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.

CaptKaruthors wrote:So I am assuming the D6 S10 hits replace the actual ram rule then? No mention is made that they stack.

Yes they do stack and as far as i can tell they happen at the same time ...

For example ...

if you tried to run over a skimmer i would say on a 3+ the skimmer gets out the way and you don't deffrolla it.
if you ram a land raider it will take the impact hit + D6 str10 ... and at the same time the battle waggon take an impact hit back

... however these case are not cover by the rules and you'll have to work it out before the game

Its actually kinda fun to listen to all people cry that the ork codex is suddenly overpowered.

And after listening to yakface on the last episode of 40k radio i guess he has just a little more work to do before Adepticon.

As well as a few ork players!

Skimmers can dodge a ram on 3+. Does that mean they can also dodge this thing on 3+?

And is it legal for an ork player to declare ram on one vehicle, kill it, then declare more rams etc or do you have to declare all targets at once.

You say "My big metal behemoth of spiky death is moving thirteen inches forward. If anything of yours happens to be in the way, tough luck."

I think skimmers will need to roll a 3+ for every hit since it is 1D6 hits.

Yay. Frakking yay. That is all.

Pipboy101 wrote:I think skimmers will need to roll a 3+ for every hit since it is 1D6 hits.

If the ram doesn't hit, the Deff Rolla doesn't. 1 save, all or nothing.

This is terrible news for me, I have to worst luck in trying to destroy Battlewagons, 20+ melta shots in double pen range, 15+ assault cannon shots, and a few lascannon shots, many of which were on side/rear armor, and I'll still fail to kill a single battlewagon.

I'm TERRIBLY SAD AND TRYING TO EVADE THE SWEAR FILTER.

Please do not attempt to get around the language filter.


Hmm, so a typo leads to an insult from a mod? I see how this goes.

I guess Rule #1 doesnt apply to some people.

You're doing it wrong. What you need is Wolf Guard, with Dual Combi Meltas, in Drop Pods.

Oh wait, you did do that

Yep your Please do not attempt to get around the language filter.. Might as well pack up your armies and stop playing.

Well I have a reason now to assemble the 4 battlewagons still in the pile of new crap. This new ruling combo'd out with the DragonWagon will be pretty fun.

And here I was trying to decide what vehicles to give my orks... seems like GW made my decision for me.

airmang wrote:Don't forget that if the vehicle is destroyed (explodes) the unit inside is placed within the area the vehicle was in, so they will get hit by the Battlewagon w Deffrolla. So it seems that with some good rolls the Battlewagon could go through multiple vehicles, and take a few members out of the passengers too!

Now that will be hilarious. "I just Deff Rollad your Rhino... Oh and it explodes. Roll for wounds... now take D6 S10 hits more from the Rolla as it runs over the top of your squad."

Pika_power wrote:You say "My big metal behemoth of spiky death is moving thirteen inches forward. If anything of yours happens to be in the way, tough luck."

Are you certain. I thought you had to declare a target for a ram, not a direction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Which also makes ramming two tanks at the same time impossible.

This is awesome and all, but I don't really understand what the argument against it was in the first place. I've been wrecking my friends Lehman Russ's for weeks since I got my BW

Its stopped unless the vehicle it hits explodes, although if the target does explode.. it says you can keep going and hit additional targets.

@ grapple squiggoth: Nope you just pivot and declare your tank shock. If anything gets in the way, it suffers the the tank shock. Note that only by declaring your max speed can your tank shock also ram.

Ramming has its own rules on page 69 (small book anyways - I have it in the office) that states its is stopped unless target Vehicle explodes on a ram.

Can't see how it can be taken any other way.

Airmang, that is specifically addressed in the FAQ and it does allow for you to do that.

yeah,
It's a sad day... worst ruling ever! I guess they have DeffRollas to sell..

But at least they made a ruling...

I await the next big tourney and more than half the armies are deffrolla spam lists...

Panic...

Panic wrote:I await the next big tourney and more than half the armies are deffrolla spam lists...

And the other half being 60 melta Drop Pod Wolf Guard lists?

CaptKaruthors wrote:So I am assuming the D6 S10 hits replace the actual ram rule then? No mention is made that they stack.

