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.

tneva82 wrote:
Again haven't anybody seen it played otherwise. You think i have pics of every game every event?

Immunity to h2h is bad game design both balance and sense. It makes no sense(oo there's enemy there we can reach but let's stay here) while hoses many armies

My point wasn’t that it was good game design. My point is it’s always been played this way. If you played fast and loose with your friends or incorrectly allowed charges where your models don’t fit or half your unit was out of coherency that’s just loose casual play. However not one tournament strict rules game I’ve seen has ever allowed broken coherency or assault out of range And there are a lot of games streamed online.

Furthermore this was a legit strat for a while with armies all bunched on top of sky shield landing pads being immune to assault because you couldn’t get in range...

Bad game design sure but it’s not a new faq. It was a question that was clarified because people on you make da call were arguing about it originally and the consensus was no you can’t break the basic game rules to assault just because you want too.

I also don’t see why you have to deploy a unit of mek guns on top of each other considering the mek guns and crew are considered a single unit and you can use the crew to spread out your mek guns across the board. The other good thing about mek gun units is you can spread out the wounds to grot gunners and as long as any friendly grot gunner is close to the kmk it can still fire, but you have to be careful doing this as well as it can Cause issues for you.

If you take heavy support that isn't kmk you are nerffing yourself.

It's not biggest nerf as grots allow cheapish battallion over spearhead but still some


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It wasn#t always played. Pre 8th game had good rules to deal with and 8tg wobbly models was used widely to allow it. Only now it's def out. Before it wasn't clear cut and used widely.


As for mek gun if mek gun moves -1 to hit. Self damage on 1-2. Limits repositioning you can do. Plus no more multiple spearheads

The bigger picture is that the meta is shifting, and it seems to favour gun lines. Something that Orks often struggle against.

New tactics, a new approach is once again needed.

Too bad orks are somewhat lacking on viable options which restricts what we can do. There might be something doable with chinork but even that\s seriously dubious. So it\s still same boyz spam and rush forward and hope for best...

 grendel083 wrote:
The bigger picture is that the meta is shifting, and it seems to favour gun lines. Something that Orks often struggle against.

New tactics, a new approach is once again needed.

If the meta shifts to anti horde people will finally see how relatively week even green tide, our best build, truly is. It's effective only because of how hard it skews, but even against my friends TAC Sisters army he has enough bolter fire that it's always a question of if I win or lose by about 30 boyz. If he were to gear up to kill hordes more than armor, I'd be shot off the board every game no doubt.

But hey maybe if everyone shifts to anti infantry firepower we can just take battlewagons?

To put the final nail in the coffin of Da Jump on Turn 1...

Woop! Shame they had to clarify but better to be safe I suppose.

With regards ruins and cqc - you keep coherency vertically over 6" I believe. So what I did was perch my models on the sides of floors or what have you and attack. Its pretty bleak though guys. 5 rangers doesn't seem like anything in cqc vs Orks but when they have pistols that hit on 3+ they become weirdly formidable. I've lost 2 boss Nobs and a Boy to a group of 5 or 6 rangers. My rolling wasn't great but still.

I'm totally with tneva on the ruins thing - a lack of ability to do anything is not fun. It feels like an exploit.

Jidmah - thanks for the help with the Eldar questions too. My opponent runs a Fire Prism and the first thing he kills is the trukk full of tank bustas. Then the tank bustas lol. He also brings a vyper which I find obnoxious. To be fair I take 9 bikes which doesn't help my case lol

I hope we get more than green tide + kmk as possible lists in codex peeps. I'm getting real bored of it.

Actually that isn't final nail for two reasons.

a) that question was so lousy followed by such an ambious answer that it doesn't actually say you can deep strike outside DZ. Note outside DZ is NEVER mentioned in either question nor answer. What it uses is "benefit" BUT you benefit from those abiltiies if you can cast them. Even if you can't go outside your deployment zone.
b) this comes from warhammer community team which as they say themselves IS NOT OFFICIAL! Their word has zero official status. They are no better than HIWPI answers.

Finally please rather than screenshot provide direct link. a) that's easier for you b) that at least makea it bit better(though point b above still makes it not conclusive) than screenshot that's 0% useless as evidence. For why look screenshot I provided. (yes it's fake. That's my point. It's ridiculously easy to make fake screenshots which is why I hate screenshots as "evidence". Those are useless. Doesn't even require particularly advanced skills or equipments. Everybody has all they need in form of web browser)

So currently we have officially is what FAQ says which is ambigious and HIWPI from warhammer community team who aren't official rule answerers.

