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.

Not to mention that cracking any vehicle with a Klaw more or less means dead Orks as the trade.

 matphat wrote:
Not to mention that cracking any vehicle with a Klaw more or less means dead Orks as the trade.

Orks should get FNP from vehicle explosions that they cause, and shouldn't care if boys die in the process. . It's all good fun and explosions, what's not to like?

Tankbustas at least need something to protect them against explosions. They are after all veteran tank hunters. If they die to the first tank they kill, they don't really stand a chance of becoming veterans.

There haven't been any rumors for months. Can we let this die?

 pretre wrote:
There haven't been any rumors for months. Can we let this die?

Even though the last rumors were dated 4 November of this year?

Watch... you lock this thread, three hours later there'll be fresh rumors popping up elsewhere.

4 November was 52 days ago or almost 2 months. Hence months.

And that was also 3 pages ago. We need to put this one to bed.

Also, they don't let me lock threads. I'm not a mod.

 pretre wrote:
4 November was 52 days ago or almost 2 months. Hence months.

And that was also 3 pages ago. We need to put this one to bed.

Also, they don't let me lock threads. I'm not a mod.

I find your lack of faith disturbing...

Three pages of speculation isnt a bad thing... gives us some place to discuss the rumors posted and hope ourselves... dont get that taken away from us...

Never said you were... it was a blanket statement... dont be so analytical

I sincerely apologize for my moment of weakness.
I would never have thought that I would post something so irrelevant in this thread, but apparently this is what playing a 4th edition codex does to you.

All the rumors don't seem to address the huge fail that is 6th ed. How do Orks cross no mans land? will there be broader access to kustomforcefields so you still have one after first turn? Will trukks stop being a coffin! Seriously you loss 4 boyz even when the trukk is glanced to death. Trukks would function as intended if they had AV 14 13 10 & a single hullpoint

Yorkskargrim wrote:
All the rumors don't seem to address the huge fail that is 6th ed. How do Orks cross no mans land? will there be broader access to kustomforcefields so you still have one after first turn? Will trukks stop being a coffin! Seriously you loss 4 boyz even when the trukk is glanced to death. Trukks would function as intended if they had AV 14 13 10 & a single hullpoint

The trukks' main problem is that it doesn't carry near enough boyz for it to be viable compared to footslogging given its price in comparison to other transports and the way ramshackle works. If ramshackle is overhauled to something closer to Forgeworld's rules where due to it's haphazard nature of composition that you're just as likely to just knock off some random plates bolted on as you are to hit its engine which is reflected by a 5+ invuln. save against shooting attacks with exceptions towards weapons with sufficient force to pound it into scrap like Ordnance or AP2-1 weaponry. Throw in a Ramshackle table that just lets it get wrecked rather than explodes most of the time and jack up its transport capacity from 12 to 16 and I could see it being a much more viable choice in lists and allow more Kult of Speed lists not dependent on slow-poke battlewagons. This way it's much harder to glance it to death with things like bolters while not giving it too much protection against dedicated tank-busting weapons which can handily destroy it as it should be.

Agree.

Being allowed to field two trukks per troops choice would also fix some of the problems, maybe knock a few points off in the progress, or give away the ram for free. The model looks stupid without anyways.
It would create a huge crater in everyone's wallet though, considering that you could field 12 trukks without resorting to nobz. Damn, I hope GW doesn't read this

 Jidmah wrote:
Damn, I hope GW doesn't read this

ahhhh that moment when the insane realize that they are crazy,.... but can't do a thing about it! I'm right there with you.

 Bonde wrote:
I sincerely apologize for my moment of weakness.
I would never have thought that I would post something so irrelevant in this thread, but apparently this is what playing a 4th edition codex does to you.

Couldn't agree more. How about giving us Greenskins a break Pretre? We don't have much else to do, or talk about.

Since Orks are going to get their update after other armies have had two, or even three updates before us, I think we deserve a little slack.

 matphat wrote:

 Bonde wrote:
I sincerely apologize for my moment of weakness.
I would never have thought that I would post something so irrelevant in this thread, but apparently this is what playing a 4th edition codex does to you.

Couldn't agree more. How about giving us Greenskins a break Pretre? We don't have much else to do, or talk about.

Since Orks are going to get their update after other armies have had two, or even three updates before us, I think we deserve a little slack.

There's a sub-forum for discussing armies. In fact several of them. It is not the news and rumors sub-forum.

 pretre wrote:
There haven't been any rumors for months. Can we let this die?

I think that's best for now. As mentioned we have other boards where people can speculate or wishlist.

Hopefully we'll see some more substantial and worthwhile rumours soon.