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.

 office_waaagh wrote:
@tag8833 - all I can think of without more information is using blocking units to stop him charging you. Put grots or your koptas in front of his invincible units, and sacrifice them to let your tide stay free to move forward. Then run forward and make sure you get a multi-charge against as much of his army as possible. Remember, you can charge in all directions at once and you don't have to maintain unit coherence when you do.

The problem is that leaves a deathstar or two that is unmolested and can beat me.

Backing up the tide is 10 KMK's, but against invisible deathstars they can't do anything unless the tourney is nerfing invisibility. Against Rerollable 2+ invuls, they don't do much. Against things like Wraiths who can tarpit the tide on their 3++ / 4+ RP, it doesn't do much. I would love to include Tankbustas, but the best way to do so is via a gunwagon, and ATC which is the tourney I'm practicing for doesn't allow forgeworld.

ETA: What I really need is a culexus assassin in a fast attack trukk, but I'm limited to 2 detachments, and I need 1 for the tide, and 1 for the painboy. Also, I don't play orks so I can be like everyone else at tourneys, so running the Culexus that you sometimes see in 40% of lists is a little distasteful.

The Imperial Answer wrote:

 Waaagh 18 wrote:
What he's saying is that you can't use rules from a book, when a newer book is out. That's like saying you could use a rule from the old ork codex when the new codex exists.

So effectively the Turbo Charger no longer exists.

May bad, I didn't have my book right in front of me when I typed that. Odd tho, my battlescrib gives two reference points for the upgrade. One is Apoc reload book and the other is IA:apoc book. I really hope its not gone. That upgrade is pretty nice to have on the klaw stompa. Helps make up for the lack of shooting attacks.

Either way, I believe the Kustom Stompa is a Competitive unit. Base on its scalability. Some of my local events are point point caps on how many points you can put into your LoW. So having something like a stompa that can scale up or down for the event is really handy.

What do you guys think would be an effective build of a Kustom Stompa? The last event I went to had a point cap of 610pts for a LoW.

 Glitcha wrote:

The Imperial Answer wrote:

 Waaagh 18 wrote:
What he's saying is that you can't use rules from a book, when a newer book is out. That's like saying you could use a rule from the old ork codex when the new codex exists.

So effectively the Turbo Charger no longer exists.

May bad, I didn't have my book right in front of me when I typed that. Odd tho, my battlescrib gives two reference points for the upgrade. One is Apoc reload book and the other is IA:apoc book. I really hope its not gone. That upgrade is pretty nice to have on the klaw stompa. Helps make up for the lack of shooting attacks.

Either way, I believe the Kustom Stompa is a Competitive unit. Base on its scalability. Some of my local events are point point caps on how many points you can put into your LoW. So having something like a stompa that can scale up or down for the event is really handy.

What do you guys think would be an effective build of a Kustom Stompa? The last event I went to had a point cap of 610pts for a LoW.

Well here is what I would go with for one:



Kustom Stompa - 650 points

> Krusha Ball

> Deff Arsenal

> Deff Kannon with Supa-Gatla


Benefits:

- 7 Destroyer Hits in Melee combat

- Ability to knock down terrain.

- 120", 3D6, STR9, AP3 + D3 Supa Rokkits (each an Infinite Range, STR 8, AP3, Large Blast)

- 72”, STR 10, AP1, Primary Weapon 1, Massive Blast

- 48”, STR 7, AP3, Heavy 2D6 shots (it makes this attack three times but after the first time if doubles are rolled for the number of shots the weapon can’t be fired anymore for the rest of the game so it will fire a minimum of two times before this becomes a possibility).






Or if you need one below 600 points:


Kustom Stompa - 595 points

> Krusha Ball

> Deff Arsenal

> Bursta Gun (D Strength Large Blast)




Or one that is exactly 610 points:


Kustom Stompa - 610 points

>Titan close combat weapon

> Deff Arsenal

> 2 x Kannons (shoulder mounted)

> Bursta Gun (D Strength Large Blast)

> 2 x Twin-linked Big Shootas



Not sure how effective these would be however. One thing to note however is that all of them receive 7 D Weapon hits in melee.

