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.

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Warpaint Studio wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Aduro wrote:Marnius Calgar.

Yeah, or maybe two PFs are an option in the new Marine dex. *Shrug*

ok and that comes out how far after?

and that changes the other marine armies how ?

what im saying is they are makign changes to the game that no one can use for several months aftre its release... i wouldnt want to pl;ay 5th edition as a space amrine until they release the new dex

with wolves sposibly comming out end of year i hope they address this there

Marines will be out in Sept, possibly Oct. That's around 60-90 days after 5th....not exactly a long time..

FYI, I would rather they just get rid of any bonus attacks when you have a PF. Hidden PFs have become weaker with allocation rules and reduction of attacks....but as a Marine player I think it was needed. Two PF is just covering a model/special character/possible strange option so they don't have to FAQ it (Probably).

yes lets not talk about how long it will take to roll all those seperate rolls

2-3 months after a rule has been changed is still a bad decision by gw.. i could say they need a faq saying that all armies can now buy a second power fist at cost plus x.. but waiting for faq's is like trying not to breathe you can do it but youll just die trying

except there are specific rules for dark angels and blood angels that say you can only take 1

Warpaint Studio wrote:
yes lets not talk about how long it will take to roll all those seperate rolls

2-3 months after a rule has been changed is still a bad decision by gw.. i could say they need a faq saying that all armies can now buy a second power fist at cost plus x.. but waiting for faq's is like trying not to breathe you can do it but youll just die trying

except there are specific rules for dark angels and blood angels that say you can only take 1

We've found wound allocation an adjustment but not a breaking rule by any means. Usually when you need it, the squad is near dead (Which means large number of dice in few rolls) or HTH. Either way, it's not as 'common' as I initially thought it would be. Interesting effect though, as it makes squads with dual specials weaker (Such as high AP plasma)....but 'more shot less ap' weaponry better. I think I dig that so far.

I think I'm miscommunicating my point regarding two PF. I believe they intended the rule to be "No additional attacks with a PF and close combat weapon" as they found it too strong in 4th (It is). However, perhaps someone spoke up and said "Well Character X can have two PF and we will allow Captains that option too...which means we'll have to FAQ it".

Warpaint Studio:

I appreciate the new information you are sharing with us, but please take a little extra time and effort when writing your posts to ensure that they are coherent and contain proper spelling and grammar.

On a forum, the only means of communication is via the written word and when a whole series of posts in a thread is difficult to read it is highly impolite to your fellow members.

Warpaint Studio wrote:Dude i play eldar along with other armies

Yea? Join the club, I'm using them this year in GT's myself.

it wont affect me that much at all.. especially since i cant be killed on a glancing shot

ill gladly take a 4+ cover save to ignore you plasma pistol on my rear armor or wherever

Yea? ....and in this current edition, you dont have to risk the 50% chance....plasmas have a snowballs chance of doing anything...ever...so long as the vehicle moves over 12". (what you need for your 4+) Falcons are nerfed. Period. Not better, nerfed! If you cant see that, you dont know vehicular rules OR how to properly use a falcon.

there are serious advantages given to the eldar in this edition

Ok, so nothing has changed. Eldar have ALWAYS had a penchant for having huge advantages within certain army selections in regards to their appropriate battlefeild applications.

i know i have read it.. i can see the implecations of how much an advantage the skimming tanks now have over everyone else

So long as skimmers have the possibility of being penetrated while moving at speed, its a nerf. coupled with the new defensive weapon rules, they're definatly LESS effective than before. Good? maybe, it depends on the vehicle, but theres definatly a decrease in power.

Warpaint Studio wrote:We were treated to AN EARLY COPY AT OUR LOCAL STORE TODAY

tracked vehicles get screwed in moving and shooting fast moving vehicles do not suffer penalties

All you eldar players can now go shut up.. your precious holo falcon lists are going to be just fine

assauting a vehicle does indeed attack rear armor ..

Oh and yes you have to have 2 power fist now to get the extra attack.. dont know how you will do that my space marine codex wont allow me to take a second one if i remember correctly.. or 2 thunder hammers....its totally lame

Funny, my store had a copy, too. Of course mine would be the LA Bunker, but that's not especially important.

What's even better is that Fast Skimmers (e.g. Holo-Falcons) still move 24" Flat Out.

Assaulting a Vehicle attacks the *top* armour, which just happens to have the same AV as the rear. It's an excellent correction, and extremely realistic.

With the Power Fist hitting the thinner top armour, instead of the heavy front armour, you won't need the bonus attack...

