http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/6.page JForum - http://www.jforum.net
These are taken from Warseer member "Champsguy"

[b]First Update:[/b] [url=http://warseer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2263976&postcount=656]Link[/url]
[quote]Okay, I'll give some update and a little clarification.

The rumors I gave were based off of an early version of the rulebook. I gave it a quick read-through, so I can clarify as far as how some of these rules work (i.e., I didn't just talk to a guy who told me how it would work in bullet-point fashion). I haven't had a chance to re-read it yet, as I've been too busy with work and other things to devote any time to 40K in the last few days, so certain things I'm not really sure about until I get a chance to look at the thing again.

It was an early draft, this much was obvious by sections that had old versions of charts in them (with things like "we need to update this graph" written in on top of them). Not all the rules were complete. There were a few sentence fragments and blank places where certain rules had obviously not been finished. There was also no artwork, just large blank spaces saying "put artwork here" (basically).

So, basically going off of memory, this is what I remember (not saying that other questions can't be answered, just that I didn't see or don't remember what that answer is).

Vehicles: Fire everything if you stay still (except Ordnance, it's got special rules, and I don't use Ordnance, so I didn't look closely). Fast vehicles can fire everything if they move up to 6". If you move, you can fire 1 plus defensive weapons. Fast vehicles can move up to 12" and fire 1 plus defensive. If you move more than 6", you only fire defensive (I think you can still fire defensive weapons here, but I'm not 100% on that). Fast vehicles can move up to 18" (their max speed now) and only fire defensive. Vehicles can only fire at one target. I did not see any special rules for sponsons firing at multiple targets. Not saying they won't be in the final version, or even that they aren't in the one I saw, just that I didn't see them.

Wound allocation before armor saves: Didn't see it. It may or may not be. I was looking at other sections and really didn't expect to see any changes here, so I glanced over that part and didn't look too closely. I'll try and update later on in the week, once I see it again.

Vehicle damage chart: It's about halfway between the glancing and penetrating charts of today (1-2 is the can't shoot/move thing, 3 is weapon, 4 is immobilized, 5-6 destroyed/annihilated). Glance is a -2. If you are glanced, your vehicle can at most be immobilized. Vehicles are a bit more survivable because of the way damage stacks. If you get two immobilized results, it becomes weapon destroyed. You aren't destroyed by "cumulative results" until you've been immobilized and all your weapons are gone (and then you get one more).

Transports: If your transport is destroyed, passengers now take a Str 4 hit, saves allowed (instead of a 4+). If an open-topped transport is destroyed, it's a Str 3 hit because its easier to disembark.

Plasma/frag: I don't know about their armor penetration against vehicles. I think they're the same now, but don't quote me on that.

Assaulting in cover: If you assault someone in cover, and you don't have grenades, you now become initiative 1 (instead of them becoming init 10). This works a lot better when more than two units are in combat.

LOS: I'm pretty sure that it's units that block LOS, so you shouldn't worry about spending 45 minutes drawing LOS from each individual trooper to each individual target. You draw LOS from the eyes of the model. Area terrain gives cover saves. There's an entire chapter on ruined buildings and how they affect line of sight (like a mini Cities of Death). I honestly don't remember if 6" of terrain blocks sight or not.

Blast weapons: I didn't see anything in the rules about rolling to hit at all, just scatter. But honestly, I was on the phone with a guy relating all the stuff to him, and I can't always do two things at once. So it might be there -- I didn't get to give this stuff my complete and full attention.

Running can be done w/in 12" of an enemy. You just can't charge if you run.

More rumors:

After shooting and wounding, you can choose to become pinned. You get a +1 to cover save (or a 6+ if you're in the open). It's the "get down!" rule.

If you are charged while broken, you make another fall back move immediately. If you don't get away (i.e., they can still reach you), you're destroyed. If you do get away, umm, you get away.

Gets Hot! is back to the 3rd ed version. So that Ork character doesn't have to worry about rolling 3s on his plasma gun.

There is not a new HTH chart. Sadly, the Avatar still only hits Fire Warriors on a 3+.

Preferred Enemy now allows you to reroll all misses, instead of hitting on a 3+.

Ground vehicles that move at full speed and cross dangerous terrain roll 2D6 for their test. If one "one" is rolled, they're immobilized. If two "ones" are rolled, the vehicle flips over and is considered destroyed. Kinda cool, I think, because it represents what you see in action movies.

Flamers: You now determine wounds for all template weapons firing from a squad before you take saves or remove casualties!!!

