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.

two questions me and my friend is curoius about

1) Does Wazdakka Gutsmek's bike count as still having twin-linked dakkakannon where the normal bike has the dakkaguns twin-linked.

2) if a mob of three killakans has grot riggers when an imobilized is rolled on them is it viewed as destroyed or does it get it grot rigger roll.

1) No, Wazzdakka still has a bike which still has t-l Dakkaguns, then he has a Single Dakkacannon, and a single Kustom mega blasta and Finally a Slugga.

2)Destroyed; do not waste the points on riggers.

2. Look at it this way:

Damage results for squadrons:
1 shaken
2 shaken
3 Weapon destroyed
4 destroyed
5 wrecked
6 explodes.

Grot riggers can't fix immobilised results on squadrons because the squadron rules effectively modify their table so that it no longer has an 'immobilised' result.

ty guys for the help

It's important to remember, in the case of Wazdakka, that he can still only fire a single weapon in the shooting phase.
You must choose between the Dakkaguns, Dakkakannon, Slugga or Kustom Mega Blaster.

Ignore the plural where it says 'When Wazdakka uses a Turbo Boost he may still fire his weapons that turn.' - he has no rules allowing him to fire multiple weapons.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Ignore the plural where it says 'When Wazdakka uses a Turbo Boost he may still fire his weapons that turn.' - he has no rules allowing him to fire multiple weapons.

The plural is technically correct, if you read it as '...may still fire [any] of his weapons...' rather than '...may still fire [all] of his weapons...'

But yes, '...may still fire a weapon...' would have been clearer.