[Pseudomancer]

Hey guys, the relevant parts of an email I sent yesterday to custserv@games-workshop.com. Some of the questions may seem dumb, but I'm working on a drone tactica and wanted to make sure I was solid on all points.

---

Do seeker missiles, which do not require LoS to the target, suffer from cover saves imposed by intervening terrain/units? It is hard to work out whether the shot goes over or through intervening terrain according to rules as written - if over, the target would only get the cover save of cover they're in.

Seeker missiles would follow the normal rules for cover. This could change with a FAQ, as it seem plausible that since seeker missiles do not use LOS, they may ignore some cover.

[Interesting response; I'm going to be asking for interpretations from opponents before choosing my seeker lists]

Do the two gun drones, that many Tau vehicles are equipped with as wargear, count as a second, separate kill point?

The rulebook is totally unclear on this, we are saying no, they do not count as a kill point (nor do they prevent you from gaining a kill point for killing the vehicle).

[WOOT]

On a related note, do the drones that commanders buy as wargear count as a separate killpoint, as a retinue would?

No, they are wargear.

[I did say there'd be stupid questions]

When a Piranha squadron has multiple models equipped with flechette dischargers, and is assaulted, how do the flechettes fire? Not at all, only one roll per assaulting model, or one roll per discharger per assaulting model? The rules sorta point in all three directions.

You would need to have the models with the Flechette Dischargers modeled so you (and the opponent) can tell which ones they are. Only the models attacking the models with Flechette Dischargers would have the chance of being hit.

[I'm not sure this is solid RAW stuff here (largely because there is no solid RAW on flechette and squadrons). I'm still not quite sure how we're meant to play it, but it sounds a little like we should look at which attackers are engaged with the FD-equipped piranha. It also sounds to me like he's speaking about the case of a single FD; this sounds like each FD has its individual effect. This would actually be a very interesting way to play the FD, as it would be possible for you to overlap several fields of flechette through positioning to meet the charge. Your opponent would then have the opportunity to engage his squad in such a way as to minimise having models engaged with multiple flechette-equipped Piranhas. I assume from the normal treatment of 'hits', that you would be able to remove models from any part of the squad. I may email John for clarification of these points, but if I'm interpreting his position correctly I find myself in agreement with it on a common-sense and tactically interesting level]

How do sensor spines work? They say the vehicle may be counted as obscured, as would a normal vehicle in the same position. But being in area terrain no longer confers Obscured status. Checking line of sight is problematic, because the skimmer is on a skimmer base: would a 'normal vehicle in the same position' be on a skimmer base, or not? That is, should LoS use the skimmer's location, or the location of a 'normal vehicle in the same position'? If the latter, does this justify taking the skimmer off its flight base in order to see if a 'normal vehicle in the same position' would be obscured? Apologies for the repetitive repetition.

The Sensors Spines do nothing as you can no longer hover over terrain.

[ =*( ]

Similarly, does Tau landing gear allow the vehicle to be taken off its flight base?

Sure but, as skimmer no longer die for being immobilized, Landing Gear have no real function in the game.

[Huh?]

[Zen]

Originally Posted by Pseudomancer

Similarly, does Tau landing gear allow the vehicle to be taken off its flight base?

Sure but, as skimmer no longer die for being immobilized, Landing Gear have no real function in the game.

[Huh?]

In the 4th Edition, doesn't a Skimmer get Destroyed if it got Immobilized as to in the 5th Edition, they only get Destroyed if they go Flat-Out? I think that what he means.

In any case, some good news for the Tau overall especially when it comes to KP. Now GW can take care of the Imperial Guard's KP problem :-*

[Jedibean]

How do sensor spines work? They say the vehicle may be counted as obscured, as would a normal vehicle in the same position. But being in area terrain no longer confers Obscured status. Checking line of sight is problematic, because the skimmer is on a skimmer base: would a 'normal vehicle in the same position' be on a skimmer base, or not? That is, should LoS use the skimmer's location, or the location of a 'normal vehicle in the same position'? If the latter, does this justify taking the skimmer off its flight base in order to see if a 'normal vehicle in the same position' would be obscured? Apologies for the repetitive repetition.

The Sensors Spines do nothing as you can no longer hover over terrain.

Sensor Spines do nothing? Is the guy on crack? It specifically says in the last line of the entry for sensor spines "...but the sensor spines allow it to avoid the affects of dangerous terrain." So what the hell is he talking about? Skimmers can no longer hover over terrain the way they used to. But now they have to take a dangerous terrain test. It seems clear to me that the sensor spine would just allow the vehicles to avoid dangerous terrain.

[Wild]

I'd have to agree, the guy is clearly on drugs. But at least it does help with the Kill Points that Drones from vehicles don't count.

[Jedibean]

Originally Posted by Wild

I'd have to agree, the guy is clearly on drugs. But at least it does help with the Kill Points that Drones from vehicles don't count.

Well, judging by the GW guys inability to read regarding sensor spines I dont know how to feel about his judgement on gun drones. I agree that they shouldn't be counted as a kill point considering that they've never counted as scoring in any capacity in any previous edition of the game. However, judging by the wording in the book saying that they operate as an independent unit and that any unit that you kill counts as a kill point then there's a valid argument going the other way too. It's an argument that I disagree with but it's an argument none the less.

My problem with believing the judgments rendered here on these particular issues is how incredibly wrong the guy was about sensor spines. Sensor spines clearly still have a use. It's obvious to anyone who reads and understands the entire entry in the codex.

[sarddok]

And about seeker missiles... If intervening terrain count... which one ? if there are more than one ?

[DELPHEUS]

Quite interesting...

[Korill]

Well, this is good I guess. But maybe GW should wait for all these quesitons to come in before making their FAQs.

[Sidstyler]

Originally Posted by Jedibean

Sensor spines clearly still have a use.

So do landing gear. A skimmer can "land" and act as LOS-blocking cover for a unit behind it, far from useless.

Also, I assume when it's been immobilized that the skimmer has "landed", so that's just odd to say they have no point.

[hippster59]

Originally Posted by Pseudomancer

Do the two gun drones, that many Tau vehicles are equipped with as wargear, count as a second, separate kill point?

The rulebook is totally unclear on this, we are saying no, they do not count as a kill point (nor do they prevent you from gaining a kill point for killing the vehicle).

[WOOT]

I find this response interesting. When GW was still taking phone calls for rule inquiries I called ended up calling 3 separate times on this issue and got the same response 3 times from 3 diffrent redshirts. That the gun drones from a vehicle do count as a kill point. Has anyone else had this issue? At this point I really don't care what they rule as long as they pick something and stick with it.