Strike a flyer can make a single shooting attack in the shooting phase with up to of its 4 weapons.
With a Vector Strike a flyer can make a single shooting attack in the shooting phase with up to 3 of its weapons.

Either of those shooting attacks in the shooting phase can be given up to go flat out, move instead of fire.

[Nabterayl]

Okay, here's a place where I'm not clear which argument you're making. I can't tell if you are contending that:

A flyer that fires one weapon in the shooting phase via Vector Strike is not "firing," or
A flyer that fires one weapon in the shooting phase via Vector Strike is firing, but - notwithstanding that fact - it can still elect to move Flat Out "instead of firing" because it can make a shooting attack at a target other than the target of the Vector Strike.
I'm pretty sure you're saying #2, but can you clarify, please?

[Magpie]

A flyer that fires one weapon in the shooting phase via Vector Strike is firing, but - notwithstanding that fact - it can still elect to move Flat Out "instead of firing" because it can make a shooting attack at a target other than the target of the Vector Strike.[/list]
I'm pretty sure you're saying #2, but can you clarify, please?

Yep #2 is the one. It is still able to fire

[ted1138]

If a Heldrake uses VS, it can't shoot or Flat-Out that turn, as there is no rule in the BRB that says a Zooming Flyer can fire four weapons, the 'counts as firing one weapon' applies to the weapons on the Heldrake, thus reducing the number of weapons it can fire in the shooting phase to zero.

If you disagree with what I say, fine. But have the decency to not resort to petty insults and bullying, and maybe try going back and looking at the rules with an open mind...

[Mr Mystery]

Okay.

Vector Strike specifically. I have a Hive Tyrant. I give him wings, Scything Talons, Lash Whip and Bonesword. Assuming I generate or purchase no ranged psychic powers, he is a pure melee creature.

According to your logic, he therefore cannot vector strike, because he has no ranged weapons to sacrifice in order to do so.

And in relation to your quoted rule, it does not say 'counts has having fired one of it's weapons. And on that, your argument carries no weight.

[ted1138]

Okay.

Vector Strike specifically. I have a Hive Tyrant. I give him wings, Scything Talons, Lash Whip and Bonesword. Assuming I generate or purchase no ranged psychic powers, he is a pure melee creature.

According to your logic, he therefore cannot vector strike, because he has no ranged weapons to sacrifice in order to do so.

And in relation to your quoted rule, it does not say 'counts has having fired one of it's weapons. And on that, your argument carries no weight.


Not having a ranged weapon does not prevent you from Vector Striking(there is no 'sacrifice ranged weapon to Vector Strike' rule), Vector Striking only prevents you from firing one of your weapons in the shooting phase(if you have one). And it doesn't have to say "one of it's weapons" to mean one of it's weapons, as what other weapons could it possibly mean? And don't say 'from it's zooming flyers 4 weapons', unless of course you can quote that rule as well...

[Mr Mystery]

Not having a ranged weapon does not prevent you from Vector Striking(there is no 'sacrifice ranged weapon to Vector Strike' rule), Vector Striking only prevents you from firing one of your weapons in the shooting phase(if you have one). And it doesn't have to say "one of it's weapons" to mean one of it's weapons, as what other weapons could it possibly mean? And don't say 'from it's zooming flyers 4 weapons', unless of course you can quote that rule as well...

Actually, in order to actually mean 'one of it's weapons' the rule has to actually specify counts as having fired one of it's weapons in order to support you. It of course doesn't. It using the term 'a weapon'. This does not therefore limit the firing of a sole weapon.

[Magpie]

as there is no rule in the BRB that says a Zooming Flyer can fire four weapons,

Page 80
"Zooming flyers can fire up to four of their weapons using their full ballistic skill"
Pretty much covers it.

VC isn't a "weapon" in the conventional sense but it counts as one, so the Helldrake has 2 things that count as weapons.

[ted1138]

Actually, in order to actually mean 'one of it's weapons' the rule has to actually specify counts as having fired one of it's weapons in order to support you. It of course doesn't. It using the term 'a weapon'. This does not therefore limit the firing of a sole weapon.

In the case of the Heldrake, it only has one weapon, so it's not hard to figure out which one "counts as" having been fired. And it says "one weapon" not "a weapon", and even if it did say that, it would mean the same thing...