Bikes all now get a 3+ cover save for their turbo-boost. So the psy-cannon thing is out the window.

A unit with Scouts that is inside a vehicle confers that ability to the vehicle!!! Let the Pathfinders and Possessed Marines rule!

--

Honestly, one thing I noticed is that the new rules should make Dark Reapers turn back into their tank-murdering selves (at least the Exarch). An Exarch with Crack Shot and an Eldar Missile Launcher could deny a skimmer any real protection. No cover save, ka-blam!

Overall, if something remained the same, I didn't mention it. So while I understand the desire for defensive weapons to be something different than they were in 4th...[/quote]

[b]Second Update:[/b] [url=http://warseer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2264746&postcount=710]Link[/url]
[quote]Okay, I looked at it again. A few updates.

1) Blast weapons don't roll to hit, they just scatter. However, they now operate like template weapons in that any model touched by the blast is hit. None of this "roll 4+ for partial" stuff. A unit firing multiple blast weapons (a SM Dev squad being the example) fires like a multiple barrage unit would in 4th edition. Scatter once, then lay the blasts off of the original template. These two things might make up for the lack of a to-hit roll. Oh, and you don't need to center the hole over someone when you place it before determining scatter.

2) No shooting of defensive weapons if you move full speed.

3) Yes, vehicles can now get up to a 3+ cover save, depending on what they're hiding behind.

4) Still saw nothing on 6" plus of area terrain blocking line of sight. You CAN declare certain types of terrain as LOS blocking -- it just has to be done before the game. You also decide what is difficult, what is dangerous, and what is impassable. Certain things can be difficult for one type of model and not difficult for another. So tank traps might be dangerous terrain for vehicles, but count as clear terrain for infantry. A river might be impassable for infantry, but dangerous for vehicles. You just have to decide before you play. I like this, as it gives more power to the players.

5) No re-roll of wounding against transported infantry no matter how far you moved.

6) Force weapons now just inflict instant death instead of that weird pseudo-instant death.

7) Smoke launchers are a 5+ cover save.

8) You can still only take one save per guy.

9) Yes, allocate wounds before making saves. This will probably encourage larger squads (goodbye, 6 man las-plas).

10) You can shoot over other squads if you can see over them because of elevation, etc. You can always shoot at vehicles or monstrous creatures over other squads.

Overall, it looks like a lot of streamlining went into the rules. That's good. It also looks like they wanted to move away from certain types of armies. Certain vehicles have become "viable" (to some degree) again. A Dark Eldar Ravager with 3 Dark Lances is now something you can take. You couldn't really before, because you "had" to move 6+ inches to get SMF, and that meant you could only fire one weapon. Now, with SMF just a 5+ cover save, and the Ravager able to fire all weapons if it moves 6" or less, we may actually see it shoot more often.

The problem that I see with 4th is that certain builds were simply too good to not take. As a result, a lot of different units were never used. A Falcon can have a pulse laser, a scatter laser, and a shuriken cannon, move 12", and fire them all. Well, that's a hell of a lot of firepower. Likewise, the Land Speeder w/ AC and HB was just too good to ignore. Now, with these changes, vehicles that were too good in 4th will become... not so good now.

With fast vehicles only able to move 18", it likewise eliminated the Dark Eldar rush. It again looks like they're moving away from one-turn assaults and other too-good combos.

This is overall, in my opinion, a good thing for 40K. The fewer no-brainer builds that are available, the better. Builds that were never competitive before now have a chance to be good. Vehicles as a whole are now less mobile, but more survivable. It will lead to different tactics, to be sure. Some vehicles may become more common (like the Land Raider), simply because Eldar skimmers got worse. It's hard to justify 250 for a Land Raider when a Falcon is so much faster, more survivable, and has more mobile firepower than you. Of course, the Land Raider Crusader remains 10 gallons of kick-ass in a 5 gallon jug.[/quote]


So if we can keep discussing these [b]rumors[/b] based off some kind of [i]early leak[/i], and not diverge too far off topic; then this could be a better round than last time.

UPDATE 1/17/07:

More stuff from Warseer: [url=http://warseer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2268985&postcount=870]Link[/url]

[quote]Ok I have a copy of what I think is the same document (only had a quick browse)

The chart for missions says
1-2 = Recon
3-4= Take and Hold
5-6 = Total Anihiliation

Recon = You role for d3+2 objectives and if you have troops within 3" and the other guy doesnt at the end of the game, you hold that objective. The one with the most objectives wins.

