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.

nkelsch wrote:The disadvantages are minimal if any at all. Smaller crater for cover? That is not a real disadvantage as your trukks will blow up less due to the ease of hiding them. Less disembark size? you only use one side so it is zero impact to room to disembark.

Except if you're disembarking from one side, and that side is smaller... that's less space to disembark into. Which gives you less flexibility on model placement, which can affect what happens next.

less LOS for shooting? Does anyone even shoot with the BS on a trukk or is it there to protect against immobilized results?

I do when the troops have clambered out.

And how often will a player who knows about a disadvantage throw himself out there to have that disadvantage used against him. We don't expose our rear amror to the opponent even though rear armor is a disadvantage right?

We also don't try to claim that not exposing your rear army is a cheaty tactic.

Or that not deliberately exposing your rear armour means that the vehicle is over-powered due to its front armour being higher.

That weak rear armour is still there. Whether or not that causes you problems depends entirely on your tactics, and on how well your opponent manages to capitalise on that fault.

If it wasn't then why wouldn't people just be fine with treating them as the modern GW trukk for all purposes so it has NO impact and the way the codex plays isn't fundamentally altered due to it?

Speaking for myself, that would be because I absolutely detest treating a model as anything other than what is actually on the table. It leads to all sorts of issues, not least being that determiing LOS suddenly goes from 'Yes, I can see it' to 'Well, I could probably see it if it was this much taller...'

It's far easier to just play the game with the models you have, rather than the models someone else wishes you had.

Oh... and trukks never go 'boom'. You can never be placed in the crater as ramshackle never allows you to. All 3 results for ramshackle force disembarking before the trukk is removed so they will always be around the peremeter of the trukk. So claiming a 'tiny crater' as a disadvantage is a total dishonest lie when speaking of ork trukks.

It's a 'dishonest lie' if you remember the ramshackle rule and what it does when you point it out. There's a world of difference between a lie and forgetting a special rule. So how about we just turn the hyperbole down a notch, hmm?

And it still leaves you with a smaller zone to disembark into, about which I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree as to how large a disadvantage that is.

rigeld2 wrote:

nkelsch wrote:Maybe learn to play 5th edition orks instead of playing tactics that require 10+ year old models and would not work unless you had abusive models.

Maybe don't assume I play orks?

It is a very real and large advantage, especially with mixing multiple sizes of trukks. If it wasn't then why wouldn't people just be fine with treating them as the modern GW trukk for all purposes so it has NO impact and the way the codex plays isn't fundamentally altered due to it?

Because you're essentially forcing me to buy new models just to make things easy - because pretending something is bigger than it really is is annoying.

it is pretty easy to do... and it is fair to your opponent.

Good news is most events (or at least the ones that matter) have made the decision for you. Pretend they are the correct size or don't attend. If you are playing with old models for nostalgia or poorness, no problem... just don't try to screen your trukks with grots. If you are playing for advantage, it has been made clear you are not welcome at the event. Everyone who matters wins.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

And it still leaves you with a smaller zone to disembark into, about which I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree as to how large a disadvantage that is.

Considering ork trukks are fast and usually control the angle, location and where to commit your models for a coordinated assault to maximize waaaagh (and considering the fact you hid total LOS so your trukks are not craters by now and you have more of them in position to strike directly due to the smaller size), you actually want a smaller disembark zone and less space taken up by the trukk. I have more than once had issues with coordinating my assault because there simply is not enough room for all my transports to get where I need them. Smaller transport gives less real estate taken up by trukks which leaves more room for boots on the ground. 12 25mm bases can easilly fit around the front of a gorka trukk a lot easier than the larger trukks. I would have killed for my trukk to be smaller as it would give me more room for disembarking as I can put multiple trukks near each other without them choking each other.

It is always an advantage, and a really really large one to the point that you can actually play the codex completely differently due to it. Things that do not work with new trukks can work with the old trukks.