[Mr Mystery]

In the case of the Heldrake, it only has one weapon, so it's not hard to figure out which one "counts as" having been fired. And it says "one weapon" not "a weapon", and even if it did say that, it would mean the same thing...

But that's categorically not what the rule says. It counts as having fire a weapon. Not one of it's weapons. And Zooming, the Heldrake can, in the shooting phase, fire up to four weapons. If it had performed a Vector Strike, it has three weapons left to fire. The actual number of weapons on the model is thus immaterial. There is no exclusion clause here.

You're attempting a RaW argument, and then trying to support it with RaI. That's how untenable your position is fella.

[ted1138]

Page 80
"Zooming flyers can fire up to four of their weapons using their full ballistic skill"
Pretty much covers it.

VC isn't a "weapon" in the conventional sense but it counts as one, so the Helldrake has 2 things that count as weapons.


That rule is about how many of your model's weapons can fire at full BS, it is not about how many weapons can or can't fire, ie:

A Zooming Flyer with;

one weapon can fire one weapon at full BS
two weapons can fire two weapons at full BS
three weapons can fire three weapons at full BS
four weapons can fire four weapons at full BS
five weapons can fire four weapons at full BS and one weapon can "snap shot"
six weapons can fire four weapons at full BS and two weapons can "snap shot"
seven weapons can fire four weapons at full BS and three weapons can "snap shot"
etc, etc...


And VS neither is a weapon, nor counts as one, but if you perform it, then you 'count as' having fired one weapon in the shooting phase(you don't actually use that weapon to perform the VS, you just can't use it in the shooting phase)...

[ted1138]

But that's categorically not what the rule says. It counts as having fire a weapon. Not one of it's weapons. And Zooming, the Heldrake can, in the shooting phase, fire up to four weapons. If it had performed a Vector Strike, it has three weapons left to fire. The actual number of weapons on the model is thus immaterial. There is no exclusion clause here.

You're attempting a RaW argument, and then trying to support it with RaI. That's how untenable your position is fella.


A Heldrake cannot fire four weapons, it only has one, and there is no rule that says it can fire four(if I'm wrong, then show me)...

[Learn2Eel]

http://i.imgur.com/tcBXy.gif

[Magpie]

And VS neither is a weapon, nor counts as one, but if you perform it, then you 'count as' having fired one weapon in the shooting phase(you don't actually use that weapon to perform the VS,

That's right, out of the four you are allowed, so the Baleflamer doesn't have to fire a snap shot.
Nothing in the rule says that you have to forgo firing one of you weapons in lieu of the Vector Strike.

If a flyer has:
one weapon it can fire four weapons at full BS but it only has one to shoot
two weapons it can fire four weapons at full BS but it only has two to shoot
three weapons it can fire four weapons at full BS but it only has three to shoot
four weapons it can fire four weapons at full BS YAY !
five weapons it can fire four weapons at full BS and one weapon can "snap shot"

If you Vector Strike tho'

If a flayer has:
one weapon it can fire three weapons at full BS but it only has one to shoot
two weapons it can fire three weapons at full BS but it only has two to shoot
three weapons it can fire three weapons at full BS
four weapons it can fire three weapons at full BS and one weapon can "snap shot"
five weapons it can fire three weapons at full BS and two weapons can "snap shot"

[ted1138]

http://i.imgur.com/tcBXy.gif

Is that what passes for a rebuttal in your neck of the woods? :confused:

[ted1138]

That's right, out of the four you are allowed, so the Baleflamer doesn't have to fire a snap shot.
Nothing in the rule says that you have to forgo firing one of you weapons in lieu of the Vector Strike.

If a flyer has:
one weapon it can fire four weapons at full BS but it only has one to shoot
two weapons it can fire four weapons at full BS but it only has two to shoot
three weapons it can fire four weapons at full BS but it only has three to shoot
four weapons it can fire four weapons at full BS YAY !
five weapons it can fire four weapons at full BS and one weapon can "snap shot"

If you Vector Strike tho'

If a flayer has:
one weapon it can fire three weapons at full BS but it only has one to shoot
two weapons it can fire three weapons at full BS but it only has two to shoot
three weapons it can fire three weapons at full BS
four weapons it can fire three weapons at full BS and one weapon can "snap shot"
five weapons it can fire three weapons at full BS and two weapons can "snap shot"

That is complete nonsense, there is no "out of the four you are allowed" rule. Read the rule on page 80, it does not say you can fire four weapons, it says 'you can fire up to four of your weapons at full BS', so if you have one weapon, you can only fire one weapon(at full BS). There is no 'four weapon rule', so you can't apply the VS "counts as" rule to it, you have to apply it to the weapons that are actually on the model in question.

