Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2007 19:31:23 GMT -5
It never says the second guy is even a loader, hes just around to carry extra equipment on the move, the second man isnt required for the gun to shoot, if the guy is dead it still works. And even if they were a "Loader", the men are still armed with rifles.
|
|
|
Post by Woz on Jan 30, 2007 20:31:26 GMT -5
I know that in 40k the loader can still fire, the point I was trying to make is that 40K isn't like real life. RE Azalar: I know these aren't real action shots I was just showing how a guy who's using both hands to load ammo into a weapon can't fire another wepon at the same time (unless he's good with his feet). Also I did once got to fire a GPMG when I was in the cadets. www.army.mod.uk/equipment/pw/pw_mg.htm I also had a turn as the loader. Why would they train people to do that if you don't do it in real life?
|
|
|
Post by Turtleboy(AWOL) on Feb 5, 2007 14:46:25 GMT -5
the way I play is that the heavy weapon guardsman has his heavy weapon, and that's all, but the 'loader' (2nd man in the heavy weapon team) still retains his lasgun. seems fair and fluffy enough to work for me.
|
|
|
Post by Goddess of Darkness on Feb 8, 2007 16:13:39 GMT -5
They way i have read the rules is that if the HW fires then the 2 guardsmen can't use there lasguns, but if it doesn't fire than they may use there lasguns.
I have never shot any type of weapon, but if I may be so bold to say that i feel it is useless trying to compare to real life stuff as this is a hobby based 40,000 years in the future and the only thing that matters is what the guys have written in the rule book.
|
|
|
Post by Turtleboy(AWOL) on Feb 9, 2007 4:25:06 GMT -5
the only thing that matters is what the guys have written in the rule book. can't argue that. the question is: what EXACTLY is written in the rulebook. this thread has gone on long enough that I'm gonna take my full fledged whack at interpretting rules straight out of the codex. insert your arguments as you form them. ok...so now lets compare this to the special weapon options section to establish a syntax of how they're intending these rules to work. ok, so we know that special weapon troopers trade their lasgun for their special weapon. they don't have the option to fire their special weapon or their lasgun so we can safely assume the term ' may be armed with one of the special weapons from the following list' essentially means in plain english: 'if you take a special weapon then that's the models new gun.' now we look at the phrase from the heavy weapon team that is almost identical to the special weapon entry: ' must be armed with one of the weapons from the following list.' The difference in the syntax of this and the similar term in the special weapon entry is the words may and must. a guardsman MAY take special weapon if he is not apart of a heavy weapon team. in the heavy weapon team the term MUST appears - why MUST the guardsmen take a heavy weapon? the answer is the first part of the entry for the heavy weapon option. it goes as follows: ' Two Guardsmen may form a single heavy weapon crew. ' so the reason they MUST take be armed with a heavy weapon instead of their regular weapons is that they are officially a 'heavy weapon crew.' this means that all heavy weapon crews MUST have a heavy weapon. this makes sense but also means that, looking at how the same words for the special weapon option are exactly the same, the fact becomes clear that a heavy weapon crew has no other weapon than the heavy weapon. the loader has no weapon, he is simply the loader. if the gunner dies, the loader becomes the gunner, but you effectively trade 2 lasguns for a heavy weapon when you establish a heavy weapon crew. I honestly don't see any room for argument in how it's worded in the codex and in saying that, I admit that I've been playing wrong all along and even giving myself an extra lasgun shot every turn!!
|
|
|
Post by Goddess of Darkness on Feb 9, 2007 5:39:16 GMT -5
Your going the wrong way about it turtleboy.....the word you should be looking for is "replace".
Only the special weapons say that you may REPLACE your weaponry with..... The heavy weapons say ....Lasgun. They must be equiped with a heavy weapon.
|
|
|
Post by Turtleboy(AWOL) on Feb 9, 2007 5:56:24 GMT -5
the two quotes in my post are directly out of the current guard codex... where does it say replace? *turns the light back on at 3am and goes flipping thru the guard dex again*
|
|
|
Post by Turtleboy(AWOL) on Feb 9, 2007 6:18:45 GMT -5
ohh ok, I see where you're getting that - it's out of the heavy weapon squad section of the hq entry.
