Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Already done RiTides, they released the English one today or yesterday

Hulksmash wrote:Already done RiTides, they released the English one today or yesterday

today some time about 12 ... since i checked it around 10 and it wasn't there.

BrassScorpion wrote: Because all those Nobs with power claws getting in your face from Battlewagons and fast moving open topped trucks just couldn't get the job done? Deffrollas taking out vehicles is abusive.

Yes... and those Nobs with Power Klaws have an awesome save at 6+ and dies like flies when the bolter rounds come flying. And what are the chances of that happening when I zoom into your deployment zone and get out to assault your vehicle?

Sounds like sour grapes to me. Let's talk about abusive:

1. Jaws of the World Wolf. Character sniping. 'nuff said.
2. Doom of Malantai.
3. Storm shields and a FREE 3+ invulnerable save.

Etc. etc.

Get over it. Orks NEED a S10 weapon to deal with AV14.

RiTides wrote:
Lol! I find it telling that it's already been put out a few months ago in an italian FAQ. It's hard to say this Spanish one is going to end the debate (it obviously hasn't) if that one didn't... hopefully they will clear it up in English one way or the other as well!

Did you miss the part where even though the Italian FAQ said 2009, someone checked the document history of the PDF and it had been updated in the past 2 days. The Italian FAQ does not appear to have been 'put out for months'.

It actually appears like they are updating all the FAQs in a reasonable amount of time in relation to each other this time.

The Green Git wrote:Get over it. Orks NEED a S10 weapon to deal with AV14.

They had one, it was called a Warboss

I tried using the Spanish Tyranid FAQ, for the English one, and I don't think we should be able to use a different language FAQ because somethings don't ad up.

I tried to go to page 83 (I think it was, and couldn't find anything on page 83 that would have 2 claws). So I believe page numbers can be different as well. So since page numbers don't match how can we say what is suppose to be changed is the correct one.

Also because of the the way words can be translated, there is a bit of confusion, since when I thought I was looking for Swarm Tyrant (since Swarm was in the name) nothing made sence, but when I looked at Hive Tyrant section it sort of made sence but not completely. So that is why we should never use another non native language to codex FAQ. So if you have english codex, use english FAQ, if you have Spanish codex use Spanish FAQ.

The Green Git wrote:

BrassScorpion wrote: Because all those Nobs with power claws getting in your face from Battlewagons and fast moving open topped trucks just couldn't get the job done? Deffrollas taking out vehicles is abusive.

Yes... and those Nobs with Power Klaws have an awesome save at 6+ and dies like flies when the bolter rounds come flying. And what are the chances of that happening when I zoom into your deployment zone and get out to assault your vehicle?

I've never played against Nobs that have a 6+ save. Maybe you're looking at the wrong codex. In all games I've played against or with Nobz, they always have a 4+ armor save or 5+ INV and Feel No Pain. Sometimes they ride bikes too, or have Mega Armor.

Also, Monoliths just lost their last, great hope.
Goodbye, my necron brothers.

I've never seen them ride Bike AND have Mega Armour, because that would be silly and they would fall off a lot.

Have you guys ever noticed that FAQ's aren't really official rules, that they are just GW house rules?

whitedragon wrote:I've never played against Nobs that have a 6+ save. Maybe you're looking at the wrong codex. In all games I've played against or with Nobz, they always have a 4+ armor save or 5+ INV and Feel No Pain. Sometimes they ride bikes too, or have Mega Armor.

No, it says it right there in the Codex... wait a minute...

Timmah wrote:Have you guys ever noticed that FAQ's aren't really official rules, that they are just GW house rules?

Yes that has been mentioned alot in other threads. I believe most of the poeple accept GW house rules as official though.

Yeaaaah !

Nice to see this updated in english at last. Two days after spanish, one after italian.
This ends the growing rage about "it's in a foreign language only, thus nooooo."


Anyway this ruling will greatly help a race that had horrendous problems at dealing with AV14, which is nice.
Reminds me of the good old days of Epic, 2nd edition. All these orky vehicles with deffrollas rules were absolute fun.
Might even consider building a Waaagh on 30mm scale now.

Nice to see GW answer a question and then create more chaos, in that very same answer!

So now how many Deff Rolla equipped Battlewagons can I fit in a 1850 list now? Hmmmmmmmmmm..........

Pipboy101 wrote:So now how many Deff Rolla equipped Battlewagons can I fit in a 1850 list now? Hmmmmmmmmmm..........

The minimum cost to take 8 of them is 1300 points exactly. That's for 2 Naked Warbosses, 5 Naked 3 strong Nobs Squads and 8 Battlewagons with a Deffrolla and no Weapons. So I reckon 6 would be the optimum number.

Well one thing is for sure now, Orks dont have to cower when SM bring LR spam everywhere. Of course those that read my petition, know I was against using it until they FAQ the bloody thing. Win one for the hobbyists!

That is alot of S10 hurt on the board and it is still legal. I am still wondering how this is going to change this year's Adepticon with this new FAQ especially in the team tournament where HS and Elites are restricted.

Also, anyone think its sad it takes GW so long to FAQ the codices? I mean really, how old is the Ork dex now?

Monster Rain wrote:Si ellos no comprenden Espanol, no es mi problema.

Apizonadora de muerte PEG*.

*(FTW)

PEG? Para el ganar? Don't use internet translators. Closest option would be "Para la victoria", but it's not very good either.

@OP Brutalidad acorazada is the name given here for the Tank Shock rules.

kowbasher wrote:Freetranslation.com

P. I can utilize the Apizonadora of death to Charge to vehicles, or only functions upon applying its Ironclad
Brutality against units that are not vehicles?

R. The Apizonadora of death will inflict 1D6 impacts of F10
against vehicles, given that the Attack is a type of ironclad Brutality.

