Hunter-Killer Missiles?

[Reglor]

The Sky Ray is the same, it has ONE WEAPON that can only be FIRED a certain number of times - after that it simply cant be fired again, that does not mean that it is removed or destroyed.

 

The Sky Ray comes with up to 10 weapons as standard. It has "...six turret-mounted seeker missiles, two networked markerlights ... It is also equipped with a hull-mounted secondary weapon system." The secondary weapon is either two burst cannons, a pair of Gun Drones, or a smart missile system. So 6 seekers, 2 markerlights, and two burst cannons means it has 10 weapons.

[eyescrossed]

Exactly - so it DOES need 10 weapon destroyed results to get rid of all of them, and there was no mod hat needed, praeger.

[Hexx]

I had been pretty sure the "how cool it will make me" line was enough to show how silly this is, but apologies if anyone took offence to it.

It was a dig at myself , but I can see how it may have been misinterpreted.

 

Anyway

Show proof. Where does it ever say you buy 1 missile? it dosnt.

 

 

What the RULES say is that you purchase a WEAPON. This WEAPON may only be fired once. After that it can not be fired again. No where does it state the WEAPON is removed or destoryed, it just cant be fired again.

 

 

 

Uhmmm the RULES don't say that.

 

The rules say you purchase (for X number of points) a Hunter Killer missile -this is obviously a few different places in the codex

but we can use pg 135 as we started talking about Rhino's.

Please note it is listed under "Options" not under "Weapons that you can buy"

 

Then on pg 103 .

 

"A Hunter Killer missile is a Krak missile with ...."

Note the use of "A"

"A" is singular, it means single, meaning (essentially) "1"

 

So actually, the Codex (that's the new Marine Codex in case there is somehow some confusion) is saying that you buy 1 missile.

 

Now that we've agreed (I'd hope) that I'm correct in this.

 

It does say that the HK missile is treated as an additional weapon, my contention is that it says the HK missile is treated as an additional weapon, once you've fired the HK missile you don't have it anymore, ergo you have nothing to treat as an additional weapon.

[GTang]

It's also "an extra storm bolter" for most pintle-mounted storm bolter entries.

[SeattleDV8]

DA codex pg. 55 "These single-use weapon systems...." ; "....treated as an additional main weapon"

The fact that the SM codex has simular wording makes your case weaker.

The "treated as a Krak missle" is there to tell you the St and AP of the missle.

[Hexx]

DA codex pg. 55 "These single-use weapon systems...." ; "....treated as an additional main weapon"

The fact that the SM codex has simular wording makes your case weaker.

The "treated as a Krak missle" is there to tell you the St and AP of the missle.

 

 

The "single use weapon system" is fluff text and has nothing to do with the rules(I made the same mistake with the relic blade being a 2 handed weapon)

 

As for it being treated as a main weapon, I think it makes my case pretty much exactly the same.

 

The "Huter Killer missile" is treated as an additionl main weapon.

Once you fire the HK missile, you don't have it anymore. Therefore what are you treating as your additional main weapon?

 

In any event I was arguing from the new Marine Codex, if codex DA/BT/BA/SW(an older codex btw) have different wording it can't really be held up as

applicable to codex SM as all of them are now treated seperately (except of course for some rhings in Codex SW)

[Brother_Dan'l]

It would seem that this has come down to, what every other thread on this subject came down to, the fact that some folks see/read/understand it one way and some the other. And neither group can even come close to convincing the other that their point of view is correct.

 

Some day we can all march on GW with our torches and pitchforks and force them to tell us what's correct, but until then...

[SeattleDV8]

As for it being treated as a main weapon, I think it makes my case pretty much exactly the same.

 

The "Huter Killer missile" is treated as an additionl main weapon.

Once you fire the HK missile, you don't have it anymore. Therefore what are you treating as your additional main weapon?

That line from the SM codex renders your arguement a death blow. It is treated as an additional weapon. thats it, nothing in the rules that state it is a weapon until fired. You have paid your points for it and gain all the abilities granted.

Your Idea that it is "just" a missile is based on fluff and modeling.

[Hexx]

See (as Dan'l poited out) I can't see how you guys are reading this, I'm guessing you feel the same.

 

The Hunter Killer missile is treated as an additional weapon.

Once it's launched, what are you counting as your additional weapon?

 

As I've pointed out- the rules(not the fluff text) say you're buying one missile.

The rules say this missile (not a HK launcher or anything else) is treated as a weapon

Once you've fired the missile , you don't have anything left to count as your weapon.