STILL NOT CLARIFIED.

The ruling says you can use DaJump, but it does not say you can use it outside of your deployment zone.

Even under the FAQ rulings you could use it, in your deployment zone.

That is all the ruling says.

Further clarification needed.

ETA: Does this facebook post carry the same legal weight as the FAQ?

Guys please. Just stop. At this point you're either trolling or embarrassing yourselves, neither of which is cool. The rule has always been clear, I don't know how it was misinterpreted in the first place.

The facebook answer is so abundantly clear in terms of using da jump to appear anywhere turn one that to deny it is to make yourself look silly. Stop.

You don't need a link. You don't need to verify the screenshot. You need to take your hands and slap them across your face a couple of times to wake up.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Guys please. Just stop. At this point you're either trolling or embarrassing yourselves, neither of which is cool. The rule has always been clear, I don't know how it was misinterpreted in the first place.

The facebook answer is so abundantly clear in terms of using da jump to appear anywhere turn one that to deny it is to make yourself look silly. Stop.

You don't need a link. You don't need to verify the screenshot. You need to take your hands and slap them across your face a couple of times to wake up.

a) rule was not clear in the first place. Rule trigger was arriving on battlefield. That is fullfilled with Da Jump
b) this answer comes from 100% unofficial source. THEY THEMSELVES say so. It's as official as my answers are.
c) even as unofficial answer this doesn't actually allow jumping outside DZ.

And if I don't have link how can I show to opponent if they disagree? Which is their right if they don'¨t know since original rule(which btw still is only OFFICIAL thing we have to go for) is 100% unclear. So without actual link I can't prove even "How I Would Play It" answer of this unofficial source. Screenshots would be 100% useless as only idiot accepts screen shot as official proof on anything.

Seeing how much players pay to GW to play their games wouldn't be too much to ask for CLEAR rules in OFFICIAL source. This is neither clear answer nor clear original rule and 100% absolutely NOT official. Source themselves have said their answers are NOT official rule answers.

Personally, since it seems most players are thinking gunline is the way to go. I'm thinking siege list. Lots of armed transports and big tanks. Rush forward and smash da line with the vehicles and then assault them.

tneva82 wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Guys please. Just stop. At this point you're either trolling or embarrassing yourselves, neither of which is cool. The rule has always been clear, I don't know how it was misinterpreted in the first place.

The facebook answer is so abundantly clear in terms of using da jump to appear anywhere turn one that to deny it is to make yourself look silly. Stop.

You don't need a link. You don't need to verify the screenshot. You need to take your hands and slap them across your face a couple of times to wake up.

a) rule was not clear in the first place. Rule trigger was arriving on battlefield. That is fullfilled with Da Jump
b) this answer comes from 100% unofficial source. THEY THEMSELVES say so. It's as official as my answers are.
c) even as unofficial answer this doesn't actually allow jumping outside DZ.

And if I don't have link how can I show to opponent if they disagree? Which is their right if they don'¨t know since original rule(which btw still is only OFFICIAL thing we have to go for) is 100% unclear. So without actual link I can't prove even "How I Would Play It" answer of this unofficial source. Screenshots would be 100% useless as only idiot accepts screen shot as official proof on anything.

Seeing how much players pay to GW to play their games wouldn't be too much to ask for CLEAR rules in OFFICIAL source. This is neither clear answer nor clear original rule and 100% absolutely NOT official. Source themselves have said their answers are NOT official rule answers.

Dude if someone disagrees with you after you show them the screenshot you start packing up your gak and find another opponent because you are playing the saddest, most beardy mcbeardyson ever to exist. There's some opponent's you'd rather not play at all with. You just described them.

A 2 minute search on fb reveals the screenshot to be legit.

At this point I would not be surprised if they do in fact nerf "da jump" to mean that, and that you can't use it after turn 3 because you are arriving from reserves apparently. GW does there absolute best to Feth over orkz as much as they can.

This reminds me exactly of the battlewagon nonsense that they FAQd last year. Can BWs ability convey to passengers...you know....to make the BW remotely worth taking? GW: No. Suck it orkz.

