Tau Empire Codex 2013 | Army Builder Program
Dark Angels Codex 2013
Chaos Daemons Codex 2013
Chaos Space Marines Codex 2012

Warhammer 40k Forum Tau Online

 

Warhammer 40K Forum

The big Topic: Deffrolla
Reply
Old 12 May 2010, 01:47   #1 (permalink)
Kroot Shaper
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 49
Send a message via MSN to TauGamer
Default The big Topic: Deffrolla

So, I have been browsing the forums and I haven't found a strait answer to the Deffrolla tank shock debate. Does it effect tanks with its d6 hits, or is that just rubbish? please answer this with an official answer, or if their is a FAQ, please tell me. Thanks!
__________________
98% of the world plays World of Warcraft or any other type of MMO. If your one of the 2% that doesn't, post this into your signature.

92% of teens have moved onto rap. If you are part of the 8% that still listen to real music, copy and paste this into your sig


(\_/) this is bunny.
(0.o) please copy and paste this into your sig and
'(__)' help him achieve world domination.
TauGamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 May 2010, 01:57   #2 (permalink)
Shas'O
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,741
Default Re: The big Topic: Deffrolla

Your answer is in the Ork FAQ. You can find it here. Put simply, a Ram is a 'special type' of Tank Shock and as such the D6 S10 hits are inflicted upon an enemy vehicle.
Droids_Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 May 2010, 23:50   #3 (permalink)
Shas'La
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 319
Default Re: The big Topic: Deffrolla

Me and my friends find it to be total rubbish, seeing as a ram and tank shock are two totally different scenarios by the book. Tank shock is strictly troop oriented and the vehicle immediately stops when it reaches a vehicle or other obstruction. Where as a ram is oriented towards vehicles. Also Ramming disallows your vehicle to shoot while tank shocking still allows the vehicle to shoot.
The FaQ does however spell it out that it does work against vehicles, which kinda negates the need for reinforced ram armor or whatever the orks get. Even the local ork players think its a dumb ruling, but hey whatever.
Ekiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 May 2010, 02:16   #4 (permalink)
Shas'O
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,814
Default Re: The big Topic: Deffrolla

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekiel
Me and my friends find it to be total rubbish, seeing as a ram and tank shock are two totally different scenarios by the book. Tank shock is strictly troop oriented and the vehicle immediately stops when it reaches a vehicle or other obstruction. Where as a ram is oriented towards vehicles. Also Ramming disallows your vehicle to shoot while tank shocking still allows the vehicle to shoot.
The FaQ does however spell it out that it does work against vehicles, which kinda negates the need for reinforced ram armor or whatever the orks get. Even the local ork players think its a dumb ruling, but hey whatever.
You'll have to learn to live with it, like the rest of us. As much as GW screws things up, they have done worse things than not follow the rules of English.

I personally find it hilarious since their supposed to be a British bunch, yet Americans get ragged on for their "shoddy" English. Had they gotten some decent editors beforehand we wouldn't have need of 90% of the errata/Faqs out there. XD
__________________


Seventh Sanctum signature oddities.
Alignment: Neutral Pessimistic
Area of Magical Study: Practical Chronomancy
Favorite Spells: Divine Spell of the Cotton Candy Golem and Field of Bacon.

Proud supporter of Joe Wood!

Makes this your one good deed a day.
http://www.thehungersite.com/
enderwiggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 May 2010, 02:56   #5 (permalink)
Ethereal
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18,087
Default Re: The big Topic: Deffrolla

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekiel
Me and my friends find it to be total rubbish, seeing as a ram and tank shock are two totally different scenarios by the book. Tank shock is strictly troop oriented and the vehicle immediately stops when it reaches a vehicle or other obstruction.
You might keep in mind that when the Ork Codex was released, "Ramming" did not exist and you could Tank Shock vehicles...

The rulebook states that Ramming is a type of Tank Shock move, and that is what the FAQ confirmed. Which makes the Deffrolla slightly better than it was in 4th Edition in that it can attack Armor 14 vehicles, and slightly worse in that it will take a hit in return.

For as much as people freaked out about it, I haven't found it to be all that important. It is essentially a 0" weapon on a vehicle that only moves 13" a turn (giving up its shooting to do so). It has good strength but it doesn't negate armor. You are going to see it coming. Compared to the vehicles in the 5th Edition books it is actually pretty tame.
khanaris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 May 2010, 03:07   #6 (permalink)
Shas'La
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 319
Default Re: The big Topic: Deffrolla

I guess you're right as it's not that bad...but the fact that it can be anywhere between 1 to 6 railgun hits is kinda upsetting to a tau player. Even slow moving monoliths can get rolled over (heh heh) by one. But yes, I know I have to deal and it's all good in the end. Was just a minor vent.
Ekiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 May 2010, 03:13   #7 (permalink)
Ethereal
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18,087
Default Re: The big Topic: Deffrolla

The Monolith is a skimmer, though. On a 3+ it simply dodges out of the way as per the normal Ramming rules. The same will happen with Valkyries, Land Speeders, and every Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Tau vehicle. The biggest target of the Deffrolla is the Land Raider. But given how few options Ork players have to deal with Land Raiders, I think that is more than fair.