Mmmm ironclad Brutality.

LOL seriously, don't use internet translators


Anyway guys: there is a lot of people here who doesn't have english as first language. There are many posters from Sweden, Germany, Japan... and we all use English, just as it is, a language. And for one time, you read a few words in another language that is not english and the first thing you do is make fun of that language? Who do you think you are?



About the rules: Spanish rulebook, page 69, second paragraph of ramming: "Ramming is a special kind of Tank Shock, wich is done in the same way, being the only difference that the tank must move at highest possible speed. However, if the ramming tank gets contact to an enem vehicle, the crash will be resolved as we are about to tell.

(then third paragraph and roll bonuses for armour and such, and example]

I don't PARTICULARLY mind it, but I think there should have been some sort of ....I don't know. d6 S10 is just ridiculous. AUTOMATIC hits. If you touch them, you throttle them. I mean a landraider ramming 12" does what, a S9 hit? Falcon moving 24" does a S10 but that's kind of a long shot getting that much distance. I think auto-S10 when ramming would have been fine. That would allow you to ram from any distance and still hit with crushing force.

All in all it's alright though. My issue is still with the boarding plank. Most broken 5 point upgrade ever. "I do 6 S10 attacks on your defiler cuz I'm next to it!" With no limitation on how fast you can move before using it, trukks moving 18" and then dropping a ton of hard hits on my walkers gets pretty damn annoying after a while.

Which btw, THERE is the ork anti-tank. Killakanz, lootas and powerclaws from boarding planks. What more do you need?

And one more thing - those complaining about the Monolith really need not worry. It's a skimmer, it gets a 3+ save to ignore a ram completely. Pass the save once, avoid d6 hits.



On the note of rules errata and translations, I prefer the Japanese way of handling things. Very few errata, very few FAQs. "I think Deffrollas work against vehicles" "I think they don't" "let's roll off" "ok"

END RULES DEBATE. Seriously the Japanese have such a wonderful way of settling rules disputes. Never had a problem over there, ever. No lengthy debates, no technicalities, no RAW down to the very nitty gritty of verb tenses and pronoun usage.... just roll a friggin' dice and get on with it!

Alpharius wrote:Nice to see GW answer a question and then create more chaos, in that very same answer!

I don't understand why you say that. Rulebook at bottom of page 69, states that ramming is a sub-type of tank shocking, adding the obligation to drive full speed towards the vehicle you aim, and no shoot. So this ruling is coherent.

KingCracker wrote:Also, anyone think its sad it takes GW so long to FAQ the codices? I mean really, how old is the Ork dex now?

In all fairness they are getting better. Compare the amount of time from the Space Wolf Codex release or Nid Codex release to FAQ. Not too bad.

If GW keeps this up I might even consider lifting my self imposed moratorium on new purchases from them.

KingCracker wrote:Also, anyone think its sad it takes GW so long to FAQ the codices? I mean really, how old is the Ork dex now?

Especially since this question has been floating around since the book was first released. That is a long time, even more so when you consider that this ruling is contrary to what most of the people I've seen have agreed upon. This should have been out two years ago. And as far as my "this is abusive" comment, I stand by it given the comments following it about army lists entirely built around multiples of this single piece of wargear. If any one thing in an army list is so near a guaranteed win that every army is built around it then there's little fun to be had for anyone else willing to play against it. Stuff like this which exists for nearly every 40K army constantly reminds me why I don't play pick-up games and only play games with friends who are also interested in the models and the hobby instead of just building "broken" army lists.

Basically what nkelsch said. It won't be the first time the Europeans get it wrong and need to be corrected later.

Never get near a battlewagon. I picture this scenario:

Ram rhino. d6 S10. Boom. Squad gets out. Squad's in the way. Squad gets shocked. d6 S10. Ouch! Rhino behind squad. Ram. d6 S10. Squad gets out. Tank shock. d6 S10. End movement. Boarding plank nearby rhino, 4 S9 attacks on rear armour. Boom, or not either way Wrecking Ball, S9 hit.


A single battlewagon can now crush its way through multiple vehicles and the units they carry now, even just barely clipping. And at the end of it all, drop the boarding plank on whatever else is around.

BrassScorpion wrote: If any one thing in an army list is so near a guaranteed win that every army is built around it then there's little fun to be had for anyone else willing to play against it. Stuff like this which exists for nearly every 40K army constantly reminds me why I don't play pick-up games and only play games with friends who are also interested in the models and the hobby instead of just building "broken" army lists.

It won't be nearly so useful against armies that aren't LR spam or all mechanised. So, in tourney it may well come to limit those builds and force those currently relying on maximum land raiders to re-evaluate. So, back to the drawing board for those armies once this gets put out and about.

So it will be limiting spam of another kind.

Good isn't it.

Spellbound wrote:A single battlewagon can now crush its way through multiple vehicles and the units they carry now, even just barely clipping. And at the end of it all, drop the boarding plank on whatever else is around.

Meh. If you let the Battlewagon get that close you've done something wrong anyway.

The only lists really threatened by this is the "gimmick" armies i.e. Rhino Rush, LR Spam, IG Chimera Wall, etc. A balanced list is not going to suffer excessively at the hands of the occasional Deff Rolla.

I feel a great disturbance in the Imperium, as if billions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced.

Erasoketa wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Si ellos no comprenden Espanol, no es mi problema.

Apizonadora de muerte PEG*.

*(FTW)

PEG? Para el ganar? Don't use internet translators. Closest option would be "Para la victoria", but it's not very good either.

I don't know if this makes it better or worse, but I didn't use an internet translator. That was based on my High School spanish classes and having a lot of Mexican friends when I was in the Marines.

"For the win" isn't really proper English either though. I think Para la Victoria suits my purposes just fine.