How many meltabombs can I use in assault?

[Terminus]

Dedicated melee anti-tank units can already evaporate tanks in melee, no need to force the same disadvantage by letting everyone do it. Ski mask above was complaining that krak grenades are "useless against AV13" and "can't even destroy a vehicle in one shot", as if a free piece of gear should be able to do so. Yet discounts that those same krak grenades make vehicles with AV12 or less evaporate in one phase of combat against any infantry units, and guardsmen can murder daemon princes with impunity.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

 

Nice terminus, still not acknowledging that "throw" doesn't actually mean anything lol

Because it doesn't mean anything, as it is not a game-defined term, and GW CLEARLY AND UNQUIVOCALLY STATED WHAT THEY MEANT.  What you are not acknowledging is that your entire argument just boils down to the GW FAQ being a "draft", and essentially using a technicality to string along using an unintended advantage.

 

That's fine, and it's not worth my time to fight about it, but that is the case. Like I said, enjoy the autumn months of grenade-spam, because winter is coming.

 

 

 

Not everything is based upon original intent and they definitely have changed how some things work for whatever reason.

[Thanos33]

Regarding MC's and GMC's

MC's are not powerful though, I'm not sure where this idea MC's were powerful comes from (this is not 6th edition). As well, I've actually only once had a GMC survive, you can deal a wound to any GMC with any weapon 6-7 strength and above and they have a 3 up invul. 1 in 3 wounds is getting through on average. GMC's are also now limited to 12" movement even with the wings. I think people get scared when they see big or rather big and cool things on the table and forget to possibly ask how to deal with it. The Ordinatus is one of those things and yet if you can charge it with melta-bombs, chain-fists and any Knight with melee D it will die.

Most MC's die in a turn or two in a game of 30K and the Mechanicum ones I rarely use because there mobility is a huge question as is their damage potential from far distances. If they do manage to survive it's because I've taken extreme care to have my opponent point out each and every single unit that may have Fearless as to ensure my Fear test has a chance of succeeding so I just don't die instantly off a counterattack in close combat with melta-bombs, first game of 30K with Skimask Mohawk taught me just that. Now the MC's I play are usually minimal 1-2 in a 2500 point game and they always deep strike so I can have the field spread apart to minimize their chances of dying. I have to set up the entire scope of the field just to use a model that's 300ish points effectively. They can still be effective but you have to plan around each and ever piece on the playing area to do so.

Fateweaver being the exception to this rule of course as he's flying all game out of necessity and is really an abomination to rules and playtesting in any context of any game. He doesn't need to be that good and you should seriously question people playing with him.


Regarding Melta-bombs

The FAQ limiting melta-bombs to a single use in combat in its context of the relevant strength of the item being used makes sense. Because of the AP and Armourbane at the high strength level you don't need many more than 3-4 Marines (max) to kill any non-SuperHeavy vehicle. So you can't even peel a unit to a lesser amount and survive. If you get hit your vehicle is gone. That seems like a very huge inherent flaw in design. Like I mentioned above its far too good for 5 points and even at 50 points for 10 it's far too good.

If it was as illustrated above a 5 strength AP 2 weapon with Armourbane it would still have the same effectiveness against light vehicles, strip hull points from medium and high AV vehicles. And at 5 strength you have a "a chance" of doing damage to monsters. Most are in the 6-7 toughness range so your going to be wounding on 5's and 6's which makes sense as at AP 2 your going through their armour relegating them to 5-6 invulnerable saves.

Now that being said the FAQ isn't legal but it does validate the strength of the weaponry being used and being used en masse and messing up the entire scope of the game. I charge your Monster or it charges me and your Monster dies, I charge your tank and your tank dies. There is no need to roll in the scope of the current statline of a melta-bomb and therein lies the issue.

You either nerf the item or you nerf the availability to get it en masse. Both deal with the situation at hand and both are appropriate responses to the issue.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

So says the Mechanicum player .

[SkimaskMohawk]

Dedicated melee anti-tank units can already evaporate tanks in melee, no need to force the same disadvantage by letting everyone do it. Ski mask above was complaining that krak grenades are "useless against AV13" and "can't even destroy a vehicle in one shot", as if a free piece of gear should be able to do so. Yet discounts that those same krak grenades make vehicles with AV12 or less evaporate in one phase of combat against any infantry units, and guardsmen can murder daemon princes with impunity.