[Steelmage99]

The Sky Ray does NOT have 10 weapons, it has ONE weapon that FIRES 10 times. Big difrence.

 

How do you figure that?

 

Codex Tau Empire, page 41

 

Weapons: A Sky Ray is equipped with landing gear, and is armed with six turret-mounted seeker missiles, two networked markerlights (these are counted as defensive weapons) and a target lock (meaning it can *snip*). It is also equipped with a hull-mounted secondary weapon system. *snip*

 

(The "10"-thing comes from an earlier poster saying it took 10 hits to remove all weapons from the Sky Ray.)

 

I get 10 weapons too. A hull-mounted system (2 burst cannons), 2 networked markerlights and 6 seeker missiles.

[Mordekiem]

By the letter of the law I think the hunter-killer missle is a weapon that has one shot. Even after it shoots it is a weapon. Though it is not 100% cut and dry.

 

However, due to the insanity that could ensue from this interpretation I think it is best to consider them weapons only until they have fired. Once they have fired they are no longer valid targets for weapon destroyed. I believe this is more along the lines of rules as intended for two reasons: One, you don't have crazy Tau manta Rays with 10 destroyed weapons. Second, and more importantly, if you take a damage result then you should suffer damage. Taking a weapons destroyed result on an expended weapon goes against the spirit of the rules.

[eyescrossed]

Exactly - I'm on the "Only until it's fired" side.

[Trekari]

Pg 103 of the 5th SM Codex...

 

"They are treated as an additional weapon."

 

Note there is nothing conditional about being treated as a weapon. It is not an additional weapon "...until it fires."

 

RAW, whether you like it or not, it is a weapon whether you've fired it or not. It may not make fluff sense to you, and it may not even make logical sense, but the rules are very clear that no matter what, it IS a weapon.

[Commander Gitsnik]

It's been a while since I weighed in on a rules discussion so I'm going to try keep it short. I'm on the side of you can destroy the HK after you have fired it (ergo, a RH1N0 requires two weapons destroyed if you take a HK on it). Because:

 

The "Huter Killer missile" is treated as an additionl main weapon.

Once you fire the HK missile, you don't have it anymore. Therefore what are you treating as your additional main weapon?

The launcher (not the ammunition). You don't remove your flamer from the commanders combi-flamer because he's fired it, ergo he is worth the full points you paid. Just as you don't remove the HK from the tank once you've fired it, ergo it is a weapon you can destroy (just because it is out of ammunition makes it no less a weapon).

 

Take a look at the Rhino's modelling (I know, not RAW, not RAW) if you like, the missile is encased in a launching unit.

[SeattleDV8]

Off Topic but oh how ironic... I read (and agreed with) your post and then noticed your Sig with the TSoaLR quote......Heh

[Hexx]

It's been a while since I weighed in on a rules discussion so I'm going to try keep it short. I'm on the side of you can destroy the HK after you have fired it (ergo, a RH1N0 requires two weapons destroyed if you take a HK on it). Because:

 

The "Huter Killer missile" is treated as an additionl main weapon.

Once you fire the HK missile, you don't have it anymore. Therefore what are you treating as your additional main weapon?

The launcher (not the ammunition). You don't remove your flamer from the commanders combi-flamer because he's fired it, ergo he is worth the full points you paid. Just as you don't remove the HK from the tank once you've fired it, ergo it is a weapon you can destroy (just because it is out of ammunition makes it no less a weapon).

 

Take a look at the Rhino's modelling (I know, not RAW, not RAW) if you like, the missile is encased in a launching unit.

<shrug> and again the idea that you can destroy a launcher for a missile (that according to the rules you don't buy) lets you take multiple hits on a lascannon (hey there's those 2 barrels) plus there has to be a geanerator somewhere and some powerfeeds, those must take up some room to absorb a hit..

 

Again (I'm getting curious how many times that word has been used in this thread) you don't buy a launcher, you buy a missile.

YOu fire it and the Missile flies across the table and hits stuff,or misses stuff (if you use my dice).

You don't have a missile anymore.

YOu don't have anything to count as an extra weapon

[Steelmage99]

I am really on the fence on this one, but a few facts have to be kept in mind;

 

(in no particular order)

 

1. You do not buy a launcher. You buy a Krak Missile, with some special rules.

 

2. The HK model does not have an impact on the rules discussion. Sometimes it is a box, sometimes it is just a missile (with a rail).