Take and Hold = Is similar, except each player choses an objective within their deployment zone, not in impassible terrain, and not within 24" of the other objective.

Total Anihilation = Get 'Kill Points' for units destroyed or falling back. HQ=3pts. Fast, Heavy, Elite = 2pts Troops=1pt


Oh and later on its says VPs are used to decide draws. Units destroyed are worth their points, half strength units worth half their points. You need at least a 10% difference in VPs based on the points of the game to win (i.e. their example 1,500 points requres a 150 pints difference to register a win)

There is also a 'deployment' chart which I will put on in the morning (too tired) if someone else hasn't done it already. As noted earlier, only troops are scoring, except if falling back / it is a transport? / it has a specific rule saying it isn't scoring.

One funny thing about the deployment chart. One of the deployment types is called "Dawn of War"[/quote]]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230096.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230096.page GMT
Tanks taking a nerf in terms of mobile firepower is a good and bad thing.

Skimmers getting nerfed is plenty positive in my eyes; and reducing the overall speed of the fastest vehicles is positive. A lot is going to depend on if you can move 6" and fire a primary weapon, and/or Ordinance weapon. If Normal Tanks can keep that feature (and hopefully fire sponsons on the move) then we should see things brought a little back in line.

On the other hand, if vehicles can't move that fast and you can "forced march" with ground troops, and other troops block LOS to the guys behind them - whoa boy are things going to start to get silly; at least thinking from an Ork perspective.

On the other hand, Marines with Rhinos became a lot more viable, and in general even Eldar taking hits from a downed Waveserpent (or now a Falcon, which would lose it's godlike survivability if those damage tables and the other vehicle rules came into play) would probably be better off than they were with the 4+ to wound with a re-roll and the no more auto-entangled.

Assuming you can't launch assaults from the closed top transports, you get a happy medium between the death traps of 4th and the Rhino Rush of 3rd.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230100.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230100.page GMT
LoS rules make the new Grots good, especially if combined with say the pinning option.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230105.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230105.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230106.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230106.page GMT
I've also heard that Area Terrain is, in effect, going away to true LOS. To this day, I still get in debates about Area Terrain and LOS, plus all the various Mech players wanting to declare every piece of terrain Size 3 Area Terrain. This really won't bother me.

Allocating the wounds before armor saves. I suppose this will replace the massively overlooked Torrent of Fire rule.

All in all, I look forward to seeing some new changes. I've played since 1st edition and will continue when 5th comes out and not scream out 'the end times are here!'.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230107.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230107.page GMT
LoS rules make the new Grots good, especially if combined with say the pinning option.[/quote]

Grots will still suck. LD7 on the Runtherds means they'll run once they take casualties; I'd rather just blow 220 Points on 30 Boyz w/ PK Nobz + Bosspoles to "screen" whatever I wanted.

It certainly helps Burna Boyz, Tankbustas, and the like to become "decent". It also makes some things VERY silly since I can "forced march" that Slugga Screen up on turn one, and use it as a giant LOS blocking Wall for 20 Storm Boyz who will then get an assault on Turn 2 almost regardless of table terrain setup.

Couple of other points I wanted to make:

With no more "Glancing 6" to destroy a vehicle S8 just became near useless against AV14.

It also sees a significant decrease in the Ork anti-tank arsenal aside from using PK's to whack things. Necrons also take it up the proverbial metal butt; only Heavy Destroyers now have a shot to do anything to most tanks.

Though I'm sure the Necrons will be fixed with the new rules with a new Codex in 5th Ed, and to be honest as a Necron player I see armies made up of "Tracked" vehicles or any kind of vehicle heavy list an easy win; any kind of heavy vehicle - Land Raiders, Leman Russes, and even Monoliths are just easy fodder for my basic guns.

The only sad downside to S8 becoming useless agianst higher AV's is that it's just going to encourage players to take more Lascannons instead of Missile Launchers for the few places they CAN still buy anti-tank in the new Codex's.

On the other hand, once SM's get their proverbial "nerf", Tanks are going to get VERY survivable as there will be just far less anti-tank sitting around out there.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230108.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230108.page GMT Skimmers getting nerfed is plenty positive in my eyes; and reducing the overall speed of the fastest vehicles is positive.
[/quote]
Why? Thats what a skimmer is all about-speed. This looks like a blatant attempt to get people who had skimmer heavy armies to buy something else. I'm not impressed with that. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230110.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230110.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230111.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230111.page GMT Skimmers getting nerfed is plenty positive in my eyes; and reducing the overall speed of the fastest vehicles is positive.
[/quote]
Why? Thats what a skimmer is all about-speed. This looks like a blatant attempt to get people who had skimmer heavy armies to buy something else. I'm not impressed with that. [/quote]

And with the ability to "fire as if moving fast", combined with the fact that most skimmers are "fast" anyway, they will still be faster than their tracked vehicle counter parts 99% of the time.

