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 was thinking about the Blitza Bomba, it's actually best when you roll double ones. Not against vehicles but against terminators. Killing just five would be far more points than the Blitza Bomba.

To risky though, I think dakkajets are what I will be going with.

rabidaskal wrote:Now, is it better to take 3 AV 11 flyers or 9 AV 10 buggies. That's the real question in my head.

Same here. Been running 6-9 buggies in a trukk-heavy list for a while. Usually they won't kill much (I'll call myself lucky if they survive long enough to land some shots on enemy armor), but they are great at soaking autocannon/multilaser/heavy bolter fire that would otherwise be stopping my trucks dead. Switching them for dakkajets/bommas would mean better, reliable anti-transport (and even antitank) fire, but would also leave the trukks exposed.

I'll probably be using them to fill the (neglected) FA slots on my kanwall list, or maybe if I choose to run a pure battlewagon army where the core of my army is a tad more solid. But as long as I'm running trukks, the buggies are staying.

Engine of War wrote:Its a good thing i have Hydras.... i need to build a third....

All three of the flyers look like they would be fun to fight against/use

Need to get my stupid Hydra's... wanted them for months now, and I've got an even better reason to buy them!

You guys know you can see the stats on GW's website, right?
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1600094a

Testify wrote:You guys know you can see the stats on GW's website, right?
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1600094a

Doesn't have points costs, weapon stats, upgrade abilities and costs, or special rules.

I think he was reffering to the AV11 discussion not your points.

I.... might actually need to buy one of these.

Of course, I'll be converting it into a Messerschmidt Heavy Fighter style of plane, similar to a Hornesse or Me262.

Why does everyone keep thinking they're av 11? THEY ARE AV 10!!!!

I have no idea why but that has been bugging the heck out of me

Because the Marine one is AV 11, and therefore all of them must be...

*headdesk*

I only see one person who thought they were AV11.
I don't know why it was brought up again.

If you guys wanna see a done dakka jet checkout my gallery/ig air guard dakka project blog. as for a list for effective orks i would say 3 dakka jets use all your fast attack there. Then for a core cause whats airforce without a ground is 20 lootas two squads of 10. 1-2 big meks both with KFF's to make sure your planes always have a 4+ cover save and those meks have to be mounted in a trukk/battle wagon to keep up. Really leaves the impression that their is a group assult of air/ground at the same time. The rest i would suggest boyz and nobs and thats a good shooty/punchy core.

KrimsunBaron wrote:I only see one person who thought they were AV11.
I don't know why it was brought up again.

The assumption has been cropping up regularly on the other threads about the new fliers too. Usually in the context of someone whining that av 11 is 'paper' and dies too easily.

I'd love them to be AV11

They aren't.

Such is life.

I've already seen someone create a "maximum dakka" high points list that just crams in as many Dakkawagons, Shoota boyz, Lootaz, and Dakkajetz as possible into a 3k point list. I'd really like to see how such a list would preform.

It would be worth the points if you were able to squadron them, IG can do it with tanks, hell orks can do it with kopttas. That and give us a hq that will allow storm boys to be take. As troop choices. Then we'll be ready for real air combat.

IG can do it with vendettas IIRC also.

only IG are allowed aircraft squadrons, apparently (Vyper don't count )

I would have liked it for DE Razorwings, too.

AV10 means what?
Its an ork vehicle, it will go down in flames at some point anyway.

Liking the 3 supershootas, with the upgraded BS to boot


Still though, flyer wise they have the most character, but i prefer my razorwings for anti-horde and anti-armour

Theres just something about firing off 12 large blasts on the 1st turn that i really do love.

I've always thought Zagstrukk and Badrukk needed to be IC HQ choices- Badrukk would allow a single Flash Gitz unit to be taken as Troops (similar to 'da Big Boss rule) and Zagstruk would allow Stormboyz to be taken as troops (ala Wazdakka).

6 mobs of Stormboyz with a flight of 5 Koptas and 2 Fighta/Bommas. Aw yeah.

Yeah, that would instantly fix the issues of both stormboyz and flash gits...

Too bad, we ain't getting a new codex anytime soon.

MrMoustaffa wrote:3. Supersonic lets them move 36" flat out instead of 24. Aerial Assault allows them to fire all weapons at cruising speed instead of just one. People are saying this combined with RPJ allows the dakkajet to move 13", count as moving flat out for +4 cover save, and still allowing it to fire all its weapons. Given that this is an ork plane and not a marine vehicle, it'll probably be nerfed in a faq soon

So what is the consensus on this right now? Is there anything official on whether this holds true? It probably won't matter much since 6th comes out this month and hopefully some sort of flyer rules will be in place.

