Librarium Online Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Ok, the following situations and questions force me to ask of you what you think or know, either by Q&As I've yet to see or Chapter Approved entries I've yet to read.

Situation #1: An ordnance weapon glances. The Ordnance table says it must be followed when the ordnance weapon BEATS the Armor, but it has no equal table...

Situation #2: A railgun solid shot is just a heavy weapon, and so the hammerhead could move AND shoot it, as well as other weapons. The submunition, however, is an ordnance weapon, and so it can't move or shoot to fire...

Situation #3: An ordnance blast, centered right on the center of a vehicle, hits dead on. The vehicle is hit on all armour sides since the template touches them all, and is not originating from any particular side, since it's dead on...

Question #1: Do we use the glance chart for normal weapons for ordnance weapons, or use ordnance chart for both glancing and penetrating, despite it's wording.

Question #2: If the railgun can be fired while moving, and the submunition uses the same gun, could a hammerhead then techinically fire the ordnance submuntion while moving?

Question #3: What armor should be checked if the origin is dead center and the ordnance blast hits all sides? The weakest? The strongest? Three checks, one for each armor?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,580 Posts
s#1 use standard glancing hits table.

s#2 it's not ordnance, it only uses the ord template, which is an important difference.

s#3 just don't put it on the center :p . Usually if you look strictly a vechile can't even be hit on the center unless the shell would fall from the sky.

q#1 glancing hits use the glancing table :blink: .

q#2 yes, because it's not ordnance.

q#3 roll a D3 if unsure, but technically this should be impossible anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thank you.

Thank you.

And thank you again. :D

String complete, not neccesary anymore. Use the power 'vested in ye, Darkness! :w
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
Re: Question #3 - In the new vehicle rules, you use the armor from the direction the ordinance was shot. That makes sense for direct fire weapons (ie, tanks) but not so much for the indirect fire artillery. Still, that rule will probably make it to the final revision so it may be a good idea to start playing by that rule now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,770 Posts
Now i can't say if I remember right, but I think that it said somewhere that when a hit is scored on the top of the tank, as for eg. an indirect hit it is counted as being to the rear armour...
I think that was from the cityfight rules, but to me it sounds the most logical. Just compare to modern day and earlier tanks, they have a good front armour and side armour... but I doubt that the top armour was of the same quality... it's not the place one expects to be hit.
But if I should intermix this with the new rules I would say that a dead center top of the tank hit would be counted as the direction it came from... it still has to be fired at some angle to get it anywhere besides on top of yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I can think of only one instance where the attack doesn't in some way come from a direction: Daemonhunters Orbital Strikes. Right overhead. As for the rear armour ruling, I would at first say that the front has to be protected for shots coming from the front that land on top instead of in it's face, so I'd say front armour, but since there's a chance of a shell smacking it in it's top-side entrance, (like the hatch on a Leman Russ,) then I might say rear armor. But most importantly, since ALL sides are getting hit, the most likely to get penetrated would be the weakest, and so I'd still say rear armor, (unless the rear armor has better armor, for whatever reason.)
 
1 - 7 of 7 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top