Honestly, I don't respect all these fictional examples... I play orks and have been playing forks for 15+ years. I played a trukk heavy list all tourney season this year... it is a GAME BREAKING ADVANTAGE. Small trukks, oversized BWs and 60mm Ghaz are exploitative for the current ork codex. I support events which call these ork players out on their bull.

nkelsch wrote:Honestly, I don't respect all these fictional examples... I play orks and have been playing forks for 15+ years. I played a trukk heavy list all tourney season this year... it is a GAME BREAKING ADVANTAGE.

The thing is, the original scenario that started this thread wasn't talking about a trukk heavy list. It was talking about two trukks.

I have one trukk in my Ork army. As I mentioned earlier, I use the actual trukk model as a buggy. My trukk is a converted Chimera... but if I were to use the trukk as a trukk, I'm honestly just not seeing it as that big a deal in an army that also has an oversize Battlewagon (that has so far endured one tournament with nothing but compliments) non-standard Kans, bikes converted from Ork bikes, Marine bikes, and spare parts, Nobs made from Warboss models, and Ork Boyz ranging from Gorkamorka Yoofs and 2nd edition starter set plastics through to current edition models.

YMMV, obviously. Which comes back to that 'makes a difference where you're playing' thing.

Small trukks, oversized BWs and 60mm Ghaz are exploitative for the current ork codex. I support events which call these ork players out on their bull.

I'm puzzled as to why you keep bringing the 60mm Ghaz up, since it's not legal in the first place. I notice though that you didn't answer the question posed earlier, which was whether it would still be abusive if GW decide to upgrade him to a 60mm base as they have done for Kans and Dredds?

I completely agree with Insaniak. It matters where you are playing. That really sums it up. Talk to your TO or your opponent and you'll be fine. Just be aware that people may have different opinions than you about perfectly legal things and that may affect your ability to play them. Same if you're playing Orks or SW, it all comes down to opponent consent.

nkelsch wrote:It is also perfectly legal to not play him because he is modeling for advantage.

Gorkamorka trukks are abusive and have no place as trukks in 5th edition and I am a ork player who has 50k+ of orks and almost every ork vehicle ever made.

The grace period is over, it is time to update your trukks and battlewagons fellas. No reason to have skateboards and 12"x24" tanks on the table.

I use my old trucks and converted them to buggies.

nkelsch wrote:Good news is most events (or at least the ones that matter) have made the decision for you. Pretend they are the correct size or don't attend. If you are playing with old models for nostalgia or poorness, no problem... just don't try to screen your trukks with grots. If you are playing for advantage, it has been made clear you are not welcome at the event. Everyone who matters wins.

People gather together to collectively re-write the rules of the game to their own liking all the time. That is great. What is not great is you claiming that the house rules of 'the events that matter' supersede the actual real rules of Warhammer 40K. I'll screen any legal model I want with any other legal model I want. You can't stop me. You just won't include me in the 'everyone who matters' club, whose by-laws are the whim of the in-crowd. Thanks, but I think I'll just stick to the written rules and those who play by them.

Hiding a smaller model behind a big one is definitely orky. Besides, how hard is it to blow up a trukk FFS? Now TWO trukks in front of a small trukk that's over powered indeed.

If old models are legit, then the the obscurement rule would apply. If the trukk is 50% visible it gets a 4+ cover. If it's not visible and you think that it is cheating/unfair, then don't play the guy. If you can't blow up a trukk, then use str 7 shooting.

Really? No comments on my remark of Orks riding in single file? Not even a "will someone slap that guy?" Gah! I don't know why I waste my time with pointless posts...
At least it was kinda relevent... mumble. mumble, young whipersnappers...mumble...

Happyjew wrote:Really? No comments on my remark of Orks riding in single file? Not even a "will someone slap that guy?" Gah! I don't know why I waste my time with pointless posts...
At least it was kinda relevent... mumble. mumble, young whipersnappers...mumble...

