Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I saw this tank on ebay that had the side sponson bolters mounted onto the sides of the turret - so they had a 360 degree fire arc just like the battle cannon. Is that legal???

I'm wondering because I've always been annoyed at the side sponsons, because you can NEVER use both of them at the same time since you have to fire all your weapons as one target.

The sponsons on the Land Raider are particularly useless because it is so wide - the raider is so wide that there is a huge blind spot right in front of the tank where the sponsons can't fire.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
No, you are not allowed to give side sponsons a 360 degree firing arc. Also, it is entirely possible to have both sponsons fire at one target (even on a land raider). I've seen it down many times. Sides sponsons have roughly a 220 degree firing arc in most cases (not just 180). Check the diagram in the core rule book under "vehicle shooting."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
A similar question:

Couldn't you, then, mount your sponsons farther forward?

Also, do you have to place the lasguns on the Chimera at the sides, or can you convert it and orient them so a few face forward? They're still fixed, just with a different orientation
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
You can't change the firing arcs through conversions. Period. Doesn't matter if you put them on the turret or change their locations on the sides, you cannot tactically improve a unit through modelling.

As for the lasguns out the Chimera ports, same deal. They've got a defined firing arc that can't be fudged with an Xacto.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Neferata said:
No, you are not allowed to give side sponsons a 360 degree firing arc. Also, it is entirely possible to have both sponsons fire at one target (even on a land raider). I've seen it down many times. Sides sponsons have roughly a 220 degree firing arc in most cases (not just 180). Check the diagram in the core rule book under "vehicle shooting."
I don't have my rulebook here, but I think I remember the diagram you are talking about. The firing arc from the two sponsons don't go straight forwards from the sides of the tank but instead angle across the front of the tank and in fact overlap a bit. That would be nice, because then you could theoretically have both sponsons, AND the main weapons and any other front mounted weapons fire on the same target.

However, isn't there somewhere else in the rules that says you must be able to draw a line of sight from the weapon to the target?

So which is it? That theoretical firing arc in the diagrram - or direct from the weapons los on the model? Also, if it's the diagrams arc then how do you figure out what that is - especially on different models.. (again with the LR, you can have the sponsons mounted towards the front, or the back - would this alter their firing arc?)

I would LOVE to get this clarrified because my opponents claim I must draw an LOS from the top of the weapon which is crap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
Well, yes, you do have to be able to draw LOS from the weapon itself. You can still attain the firing arc pictured in the rule book with most vehicles, as the turrets can swivel (unless you glue the weapon within the mount). In order to ahieve overlapping firing arcs, you usually must be a decent distance from the target. If you are at point blank range of your target, then dont expect overlapping firing arcs.

Also, its important to note, that if facing straight forward, firing at a spread out unit (or even a vehicle of the same size as yours), you should be able to "see" the unit with each weapon.

In the diagram provided, you'll see an example of what I mean.



As you can see in exhibit A, even without swiveling the weapons, the land raider is still able to shoot at the target with all guns.

In exhibit B, the land raider is only able to fire at target A with its heavy bolter and storm bolter, whereas he is able to fire at target B with one sponson, and target C with all weapons. (It of course would have to choose which target to fire at, as it cant fire at three separate units).

Granted, this is not the world's best drawing, but it still gets my point across. What I'm trying to say is that even though you have to draw LOS from the weapon itself, you will can still position your tank in such a way to hit the target with all guns. You won't always be able to do so, but then again, that's what makes the game more tactical and more realistic.

Hope that helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
First, thanks for your reply and your diagrams are a great help.

I think most people believe the Example B is how it works. However - and if you have a land raider handy you can check this yourself - a LR will aways be in the situation pictured in Example A because the guns just can't be positioned like Example B. You can rotate the guns parallel to the hull, but no closer. This is probably the case with all of the tanks (I'll have to check).

I guess the solution to this is to just constantly "wiggle" down the field. That is, at the end of a tanks movement, rather than stay pointed in the direction I intend to keep going next turn, I should pivot the tank so that the maximum amount of its guns are pointed at some target. Then next turn I just pivot back to the path I want to move along and repeat.