I had a thought about that unassaultable unit on the first floor, above ground floor. If my charging mode way tall enough it shouldn't need to move up to the floor they are standing on, just end it's charge move within an inch. So if the floor that unit is on isn't all that high I could charge them with a Deff Dread. As long as my model ends it's move within an inch.
Am I way off on that? Or is this exactly what the faq is preventing?

Question:

What about using mob up on units coming out of Trukks/Battlewagons?

Has anyone tried this strategem on Boyz mobs? How effective is it?

 TedNugent wrote:
Question:

What about using mob up on units coming out of Trukks/Battlewagons?

Has anyone tried this strategem on Boyz mobs? How effective is it?

I have. In my last game I had 12 boys in one trukk and 10 in the next trukk with another 10 in yet another trukk. I saved that third trukkfull for a later mob up or to go off and do what ever.
My only issue was the area I was in was congested with terrain and enemy transports so I couldn't bring the full numbers into combat as I had planned for. Mob up is fairly killer. I've used it well with Kommandos before. 15 + 10 charge and the next turn mob in survivors from other Kommandos in the next closest mob. It keep up a strong LD bubble.
I planed my list around mobbing up before a charge and trying to put war path on those boys.

Mob up can also be nice to "sling-shot" a unit that is further away into combat by joining a unit that's closer to enemy lines. I often find I have a unit of boyz lagging behind while another is further up and has taken significant casualties to bring it to 10 or below. the mob up can bring the larger mob into play and buffer the small mob. works well with far-flung squads that can be da jumped in and not have to worry about the 9" charge because they can attach to the closer unit

 warhead01 wrote:
I had a thought about that unassaultable unit on the first floor, above ground floor. If my charging mode way tall enough it shouldn't need to move up to the floor they are standing on, just end it's charge move within an inch. So if the floor that unit is on isn't all that high I could charge them with a Deff Dread. As long as my model ends it's move within an inch.
Am I way off on that? Or is this exactly what the faq is preventing?

Your BASE needs to be within 1". So if enemy base is 1.1" taller than your base you can't attack it. Doesn't matter that your deff dreadnought's claws are literally touching the enemy!

Funnily enough if dreadnoughts didn't come with base suddenly measurements would be from hull so you could attack...

Ditto for just basic infantry. Have platform where top is 1.1"+height of base and you can stand there freely and the enemy next to you cannot attack without guns or having non-base vehicle(like land raider/battlewagon) charging into combat.

Apparently that's stuck off to the side under tools of war.

"Dude if someone disagrees with you after you show them the screenshot you start packing up your gak and find another opponent because you are playing the saddest, most beardy mcbeardyson ever to exist. There's some opponent's you'd rather not play at all with. You just described them."

Oh ok, so you'll just concede to them in tournament. GG easy win...
No one is talking about this for friendly games...

gungo wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Again haven't anybody seen it played otherwise. You think i have pics of every game every event?

Immunity to h2h is bad game design both balance and sense. It makes no sense(oo there's enemy there we can reach but let's stay here) while hoses many armies

My point wasn’t that it was good game design. My point is it’s always been played this way. If you played fast and loose with your friends or incorrectly allowed charges where your models don’t fit or half your unit was out of coherency that’s just loose casual play. However not one tournament strict rules game I’ve seen has ever allowed broken coherency or assault out of range And there are a lot of games streamed online.

Furthermore this was a legit strat for a while with armies all bunched on top of sky shield landing pads being immune to assault because you couldn’t get in range...

How does that even work? Pretty much every ork army worth anything has one or two weird boyz. You smite a hole into whatever is standing on top of the ruin/landing pad and put your charging model there.

I really don't get how anything becomes "immune" to assault unless it's a single model standing on a very small platform.

 Jidmah wrote:

gungo wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Again haven't anybody seen it played otherwise. You think i have pics of every game every event?

Immunity to h2h is bad game design both balance and sense. It makes no sense(oo there's enemy there we can reach but let's stay here) while hoses many armies

My point wasn’t that it was good game design. My point is it’s always been played this way. If you played fast and loose with your friends or incorrectly allowed charges where your models don’t fit or half your unit was out of coherency that’s just loose casual play. However not one tournament strict rules game I’ve seen has ever allowed broken coherency or assault out of range And there are a lot of games streamed online.

Furthermore this was a legit strat for a while with armies all bunched on top of sky shield landing pads being immune to assault because you couldn’t get in range...

How does that even work? Pretty much every ork army worth anything has one or two weird boyz. You smite a hole into whatever is standing on top of the ruin/landing pad and put your charging model there.

