Defeating The Deffrolla

[Angelofblades]

I've been having recent difficulties dealing with deffrollas. Namely 3 of them, zooming across the boaed holding nasty gribbles inside. Standard caveats apply (KFF big mek, nasty nob squad etc)

Flipping through the rulebook for an answer, I came across the "RAMMING A SKIMMER" section.

As I read the rule, on a 3+ the skimmer totally negates the entire ram, including the Deffrolla, since the deffrolla happens during the ram.

At least, that's how it read to me.

Another question is how does this work on skimmer squadrons?
A) If one skimmer is hit in a 2 skimmer squadron?
I) If that one skimmer fails the 3+ Sv, do you distiribute the hits between the two or is it only for that skimmer? If it's only for that skimmer, what happens as the defrolla continues, does the second skimmer get it's 3+ sv? What happens if hits are distirbuted?

Has anyone used a skimmer screen to stop deffrollas like this?

Thoughts?

[DrLove42]

My thoughts on it is that when it hits a Squadron it runs a ramming test on the 1st skimmer. if it fails then the deathroller has hit that 1st skimmer and continues onto the 2nd. If the skimmer passes and "avoids" the hit then the deathrolla stops dead in contact with the object hit

If it stops dead on the 2nd skimmer then it stops at the 2nd, and moves the 1st out of coherancy (to one side of the battlewagons for instance)

As for hits on one not the other i'd keep all the hits on one tank, as thats the one thats been hit. Besides why spread them onto 2 or more targets as instead of killing one you could lose all of them?

What do you play? If its skimmers i'm guessing Eldar, Tau or Dark Eldar....

[Angelofblades]

I do play eldar, but I've gone back to playing my Flesh Tearers (BA).

My buddy's been running a Ghaz wagon list, to get a 28" charge range. I've been looking for things to slow down the dam deffrolla blitz, and I was thinking that a melta speeder squadron screen in front of my LR would do the trick.

I've been running a Shield and Rage libby inside a LR, I was thinking of running the skimmer screen and providing them with a 5+ cover save from the libby inside the LR. Since vehicle squadrons keep 4" coherency, I was thinking I could stretch a 10" buffer zone between my LR + escort rhinos and battlewagons, using speeders as a screen.

[DrLove42]

being marines theres no real "expendable" units you can sacrifice. Once the initial charge is out, they should be easier to kill.

I'd favour some kind of polarizing deployment...put your forces into the extreme corners of your board edge, adn try to get some nice impassable terrain in the way. If you get 1st deployment he needs to split them. if you get 2nd chances are some of them are out in the lurch.

I'm not a marine player, but does anything have a scout move? Deploy them right at the front and scout them forward into the way of the dethrolla? Cheap rhino to hold it back maybe, and limit its charge...I'm just spitballing here, i've never really faced a dethrolla, not a popular choice round here. Only time i have a singlebright lance split it in half...all those expensive nobs, slowly walking across the board....

[DaveLL]

I've been having recent difficulties dealing with deffrollas. Namely 3 of them, zooming across the boaed holding nasty gribbles inside. Standard caveats apply (KFF big mek, nasty nob squad etc)

Flipping through the rulebook for an answer, I came across the "RAMMING A SKIMMER" section.

As I read the rule, on a 3+ the skimmer totally negates the entire ram, including the Deffrolla, since the deffrolla happens during the ram.

At least, that's how it read to me.

Another question is how does this work on skimmer squadrons?
A) If one skimmer is hit in a 2 skimmer squadron?
I) If that one skimmer fails the 3+ Sv, do you distiribute the hits between the two or is it only for that skimmer? If it's only for that skimmer, what happens as the defrolla continues, does the second skimmer get it's 3+ sv? What happens if hits are distirbuted?

Has anyone used a skimmer screen to stop deffrollas like this?

Thoughts?
My assumption has been that it doesn't work like a regular 3+ save. It keeps your opponent from hitting anything on a 3+, but if you roll a 1 or a 2 everything hits as per normal squadron rules. In this case, only one skimmer would get the save, which you might think of objecting to... but I suspect you'd be happier with that than with the idea of each deffrolla hit needing an individual save, which I've heard people arguing for.

