SM assault bike

[The 518th]

well i was fighting with my steel legion and fought a "ultrajerk" player who i think cheated on his points (lol he had 3 times more mariens than ihad guard, including a land raider)

but getting to the point.
if an assault bike moves its maximuim movement it says it gets its armor save treated as invunerable...and it just so happens i was allowed 1 grey knight squad so im like "o my psycannon could help"...but he says he gets an armor save..and saved against it....do u get an inv. save AND armor save?

[Ikarus]

Originally Posted by The 518th

well i was fighting with my steel legion and fought a "ultrajerk" player who i think cheated on his points (lol he had 3 times more mariens than ihad guard, including a land raider)

but getting to the point.
if an assault bike moves its maximuim movement it says it gets its armor save treated as invunerable...and it just so happens i was allowed 1 grey knight squad so im like "o my psycannon could help"...but he says he gets an armor save..and saved against it....do u get an inv. save AND armor save?

This is a big tough question, that I really really do not have an answer to. To my belief direct rules wise, you could ignore the save, but that would not make sense realistically, being that it shouldn't be any different physically in the game from fast moving to slow.. they still have a strong armor,

This one cannot be answered by me. Rules can be read both ways.

'Psycannon goes through invurn. saves but normal saves are allowed'

'Turbo boost turns the bikes into invurn save"

Someone know the answer?

IKARUS

[The 518th]

lol, this is like the answer to life..

[MarkedByChaos]

so, I would say the bikes get the save. The way it reads it isn't percicely clear, but the implication via words like "ro represent the difficulty of hitting such fast moving targets" is fairly common sense. the idea that the Psicannon ignores Inv. Saves doesn't come from "added acuracy" but from its ability to ignore super armor more efficiently than it deals with normal armor because it uses Psi energy rather than conventional. seems like rules lawyering. I can understand being frustrated with the guy, and under any normal circumstance I would side with your opponent based on obvious oversite of the gw boys (who are not known for their most efficient way of edditing) and the fact that you are dealing with a one of a kind situation using rules written from separate versions of the game (daemon hunters came out before 4th ed) and aside from C'tan and one of the assasins you would otherwise never run in to this problem. However because of some dude cheeting take it by the script. and don't play with him again.

[Dan296]

i think the rule says that basicly for that turn the bike gains a invulnerable save equal to his armor save. so yes, he does get it. and dont play with him again.
on a side note, if you think that the opponant has ''overlooked'' a land raider or two when calculating his points, call him out on it! ask to see his army list with the points value! ive never really seen it with space marines, but with nids and chaos, cause they have so many upgrades, you can just say 'oh yea he has toxin sacs' or whatever. i should know, cause unfortunetly i used to do this until i stopped being an A-hole

[Torquemada Coteaz]

I think that the general concensus (including quite the many times of asking GW staffers at local and HQ stores) is that you DON'T get the armour save. Generally it's interpreted as "the bike is going so fast that for anything to hit the relative speed of bullet+biker is going to get through any armour" It's like boosing into the bullet at mach 5, instead of it hitting you at same speed :P.

the GW staffers also say that this game is meant to be FUN and FAST and not meant to be completely thorough and strict, so the rule is completely open to interpretation. However the answer I get is still "loses the AS"

my opinion here to add to the staffers':
-"treated as" doesn't mean "treat as, and if you lose it go back to other"

of course you could always just do it the true gamer way.
1 or 2 or 3 I'm right
4 or 5 or 6 you are
(or vise versa)

And yes if you think he's cheating definitely ask to see his army list. you don't "overlook" something like 4 squads and a LR. If he seems to have too many units, or has upgrades and stuff seem to pop up out of nowhere (e.g. turn 2 SM commander in PA didn't have a iron halo, but turn 4 you try to lascannon him and he does or something similar)

[Steellegioncpt]

no no no, he must be able to get his armour save simply because, yes the bike is going super fast thus he gains the invul on top of his armour. You dont loose armour cause your going too fast. The compromise is that though your gaining a +4 invul your loosing the ability to fire. Thusly your new stats with the turbo boost becomes +3 armour +4 invul, rather than +3 armour and able to FIRE. He has the choice of either one.

[Ikarus]

Originally Posted by Torquemada Coteaz

of course you could always just do it the true gamer way.
1 or 2 or 3 I'm right
4 or 5 or 6 you are
(or vise versa)

Otherwise known as the most special rule. The hand of fate.

Whoever rolls the greater number on the die wins the disputed problem Ofcourse it has to be reasonable.

