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.

note that in the eyes of many players, that would not be modeling for advantage. You would be modeling for a disadvantage just as well as an advantage. if you elevate one grot so it can see/be seen according to the rules, that it the only one that would take damage from incoming shots.

You could always build your own orky ADL (or magnet on a step on the backside for them to stand on where they could all see over it. Again, that it not modeling for advantage because your also adding in the disadvantage of makeing them easier to be shot at and it being lower so covering less of larger models like ork boyz or looted wagons that might also be behind it.

Well, it IS literally modelling for advantage - you want to be able to shoot with a model that could not otherwise do so, and are doing so by altering the model. Absoilutely MFA

 EVIL INC wrote:
note that in the eyes of many players, that would not be modeling for advantage. You would be modeling for a disadvantage just as well as an advantage. if you elevate one grot so it can see/be seen according to the rules, that it the only one that would take damage from incoming shots.

You could always build your own orky ADL (or magnet on a step on the backside for them to stand on where they could all see over it. Again, that it not modeling for advantage because your also adding in the disadvantage of makeing them easier to be shot at and it being lower so covering less of larger models like ork boyz or looted wagons that might also be behind it.

Regardless of any disadvantage the you get, does your model have an advantage the stock model does not?
Yes?
Literally modeling for advantage. Some people may not take issue with it because of the disadvantage, but that doesn't mean you're not modeling for advantage.

For reference - I would take issue with it. It's not any different than making a dreadnought stand on something so he can fire over a Rhino.

For the rhino / dreadnought thing, we actually had this as a FAQ in our 5th edition tournaments that we ran - that ANY rhino, on a level surface, blocks a dreadnought from firing. This was after some really crappily done "conversions" showed up for some GK psyrifleman spam armies, where they used a quad gun and essentially had the two sets of barrels on the top of the dreadnoughts chassis, not on arms to the side, specifically so they could hide behind razorbacks.

Some of the old Grot big Gunnz crew are taller. There is also a grot in a WHFB box that is standing on his tiptoes mooning everyone funny as all get out the way it looks.. Those models are plentytall enough to see over an ADL to fire the Quad gun.

Good thing I don't use grots or play orks. Not a big deal to meeither ay. Personally, if you were playing against me, I would have no problem with you shooting over it I play for fun, not WAAC.

I also play for fun and would have a problem with it.
It has nothing to do with playing for fun or not - it has everything to do with a social contract and not trying to take advantage of the other person.

What about shortening the ADL? It's still an ADL in length, just shorter in height to allow shorter models to see over.

How is building a custom ADL which stock grots can see over any less MFA than elevating grots? And where are your custom ADLs to be literally any shape and size you wish?

Stock grots cannot see over stock ADLs. All the examples are not official models for grots or big guns. All those forge world examples are vehicle upgrades and vehicle crew. If you bought a model from forge world explicitly to have a single grot to see over an ADL, then you are basically opening the door for anyone to proxy any model for anything.

Ammo runts, grot oilers, vehicle crew and decorations are not big guns crew or stock grots. While they can stand-in, if they are different enough to gain an advantage, they are inappropriate proxies then. Feel free to use an array of grots and goblins as long as you don't try to gain an unfair advantage... Like shooting over something you could never do with regular models for Ana vantage no other ork player on the planet can do without cheating.

EVIL INC wrote:Good thing I don't use grots or play orks. Not a big deal to meeither ay. Personally, if you were playing against me, I would have no problem with you shooting over it I play for fun, not WAAC.

How about if I want to shoot over my Land Raider with my Dreadnought? Or why stop there? That Bastion that's in front of my Guardsmen... it's a bit inconvenient to me that they can't see over it, so that's all good to shoot over too, right?

Hell, why not just throw the rulebook out entirely, and we'll just spend two hours pushing models around the board making 'pew pew' noises and arguing about who got whom first.


Again, wanting to play the game by the actual rules is not 'WAAC'.

Boblogik wrote:What about shortening the ADL? It's still an ADL in length, just shorter in height to allow shorter models to see over.

If you alter a model in order to garner an in game advantage, that pretty much by definition counts as modelling for advantage, and will get people riled.

nkelsch wrote:

Ammo runts, grot oilers, vehicle crew and decorations are not big guns crew or stock grots. While they can stand-in, if they are different enough to gain an advantage, they are inappropriate proxies then. Feel free to use an array of grots and goblins as long as you don't try to gain an unfair advantage... Like shooting over something you could never do with regular models for Ana vantage no other ork player on the planet can do without cheating.

Sorry but the blister/box mine came in said Gretchin and they have the GW logo on the tab. Nothing there is unfair it is just using GW supplied miniatures in their original unmodified position to fire a GW original unmodified weapon a GW game without modifying any rules. Just because I found some (well with around 10k of orks I all ready had them) grots that will work with models and rules currently supplied does not mesn I have gained an unfair advantage. It means i am playing within the ruleset provided.

 insaniak wrote:

Boblogik wrote:What about shortening the ADL? It's still an ADL in length, just shorter in height to allow shorter models to see over.

