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.

I had originally made a list with 20 tankbustas because I thought it gave orks the antitank power it needed. Then everyone started to tell me that they suck and that Ill be chasing down armor all day. I re-read to rule. All the Gloryhogs rule says is that you must attmpt to shoot or assault an enemy vehicle within line of site reguardless of range. It says nowhere that you have to move towards it during the movement phase. So if you are not withing assault range then you do not assault. Am I reading this incorrectly. Does it say you must move towards an enemy vehicle during movement phase? I dont see that.

Glory Hogs: Tankbustas live for the really big kills. They must always attempt to shoot at and/or assault an enemy vehicle if there is one in LOS, reguardless of range. If there is no visible vehicle target, tankbustas may select a target as normal.

Am I missing somthing? Or are people just infering that you must move towards vehicles in the movement phase?

ALso the mob rule says that orks ALWAYS chose to substitute the number of orks in thier mob for thier normal leadership. So can a psyker in a mob of 30 add 30 to a D6 roll to overcome a phsycic hood?

I suspect that people are taking the 'must always attempt to assault' to mean that if a vehicle is in LOS, they must move towards it to try to get into assault range.

I would take it to mean simply that in the assault phase they must attempt to assault a vehicle within LOS. It would have no effect on the movement phase whatsoever.



As for the Psychic Hood, the Wierdboy can indeed use the Mob Rule for psychic hood tests. It even goes to the trouble on page 37 of pointing out specifically that the Wierdboy's Leadership is affected by the Mob Rule.

Thats what I thought at first then people had me convinced otherwise till I read the rule for myself.

RAW you are right, the rules state that the tankbusta unit must shoot at a vehicle if one is in LOS in the shooting phase and that they must assault one if one is within range in the assault phase, it does like you say not demand that you move towards a vehicle in the movement phase.

This will naturally cause a whole host of problems when you, during the movement phase, manage to block LOS from the tankbustas to vehicles far away.

It will also cause problems on the turn when you Whaaagh! and your oponent claims you may not fleet the tankbustas but must remain and shoot at a vehicle out of range.

Really this should be in Yakfaces FAQ compile list, I for one would like to be able to get to use tankbustas sneakilly by moving them as to block LOS to vehicles and thus allowing them to shoot at pesky SM's and CSM's

fester wrote:This will naturally cause a whole host of problems when you, during the movement phase, manage to block LOS from the tankbustas to vehicles far away.

Sorry, where's the problem?

It will also cause problems on the turn when you Whaaagh! and your oponent claims you may not fleet the tankbustas but must remain and shoot at a vehicle out of range.

Of course you can't fleet if there's a vehicle in LOS. They are required to attempt to shoot. Nothing in the Waaagh! rule over-rides that.

Raw there is nothing that forces a tankbusta unit to move with respects to a vehicle in the movement phase, this however does not meen people will claim that this is so.

As for the whaaaagh! the rules state the unit must try to shoot at and/or assault, fleeting to get closer and then failing to charge the vehicle seems to me as just as optionable as simply shooting, especially if the fleet move has a good chance of placing the mob in a position to charge a closer but initially out of LOS vehicle.

Now Im not saying that the above intrepretations are right, just that a person may argue them and easilly do well enough to force a die breaker.

You must be a very lucky gamer to completelly lack the rulebenders that most gamers I have spoken to deal with on an every gaming day basis.

Comic example.

insaniak wrote:

fester wrote:This will naturally cause a whole host of problems when you, during the movement phase, manage to block LOS from the tankbustas to vehicles far away.

Sorry, where's the problem?

I too am curious what problem there is.


As a side question: EDIT - question removed because I'm slowed

Btw, I don't think you can put Ld over 10, or any other stat over 10 for that matter, so I don't think Wierd Boyz can have a 30 Ld for Psychic tests. I might be wrong about that though.

budro, does that question really not need asking? Of course you have to shoot at it. What would allow you to ignore it?

Wehrkind wrote:Btw, I don't think you can put Ld over 10, or any other stat over 10 for that matter, so I don't think Wierd Boyz can have a 30 Ld for Psychic tests. I might be wrong about that though.

Its a tough call, RAI I agree with you but RAW I do not.

The problem is that the rules state that when core rules are in conflict with codex rules then codex rules will have superiority.

Thus when the core rules state that stats are from 0-10 that is a core rule that is overridden by the ork codex rule that states that an ork player may substitute the number of orks in a untit for his normal Ld value. If the number of orks thus is 30 then he counts as having Ld 30.

For most situations this is however not an issue as the ork mob becomes fearless when they become 11+ strong but for a number of minor issues such as target priority, psycic tests and so on the actual number of orks kick in.

Worth noting however is that an ork wierdboy with 30 mates having an effective Ld value of 31 still has to roll his test as he in no way is imune to perils of the warp and all it entails.

Btw, way to hijack the thread

a little off-topic, but:

I just realised. Tnakbustas don't have to shoot the closest cehicle. I always thought they had to do that.

fester: Runes of Warding are nice for encouraging Weirdboyz to suffer the Perils of the Warp.

Anung Un Rama: Why did you think that?

fester wrote:Raw there is nothing that forces a tankbusta unit to move with respects to a vehicle in the movement phase, this however does not meen people will claim that this is so.

...and so the problem is...?