Just played a local tourney of 1000, 1500, and 1850 games.

One unit that surprised me a lot was my Wierd boy. Mind you, I was playing Psyker light armies for the last two games I had him in (IG and Newcrons), but he pulled his weight well.

I had him in a blob of 30 boys running up the field while the boss stayed in a battlewagon screaming ahead.

Da Jump made a good appearence and dropped 30 boys in the face of my enemies. And the blessing (forget the name) that provided another attack to my boys made them running into melee in the next turn after Da Jump with 5 attacks each.

Even after a handful of wounds, the number of boys left behind with the 5 attacks each made the casualties less painful as I ended up attacking with more than usual to begin with.

I just wish Necrons would die already. Usually the Klaw is our big bang on a group of bad guys, but with a 4+ reanimation Decurion list, they would literally not die.

Considering the age-old mantra of "boyz before toys", is it competitively viable to spend 600-700 points on a damn big toy, i.e. a Stompa?

 The Shadow wrote:
Considering the age-old mantra of "boyz before toys", is it competitively viable to spend 600-700 points on a damn big toy, i.e. a Stompa?

Well it depends.

There are Stompas as cheap as 400 points.

But to me unless that Stompa justifies its points cost it is perhaps not worth taking.


Also the "Boyz before toys" thing is said to be an outdated ideology by some.

 The Shadow wrote:
Considering the age-old mantra of "boyz before toys", is it competitively viable to spend 600-700 points on a damn big toy, i.e. a Stompa?

810 for Codex Stompa plus whatever goes inside. The greatest thing going for it is Effigy. Fearless Grots are awesome! The Imperials get a statue as terrain. I wish the Orks had that.

I'd have to agree that the ideology that "Boyz before toyz" is no longer apply. I believe this change when the new codex came out and we saw a shift. Instead of taking boyz before other stuff, I think its now the other way around. Now Toyz before boyz, or in some case grots. Personally, I don't run grots unless they are on kannons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also how do you get 7 destroyer hits with the krusha ball?

 Glitcha wrote:
I'd have to agree that the ideology that "Boyz before toyz" is no longer apply. I believe this change when the new codex came out and we saw a shift. Instead of taking boyz before other stuff, I think its now the other way around. Now Toyz before boyz, or in some case grots. Personally, I don't run grots unless they are on kannons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also how do you get 7 destroyer hits with the krusha ball?

In Kastorel-Novem, the Krusha Ball is a "Titan close combat weapon" in its profile description.

Titan close combat weapons add 3+ attacks to the profile of the unit.

In this case the Stompa starts off with 4 so it gets 3 more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So how is this build for a Kustom Stompa



Kustom Stompa - 770 points (exact same points cost as the Codex Stompa)

- 2 x Deff Kannon with Super Gatla
- 1 x Deff Arsenal.


Despite the Stompa being limited in melee with this build you gain:


> 2 x 72”, STR 10, AP1, Massive Blasts

> 120", 3D6, STR9, AP3 + D3 Supa Rokkits (each an Infinite Range, STR 8, AP3, Large Blast)

> 48”, STR 7, AP3, Heavy 2D6 shots
( This attack can be made up to 6 times, 3 for each Deff Kannon with Supa-Gatla, if no doubles are rolled).

Regarding that Kustom Stompa in IA8, it says if you take two Titan CCW you become a Klaw stompa and get to chuck mangled enemies around the table.

A Krusha Ball is a titan CCW. So if I take Krusha + a TCCW that makes me a klawstompa, right?

Edit: Also, invis looks gak, whats the common tourney nerf for it to make it playable?

I get the sentiment that boys are outdated, but I don't agree with it at all. The ghaz sup added green tide that makes boys viable in a big way.

Solar Shock wrote:

 office_waaagh wrote:
you can charge in all directions at once and you don't have to maintain unit coherence when you do.

Why don't you need to remain coherent? Am I missing something? Is it to do with the tide, or something more general?

The latest rules errata changes the charge rules to no longer require that the charging unit maintain unit coherency with a model that has already moved.