I giggled. Just didn't feel like commenting at the time. I don't want you to feel your effort was wasted though.

Ghenghis Jon wrote:People gather together to collectively re-write the rules of the game to their own liking all the time. That is great. What is not great is you claiming that the house rules of 'the events that matter' supersede the actual real rules of Warhammer 40K. I'll screen any legal model I want with any other legal model I want. You can't stop me. You just won't include me in the 'everyone who matters' club, whose by-laws are the whim of the in-crowd. Thanks, but I think I'll just stick to the written rules and those who play by them.

I have to agree with you completely here, if by following rules that are set by the company is going to break 'event rules' then I will gladly break those. They want to complain well I have some strong opinions on that.

Happyjew wrote:Really? No comments on my remark of Orks riding in single file? Not even a "will someone slap that guy?" Gah! I don't know why I waste my time with pointless posts...
At least it was kinda relevent... mumble. mumble, young whipersnappers...mumble...

Sorry Happy, while I did laugh didn't see a point in making a comment.

insaniak wrote:

Small trukks, oversized BWs and 60mm Ghaz are exploitative for the current ork codex. I support events which call these ork players out on their bull.

I'm puzzled as to why you keep bringing the 60mm Ghaz up, since it's not legal in the first place. I notice though that you didn't answer the question posed earlier, which was whether it would still be abusive if GW decide to upgrade him to a 60mm base as they have done for Kans and Dredds?

Because it is one of the 3 ork model size issues which is constantly abused by cheaty ork players and is frequently removed from well-run events.

If GW decided to upgrade him to 60mm then all ork players across the meta could then have 60mm GHAZ and while it would be a bump, it then becomes fair as every ork player everywhere gets the advantage, not just the ones who build oversized Mega Armor Bosses. If GW decides to give all GHAZ players an extra inch to his movement, then that is how it is, opposed to a single player who decides to give himself an extra inch to his movement while everyone else does not recieve that distance.

New trukk size is a large nerf, almost to the point people hardly use them or see them as competative. The only way to keep the integrity of events is to make sure all ork players use the same size vehicles because small trukks drastically impact the game more than any other size difference for legacy models out there. The advantages are massive and numerous, the disadvantages are realistically non-existent and the way the model plays is drastically different to the point where it is almost a different unit type. In an army which is about cover for vehicles via wargear, having models who don't need cover because they can't be seen changes the entire way the army plays and brings tactics which ONLY WORK for gorkatrukks. That is a problem to me and where the game breaks.

My ghaz is on a 25mm base...so eat that! Good old second edition ghaz.

A lot of the arguments come down to intent really. Did the player purposely purchase and use the more advantageous model knowing full well the advantage it would give? If I were to go out today and purposely look for and purchase a 2nd edition Tyrant with the intent of gaming the LOS rules, that would be shady, but using something I've had for years upon years isn't. Since it's impossible to know how long someone has had something, or their intent in using it, many want to default to a common size for all models of that type, usually the newest.

On a similar topic, what about units that don't have models and intentionally gaming the LOS rules? Odds are that any GW produced Harpy model for example, will be huge and very likely on a flying stand like a Storm Raven. I've seen conversions done where people have just glued gargoyle wings on a warrior and given it a bigger gun, and tried to claim cover saves off of termigants. No model, so you can't argue it's not legit, but clearly a case of modelling for advantage and one you can't really shoot down easily.

Because it is one of the 3 ork model size issues which is constantly abused by cheaty ork players and is frequently removed from well-run events.

Bit of an uniformed and incorrect statement there. So in your world any Ork player that uses a legal GW supplied model is a cheater and abuser? I also guess that in your mind any event that allows legal models is not well run. You must have loads of fun at RTTs.

