PDA

View Full Version : Cannons and Close Combat in 8th



RichBlake
22-06-2010, 03:40
Something has been bugging me, for anyone who doesn't know how cannons work in 8th Edition it is thus:

Rotate the cannon in your movement phase to point at whatever
Pick a point on the board in a straight line from the cannon (remember you can measure whenever you want).
Roll an artillery dice, add that many inches (assuming no misfire) onto that line. This is where the ball lands.
Roll artillery dice to see how far it bounces (if at all)

So basically as it stands now but as if you guessed 100% accurate every time for the initial range.

This is all fine, however there is a section that says something alone the lines of:

"However a cannon cannot be fired so that it has the chance of hitting a unit that is fighting in close combat."

Now that is clearly there to prevent skullduggery that is currently present (I do it myself sometimes when I get frustrated by the line of sight rules) where you "guess" 30" at a unit that is clearly 3" away and smash into something on the other side of the board.

However since you know the precise measurements at all times, would this imply that if a combat was going on within 20 inches of your initial landing point (roll 10 on artillery then 10 again) then you could not shoot the cannon as it would hit an ongoing combat?

On the one hand the wording seems very clear, on the other hand that seems very restrictive. There is a strong RaW argument, but what do you guys think?

Ultimate Life Form
22-06-2010, 05:08
Glad to hear they've done away with overguessing.

Well if it is as you say it really sounds very clear to me. Basically it means you have to do the maths for each shot and see if it has a 'chance' to hit close combat.

However it doesn't sound too bad; I mean you have an entire battlefield to plaster with shots and it must be possible to draw a line somewhere that's legal (if not I daresay you have a problem that your cannons won't solve, either).

RichBlake
22-06-2010, 12:49
Glad to hear they've done away with overguessing.

Well if it is as you say it really sounds very clear to me. Basically it means you have to do the maths for each shot and see if it has a 'chance' to hit close combat.

However it doesn't sound too bad; I mean you have an entire battlefield to plaster with shots and it must be possible to draw a line somewhere that's legal (if not I daresay you have a problem that your cannons won't solve, either).

The only problem I forse is running monster in front of close combats to prevent the cannon from shooting at them. Units are less of an issue as they are too large and fiddly to do that with. Monster, especially flyers, can easily place themselves between a dirty big close combat and a cannon.

As you say the wording seems pretty clear, seems a bit harsh though. I guess it depends how much they meant it to be a "Don't be an idiot with it" and how much they meant it to be literal.

TheDarkDaff
22-06-2010, 13:02
Something has been bugging me, for anyone who doesn't know how cannons work in 8th Edition it is thus:

Rotate the cannon in your movement phase to point at whatever
Pick a point on the board in a straight line from the cannon (remember you can measure whenever you want).
Roll an artillery dice, add that many inches (assuming no misfire) onto that line. This is where the ball lands.
Roll artillery dice to see how far it bounces (if at all)

So basically as it stands now but as if you guessed 100% accurate every time for the initial range.

This is all fine, however there is a section that says something alone the lines of:

"However a cannon cannot be fired so that it has the chance of hitting a unit that is fighting in close combat."

Now that is clearly there to prevent skullduggery that is currently present (I do it myself sometimes when I get frustrated by the line of sight rules) where you "guess" 30" at a unit that is clearly 3" away and smash into something on the other side of the board.

However since you know the precise measurements at all times, would this imply that if a combat was going on within 20 inches of your initial landing point (roll 10 on artillery then 10 again) then you could not shoot the cannon as it would hit an ongoing combat?

On the one hand the wording seems very clear, on the other hand that seems very restrictive. There is a strong RaW argument, but what do you guys think?You said yourself that you would deliberately cheat under the old rules to target things you couldn't legally target. This new restriction is taylor made to stop people like you abusing the rules. Yes it has made it impossible to shoot a cannon at targets near combats, which is a shame for those people that actually played by the rules but it is a small sacrifice to make the cannon rules more clear cut.


The only problem I forse is running monster in front of close combats to prevent the cannon from shooting at them. Units are less of an issue as they are too large and fiddly to do that with. Monster, especially flyers, can easily place themselves between a dirty big close combat and a cannon.