If you alter a model in order to garner an in game advantage, that pretty much by definition counts as modelling for advantage, and will get people riled.

Ah but you're also gaining a disadvantage, the reduced height will be less likely to protect vehicles and other further back models]

Edit: I play imp guard and I don't think it's fair the other races have to use something that is more designed for imperial/SM players. That model itself is MFA for the imp players in a way haha.

 Boblogik wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Boblogik wrote:What about shortening the ADL? It's still an ADL in length, just shorter in height to allow shorter models to see over.

If you alter a model in order to garner an in game advantage, that pretty much by definition counts as modelling for advantage, and will get people riled.

Ah but you're also gaining a disadvantage, the reduced height will be less likely to protect vehicles and other further back models

which of course does not matter as you are still MFA...

 CrownAxe wrote:

 earlofburger wrote:
Total bummer man, anyway around this travesty?

not with out cheating and modeling for advantage

not true.


put the quad gun at the edge of the ADL

put some grots behind the gun but to its side, so that they see around the "side" of the ADL/gun,

the gun is always fired as stationary, so its really not a problem, you might lose a grot a turn since he might not get cover, but who cares? replace him with another, and if the grots cant see over the line, they cant BE seen, so its actually a good thing. youll only lose one grot a turn, and can still fire.

 easysauce wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 earlofburger wrote:
Total bummer man, anyway around this travesty?

not with out cheating and modeling for advantage

not true.


put the quad gun at the edge of the ADL

put some grots behind the gun but to its side, so that they see around the "side" of the ADL/gun,

the gun is always fired as stationary, so its really not a problem, you might lose a grot a turn since he might not get cover, but who cares? replace him with another, and if the grots cant see over the line, they cant BE seen, so its actually a good thing. youll only lose one grot a turn, and can still fire.

Exactly what easysauce has said.

I dont think anyone is going to waste a round of shooting just to kill 1 grot...

Or you could put the gun in the center of the ADL and put a grot on top of it (The Gun Emplacement is Difficult terrain). and that way you do not have to have the gun at the end of the ADL if you do not want it there.

 Boblogik wrote:
Ah but you're also gaining a disadvantage, the reduced height will be less likely to protect vehicles and other further back models]

Which would be a valid point if you were trying to hide vehicles and other models behind the ADL, rather than grots...

Edit: I play imp guard and I don't think it's fair the other races have to use something that is more designed for imperial/SM players. That model itself is MFA for the imp players in a way haha.

You obviously haven't tried putting a heavy weapons team behind an ADL yet, then...

 insaniak wrote:

 Boblogik wrote:
Ah but you're also gaining a disadvantage, the reduced height will be less likely to protect vehicles and other further back models]

Which would be a valid point if you were trying to hide vehicles and other models behind the ADL, rather than grots...

Edit: I play imp guard and I don't think it's fair the other races have to use something that is more designed for imperial/SM players. That model itself is MFA for the imp players in a way haha.

You obviously haven't tried putting a heavy weapons team behind an ADL yet, then...

Nope, I don't ever really field the ADL, I tend to rely on the board for cover and vendettas for anti-air (I know what you're saying though, most HWTs can't see over them or through the slots, only my standing "stinger"-style missile launchers can see over). When I do field the ADL it tends to be my counts-as ADL using pegasus hobbies sandbag walls, the set with 6 pieces (4 of them curved) comes close the adl length (I choose a combination that is like 2 in less in length rather than over length) and I have never had a player say no or even make a comment on it, but I don't play tourneys or at GW owned stores...

I will say this, I feel the argument is a tad silly anyhow and one of the reasons I am glad I abandoned playing in tourneys. If an ork player made a grot friendly adl, I'd let him/her use it, no problems from me. Especially because if a grot can see over it, I can see them and they're pretty easy to pop.

Why is it silly to expect an opponent to follow the LOS rules?

I purposely put a stand guy on my HWT when I use them for just that reason. many will cry MFA but they are laughed out of the stor. When the disadvantages outweigh the advantages 2 or 3 to 1, that argument goes right out the window.

Using Guardsman legs legs on Guardsmen isn't modelling for advantage.

 insaniak wrote:
Why is it silly to expect an opponent to follow the LOS rules?

I never said it was silly to obey a rule in the game, I said it was silly to not allow another player to make an adl that works for them as long as it meets the max length and max height of the real adl (otherwise you have crazy long ones that span entire fronts or ones that russes can sit behind entirely with just their turret showing...), really a shorter wall is not an advantage, it brings certain things into usability. And if you begin to question if a shorter wall is mfa, then what about kneeling guardsmen, they must be mfa because it reduces their profile...

 Boblogik wrote:
I never said it was silly to obey a rule in the game, I said it was silly to not allow another player to make an adl that works for them as long as it meets the max length and max height of the real adl ...

I'm a little confused as to how it can meet the specs of the original ADL, but be shorter...

