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.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Actually hang on, would this FaQ now mean that a unit can't use Assault Grenades & Krak Grenades in the same Assault Phase.

Or Defense & Haywire, etc, etc?

Any grenade, be it assault, blind, blight, haywire, or melta bomb, or anything else that is considered a grenade, can be used exactly once per unit per phase, according to the new FAQ. This includes the assault phase.

So, 15 tankbustas charge a imperial knight, exactly one is allowed to attack with a melta bomb.

Not quite. Assault Grenades are the status of "equipped" for their Assault use, so are able to provide their Assault bonus even when the weapon is not being used, just like the Khorne Great Axe would keep the Bloodthirster at I1 even when using another Weapon.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Actually hang on, would this FaQ now mean that a unit can't use Assault Grenades & Krak Grenades in the same Assault Phase.

Or Defense & Haywire, etc, etc?

Any grenade, be it assault, blind, blight, haywire, or melta bomb, or anything else that is considered a grenade, can be used exactly once per unit per phase, according to the new FAQ. This includes the assault phase.

So, 15 tankbustas charge a imperial knight, exactly one is allowed to attack with a melta bomb.

So now you'll bring 3 x 5 Tankbustas, with a mix of PK Nobs, Killsaw Meks, Squigs, and Tank hammers. Not pretty, and more expensive, but it'll get you there. I guess. We'll see what the final FAQ looks like.

Well it's a good thing they took Haywire grenades from Wyches, otherwise they'd now be useless. Oh wait...

Its just the reasoning used is wrong.

THere are some "wrong" calls in the FAQ - so hopefully the feedback will get through

(stomp causing a 25% causalty check, when Assault phase is explicitly called out as an exception to the rule)

 Cleatus wrote:


So now you'll bring 3 x 5 Tankbustas, with a mix of PK Nobs, Killsaw Meks, Squigs, and Tank hammers. Not pretty, and more expensive, but it'll get you there. I guess. We'll see what the final FAQ looks like.

So... forgive dumb question but I have lost rule book (!) - would the nob get to chuck a grenade in addition to the unit? Or is it simply that the Nob can use his PK on the Imperial knight, along with the Mek's Killsaw and the Tank Hammers etc. Should the Nob have a Rokit as well?

... you can tell who's just finishing a new Tankbusta squad

Maybe I will model up that Killsaw Mek now...

The reasoning is wrong, but the answer is clear. One per unit. THats it.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Cleatus wrote:


So now you'll bring 3 x 5 Tankbustas, with a mix of PK Nobs, Killsaw Meks, Squigs, and Tank hammers. Not pretty, and more expensive, but it'll get you there. I guess. We'll see what the final FAQ looks like.

So... forgive dumb question but I have lost rule book (!) - would the nob get to chuck a grenade in addition to the unit? Or is it simply that the Nob can use his PK on the Imperial knight, along with the Mek's Killsaw and the Tank Hammers etc. Should the Nob have a Rokit as well?

... you can tell who's just finishing a new Tankbusta squad

Maybe I will model up that Killsaw Mek now...

No, under the new interpretation it's one grenade per unit. The Nob is part of the unit. Even if you were to join an IC to the unit, that unit could still only get 1 grenade per phase. You can upgrade one Tankbusta to a Nob, so he has a rokkit launcha base; the codex says he can replace his melee weapon with a PK (or BC), so I think he could have a PK, or a rokkit launcha, but not both. (Pretty sure this has been discussed in YMDC before.) Actually, now that I think about it, he doesn't have a melee weapon to trade, so technically the only way to give him a PK is to upgrade a Tankbusta with a Tankhammer first, then make him a Nob, then give him a PK. Which is silly. You might as well just keep the rokkit launcha, give the nob a BP, and take a Killsaw Mek.

So yeah, if this ruling sticks, Ork players will need to get more creative with their anti-tank options.

Has no effect on demolition charges. They are just ranged weapons.

 Cleatus wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Cleatus wrote:


So now you'll bring 3 x 5 Tankbustas, with a mix of PK Nobs, Killsaw Meks, Squigs, and Tank hammers. Not pretty, and more expensive, but it'll get you there. I guess. We'll see what the final FAQ looks like.