That's find for vehicles that have the same armor on all sides, I guess.

Since LRs are sooo wide, what that really means is that as you approach the enemy you are intending to assault (w/ the troops inside your LR) your fire becomes less and less effective. How lame. Yes, I know I'm whining - I just want my really cool, really expensive, nicely painted model to be useful...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I reckon if you can convert a model and make it look decent and feasible and not ridiculously unfair then do whatever you want. Conversions are ace! Some regiments are renowned for customising their equipment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
IGFreely said:
As for the lasguns out the Chimera ports, same deal. .
they count as fire points they have a 360 degree arc there wouldnt be a need to "fudge them with an exacto"

thoguht technaically you would need the sponson sides modeled on because there pert of the tank
 

·
Son of LO
Joined
·
2,574 Posts
Does someone here have any type of documentation on the fire arc answer? I realize that it seems logical that a gun can only shoot at what it can see, but it's also logical that three guns on a tank could shoot at three different targets, so please leave logic at home when answering these questions and provide proof instead.

One reason that I say this is because I have seen heavily modified tanks being used in tournament level play (both RT and GT) that have heavy conversions such as repositioning the sponsons and adding one to two widths to the tracks. I even have a GW publication where one of the Heavy Metal team members put the Battle Cannon of a Leman Russ where the front bolter would be and then proceeded to put the rest of the bolters where the turret would normally be.

These vehicles obviously do not have the same firing arcs that the original vehicle did, however, they are perfectly legal for play.
 

·
Son of LO
Joined
·
5,146 Posts
You cannot change the rules with conversions.. If your opponent is nice enough to let you use the VDR, you can make up rules to represent your abominable creation. Otherwise..

The battlecannon on a leman russ always counts as a turret weapon. Even if you stuck it coming vertically out of the top.

The side sponsons always count as sponson weapons, even if on your model they're pointing out the back.

But the guys are right.. sponson weapons can both fire at a target provided it is directly in front of or behind the tank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
$H0urg1ass - I think you are not getting a definitive response because the rule book contradicts itself here. The rulebook is pretty clear about drawing a line of site from the weapons mount - but at the same time it has a picture clearly showing LOS lines crossing *through* the hull of the tank....

But wait a minute! I just realized something!

An earlier post mentioned that the rules say to draw the los from the weapons *mount* - NOT the barrel or tip of the weapon. And if you draw LOS from the mount, the line would actually cross through the hull of the tank! JUST LIKE IN THE PICTURE!

SO, if we draw Line of sight AND range from the MOUNT of the weapon - not up against the hull, but say the pivot point - they we have a nice consistent point to measure from for range, and tanks could fire all their weapons at a target as long as it (the target) was far enough out. You can also justify this easily by saying it represents the tank occasionally pivoting as it moves specifically to fire it's weapons.

What do you all think? At least it clarrifies something that previously had looked like a contradiction.
 

·
Son of LO
Joined
·
2,574 Posts
I already know why I'm not getting a definitive response. :)

It's because there is no definitive response. The rulebook contradicts itself, the heavy metal team contradicts the rules and tournament organizers (even GT organizers) dont have any definitive standards.

Simply put, there are no standards for how modeling effects shooting. None. Nowhere. I've looked it up in every book I can get my hands on. The BGB tells us how to draw line of sight from a standard issue tank, but it say absolutely nichts about drawing line of sight from converted tanks.

If you make a tank that has the bolter sponsons on the turret so that they also get a 360 degree view, then there's nothing in the rules that stops you. People can call you cheesy and make strange angry faces at you, but in the end they have to suck it up and move on because GW fails to make a distinction in this case.

In fact the only rule that we can draw on is the WYSIWYG rules and if someone puts their sponsons on the turret, then that's what you see and that's what you get. Too bad that you weren't smart enough to do the same thing with your own tank, but it's your own damn loss. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
So, I realize I went off topic a bit (and I started this topic! :rolleyes: ) - but is my interpretation of the general LOS rules correct? We should draw LOS from the weapon mount (ignoring the fact that it crosses the hull)?

I see this issue cause problems all the time and I'd like to get it clarrified.

Thanks.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top