Or maybe they made the power fist change in order to give people a reason to actually take a power weapon. You know, a choice. Do you want an extra attack or the extra strength? Right now it is a no brainer to take both.

did anyone see if run applies to walkers? will make the difference in weather or not I buy a furioso or 2

NaZ

Yikes, no kidding NaZ. Like Dreads needed another reason not to take them. Wish they could do something to make them a little more survivable. I mean, how may Venerables can you justify?

To the kid posting under Warpaint Studio's avatar... DUDE!

Calm down, spell correctly, proof read your post, and fix your typos before clicking "submit."

You're going to get your dad's dakka account in trouble.

DUDE!

Okay, let's settle this skimmer issue.

Stop! (math)Hammertime!

Odds of downing a holofield falcon in one shot, assuming SMF for 4th ed and Flat Out for 5th (ignoring vectored engines to simplify the comparison; with VE, these become the odds to destroy or immobilize). Assuming the shot hits in all cases, so we don't have to correct for twin-linked, BS of firer, etc.

Lascannon, 4th ed: (2/3 glance)*(1/9 dest./immob. w/ holofield) = 7.41%

Lascannon, 5th ed: [(1/6 glance)*(1/36 imm.) + (1/2 pen)*(1/4 imm/dest)]*(1/2 fail cover save) = 6.48%

That's right, folks, GW just made the holofield falcon tougher. But different weapons are affected differently by the changes... obviously, venom cannons and S6 weapons can only glance, so they're hit much harder. Things with S<9 will obviously lose more than the lascannon, since they have a higher glance:pen ratio, and glances got much, much weaker while pens got somewhat better (assuming the falcon isn't fortuned). Some weapons do gain against the holofalcon, however.

Using the same set of assumptions:

Railgun, 4th ed: (5/6 glance)*(1/9 d./i.) = 9.26%

Railgun, 5th (recall that AP1 is now +1 on damage roll):
[(1/6 glance)*(1/9 d./i.) + (2/3 pen)*(4/9 d./i.)]*(1/2 failed cover save) = 15.7%

I haven't bothered to run the math, but melta weapons would also presumably be deadlier to falcons in 5th, due to high odds of getting a penetrating hit, along with AP1.

A couple of other thoughts:

Waveserpents are a lot tougher now... they would have been somewhat harder to kill even if the cover save had only been 5+, as had been rumored. This might help console all those aspect warriors who had been trying to drink away their sorrows over the loss of their scoring status.

Tau tanks aren't fast skimmers, right? So, if that cover save is really only for fast skimmers, it looks like Hammerheads and Devilfish just got beaten bloody with the nerf bat and left in a ditch to die.

If the skimmer changes were supposed to rein in holofield skimmers, this is a major screw-up... falcons got tougher against the vast majority of weapons, and Tau got severely nerfed.

Easy thought

Eldar = Good.

What you have = Wont do crap.

Simple enough, now think about it.

Dire Wombat, I'm suspending judgment till I actually see how it plays out on the table, but as far as I can see, the changes are still a nerf to Falcons. I don't know if they're a sufficient nerf, or the right nerf, but they are a nerf. In 4th, one shot each Falcon until it was shaken, then moved on. Now, if an Eldar player wants to get the cover save, they'll just have effectively shaken their own Falcon. Should they ever choose not to go flat-out and fire their weapons instead, they'll be leaving the tank much more vulnerable than it used to be.

Fair enough. I may have been overly dramatic with my conclusions.

The main point though, and what I should have emphasized, is that the 5th ed rules as reported here do make Falcons harder to kill with most weapons, thus making them even more durable in their roles as battle taxis.

You're quite right that they're losing a lot of firepower, as well as the ability to claim objectives (though they can still contest), and this may make them less useful overall. Mostly I wanted to debunk the idea that they'd somehow become, in general, more fragile as well.

So if a Prism wants the cover save, it has to give up firing anything. [sarcasm]Fun fun...[/sarcasm]

The real nerf to Falcons is the assault rules. With no kill zones and the counter-assault rule small squads of fragile assaulters are going to get massacred by anything they go after.

Just means snakes on a plane become a clearly better choice than clowns, skyth.

Can't Prisms just get a cover save through normal means? They don't really need to move to get the job done, after all. Fortune + Prisms, as people have been suggesting for a while, could get annoying.

