Grey Mage Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Second, choosing to keep a pod glued shut isn't modelling for advantage It is, becuase it changes the useage and roll of the unit. Even if you downplay the build instructions from GW into an unofficial guidline, GW guide you to leave them unglued, becuase thier vision is for the doors to open. As they open, you can shoot through them. The Pod doesn't block LoS, but as usual would grant a cover save. If you choose to rule your DPs block LoS, you can now use these as pillar drops to strategically block massive amounts of fireing lines and LoS. DPs *shouldn't* be able to achive this, and doing so is modelling them to an advantage. As I said in the other threads, by all means, glue them shut for any number of reasons. Ease of transport, asthetic appeal, whatever. But play them and rule them, as if they work as GW 'advise' and have designed the mini to work. By allowing you LoS through them. Just because something can open doesnt mean it has to be opened- for example the rear door on a rhino, or a waveserpent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Willy Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 What he's getting at is it isn't in the spirit of the game to be using your pods like that, with rhinos and serpents it s different, you open the doors but the model can still block line of sight but a pod when open will affect what can and can't draw LOS, it s a little stink to purposefully glue the pod shut so you can deny units LOS but if you glue it and say normally you can see through an open drop pod and as such it doesn't block line of sight, your at the least showing yourself to be a good sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 And my point is there are fewer contentions over where they can deploy and where they can be targetted etc if the doors are up. Saying that my model has to be posed in a certain way is weird, and doesnt carry over to any other model in 40k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 GM, there are *absolutley* no contentions, unless you rule that the petals are part of the hull. Which is convoluted, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacefrisian Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 My Tyrannofex now also looks like its been modelled with advantages, eg its like 3 times smaller than the original one, the thing was build 4 months ago, i couldnt know GW would bring out such a large thing? What do you name this situation, advantages modelling as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Willy Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 No because at the time we wouldn't of concieved that the thing was so big, most agreed it was a varient of Carnifex but a pod is a gw model that has been around for more then a month. Plus this game, despite what some would like to believe, is something that has to be taken on a case by case basis, there will be times were one person will be doing something others will consider to be cheating, some people will discuss this topic with civility, stating there case and hearing out the other, while others will simply not be able to play each others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 GM, there are *absolutley* no contentions, unless you rule that the petals are part of the hull. Which is convoluted, really. And since they are frankly the largest part of my model I cant see them being anything else. Moreover, when people I havent played against are accross the table from me sometimes they assume they are and sometimes they assume they arent- having the doors up removes the differences between these two types of opponents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 What do you name this situation, advantages modelling as well? If you continue to use a scratch built mini that gets easier cover saves (from being about 3 times smaller), then yes. Unintrntional, but stil modelling for an advantage. Sorry GW bought out a mini that :cussed up players scratch builds. A :tu: move on thier part. But sadly, you should be using a mini equivalent to the 'official' one now. (Of course, this is always mainly aimed at tournaments, I wouldn't give a fig in friendly games I played with mates.) And since they are frankly the largest part of my model I cant see them being anything else. Wow. Then you're modelling for an even bigger advantage, as you're now reducing the DS footprint of your DP, making it easier to land, and reducing the range your enemies should be able to shoot/assault it. Even worse classing the petals as hull, and leaving the glued shut... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacefrisian Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Now we talk about bases?, i cant help that my DP is on a 40mm base, it came with that one (pure good ol metal prince) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 What do you name this situation, advantages modelling as well? If you continue to use a scratch built mini that gets easier cover saves (from being about 3 times smaller), then yes. Unintrntional, but stil modelling for an advantage. Sorry GW bought out a mini that :cussed up players scratch builds. A :cuss move on thier part. But sadly, you should be using a mini equivalent to the 'official' one now. (Of course, this is always mainly aimed at tournaments, I wouldn't give a fig in friendly games I played with mates.) And since they are frankly the largest part of my model I cant see them being anything else. Wow. Then you're modelling for an even bigger advantage, as you're now reducing the DS footprint of your DP, making it easier to land, and reducing the range your enemies should be able to shoot/assault it. Even worse classing the petals as hull, and leaving the glued shut... Keep it friendly, theres no need to be raging over this- were just talking here. And like I said theres nothing in the rules that say I have to open a door on the pod, or any other vehicle, at any time. This isnt a modeling thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Oh I wasn't raging. :cuss I was trying to be polite by using the 'cuss' smiley. ;) And like I said theres nothing in the rules that say I have to open a door on the pod, or any other vehicle, at any time. This isnt a modeling thing. No, there isn't. Unless you claim the petals are hull, in which case they would count for Drop Pod mishaps, and by *not* openeing them, you're changing the rules for your favour, by making it easier to deploy your pod. Which some might label, cheating. Now, if they're purely decorative, and don't effect play in any fashion (even open, they're not large enough to block TLoS to anything), then do with them as you want. heck model your DP without any petals, as they've 'blown' off. The issue is when you start to cherry pick rules to suit yourself, and the world of difficulties this brings. You want the petals to be part of the hull. Therefore you also have to rule that they block LoS and impact DS footprints. And you have to take the good with the