So, maybe I'm missing this somewhere in the rules, but does facing not matter for large figures?

I.e. the E-Web engineer is clearly facing a particular direction

All I can find is rules about Line of sight. Which would seem to me indicate that it doesn't actually matter which direction the deployable gun is actually pointing. Which feels a little... cheap that it can fire directly behind itself.

Any help/clarification would be appreciated.

Indeed, facing does not matter. Considering that other figures don't have facing, it makes perfect sense.

Yea, just think of the e-web gunner as swiveling around that tripod.

Indeed, facing does not matter. Considering that other figures don't have facing, it makes perfect sense.

Yea, just think of the e-web gunner as swiveling around that tripod.

The AT-ST spinning like a ballerina, poised on one foot, to spit death at the rebels creeping up behind it...

Wait.. what?

Admittedly the AT ST is much harder to justify having no facing... even though the "head" does pivot it is not a 360 swivel. The game designers were clever enough to limit the walker's field of fire so that it can't shoot targets directly next to and underneath it, but the facing rules do make for a somewhat questionable turn about ability for the walker.

...of course now I am forced to envision the scout walker spinning around on one "toe" like a pretty ballerina, landing in plie' and firing at targets that were behind it.

Thanks Alarmed!

...of course now I am forced to envision the scout walker spinning around on one "toe" like a pretty ballerina, landing in plie' and firing at targets that were behind it.

Thanks Alarmed!

You are very welcome!

I think the at st side cannons maybe swivel to behind, but thx this answered a question i was going to post.

The AT-ST will have some form of camera system that shows whats behind them and the guns even though not articulated in the model would be able to rotate 360 so it would be able to shoot behind itself.

The turning though it hard to imagine because you need to use 2 movement points to make it turn to face what is behind it.

The AT-ST will have some form of camera system that shows whats behind them and the guns even though not articulated in the model would be able to rotate 360 so it would be able to shoot behind itself.

The turning though it hard to imagine because you need to use 2 movement points to make it turn to face what is behind it.

Two? It takes one to rotate large figures. Did I miss another rule again? Stupid compendium

The AT-ST will have some form of camera system that shows whats behind them and the guns even though not articulated in the model would be able to rotate 360 so it would be able to shoot behind itself.

The turning though it hard to imagine because you need to use 2 movement points to make it turn to face what is behind it.

Two? It takes one to rotate large figures. Did I miss another rule again? Stupid compendium

1 point to rotate 90º. Another point to rotate another 90º. Making it 180º to look behind itself (if facing mattered). But since it doesn't, you can rotate the figure 180º for free, just so that thematically it's not shooting a guy out of it's ass.

Only the position of a figure's base is mechanically relevant; so turning a large figure 180 degress doesn't "do" anything. For 1 movement point you can rotate 90 degrees because that may be mechanically relevant (LOS or additional movement).

We ran into an issue with this tonight with the E-Web figure. The Imp player spent 1 pt to turn 90 degrees but he argued he didn't have to turn the full 90 degrees but could turn less than that to 45 degrees if he so wanted. I argued he was wrong.

We ran into an issue with this tonight with the E-Web figure. The Imp player spent 1 pt to turn 90 degrees but he argued he didn't have to turn the full 90 degrees but could turn less than that to 45 degrees if he so wanted. I argued he was wrong.

45º Would cause it to take up half squares... that's... that's just dumb.

Ask him if he thinks he could spend 1 point to turn 63.745 degrees, and if so, what he thinks it would even mean.

A point to turn 90 degrees means exactly that. Not 45, not 63.745, but 90.