I really don't get how anything becomes "immune" to assault unless it's a single model standing on a very small platform.

You go to platform, enemy cannot assault you, you just became immune to assault. Explained many times. There's even pictures showing how it is. You just need ~1.3" high platform on which to stand and you are safe from assaults. Note not even dramatically high ruin or something. Barely taller than your models is sufficient.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Dude if someone disagrees with you after you show them the screenshot you start packing up your gak and find another opponent because you are playing the saddest, most beardy mcbeardyson ever to exist. There's some opponent's you'd rather not play at all with. You just described them.

A 2 minute search on fb reveals the screenshot to be legit.

Disagreeing with screenshot of unofficial "How I would Play it" answer...Well I can of course pack it but then again in tournaments that means automatic loss. Not to mention that answer doesn't even allow deep striking outside deployment zone on turn 1. And again that answer has zero official value. I repeat. IT IS NOT OFFICIAL. I can't use it as evidence as to why I can. It's house rule of that guy. It's not official answer whatsoever. It's no different than asking opinion of anybody in the forums here. Absolutely not useful when you are playing in enviroment where games are expected to play by the actual rules rather than by house rules.

It...is...not...official. Do you understand difference between words official and unofficial? That answer comes from source who themselves have said to not treat them as official source for rules.

I can live either way(orks are boned anyway rules wise) but what I want is OFFICIAL word one way or another so I don't have to go over this(and many other equally bonker screwups by GW) with every new player I face. Clear official rules shouldn't be too hard to ask from company that makes up tons of money. They could easily afford to hire one guy to go over the rules and spot the screwups the designers seems to be unable to avoid. Writing the deep strike rule so that it would be 100% clear either way would have been child's play.

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
"Dude if someone disagrees with you after you show them the screenshot you start packing up your gak and find another opponent because you are playing the saddest, most beardy mcbeardyson ever to exist. There's some opponent's you'd rather not play at all with. You just described them."

Oh ok, so you'll just concede to them in tournament. GG easy win...
No one is talking about this for friendly games...

Talk to a TO. If the TO rules this contrary to what a GW employee is saying then its on them.

Also rvd I hate to break this to you buddy but if you decided to play Orks to win a load of massive, high level tournaments you chose the wrong army. We're never top of the top tier, by design

tneva82 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Dude if someone disagrees with you after you show them the screenshot you start packing up your gak and find another opponent because you are playing the saddest, most beardy mcbeardyson ever to exist. There's some opponent's you'd rather not play at all with. You just described them.

A 2 minute search on fb reveals the screenshot to be legit.

Disagreeing with screenshot of unofficial "How I would Play it" answer...Well I can of course pack it but then again in tournaments that means automatic loss. Not to mention that answer doesn't even allow deep striking outside deployment zone on turn 1. And again that answer has zero official value. I repeat. IT IS NOT OFFICIAL. I can't use it as evidence as to why I can. It's house rule of that guy. It's not official answer whatsoever. It's no different than asking opinion of anybody in the forums here. Absolutely not useful when you are playing in enviroment where games are expected to play by the actual rules rather than by house rules.

It...is...not...official. Do you understand difference between words official and unofficial? That answer comes from source who themselves have said to not treat them as official source for rules.

I can live either way(orks are boned anyway rules wise) but what I want is OFFICIAL word one way or another so I don't have to go over this(and many other equally bonker screwups by GW) with every new player I face. Clear official rules shouldn't be too hard to ask from company that makes up tons of money. They could easily afford to hire one guy to go over the rules and spot the screwups the designers seems to be unable to avoid. Writing the deep strike rule so that it would be 100% clear either way would have been child's play.

Tournaments = show it a TO as above, don't even show your opponent.

I know the meaning of 'unofficial' and 'official' believe it or not. Since the argument to stop da jump out of deployment zone was so weak and has virtually no credence to begin with I would suggest that even an 'unofficial' response will settle most opponents down.

Or you can choose not to play until an official clarification comes out. Or you can play that you can't da jump outside of deployment on turn 1 if you'd rather not have the drama. I'm not here to tell anyone how to play, I'm simply stating that the intent of GW is clear anyway (to me) and this extra bit of information just adds a ton of weight to that argument. FLG and Nick Nanavati are great players for sure and have a wealth of knowledge, but I somehow doubt they know more than GW employees themselves. Let them play how they want to, they already play a different version of 40k, I'll play as GW state the game is to be played though, whether that's through official or unofficial channels.

if we're talking about "official vs unofficial"...this whole stinkin' mess is based off questionable interpretation of BETA RULES...as in not finished/final...why are we treating that as official?

