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.

 p5freak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The Dataslate does not list anything other than "1-3 Mek Gunz" Therefore no "Krew" needed. (Probably not intended, but 100% RAW)

When the rules mentions a crew, and a crew comes with the model, the crew must be there.

How many, and citation needed for how many.

My Mek Gunz model did not come with any "Krew" though.

 Jidmah wrote:
*sigh* really guys?

A mek gun krew is what comes with the box.

there is no rules basis for that statement.

 Jidmah wrote:
Not putting every krew member on the board is the same as deploying a model with a missing arm, turret or other part. Simple as that.

They really are not the same.

 p5freak wrote:


Because crew models need space on the battlefield. Is it so hard to imagine 18 mek gunz without crew, and imagining 18 mek gunz with crew ??

With rule of 3 in play 18 mek gunz are illegal. 9 (3 squadrons of 3 models each) is the maximum allowed now.

 DeathReaper wrote:
there is no rules basis for that statement

Sorry, but that's an idiotic thing to say. You are not allowed to alter the model for your advantage, the model consists of krew and gun. If you leave even one krew off, your opponent is allowed to leave every part of their models at home as well.

RAW you must play with citadel miniatures and fully assemble them according to their instructions.

 Jidmah wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
there is no rules basis for that statement

Sorry, but that's an idiotic thing to say. You are not allowed to alter the model for your advantage, the model consists of krew and gun. If you leave even one krew off, your opponent is allowed to leave every part of their models at home as well.

RAW you must play with citadel miniatures and fully assemble them according to their instructions.

So RAW you're not allowed to convert or kitbash anything, even if it's to make it look cool?

RAW? No. However, if you actually want to play that way is up to you.

However, leaving out krew is not to make it look cool - if anything, it's the very opposite. So that would be a strawman argument anyways.

 Jidmah wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
there is no rules basis for that statement

Sorry, but that's an idiotic thing to say.

Why? Because asking for a rules basis to an argument on a rules forum is somehow ludicrous to you?

You are not allowed to alter the model for your advantage,

This is not a rules thing, this is just a common practice.

the model consists of krew and gun.

False. The model consists of Mek Gunz The unis is 1-3 Mek Guns

If you leave even one krew off, your opponent is allowed to leave every part of their models at home as well.

Citation needed for how many "Krew" to use with each, I cant find it on the Dataslate.

RAW you and fully assemble them according to their instructions.

Citation needed, because I can not find this in the rules at all.

The RAW states that citadel miniatures are used. There is nothing in the RAW about "and fully assemble them according to their instructions"

Got a quote to prove me wrong?

You have literally provided zero proof for your argument, meaning everything is worthless and wrong by default.

From years of experience I know quoting anything to you is a waste of time, so I will not do your work for you. Go read the rules yourself, it's in there.

The burden of proof is on you, find any proof supporting REMOVED - RULE #1.

 Jidmah wrote:
You have literally provided zero proof for your argument, meaning everything is worthless and wrong by default.

I don't need proof to prove a negative... So the burden of proof is not on me.

And it is not in the rules, I have checked.

From years of experience I know quoting anything to you is a waste of time, so I will not do your work for you.

Then you should know that quoting anything to me is never a waste of time, I love a good citation that proves what I have claimed is incorrect, it just does not happen much.

Go read the rules yourself, it's in there.

The burden of proof is on you, find any proof supporting your stupid gak or be quiet.

Again I don't need proof to prove a negative, that is not how it works. The burden of proof is not on me. You have to find quotations for what you have claimed is RAW. If you can not do that, then your argument is automatically incorrect.

P.S. Please don't be rude, I have never been rude to you, or anyone for that matter.

I consider barging into a discussion without any proof extremely rude, and you do that all the time. Deleting all your posts from this thread would not remove a single argument backed up by proof.

What you are doing, every single time, is making statements and pushing the burden of proof on others. This is also known as argumentum ad ignorantium.

You absolutely have to prove a negative, this is not philosophy, this is game rules. You can always prove a negative by proving the opposite wrong.
As long as you can't find permission to leave off parts of the citadel models, you must play models as designed by citadel.

Oh, and a free hint to you: try reading the BRB from the beginning if you have trouble finding rules. It tells you what kind of miniatures you are allowed to use for your games.

 Jidmah wrote:
I consider barging into a discussion without any proof extremely rude, and you do that all the time. Deleting all your posts from this thread would not remove a single argument backed up by proof.

You can not be serious, can you? Have you not read my posts, that are all basically asking p5freak for citations? The only thing I can think of that you are referring to is when I said this "The Dataslate does not list anything other than "1-3 Mek Gunz" Therefore no 'Krew' needed." And I literally gave a citation with that, so what exactly are you referring to?

What you are doing, every single time, is making statements and pushing the burden of proof on others. This is also known as argumentum ad ignorantium.

Asking people for proof of their rules claims is not "argumentum ad ignorantium"

You absolutely have to prove a negative, this is not philosophy, this is game rules. You can always prove a negative by proving the opposite wrong.

I have proved the opposite wrong when I said "there is nothing in the rules that states nothing in the rules says that." but I guess that is not enough for you.

And you dont have to prove a negative even in game rules. The person that makes the claim of what the rules say needs to back that statement up, not tthe other way around.

As long as you can't find permission to leave off parts of the citadel models, you must play models as designed by citadel.

You need to use Citadel Miniatures, but beyond that... Is a model made up of 50 parts "Citadel Miniatures"? What if it came with 48 parts and you use 2 parts from a different "Citadel Miniature"? Seems 100% "Citadel Miniatures" to me...

Oh, and a free hint to you: try reading the BRB from the beginning if you have trouble finding rules. It tells you what kind of miniatures you are allowed to use for your games.

Yep, Citadel Miniatures. What it does not have any RAW on? Painting those models, so RAW you can not do so. the Rules are also silent on if you can assemble your models o not, so...

Sorry, but if your argument is that you don't actually have to assemble models to play, we are done here.

You have just proven yourself a fool, wrong and unworthy of attention.

You have to put the krew on the table to play a mek gun model. All of it.

We are done here.