|
|
If GW hasn’t learned by now, they never will.
The Imperial Guard Valkyrie, a shiny new model with a mammoth new price tag ($58), was released along with the new codex last month. Its over-the-top rules and undercosting make it the stand-out choice for Fast Attack, however it has become apparent that GW never actually play-tested the model in a game of 40k.
The problem with the Valkyrie model is the new flight stand, which measures about 5 1/4″ inches tall. The increased height allows the model to fly quite a distance above the tabletop plane (fly, plane, get it?), and while this may look impressive, it creates some fundamental problems for how the model functions in the game.
First of all, let’s look at the rules for transports. In order to disembark a unit from its transport vehicle the unit must be able to be placed within 2″ of an access point. Many players assume that you measure along a horizontal plane, therefore (incorrectly) believing that you can place the unit on the ground under the access point. The rulebook, however, makes no such limitations on distance.
A model is considered to occupy the area of its base, so
when measuring distances between two models, use
the closest point of their bases as your reference points.Rulebook, p.3
When the unit disembarks, each model is
deployed within 2″ of one of the vehicle’s access
points, and within unit coherency.Rulebook, p.67
The language of the rules simply requires us to measure the distance between point A and point B. If you place the disembarking models on the ground they will not be within 2″ of the access point and therefore cannot disembark (measurements are made from the base of the disembarking models). Yes, this means you cannot use the normal disembarkation rules for the Valkyrie without suitably high terrain beneath the model. (Note: this is also a problem with embarking.)
On the one hand, it seems plainly obvious that units aboard the vehicle should be able to disembark normally. On the other hand, GW did specifically give the Valkyrie a special rule which allows embarked units to exit without the normal restrictions, including transport moving speed. Fortunately the Grav Chut Insertion rule does mitigate the effects of this problem, and is a sufficient workaround until GW addresses the issue via FAQ.
Unfortunately, the flight stand creates another glaring issue. The rules for vehicles state that all measurements are made to the vehicle’s hull (the skimmer rules tell us to ignore the base), which logically also extends to mission objectives. Because the Valkyrie is so high off the ground, it will never be able to get within 3″ of an objective in order to contest or score (with an embarked Troop unit) unless that objective is elevated or more than 2 1/4″ tall. That’s a pretty big “oops”, GW.
But look on the bright side, disheartened IG players–the double-edged sword cuts both ways. There are some killer advantages that come with being up so high.
First of all, Valkyries are almost immune to being within half range of meltaguns (remember: measure from the base of the firing model to the vehicle’s hull). An infantry model will need to be completely underneath the flyer in order to be within 6″ for 2D6 on the penetration roll. The height shaves distance off of all conventional weapons that need to measure range; you can use the formula for calculating the hypotenuse of a right triangle to figure out exactly how much your range is impacted based on your distance from the Valkyrie’s base.
The other added bonus for fielding a Valkyrie is that the gunship’s height allows it unobstructed lines of sight to models that normally would receive cover saves. The high angle measured from the gun barrels (or nosecones) of its weapons will often be enough to see over intervening models and terrain pieces rather than through them, thereby denying cover saves from these conditions. This is especially valuable when arming the flyer with S8 AP3 rockets or taking the Vendetta loadout (triple twin-linked lascannons).
Some argue that all measurements must be restricted to the two-dimensional plane because this is how all of the diagrams in the rulebook are presented, and because most of the rules do not take into account the third dimension. However, this logic is flawed. The section on Ruins (specifically, moving within ruins) shows that the developers were indeed aware the third dimension with respect to how Warhammer 40K functions. It cannot be reasonably concluded that the game must be played in 2D simply because the majority of it typically is–the introduction of the Valkyrie drastically changes things.
Many players on Dakka (and elsewhere) are outraged that anyone would even consider not letting passengers disembark or claim objectives, however these same players are unlikely to similarly discount the rules when acting in their favor (for example, when a meltagun is not within 6″). People have to realize that you can’t have your cake and eat it too. Regardless of its rules oddities, the Valkyrie is still a monumentally efficient choice that packs a huge punch and comes with more special rules than you can shake a stick at.