IKARUS

[The 518th]

its jsut the rules say.
"his armor save is now treated as an inv. save..." so i took this as its turned into invunerability.

haha, i didnt car eto much, i know he cheated, i know the costs of marines, he had about 3k points feilded. its jsut the fact i was able to hold him off and infict decent damage was enoguh for me...but what really got me mad was when he "killed" my 'russ....he saw the edge of my dozer blade...and we went off on it for atleast 30 minutes..but being a 10 year old he keeps saying he hits it...and wouldnt listen,m so i gave it to him and proceeded to pretty much kill myself to get out of the game (i hate conceding).

haha, upgraded to the ultimate extreme o could only feild 844 points.(i know small army).
moral of the story...plasma cannons pwn termies

[Torquemada Coteaz]

"but being a 10 year old he keeps saying he hits it...and wouldnt listen,m so i gave it to him and proceeded to pretty much kill myself to get out of the game (i hate conceding)."

that's the second most important rule: when in doubt, side on your opponents' sides. not when it's too outrageous like 1k of extra models but things like rules-inclarities.
it makes game smoother, faster, more fun (generally) and lets you keep your friends.
And that about "not losing your armour due to speed"
I might have been inclear but "loosing your armour due to speed" is what i generally get from staffers.
you don't get 3+AS and 4+IS, but you take your AS and turn it into a 4+ IS
I'm just saying that's what GW people say
But of course, the aformentioned "siding to your enemy" and rolling the die works well too.
In the (immortal) words of Adam: "40k rules are NOT made for tournament play, so rules unclarities are often. So when in doubt side with your opponent or roll a die. 456 you win, 123 i am right."

god that was a long post... ok rant clear you can get out of cover now

[Ravens_Shadow]

Originally Posted by Torquemada Coteaz

I think that the general concensus (including quite the many times of asking GW staffers at local and HQ stores) is that you DON'T get the armour save. Generally it's interpreted as "the bike is going so fast that for anything to hit the relative speed of bullet+biker is going to get through any armour" It's like boosing into the bullet at mach 5, instead of it hitting you at same speed :P.

Even if the bike was going 200 mi/h, its velocity would still only be 136 ft/s. The muzzle velocity of the popular 20th century firearm is over 3000 ft/s. Since Force = Mass x Acceleration, the addition of these two vectors would have very little difference in the overall force of the impact, unless the mass of the projectile was extremely large (and it is obviously not). Granted, the additional force would still be distrubuted over the same small surface area of the armor, which would somewhat increase the total pressure placed on that particular section. However, that is assuming the direction of the vectors are exactly opposite. Even a slight change in the direction of the vector of the biker would result in massive difficulties in making the two vectors collide. Hence the rule for the invulnerable save, saving many long hours of arguing over vector magnitude and direction Thank you gw!!

[Torquemada Coteaz]

Originally Posted by Ravens_Shadow

However, that is assuming the direction of the vectors are exactly opposite. Even a slight change in the direction of the vector of the biker would result in massive difficulties in making the two vectors collide. Hence the rule for the invulnerable save, saving many long hours of arguing over vector magnitude and direction Thank you gw!!

Exactly opposite: not really, I think somewhere in the range of 1deg either side is acceptable (depending on range of initial firing too)
Also, if they were exactly SAME then it works as well, but impact would have less force.(though really not that much less force so not any difference is made)
long hours of arguing over vector magnitude and direction: exactly the kind of thing GW DOESNT want you to do :P
GW games are "not meant for competetive or tournie play, are supposed to run fast and generally smoothly, relying more on 2 players sportsmanship and etc instead of solid detailed rules" hence the whole thing about rules lawyering in special scenarios pops up

[Ikarus]

Originally Posted by Ravens_Shadow

Even if the bike was going 200 mi/h, its velocity would still only be 136 ft/s. The muzzle velocity of the popular 20th century firearm is over 3000 ft/s. Since Force = Mass x Acceleration, the addition of these two vectors would have very little difference in the overall force of the impact, unless the mass of the projectile was extremely large (and it is obviously not). Granted, the additional force would still be distrubuted over the same small surface area of the armor, which would somewhat increase the total pressure placed on that particular section. However, that is assuming the direction of the vectors are exactly opposite. Even a slight change in the direction of the vector of the biker would result in massive difficulties in making the two vectors collide. Hence the rule for the invulnerable save, saving many long hours of arguing over vector magnitude and direction Thank you gw!!

-That is, sir, when you know... you have had too much 40k.