[MVBrandt]

If you're not expending your fast attack slots already, there's legitimate argument for taking a trio of heavy flamer plain jane land speeders. You shoudln't be tailoring for Orks, but they still have a place in numerous lists, and as you've figured, they make an excellent road block for the orks. What's better, if one of the wagons successfully rams through and the other two get stopped, breaking up his advance.

I don't know how your list is organized, but the other obvious approach is dividing your army into halves in opposite corners where deployment allows. Side armor shots and divide/conquer are your friends.

What am I doing, I never post in things like this ...

[Nabterayl]

As I read the rule, on a 3+ the skimmer totally negates the entire ram, including the Deffrolla, since the deffrolla happens during the ram.

At least, that's how it read to me.
I think there's room for legalistic debate on that point, though as an opponent (and a strong proponent of deffrolling vehicles since the day the codex came out) I would always allow a skimmer's 3+ dodge roll to negate the deffrolla. (As a matter of purely academic curiosity, consider the Death or Glory! analogy - a successful Death or Glory! attempt stops an attempted tank shock but does not stop the deffrolla hits.)


Another question is how does this work on skimmer squadrons?
A) If one skimmer is hit in a 2 skimmer squadron?
I) If that one skimmer fails the 3+ Sv, do you distiribute the hits between the two or is it only for that skimmer? If it's only for that skimmer, what happens as the defrolla continues, does the second skimmer get it's 3+ sv? What happens if hits are distirbuted?
Quick and dirty answer: The individual skimmer that is Rammed gets to make its dodge roll and if successful stops the entire deffrolla attack. Long and complete answer:

The dodge roll is not technically a "save," which is an important distinction, as saves are taken after penetration rolls (see page 62) and prevent rolls on the vehicle damage table. The dodge roll, by contrast, stops "the collision" (see page 71) and thereby prevents an armor penetration roll from being made in the first place.

So the first question to ask is whether the deffrolla hits are a consequence of the ram or the collision (I personally believe that technically they are due to the ram, by analogy to Death or Glory!, as I said earlier - but as I also said earlier I don't think anybody is likely to play this way. I'm certainly not). If the deffrolla hits are a consequence of the ram, then the skimmer dodge roll has no effect.

If the deffrolla hits are a consequence of the collision, then a successful skimmer dodge roll would prevent the deffrolla from even getting to roll its d6 for the number of hits (because the dodge roll stops the collision).

Either way, if a deffrolla successfully hits a vehicle squadron, the process goes like this (c.f. page 64):
Deffrolla rolls d6 for the number of hits. Let's use 4 as an example.
Armor penetration rolls are made for each hit against the facing armor value of the closest visible vehicle (i.e., against the AV that is in base contact with the deffrolla). Let's say we rammed a squadron of Piranha in the front of one vehicle (front AV of 11) and scored 3 penetrations and 1 glance.
Each penetrating and glancing hit is distributed to one vehicle in the squadron until all vehicles have at least one penetrating or glancing hit, and then the process is repeated. Let's say we have 3 Piranha in the squadron, so we allocate 2 penetrating hits to Piranha A, 1 penetrating hit to Piranha B, and 1 glancing hit to Piranha C.
The individual vehicles take any saves they may have (remember that individual vehicles only receive cover saves from being Obscured if at least 50% of the entire squadron is Obscured). Since cover saves probably don't apply to deffrolla attacks (that's another matter of purely academic interest) and Piranha don't have invulnerable saves, let's assume there are no saves that are applicable.
Each vehicle rolls on the vehicle damage table individually according to the penetrating or glancing hits assigned to it. Let's say Piranha A rolls two Explodes! results, Piranha B rolls one Immobilized result, and Piranha C rolls one Crew Stunned result.
The end result is that Piranha A explodes, Piranha B is wrecked (because it's a vehicle in a squadron), and Piranha C is shaken (because it's a vehicle in a squadron).

[BuFFo]

If a Skimmer rolls a 3+ against a ram attempt, the ram attempt is simply ignored, and everything that goes along with that ram attempt.