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Warpaint Studio wrote:taking the time to determine if indeed half or more of the vehicle is obscured how many times have you played the win at all costs guys who will argue and say its more than half when it isnt

the new effects of the rules will increase game time dramatically

thats not something to quibble over it will when you have to add and subtract additiaonl numbers on a chart that even vets dont have memorized it slows stuff down

This:

*Damage table is
1. Shaken
2. Stunned
3. Weapon destroyed
4 Vehicle immobilized
5 Wrecked
6 Vehicle explodes d6 inches, Strength 3 ap- hit.
(Glancing is -2, Ap1 is +1. AP- is -1)


Is hardly complicated and easier to remember than 2 different charts (As it is now). As far as gaming time goes, our 5th games have been about the same if not shorter than 4th. The main drag of large game 4th is mired down HTH that lasts turns and when I initially read the wound allocation I was quite worried. However, with the following changes:

*Charge units get a 6" counter assault to get as many models in base as possible before attacks are made. No 2 inch kill zone, remove casualties anywhere in the unit. All models with in 2" get to attack.

*You cannot use a consolidation move to start a new combat. However you can join one already in progress.

*When taking wounds from a combat, it is allocated exactly like shooting, and you can take guys off from anywhere in the combat, i.e. not within 2 inches, so basically unless you kill a model that was within 2 inches before dice were rolled, you can attack them.
Independent characters no longer have to be in B2B contact with the enemy to fight, just within 2 inches. This does mean the enemy within 2 of him can allocate attacks....

*Break tests are taken by the loser, with the difference he lost by subtracted from his leadership (IE Lose by 6 wounds, Leadership 10 becomes Leadership 4!)


We've found HTH to be short, bloody affairs. I think 5th is faster.

I beleive he was referring to the way wound allocation works. IE Shooting and CC you allocate wounds on a model by model basis.
Well my work got its book as well and I read the important bits.

* Monsterous creatues CAN shoot 2 weapons.
* Independent characters fight as part of a squad.
* Bunkers work like vehicles (for loading, unloading, and shooting purposes).
* Monsterous creatues ONLY get a cover save if you can't see 1/2 of the model.

Greetings, I just want to know that how many weapons can a MC shoot in a turn ,1 or 2 ? and how much will the blast marker scatter 1D6-BS or 2D6-BS ?

edited : thx Foda_Bett ,you answered the first one even before I put the question

Just a quick question: do multiple-barrage rules still work the same way? I was just wondering because as it stands, my Thudd Guns are incredibly tedious to use (4 separate rolls for scatter) to almost no effect.

Thunderhammer + Storm Shield is better now. Or even Power Fist + Storm Shield.

So what's the run down on the new screening rules?

Dire Wombat wrote:Odds of downing a holofield falcon in one shot, assuming SMF for 4th ed and Flat Out for 5th (ignoring vectored engines to simplify the comparison; with VE, these become the odds to destroy or immobilize). Assuming the shot hits in all cases, so we don't have to correct for twin-linked, BS of firer, etc.

Lascannon, 4th ed: (2/3 glance)*(1/9 dest./immob. w/ holofield) = 7.41%

Lascannon, 5th ed: [(1/6 glance)*(1/36 imm.) + (1/2 pen)*(1/4 imm/dest)]*(1/2 fail cover save) = 6.48%

That's right, folks, GW just made the holofield falcon tougher.

Does the equations take the +1 for pen hit on the damage table into account?

What I am curious about is scoring -

Now I know only troops score, but other units can contest objectives. Can a dedicated transport (Or even a vehicle) or a swarm contest an objective? What happens in the case of a tie with objectives?

And did kill points make it in?

Tacobake wrote:Thunderhammer + Storm Shield is better now. Or even Power Fist + Storm Shield.

Better for who?

Those who are alarmed about the SMF cover save should consider that they can get a _better_ save by using terrain, should they be using their skimmers as gunships rather than transports. If you're doing a transport assault, you'll want to be moving over 12" anyways. The loss of the bonus at 6-12" isn't so bad there.Then once the cargo is deployed, you can go find some cover (moving under 12" to do so if possible) and add fire from the transports.

NEEDS CLARIFICATION:

Here's what will really matter: Is assaulting from close-topped transports back in?

And item 2: Are assault weapons counted as defensive? If so, shuriken cannons are going to be very, very hard to get at bitz trading sites all of a sudden. A Falcon with pulse laser and 2 shuricannons will be the new black.

Dire Wombat wrote:Okay, let's settle this skimmer issue.

Stop! (math)Hammertime!

Odds of downing a holofield falcon in one shot, assuming SMF for 4th ed and Flat Out for 5th (ignoring vectored engines to simplify the comparison; with VE, these become the odds to destroy or immobilize). Assuming the shot hits in all cases, so we don't have to correct for twin-linked, BS of firer, etc.