I'd say the heavy weapon squad entries are far less clear than the regular entries in say the guard infantry platoon entry in the troop section or the hq squad entry.
let me try to look at this as logically as I can.
before I do, to recap, we know that in, for example, the troop section, under the armored fist squad, it says that 2 guardsmen can form a heavy weapon crew. heavy weapon crews must be armed with a heavy weapon. it then that you can take a special weapon for a special weapon trooper but it uses the exact same syntax as the heavy weapon crew syntax.
so we can assume that since the syntax is the same, the effect is the same: the special weapon trooper replaces his lasgun with a special weapon and the heavy weapon crew replaces its weapons with a heavy weapon.
now lets see if anything in the heavy/special weapon squad entries outright conflicts that...
ok initially this seems to support the theory that heavy weapon crews retain their lasguns due to the fact that it says 'weapons: lasguns. blahblahblah...' still, going off the syntax from the regular unit entries, when a heavy weapon crew is formed, it must be given a heavy weapon as its weapon instead of the lasguns the guardsmen used to have. the reasons for this are detailed above, but it comes down to the syntax for what it is to become equipped with a new weapon option that is the same with special weapons as it is for heavy weapons.
lets set this aside and look at the special weapons entry to see if that helps us some...
ok. this essentially says: you get 6 troops and you can give 3 of them special weapons, it's clear, concise, and to the point. it also lends credence to the thought that heavy weapon crews still get lasguns, BUT...
look at the number/squad lines. special weapon squads just come with 6 guardsmen. heavy weapon squads come with 6 guardsmen **in 3 heavy weapon crews.** heavy weapons crews MUST be given 'special' weaponry - the heavy weapon, so they are automatically assumed to be replacing their lasguns with heavy weapons since, as the entry states, they >must< take the heavy weapon.
I would submit that the fact that lasguns are even listed in the weapons section of heavy weapons squads is practically a typo but actually ISNT because the heavy weapon crew has not yet been assigned a weapon >at which point< it loses the lasguns (using the syntax from any other section of the codex where heavy weapon crew and special weapon options are worded exactly alike to support this theory).
I think I stand by my opinion that heavy weapon crews are nothing but two unarmed guardsmen manning a heavy weapon, even though this is easily the most debatable rule point in the whole codex in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Goddess of Darkness on Feb 9, 2007 16:44:22 GMT -5
I look at it this way....
A special weapon, say, a flamer, one model has a flamer which can move and shoot. He can't shoot his lasgun due to having a flamer in his hands. Correct?
A heavy weapon, must not move to shoot. What are they doing when they are not shooting their heavy weapon (which is planted firmly on the ground)? They have their hands free to reach over and pick up their lasgun and shoot at the enemy.
That is my interpretation of the rule and also the theory behiind the rule.
|
|
|
Post by Turtleboy(AWOL) on Feb 9, 2007 17:46:33 GMT -5
a special weapon trooper with, in your example, a flamer, has no lasgun. he can't shoot his lasgun cuz he doesnt have it. he doesn't have the option to fire either his lasgun or his flamer, he simply doesnt have a weapon other than the flamer. the snytax on how a heavy weapon crew is equipped is exactly the same as how special weapon troopers are equipped. in the end, to quote one of the greats: the only thing that matters is what the guys have written in the rule book.
|
|
|
Post by Woz on Feb 9, 2007 18:48:18 GMT -5
the only thing that matters is what the guys have written in the rule book. The rule book says that Guardsmen come with Las guns (or if its a HW/ SW squad attached to a HQ they have Lasguns orLas pistols and CC weapons.) Example Fire support squad- Under Number/Squad it says "see Command Squad entry for Guardsman Profile" In the Command Squad entry under weapons it says "Guardsmen are armed with either a lasgun, or a laspistol and a close combat weapon" So you get three two man HW crews with Lasguns, they then are equipped with a HW. The same applies for Special Weapon Support Squads except that it says that the SW REPLACES the guardsmans other weapon. REPLACES only appears in this section. So if you follow the rules then all guardsmen in a support squad or infantry squad come armed with Lasgun (or LP + cc weapon) but that weapon is only replaced if he's in a SW support squad because thats the only entry that says that his new weapon replaces his old one. Also if they don't already come with weapons then where does the loader get his Lasgun from ? It deosn't say that one guardsman must chose a HW and the other one takes a Lasgun. The problem is that in all the entries apart from the SW Support Squad entry GW forgot to add the word REPLACE when you give a guy a new weapon. Why did they say Replace in the SW section but nowhere else? It was probably a mistake on GWs part but by putting it in one section and nowhere else then all the word lawyers jumped on it.
|
|
|
Post by Turtleboy(AWOL) on Feb 9, 2007 21:32:04 GMT -5
they only used the word 'replace' in the special weapon squad section because all the other sections have 'heavy weapon crews' which must manditorily replace their weapons already so the word 'replace' is assumed to be something which must occur as soon as the heavy weapon is selected. in support of this, I give you the entries for heavy weapon and special weapon options in literally every other section of the codex. note that the syntax for how they 'replace' their weapon is worded >exactly< alike. this means that special weapon troopers replace their lasgun and get a special weapon and for heavy weapons, 2 guardsmen form a 'heavy weapon crew' at which point they must replace their weapons with a heavy weapon from the list provided.
getting back to your argument, again, that the word 'replace' only appears in the special weapon section - this is because once you form a heavy weapon crew you must replace their weapons with a heavy weapon. the troopers in a special weapon squad don't have a similar 'crew' type sub-unit, so the word replace becomes neccessary to use, otherwise the rules would leave it totally open to interpret that a special weapon trooper could have both weapons and choose which to use.