So... forgive dumb question but I have lost rule book (!) - would the nob get to chuck a grenade in addition to the unit? Or is it simply that the Nob can use his PK on the Imperial knight, along with the Mek's Killsaw and the Tank Hammers etc. Should the Nob have a Rokit as well?

... you can tell who's just finishing a new Tankbusta squad

Maybe I will model up that Killsaw Mek now...

No, under the new interpretation it's one grenade per unit. The Nob is part of the unit. Even if you were to join an IC to the unit, that unit could still only get 1 grenade per phase. You can upgrade one Tankbusta to a Nob, so he has a rokkit launcha base; the codex says he can replace his melee weapon with a PK (or BC), so I think he could have a PK, or a rokkit launcha, but not both. (Pretty sure this has been discussed in YMDC before.) Actually, now that I think about it, he doesn't have a melee weapon to trade, so technically the only way to give him a PK is to upgrade a Tankbusta with a Tankhammer first, then make him a Nob, then give him a PK. Which is silly. You might as well just keep the rokkit launcha, give the nob a BP, and take a Killsaw Mek.

So yeah, if this ruling sticks, Ork players will need to get more creative with their anti-tank options.

According to the 'no specified close combat weapons' rule in the Weapons section of the main rules any model with no close combat on their profile is considered to have a close combat weapon. So a tankbusta nob can have both klaw and rokkit launcha.

StrikerTommy wrote:
According to the 'no specified close combat weapons' rule in the Weapons section of the main rules any model with no close combat on their profile is considered to have a close combat weapon. So a tankbusta nob can have both klaw and rokkit launcha.

The 'No Specified Melee Weapon' rule does not give you a weapon to trade during list construction.

 Ghaz wrote:

StrikerTommy wrote:
According to the 'no specified close combat weapons' rule in the Weapons section of the main rules any model with no close combat on their profile is considered to have a close combat weapon. So a tankbusta nob can have both klaw and rokkit launcha.

The 'No Specified Melee Weapon' rule does not give you a weapon to trade during list construction.

Thanks for the info Cleatus, that's what I assumed.

The Ork Codex says specifically thatthe Nob CAN take an item from the melee weapon list. Altho the list mentions replacing a CC weapon, the more specific "can take a weapon from Mellee lit" surely over-rides it so I can't see why he can't take both Rokkit and PK (or BC).

Interesting, the Mek/killsaw options altho of course he's weaker than a Nob but the AP2 Armorbane is a plus.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

StrikerTommy wrote:
According to the 'no specified close combat weapons' rule in the Weapons section of the main rules any model with no close combat on their profile is considered to have a close combat weapon. So a tankbusta nob can have both klaw and rokkit launcha.

The 'No Specified Melee Weapon' rule does not give you a weapon to trade during list construction.

Thanks for the info Cleatus, that's what I suspected.

The Ork Codex says specifically thatthe Nob CAN take an item from the melee weapon list. Altho the list mentions replacing a CC weapon, the more specific "can take a weapon" surely over-rides it so I can't see why he can't take both Rokkit and PK (or BC).

Interesting, the Mek options altho of course he's weaker than a Nob.

It doesn't override the restrictions of the list, it simply allows you access to the list in the first place. You still need to replace an existing melee weapon.

 Ghaz wrote:

It doesn't override the restrictions of the list, it simply allows you access to the list in the first place. You still need to replace an existing melee weapon.

tankbustas entry: "the Nob may take weapons from the melee weapons list".

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

It doesn't override the restrictions of the list, it simply allows you access to the list in the first place. You still need to replace an existing melee weapon.

tankbustas entry: "the Nob may take weapons from the melee weapons list".

And it does not say "The Nob may take weapons from the Melee Weapons list without replacing an existing weapon." The wording gives you access to the list, nothing more.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

It doesn't override the restrictions of the list, it simply allows you access to the list in the first place. You still need to replace an existing melee weapon.

tankbustas entry: "the Nob may take weapons from the melee weapons list".