 Dakkamite wrote:
Regarding that Kustom Stompa in IA8, it says if you take two Titan CCW you become a Klaw stompa and get to chuck mangled enemies around the table.

A Krusha Ball is a titan CCW. So if I take Krusha + a TCCW that makes me a klawstompa, right?

Edit: Also, invis looks gak, whats the common tourney nerf for it to make it playable?

I've heard a common nerf is to just make invis give a reduction in BS or make is so enemy models fire at targets with Invis at BS1... The idea generally is to make it so stuff that can't fire snapshots can fire at invisible targets.

At the risk of stealing someone else's thunder, the Storm of Silence tournament had 52 entrants and was won by an ork player (one of only 4, compared with 8 Necron armies for example). The results are on the Facebook page here: https://www.facebook.com/TheHarvester40kGT?fref=nf.

The winner, Chuck Arnett, kindly posted his army list in the comments:
Ork Horde (primary)
Zhadsnark 'Da Rippa'
Warboss: Da Lucky Stikk; power klaw; warbike
Painboy: grot orderly; warbike

14 Warbikerz: Boss Nob (power klaw)
3 Warbikerz
3 Warbikerz
3 Warbikerz

Great Waaagh!
Big Mek: Mega Force Field; killsaw; warbike
Warboss: Big Bosspole; power klaw; warbike

10 Gretchin: + 1 Runtherd
10 Gretchin: + 1 Runtherd

8 Tankbustas
• Trukk
8 Tankbustas
• Trukk
8 Tankbustas
• Trukk 30
8 Tankbustas
• Trukk
8 Tankbustas
• Trukk

1,849 points

How does everyone feel about this?

I saw that as well. I don't really know how I feel about zhadsnark since he is forgeworld. On the other hand it is refreshing to see any ork list do well in a tournament setting.

 Dakkamite wrote:
Regarding that Kustom Stompa in IA8, it says if you take two Titan CCW you become a Klaw stompa and get to chuck mangled enemies around the table.

A Krusha Ball is a titan CCW. So if I take Krusha + a TCCW that makes me a klawstompa, right?

Yes.

In fact you also gain the added advantage of being able to knock down terrain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
While on the subject of Super-Heavies is there anything the transport capacity of Ork Super-Heavies is good for outside of Meks to make repairs ?

Fine summary of competitive ork units so far. Nice example with Chuck Arnetts army too.

I wonder how the units scores and fares against the eldar and tau?

-Against eldar it is already established how AP units do good, well that and forcing saves.

-Against tau there is a real threat the riptide and broadside firebase will absorb the AP3 rockets from the orks and gun down bikes and trukks.

 Rismonite wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
Regarding that Kustom Stompa in IA8, it says if you take two Titan CCW you become a Klaw stompa and get to chuck mangled enemies around the table.

A Krusha Ball is a titan CCW. So if I take Krusha + a TCCW that makes me a klawstompa, right?

Edit: Also, invis looks gak, whats the common tourney nerf for it to make it playable?

I've heard a common nerf is to just make invis give a reduction in BS or make is so enemy models fire at targets with Invis at BS1... The idea generally is to make it so stuff that can't fire snapshots can fire at invisible targets.

There are a couple approaches. One tourney I went to banned invis (reroll). One Tourney upped it to 3 Warp charges. One tourney made all units BS:1 if shooting at it so that blast and templates could still target it, and you hit on 5's in Close combat instead of 6's.

Personally, I think invis is a big problem for fun, but every event that adjusts it gets trolled by people who see it as their god given right to give opponents a bad time. It tends to be based on missions as well. ATC missions are built for deathstars, so the effects of invisibility are magnified somewhat compared to missions that are more friendly to MSU or board control armies.

Anyone have any good ideas on how orks can contend with the new Eldar Scattbikes? A potential 40 str6 shots per unit on a 48in objective secured platform pretty much shreds most of the ork codex.

Can only think of massed lobbas and wagon (and gunwagon) spam or going unbound with A LOT of msu koptas or alike.

Waaargh wrote:
Fine summary of competitive ork units so far. Nice example with Chuck Arnetts army too.