But reducing their ability to move such a drastic amount in game (such as to score, block assaults, etc) is probably a good thing; and to make them chose to move as fast as possible to get the defensive bonuses or move a little slower to fire their weapons, it brings them in line instead of "I move 12, you can now only glance, and I get to shoot everything I've got too" which is what we're dealing with now.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230113.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230113.page GMT Skimmers getting nerfed is plenty positive in my eyes; and reducing the overall speed of the fastest vehicles is positive.
[/quote]
Why? Thats what a skimmer is all about-speed. This looks like a blatant attempt to get people who had skimmer heavy armies to buy something else. I'm not impressed with that. [/quote]

To be fair, skimmers are likely just as good as other other choices in the existing codex. This is a farcry from the "Chaos Codex" yo-yo where there is a new termie kit coming out so terminators get great rules and next time it will be NEW CHAOS DREAD, NOW WITH HAVOC LAUNCHERS, and a fancy plastic kit with brand new ikons on it.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230114.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230114.page GMT
Probably a smart marketing strategy. They sold a ton of tanks for apoc, so now release rules to make tanks useless.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230116.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230116.page GMT Though I'm not convinced this is the true way things happen- it's probably a confused jumble between that and incompetence.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230117.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230117.page GMT
Uh... this gives me great pause in terms of believing the veracity of these rumours. They book is already in layout (i.e. artwork placement) before the text is finalized?

That sounds very strange. It's not impossible, but it sounds unlikely based on what I know about the publishing industry.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230118.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230118.page GMT
Probably a smart marketing strategy. They sold a ton of tanks for apoc, so now release rules to make tanks useless.

[/quote]

Not sure how bad they'll be, in general they shouldn't be too bad off. Probably better off now than they were before. Glances are far less dangerous, Pen's aren't as bad as now, and they're limiting the number of anti-tank weapons you can take in new Codex's.

Remember, if small Las/Plas goes away for regular Marines and Assault Cannons aren't the vehicle killers they are now, then only IG can really throw down as many long-range anti-tank guns "en masse". Orks anti-tank that they're currently enjoying go down in overall power, especially since Glances aren't that good now.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230120.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230120.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230124.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230124.page GMT Or even better-
"Bikes all now get a 3+ cover save for their turbo-boost. So the psy-cannon thing is out the window. "
If that holds up, every Waaagh! will need the supreme cover of a unit of nob bikers with painboy roaring down the field. 3+ cover, 4+ FNP will hold up to the round or so it takes them to get into close combat.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230126.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230126.page GMT I think you meant "Monoliths" are essentially invincible against "Witchunters (penetent engine - huur!) and Dark Eldar (haywire)", and almost invincible against "Daemonhunters (Lascannon and dread CCW on dreads and landraiders) and Eldar (fireprism, haywire, wraithlord HTH and d-cannon)". Hooray.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230128.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230128.page GMT
But!! Overall, I like what I'm hearing. Great stuff. I hope smokes can be popped every turn. Just means no shooting in those turns. Makes vehicle use quite tactical imho.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230130.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230130.page GMT
[quote]Uh... this gives me great pause in terms of believing the veracity of these rumours. They book is already in layout (i.e. artwork placement) before the text is finalized? [/quote]
I thought dakka already agreed that it was minis>background/artwork>rules for 40k. When they're deciding what to do because adding more text would mean the artwork couldn't be placed on that page..."Hey Jim, do you really think players will need this rules clarification?" "Nah, Ed, see it says right there that they should just roll for it."]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230132.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230132.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230141.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230141.page GMT
"Oh look, I've gotten Glanced and can't shoot; I'll just zoom 24", ignoring terrain, to hide behind some cover for a turn and then I'll come out and shoot again.".

At least now you have to be somewhat close to terrain to do this; it seems like they want to stop people form being able to zoom across tables without much regard for distance like they can now. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230144.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230144.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230149.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230149.page GMT
When the first set of Ork rumors, which turned out to be almost 100% spot on in terms of rules came out from Orkdom seeing a printed copy of the leaked dex, Brim and co said nothing about it.