New trukk size is a large nerf, almost to the point people hardly use them or see them as competative. The only way to keep the integrity of events is to make sure all ork players use the same size vehicles because small trukks drastically impact the game more than any other size difference for legacy models out there. The advantages are massive and numerous, the disadvantages are realistically non-existent and the way the model plays is drastically different to the point where it is almost a different unit type. In an army which is about cover for vehicles via wargear, having models who don't need cover because they can't be seen changes the entire way the army plays and brings tactics which ONLY WORK for gorkatrukks. That is a problem to me and where the game breaks.

Again incorrect and uninformed. To me the new trukks are better. I use them exclusively and see them as highly competive. Not to mention better looking. If you feel all Ork players should be required to use the current Trukk do you also feel that anyone with old Terminators should be required to rebase them? How about folks wanting to use models that GW either doesn't or has not released yet? Would you complain about someone using a model that no one knows what the proper base size is/should be? What is the size of a Tyranid Pod? If I use one the size of an IMperial DP is that OK? How about if it is twice as large/half the size? I give my Chaos Daemon Prince wings. There is no model supplied with Wings. Is converting one with wings going to be met with scorn by you?

Boss GreenNutz wrote:I give my Chaos Daemon Prince wings. There is no model supplied with Wings.

Yes there is. There always has been, the old metal daemon prince sculpts had wings, the special character princes had wings, and the plastic kit has wings as one of its assembly options. There are two princes without wings (the metal one that was replaced by the plastic kit and the nurgle one) but those are actually the minority.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:

Boss GreenNutz wrote:I give my Chaos Daemon Prince wings. There is no model supplied with Wings.

Yes there is. There always has been, the old metal daemon prince sculpts had wings, the special character princes had wings, and the plastic kit has wings as one of its assembly options. There are two princes without wings (the metal one that was replaced by the plastic kit and the nurgle one) but those are actually the minority.

So swap "Chaos Demon Prince" with "Tyranid Hive Tyrant".

nkelsch wrote:
If GW decided to upgrade him to 60mm then all ork players across the meta could then have 60mm GHAZ and while it would be a bump, it then becomes fair as every ork player everywhere gets the advantage, not just the ones who build oversized Mega Armor Bosses. If GW decides to give all GHAZ players an extra inch to his movement, then that is how it is, opposed to a single player who decides to give himself an extra inch to his movement while everyone else does not recieve that distance.

Did you just say that a change in size is ok if everybody does it? Of course, the 60mm Ghaz would have to be legal first....

But, if everyone had Gorka trukks, which are completely legal GW trukk models, does that make it ok? That way, whenever an opponent hears "ork trukk" they can identify the small size with the points cost. Sure, it would change the meta. But it would be legal.

nkelsch wrote:... by cheaty ork players...

Again, with the biased language and accusations of cheating.

... The only way to keep the integrity of events...

Integrity of events? Seriously? And what integrity are you attempting to preserve? Your fictional idea of what the competitive metagame is? God forbid someone run an ork trukk at a tournament, shattering your idea of what's viable and what isn't.

I'd venture to say that any ork player who wants can find the old trukks with minimal effort on their part. There are at least six on eBay right now, all for under $10. If all ork players simply use the old ones, your argument about the differences becomes invalid. The community has simply refused to acknowledge the new model, or the disadvantages that it comes with.

You have yet to present any argument as to why you believe the size of the models is designed into their cost. I've put forth several arguments, backed with supporting data, that shows that the size of a model is not related to their points cost. Based on this, I still fail to see how using an older model is getting an advantage that isn't paid for.

nkelsch wrote:Because it is one of the 3 ork model size issues which is constantly abused by cheaty ork players and is frequently removed from well-run events.

You have failed to prove that using the two different legal GW Trukk models in accordance with the rules is cheating. As for your 'well run events', just saying 'this is how we do it around here' is not tantamount to official GW rulings. Some posts have a claim that the intent of their use is cheating or being TFG. As for intent, I intend to win. The extent to which I pursue that goal is totally dependent on my mood, my opponent, and the circumstances under which we are playing. Does shielding my smaller legal model with a larger legal model in accordance with the rules make me TFG? Yes. Does fielding 20 point Psyker Marines with three types of grenades and Force Weapons make me TFG? Yes. Are they both legal? Yes. Why do you feel the one condemned by the 'well-run' events is cheating, and the other is not?

