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.

Oh ffs.
Ramming IS a tank shock, same way being hit with a power fist is a Close Combat attack!
I mean, no one argues that Toxic Miasma doesn't work on power fist attacks because they are a special form of close combat attack, which is essentially what you are doing.

Kirsanth - it s subset but doesnt have to follow all the rules...because it excplicitly tells you it DOESNT have to follow all the rules: it even says follow Tank Shock witht he following exceptions.....

(All possible Tank Shocks) includes any special and normal tank shocks by *definition of a superset*. Deff Rollas work on ALL tank shocks: they work on the superset and therefore work on the subset.

One question. Can Ram attacks actually hit vehicles?
Reading through this, the wording seems a little funny.

Ram move: Must declare full movement forward, move as per normal tank shock until you contact an enemy vehicle.
Tank shock move: Move forward, hit enemy units yada yada, stop if you come within an inch of an enemy vehicle.

Piece the two together: Move forward, stop when you come within an inch of an enemy vehicle. O look, I haven't made contact with it!!

Am I going crazy?

(Btw.. special type implies subset of, meaning ram is a tank shock. imo)
(edit: I'm not an ork player)

You declare a ram before doing it, same way as with a tank shock. So you can either tank shock normally (and run over infantry, stopping at vehicles) or you can ram, which means you are intentionally targetting an enemy vehicle, and therefore can move into contact.

Trasvi wrote:One question. Can Ram attacks actually hit vehicles?
Reading through this, the wording seems a little funny.

Ram move: Must declare full movement forward, move as per normal tank shock until you contact an enemy vehicle.
Tank shock move: Move forward, hit enemy units yada yada, stop if you come within an inch of an enemy vehicle.

Piece the two together: Move forward, stop when you come within an inch of an enemy vehicle. O look, I haven't made contact with it!!

Am I going crazy?

(Btw.. special type implies subset of, meaning ram is a tank shock. imo)
(edit: I'm not an ork player)

You're not crazy, but as I said on the previous page I'm sure 99% of players manage to figure out that the implicit allowance is enough... especially with the block of text describing the results of such a collision followed by a large text and picture example demonstrating a ram involving a vehicle to vehicle collision.

subset N. - a set of which all the elements are contained in another set.

All elements are not contained.
Movement distance requirements, approach to vehicles, etc. are not contained.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Da Boss wrote:I mean, no one argues that Toxic Miasma doesn't work on power fist attacks because they are a special form of close combat attack, which is essentially what you are doing.

Not even.
Attacks made with special weapons are still attacks.
They are not special attacks - which can cause their own issues.

That may be a good place to start reading.

kirsanth wrote:subset N. - a set of which all the elements are contained in another set.

All elements are not contained.
Movement distance requirements, approach to vehicles, etc. are not contained.

Movement distance is not an 'element', it is a property.

Squares are a special type of (subset of) rectangle (or trapezium, parallelogram, kite, rhombus, quadrilateral, shape...)
Squares have a different side length requirement to rectangles.
Rams have a different movement distance requirement to tank shocks.
Squares are still rectangles.
Rams are still tank shocks.


I mean, it would be a pretty damn poor 'special type of' tank shock if it behaved identical to a tank shock....

Then every vehicle that can Tank Shock can Ram?

Pray explain why not, if they are the same.
That is another part I miss.

Is this a ram?



Or just a special type of sheep?


Or is it both? Much like a square is both a special type of rectangle and a rectangle? Could ram be both a special type of tank shock and a tank shock?

The ram and I think it can. What say ewe?

kirsanth wrote:Then every vehicle that can Tank Shock can Ram?

Pray explain why not, if they are the same.
That is another part I miss.

I'm obviously missing what you're alluding to... what vehicles out there can Tank Shock but not Ram?

DE vehicles with the Torture Amp, if memory serves.

BTW the set of (ALL Tank Shocks) is (Normal Tank Shocks, SPecial Tank shocks) == (Normal Tank Shocks, Rams)

Deff rollas work on (ALL Tank Shocks)

This is an issue I've long wanted to chime in on.

Deffrollas, per their rules, work when you do any tank shock. Therefore, if ramming is any form of tank shock, the deff rolla will work. The BGB clearly indicates that ramming is indeed some form of tank shock, so the deff rolla (which works on any tank shock) will also operate in this situation, causing D6 hits on the vehicle.

