| Poll |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
|
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
2009/01/27 23:11:24
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
Feasting on the souls of unworthy opponents
|
You tank shock soldiers, you ram vehicles.
The first part of the ramming rule says, "Ramming is a special type of tank shock." Now, that would make me think that ramming is a subset of tank shock.
To the point....a Deff Rolla on an Ork Battlewagon is used in tank shocking. I would think that you could use it in ramming as well because ramming says that its a type of tank shock. The folks at the store where I play say that I cannot do it because Ramming follows different rules.
Anyone with some insightful words?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
2009/01/27 23:25:56
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot
|
I do... LOCK THIS THREAD NOW. QUICKLY!!!!
|
 "Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas."
-Joseph Stalin
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/27 23:27:07
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Ragin' Ork Dreadnought
Monarchy of TBD
|
Are you familiar with Pandora's box? This topic just opened it. Try a forum search for Deffrolla or ramming and you'll find pages of argument about this very thing.
|
Klawz-Ramming is a subset of citrus fruit?
Gwar- "And everyone wants a bigger Spleen!"
Mercurial wrote:
I admire your aplomb and instate you as Baron of the Seas and Lord Marshall of Privateers.
Orkeosaurus wrote:Star Trek also said we'd have X-Wings by now. We all see how that prediction turned out.
Orkeosaurus, on homophobia, the nature of homosexuality, and the greatness of George Takei.
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleyways and mugs them for loose grammar.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/27 23:34:29
Subject: Re:Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Sneaky Kommando
|
As much I think Ramming is Tank Shocking, I do not want to see yet another thread fall into the void of debate. We all know the arguments on both sides, we all know we will never agree, so let this particular beast lie in peace. If you truly are simply looking for insight, I would suggest checking the following threads instead of making a whole new one.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/214382.page#331378
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/216779.page#359935
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/220185.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/222055.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/227443.page
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/01/27 23:39:00
Moz:
You: "Hold on, you rammed, that's not a tank shock"
Me: "Ok so what is a ram, lets look at the rules."
Rulebook: "A ram is a special kind of tank shock"
You: "So it's a tank shock until it hits a vehicle, and then it's a ram, not a tank shock, and then it goes back to being a tank shock later!"
Me: "Yeah it doesn't really say any of that in here, how about we just play by what's written in here?" |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/27 23:45:03
Subject: Re:Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Fresh-Faced New User
|
Also, way to misquote the relevant rule.
"Ramming is a special type of tank shock move."
There that is much better. And by better I mean what the rulebook says and totally unclear.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 00:33:06
Subject: Re:Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
Feasting on the souls of unworthy opponents
|
Sorry, I'm new to the forums; I didn't know that this had been under debate before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 01:08:59
Subject: Re:Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
Feasting on the souls of unworthy opponents
|
Can't someone just ask GW for clarification?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 01:38:32
Subject: Re:Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan
UK
|
Its been done to death. Im confident I can convince people in person of the right way to use the rule but over the interwebs on dakka, it simply goes back & fourth between the two sides.
|
 H.B.M.C. wrote:Friend of mine just sent me this:
"The Tyranid Codex, where I learned the truth about despair, as will you. There's a reason why this codex is the worst hell on earth... Hope. ."
Too be fair.. it's all worked out quite well!
Heh.  |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 01:47:22
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Regular Dakkanaut
|
This was a special argument at a Local Games Workshop store between "TFDEG" and everyone else.
Save for myself, I learned long ago how to translate GW-speak. You don't know the power of the dark side.
"TFDEG" believed it's not enough to be a vehicle to ram. No, you must also be a TANK! Why?
"it's a special type of tank shock."
So the question became "what is inherited from the tank shock parent class that is not overriden by the ramming child class?"
And that's when the crickets began chirping.
|
5.12.2011 - login works. 1747 hours. Signs of account having been accessed by unknown party due to strange content in inbox. Search on forum provides no relevant material towards that end. In place of that a curious opportunity to examine the behavior of cyberstalker infestation has arisen. |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 01:50:43
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
Feasting on the souls of unworthy opponents
|
with an iron fist wrote:This was a special argument at a Local Games Workshop store between "TFDEG" and everyone else.
Save for myself, I learned long ago how to translate GW-speak. You don't know the power of the dark side.
"TFDEG" believed it's not enough to be a vehicle to ram. No, you must also be a TANK! Why?
"it's a special type of tank shock."
So the question became "what is inherited from the tank shock parent class that is not overriden by the ramming child class?"
And that's when the crickets began chirping.
I'm too new to 40k; I don't understand what you just said. :(
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 01:52:30
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Confessor Of Sins
|
I am with Ghaz. Ramming is a tank shock and can be done with anything able to tank shock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 01:59:52
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus
|
I think Yakface summed it up best so I'm going to transplant it quickly.
Yakface wrote:Ok folks, I'm going to lock this thread, not because my opinion is the most right (it ain't) but rather because we have several threads arguing the same thing over and over again and there is absolutely no new information being brought up just never-ending circular arguments.