Nkelsch, I just looked through your gallery. Is that your army? According to YOUR name-calling and arguments here so far, I'm going to call you cheaty. Your biker boss is on a custom bike base, which is HUGE. Most of your stuff is- God forbid -converted from other models, and does not exactly match the current official GW models for LOS purposes.

Seriously dude? I'm not saying you're wrong- I play orks to convert as well. I love being able to use any model I want and turning it into something orky. But with the vehement resolve you have had in this thread, I can't help but point out your disparities in theory and practice.

Beautiful army though btw.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Logically that previous post of mine is ad hominem and off topic.

However, I think it shows us that playing orks is not about having everything the same "correct GW sanctioned tourney legal blah" shape and size. And you know that.

You do you are talking about ork trukks? GW has not disallowed the use of older ork model but infact has sanctioned use of older trukk as the codex and gw website both state that each trukk looks different.

pretre wrote:

Ghenghis Jon wrote:

pretre wrote:Okay, so you're a new ork player and you want to be competitive. Can you scratchbuild Trukks to the exact specifications of the original gorka trukks and field them? Afterall, there's no way to buy new Gorka trukks.

We are talking about taking advantage of a model. You are talking about modeling for advantage. There is a difference. One involves using existing legal models without changing a thing. This is the player utilising the parameters of the game. The other involves deliberately altering or building a model. That is the player trying to alter the parameters of the game.

Why do you get to use a smaller truck but the newer player doesn't?
Why should he suffer because he started the game later than you?
Would you be okay with him using a scratchbuilt trukk the size of the new trukk?
Why is that different than one of the old trukk?
Why is building a model the exact same size as your 'legal' old trukk modelling for advantage and building one the exact same size as a new trukk not?
Aren't they both 'legal' representations?

Pretre I think your heart is in the right place here, you are trying to make the game fair, but unfortunately in your quest for fairness you are the one actually breaking the rules. Think of it like this. I have a bunch of Gold and Silver US dollars that were made in the year 1901 and 1892. As legal tender currency they are both legal dollars. If I go to the gas station with my 24K gold US eagle $1.00 coin it will buy me exactly $1.00 worth of gas. But why would I do that, the gold in the coin and the collectibility of the coin make it worht thousands of dollars. However the coin is legal currency and it is legally worth $1.00.

However since I own it, I can sell it for thousands of US paper dollars, I can use it as legal tender for $1.00 the decision is mine and both are legal.

Now, do they still make $1.00 coins out of 24K gold? No

Are you allowed to buy gold and make a 1892 US gold Eagle dollar? No that would be highly illegal.

Can you go to a coin shop and buy a Gold eagle dollar? Yes.

Hereya go: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Warhammer-40k-Space-Orks-Gorkamorka-Trukk-wABJ-/260912272756?pt=UK_Toys_Wargames_RL&hash=item3cbf955574

make sense now?

basically my great granpa was a coin collector and he gave me these coins. Is that unfair to you? Should I just throw my coins away and never use them because you don't like the fact that I have them and you don't? Am I cheating because my great granpa collected gold coins and gave them to me and I decide that I want to legally use them?

Grots R OP wrote:make sense now?

Wow. Equating converting with counterfeiting currency. Unique. And no. That didn't help.

I largely gave up on this thread a while back though.

Sentinel wrote:Nkelsch, I just looked through your gallery. Is that your army? According to YOUR name-calling and arguments here so far, I'm going to call you cheaty. Your biker boss is on a custom bike base, which is HUGE. Most of your stuff is- God forbid -converted from other models, and does not exactly match the current official GW models for LOS purposes.