"You can't do that!"
"Why?"
"It goes against the laws of physics!"
*Scratches head*
"I guess using Physics for 40k Rules Reasoning is justifiable.."
*GW Staff comes*
"Hey.. this is 4th edition. . . Its suppose to be 'easy!' "
" So... can bikes get their save?
"Well well...... since.. er.... "
*GW Staff walks away*
"Help?..."

(Oh man sounds like a good script for a webcomic)
*SAVES*


haha.

[MarkedByChaos]

just to make sure we are clear, my book reads turbo boosters ruling as treating the bikes save as an invulnerable save. twice it has been mentions as becoming a 4+ which wouldn't be correct. the only reason I mention is cause if there was a change in the numeric value it would be a much simpler argument.

10 year olds need to be guided and corrected... if you allow this little guy to play the way he does, your ruining games for others later on and reinforcing horid stereo types.

physics schmysics!

[Torquemada Coteaz]

well. you are possibly ruining it for him too. If he cheats and rules-lawyers, then not many people are going to want to play with him. (I for one, don't like ubr-cheesheads, and rules lawyers)

[DeAd_cOmMaNdO]

well going by GWs love of RAW id have to grudgingly say that the attack bike would get no save. i hate the lack of common sense in todays rules

[Chaptermaster Kezef]

Nice guy answer
yes

Rules lawyering answer
no

"in the following enemy shooting phase, treat the bikes armor save as being invulnerable to represent the difficulty of hitting such fast moving targets"

note it doesnt say you may take either an armor save or invulnerable it simple makes its existing save invlunerable now a psycannon simply ignores all invulnerable saves as the description stands now

(good for you in using your Strengths)

true the cannon does allow for normal armor saves for models that have both
I.E. 2+/4+ inv

in this instance the normal save is replaced with a invulnerable one.

the thing is the psycannon ignores invulnerable saves, its wording doesnt make any exceptions for turbo boosters or anything else as im sure they had to make it a blanket cover-all rule so that people couldnt then complain and nit pick it to fit themselves. but my Inv. save isnt from psychic powers, etc.

and to bend the rules in favor of REAL world physics is wrong, i mean how do we living in the real world know if a grey knight space marine could really hit a speeding target or not they are the best of the best of the best after all

in this problem yes it sucks for your opponent that he choose to use turbo boosters, and moved the distance, and that you choose the best element from your army to handle the threat. but if your rolls took it down it should be down.

[Torquemada Coteaz]

well to extrapolate:
Nice guy answer:
yes you get your save
Rules lawyer:
no
what you should answer:
yes
what GW says:
no
what GW says you should say (unless the staffer is another cheese/beard head or rules lawyer):
yes
what i suggest:
yes

[rintinglen]

No, you don't get an armour save. If you turbo boost you get an invulnerable save that replaces the armour save. If the weapon in use ignores armour saves, you don't get a save.
That is not logical, but that is Games Workshop for you.

[experiment 626]

well, if you insist on playing by RAW (Rules As Writen) then no, a psycannon (or any other attack that specifically ignores invulnerable saves!) will kill bikers who turbo-boost...
but honestly, i would not advise playing it this way as this is one of those glaring over-sights on the part of the games designers... you'd think they'd have clairified this biggie by now, but of course, that would mean admitting they made a boo-boo! (and gw never makes mistakes as far as they're concerned )
personally, i also see this as rules-lawyering of the very worst kind! just because you're going really fast, you're power armour stops working?!

if you suspect that your opponent has more pts in his/her list than you both agreed to play, then call him/her on that and ask to see their army list. if they don't have a legibly writen list (or they say "well, i've got it up here", while pointing at their head!) then simply refuse to play them next time! tell them you won't play them anymore untill they can have the decency to write out a proper army list like you did! (right?!!)

cheers!

[Torquemada Coteaz]

it takes much less effort to say "meh" than to go and correct the rule to either way,
so the designers leave it to the players. plus it's one of those sportsmanship things that people grade you on at tournies

[experiment 626]

Originally Posted by Torquemada Coteaz

it takes much less effort to say "meh" than to go and correct the rule to either way,
so the designers leave it to the players. plus it's one of those sportsmanship things that people grade you on at tournies

hmmmm... my feelings right now after attending a few rouge trader events is that 'sportsmanship' and 'tournament' is more of an oxymoron nowadays! (it's getting right there with 'military inteligance')

i swear, the last non-astro tourny i was at two guys nearly came to blows over about 1/4"

cheers!