And it does not say "The Nob may take weapons from the Melee Weapons list without replacing an existing weapon." The wording gives you access to the list, nothing more.

Right. Although the Tankbusta entry says that the Nob can take weapons from the Melee Weapons list, when you look at the Melee Weapons list on the Orks Wargear page, it says "A model may replace its melee weapon with one of the following". That's where the restriction comes in. The Nob doesn't have a melee weapon to trade.

So the "no cc weapon" only happens once the game has started? It is ambiguous when they begin to be treated as having a cc weapon if none was listed. Surely GW intended the no cc weapon listed to auto-apply to units during list building.

If someone can prove that it doesn't come into play during list building it would be appreciated, otherwise it seems fair to read it as an all-the-time condition.

GW's intention was to give models without a specific close combat weapon a way to fight in close combat. It most definitely wasn't done to give the model a potentially never-ending supply of close combat weapons to trade out for other weapons (e.g., get free close combat weapon, trade out for ranged weapon, get free close combat weapon, trade for ranged weapon...).

 Ghaz wrote:
GW's intention was to give models without a specific close combat weapon a way to fight in close combat. It most definitely wasn't done to give the model a potentially never-ending supply of close combat weapons to trade out for other weapons (e.g., get free close combat weapon, trade out for ranged weapon, get free close combat weapon, trade for ranged weapon...).

I see what you mean but in this case it is traded for another cc weapon. It is just strange to have this kind of oversight writing the entry for tankbustas unless they were copy-paste crazy.

StrikerTommy wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
GW's intention was to give models without a specific close combat weapon a way to fight in close combat. It most definitely wasn't done to give the model a potentially never-ending supply of close combat weapons to trade out for other weapons (e.g., get free close combat weapon, trade out for ranged weapon, get free close combat weapon, trade for ranged weapon...).

I see what you mean but in this case it is traded for another cc weapon. It is just strange to have this kind of oversight writing the entry for tankbustas unless they were copy-paste crazy.

The 2014 Ork Codex has many editing, erm, "oversights". The worst example is probably Mad Doc Grotsnik, who both has Cybork Body (was 5+ Invlun, now 6+ FNP) and has a 5+ FNP for himself and any unit he joins. They don't stack. Completely useless.

Anyway, come on GW, don't nerf my Tankbustas! They love clamping their melta bombs on the sides of vehicles. Whether the Ladz survive the ensuing explosion or not, it's good for a larf! Har har har.

Same goes for having stikk bomb chukkas as an optional upgrade on trukks, which gives any unit disembarking from it stikkbombs for that round. Except every unit in our codex that can embark on a trukk, save for gretchin, has stikkbombs for free, unless 6th ed iirc, and I don't think I've heard of anyone sticking gretchin in a trukk, much less assaulting with them.

StrikerTommy wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
GW's intention was to give models without a specific close combat weapon a way to fight in close combat. It most definitely wasn't done to give the model a potentially never-ending supply of close combat weapons to trade out for other weapons (e.g., get free close combat weapon, trade out for ranged weapon, get free close combat weapon, trade for ranged weapon...).

I see what you mean but in this case it is traded for another cc weapon. It is just strange to have this kind of oversight writing the entry for tankbustas unless they were copy-paste crazy.

Except its not another close combat weapon. Its a power klaw. So you're trying to make a unit that's focused on long-ranged tankbusting just as effective in close combat as well. You're looking for the best of both worlds. IMHO its not an oversight, but a deliberate design choice. When FAQed, its just as likely to remove the Melee Weapon option from the Nob as it is to grant him a melee weapon to trade.

 Cleatus wrote:
The 2014 Ork Codex has... many editing "oversights". The worst example is probably Mad Doc Grotsnik, who both has Cybork Body (was 5+ Invlun, now 6+ FNP) and has a 5+ FNP for himself and any unit he joins. They don't stack. Completely useless.

Sometimes its a decision based on the character's existing fluff. Just like its fluff for Lysander to have three Invulnerable saves (Terminator Armour, Storm Shield and Iron Halo).

*Shrug* Melta Bombs are a melee only weapon, lets pretend he turned that in for a Power Klaw. An ork would do it.