I think that because of the nature of the source, them "confirming what the leak shows" as something they've heard would just give credence to the leaked document where almost the entire thing is bound to get online at some point. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230150.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230150.page GMT I think you meant "Monoliths" are essentially invincible against "Witchunters (penetent engine - huur!) and Dark Eldar (haywire)", and almost invincible against "Daemonhunters (Lascannon and dread CCW on dreads and landraiders) and Eldar (fireprism, haywire, wraithlord HTH and d-cannon)". Hooray.[/quote]

Well, they already kind of are. Though the Sisters enjoy the benefits of AP1 currently to give them the Pen on a hit, and even if the rumors are true and AP1 becomes +1 on the damage chart, it gives them a one in 6 chance to tag the monolith. Not good, but workable (I guess).

I wonder if power weapons and melta grenades are going to be considered AP1 as well. It would make a certain amount of sense, and keep melee a little more effective against the fortress vehicles like Monoliths and Land Raiders that there is no "rear armor" to hit in melee.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230152.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230152.page GMT Fast vehicles can move up to 18" (their max speed now) and only fire defensive.

Glance is a -2. If you are glanced, your vehicle can at most be immobilized. Vehicles are a bit more survivable because of the way damage stacks.

Transports: If your transport is destroyed, passengers now take a Str 4 hit, saves allowed (instead of a 4+). If an open-topped transport is destroyed, it's a Str 3 hit because its easier to disembark.

Certain vehicles have become "viable" (to some degree) again. A Dark Eldar Ravager with 3 Dark Lances is now something you can take. You couldn't really before, because you "had" to move 6+ inches to get SMF, and that meant you could only fire one weapon.

With fast vehicles only able to move 18", it likewise eliminated the Dark Eldar rush. It again looks like they're moving away from one-turn assaults and other too-good combos.
[/quote]

Ravagers won't be more viable, because (based on these rumours and the reported SMF changes) every Dark Eldar player will be wimpering in their closet until a new codex comes out.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230153.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230153.page GMT
I think that's the main sticking point for me. Vehicles can move 12" and fire defensive weapons (so a heavy stubber or StormBolter, or, good god, Hurricane Bolters [yeah good call on that one], i.e., basically nothing). Infantry can move 12" and not fire at all. So infantry and vehicles are the same speed? Why would I ever take a transport then?! Well I suppose my Chimeras can be big metal skin for my Guard now. Of course, I could just take another unit and have 2 scoring units instead of 1 with an AV.

Also:

[quote]Ground vehicles that move at full speed and cross dangerous terrain roll 2D6 for their test. If one "one" is rolled, they're immobilized. If two "ones" are rolled, the vehicle flips over and is considered destroyed. Kinda cool, I think, because it represents what you see in action movies. [/quote]

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong... isn't that how it is NOW? What's new about this?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230155.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230155.page GMT
Seriously. GW needs to decide what the point of a transport is. Even with these changes, what good is a rhino?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230156.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230156.page GMT GW got sick of selling vehicles.

I see house rules for vehicle movement/fire in my future.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230157.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230157.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230158.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230158.page GMT OP.

These rules do nothing to change DE raider rush. You couldn't disembark from raiders if they moved more than 12" in 3rd or 4th edition. Limiting the raider to a max move of 18" doesn't change that. Unless they've changed the disembarkation rules, raiders and trucks will still be able to move 12", disembark, fleet (waagh), and assault.

Also, if rumors are true, then walking still isn't as fast as a vehicle. The first rumor stated that, if you "ran," then you couldn't assault that phase. Therefore, you're limited to a max move of 12", while vehicles will be going, potentially, 18". If this rumor is true, then it goes differential "fleet" from "run/forced march." If you "run," you can't assault; if you "fleet," you can.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230165.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230165.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230169.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230169.page GMT
It would seem to me that they want to turn the attention to the basic trooper, in which case I might jump ship and go for more warmachine/hordes.

I think other game companies out there should thank GW for helping boost their sales, cause I see more PP buys in the near future.

Just my 2 cents

Chappy P!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230171.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230171.page GMT
It would seem to me that they want to turn the attention to the basic trooper, in which case I might jump ship and go for more warmachine/hordes. [/quote]

That's not what's supposed to happen. You're supposed to buy a whole new set of Carnifexes and Hive Tyrants and equip them with different weapons load-outs under the new rules. Get with the program!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230181.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230181.page GMT CC carnifex into it in hand to hand. Which seems unlikely to happen, ever.
Are Zoanthropes S9 or 10?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230185.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230185.page GMT GW has at least some idea of what's wrong with the current environment.