Seriously dude? I'm not saying you're wrong- I play orks to convert as well. I love being able to use any model I want and turning it into something orky. But with the vehement resolve you have had in this thread, I can't help but point out your disparities in theory and practice.

Beautiful army though btw.

I totally have ork models which have had to be 'retired' due to changes. I have a biker boss who was made way before the official FW model was released which set a 'larger than bike, smaller than my bike' base. I haven't run bikerboss in a tourney in 3 years either because of it. I am very aware of non-standard sized models and how it impacts the ork player.

I have Gorka trukks and 3rd edition massive BWs. They get retired. Can I run around and scream about my rights? Can I leverage 'rule of cool' to dazzle people? I can do a lot of things, but I don't I try to respect opponents in what is primarily a social game by not bringing models which impact the game, or if it *DOES* impact the game, refrain from using them or treating them in such a way it does as minimal impact as possible. I have had events tell me if a model was an issue and when it was I simply did not use it. Infact I usually strive to get pre-approval of any non-standard models and seek out how a tourney will rule on model sizes. If I do use a non-standard size, I point it out to my opponent and treat it as 'the official' size for all purposes and if there is an issue apply the least advantageous result. That is respecting your opponent and using models because they are cool not because you intend to get an advantage out of it.

The issue is all of the 'excuses' are just that. We all can tell when someone is attempting to get away with something and when they are not. People on Dakka like to make 'Hypothetical' to try to paint people into corners. We all know that friendly games and events is very much a 'gut check'. If someone happened to have gorka trukks and was playing them as if they knew no better, it would probably be ok. If I had a player scream at me about his player rights, mixed his trukk with other trukks and then put his highest priority target int he smaller trukk to deny full LOS and then attempted to screen that trukk using tactics which would be impossible with other trukks, the game ends. Pure and simple. Tourneys are aware, it comes up more than you think and I support the effort for TOs to lock down these models to prevent arguments and do what is best for the majority of participants and fair to everyone involved.

The reality is it does impact gameplay, and if the player purposefully takes advantage of the advantages, it can impact it drastically so to a point where the game is being played based upon things that break the social contract (like infiltrating your kroot so your opponent can't come ont he board and instantly loses...)

nkelsch wrote:
If I had a player scream at me about his player rights, mixed his trukk with other trukks and then put his highest priority target int he smaller trukk to deny full LOS and then attempted to screen that trukk using tactics which would be impossible with other trukks, the game ends. Pure and simple.

So if a player had old trukks, and bought a couple of new ones, without wanting to spend the money to buy all new ones, you're saying that he should be forced to play stupidly with what resources he has?

after reading this massive thread i am still going to use my trukks as trukks.

if you gave a new trukk and and old trukk to a kid and some nobs and some boyz and the kid new the fundamentals of how to play and that nobz are better then boyz i think he would try screening his nobz with his boyz.


now lets reverse this lets say he tried screening his boyz with the nobz. you would inwardly (or outwardly if you TFG) laugh at his tactic error, and then would you suggest to him that his nobz are better suggest screening them then turn around and say oh yeah those models you got from your family that are legal GW models you can't use now due to it being to small and give you an advantage even though i just told you to do it...

i know my trukks are smaller then my new trukks and your damn right i am going to trying hiding my nobs or ghazzkull, and cruising with a big mek is the way to go. so i will have my cake and i will eat it. hell if i want ghazz with snikk rot coming on your side of the board i can do that to. its not an advantage when its all the models i have. but i wont be stupid and place high value targets in front of chump blocks. and if this is what is game breaking for you well l2p

Nkelsch:

Ok, fine, you've retired them. Good enough.

But I think you're applying the tournament mentality to the entire game and "what makes something right".

40k is not a tournament game. The rulings made by TOs about these trukks are simply there to avoid confusion and time-wasting arguments. But that doesn't mean it is wrong or game-breaking to play with those units....

Sentinel, it mostly matters in tournaments, though. In friendly games the outcome is more casual, and you can easily walk away from the table if your opponent is doing something you don't like.

