Tau Empire Codex 2013 | Army Builder Program
Dark Angels Codex 2013
Chaos Daemons Codex 2013
Chaos Space Marines Codex 2012

Warhammer 40k Forum Tau Online

 

Warhammer 40K Forum

twin linked rule
Closed Thread
Old 02 Sep 2005, 17:44   #1 (permalink)
Kroot Warrior
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 27
Default twin linked rule

in my opion the twin linked rule doesnt make sense and a very bad rule. anybody know why GW even thought of this extremely horrible and messed up rule. do people at GW lack brains or something?
XV15 Stealthsuit is offline  
Old 02 Sep 2005, 17:51   #2 (permalink)
42
Shas'El
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Haddenham, Aylesbury, Bucks, England
Posts: 4,098
Send a message via MSN to 42
Default Re: twin linked rule

Excuse me? I don't quite get your line...What exactly do you have against the twin linked rule?

Twin linked weapons are bascially two weapons firing as one - even thought one shot is only ever fired it hits with greater accuracy. Twin linked weapons obviously will never cost as much as two weapons - if you are a Tau player look at the armament options for Crisis battlesuits in the Tau Codex to see what I mean.

--42
__________________
42 is offline  
Old 02 Sep 2005, 17:52   #3 (permalink)
Ethereal
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18,087
Default Re: twin linked rule

Quote:
Originally Posted by XV15 Stealthsuit
in my opion the twin linked rule doesnt make sense and a very bad rule. anybody know why GW even thought of this extremely horrible and messed up rule. do people at GW lack brains or something?
There have been several incarnations of the "twin-linking" rules. *The first was a weapon that rolled to hit once but caused two "to-wound" rolls. *The second was just a weapon with two "to-hit rolls" that must be taken at the same target (redundant on a single model). *The current incarnation of the rule was introduced in 3rd edition. *It just represents the fact that a higher rate of fire is more likely to cause a wounding hit, but only on the specific model being fired at. *It actually makes more sense if you think about it. *Firing two lascannons at the same spot on an enemy tank is more likely to get through armor than one lascannon, but won't necessarily do any more damage. *You are going to need to be a little more specific about why you don't like the rule.
khanaris is offline  
Old 02 Sep 2005, 18:02   #4 (permalink)
Kroot Warrior
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 27
Default Re: twin linked rule

but if you fire to lascannons with a land raider then the lascannons will hit deferent places unless the imperium angles them to intersect at a specific distence so then you should have more of a chance to do damage as you have two different spots hit.
XV15 Stealthsuit is offline  
Old 02 Sep 2005, 18:17   #5 (permalink)
Shas'El
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,742
Default Re: twin linked rule

I think the twin link rule is an excellent way to account for multiple, similar fires from a single source. Chance of hitting increases. Chance of doing damage doesn't.

Since the "people at GW" are making money hand over fist from us gamers, I'd say their wits are fully within normal parameters.

Wanax
Shaso Wanax is offline  
Old 02 Sep 2005, 18:24   #6 (permalink)
Ethereal
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18,087
Default Re: twin linked rule

Quote:
Originally Posted by XV15 Stealthsuit
but if you fire to lascannons with a land raider then the lascannons will hit deferent places unless the imperium angles them to intersect at a specific distence so then you should have more of a chance to do damage as you have two different spots hit.
Technically, they are supposed to hit at approximately the same place, or at least close enough that they won't be hitting seperate subsystems. Not really the best way to represent it, but 40k is pretty heavily abstracted for the sake of game balance.
khanaris is offline  
Old 02 Sep 2005, 18:33   #7 (permalink)
Kroot Warrior
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 27
Default Re: twin linked rule

but if one of your lascannons shots miss then you hit the edge of the tank in the first place because there sooo close together. and if you hit the edge of a tank then that would be a glancing hit probobly in real life. and even if the hit the same subsystems it still would do more damage. for instence if i drop a sinder block on a table it might brake( simulating a lascannon) but if i drop two sinder blocks on a table then their will do a higher probobility that the table would break so therefore you can come to the conclusion that if two lascannons hit a tank then their would be a much higher chance for that tank to be disabled
XV15 Stealthsuit is offline  
Old 02 Sep 2005, 18:49   #8 (permalink)
Shas'Vre
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bristol, England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,102
Default Re: twin linked rule

Think of it more that they aren't firing at the same time. Thus the first shot is the 'tracer'. If you miss, you can adjust the aim of the second gun. That makes perfect sense, and it's a technique used by artillery and mortar crews I believe.

Or you can think of it like an anti aircraft gun - multiple barrels firing at the same time. In this technique the theory is that a bullet won't hit exactly the same place as the last when firing that quickly, plus you're aiming at a fast moving target. The chances of you hitting with a single shot are tiny. The more bullets you fire, the larger the spread area of bullets will be and thus the more likely you are to hit. Weapons are limited by their RPM (Rounds Per Minute), so more guns are added to the frame.

The example shown in Turn Signals On A Land Raider is an amusing, if inaccurate, way of looking at the rule.

~Andromidius
__________________
Tactica Imperial Guard: Conscripts
http://forums.tauonline.org/index.php?topic=9751.0
Andromidius is offline  
Old 02 Sep 2005, 19:37   #9 (permalink)
Kroot Warrior
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 25
Send a message via AIM to The_Codeman Send a message via MSN to The_Codeman
Default Re: twin linked rule

Quote:
Originally Posted by XV15 Stealthsuit
in my opion the twin linked rule doesnt make sense and a very bad rule. anybody know why GW even thought of this extremely horrible and messed up rule. do people at GW lack brains or something?
Am I the only person that found this to be very funny?
__________________
Currently looking for San Diego gamers...
The_Codeman is offline  
Old 02 Sep 2005, 19:38   #10 (permalink)
Shas'Vre
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bristol, England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,102
Default Re: twin linked rule

Apperently so.

~Andromidius
__________________
Tactica Imperial Guard: Conscripts
http://forums.tauonline.org/index.php?topic=9751.0
Andromidius is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Twin-Linked Mathhammer... Grorx Tau 7 11 Mar 2009 22:19
Twin linked weapons? Luseferous Tau 15 07 Jun 2007 02:35
Twin-Linked & Fire-Linked weapons Ravager House Rules 14 27 Mar 2007 05:38
Twin Linked? SpacePuppy General 40K 22 11 Feb 2007 03:51
Twin-Linked? Dagon General 40K 11 09 Feb 2005 18:30