The Railgun might give up a cover save, and sometimes it will miss. But it also has range and AP1. As a Tau player I would be a lot more upset about some of the changes to the Guard and Tyranid books.
khanaris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 May 2010, 03:22   #8 (permalink)
Shas'O
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,814
Default Re: The big Topic: Deffrolla

Quote:
Originally Posted by Khanaris
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekiel
Me and my friends find it to be total rubbish, seeing as a ram and tank shock are two totally different scenarios by the book. Tank shock is strictly troop oriented and the vehicle immediately stops when it reaches a vehicle or other obstruction.
You might keep in mind that when the Ork Codex was released, "Ramming" did not exist and you could Tank Shock vehicles...

The rulebook states that Ramming is a type of Tank Shock move, and that is what the FAQ confirmed. Which makes the Deffrolla slightly better than it was in 4th Edition in that it can attack Armor 14 vehicles, and slightly worse in that it will take a hit in return.

For as much as people freaked out about it, I haven't found it to be all that important. It is essentially a 0" weapon on a vehicle that only moves 13" a turn (giving up its shooting to do so). It has good strength but it doesn't negate armor. You are going to see it coming. Compared to the vehicles in the 5th Edition books it is actually pretty tame.
The FAQ clarified, it did not confirm. It was almost universally the Ork players that saw it that way since they stood to gain the most from the decision.
Otherwise there would never had been a need for the FAQ/errata in the first place.
It's like GW putting out a custom color they call Blue, that is very clearly Red, then going back and re-affirming that it's Blue. They control their IP rules, not those of the English language.
[hr]
It's also good to point out that Orks were designed (like Daemons) with 5th edition playing principles in mind and were certainly around for the playtesting of it.

I do agree that Deffrollas are not as big a worry though, it's just that many of us feel it's underpointed for the potential effect. Much the same way many feel Seekers/HK's are overcosted for the potential effect. :P

Your point about 5th editions curve has a valid place though in this discussion. You could almost make an entire new topic from what that provokes really.
I merely wonder how much more the game can take of such units/rules/special characters (not Ork specifically for these) that can be justified by merely later, more powerful rules/codices. :huh:
__________________


Seventh Sanctum signature oddities.
Alignment: Neutral Pessimistic
Area of Magical Study: Practical Chronomancy
Favorite Spells: Divine Spell of the Cotton Candy Golem and Field of Bacon.

Proud supporter of Joe Wood!

Makes this your one good deed a day.
http://www.thehungersite.com/
enderwiggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 May 2010, 13:08   #9 (permalink)
Shas'La
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 319
Default Re: The big Topic: Deffrolla

Guard and Tyranids, I won't even go there lol. To almost all the updated codexes for that matter :P C'mon Tau lol ;D
Ekiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 May 2010, 14:58   #10 (permalink)
Ethereal
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18,087
Default Re: The big Topic: Deffrolla

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter Morgan
The FAQ clarified, it did not confirm. It was almost universally the Ork players that saw it that way since they stood to gain the most from the decision.
Otherwise there would never had been a need for the FAQ/errata in the first place.
Clarified by confirming what had been argued by one camp before. The point is that it was not a change nor an errata. A few folks understood the wording one way, and a few others understood it another. The FAQ was needed because it wasn't obvious to anyone who did have a reasonable grip of the English language. It would be more like GW coming out with a shade of purple and half the players wanting to call it red and the other half calling it blue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter Morgan
It's also good to point out that Orks were designed (like Daemons) with 5th edition playing principles in mind and were certainly around for the playtesting of it.
Unlike Daemons, the Ork book had to be viable for many months before 5th Edition was released, and went to the printers while the main rulebook was still in revision. So it would not have been reasonable for the Deff Rolla to contain references to rules that might not exist for half a year and might have changed or been removed. A basic idea of what changes would exist in 5th was on the table long before Orks. But you can not assume that the wording would be the same if it were to be released today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter Morgan
I do agree that Deffrollas are not as big a worry though, it's just that many of us feel it's underpointed for the potential effect. Much the same way many feel Seekers/HK's are overcosted for the potential effect. :P
I felt the same way originally, but so far I have found it to be a case where the theory doesn't really match the table. It is underpointed if you assume that you will be able to get it off more than once or twice in a game. In practice, it is fairly difficult to do that. The potential damage you can cause with a Deffrolla is high, but your ability to reach that potential requires a very specific set of conditions and a lot of luck. On its own the Deffrolla is cheap. But the vehicles you mount it on are vulnerable and relatively expensive for Orks. And both of them are extremely vulnerable in 5th Edition once they get close to the enemy, particularly the open-topped Battlewagon. You don't pay points for the maximum damage an upgrade or weapon can cause. You pay points for what it is likely to do.
khanaris is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Deffrolla: Can they destroy vehicles? crisis_vyper Orks 2 14 Jan 2010 18:11
Deffrolla question and ramming Atlantis Orks 2 07 Nov 2009 18:54
my ork blog battlewagon with deffrolla now up 13/06 cadius Project Logs 13 13 Jul 2009 19:33
Deffrolla khanaris Conversion 17 04 Jun 2009 06:01
Deffrolla? Darth_Fraggle Orks 1 07 Apr 2009 09:56