From the FAQ:

Q. Does a unit that successfully stops a Deff
Rolla-equipped Battlewagon’s Tank Shock suffer
any hits?
A. Yes, it does. In fact, it suffers 2D6 S10 hits!

This lends credence to the "they do stack" argument. As it seems you resolve the Tank Shock, then if your vehicle is still alive, you take the Rolla' hits.

Gwar! wrote:

Panic wrote:I await the next big tourney and more than half the armies are deffrolla spam lists...

And the other half being 60 melta Drop Pod Wolf Guard lists?

What about nids?

Tri wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Panic wrote:I await the next big tourney and more than half the armies are deffrolla spam lists...

And the other half being 60 melta Drop Pod Wolf Guard lists?

What about nids?

Nids are not that hot tbh. Doom is not that good, Tervigon Spam will die in KP missions, and 60 melta Drop Pod Guard will just shoot the big ones and watch the rest collapse

I have a feeling that GW will do unto the Deff Rolla what was done unto the combination of Counter-Attack and Furious Charge.

Nurglitch wrote:I have a feeling that GW will do unto the Deff Rolla what was done unto the combination of Counter-Attack and Furious Charge.

I doubt it. Here they are clarifying unclear RaW. The previous was just pissing on RaW full stop.

Yeah... I doubt this one gets retracted. It'll be interesting to see how it shakes out, as now Deff Rollas just take a huge dump on any non-skimmer mech list.

Gornall:

Well that's just it. Quite aside from the fact that I believe the rules clearly indicate the contrary to what the new FAQ declares (wouldn't be the first time GW contradicted itself via an FAQ, witness the CSM FAQ granting the ability to cast Gift of Chaos twice to Marks of Tzeentch), the Deff Rolla is stupidly good against vehicles.

I mean, when the Deff Rolla affects vehicles they're a no-brainer choice. My rule of thumb for disputed rules is that when one opinion makes a unit either a no-brainer or not even an option, and another makes that unit reasonable, then the opinion that makes the unit reasonable is the better one to play, quite aside from what the rules actually say.

I know the rest of you don't hold the game designers in high regard, but from my perspective they don't make units that are either no-brainers or not worth taking. So if some cock-eyed 'interpretation' of the rules is turned up some one of the retards in the YMDC forum, that person is almost always wrong: veridical mistakes are few and far between (the extension of "Chaos Space Marine" is an actual instance of GW rules being sloppy). If one of those mistakes is supported by an FAQ then that FAQ is redacted, like the Counter-Attack/Furious Charge combination.

Gornall wrote:Yeah... I doubt this one gets retracted. It'll be interesting to see how it shakes out, as now Deff Rollas just take a huge dump on any non-skimmer mech list.

And that's why you bring ranged anti-tank to keep those battlewagons from getting close.

Since this is in the YMDC area now too, I suppose I could pose this here.

The ramming vehicle stops when it contacts another vehicle unless the rammed vehicle explodes. So for a Deff Rolla Ram, does that mean the one regular ram hit (the one calculated from armor, speed, and being a tank) must explode the vehicle for the Battle Wagon to keep moving, or will the Battle Wagon keep going if any of the 1d6 S10 hits explode the rammed vehicle?

Basically, is the one hit the "Ram" with the 1d6 being an additional benefit from ramming, or does the Deff Rolla simply make the Ram into 1d6+1 hits, (with the 1 possibly a different S from the 1d6)?

I can see it falling out either way. From a logic standpoint, I can see the argument that if the initial ram fails to explode the vehicle, the Battle Wagon stops while the Rolla it just slammed into something grinds the other vehicle apart, but it's already lost its momentum. But which way seems more appropriate given the RAW? (Don't own an Ork codex unfortunately.)

Woot! I guess I havn't been hoarding all dem toilet paper tubes fer nothin'!

Actually this will be very helpful - I have broken my teeth (well my Orks' teeth) on a couple of LR spam lists this year. Ooof. Tight formation = beautiful. I think this is the Ork's Melta Gun - and it's only proppa that our 'meltagun' is covered in spikes and bolted onto a 10-ton armored vehicle.

I shall name my next Rolla "Armored Brutality"