And if you begin to question if a shorter wall is mfa, then what about kneeling guardsmen, they must be mfa because it reduces their profile...

Because heavy wepons teams not being able to see their target is such a big advantage...


In actual practice, most players won't have a problem with a custom ADL, so long as it's not too ridiculous. More players would have a problem with you wanting to draw LOS over something that is too tall for the model to see over.

 insaniak wrote:

 Boblogik wrote:
I never said it was silly to obey a rule in the game, I said it was silly to not allow another player to make an adl that works for them as long as it meets the max length and max height of the real adl ...

I'm a little confused as to how it can meet the specs of the original ADL, but be shorter...

And if you begin to question if a shorter wall is mfa, then what about kneeling guardsmen, they must be mfa because it reduces their profile...

Because heavy wepons teams not being able to see their target is such a big advantage...


In actual practice, most players won't have a problem with a custom ADL, so long as it's not too ridiculous. More players would have a problem with you wanting to draw LOS over something that is too tall for the model to see over.

You misread my words again, I said "as long as it meets the max length and max height of the real adl ..." I don't see how a smaller wall is an advantage but I guess I'm not the kind of player

Also I was referring to kneeling infantry not kneeling hwt dudes. But really until there is an official ADL for other races, we won't know if GW intended any used adl to match the silhouette of the imperial one exactly. I wonder if the rumored fortification based expansion will bring a wave of other race fortifications. Until then we have this problem, which is only a problem for tourney players I feel since you said yourself you'd allow custom adls as long as they're not ridiculous.

 Boblogik wrote:
But really until there is an official ADL for other races...

There is an official ADL for other races. In the grim darkness of the far future, everyone uses Imperial builders for their fortification needs..

Grimdark Contracting LLC, you're one-stop fortification contractors, serving all species since M40

So doing so ring you cannot do with stock models is a documented advantage. I love how people try to justify gaining an ability they couldn't do with stock models as not an advantage then claiming to be justified to have the advantage because they have met some arbitrary line in the sand where they gain the advantage but claim it is not an advantage. So now going over max dimensions is an advantage but being smaller is not?

If you want to use counts as custom models, then you should always be willing to play them as if they were the stock model with no difference. If you are unwilling to play them as the stock model, then you are MfA and a tool.

Claiming the rights of casual players and blame tourney mentality as a universal shield to cheat is weak sauce. Exploiting the rules and MFA and pre-empt their objections with calling them TFG makes you the TFG.

No stock grots or big guns crew GW has ever made can see over the stock ADL. The only fair way for the game to be played is if no ork player anywhere has grots seeing over the wall. This is not the same as a random kneeling fire warrior where there are stock models who can see.

Buying 3rd party counts as grots, custom ADLs and using ammo grots or grot riggers for proxies to gain the ability to see where no one anywhere can achieve that rule change is being TFG.

nkelsch wrote:
If you want to use counts as custom models, then you should always be willing to play them as if they were the stock model with no difference.

You really shouldn't.

The game works off the physical model that is on the table. If you object to an opponent using a custom model, the time to resolve that is before the game - don't play them, or insist on them using the correct model (assuming one is available). Don't spend the entire game pretending that their model is something that it isn't... that way lies madness.

 insaniak wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
If you want to use counts as custom models, then you should always be willing to play them as if they were the stock model with no difference.

You really shouldn't.

The game works off the physical model that is on the table. If you object to an opponent using a custom model, the time to resolve that is before the game - don't play them, or insist on them using the correct model (assuming one is available). Don't spend the entire game pretending that their model is something that it isn't... that way lies madness.

I'm with insaniak on this one. Talk to your opponent before the game, find out if they use anything non-standard or in a lot of cases non-wysiwyg before playing so that if you have a problem, it can be resolved as mentioned above, and vice versa, always let your opponent know of anything in your own possession they need to know about.

It is not hard to use a stock model or simply "not shoot over the adl"

It isn't as hard as you make it and is not a justification for cheating with MFA. If you are unwilling to replace your model with a stock model or a model of approximate size and profile of the stock model, the game can't be played.

Conversions should be as close as possible and you should bend over backwards to not take unfair advantage of differences. When in question, you take the disadvantage. Grots can't see over an ADL.

nkelsch wrote:
It is not hard to use a stock model or simply "not shoot over the adl"

It's hard to use a stock model if you don't have one... and trying to determine what could or could not see over a stock model if you don't have one is an exercise in futility.


But this isn't just a random idea I've applied to the ADL... it goes for all conversions or scratch-builds. If you're using a non-standard model, then you're using a non-standard model. Point it out to an opponent before the game, and then either get on with the game or go find someone else if your views on that model don't mesh.

The whole 'treat it as a stock model' approach just doesn't work ina game that uses TLOS. It's particularly absurd in a game that uses TLOS and has stock models with vastly different LOS profiles depending on which version of the model you have, or which parts you decide to use.

It's ultimately going to cause more arguments than it resolves.