The fact is, GW needs to answer this question in an official FAQ for everyone to agree on how it should be played no matter how you look at it.
As for the INAT FAQ (for those who care), in the 2.1 version that will be coming out tomorrow we have reversed our previous ruling and gone with the stance that Deff Rollas cannot be used with Rams (and also therefore that Reinforced Rams do not allow Trukks to Ram either).
I personally believe that the rules support the position Sourclams has been arguing:
Ramming is a type of Tank Shocking, similar to how a Morale Check is a type of Leadership Test. The Deff Rolla says it works with any Tank Shock and therefore it should function with a Ram. This would be the same concept as if there was a special rule that did D6 S10 hits to a unit when it took a Ld test. If a unit then had to take a Morale check would this not still be a Ld test? Of course it would and as such the rule would apply.
However, having said that, there are other factors to consider some of which being the fact that both the UKGT house rules this year (which I've gotten the chance to read a preview version of) and John Spencer are both ruling that Deff Rollas do not work with Ramming. With an issue that so divided and one that can have a pretty big impact on games we felt it behooved us to have our FAQ ruling the same way as these other two sources, especially since the argument either way really comes down to semantics.
So for those of you looking to play strictly by the RAW you just have to know that this is an issue you'll have to discuss with your opponent before the game, and for those playing in the UKGT or a tournament using the INAT FAQ this year, you will not be able to use Deff Rollas when ramming.
Beyond that, we'll all just have to wait until GW decides this issue worthy enough to include in their official FAQs.
|
Interceptor Drones can disembark at any point during the Sun Shark's move (even though models cannot normally disembark from Zooming Flyers).
-Jeremy Vetock, only man at Games Workshop who understands Zooming Flyers |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 02:14:37
Subject: Re:Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Major
far away from Battle Creek, Michigan
|
I wish there was a subforum just for this question.
|
PROSECUTOR: By now, there have been 34 casualties.
Elena Ceausescu says: Look, and that they are calling genocide.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 03:03:14
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Hurr! Ogryn Bone 'Ead!
|
how do you lock..
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 03:55:58
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
Become a Mod
|
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 05:10:22
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Dakka Veteran
|
frgsinwntr wrote:I am with Ghaz. Ramming is a tank shock and can be done with anything able to tank shock.
But things that are not tanks are still able to ram, they just can't tank shock... A DE Raider for example would be able to attempt ramming another vehicle, but without a specific vehicle upgrade it is unable to perform a tank shock on infantry units...
|
"...you don't run internet lists, except for when you make a list and it becomes an internet list..." |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 05:12:44
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
toxic_wisdom wrote:frgsinwntr wrote:I am with Ghaz. Ramming is a tank shock and can be done with anything able to tank shock.
But things that are not tanks are still able to ram, they just can't tank shock... A DE Raider for example would be able to attempt ramming another vehicle, but without a specific vehicle upgrade it is unable to perform a tank shock on infantry units...
Umm regardless of whether or not deff rollas work on vehicles, only tanks may tank shock, OR ram.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/01/28 05:13:12
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 05:19:41
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Nurgle Chosen Marine on a Palanquin
|
Drunkspleen wrote:I think Yakface summed it up best so I'm going to transplant it quickly.
Yakface wrote:Ok folks, I'm going to lock this thread, not because my opinion is the most right (it ain't) but rather because we have several threads arguing the same thing over and over again and there is absolutely no new information being brought up just never-ending circular arguments.
The fact is, GW needs to answer this question in an official FAQ for everyone to agree on how it should be played no matter how you look at it.
As for the INAT FAQ (for those who care), in the 2.1 version that will be coming out tomorrow we have reversed our previous ruling and gone with the stance that Deff Rollas cannot be used with Rams (and also therefore that Reinforced Rams do not allow Trukks to Ram either).
I personally believe that the rules support the position Sourclams has been arguing:
Ramming is a type of Tank Shocking, similar to how a Morale Check is a type of Leadership Test. The Deff Rolla says it works with any Tank Shock and therefore it should function with a Ram. This would be the same concept as if there was a special rule that did D6 S10 hits to a unit when it took a Ld test. If a unit then had to take a Morale check would this not still be a Ld test? Of course it would and as such the rule would apply.
However, having said that, there are other factors to consider some of which being the fact that both the UKGT house rules this year (which I've gotten the chance to read a preview version of) and John Spencer are both ruling that Deff Rollas do not work with Ramming. With an issue that so divided and one that can have a pretty big impact on games we felt it behooved us to have our FAQ ruling the same way as these other two sources, especially since the argument either way really comes down to semantics.
So for those of you looking to play strictly by the RAW you just have to know that this is an issue you'll have to discuss with your opponent before the game, and for those playing in the UKGT or a tournament using the INAT FAQ this year, you will not be able to use Deff Rollas when ramming.
Beyond that, we'll all just have to wait until GW decides this issue worthy enough to include in their official FAQs.