As you say the wording seems pretty clear, seems a bit harsh though. I guess it depends how much they meant it to be a "Don't be an idiot with it" and how much they meant it to be literal.If you are playing in your group of friends then feel free to house rule it so it can hit units in combat if they aren't the intitial target. I'd be more than happy with this as long as a realistic effort is made to hit the declared target (i.e. the unit in front of the combat).

rtunian
22-06-2010, 13:58
are you sure you roll art twice in 8th? in the demo game i played with the staff this weekend, they made a point of showing the new cannon rules, and a point of rolling only 1 art dice. there was no bounce to resolve. this was a selling point in the demonstration. as in "hey guys, cannons are even easier to use now! no guess, no bounce, just point and roll!"

snowywlf
22-06-2010, 14:11
I hope the rule is as interpreted above (ie - cant target something that could overshoot into combat). With the new TLOS rules, you really need to be able to protect your models *somehow* from instant canon death. If that means putting them dangerously in the fray near another combat, then that's a good compromise in my opinion.

It's also fluffy... you wouldnt be aiming at a terradon rider if immediately behind them is your unit of Swordsmen. The risk to plastering your own brothers/friends/comrades would be too great.

(Also, admitting you are blatantly and knowingly cheating might not be the best move in an OP.)

RichBlake
23-06-2010, 01:21
You said yourself that you would deliberately cheat under the old rules to target things you couldn't legally target. This new restriction is taylor made to stop people like you abusing the rules. Yes it has made it impossible to shoot a cannon at targets near combats, which is a shame for those people that actually played by the rules but it is a small sacrifice to make the cannon rules more clear cut.


Seem a bit sore on this subject :P

The main reason I did this was to get around what I believed to be ridiculous LoS rules. The giant bat (vargulf(sp?) is huge but not a large target for some reason) behind the skeletons half it's size could not be seen by the crew for some reason, or those skink skirmishers who are clearly tiny and well spread out prevent me form seeing ANYTHING instead of my cannon crew simply firing over them.

To be fair I never shot into combat on purpose, but did over guess to shoot units i couldn't see.



If you are playing in your group of friends then feel free to house rule it so it can hit units in combat if they aren't the intitial target. I'd be more than happy with this as long as a realistic effort is made to hit the declared target (i.e. the unit in front of the combat).

That would be an acceptable house rule, however me and my friends are rather competitive so sadly I doubt we'd be able to stick to it.


are you sure you roll art twice in 8th? in the demo game i played with the staff this weekend, they made a point of showing the new cannon rules, and a point of rolling only 1 art dice. there was no bounce to resolve. this was a selling point in the demonstration. as in "hey guys, cannons are even easier to use now! no guess, no bounce, just point and roll!"

Nah basically you pick a point as if you had guessed it, roll artillery to extend the range (to show the fact your crew are guessing the distance rather than you) and then you roll for bounce (to represent the bounce of course!).

The staff probably haven't had a chance to read through the book properly, or have only skimmed it, or one misread it then informed the rest. Anyway I'm 99.99% sure I'm right in this matter. Cannons are still LOADS more accurate, just not quite that accurate.

The reason I know they bounce too is the fact that if the ball bounces through a monster but doesn't kill the monster the mass of the monster stops the cannonball dead and protects the unit(s) behind it.



It's also fluffy... you wouldnt be aiming at a terradon rider if immediately behind them is your unit of Swordsmen. The risk to plastering your own brothers/friends/comrades would be too great.


While thats true I think that it's possible to imagine a crew aiming at a unit then firing and it being WAYYY off target, I mean a 10" followed by a 10" bounce to me screams "accidental" rather then "perfectly judged" when it comes to firing the cannon.

TheDarkDaff
23-06-2010, 08:57
Seem a bit sore on this subject :PI dislike all cheating. The only difference between overguessing and insisting all your units stats are 10's when they aren't is that overguessing relies on the player to have some integrity.


The main reason I did this was to get around what I believed to be ridiculous LoS rules. The giant bat (vargulf(sp?) is huge but not a large target for some reason) behind the skeletons half it's size could not be seen by the crew for some reason, or those skink skirmishers who are clearly tiny and well spread out prevent me form seeing ANYTHING instead of my cannon crew simply firing over them.
Everyone had to cope with the LoS rules so why should a cannon crew be any different. In fact they would be more likely to be freaked out by just how close the enemy is and aim for them.

BTW the Vargulf is just a feral vampire so it is really the same size as a human, which i believe would be of similar height to a human skeleton.


To be fair I never shot into combat on purpose, but did over guess to shoot units i couldn't see.Shooting into combat was never the problem as there were rules to cover it. Overguessing to do it is a different matter but the issue is with the overguessing part of that situation.