Use it, but use it correctly.
| Posted in Rules | 14 Comments » |  |
Email Danny Internets
TastyTaste: After about the first 15 comments I thought to myself wouldn’t it be fun to calculate the average...
Tyr'sVanguard: I suppose I get belligerently drunk too often to be a champion… :(
Dashofpepper: Hod, that has nothing to do with my success. The flash cards on the other hand, have everything to do...
Hod: @Dash Sex good. I think thats sacrifice enough. Though one thing you do present that has been the staple of...
yermom: I guess thats why im only 13th. I spend far too much time with females!
Green7: Why havenbt they ever put in the results for BoLScon ? Paul Murphy would be ranked #1 if they did. I talked...
Yur Ahlozer: wow fail.
Loading ...
I have to respectfully disagree with your argument that gunfire is in anything other than the 2-d plane, save for ruins.My next point will explain why.
I have just recently had an argument with a co-player at my local club. He looked at jump packs/wings and the rule that said they ignore intervening terrain and then observed the rules for such movement into and out of ruins–just like you point out for shooting– true point to point. He claimed that since movement into/onto ruins required a true distance measurement, all flight movement required measurement– basically getting rid of the entire “ignore intervening terrain rule’ that stands.He couldn’t accept the idea that flight movement would allow a model to simply fly forward 12 inches even if in the middle of the way there was a building or wall or whatnot 5ft high.He stated that such logic didn’t mesh with the rules for ruins and that since the ruins made more since to him that was what was good to game by.
That isn’t the case though, and as we argued and found (no duh), even getting word back from GW on it, there are fairly distinctive rules for ruins and then there are rules for the rest of the terrain. This also applies to your shooting.
Think about it. let’s say there’s some fairly uneven terrain ( steep hillsides, etc) out on the table. If template weapons or blast weapons get over them they’re targets. plain and simple. However, in ruins that isn’t the case. You have to select a specific elevation level to target with your weapons and only hit what’s there even if scatter out into the open air and would normally hit 5-6 guys. By that same token… flame templates are pretty expressly described as being fired out in a flat, 2-d form catching everything underneath them yet in your terms it would seem, (maybe you don’t mean it that way, I don’t know), that they would have to be held over models according to the contour of the terrain instead.
I have a few other gripes with parts here and there of your view, but I’ll simply end on this. Skimmers don’t ignore their bases completely.
Maybe somebody else will pick that little tidbit up and run with it.
The stuff about the ruins is only RAI support to sway those who can’t accept the rules as they are written.
There’s absolutely nothing confusing or unclear about how to measure from A to B. Is the model on the ground within 2 inches of the Valkyrie’s hull? No? Then you can’t put him there, period.
To assume that it happens in a 2-D plane requires explicit support from the rules because it runs completely counter to how the statement works according to the English language. In order to claim that you ignore the vertical dimension you’re going to need to quote a rule which supports it.
As for the skimmers and bases thing, it’s totally irrelevant:
“The skimmer’s base is effectively ignored, except when assaulting a skimmer, in which case models may move into contact with the vehicle’s hull, its base or both.”
Base does not equal hull, and it certainly doesn’t equal access point.
Okay, I read up on the rules on embarking/disembarking and measuring and whatnot and I have to say I’ve come around for the most part to your line of thinking
With that said, I have a new point…
“There’s absolutely nothing confusing or unclear about how to measure from A to B. Is the model on the ground within 2 inches of the Valkyrie’s hull? No? Then you can’t put him there, period.”
+
A model is considered to occupy the area of its base, so
when measuring distances between two models, use
the closest point of their bases as your reference points.
Rulebook, p.3
Wellllllllll….. What about Assault rules stating that models must be within assault range to assault— this is usually about 2″ combined with the Ruins rule for assault on one level to another.
“That is to say, distances between models on different levels are measured between the heads of the models on the lower level to the bases of the models on the upper levels” rulebook p. 85
See? nothing is immutable. A to B is not actually as simple as that. So, on that note, if you had ridiculously tall models could they board/exit the vehicle or is that specific type of measurement reserved solely for that specific type of assault.