 

 

Yes, my full statement was that krak grenades can pen rhino hulls and speeders. People do take rhinos, so yay you can inflict a hull point more easily. But people usually have spartans, contemptors, leviathans, deredeos, sicarans, fire raptors and pods more than the amount of rhinos. At best you can glance on a 6, so after 3 turns of combat your squad can kill the rhino on the objective. Against all the more common vehicles they're useless. Now your squad is an absolute joke, you better put your objectives on upper floors of ruins or you'll just get tank shocked off of them by that rhino turn after turn 

 

Your incredulity about krak grenades killing a vehicle in one shot seems kind of odd, considering that they were able to do so since at least 4th ed, which is also when it transitioned into free wargear. It gets even more confusing when the devs started writing the rules in 5th and then adapted them for 6th, where you could still kill vehicles off of one pen. Are you equally against missile launchers having the opportunity to kill vehicles in one shot, or are you content with marines having better odds of killing a land speeder in melee with their hands than shooting a krak missile into it?

[Terminus]

Krak grenades could destroy vehicles when they couldn't be glanced to death, the fact that you ignore this key point makes your whole argument disingenuous gibberish.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Krak grenades could destroy vehicles when they couldn't be glanced to death, the fact that you ignore this key point makes your whole argument disingenuous gibberish. 

 

It appears someone completely forgot about 6th edition, the edition where both happened. 

[IronDrake28]

Guys, you don't need to debate with snide remarks and sarcasm to get your point across, and evidently it isn't working anyway!

 

Remember, it's just toy soldiers! (For some people ;) )

[Terminus]

 

Krak grenades could destroy vehicles when they couldn't be glanced to death, the fact that you ignore this key point makes your whole argument disingenuous gibberish. 

 

 

It appears someone completely forgot about 6th edition, the edition where both happened. 

 

 

The 7th rule is pretty simple: "Some grenades can be used to make shooting attacks or attacks in the Fight sub-phase, albeit to different effect. Only one grenade (of any type) can be thrown by a unit per phase."  This is all in one sentence, in one section, and no amount of linguistic gymnastics make the second sentence apply to only half of the first.  But people latched on to how things "used to be" in 6th (which introduced throwing grenades), where it was specifically only limited to 1 per Shooting phase.  Then a few folks actually read the new rulebook, and ask GW about it, they say "yes, we really did mean what we wrote", and suddenly everyone loses their minds.

 

Like I said before, and this will be my final participation since we've been going in circles for at least the last page and a half.  You are playing by a house rule, both from a RAW and RAI stand-point, and that is fine, but a houserule is all it is.

[Slips]

Alright, guys, if y'all are unable to keep things from getting confrontational or, at the very least, agreeing to disagree and to leave it at that, we expect any further discussion to occur in a respectful tone.

 

If this is something that cannot occur, then I suggest using the boards ignore function and just avoid each other from here on out.

[Ishagu]

Terminus has pretty eloquently clarified the situation so this topic could be closed?

[noigrim]

locals here are saying just one per unit

[Charlo]

locals here are saying just one per unit

 

And locals in a lot of other places are saying multiple.

 

Play what your meta agree's on after a big meaty discussion :)

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Grenade nerf is just one of many dumb things in the GW FAQ's. 

 

My local group uses them, because we can see the writing on the wall. Why wait to be disappointed in a few months? 

 

Hasn't overly affected my armies to be honest. Thallax were bad already, the meltabomb nerf is just salt in the wound really (Ferrox+heavy chainblade is just straight better now). Plus FW already gave Mechanicum Ursarax and Arlatax to punch tanks to death in melee. Due to Demolisher/Medusa spam locally I take Arlatax. 

 

You can choose to not use the new FAQ of course. But just be aware that's as much a house rule as anything else in this game. For example, my local group completely ignores the Death from the Skies supplement (because its garbage and just complicates the game), just as we ignore the equally stupid FW Flyer FAQ. They're 'official', but nobody locally wants yet another phase to the game. 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

One of the great things about 30k versus 40k is it's not geared towards hyper competitive WAAC tournament play so house rules are s lot easier to use.