[Learn2Eel]

Nah mate, it is more just that this thread is still going that bothers me - hence why I see the funny side and stay out of it.

[Magpie]

Nah mate, it is more just that this thread is still going that bothers me - hence why I see the funny side and stay out of it.

I have to agree, the useful portion is over, I'm out.

[Mr Mystery]

That is complete nonsense, there is no "out of the four you are allowed" rule. Read the rule on page 80, it does not say you can fire four weapons, it says 'you can fire up to four of your weapons at full BS', so if you have one weapon, you can only fire one weapon(at full BS). There is no 'four weapon rule', so you can't apply the VS "counts as" rule to it, you have to apply it to the weapons that are actually on the model in question.

Ergo, you must fire the full amount allowed yes? Because if it says 'you can fire four weapons' that's giving me the choice between not firing (fulfilling the can) or firing four weapons.

Well, according to your 'logic' that's both Nightscythes and Doomscythes knackered as well, as only have 1 and 2 weapons respectively, I cannot fire 4 weapons even if I wanted to. Ergo, I cannot fire any.

See. Untenable position is untenable.

[Tynskel]

Nah mate, it is more just that this thread is still going that bothers me - hence why I see the funny side and stay out of it.

You are missing the point. People are trying really hard to beat the record of the Combat Squad thread, or the Doom of Malantai thread! There are two combat squad threads, amounting to 500+ replies!

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?6439-Deep-striking-combat-squads&p=83146&viewfull=1#post83146

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?15051-Deep-strike-and-Combat-squads&p=142841&viewfull=1#post142841

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?4452-The-Doom-of-Malantai&p=55996&viewfull=1#post55996

[Tynskel]

Yep #2 is the one. It is still able to fire

That does not make sense, considering the rules states that you have fired, and you are not allowed to go Flat Out when you have already fired.

[Learn2Eel]

You are missing the point. People are trying really hard to beat the record of the Combat Squad thread, or the Doom of Malantai thread! There are two combat squad threads, amounting to 500+ replies!

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?6439-Deep-striking-combat-squads&p=83146&viewfull=1#post83146

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?15051-Deep-strike-and-Combat-squads&p=142841&viewfull=1#post142841

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?4452-The-Doom-of-Malantai&p=55996&viewfull=1#post55996

Oh dear....lol. Just lol.

[Magpie]

and you are not allowed to go Flat Out when you have already fired.

Nothing in the rule book says that. What ever your follow up comments are just cut and paste that reply in, until such time as you can find something in the rulebook that does say that.

You can use a pick instead of a shovel. So if I have two shovels I can use two picks instead of them.

[ted1138]

Ergo, you must fire the full amount allowed yes? Because if it says 'you can fire four weapons' that's giving me the choice between not firing (fulfilling the can) or firing four weapons.

Well, according to your 'logic' that's both Nightscythes and Doomscythes knackered as well, as only have 1 and 2 weapons respectively, I cannot fire 4 weapons even if I wanted to. Ergo, I cannot fire any.

See. Untenable position is untenable.


It does not say "you can fire four weapons", read the rule on page 80 to see what it does actually say.

[Mr Mystery]

Is this the rule you were earlier adamant didn't exist yes?

[ted1138]

Is this the rule you were earlier adamant didn't exist yes?

No, it's the rule on page 80 that says how many weapons a model has that can be fired at full BS. The one you are thinking of is the one that says that zooming flyers can fire four weapons(whether they have them or not), that's the one that doesn't exist.

[Tynskel]

Nothing in the rule book says that. What ever your follow up comments are just cut and paste that reply in, until such time as you can find something in the rulebook that does say that.

You can use a pick instead of a shovel. So if I have two shovels I can use two picks instead of them.

Yes the rulebook does state that when you are shooting you cannot go Flat Out. You don't get a choice about how much you get to shoot before going Flat Out.