Another scenario, say you’re high up on a point and you’re shooting down on a troop with a troop. Do you literally measure your shooting from your estimated base height as opposed to the top of your model’s head and when you’re checking to be in range are you literally measuring to the enemy model’s base as opposed to the top of its head?Do you figure top of head to top of head is as good as base to base?
What if you’re a vendetta shooting at extreme range (theoretical incoming so forget real range) and you check range and find from some peculiar happenstance of height and angle that you can literally touch a, lets say, Carnifex’s model, but not the actual base– do you not get that shot?
Is simply “over it” but not “to” good enough? Would the literalist’ perspective even be really feasible for standard game play without making some of the core procedures ( and by proxy the game) nearly unplayable to the average casual gamer?
BTW, the rule on assault WAS what I was alluding to in regards to skimmers.
Sorry, one more thing. I’m trying to pitch the rules as you’ve presented them for the Valkyrie, but now they’re referring to some asinine quote
Pg. 71 “Note that a skimmer must be set down on the table and left in place at the end of its move-it cannot be left hovering in mid air”
I took this to mean you can’t just say it’s hovering 24″ above the table in limbo or some such nonsense. They’re taking this to mean–no, it literally has to come off its base and hit the floor.
My response what “#@$# are you #$@#$ talkin’ about?” followed by the rules talking about assaulting the BASE or hull of a skimmer and the rules about not drawing range to the BASE, but rather the hull.
You know… the little things that suggest the base is still around after movement.
I actually got one to admit that. However their counter was that even if that were true….what requires them to actually place their skimmer
So there I am… what actually requires people to use the dog gone base any ol’ skimmer comes with as opposed to just moving around on the table surface flush. I’ve got nothing.
So,
What AV do you use when you fire at the bottom of a vehicle?
I guess it would be “side”, but you could make a pretty good argument for “back” as well.
Regarding which armor facing you’re firing into, whether you’re above or below the vehicle makes no difference as per the rules and the diagram on page 60.
The only time the top armor of a vehicle ever comes into play is with barrage weapons (in which case you defer to side armor, also page 60).
Heh,
I was mostly joking, as I think the whole idea is silly…
If we’re going by diagrams, though, whether you’re above or below the vehicle makes no difference when disembarking according to the diagram showing space marines within two inches of the rhino hull (I think it’s on page 67 but I’m away from my rulebooks at the moment).
I don’t think the mere presence of top-down diagrams is ever sufficient to allow us to ignore the vertical dimension in-game.
I do agree that the vertical dimension has no effect on which armor facing you’re shooting at, but not because of the 2d diagram.
-GK
The other issue is that a skimmer can’t have anything underneath it and the valk is massive.
GW needs to shit or get off the pot, they have real line of sight but a 2d system with the exception of ruins. No models can ever be underneath/overtop eachother EXCEPT in ruins apparently. The valk rules are just fucked.
I agree the Valkyrie rules could be clearer, but they do not have a 2D system. The line of sight rules are proof enough of that.
I just found the errata for the Valkyrie from 2009, it states Valkyrie are used as normal skimmers except that distances for embarking/disembarking are measured from the base. Personally I think I’ll use a house rule where I have to ‘land’ the Valkyrie unless the troops inside have some doctrine (i.e. gravchute insertion). This seems the most fair to me even if it’s not the approach GW takes. I’d also say if a Valkyrie is landed the problem with shooting up at it is removed and it won’t get the special rule for glancing hits only on skimmers as it is essenially holding position in one place to disembark. Sounds reasonable to me.
Not sure what edition of 40k you’re playing, but there is no rule that says you get only glancing hits on skimmers.
House rules are fine, but just don’t expect others to play by them unless you agree beforehand, and never at a tournament unless it’s strictly locals.
i dont know for shure, but when the valk was just a forge world model, it had decent logical rules, to it, but i admit i was alittle drunk when me and my mates where rockin the vlak