I wonder how the units scores and fares against the eldar and tau?

-Against eldar it is already established how AP units do good, well that and forcing saves.

-Against tau there is a real threat the riptide and broadside firebase will absorb the AP3 rockets from the orks and gun down bikes and trukks.

Yes but the Broadsides won't absorb a Kustom Mega Kannon blast that well.

In fact they will be insta-killed by it given its STR 8, AP2 unless Broadsides have an Invulnerable save.




Also even if its just mass rokkit fire, the Broadsides only have to fail one of their saves to be removed from play given the Rokkits are STR 8.

office_waaagh wrote:
The latest rules errata changes the charge rules to no longer require that the charging unit maintain unit coherency with a model that has already moved.

OOO, so could someone elighten?
I can multicharge, not needing to move models so that I create a string of 2" coherency boyz between the two combats? Also, what about once in combat? I don't need some sort of string? what occurs when combats end?

So if 1/2 combats end the other unit just moves towards the other like a pile in? and if both end I just consolidate towards each other?

pickled_heretic wrote:I saw that as well. I don't really know how I feel about zhadsnark since he is forgeworld. On the other hand it is refreshing to see any ork list do well in a tournament setting.

See in my opinion there aren't any Ork FW things that are stupidly OP, in general the FW ork things are actually fantastically fun and balanced units to add to ork armies. Personally I really enjoy them and would advise other ork players to have a go with some of them.

Errata - Charge Move, Moving Charging Models:
"If possible, a charging model must end its charge move in unit coherency with another model in its own units that has already moved. If it is not possible for a charging model to move and maintain unit coherency, move it as close as possible to another model in its own unit that has already moved."

This does not permit you to break coherency on purpose, it pins out what happens if you are somehow not able to maintain unit coherency. Parhaps due to casualties or something else that has made a large physical gab in the unt.

Man that wording is making my brain frazzle
Thankyou for the quote though i'll have a few more thinks about it.

Waaargh wrote:
Errata - Charge Move, Moving Charging Models:
"If possible, a charging model must end its charge move in unit coherency with another model in its own units that has already moved. If it is not possible for a charging model to move and maintain unit coherency, move it as close as possible to another model in its own unit that has already moved."

This does not permit you to break coherency on purpose, it pins out what happens if you are somehow not able to maintain unit coherency. Parhaps due to casualties or something else that has made a large physical gab in the unt.

But this does: Any remaining models that are not in base contact with one or more enemy models and have yet to Pile In must now do so, and must attempt to get as close as possible to one or more of the enemy units locked in this combat.
Like for me it overrides coherency condition

By your wording I agree at that step the rules tells us to actively split up a unit in coherency. To obey both steps; A) End in coherency after you made the charge move, and B) Each model not in base contac must pile in to get as close to one or more enemy units locked in the combat... to obey both steps and aim to not be coherency requires a lot of jiggling, it can be difficult enough to make the multiple-assault.

Multi-assault is still more difficult in this edition than in previous edition, even after the errata. To make a sucessful multi-assault, get your Boyz as close to the enemy units as possible during the movement phase.

Remember that each glancing hit equals 1 wound and each penetrating hit equals 2 wounds regardless of how many hull points were actually removed. If you can tie up multiple units including at least one vehicle and pile on glances and pens, you should be able to easily win combat and force the opponent to take Ld 2 tests. As long as no one rolls snake eyes, you could hypothetically run down many units.

Solar Shock wrote:
Man that wording is making my brain frazzle
Thankyou for the quote though i'll have a few more thinks about it.

There is a line under "multiple charges" that prohibits breaking unit coherency. However, the FAQ removes the requirement that the two units you charge are close enough together that you can charge both of them without having to maintain coherency for each individual model after it moves. You can move subsequent models to "daisy chain" or string together the two parts of the unit, but once you make pile-in moves you're no longer bound by unit coherency rules.