Yes the argument was so weak that all these guys saw it that way:
A major tournament TO
FLG
Nick Nanavati
LVO judge staff
etc...

 ZoBo wrote:
if we're talking about "official vs unofficial"...this whole stinkin' mess is based off questionable interpretation of BETA RULES...as in not finished/final...why are we treating that as official?

Those comes from official source. Facebook posts comes from source who themselves say "don't treat our word as official".

Thus anywhere that uses beta rules(which will be pretty much everywhere) facebook post cannot be used as evidence. Why? Because it's not official.

Beta rules meanwhile are from official source so no wonder if they are used(which they will be virtually everywhere) those are valid sources for using to determine how the rules are to be used.

It's really simple. Official: It's valid source. Unofficial: It's house rule. Just because I have house rule that says windows don't allow LOS through ruin doesn't mean others are expected to follow it. In same way facebook dude's house rules(which the answer is) aren't universally used so unless players agree on that house rule it's not usable.

And I don't want to spend tons of time figuring out through house rules for all the various screw ups GW has done with their rules. What I want is good clear rules so that when I get to play I can start playing RIGHT AWAY rather than first spend time going through what house rules are to be used now. When for example your weekly game you have ~2 hours to play 2k game with orks I DON'T HAVE TIME TO WASTE.

GW makes millions. Is it too much to ask for them to provide clear offiial rules? That's not too much to ask now is it? Or do you ENJOY having badly written(without even considering how balanced/fun rules. Just on technical aspect of it) rules?

The problem isn't can Da Jump be used or not. Either way I can deal with it. Yes and hey I can do it. Yey. Nice. No? Well orks are boned anyway so this won't actually affect result of game either way. BUT clear official rules are something GW should be expected to provide. Anything else is simply them being lazy and greedy. Out of millions of profit per year how much they would have to sacrifice one guy going through rules to tighten up wordings? 50,000£? (if they want to get cheaper sack one developer and replace with somebody who can actually write rules well from the get-go so you don't need to hire yet another to go through texts later)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
Yes the argument was so weak that all these guys saw it that way:
A major tournament TO
FLG
Nick Nanavati
LVO judge staff
etc...

It came down to this: Location of rule is in tactical reserves. This is the arqument for "yes it can be used". However actual rule text said it applies to units that arrive on battlefield on turn 1 which Da Jump etc most definitely 100% fullfill.

Thus it comes down to question is title of section more important than actual rule text.

That rule was soooo easy to write clearly either way how even GW managed to botch it is mind boggling.

Going back to tactics.

Now the bikers became a viable Option thanks to the Warboss Aura. What do you think?

Are the bikers + stormboyz enough for a first turn Charge to build up some pressure? And then, on turn 2 bring in the chinorks and Kommandos?

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
Yes the argument was so weak that all these guys saw it that way:
A major tournament TO
FLG
Nick Nanavati
LVO judge staff
etc...

NEWSFLASH! Person is position of authority and knowledge makes knee jerk reaction to something causing chaos and confusion! If only this had happened before so we could have learnt a lesson from it. Oh wait....

Their opinion is there's. Good for them. I watched the Nick Nanavati Facebook stream, asked a few questions too. He didn't strike me as someone who had read the argument around this thoroughly, I believe his thoughts are focused on list building and the meta change. In his later article he says that Ork bikes might be back and that we 'only got buffed'. Completely disregarding the massive issue around combat on terrain. Pablo does not think that da jump can't be used turn 1 outside of deployment zone, so it looks like FLG was split on the ruling on this too.

Regardless your statement is kinda pointless. Gw are the people responsible for the rules and they have all but said you can da jump wherever you like turn 1.

Ming wrote:
Going back to tactics.

Now the bikers became a viable Option thanks to the Warboss Aura. What do you think?

Are the bikers + stormboyz enough for a first turn Charge to build up some pressure? And then, on turn 2 bring in the chinorks and Kommandos?

How people keep getting first turn charges so easily? 12+3.5+7=way less than 24". Even warbike shouldn't be getting in easily if opponent isn't careless. Is there something I'm missing that gives extra speed besides advance?