While I don’t think nkelsh’s tone does the argument any favors, and I disagree with some of his inferences and implications, in essence I have to agree with many of his points.

A few folks have put forward the argument that the advantages are counterbalanced by disadvantages, but here I have to 100% agree with nkelsch. There are very few, limited circumstances under which a smaller transport is a drawback. The size differential of the old trukk vs the new is so big that it really does greatly change how the unit can be used. This isn’t something that’s necessarily obvious if you haven’t played a lot of competitive games, and on a wide variety of tables (no insult meant, but I know at least one of the active folks in this thread has very limited tournament experience), but it becomes apparent when you have and when you take into account the actual terrain that’s out there. While I think most tables in the world could use and should have more big LOS-blocking terrain, including more stuff capable of completely hiding grav tanks, battlewagons, landraiders and new Trukks, in reality even most good tables have only a few pieces capable of doing that. Whereas they very often have several medium-sized hills, low ruins, or walls 1”-2” in height which are mostly just capable of hiding infantry, while leaving at least part of most vehicles visible. The Gorka trukks are so small that on most tables they are capable of hiding in many more places than a current Trukk would be able to, and their shorter length helps make it so that you’re often capable of fitting a couple of trukks into such a hiding space.

Now I know that Redbeard has played a lot of competitive events and is aware of this, but his argument is a different one. I don’t believe he’s disagreeing that the model is far more advantageous from a tactical standpoint. His argument is that it’s a legal model from GW and he has the right to use it in perpetuity. Further, he feels that the game itself is sufficiently unbalanced as to render even the level of the Trukk difference basically irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. And I’m not going to say that there’s no validity to those opinions. This is an area where it’s going to come down to some subjective judgments and personal experiences. In most cases I agree- most changed models are not SO changed that the difference really matters in games. Examples where it does are relatively infrequent.

But, IMO, this (like the old 28mm tall RT Avatar) constitutes one. It’s one of those situations where as a person playing against Orks, as soon as you see the Gorka trucks (even one or two of them) across the table for you, you become acutely aware that they will be harder to see and to kill during the game, and you will need to play differently than you would if your opponent had chosen to use the current model. Now, issues like this can sometimes come up with nonstandard and converted models too. But most of the time with those models, you can tell that they were built for Reasons of Cool, and you are in part “compensated” for the extra effort or annoyance of dealing with a nonstandard model by the enjoyment of looking at it, especially if your opponent makes clear by his behavior during the game that he’s not trying to maximize the tactical impact of his nonstandard model. He’s using it because it’s cool, and may even deliberately avoid taking advantage of its unusual shape or size. With Gorka trucks (and RT Avatars) it’s the opposite. Your opponent has chosen to field a tactically-advantageous but less-appealing model. It’s two strikes against the social contact of the game. Instead of being provided a superior visual spectacle to “make up for” the advantageous model, the opponent loses out in both areas.

I’m not saying that I will or ever have refused to play against Gorka trukks, but I will say that I have had a range of experiences with and against them, and they tend to hinge on the behavior of the guy across the table; a point that Pretre made earlier, IIRC. If the player is deliberately fielding it purely to take advantage of its size, it becomes annoying and reduces the fun of the game. If they are just using it for reasons of not having more current models (whether through lack of cash or whatever), and are not maximizing the use of the model’s advantages, it does not impact the enjoyment of the game in a negative way.

While I will never say that owners of the older model have no right to use it, I do think it is telling that some of the big events have started to make rulings about nonstandard model sizes, trying to reduce some of the gamesmanship which can be engaged in by using unusually-sized and shaped models.