Lascannon, 4th ed: (2/3 glance)*(1/9 dest./immob. w/ holofield) = 7.41%

I suck at math so take this with a grain of salt:

But shouldn't the result of immobilizing/destroying a holo-field falcon with a glancing hit be 1/12 not 1/9?

You have 3 results out of 36 that do it: 6,6 5,6 & 6,5 out of 36 possible results. 3/36 = 1/12 not 1/9.

Yakface: The one you're missing is 5,5, which brings it up to 4/36 or 1/9. You had me scared for a second there.

His Master's Voice: I'm not sure I follow... +1 for pen hit? Do you mean the +1 for AP1 in 5th ed? If so, yeah, I included that.

Deadshane1 wrote:

Warpaint Studio wrote:Ok.. no you can move your normal moving distance and fire all of your guns you now get covers saves to ignore getting shot at at all.. give me a break.. eldar will be the dominant army for a long time to come

The strength of the falcon was that it could only be glanced when moving, making it exceedingly difficult to kill when kitted. The fact that it CAN be penetrated breaks it. Its still good, but nowhere near as good.

Do the actual math for a 4+ cover save and the average likelihood of a Lascannon killing a Falcon is still very small.

Remember, you get to flat out ignore hits 50% of the time with that save, and when you are successfully penetrated, with the new damage table and Vectored Engines, you are only rolling a destroyed result 1/9 times. So a falcon that gets hit and penetrated by a lascannon has a 1/18 chance to go down with its 4+ cover save. Its totally immune on the glance now, meaning S6 weapons like Multilasers really don't do anything to them.

So out of 54 BS4 Lascannon shots thrown at a Falcon with a 4+ cover save in 5th Ed, on average 1 will result in a kill shot. True, its still not as good as requiring 81 to on average inflict one destroyed result, but its still ridiculous.

I for one am not too upset by this, a Falcon is still going to survive twice as many lascannon hits on average than a Leman Russ or Land Raider on average.

And lets not forget the ability to Fortune them either

Too much math makes my head hurt. Going to have to hit the local Hobby Center to paw the new book and get hounded for a pre-order.

Just took a break from work today to walk down to my hobby store and read through the rulebook.

Some interesting things I noticed:

#1 - True LOS it is. As far as I can tell, that means shooting through the legs of Defilers/Soul Grinders is perfectly legitimate (as long as you don't mind the 4+ cover save).

#2 - Gets Hot requires a roll, even if the target is out of range.

#3 - sniper rifles are S3 + rending against vehicles.

#4 - MCs still fire 2 weapons. Go Go Godzilla.

#5 - SMF only applies to skimmers moving at flat-out speeds. In other words, if the skimmer is going to shoot, it won't get the skimmer cover save. (Fairly significant nerf to all skimmers, but particularly to Tri-falcon eldar, who will now have to choose whether its more important to shoot or to transport the choppy bits inside.

#6 - vehicle squadrons ignore "can't move or shoot" results. (Light vehicle squadrons +1, especially considering the new vehicle damage tables. )

#7 - assault attacks against a vehicle squadron are now against the squadron instead of against individual vehicles. (Long overdue.)

#8 - a fast transport cannot move "flat out" on the same turn that it embarks a squad. (Very interesting---makes late-game objective grabbing tougher.)

#9 - Walkers can run. (Because somebody asked)

#10 - Troops with counter-attack get the counterattack move, but on a leadership test they count as charging. (Are there any armies with units that still use the counter-attack rule?)

#11 - Any non-vehicle/non-swarm troop units count as scoring. (Go Ravening/Guardian Jetbikes!)

#12 - Armies totally wiped out (no units on the table) automatically lose the battle. (Looks like that's going to the Guard strategy in a KP mission)

#13 - Kill points have been modified - each unit, regardless of Org slot, counts as 1 KP for the KP mission. (Still screws Guard, but everyone else comes out okay)

#14 - "Seize the Initiative" the player who goes second can attempt to go first by rolling a "6" on a d6. (Very tricksy - I like)

#15 - Deep striking units with "fleet" can assault on the turn they arrive. (Chaos Daemons are now completely viable, and Tyranid Raveners just got a MAJOR boost)

Centurian99: Thanks for the update.

#1. Big thanks for that clarification. 4+ saves are perfectly reasonable.

#6. Clarification: If I understand your post correctly, vehicle squadrons ignore 'Crew Stunned', but end up with a +1 on the damage chart?

#15. Ouch. Ummm, yeah, this definitely changes things.