My guess is that RAW-accurate or not, it wasn't intended to work this way, and they will eventually add it to the FAQ.

The only 'official' place it would hold true would be an errata to the wording for the Ork Dex. Even the FAQ's are arguably non-official, although everyone i know treats them as official.

It could also be that they might change how vehicle movement works, rendering the whole can of worms obsolete.

We'll see in a few weeks, or a year or so for the FAQ update

Ascalam wrote:My guess is that RAW-accurate or not, it wasn't intended to work this way, and they will eventually add it to the FAQ.

Why? Trukks and buggies have been moving 7", shooting and while getting hit on 6+ for the entire 5th edition. I don't see how this suddenly becomes a problem now, is it just because the vehicle in question might actually be good?

Keep in mind that the White Dwarf did a 1:1 reprint of the RPJ rule from the codex.

Some people have been using them that way all through 5th, you mean

Our local FLGS's house-rule interpretation of the rule is that it only grants you an extra 1'', but that you still are hit according to the speed category you would be in without it, for example, and that's been the rule in other places i've played, as often as it's been the other way around.

As you can tell by the many YMDC threads on the subject alll through 5th, and especially now with the flat out skimmer question, it's not a cut and dried thing, or there wouldn't be the discussion.

I would like for it to apply the way that you argue for, believe me, but it's not as 'man you're thick if you don't get this' as you claim, as not every TO or player uses the same interpretation of the rule

As this is already being discussed in several places in YMDC, lets not argue the pro's and cons here as well.

Here's one of the many threads, Sencho. There is, as yet, no consensus, but the usual two sides.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/453504.page

I'd agree on there being two sides, but the only true argument against using it that way are really based on what a "penalty" is. For me, getting a cover save, getting hit in close combat, or even moving flat out as a whole is absolutely not a penalty.

Luckily for me, the German ork codex actually says "disadvantages or limitations" rather than "penalty", so there is absolutely no room to wiggle there.

Have 3 of them =) gonna run them with beg meks in BW's going to try a shooty list with them as well shoota boys flash gits jets the works =) let's see those sissy tau compete wiff da boyz shootin!

Jidmah wrote:I'd agree on there being two sides, but the only true argument against using it that way are really based on what a "penalty" is. For me, getting a cover save, getting hit in close combat, or even moving flat out as a whole is absolutely not a penalty.

Luckily for me, the German ork codex actually says "disadvantages or limitations" rather than "penalty", so there is absolutely no room to wiggle there.

If it was worded properly, like that, in the english-language codex I'd be 100% behind it.

Shame they always feth the English-language rules language up by being vague or contradictory.

It just feels beardy to me. And I hate trying to explain it to anyone I play with, because the way everyone looks at you when you start to say "Well, it says that you can move an extra inch, but suffer no limitations from doind so, so i get to fire my weapons, but technically, because i moved 13" i am moving over 12" so i'm moving at flat out, so you can only hit me on 6+" I can't help but feel like i'm bending the rules. If they FAQ it that you can, fine, but for now it just feels like i'm really bending the rules and getting way too RAW about it.

My store rules it as it all depends what movement category you moved. so if you moved 13" to count as moving at cruising speed so you can fire your weapons, you're not getting the cover save from moving flatout. and to be honest, I agree with them. It just feels like cheating otherwise, and seems like a really stupid argument no matter how its worded (no offense) RPJ seems in all intents and purposes to only be meant to give you +1" to movement. If it was designed for these shenanigans in mind they would have pointed it differently (or at least thats what I would hope they did)

Thanks for the further clarification Ascalam. It looks like a hung jury. I'll just play RPJ as a 1" movement boost with no other benefits until 6th comes out and hopefully that will bring some explanations and some fun new rule changes/additions.

My friends are completely fine with RPJ giving a 4+ cover save and allowing all weapons to fire at 13" movement.

loota boy wrote:It just feels beardy to me. And I hate trying to explain it to anyone I play with, because the way everyone looks at you when you start to say "Well, it says that you can move an extra inch, but suffer no limitations from doind so, so i get to fire my weapons, but technically, because i moved 13" i am moving over 12" so i'm moving at flat out, so you can only hit me on 6+" I can't help but feel like i'm bending the rules. If they FAQ it that you can, fine, but for now it just feels like i'm really bending the rules and getting way too RAW about it.

Yeah, then you show them the rules, and they usually agree. It's really easy to explain fluff wise. "It works, because my orks think it works if the vehicle is red. Your guys don't, it doesn'T work for them."

There are really much worse rules out there, and I see none giving up their rule just because it "seems beardy". You know, like shooting JotWW into combat.