immobile Walkers

[G. A. K.]

I think I may be in the minority on this one but I thought of asking the community anyway.

The BRB states that a vehicle that is immobilized can't move or turn but can turn its turrets to shoot the enemy. While in the wlaker section it states that in the shooting phase a walker can pivot on the spot to angle its weapons at the enemy and this doesn't count as moving.

I figure this is in reference to the way a walker has a swivle mount in its torso effectivly making the upper part of the vehicle a turret. But should walkers be able to turn toward the enemy even if its immoble? I see no reason why not; as losing the ability to move ones legs doesn't stop you from pivotting with your torso. Its a little bit of a strech but I could see it going either way as the exact wording uses different terms in the rules ie. turning vs. pivotting almost the same thing but not quite. I don't see a problem using it one way or the other but i think walkers are different enough from a regular vehicle that they should indeed gain this small advantage.

 

G

[PyronusSouria]

Oh boy, this again.

[greatcrusade08]

its covered Here

 

short answer dreads cannot pivot when immobilised, they have thier fixed 45 degree angle of fire

[Seahawk]

Also debated here.

 

reference to the way a walker has a swivle mount in its torso effectivly making the upper part of the vehicle a turret

Remember, fluff does not equal rules. No walkers have turret mounted weapons (yet). Also, many walkers cannot swivel on their torso in a fluff sense (Warwalkers, Deff Dreads, Kans, Penitent Engines, Soul Grinders, Triarch Stalkers, OOP Sentinels and Dreadnoughts) so any argument for it is purely bias towards your chosen army.

[Isiah]

Yes please refer to previously discussed topics.

 

But Seahawk has the right of it: Dreads are not stated to have turrets so can't swivel their weapons in the same way as an immobilised turreted tank I'm afraid.

 

 

Cheers

I