 

3. The HK is indeed a weapon as it has all the charateristics of one.

 

4. A Krak Missile, as such, does not exist in the weapons overview.

 

5. GW has made no rules about how the rules of a one-shot weapon changes status when fired.

 

6. A HK is indeed bought under "Options" and not under "Wargear", but so is the Pintle-mounted Storm Bolter.

 

 

 

I believe number 5 is very important. We cannot do anything without having a rule telling us to do it. "The rules doesn't say I shouldn't/can't" does not fly in the 40K universe.

 

On the other hand it just doesn't sit well with me from a realism/gamebalance standpoint to both eat the cake and keep it.....errrr, fire the missile and keep it.

 

In the end I'll most likely be guided by number 5, but......

[nighthawks]

new GW logic - play it as you feel is right.

 

If they won't take a stand, how can we? touries etc... have their own house rules, and forknowledge of those rules would be nice when configuring your list. in all other respects, GW seems content to let us hash this out amongst ourselves. given the lack of solid evidence on either side, it's a house rule, period.

[Praeger]

The Sky Ray is the same, it has ONE WEAPON that can only be FIRED a certain number of times - after that it simply cant be fired again, that does not mean that it is removed or destroyed.

 

 

The Sky Ray comes with up to 10 weapons as standard. It has "...six turret-mounted seeker missiles, two networked markerlights ... It is also equipped with a hull-mounted secondary weapon system." The secondary weapon is either two burst cannons, a pair of Gun Drones, or a smart missile system. So 6 seekers, 2 markerlights, and two burst cannons means it has 10 weapons.

 

Your right, my bad - I havnt played with or against a Sky Ray for a number of years now actually, and had remebered (wrongly) the rule to be along the lines of "missile launch system that can fire 6 missiles throught the game" which would make it one weapon with 6 shots.

 

Obviously if the wording is "armed with 6 missiles" then yes, thats 6 difrent weapons.

 

One big question for everyone to answer - and id like to see everyones thoughts on this before continuing.

 

If the missile has NOT yet been fired, would you be able to remove it as a weapons destroyed result? Keeping in mind that this would still mean 10 weapons destroyed to kill a Sky Ray and an extra one on a Rhino etc.

[Captain Malachi]

If the missile has NOT yet been fired, would you be able to remove it as a weapons destroyed result? Keeping in mind that this would still mean 10 weapons destroyed to kill a Sky Ray and an extra one on a Rhino etc.

Well, yes, but I'm of the opinion you can do it after it's been fired, so my answers kind of obvious.

[Commander Gitsnik]

If the missile has NOT yet been fired, would you be able to remove it as a weapons destroyed result? Keeping in mind that this would still mean 10 weapons destroyed to kill a Sky Ray and an extra one on a Rhino etc.

That's how it's played where I come from. Though it's usually a cold day in hell for any of our marine players to not have fired their HK's by round 2.

[SeattleDV8]

I believe most everyone would agree to that Praeger.

[Praeger]

I believe most everyone would agree to that Praeger.

 

Exactly what i would think as well.

 

So really the argument is this - people against are NOT arguing that the HK stops a weapon destroyed, they just dont think its right that it should after it has been fired.

 

Now really whats the difrence? if it hadnt been fired you would still be in the same position.

[rat of vengence]

I believe most everyone would agree to that Praeger.

 

Exactly what i would think as well.

 

So really the argument is this - people against are NOT arguing that the HK stops a weapon destroyed, they just dont think its right that it should after it has been fired.

 

Now really whats the difrence? if it hadnt been fired you would still be in the same position.

If the H/K hasn't been fired, then it is a weapon that can be destroyed. If it has been fired, it isn't there anymore. It is gone, and cannot be destroyed.

 

I do understand that the rules don't explicitly state this, but they certainly don't say that you can count non-existant weapons (it was fired remember) as weapon destroyed either. The vehicle WAS equipped with a H/K, but once it is fired, the vehicle is NO LONGER equipped with a H/K.

 

To give a Fantasy example (don't shoot me!), some magic items are one use. There are other magic items that destroy magic items. I can't say I lose the magic item that has already been used, because it is one use, it is gone.

 

 

 

RoV

[Trekari]

The problem is that your opinion is not supported in any way, shape or form, by the 40k rules, and the HK entry.

 

It's not that the rules don't explicitly state that, but sorta do....it's that the rules don't say ANYTHING along the lines of what you're arguing.

 

It counts as a weapon. Period.