The ram and I think it can. What say ewe?

I lol-ed.

Trasvi wrote:
I'm obviously missing what you're alluding to... what vehicles out there can Tank Shock but not Ram?

One of the best examples is another vehicle within the Ork codex, the Ork Trukk with a Reinforced Ram. The Ram specifies that it allows the Trukk to Tank Shock (as it's not a Tank it couldn't normally). Allowing it to Tank Shock, however, is not enough to allow it to Ram because Rams are special subsets of Tank Shock.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Deff rollas work on (ALL Tank Shocks)

+

sourclams wrote:Allowing it to Tank Shock, however, is not enough to allow it to Ram because Rams are special subsets of Tank Shock.

+

nosferatu1001 wrote:BTW the set of (ALL Tank Shocks) is (Normal Tank Shocks, SPecial Tank shocks) == (Normal Tank Shocks, Rams)

= ?

Simple truth is its badly written. When something is badly written it can be misunderstood.

IF ramming was the exact same as tank shocking (bar the hitting vehicles) there would be no point in saying infantry is tank shocked as normal. This is because it would already happen that way.

When this sort of thing comes up simplest way to guess at the author intent is to see if the rule is mention. Since Ramming (though a type of tank-shock) is never mention it is safe to assume that it is not meant to work with the deff-roller.

Well, that's my view on it anyway

Is it just me or did anyone else notice that sourclames just horribly contradicted himself?

If ramming is a tank shock then so long as a vehicle can tank shock you are allowed to ram. As ork players are arguing tank shock = ram

SO if an ork truck cannot ram even though it would be allowed to tank shock how can you argue its the same thing?

Tri wrote:
When this sort of thing comes up simplest way to guess at the author intent is to see if the rule is mention. Since Ramming (though a type of tank-shock) is never mention it is safe to assume that it is not meant to work with the deff-roller.

Well, that's my view on it anyway

Ramming is never mentioned because it didn't exist when the codex was written, and the codex was written when the ability to tank shock vehicles was explicitly a part of the tank shock rules and not in a subset of them. I won't go over the fairly conclusive RAI backing up rollas working again.
Bad argument is bad.

Golga wrote:Is it just me or did anyone else notice that sourclames just horribly contradicted himself?

I'm not sure what he's on about. A reinforced ram grants the ability to tank shock and hence the ability to ram, unless I'm missing something.

Gorkamorka wrote:

Tri wrote:
When this sort of thing comes up simplest way to guess at the author intent is to see if the rule is mention. Since Ramming (though a type of tank-shock) is never mention it is safe to assume that it is not meant to work with the deff-roller.

Well, that's my view on it anyway

Ramming is never mentioned because it didn't exist when the codex was written, and the codex was written when the ability to tank shock vehicles was explicitly a part of the tank shock rules and not in a subset of them. I won't go over the fairly conclusive RAI backing up rollas working again.
Bad argument is bad.

Golga wrote:Is it just me or did anyone else notice that sourclames just horribly contradicted himself?

If ramming is a tank shock then so long as a vehicle can tank shock you are allowed to ram. As ork players are arguing tank shock = ram

SO if an ork truck cannot ram even though it would be allowed to tank shock how can you argue its the same thing?

No, I noticed that too.
And i'm the the Yes-camp BTW.

Tri wrote:

Gorkamorka wrote:

Tri wrote:
When this sort of thing comes up simplest way to guess at the author intent is to see if the rule is mention. Since Ramming (though a type of tank-shock) is never mention it is safe to assume that it is not meant to work with the deff-roller.

Well, that's my view on it anyway

Ramming is never mentioned because it didn't exist when the codex was written, and the codex was written when the ability to tank shock vehicles was explicitly a part of the tank shock rules and not in a subset of them. I won't go over the fairly conclusive RAI backing up rollas working again.
Bad argument is bad.

No. If knowledge of ramming did not exist when the rule was written how pray is it meant to work with it?

By ram being specifically written as a type of tank shock just so that crap like this doesn't happen and armies don't lose functionality, that's how.

Gorkamorka wrote:

Tri wrote:

Gorkamorka wrote:

Tri wrote:
When this sort of thing comes up simplest way to guess at the author intent is to see if the rule is mention. Since Ramming (though a type of tank-shock) is never mention it is safe to assume that it is not meant to work with the deff-roller.