[Tynskel]

No, it's the rule on page 80 that says how many weapons a model has that can be fired at full BS. The one you are thinking of is the one that says that zooming flyers can fire four weapons(whether they have them or not), that's the one that doesn't exist.

But, isn't that the rule that matters? The Baleflamer cannot fire snap fire, so you must fire at full BS. While zooming, you can fire up to 4 weapons at full BS.

[Mr Mystery]

But, isn't that the rule that matters? The Baleflamer cannot fire snap fire, so you must fire at full BS. While zooming, you can fire up to 4 weapons at full BS.

This.

I'd type more, but on a phone shift (yep, still at work)

[ted1138]

But, isn't that the rule that matters? The Baleflamer cannot fire snap fire, so you must fire at full BS. While zooming, you can fire up to 4 weapons at full BS.

Only if you have four weapons, "Zooming Flyers can fire up to four of their weapons using their full ballistic skill if they have moved at either combat speed or cruising speed that turn", it doesn't say 'Zooming Flyers can fire four weapons, using their full ballistic skill if they have moved at either combat speed or cruising speed that turn', as most people seem to be reading it...

[Mr Mystery]

And where does it say Vector Striking replaces a specific weapon?

Oh that's right it doesn't. Because if it did, according to your own interpretation, a FMC with no ranged weapon could not, ipso facto, vector strike.

[Power Klawz]

I so seldom get to do this but...

Yo Ted, you wrong. IN TWO THREADS

AWWWWW SNAP

[Caitsidhe]

Other people have stated it over and over again for you Ted. If they had intended for Vector Strike (for any model that can do it) to sacrifice a shooting attack to use the ability, they would have said so in the universal rule. It would say "instead" or it would direclty say, "may sacrifice the use of one of its shooting attacks" and so on. Your logic does not track. No amount of wanting it to be true is going to make your argument hold up because it cannot be proven valid in the inverse or across other examples.

I know it sucks to say, "I was wrong." You, me, and Fonzi don't like it. Fonzi and I still can choke it out. You don't even have to go that far. If you can't bring yourself to say the words, just let the matter drop. :)

[ted1138]

And where does it say Vector Striking replaces a specific weapon?

Oh that's right it doesn't. Because if it did, according to your own interpretation, a FMC with no ranged weapon could not, ipso facto, vector strike.

It doesn't, and I've never said it does. Would you please try to keep your argument to things that have been said instead of making stuff up.

And as for your FMC comment; you don't need a ranged weapon to VS(it's not 'sacrifice a shooting attack to perform a VS'), it's perform a VS and then in the shooting phase one of your weapon's(if you have any) "counts as" having been fired(that's "counts as" not 'has', there's a difference).

[ted1138]

Other people have stated it over and over again for you Ted. If they had intended for Vector Strike (for any model that can do it) to sacrifice a shooting attack to use the ability, they would have said so in the universal rule. It would say "instead" or it would direclty say, "may sacrifice the use of one of its shooting attacks" and so on. Your logic does not track. No amount of wanting it to be true is going to make your argument hold up because it cannot be proven valid in the inverse or across other examples.

I know it sucks to say, "I was wrong." You, me, and Fonzi don't like it. Fonzi and I still can choke it out. You don't even have to go that far. If you can't bring yourself to say the words, just let the matter drop. :)



You're right. If I can't make you read the rule on page 80, what's the point of talking to any of you? Go back to your ignorance and blind obedience... :rolleyes:



“Don’t just teach your children to read…
Teach them to question what they read.
Teach them to question everything.”
― George Carlin

[Power Klawz]

I like how you're attemtping to make sweeping philosophical statements unironically in conjunction with a rules dispute about a game with toy soldiers.

Something tells me if you were as clever as you think you are you'd have a talk show or something to do this on.

At least a podcast.

Maybe like a bimonthly pamphlet you mail to family and friends?

[Denzark]

Is that what passes for a rebuttal in your neck of the woods? :confused:

It works for me - this picture is similar to the picture I have of you from your posts.

[Nabterayl]

Really, guys? There are other 40K rules forums you can post in if all you want to do is insult people you think are making bad arguments, then insult those people for thinking you are making bad arguments, then insult those people for insulting you ...