bad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Aye, but the petals being open doesnt have to be part of the good or the bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 to be honest im not sure where i come down on the whole doors open/doors closed discussion. the only reference we have to opening them are the words "hatches are blown". now i mentioned in the previous thread that the most likely meaning of this is that they are blown open or blown away.. however there is an obscure reference to blown meaning to open like a flower. however in context it should then read "drop pod is blown", and not the hatches.. the hatches cannot open like a flower, merely each one can open like the petal on a flower.. i know that smacks of over analyzing, but the word "blown" is a really bad one to use IMO. anyway my point is without real direction i believe its upto the individual whether or not he/she open thier pods, aslong as they are all treated the same and decided before the game, so as to not use the decision to gain benefit at the time of deployment. as for whether the petals/fins/ramps are hull, ive argued in the other thread my position on that.. they really cant be hull. at best it comes down to interpretation, so heres a GW issued pic showing an ultramarine drop pod http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1860051_60110101384_SMSpearheadMain_873x627.jpg whats that you say, drop pod surfing.. that man is clearly standung on that vehicles hull... oh wait, its not the hull its only a decorative element of the vehicle. /sarcasm. my 0.02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Aye, but the petals being open doesnt have to be part of the good or the bad. Exactly GM, but *only* if you rule them as decorative. If you rule them as hull, then yes of course they do. We've mentioned why numerous times, in numerous threads... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Willy Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Hatches being blown seems to mean the unsealing of the pod the doors just slam down. Remember this is travelling through space really fast before hitting the atmo so the pod needs to be sealed with atmosphere and pressure, blowing the hatch means to blow out the seal thus letting the doors drop. As for doors, I consider them to not block LOS and if the dick doesn't open the doors, even in friendly games, I count as being able to see through, most in my group agree with me on this, but if he drops the doors down then I don't draw ranges to them on the floor since I'm assault the main body of the pod. Even if the doors a decorative just means I d ignore them and consider myself able to see through though with a cover save. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Aye, but the petals being open doesnt have to be part of the good or the bad. Exactly GM, but *only* if you rule them as decorative. If you rule them as hull, then yes of course they do. We've mentioned why numerous times, in numerous threads... No, not only if you rule them as decorative. If they are part of the hull, and up, they dont change the size of the base throughout the game, they dont make it more or less visible than if they were decorative and up, they dont allow you to deploy further out, they dont let you get shot or assaulted further out either... @GCO8, yes, because the pictures on GW boxes have always accurately reflected their rules- just like the battle reports in white dwarf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 GM, if they are part of the hull, then keeping them up is making it *more advantageous* for you. As it reduces the DS footprint, which is based on *Hull*. If they are part of the Hull, you should DS with them down, to accurately reflect the shape and size required to DS the DP. Some might call keeping them up in this instance not only modelling for an advantage, but outright cheating. /shrug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northstar Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I can see the beef in regards to advantageous modelling being the key factor on glueing the doors closed. Fact of the matter is that when open(barring FW variants), these units to provide obscurred LoS, if they are glued closed, then they bloack all manner of LoS, and become confusing modells to the greater body of players out there. This seems about as murky as the many RAW vs. RAI arguments I have seen over the past few years... Whether you argue against it or not, modelling for a particular purpose in mind is advantageous modelling. The issue has actually come up before for Ork players, with their scratch built Battlewagons... Now that a "standard" Ork Model has come out for it... unless it stays within the general scope of the dimensions of that model... it becomes advantageous... Let's not forget that this also makes the SB inside useless... if you indeed decide to get that peice of equipment(unsure if a Storm bolter is a buyable upgrade or if it just simply comes standard). Oh, and as for the "hatches are blown" reference, this is more contextual than it is literal... if the hatches were literally blown off, that would mean that in a nutshell... the entire thing basically explodes... "Blowing the hatch" referres to a High pressure blast of air breaking a vacuum seal, which in general makes a hissing sound, which depending on the size of the airlock, can be comperable to sounding like a small explosion. Now if you actually look at where the hatches touch the DP "walls", there are little circles lining the sides of both where they meet, this would basically be the modellers rendition of an Airlock... Have fun with that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacefrisian Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Oh, and as for the "hatches are blown" reference, this is more contextual than it is literal... if the hatches were literally blown off, that would mean that in a nutshell... the entire thing basically explodes... "Blowing the hatch" referres to a High pressure blast of air breaking a vacuum seal, which in general makes a hissing sound, which depending on the size of the airlock, can be comperable to sounding like a small explosion. Now if you actually look at where the hatches touch the DP "walls", there are little circles lining the sides of both where they meet, this would basically be the modellers rendition of an Airlock... Have fun with that... I agree with that, cause it would mean that Corteaz cant use his "i've been expecting you" against Black Templar pods as they have a tidbit about their pods being to fast to be targetted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Simple. :cuss Coteaz doesn't shoot them in the air (destroyign both the pod and the entire unit inside with one hit!). Coteaz shots the DPS *after* is has landed (and is therefore not moving too fast to be targetted). He would have to, to also be able to shoot the unit that disembard only after the DP lands. He just knows where the DP is planning to land, and sets up for that. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.