[Angelofblades]

@ Nabterayl:

Why would the hits distribute, since squad damage distribution only occurs vs shooting and close combat. (page 64). Ramming occurs in the Movement phase and counts neither as a shooting or CC attack.

Wouldn't the hits all be for that single speeder that failed its 3+ dodge?

Also on Page 71 for ramming a skimmer, it says

"On a 3+ the skimmer avoids the tank, neither vehicle suffers any damage, and the ramming tank stops in its tracks (literally!), its crew confused and disappointed."

Which, if played by your explanation, would be contrary to what you explained...

[Nabterayl]

@ Nabterayl:

Why would the hits distribute, since squad damage distribution only occurs vs shooting and close combat. (page 64). Ramming occurs in the Movement phase and counts neither as a shooting or CC attack.
Page 64 only mentions the distribution of hits that occur as a result of shooting or close combat, you're quite right. However, I think we're justified in reading that as "all hits." The vehicle rules don't tell us how vehicles can take invulnerable saves either, but surely we all agree that they can take them in the same manner as cover saves, by implication? Distributing hits caused in the movement phase seems like the same thing to me. However, I certainly concede your point as a technical matter.


Also on Page 71 for ramming a skimmer, it says

"On a 3+ the skimmer avoids the tank, neither vehicle suffers any damage, and the ramming tank stops in its tracks (literally!), its crew confused and disappointed."

Which, if played by your explanation, would be contrary to what you explained...
It says "neither vehicle suffers any damage," but we need to know from what source. After all, we certainly wouldn't say that a skimmer that makes its dodge roll is immune to damage for the rest of the game! If the vehicle suffers no damage from the ram, then the deffrolla hits would be included. If the vehicle suffers no damage from the collision only, then technically (technically!) the deffrolla hits would still go through.

[Angelofblades]

But arent the deffrolls hits due to the ram, as per Ork FAQ?

So if the dodge would avoide the ram alltogether, would'nt the deffrolla hits be a part of that as well?

[Nabterayl]

But arent the deffrolls hits due to the ram, as per Ork FAQ?
Yes, agreed.


So if the dodge would avoide the ram alltogether, would'nt the deffrolla hits be a part of that as well?
Agreed, if the dodge would avoid the ram altogether. But if we want to get technical about it (and I mean that "if" seriously), I don't think the dodge does avoid the ram. I think it avoids the collision. The ram is already in progress by the time the dodge happens, and consequences have already been irrevocably incurred. What is still up for grabs by the time the ramming vehicle comes into contact with a skimmer is whether or not the collision will be resolved. Just as a tank that is exploded by a successful Death or Glory! attempt has already Tank Shocked the victim unit, so it seems to me that a tank whose collision is foiled by a successful dodge roll has already Rammed the victim skimmer.

[Angelofblades]

Pls, forgive me here if I sound a little dense.


You're attempting that the "ram," and "collision," are two seprate things as a technicality, using D&G post Tank Shock as an analogy or example?

I don't think that's right... umm page 69, for Ramming, interchanged "ram," and "collision," to mean the same thing. Avoidiing one, is avoiding the other.

[Nabterayl]

EDIT: You don't sound dense at all. Please forgive me if I'm not communicating well. Doing my best! Also, this has gotten rather off-topic, but as you're the OP, I don't mind continuing if you think there's something edifying to be gained from doing so.


You're attempting that the "ram," and "collision," are two seprate things as a technicality,
With the emphasis on technicality, yes, I am.


using D&G post Tank Shock as an analogy or example?
Not really as a part of the argument so much as an unambiguous example of a similar mechanic - the Tank Shocked unit is still Tank Shocked, even though its successful Death or Glory! exempts it from the resolution of the Tank Shock.


I don't think that's right... umm page 69, for Ramming, interchanged "ram," and "collision," to mean the same thing. Avoidiing one, is avoiding the other.
Which passages are you thinking of? I'm thinking of the following two, which lead me to conclude that technically ramming and colliding are two separate things:

As page 69 says, "If the ramming tank comes into contact with an enemy vehicle, the collision is resolves as follows." If ram and collision were interchangeable that sentence would make no sense. One can clearly be ramming without colliding with anything, even though one cannot collide with a vehicle without ramming it.