As for the whaaaagh! the rules state the unit must try to shoot at and/or assault, fleeting to get closer and then failing to charge the vehicle seems to me as just as optionable as simply shooting,

You don't assault in the shooting phase. If there is a vehicle in LOS, they must shoot at it. Fleeting instead is not an option, because whether or not the unit can assault is not even considered at that point in the game. Their rules force them to shoot in the shooting phase if they have a vehicle in LOS. When it comes to the assault phase, if the vehicle is still in LOS, they are then forced to declare a charge.

Now Im not saying that the above intrepretations are right, just that a person may argue them and easilly do well enough to force a die breaker.

A person can certainly claim whatever they want. You could claim that Rapid Fire weapons get 3 shots instead of 2 if the model you are using is painted blue.

Doesn't mean the rules actually back that interpretation, though.

Wehrkind wrote:Btw, I don't think you can put Ld over 10, or any other stat over 10 for that matter, so I don't think Wierd Boyz can have a 30 Ld for Psychic tests. I might be wrong about that though.

The rulebook defines stats as being from 1 to 10. That doesn't mean that bonuses can't lift them higher, just that they wouldn't normally be initially set higher. Nor does it stop a codex specific rule from altering the stat range.

The Ork Codex says that you use the size of the mob, without placing any upper restriction. You therefore use the size of the mob, without any upper restriction.

Nurglitch :
Yes runes are nice to get some perils into the game however this is not only true vs orks and besides only Eldar have them, thats what 5% of all armies out there?

insaniak :
I think you are missing my point here, while I do agree with you that in movement you may move freely with the tankbustas and thus if when shooting comes along you do not have a LOS to a vehicle you can again do what you wish... this however does not neccesarily meen all ork oponents will interpret it so.

I have already spoken to people who claim beyond reason that tankbustas must in the movement move as far as they can towards a vehicle the unit has LOS to at the begining of the movement phase claiming the tankbustas suffer from some sort of berzerk fury or rage.

All I am saying here is that a munchkin can force a die roll to end the argument effectivelly making sure there is a 50% chance that the rules are not followed.

Having many powergamers, rulebenders and win-or-death people in my area I have seen rules claims you would not belive. For this reason I curse the name of GW every time they write a rule that they feel is crystal clear if you just use common sence, sadly many people playing the game feel that half the fun is to twist the rules as far as they will go and some more and see if they can manage to get this onto the table.
Others for some onfathomable reason cant enjoy playing a good game and loose, yes its true, one of the gamers in my area again and again state that if he does not win then the match was pointless booring and a waste of time.

Like I have said in other posts I try not to play those people but here where I live there is a shortage of players...

The Ctrl-Alt-Del comic link is reposted here for simplicity. It is slightly more that I have experienced myself but alot closer to what I have seen than I would like.

fester wrote:All I am saying here is that a munchkin can force a die roll to end the argument

Only if they can provide something in the rules that actually gives them an argument in the first place.

There is nothing in the Tankbusta entry that suggests that they are forced to move in the Movement phase.

So there is no argument.

Sadly, insaniak, untill you have tried to explain the rules to a rulebender that does not wish to see reason you will be blissfully unaware of how wrong you are.

Lets just say that while you may find me stubborn here I usualy just sigh and reach for the dice when they get started, true I may not be playing by the rules RAW, RAI or even RATCPBI but atleast you will be playing and each phase will bring you closer to the end of the game.

You don't need to explain the rules in this situation. Just ask them to show you where the Tankbusta rules refer to moving.

Simply insisting that an interpretation of a rule is correct without being able to back it up with something actually written down isn't being a 'rulebender'... it's making up rules to suit yourself.

If you're happy to dice for it to keep the game going, that's great. I'd suggest though that a better strategy would be simply finding other people to play. Wasting your time on cheats isn't going to do anything to improve your own gaming experience.

insaniak wrote:

fester wrote:All I am saying here is that a munchkin can force a die roll to end the argument

Only if they can provide something in the rules that actually gives them an argument in the first place.

There is nothing in the Tankbusta entry that suggests that they are forced to move in the Movement phase.

So there is no argument.

I would humbly disagree Insaniak. The rule simply says that the mob must always attempt to assault a vehicle. That is a very broad statement which is not specifically limited to the Assault phase. If a player doesn't move his models towards a vehicle, it could be interpreted that the mob is not making an attempt to assault the vehicle and is therefore breaking the rule.

I'm ultimately only saying that the rule is ambiguous enough to cause confusion, and I do think it deserves a FAQ ruling (which is why I included it in the Adepticon FAQ).


I think ultimately you've got the 'proper' ruling (its how I'll play it), but I do see how people could interpret it differently.

This all isn't even counting the issues of shooting at one tank 12" away and there is another tank 4 inches away. The rules still say that if you shoot at a unit you can only assault that unit.

I guess you would have to try to assault the tank you shot at, not happening.

Also what about tankbustas in a battlewagon. You can only disembark in the movement phase. So if you don't disembark are you breaking the rules? Also if the more strict reading of the rules is applied, can the tankbustas even get in the transport. If they are forced to go towards the nearest tank, but the battlewagon doesn't have that requirement. Is it breaking the rules if the battlewagon doesn't go towards a tank?

This is why GW needs more playtesting.

fester wrote:Having many powergamers, rulebenders and win-or-death people in my area I have seen rules claims you would not belive. For this reason I curse the name of GW every time they write a rule that they feel is crystal clear if you just use common sence, sadly many people playing the game feel that half the fun is to twist the rules as far as they will go and some more and see if they can manage to get this onto the table.
Others for some onfathomable reason cant enjoy playing a good game and loose, yes its true, one of the gamers in my area again and again state that if he does not win then the match was pointless booring and a waste of time.

Smartest thing said today.