A definative non-answer. Most people who I've played that use battlewagons don't use the deffrollas on vehicles, but... at the same time, if the local tourny allows them to ram with deffrollas and use them on vehicles, they will do it. I think most of us know that deffrollas shouldn't be used on vehicles, but the rules seemingly allow it, sorta, kinda.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 05:31:21
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Lieutenant General
|
I have enough for any that want them.
|
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 05:33:12
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
I'll take two.
|
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 06:10:05
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Dakka Veteran
|
toxic_wisdom wrote:frgsinwntr wrote:I am with Ghaz. Ramming is a tank shock and can be done with anything able to tank shock.
But things that are not tanks are still able to ram, they just can't tank shock... A DE Raider for example would be able to attempt ramming another vehicle, but without a specific vehicle upgrade it is unable to perform a tank shock on infantry units...
Erm... yeah disregard this statement...
|
"...you don't run internet lists, except for when you make a list and it becomes an internet list..." |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 06:53:21
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Skink Chief with Poisoned Javelins
|
inb4lock.
ungulateman
EDIT: LOLWUT? some window just popped up about me not using any capitals.
....random
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/01/28 06:54:06
One means the Mechanicum truly loses their gak, and the other means the Eldar realize that Vaul is really a toaster and experience religion fail.
Techmarine Mario and Brother Adept Luigi to the rescue !
I think it is a small fraction of Jesus worshiping Christians who have psychic powers.
Join the Church of the Children of Turtle Pie
<-- Second in Command of the Turtle Pie Guard --> |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 06:57:56
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
[ARTICLE MOD]
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Thank you, Ghaz, I'll reserve one of those spoons.
|
"I was not making fun of you personally - I was heaping scorn on an inexcusably silly idea - a practice I shall always follow." - Lt. Colonel Dubois, Starship Troopers
Don't settle for the pewter horde! Visit http://www.bkarmypainting.com and find out how you can have a well-painted army quickly at a reasonable price. |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 07:40:21
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Fireknife Shas'el
All over the U.S.
|
I reserve my vote until someone puts up a both answer.
A rapid fire gun can only fire once up to 24"
A rapid fire gun can only fire twice at 12"
A rapid fire gun can only fire 12" if the unit moved.
All are true statements about the same rule. If examined seperately they would appear to contradict but when looked at together they you realise that the rule is situational.
If we can understand this then why can't we understand that Ramming and Tank shock are 2 seperate rules with their own seperate headings and to be used in different situations. That by rule of order any following modifying rule would have to mention the specific situation as to which is its intended use. Tank shock is for types of infantry(non-armor valued units with morale) and ramming is for vehicles. As far as I can see there are no known exceptions.
|
 Officially elevated by St. God of Yams to the rank of Scholar of the Church of the Children of the Eternal Turtle Pie at 11:42:36 PM 05/01/09
If they are too stupid to live, why make them?
In the immortal words of Socrates, I drank what??! 
Tau-*****points(You really don't want to know)  |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 10:34:25
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Stormin' Stompa
|
Why isn't this thread locked already?
|
-------------------------------------------------------
"He died because he had no honor. He had no honor and the Emperor was watching."
 18.000  3.500  8.200  3.300  2.400  3.100  5.500  2.500  3.200  3.000
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 13:12:20
Subject: Re:Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
Feasting on the souls of unworthy opponents
|
Do you see where my title is "Fresh Faced New user?"
I'm guessing that probably means that just because I ask a question that's been asked before doesn't make it unworthy of discussion. Yes, its apparently been asked and discussed before, but a previous discussion doesn't make new discussions illegal.
Otherwise, every subject in 40k would only be allowed one thread, and users would be forced to search them down, unable to bring them up again. Don't hate! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 13:16:40
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Stormin' Stompa
|
I appoligize. I don't "hate".
Having said that; several topics have already be discussed to death and degenerate into a lot of people restating the same arguments over and over. This is one such topic.
All respect to you, but I doubt you can add anything new to the discussion. This is not a personal attack, I just have my doubts.
|
-------------------------------------------------------
"He died because he had no honor. He had no honor and the Emperor was watching."
18.000 3.500 8.200 3.300 2.400 3.100 5.500 2.500 3.200 3.000
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 13:34:18
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Dashofpepper wrote:
Anyone with some insightful words?
This could be seen as insightfull insofar that nobody in the ramming-is-not-tankshock camp ever bothered to explain the following:
How do you DECLARE a ramming move, take the book next to you and find the exact words that the book tells you to use when you want to do a ram move.
Steelmage99 wrote:Why isn't this thread locked already?
Because it's just too entertaining to see a few people attempt to convince us of something that basically amounts to:
"the poodle is a special type of dog, therefor it ceases to be a dog"
|
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2009/01/28 13:41:26
"ANY" includes the special ones |
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 15:13:20
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Stormin' Stompa
|
|
-------------------------------------------------------
"He died because he had no honor. He had no honor and the Emperor was watching."
18.000 3.500 8.200 3.300 2.400 3.100 5.500 2.500 3.200 3.000
|
|
|
|
|
2009/01/28 15:17:33
Subject: Is Ramming a Tank Shock?
|
|
Dominar
|
The poodle lives on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