That would be an acceptable house rule, however me and my friends are rather competitive so sadly I doubt we'd be able to stick to it.
Your telling me you can't stick to an agreed upon rule before hand if you may get away with cheating:wtf:. That's a pretty poor moral position to take. Do you follow the law because it is the right thing to do or because you may get punished? Seriously this attitude is the major reason why some power gamers have a bad name. Play to win by all means but it isn't really a victory if you had to cheat to get it.

rtunian
23-06-2010, 14:22
The staff probably haven't had a chance to read through the book properly, or have only skimmed it, or one misread it then informed the rest. Anyway I'm 99.99% sure I'm right in this matter. Cannons are still LOADS more accurate, just not quite that accurate.

The reason I know they bounce too is the fact that if the ball bounces through a monster but doesn't kill the monster the mass of the monster stops the cannonball dead and protects the unit(s) behind it.

this wasn't just an "i asked the red dude" situation. this was the guy who does the demo games. i was playing a demo game with him. he had done like 20 of them before me (i could see the list of previous players). i hope he hasn't been spreading that much disinfo!!

i'm not suggesting the cannon doesn't bounce (i may have misspoke earlier). i'm saying i think that the cannon only bounces, not extends range. i'm going into the store tonight for a league game so i'll try to remember to check the book

RichBlake
23-06-2010, 15:26
I dislike all cheating. The only difference between overguessing and insisting all your units stats are 10's when they aren't is that overguessing relies on the player to have some integrity.


Personally I felt abusing a frankly ridiculous system was, while not cheating, extremely unsporting. Likewise over guessing with a cannon was never cheating, you guess a range and shoot. Was it unsporting? Probably. Does being unsporting to get around unsporting behaviour make it "ok"? I felt so, though of course you're free to disagree with me.


Everyone had to cope with the LoS rules so why should a cannon crew be any different. In fact they would be more likely to be freaked out by just how close the enemy is and aim for them.

Imo warmachines were the ones who suffered the most from this unless you had a hill (or usually two) and some of them became next to useless, or simply didn't make sense (I can't shoot at that massive unit of Chaos Warriors because their dosg are in the way, despite the fact I'm using a mortar...).


BTW the Vargulf is just a feral vampire so it is really the same size as a human, which i believe would be of similar height to a human skeleton.

Have you not seen the model? Gamesworkshop would disagree, they would say it's got bigger due to it's transformation into a bat thing.


Shooting into combat was never the problem as there were rules to cover it. Overguessing to do it is a different matter but the issue is with the overguessing part of that situation.

In that case then I'm sorry to say I don't think the rules cover me shooting through a unit to the one behind it despite I can't see it, though I could be wrong.




Your telling me you can't stick to an agreed upon rule before hand if you may get away with cheating:wtf:. That's a pretty poor moral position to take.

Umm no? We'd rather play with the "proper" rules, whatever their flaws they may be, as when we go to a tournament they wont be using our house rules anyway.


Do you follow the law because it is the right thing to do or because you may get punished?

Thats an interesting philosophical question, my attitude is most humans frequently:

1) Don't want to do things as it's wrong
2) Want to do things but don't because it is wrong
3) Want to do things but don't as the consequences aren't worth it
4) Break the law

Note thats most humans frequently have all 4 apply to them in any given, lets say year. Thats way OT though.



Seriously this attitude is the major reason why some power gamers have a bad name. Play to win by all means but it isn't really a victory if you had to cheat to get it.

It all depends. I play according to the attitude of the player opposite me. If a Fantasy player was friendly, open and didn't abuse loopholes in the LoS rules I wouldn't either. If they were closed, edgey, out to win at all costs and abused every loop hole they could to help them, so would I.

Both games have their pros and cons, the former is more fun but beating the other player in the latter is so much more satisfying.


this wasn't just an "i asked the red dude" situation. this was the guy who does the demo games. i was playing a demo game with him. he had done like 20 of them before me (i could see the list of previous players). i hope he hasn't been spreading that much disinfo!

i'm not suggesting the cannon doesn't bounce (i may have misspoke earlier). i'm saying i think that the cannon only bounces, not extends range. i'm going into the store tonight for a league game so i'll try to remember to check the book

Well I believe it is two artillery dice roles, however like the demo guy I am only human, either of us could be wrong!

With the new edition lots of small stuff will slip through for months as people read a paragraph and go "yeah that looks the same" and miss one sentance or something.

rtunian
25-06-2010, 02:39
Well I believe it is two artillery dice roles, however like the demo guy I am only human, either of us could be wrong!


i did look in the 8th book last night. you are right, same art rolls. only difference is no guess