[Xenith]

throwing would be a shooting attack

 

You can throw a punch, though.

 

 

One of the great things about 30k versus 40k is it's not geared towards hyper competitive WAAC tournament play so house rules are s lot easier to use.

 

I think you might have that the wrong way round.

 

30k is great for competitive play due to the better balance - this is the thing tourney players scream for, yes?

 

Comparitively, 40k is better for friendly play and house ruling, as you can take whatever the hell you like, and ignore the rules you dont. 

[Terminus]

There is no real balance in 30K either, there are clearly better choices in every slot, and there are some people that abuse that relentlessly (like quad mortar and phosphex medusa spam some people advocate in the list subforum).  What keeps 30K fun is the unspoken gentlemanly agreement most folks have, but with the increasing easy entry into the game, the demographics are changing. 

 

It's just the spectrum of insanity in 40K is on a completely different scale. Powerful in 30K are Veteran Tactical Marines in Drop Pods or Horus leading a pack of Justaerin, stuff you can wrap your head around.  Powerful in 40K is a gaggle of Space Marine heroes leading Centurions backed up by Eldar wraith engines and flying Hive Tyrants. 

[Ishagu]

1 as per FAQ.

It's called a Draft, but it's been long enough.

[Nusquam]

The FAQ defintiely nerf'd squadwide meltabombs. I have yet to meet anyone who is willing to play it that way.

But the BRB says you can only throw one per phase. I accept that. One throw per phase. Then in melee you clamp them, not throw them. The BRB goes out of it's way to differentiate this. If throw is a technical term then so is clamping. Which has no limit. In order to have a limit on something it must be able to be done. Thus you can throw grenades, one per unit per phase. But against AV/(G)MCs you clamp. It's seems pretty silly, sure. But if we're getting technical...

[Ishagu]

This isn't an Errata, it's a clarification.

 

If you try to use more than one Grenade in combat, or melta bomb, it's cheating.

[Slips]

My problem with that is the following:

 

Page 180, 7th ed. BRB:

 

"Some grenades can be used to make shooting attacks or attacks in the Fight sub-phase, albeit to different effect. Only one grenade (of any type) can be thrown by a unit per phase."

 

But the, the literal section underneath called "Vehicles, Gun Emplacements and Monstrous Creatures" then adds a bit more:

 

"Some Grenades can be used against vehicles, gun emplacements (pg109) and/or Monstrous Creatures (including FMC[sic] in Gliding mode), but have to be clamped in place to maximise effect. Thus they are not being thrown. All buildings are attacked in close combat as if they were vehicles and therefore any grenade that can be used to attack a vehicle in close combat can also be used against a building.

 

A model can use such a Grenade as a Melee Weapon, but can only ever make one attack, regardless of the number of Attacks on its profile or any bonuses. [...]"

 

To me, at least, this illustrates that there is indeed a difference between throwing a Grenade in the Assault Phase and Clamping them on or they would not have made the distinction to begin with.

 

ADDITIONALLY, each grenade profile present on page 180 and 181 has 2 sections per grenade: Shooting and Assault.

 

The action of Throwing a Grenade is only ever mentioned in the shooting portion and the only shooting you perform in the Assault phase is in Overwatch.

[Nusquam]

This 'FAQ/Errata' uses both terms interchangeably(incorrectly) in different places. There's no real way to be sure it isn't one or the other. Plus it's a draft.

 

The problem with the BRB is it doesn't clarify the definition of 'throw' explicitly. My logical interpretation is that it is a shooting attack; Thus why it says each phase instead of just the shooting phase is you don't have a loophole allowing you to throw a whole units worth of grenades in overwatch. So you can only ever throw(shoot) one per unit in the shooting phase and then again in the assault phase during overwatch. Then in CC you are clamping, which has no limit.

[Charlo]

I would also say that it costing 50pts to give a unit of breachers melta bombs the intention that everyone can use them.

[Terminus]

All this continuing debate is silly.  We always have RAW vs. RAI arguments, but here we have a clear statement of RAI and a clarification of what they mean by RAW. But because it's "draft" status, people are kicking and screaming against it.  Squad-wide grenades are dumb.

[Brofist]

It would be an easier case to argue if the publishing entity wasn't an entirely separate division of the company with a completely different writing team. That's where the disconnect is.