Flamer and Point Blank Bonus

[MattyFoe]

Flamers are listed as DA on their datacards. Pg. 87 says that DA weapons fired at targets within 12" gain +1 for Point Blank. However, Flamers have their own SA entry where point blank is not mentioned at all.

 

I interpret it that the Flamers gain the +1. However, given their SA status, I can see the argument for them not gaining the +1. Which interpretation is correct?

[outek]

Flamers still receive the +1 modifier for firing within 12".

[successorlord]

Flamers still receive the +1 modifier for firing within 12".

Is there a case of a Flamer that can fire beyond 12"? Isn't their effectiveness reflected in their high RAVs? And they're unique AFAIK in that they're a DA AoE attack.

[Vil-hatarn]

All current flamers are Range (4). I doubt that will change.

 

As to the high RAVs, I'm sure that it always gets point blank has been taken into account. If it's easier to think of, call them +1 RAV without point blank; but as written, they're not an exception, which I believe was the intention, to keep things simpler.

[Sergeant_Crunch]

The Flamer SA says nothing that negates the Point Blank Range bonus as far as I can see. All it says is that flamers' AOE stops at the end of it's Long Range Band, which since flamers all have 4" range bands is 12". There's nothing rules-wise for Reaper or Mil-Net to release a datacard with a flamer that has 6" range bands, just a sense of "that doesn't seem quite right." I've always played them with the +1 bonus, making the modifiers +1/-1/-3 for 1st/2nd/3rd range bands.

[successorlord]

And while I suspect that I already know the answer to this, and that it's going to be something along the lines of 'keeping it the same way for simplicity', I'll go ahead and ask.

 

A flamer is a Direct Fired AoE weapon. The attacker, let's say a Puma, is directly in front of a target (a Rhino). Directly behind the Rhino are a Dictator, and a Wyvern. Now according to every other rule in the game the Dictator and Wyvern cannot see through the Rhino, cannot move through the Rhino, and cannot fire through the Rhino; but the Puma's flamer will hit all three (assuming they're within range)? I know respondents are likely to site K.I.S.S. here, but if that's the case why have a unique DA AoE weapon?

 

As far as the Point Blank argument goes: the whole concept of a point blank shot is in direct relation to the weapon used. It's ridiculously easy to hit something with a rifle within 25m or so, but that's a challenging shot with your average pistol. Now only a meter or two away and the rifle is becoming too cumbersome to aim effectively especially in a dynamic environment, but the pistol it in its element.

[Sergeant_Crunch]

The SA description states that it hits all models in the AOE. If the AOE covers the centerpoint of the Rhino, Dictator, and Wyvern, then the Rhino, Dictator, and Wyvern all suffer an attack from the flamer. Only the Rhino gets defensive fire because it is blocking LOS for the other two.

[successorlord]

The SA description states that it hits all models in the AOE. If the AOE covers the centerpoint of the Rhino, Dictator, and Wyvern, then the Rhino, Dictator, and Wyvern all suffer an attack from the flamer. Only the Rhino gets defensive fire because it is blocking LOS for the other two.

Like I said I was pretty sure I already knew the answer, but the incongruity of it offends me.

[Sergeant_Crunch]

Then come to an agreement with the guys you game with and say that contact with the first object that blocks LOS ends the AOE of the flamer.

[MattyFoe]

Sorry, Edd, but that agreement is not looking too likely...

[successorlord]

Sorry, Edd, but that agreement is not looking too likely...

Oh, I understand what the rules say. I'm just arguing the rules need fixing. Houserules are all well and good (hence Matt and my agreement to band the Auto 10), but the problem is still there.

[Mad Pat]

Please explain your problem with the rule as written?

[Chrome]

Is your problem that you don't feel that a Flamethrower could damage something that it doesn't have LOS too, or that you feel all AOE weapons should be IA?

 

There are a couple of reasons why the Flamers are DA weapons, none of which have to do with LOS:

• If they were IA weapons, a Model couldn't use its other DA weapons, even tho the target(s) are right in front of it, in Point Blank Range.
  
• IA weapons can't target models within their 12" No Fire Zone
  
• An IA attack could ignore any terrain features between the attacker and target(s)*
  

This does bring a couple of points to my attention that I'll deal with in RAGE Chronicles. Flamers shouldn't be able to participate in Salve Strike Fire Attacks and *any terrain (hills, walls, buildings) taller than the attacking model that completely cross the Flamer's AOE, should end the Flamer's AOE.

[successorlord]

Is your problem that you don't feel that a Flamethrower could damage something that it doesn't have LOS too, or that you feel all AOE weapons should be IA?

 

There are a couple of reasons why the Flamers are DA weapons, none of which have to do with LOS:

• If they were IA weapons, a Model couldn't use its other DA weapons, even tho the target(s) are right in front of it, in Point Blank Range.
  
• IA weapons can't target models within their 12" No Fire Zone
  
• An IA attack could ignore any terrain features between the attacker and target(s)*
  

This does bring a couple of points to my attention that I'll deal with in RAGE Chronicles. Flamers shouldn't be able to participate in Salve Strike Fire Attacks and *any terrain (hills, walls, buildings) taller than the attacking model that completely cross the Flamer's AOE, should end the Flamer's AOE.

No I understand why a Flamer isn't a IA attack. If CAV is following the K.I.S.S. principal though why have a unique DA AoE weapon and why does a Flamer have such a high RAV? +4 or +5 vs armored targets? It should be next to useless even against Armored Infantry let alone Tanks and CAVs. The other point being that it doesn't exist beyond 12" beside being an AoE both of which would seem to disqualify it for the Point Blank bonus.

 

Don't get me wrong I do really like CAV as a game, but that's all the more reason to complain at its weak points.

[Outkast Samurai]

I have to agree that flamers are far to effective against armored targets for what they are. I'd much rather they were RAV 0 and Shedder/8 than the current incarnation.