The way I read it is like this: If you want to charge two units that are more than 2" apart, you can now do that, as the requirement is no longer that you always be in unit coherency with a model that has already moved, only that you are in unit coherency at the end of moving all of your assaulting models. Whether the overall coherency requirement is over-ridden by the errata or which movement instructions take precedence (ie "move as close to an enemy as possible" vs "maintain unit coherency") is perhaps up to interpretation. I've always seen it played that you can string models along to maintain coherency and then break it during the pile-in step, but if anyone disagrees with this interpretation I'm open to hearing their reasoning.

In one of FLG's battle reports recently they read the errata as dismissing any coherency requirements entirely, including the need to chain models along between parts of a unit during the charge move, but that's the only time I've seen it played quite so loosely.

The Imperial Answer wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
Regarding that Kustom Stompa in IA8, it says if you take two Titan CCW you become a Klaw stompa and get to chuck mangled enemies around the table.

A Krusha Ball is a titan CCW. So if I take Krusha + a TCCW that makes me a klawstompa, right?

Yes.

In fact you also gain the added advantage of being able to knock down terrain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
While on the subject of Super-Heavies is there anything the transport capacity of Ork Super-Heavies is good for outside of Meks to make repairs ?

When I bring my Stompas, I fill them with burnas. I bring two big meks, one with a KFF, and three units of burnas, all with 3 meks and 2 burnas. The torchers don't get to do much, usually, but they're great for tarpit attempts (termagaunts, cultists, and the like). With that load out, a KlawStompa carrying all the guys and kitted out with two flame belchas (one head, one belly), two shoulder mounted skorchas, deff arsenal, two TCCWs, and a Power Field costs a cool 1010 (1025 if you replace one TCCW with the KB). 5++ invuln to shooting, AV12 bubble that incidentally also gets the 5++, and 11 chances to repair your big guy during your shooting phase, even when locked in combat!

 office_waaagh wrote:

Solar Shock wrote:
Man that wording is making my brain frazzle
Thankyou for the quote though i'll have a few more thinks about it.

There is a line under "multiple charges" that prohibits breaking unit coherency. However, the FAQ removes the requirement that the two units you charge are close enough together that you can charge both of them without having to maintain coherency for each individual model after it moves. You can move subsequent models to "daisy chain" or string together the two parts of the unit, but once you make pile-in moves you're no longer bound by unit coherency rules.

The way I read it is like this: If you want to charge two units that are more than 2" apart, you can now do that, as the requirement is no longer that you always be in unit coherency with a model that has already moved, only that you are in unit coherency at the end of moving all of your assaulting models. Whether the overall coherency requirement is over-ridden by the errata or which movement instructions take precedence (ie "move as close to an enemy as possible" vs "maintain unit coherency") is perhaps up to interpretation. I've always seen it played that you can string models along to maintain coherency and then break it during the pile-in step, but if anyone disagrees with this interpretation I'm open to hearing their reasoning.

In one of FLG's battle reports recently they read the errata as dismissing any coherency requirements entirely, including the need to chain models along between parts of a unit during the charge move, but that's the only time I've seen it played quite so loosely.

The FAQ doesn't affect multi-charges. Check it out: http://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/Errata/Warhammer_40000/Warhammer_40000_Rules_EN.pdf

Changes on page 46 (single assaults), not 54 (multi assaults) Only single charges allow for breaking coherence. If you can't charge both units and stay in coherence, you fail the charge via this line: "Remember that the Charging unit is not allowed to break its unit coherency, and this will obviously limit the potential for this (multi-assaults) type of charge."

You make the common mistake of applying the FAQ to a place that it explicitly doesn't apply. It replaces a bullet point on page 46, but make no changes on page 54 which is where multi-assaults are limited.

FLG played it wrong in their batrep. They were corrected after the fact. Despite being one of the more prominent experts on 40K they are just people too, and also make mistakes.

If you would end up out of coherence in a multi-assault then you fail at the multi-assault but succeed on the single assault against the primary target. The only situation the FAQ will be called into use are when casualties occur during a charge move that cause a unit to lose coherency. Previously, you could have made the argument that a unit losing coherency during a charge move due to casualties suffered as part of that move would no longer be able to make the charge at all, as they no longer meet the criteria for Moving Assaulting Models maintaining coherency at the end of each move.

ETA: I made the same mistake initially: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/635277.page