As for missiles, well, no they're not missiles. They are laser/projectile weapons, not self propelled/guided missiles. If anything that sort or ordnance would be represented by torpedoes (such as the Tau torps).
So then when the Core rules, on page 20, say of weapons batteries that they "consist of rank upon rank of weapons: plasma projectors, laser cannons, missile launchers, rail guns, fusion beamers, and graviton pulsars," to what are they referring? Many Imperial weapons are lasers, but many are also projectiles that can be, to a certain extent, guided. There is quite a difference between a torpedo, which is a completely autonomous craft that actively seeks out its own targets and self-destructs on impact, and a missile launched from a cannon, which can have its target set upon firing but doesn't have enough fuel or computing power to do more than immediately expend its fuel to move in the indicated direction. It's quite easy to envision weapons that do not have the range and autonomy that would make them equivalent to a torpedo, but are still able to be directed to avoid nearby targets, we even have comparable weapons in our modern arsenal. (Compare
this to
this.)
No, I don't buy that. I think that for massive claws to work the ships would have to be pretty much directly adjacent to one another. For the claws to work they would have to be mounted on the body of the ship itself. I can't imagine a few pincer-like claws at the end of long tentacles doing damage, nor even such tentacles surviving the sheering forces as the victim ship continues on its way.
Not necessarily long tentacles, but large arms, certainly. The ships themselves are typically several kilometers long, why would they be unable to sport large and appropriately powerful appendages? Even if the claws
are mounted on the ship itself, what is to say that the claws themselves are not several kilometers long? Your comment about shearing forces makes little sense to me either, is the Tyranid vessel now unable to attempt to match velocities? (I can certainly see how an inability to imagine things would be a hindrance with this subject matter though.
)
As I mention at the end this post, I would not necessarily argue that grappled ships should be able to fire past each other (although we might consider the case of an Emperor-class Battleship grappled by a single Kraken), because even if they can, I doubt they would be willing to do so with such a pressing concern. But I would certainly argue there is no reason they should be unable to fire at each other, and even less that they should be unable to fire at all.
Another point too: If we are to look at this from a playability perspective, how would non-tyranid players feel about the aforementioned BB vs. escort example? Would you all be okay with your ships' shooting ability being 100% nullified by a single escort that may not have even done any actual damage?
Because it is too close. It'd be like trying to fire a nuke from one ship to another ship just 100m away. The chance to damage your own ship would be too great. The Nid ship latching on would likely damage some of the guns directly in its path, and those that it didn't damage probably couldn't be fired safely. Those that a clear of the Nid vessel and could be fired probably can't be brought to bear, as the Nid vessel may be outside their traverse arc. Having a massive presence attached to one side of your ship does not make it easy for you to line up targets on the other.
Sorry, but that doesn't wash. These ships are not equipped with safety systems that cannot be overridden by the crew. While they very well
may suffer feedback from their own weapons, does that mean they would simply wait around and let a Tyranid vessel destroy them? If a captain's options were to risk blowing out his own shields and/or damaging his armor to shoot a 'nid ship off of his vessel, sending a boarding crew to almost certain death, or idly waiting to be obliterated, the choice would be pretty clear.
And you're entirely right, the vessel may be outside of the traverse arc of some of the weapons. But it's likely to be within the traverse arc of others. Have you ever looked at an Imperial lance battery, for example? The turrets project out from the ship in such a way that they can fire right down its length. Chaos weapons batteries consist of numerous turrets that have a quite wide fire arc, easily able to aim at something adjacent to the ship.
As for your statement about how having a massive presence attached to one side does not make it easy to line up targets on the other, you're exactly right again, it would not be easy. But there is a big difference between 'not easy' and 'impossible,' and, as I pointed out before, the rules already take into account the vessels' reduction in effective firepower.
For the same reason, the enemy is too close. You don't want to suffer feedback from your own weaponry. Having gotten this close the Nid vessel should be focussed upon boarding and claw attacks.
There is simply no reason to think this. Tyranid projectiles are typically far less explosive in nature than others', so the risk to them from their own weapons would be less to begin with. Also, (as I pointed out before) unlike other ships, the Tyranid vessel is constructed from the ground up with attacking with claws in mind. Why would it not be built in such a way as to minimize such damage?
Because the Tyranids do not think in strategic terms. They are instinctual. They feed. I direct you to the IB table result two. If they cannot fire and they can board, they must board. The argument is that they cannot fire. Therefore the only logical conclusion is that they must board. Why would they want to board something 10 times their size? Well why would they want to have most of their fleet lead off course by a single cunningly placed escort? They wouldn't want to, it's instinctual.
Alright, so my main counterpoint will simply be this question: If what I've quoted above is true, would you care to explain the purpose of the section of page 82 of Armada entitled "Synaptic Control"?
You say, "The argument is that they cannot fire. Therefore the only logical conclusion is that they must board." If you're talking logic, I think the logical term to describe that would be "False Dichotomy." There
is a third option: They simply stay in place and do nothing further. My point with bringing the IB table up in the first place was to point out that, for those of you who were talking about how the Tyranids should automatically board when grappled,
the rules already address this! Unless the Tyranid player overrides the ship's instinctive behavior, it
will automatically board, there are exactly zero rule changes required to make this happen.
So provide to me a justification for why the Tyranid player should not be allowed to control his ships' behavior in the slightest, even when the rules normally allow for it? Why should we suddenly add an exception to Synaptic Control that disallows... control?
Beyond that, however, I'd like to know what Tyranid fluff you are looking at Sigoroth, because I have seen none that indicates they do not think in strategic terms. I have, however, seen many fluff pieces emphasizing the tactical and strategic decision-making capabilities of the Tyranids, and I've noticed a trend toward increasing emphasis on this aspect from Games Workshop. (Try reading the newest Tyranid codex.) For the most part the individual creatures do not, but there is more to Tyranids than the individuals.
Because what a ship wants to do and what they can do do not automatically align. For example, the grappled ship may want to simply move away next turn, but it can't do that, it's grappled. Auto-boarding certainly makes sense for the Tyranids, as that's what they do. You know, instinctive behaviour and all that. Now, let's say you can override the instinctive behaviour. This would allow you to avoid auto-boarding, but it wouldn't allow you to fire with your latching ship at the victim, because you can't. What you want to do and what you can do do not automatically align, remember. Of course, the current rules do not prevent that, but the argument is that they should. In other words, your options should be limited. You shouldn't be allowed to just do as you please, since the situation doesn't make sense.
The main point I'm taking away from all of this, Sigoroth, is not that the situation doesn't make sense, but that the situation doesn't make sense
to you. Before we try to get everyone on board with making Tyranid rules even more restrictive than we already have, let's at least this time try to provide some sort of actual justification for our changes beyond "I just can't imagine that happening."
Beyond just you Sig, any opinions from anyone else on this matter?
Not true, hulked ships block LoS to other ships.
Ah, I had forgotten about that. Yes, a very easy fix then, something along the lines of "grappled ships block LOS to each other in the same manner as a drifting hulk" would be appropriate?