Page 69 does go on to say, "If the vehicle that is rammed is not removed, the rammer halts ... if the rammed vehicle is removed ... the rammer continues its move, until it reaches ... another enemy (which it will ... ram again)!" The sentence certainly works fine if we read them as interchangeable, but it also works fine if we read them as separate.

[Angelofblades]

Ok, I see where you're comign from now.

So then how does the deffrolla continue damage. It's still dependent on the fact that the initial damage is done, in regards to the original ram. But if that damage itself is negated by the dodge, wouldn't the rest of it stil lbe negated as well?

[Nabterayl]

Well, again emphasizing the extremely technical nature of this distinction, I'd say it works as follows:

The ork codex says that if a deffrolla-equipped vehicle tank rams an enemy vehicle (I'm collapsing a couple steps of the argument here), it inflicts d6 S10 hits. So all we need to know is whether the battlewagon has rammed its victim. My contention is that the battlewagon has technically "rammed" its victim the instant it comes into contact with it, thus triggering the d6 S10 hits. Ramming its victim also triggers a collision, which is resolved according to page 69. It seems to me that when page 71 says "On a 1 or 2 the collision proceeds as normal," it means that the next sentence applies only to suffering no damage from the collision.

EDIT: Let me also state that I see where you're coming from (i.e., that "neither vehicle suffers any damage" could mean "neither vehicle suffers any damage from the ram" as opposed to "neither vehicle suffers any damage from the collision"), and I think the case is ambiguous enough that I would play it your way rather than mine if my opponent didn't already think that you can't dodge a deffrolla.

[MarshalAdamar]

Something to think about. When you ram the vehicle must move its full movement and can ram other vehicles in the path if the first vehicle is destroyed.

So if the hits from the deff rolla are not distributed then following the rules if the first land speeder fails its 3+ and is takes say 4 hits from the DR and is destroyed or wrecked then the battle wagon continues in a straight line to its full movement. If it then contacts the next speeder that speeded will take the full D6 hits again and if it fails too so on and so forth.

[Nabterayl]

That's true even if the hits are distributed, really (although perhaps less likely to happen).

[Big mek]

I think there's room for legalistic debate on that point, though as an opponent (and a strong proponent of deffrolling vehicles since the day the codex came out) I would always allow a skimmer's 3+ dodge roll to negate the deffrolla. (As a matter of purely academic curiosity, consider the Death or Glory! analogy - a successful Death or Glory! attempt stops an attempted tank shock but does not stop the deffrolla hits.)


Quick and dirty answer: The individual skimmer that is Rammed gets to make its dodge roll and if successful stops the entire deffrolla attack. Long and complete answer:

The dodge roll is not technically a "save," which is an important distinction, as saves are taken after penetration rolls (see page 62) and prevent rolls on the vehicle damage table. The dodge roll, by contrast, stops "the collision" (see page 71) and thereby prevents an armor penetration roll from being made in the first place.

So the first question to ask is whether the deffrolla hits are a consequence of the ram or the collision (I personally believe that technically they are due to the ram, by analogy to Death or Glory!, as I said earlier - but as I also said earlier I don't think anybody is likely to play this way. I'm certainly not). If the deffrolla hits are a consequence of the ram, then the skimmer dodge roll has no effect.

If the deffrolla hits are a consequence of the collision, then a successful skimmer dodge roll would prevent the deffrolla from even getting to roll its d6 for the number of hits (because the dodge roll stops the collision).

