A serious problem with the Firestorm Redoubt

[ammohogg]

Ok so I played in a tourney this last weekend against a player that used the firestorm redoubt. Here is the problem...he used it as an unoccupied building (never put a single model inside or on top) hence declared the fortification could not be attacked as per the brb which says unoccupid buildings can not be attacked...Is this correct? can the firestorm really become an invulverable structure simply because no models reside inside, and get to shoot all game from automated fire, splitting fire ect ect....with out a care in the world, while he hides units behind it and out of los

If anyone has an answer for this please refer me to a rule, I already tore my rulebook apart trying to answer this, but the rule concerning unoccupied buildings seems to trump common sence.

It is worth noteing to further confuse things that the vengence weapon battery has a rule specificly stateing it can be attacked as an unoccupied building even though it also auto fires...

Is there a rule that states the firestorm must be occupied to fire? even at the the reduced bs? I just cant find anything that covers it.

[magickbk]

Don't have my rulebook with me, but I think he was combining some Fortification rules with building rules. They are slightly different. Remember, if your opponent has a fortification with no one in it, you can walk in and take it and use it as your own.

[ammohogg]

Don't have my rulebook with me, but I think he was combining some Fortification rules with building rules. They are slightly different. Remember, if your opponent has a fortification with no one in it, you can walk in and take it and use it as your own.

True but its the getting to it part that gonna be a bit difficult to do....and the stupid thing has automated fire plus the rest of his army...

[Urtyfang]

in the brb pg 96. (emplaced weapons)
buildings must normally have units embarked in them to autofire or use manual fire if they have that option.

The vengeance weapons battery is the exception.

[ammohogg]

in the brb pg 96. (emplaced weapons)
buildings must normally have units embarked in them to autofire or use manual fire if they have that option.

The vengeance weapons battery is the exception.


I will need to check that I dont remember reading a reference to automated weapons in the brb

[Nabterayl]

I don't own the Apocalypse book, but are the rules for automated fire different in Apocalypse? If they aren't, then an unoccupied fortification shouldn't be shooting at all. Page 96 of the BRB states, "If a building is occupied, each emplaced weapon that is not being fired manually automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight" (emphasis added). There is no rule in the BRB that permits fortifications, even ones that you purchased, to fire automatically without a unit in the building.

[StarWarsDoug]

Yeah, he was violating the Emplaced Weapon rule from BRB. A building must be occupied to fire. The Firestorm Redoubt cannons only modify that rule to say they must only fire as Automatic Fire, not Manual Fire. Building still needs to be occupied for Automatic Fire to be allowed.

[Paulo187]

The Firestorm Redoubt has the 'Fully Automated' rule which says that models occupying the building may not use the 'Manual Fire' rule to fire them.

The Firestorm Redoubt also has the 'Primary Target' rule that says that it must shoot at the nearest Flyer or Flying Monstrous Creature within range and LOS. If none of those are available it must fire at the nearest enemy unit within range and LOS.

Now here come the rub. The Vengeance Weapon Battery has the 'Sentry Defence System' rule which allows it to use the Automated Fire rule against enemy units and be targeted by enemy attacks even if unoccupied. Of course since the Vengeance Weapon Battery has no access points it can never be occupied anyway.

The problem is that the Firestorm Redoubt doesn't have this rule that says it can be attacked even if unoccupied. So by RAW it can't be attacked.

Now what happens if against all odds you are able to occupy the enemy Firestorm Redoubt with friendly troops? Do the guns just keep firing like normal? Do the guns switch sides and start using 'Fully Automated' fire against the other guys?

In my opinion the RAI probably intend that you can target an enemy building that is shooting at you, but RAW says you can't.

I have no idea what the hell is supposed to happen when you occupy an enemy Firestorm Redoubt. Maybe the world implodes from the Paradox. I don't know. Most people whom I've asked have said that the gun switches sides at that point. So we will go with majority rules in my group until there is a FAQ on the subject.

[Paulo187]

Now that I've read what Stickmonkey said about the 'Emplaced Weapon' rule it makes more sense.

I re-read page 96 of the rulebook and it seems that, yes indeed, the building can't fire without anyone inside it and that the emplaced weapons would switch sides if you occupied the building.

[Urtyfang]

the fortifications don't switch sides. pg 121 sets up that fortifications remain friendly/enemy during the game. From there things can get weird RAW speaking.

If you occupy a enemy building, then it is occupied and the rest of your army can shoot/assault it.
Manual fire, then the models inside would pick the target
automated fire, as your army is still the enemy models if you occupy a enemy firestorm you are enabling it to shoot at your army.

so house rule the heck out of buildings/fortifications til they work as agreed upon. Maybe GW will put out a fortifications book with more well defined rules.

[Chris Copeland]

You guys are taking these RAW way too far.

[Paulo187]

Yeah, we know we take RAW too far and we are rightfully ashamed by our actions. But what else are OCD gaming nerds supposed to do? We can't help it. If we had social skills sufficient enough to come to a sensible and mutually agreeable arrangement we wouldn't be playing with toy soldiers on a Saturday night. Or is that too much of a generalization? Man, I wish chicks liked me...

[Chris Copeland]

Paulo, that was AWESOME! That was one of the best posts I've read on the interwebz in a long time! Kuddos, sir... kuddos...


Yeah, we know we take RAW too far and we are rightfully ashamed by our actions. But what else are OCD gaming nerds supposed to do? We can't help it. If we had social skills sufficient enough to come to a sensible and mutually agreeable arrangement we wouldn't be playing with toy soldiers on a Saturday night. Or is that too much of a generalization? Man, I wish chicks liked me...