again - forget the command platoon entries for a moment - bear with me on this and you'll see my logic clearer I believe. go to the entry for armored fist..or infantry platoon squads, or the straight up command squad. look at the syntax for selecting special weapons. now look at the syntax for selecting a heavy weapon. it's the same. this means that just like a special weapon trooper loses his lasgun to get his flamer or whatever, so too does the heavy weapon crew lose its lasguns to get its heavy bolter or whatever.
the codex doesn't contradict itself, it just totally muddies the water with the heavy weapon/special weapon squad entries, but the key is the term 'heavy weapon crew.' as defined in the other sections, if you have a heavy weapon crew, then you must replace the lasguns with a heavy weapon. this is why they dont use the word 'replace' in the heavy weapon squad entry - because the unit starts as three pre-created crews. the special weapon squad doesn't have any pre-created sub-unit (like a heavy weapon crew) that infers that the sub-unit must replace its weapon, and thusly, the word 'replace' must be used in the special weapon squad section.
does this make sense? it totally does to me but it's a point that makes my eyes go crossed to try to explain ><
|
|
|
Post by Woz on Feb 10, 2007 6:55:53 GMT -5
Your trying to mix Logic and GW.
If you take a HW crew as something seperate from the rest of the squad then the loader has no weapon. It says that the HW crew must be armed with a HW but it doesn't say anything about the loader so unless he already comes with a Lasgun he's unarmed and if the loader does come with a lasgun then so would the gunner.
You can't assume that a HW replaces a Lasgun. The rules don't say that the HW replaces the lasgun so the lasgun stays.
I personally don't give my HW and SW guys Lasguns as that seems like the right thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by Turtleboy(AWOL) on Feb 10, 2007 13:27:08 GMT -5
wow, well I got off the phone with the rulez boyz, and this is the verdict: heavy weapons crews have 2x lasguns and a heavy weapon. the loader may fire his weapon anytime. if the gunner doesn't fire the heavy weapon then he may fire his lasgun if he wants. that's pretty awesome really! no more times when I move into rapid fire range and sigh because my heavy weapon crew moved so can't shoot the heavy bolter or whatever as the rest of the squad rapid fires I must conceed that I was wrong at this point, though it was still a pretty murky chunk of the codex in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by knight (M.I.A) on Feb 10, 2007 14:21:43 GMT -5
Nah. The codex isn't that bad, ever tried to equip some CSM? Then you know what a crappy written codex is
|
|
|
Post by Turtleboy(AWOL) on Feb 11, 2007 4:58:43 GMT -5
getting back on topic: when I was talking with the rulez boyz the guy I was talking to was used to only seeing heavy weapon squads with the infantry being heavy weapon-less. kinda an interesting fact. must be england style to run infantry on the light side of thing, but it makes me wonder why you'd want to send your infantry out into the open since that's the only thing for em to do if they don't have a heavy weapon pretty much!
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Grammissar Azalar on Feb 11, 2007 12:43:33 GMT -5
Hey Tboy, Thanks for Phoneing The Rule Boyz, If this went on any longer, I was gonna do the same. Lol.
Thanks for clearing it up, thank god I always stuck Lasguns on aswell.
|
|
|
Post by fatuous on Feb 12, 2007 9:26:27 GMT -5
Wow, so a Fire support squad of 3 H bolters can fire 9 HBs shots and the loaders lasguns (6 or 3). Sweet.
Cheers for checking that up m8.
|
|
|
Post by Turtleboy(AWOL) on Feb 12, 2007 15:04:21 GMT -5
yeah, not too shabby. it's also nice that when you move a line squad into rapid fire range of the enemy, you get BOTH the heavy weapon crews rapid fire lasguns to add to the squads firepower and the heavy weapon gunner just opts not to shoot his heavy weapon.
|
|
|
Post by Commissar on Feb 22, 2007 22:38:47 GMT -5
Hmmm...sniper teams are dumb, ratlings are cheaper and you can field more of them.
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Sept 22, 2007 15:43:26 GMT -5
Yup, IG have it rough.... (Darkside): Swedish infantry carry 6 heavy weapons?! No wonder you guys handed it to the Russkies.Bwhahahaha! (breif struggle. Normality ensues) the morale of this story is.... errr... always read the small print (or abscence therof) Never trust a word with more than four sylables Don't take sniper teams, 2 meltaguns/flamers and a demo charge is infinietely more entertaining. Oh, and by the way turtleboy, your website is pretty good
|
|
|
Post by twerd on Oct 1, 2007 1:34:18 GMT -5
just seen this thread
arguing over a lasgun shot A LASGUN SHOT like come on it's not llike your going to do anything with a lasgun shot most of the time
well tboy take a non hw platoon for charging a flank of the enemy works some what for me ;D
|
|