Well, that's my view on it anyway

Ramming is never mentioned because it didn't exist when the codex was written, and the codex was written when the ability to tank shock vehicles was explicitly a part of the tank shock rules and not in a subset of them. I won't go over the fairly conclusive RAI backing up rollas working again.
Bad argument is bad.

No. If knowledge of ramming did not exist when the rule was written how pray is it meant to work with it?

By ram being specifically written as a type of tank shock just so that crap like this doesn't happen and armies don't lose functionality, that's how.

And i present Tyranids, who have had massive losses in functionality. You can't claim that the writers payed any special attention to the orks because there is not a scrap of that. For it to work it must Specifically mention Ramming

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except the rules state it IS a Tank Shock: a Special form of it.

So you either follow the implicit permission AND the rules telling you it works, or you change the rules so it doesnt to satisfy.....what now?

Ah thats right - people not liking it running over LR. Arguing realism. With walk plant-animal-fungi.

You have completely failed to refute my argument:

GiantKiller wrote:nowhere in the ramming rules does it expressly permit the ramming vehicle to contact another vehicle. It has only implicit permission, which isn't enough to override the clearly expressed prohibition in the tank shock rules. Implicit permission works if and only if ramming is a separate action and isn't inheriting the "If the tank ... comes to within 1" of an enemy vehicle, it immediately stops moving" rule (BGB p. 68) from Tank Shock.

In short, ramming only works on vehicles if it is not a Tank Shock.

...with the above reply.

Again, you've failed to quote a rule from the ramming section which expressly grants permission to contact enemy vehicles. Because that's what it takes: You need express permission in a more specific rule to override an expressed prohibition in a more general one. Tell me what these so-called "rules telling you it works" are and we may have something more to discuss. Without that, you're arguing that implicit permission to contact enemy vehicles from the ramming rule is enough to override an expressed prohibition against contacting enemy vehicles in the Tank Shock rule. That argument doesn't hold water.

Note that I have never in this thread (or in the article I've been referencing) made an argument based upon game balance or realism. My arguments, Szafraniec's arguments, and many other posters' arguments are based purely on the fact that the rules as written clearly set forth Tank Shock! and Ramming as two separate and distinct actions.

I don't need to put on a magic turban to predict that your comeback (or someone who beats you to it) is going to be some form of "but it says ramming is a special type of tank shock move so whatever else the rules might say doesn't matter".

And so the circular argument rolls on.

-GK

No, I have proven that they are part of the same set, and therefore ALL you have is that this may then cause problems.

This does not disprove they are part of the same superset: it introduces problems in how you then execute it, however the RAW IS conclusive and it is against you.

Steelmage99 wrote:

Golga wrote:Is it just me or did anyone else notice that sourclames just horribly contradicted himself?

If ramming is a tank shock then so long as a vehicle can tank shock you are allowed to ram. As ork players are arguing tank shock = ram

SO if an ork truck cannot ram even though it would be allowed to tank shock how can you argue its the same thing?

No, I noticed that too.
And i'm the the Yes-camp BTW.

Because Ramming is a special type of Tank Shock.

If you can Ram then obviously you've performed some sort of Tank Shock, but just because you Tank Shock doesn't necessarily mean you can Ram. All Rams are Tank Shocks but not all Tank Shocks are Rams. It's the same simple thing I've been saying for ages.

sourclams wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

Golga wrote:Is it just me or did anyone else notice that sourclames just horribly contradicted himself?

If ramming is a tank shock then so long as a vehicle can tank shock you are allowed to ram. As ork players are arguing tank shock = ram

SO if an ork truck cannot ram even though it would be allowed to tank shock how can you argue its the same thing?

No, I noticed that too.
And i'm the the Yes-camp BTW.

Because Ramming is a special type of Tank Shock.

If you can Ram then obviously you've performed some sort of Tank Shock, but just because you Tank Shock doesn't necessarily mean you can Ram. All Rams are Tank Shocks but not all Tank Shocks are Rams. It's the same simple thing I've been saying for ages.