Some of the folks slinging insults in this thread weren't around the last time the mods had to yell at people for turning the rules forum into kiddie hour, but some of you were. Take it somewhere else.

[Tynskel]

Only if you have four weapons, "Zooming Flyers can fire up to four of their weapons using their full ballistic skill if they have moved at either combat speed or cruising speed that turn", it doesn't say 'Zooming Flyers can fire four weapons, using their full ballistic skill if they have moved at either combat speed or cruising speed that turn', as most people seem to be reading it...

There is nothing in the rules that states that the Vector Strike replaces a weapon. For all intents and purposes, it is an additional weapon.

Not to mention, it is an additional weapon, that is fired in the shooting phase, rolled for in the movement phase.

[Tynskel]

Really, guys? There are other 40K rules forums you can post in if all you want to do is insult people you think are making bad arguments, then insult those people for thinking you are making bad arguments, then insult those people for insulting you ...

Some of the folks slinging insults in this thread weren't around the last time the mods had to yell at people for turning the rules forum into kiddie hour, but some of you were. Take it somewhere else.

I don't think we are gunna break 200! :(

[DarkLink]

This thread needs to die. Everything that's relevant to the actual rules have been discussed, all that's left is a vain attempt to educate apparent illiterates, and that seems to be a lost cause.

[Denzark]

Really, guys? There are other 40K rules forums you can post in if all you want to do is insult people you think are making bad arguments, then insult those people for thinking you are making bad arguments, then insult those people for insulting you ...

Some of the folks slinging insults in this thread weren't around the last time the mods had to yell at people for turning the rules forum into kiddie hour, but some of you were. Take it somewhere else.



Yeah, really....

[Learn2Eel]

http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/SuarezBirthday.gif

[Chris*ta]

I don't think we are gunna break 200! :(

That's loser talk! We can if we make an effort! ;)


[B]it's perform a VS and then in the shooting phase one of your weapon's(if you have any) "counts as" having been fired(that's "counts as" not 'has', there's a difference).

No. There's not.

I think people tend to forget that GW doesn't make Easter Egg rules. If you were supposed to be able to do something that counts as firing a weapon, and then do something that takes the place of your shooting attack, they would've mentioned it specifically in the rules somewhere.

Until they issue a FAQ that specifically outlaws something that is obviously not allowed, idiots can keep trying to argue for this, and thus piss off other players and TOs everywhere.

[Tynskel]

Yeah, Vector Strike is just an additional weapon, that fires in the Shooting Phase, but is resolved in the movement phase.

That's all Vector Strike is.

[Chris*ta]

Then it's resolved:

Vector Strike, which "counts as" a shooting attack, precludes you from doing anything which takes the place of your shooting in the shooting phase.

Now I'm all depressed, I thought this thread could easily go longer than the one on whether Dante's power axe counts as a power axe :(
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?22876-Special-Power-quot-axes-quot

[Tynskel]

Then it's resolved:

Vector Strike, which "counts as" a shooting attack, precludes you from doing anything which takes the place of your shooting in the shooting phase.

Now I'm all depressed, I thought this thread could easily go longer than the one on whether Dante's power axe counts as a power axe :(
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?22876-Special-Power-quot-axes-quot

bwhahaha!

[Magpie]

Then it's resolved:

Vector Strike, which "counts as" a shooting attack, precludes you from doing anything which takes the place of your shooting in the shooting phase.

Or not.

[Chris*ta]

Or not.

Sarcasm detection fail.

[Magpie]

Sarcasm detection fail.

Or not.

[Chris*ta]

Or not.

So, you detected sarcasm and then chose to respond as if I wasn't being sarcastic? :confused:

[DarkLink]

Magpie is either arguing with or ignoring everything that everyone else in this thread says anyways, so just ignore him right back.

[Magpie]

Magpie is either arguing with or ignoring everything that everyone else in this thread says anyways, so just ignore him right back.

I agree with the bulk of it if you check.

[Magpie]

So, you detected sarcasm and then chose to respond as if I wasn't being sarcastic? :confused:

You're doing well to detect any form of tone from 2 words.

[Tynskel]

Yeah, Vector Strike is just an additional weapon, that fires in the Shooting Phase, but is resolved in the movement phase.

That's all Vector Strike is.


getting closer...