Often the key impetus for this is indeed “cheaty” players, deliberately making nonstandard models to garner advantages the stock ones don’t have. There’s a group of guys who appeared at one of the big events with converted “grav” Chimeras which were similar to enclosed landspeeders in shape, with narrower bodies and little wings, on low flying stands. If you counted their little wings and tails, they were technically the same width and length as a Chimera. On their stands they were the same height. But due to having smaller hulls they were able to get cover easier. And due to the shape of their bodies/wings they could often fire their hull heavy bolters past one another, where LOS would have been blocked with normal Chimera bodies. And if they became Immobilized or Wrecked, the player could remove them from the stand “for looks”, thus also removing the LOS blockage from the ones behind. Now this is obviously far from the same thing as the Trukk situation, but it’s not very far from what’s sometimes been done with Battlewagons. Most Battlewagons are made for reasons of cool (and because for many years there was no official model apart from limited-availability resin ones from Armorcast or Forgeworld). But when your converted battlewagon has a 5” frontage rather than a 3” frontage, that’s a lot wider front armor facing and a significant difference in how your opponent has to fight it/how hard it is to get side shots. These kinds of shenanigans have been some of the factors weighing into the decisions by big event organizers to put some restrictions on nonstandard models, or to require that they be played “as if” they were the standard model if a situation arises in the game where their shape is an advantage.

Thankfully that kind of stuff is relatively rare and doesn’t come up often. IME very few players come anywhere near the shadiness of the guys with the converted Chimeras. I’m not saying it’s rife. It’s just the most extreme example of a continuum of modeling choices which can have an impact on the game and on your opponent’s enjoyment. A continuum on which, I will admit, my own old Rhinos in my Fallen army sit. I personally think there’s a real and substantial difference in how and to what degree said old rhinos and old trucks impact the game and the fun of opponents, but that’s a subjective judgment. I actively listen to opponents’ comments and try to gauge if it’s an issue or garnering me a real advantage. I do plan to eventually update them, for the sake of doing fancier paintjobs at least. I did eventually re-base all the square-based lesser daemon models in my army on round ones, once I became aware that I was gaining or could inadvertently gain a small but measurable advantage from the square bases.

Obviously Redbeard and I hold different opinions about the general balance of the game, and how much this stuff matters. And that’s okay and understandable. I think what’s most important is that we are aware of these issues and respect people’s right to hold a different opinion on it, and be ready to give and take when it comes to these questions at the table. This thread arose because the original poster felt that his opponent was taking advantage of the old model, and felt it unfair. Again, this is a question relating to the behavior of one player and the perceptions of the other, not just the legality of a model. If someone reading this thread is the owner of Gorka trucks and wants to use them, this thread is hopefully food for thought in terms of why an opponent might have an issue and how you can minimize or forestall any complaints. If someone reading this thread isn’t an Ork player but encounters the old models at some point, hopefully he won’t leap to the assumption that the other guy is trying to screw him by using them, and he can see from the posts in this thread the multiple reasons why and how the opponent may consider them perfectly legit and reasonable to field.

GW should have adjusted the stats for the older models. That solves anything. I started 40K 20 years ago. 90% of my Orks are old models. No desire to upgrade them just to make it tournament legal.

 insaniak wrote:
The Gorkamorka trukk was also the regular 40K Ork trukk for quite a few years.

The rules don't require you to update your models to the newest version. So yes, it's perfectly legal to use the smaller trukk, and screen it with the newer one.

It's an official GW model, so there's no question as to whether it's legal. Safe to assume the Nobz Mob was a smaller unit than the Boyz unit, Jeeps are smaller than Trucks in the real world, and ork vehicles aren't uniform if you ask any mekaniak.

If you find it disadvantageous to play with GorkaMorka models, make adjustments by adding the intended capacity roolz, i.e. The orks can be transported in it only if the player can fit the models in the vehicle, and damage is doled out to Ork models that fall off the trukk when the player moves it.

 Scraps4Bitz wrote:
. The orks can be transported in it only if the player can fit the models in the vehicle, and damage is doled out to Ork models that fall off the trukk when the player moves it.

That would prevent all Ork vehicles from working at full capacity.


Meanwhile, this thread was from 2011. Let's put it back to bed...