Can the Venomthrope fire the Quad gun in a ADL?

[Davor]

So can the Venomthrope shoot the Quad Gun in an ADL with BS 4? I can't remember exactly how the emplaced weapons and weapon emplacements work.

I so wish GW used different terminolgy so they don't get confused.

[WestRider]

Yes. As currently written, we can fire Weapon Emplacements (basically, guns that are a separate Model on their own), but not Emplaced Weapons (guns that are totally built into a Fortification).

[andy089]

Just a heads up: I asked at my local GW how they'd rule it and they said "emplaced weapons are the same as weapon emplacements" - I know they don't really make the rules but if you're having a rules dispute, they usually do the ruling (if you play in there)!

[Davor]

I wonder why Tyrainds are getting the shaft again? I was about to go to a tourney, and I asked about the Ally rule. Someone had the nerve to say, "take it up with GW" then they see no problem taking Mysterious Terrian rule away. I asked why is it ok to change one thing and not add another?

I guess because they won't get an advantage and people need to win with plastic toy soldiers.

[swarm492]

If a failed at life I would be damned if my little plastic men did.

[gloomfang]

Your GW is wrong. You can ask them if that means that a Quad gun can autofire if it is attached to an ADL and what the AV value of the ADL is as emplaced weapons can not be targeted.

As a warning on the Venomthrope though. They are IB:Feed. While they do not have to run after people anymore if the venomthrope fails IB it can not shoot.

[demoric]

Aug 23, 2012 23:09:57 GMT Davor said:

I wonder why Tyrainds are getting the shaft again? I was about to go to a tourney, and I asked about the Ally rule. Someone had the nerve to say, "take it up with GW" then they see no problem taking Mysterious Terrian rule away. I asked why is it ok to change one thing and not add another?

I guess because they won't get an advantage and people need to win with plastic toy soldiers.

This just baffles me too. Why pick and choose what rules you will use? One event I was looking into only allows mysterious terrain if both you and your opponent agree on it before game. I also really hate the 1999+1 tournaments going on too. Just drop the points back down to 1750 or deal with 2 FOC. It really just seems like wish listing for other armies, but let's not allow the playing field to be leveled.

[coredump]

What makes you think that allowing 2FOC will level the playing field??

[guns]

Aug 25, 2012 5:36:26 GMT coredump said:

What makes you think that allowing 2FOC will level the playing field??

Thanks to the allies paradigm every other army gets a larger-than-normal FoC in sub-2000 games, and we don't. Those potential 7th or 8th troops selections or 4th specialist selection can turn out to be important in a competitive game.

[halos]

Well at 2000pts it's not just Nids who are benefit, and I would say other armies can abuse the double FoC more-so.

A lot of spam lists run into problems at higher points levels as they run out of FoC slots to spam things in, but that's no longer a problem. Would you really want to face off against 18 Venoms?

[WestRider]

I really think that Space Wolves, Coteaz or Draigo GK, and especially IG all benefit much more from double FOC than Nids do. I can come up with at least one absolutely hideous Guard List at 2K that I really don't want to have to go up against with anything I can figure out from the Nid Dex.

[demoric]

Aug 25, 2012 11:15:53 GMT halos said:

Well at 2000pts it's not just Nids who are benefit, and I would say other armies can abuse the double FoC more-so.

A lot of spam lists run into problems at higher points levels as they run out of FoC slots to spam things in, but that's no longer a problem. Would you really want to face off against 18 Venoms?

Personally I think the points break for double FoC should've been 2,500 or 3,000 but that's not what is written. While double FoC at 2000 would be very punishing all armies would have the same ability to do so. I would like to see more tournaments at 1750 or 1850 as those point levels seem to force more creative choices in army lists.