It might have been the same simple thing, but I read it and thought; "Has he changed his position?".
My basic thought is if I am allowed to Tank Shock (implicit all kinds of Tank Shock), I am by default also allowed to Ram as it is a subset of Tank Shock.
If I am allowed to Ram, I am only allowed to do that particular subset of Tank Shock and not any other kinds of Tank Shock.

Does that sound plausible?

I mean, if I am allowed to draw a dog, I can draw the infamous poodle.
If I am allowed to draw a poodle, I cannot draw a german sheppard, right?

Steelmage99 wrote:

sourclams wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

Golga wrote:Is it just me or did anyone else notice that sourclames just horribly contradicted himself?

If ramming is a tank shock then so long as a vehicle can tank shock you are allowed to ram. As ork players are arguing tank shock = ram

SO if an ork truck cannot ram even though it would be allowed to tank shock how can you argue its the same thing?

No, I noticed that too.
And i'm the the Yes-camp BTW.

Because Ramming is a special type of Tank Shock.

If you can Ram then obviously you've performed some sort of Tank Shock, but just because you Tank Shock doesn't necessarily mean you can Ram. All Rams are Tank Shocks but not all Tank Shocks are Rams. It's the same simple thing I've been saying for ages.

It might have been the same simple thing, but I read it and thought; "Has he changed his position?".
My basic thought is if I am allowed to Tank Shock (implicit all kinds of Tank Shock), I am by default also allowed to Ram as it is a subset of Tank Shock.
If I am allowed to Ram, I am only allowed to do that particular subset of Tank Shock and not any other kinds of Tank Shock.

Does that sound plausible?

I mean, if I am allowed to draw a dog, I can draw the infamous poodle.
If I am allowed to draw a poodle, I cannot draw a german sheppard, right?

Agreed.

According to your stance on this sour. As long as your battle wagon is tank shocking a vehicle it gets the d6str10 hits. regardless if its called a ram or not.

But in the case of the truck even though you can tank shock (which to you is the same as ramming) You cannot ram with it.

Care to tell me why you can have 1 but not both? Your not making very much sense.

This discussion has become too complex to post without a rulebook on hand to reference.

sourclams wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

Golga wrote:Is it just me or did anyone else notice that sourclames just horribly contradicted himself?

If ramming is a tank shock then so long as a vehicle can tank shock you are allowed to ram. As ork players are arguing tank shock = ram

SO if an ork truck cannot ram even though it would be allowed to tank shock how can you argue its the same thing?

No, I noticed that too.
And i'm the the Yes-camp BTW.

Because Ramming is a special type of Tank Shock.

If you can Ram then obviously you've performed some sort of Tank Shock, but just because you Tank Shock doesn't necessarily mean you can Ram. All Rams are Tank Shocks but not all Tank Shocks are Rams. It's the same simple thing I've been saying for ages.

Uh, can't all vehicles ram? Isn't there specifically a +1 bonus if you are 'a tank'? Wouldn't this mean that all vehicles can ram but not all vehicles can tank shock...

whitestagg wrote:

Uh, can't all vehicles ram? Isn't there specifically a +1 bonus if you are 'a tank'? Wouldn't this mean that all vehicles can ram but not all vehicles can tank shock...

Nope, only tanks can tank shock or ram, unless they have special rules/equipment that says otherwise.

whitestagg wrote:

sourclams wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

Golga wrote:Is it just me or did anyone else notice that sourclames just horribly contradicted himself?

If ramming is a tank shock then so long as a vehicle can tank shock you are allowed to ram. As ork players are arguing tank shock = ram

SO if an ork truck cannot ram even though it would be allowed to tank shock how can you argue its the same thing?

No, I noticed that too.
And i'm the the Yes-camp BTW.

Because Ramming is a special type of Tank Shock.

If you can Ram then obviously you've performed some sort of Tank Shock, but just because you Tank Shock doesn't necessarily mean you can Ram. All Rams are Tank Shocks but not all Tank Shocks are Rams. It's the same simple thing I've been saying for ages.

Uh, can't all vehicles ram? Isn't there specifically a +1 bonus if you are 'a tank'? Wouldn't this mean that all vehicles can ram but not all vehicles can tank shock...

No only Tanks get to tank shock or ram since its part of the TANK rules. There is some vehicle upgrades that let non tanks ram. Tanks get +1 when ramming but non tanks are included because the rammed vehicle hits back at the ramming vehicle.