Either way, if a deffrolla successfully hits a vehicle squadron, the process goes like this (c.f. page 64):
Deffrolla rolls d6 for the number of hits. Let's use 4 as an example.
Armor penetration rolls are made for each hit against the facing armor value of the closest visible vehicle (i.e., against the AV that is in base contact with the deffrolla). Let's say we rammed a squadron of Piranha in the front of one vehicle (front AV of 11) and scored 3 penetrations and 1 glance.
Each penetrating and glancing hit is distributed to one vehicle in the squadron until all vehicles have at least one penetrating or glancing hit, and then the process is repeated. Let's say we have 3 Piranha in the squadron, so we allocate 2 penetrating hits to Piranha A, 1 penetrating hit to Piranha B, and 1 glancing hit to Piranha C.
The individual vehicles take any saves they may have (remember that individual vehicles only receive cover saves from being Obscured if at least 50% of the entire squadron is Obscured). Since cover saves probably don't apply to deffrolla attacks (that's another matter of purely academic interest) and Piranha don't have invulnerable saves, let's assume there are no saves that are applicable.
Each vehicle rolls on the vehicle damage table individually according to the penetrating or glancing hits assigned to it. Let's say Piranha A rolls two Explodes! results, Piranha B rolls one Immobilized result, and Piranha C rolls one Crew Stunned result.
The end result is that Piranha A explodes, Piranha B is wrecked (because it's a vehicle in a squadron), and Piranha C is shaken (because it's a vehicle in a squadron).


Im going to support that way of doing it, it seems most realistic to me, and not only cause im an ork player ;)

[Torcano]

As page 69 says, "If the ramming tank comes into contact with an enemy vehicle, the collision is resolves as follows." If ram and collision were interchangeable that sentence would make no sense. One can clearly be ramming without colliding with anything, even though one cannot collide with a vehicle without ramming it.


I fail to see how it would make no sense if they were interchangeable. Let me show (putting ram in for collision):

"If the ramming tank comes into contact with an enemy vehicle, the ram is resolved as follows."

Makes perfect sense. In fact, I would contend the exact quote you are using is definitive evidence that they are the same thing.

Oh and also this: If a ram/collision are separate, and a skimmer gets "hit" by a ram before making dodge roll....it makes no sense. Wouldn't the only logical thing to happen be that the skimmer dodges the entire ram?

Reason being, its impossible to imagine a Wave Serpent get rammed, and only after contact is made attempt evasive maneuvers. The only logical scenario I can imagine is that the pilot dodges the ramming vehicle entirely. Once the WS is hit, personally I feel it would be too late to dodge anything (realism-wise).

p.s. Also just interested in the purely academic/technical questions here.

[Nabterayl]

I fail to see how it would make no sense if they were interchangeable. Let me show (putting ram in for collision):

"If the ramming tank comes into contact with an enemy vehicle, the ram is resolved as follows."
Yeah, but go the other way around:

"Colliding is a special type of tank shock move and is executed the same way ... units other than vehicles in the way of a colliding tank are tank shocked as normal."

Now, certainly you could draft that way, if you wanted to give an unnatural meaning to the term "colliding." But I think it makes more sense as English to say that a tank is ramming from the moment it declares a ram, and a collision is what happens when a ramming tank comes into contact with a vehicle, which is how it appears to be written.


Oh and also this: If a ram/collision are separate, and a skimmer gets "hit" by a ram before making dodge roll....it makes no sense. Wouldn't the only logical thing to happen be that the skimmer dodges the entire ram?
From a physical standpoint yes, but from a logical standpoint I'm not so sure. After all, if the tank is not the "ramming tank," what triggers the dodge? Yes, the rules say "attempting to ram," but they go on to explain in more detail that the ramming tank comes into contact as normal, and then the dodge occurs.

To look at it another way, since technically all we need to know is whether the skimmer has been tank shocked or not (as that is the term the ork codex uses), when would we say that a skimmer has been tank shocked? Non-vehicle units count as tank shocked the instant the vehicle comes into contact with them (which is what triggers their Morale check). Is not a skimmer tank shocked the moment a ramming tank comes into contact with it (which is what triggers its dodge roll)? Page 71 even says that if the dodge roll is passed, "the ramming tank" stops in its tracks - that looks to me like a ram has still occurred.

[scadugenga]

If a Skimmer rolls a 3+ against a ram attempt, the ram attempt is simply ignored, and everything that goes along with that ram attempt.

I like this simple, easy and efficient answer.


That being said--to avoid Deffrolla's and KFF, use something with Crack Shot.

Pisses orks off, it does. ;)