That GW rights sub standard rules for 40k is well known, pretty well understood, and not likely to dramatically change. They are, however, still at least half assed about the job. Speeders were too good, so they got nerfed. Transports sucked too bad, so they got boosted. Tanks were weak, so they get a cover save and a new damage chart. Infantry are too slow, they get forced march.

Looking at the Ork book, I'm not sure they haven't created a monster, but it's perhaps not totally out of line to cut GW at least some slack. Every set of rules pisses somebody off: the only way to balance things is to nerf the good things and boost the weak things, and if you play something good or against something weak, yeah, you're going to be pissed when the change comes.

Given it's unwillingness to adequetly playtest (and I mean seriously, competitively playtest), GW should do the next best thing: new editions and/or updates, with the hobby as a whole testing the rules.

I'm suprised HBMC hasn't plugged his alternative ruleset in this thread, but he's got a valid point. If you want the game to stay static, then pick a ruleset, tweak it with your friends, and play it. I know that I personally like change.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230186.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230186.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230194.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230194.page GMT
Anything that bones Godzilla nids is a wonderful thing. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230198.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230198.page GMT

Any nid army starts with two or three gunfexes -- without them the army is a cruel joke.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230199.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230199.page GMT GW! I mean, it sucks for us as consumers, but it's what any publicly held corporation has to do to make money, which is it's job. It's like saying a Baseball team only signed a big free agent to sell more jerseys, or an employee only works harder because they want a raise.

On the other hand, GW making money and being a large gaming company means that we get pretty good support for tournaments (though far less than I'd like), consistently high quality minis (Rackham were better, but apparently imploded), a strong network of gaming stores with play space and helpful, if dreadfully annoying, staff.

I remember in 95, when Middle Earth: the Wizards was released as a CCG. Unlike Star Wars, which only used the first half of A new Hope for it's main set, dragging the fans through years of expansions, ME:TW included every character, monster, and Item you'd want in the very first set. This was great for gamers: collect one set full of good stuff, and you'll never need to buy more! Unfortunatly, you never needed to buy more. The later expansions were interesting, but on the whole very unnecessary. Because the core of the game never changed, interest dwindled in a hurry.

Sure, it'd be great if GW released a rule set that was perfectly balanced, a line of codices that were evenly strong and interesting, and a model for every option in every codex. And then, GW would be reduced to 3 guys writing campaigns and Codex: Apocolypse 2: "This time, it's personal" for the 15 gamers still playing in their basement.

Feeding the beast is the price we pay. If you really think the rules and models you buy from PP will remain legal and competitive in 3 years, I think you might be a bit disappointed. Planned obsolence is the cynical beating heart of a consumer culture.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230201.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230201.page GMT

Any nid army starts with two or three gunfexes -- without them the army is a cruel joke.[/quote]

Well, part of me wonders if Nidzilla having a weakness wouldn't be a bad thing. There's currently not much it really fears, so having an inability of destroying (While still stunning, disarming and imobilizing) tanks might not be the end of the world.

Also, how many tanks do Nids actually fear? ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230204.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230204.page GMT
wow this should make things intresting ? are you pinned till you next turn or for a full turn ? now my IG can run out rapid fire take cover and have a Inv. save ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230205.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230205.page GMT CCG. Unlike Star Wars, which only used the first half of A new Hope for it's main set, dragging the fans through years of expansions, ME:TW included every character, monster, and Item you'd want in the very first set. This was great for gamers: collect one set full of good stuff, and you'll never need to buy more! Unfortunatly, you never needed to buy more. The later expansions were interesting, but on the whole very unnecessary. Because the core of the game never changed, interest dwindled in a hurry.[/quote]

Non-collectible card games have been extremely successful for decades - Bang! is doing extremely well, so does Citadels, Apples to Apples and others. Players just own multiple games and many people who don't buy CCG's have a copy of Uno in the house.

Similarly, WotC already sells collectible minis using the CCG model. Warhammer is different in terms that the consumer gets to choose what they buy. Removing that (by changing the rules constantly) lessens the whole point of the hobby - being able to design, collect, paint and play with your own army.

It would make more sense to me to have solid rules that are fun to play. That would sustain interest (rather than having 80% of players leave within 2 years as GW says is the case). Instead of selling a few new units to the hardcore players every rules change, both casual and serious players would invest more money buying multiple armies. There are 15 armies or so for 40K - few players own all of them. There's tons of room for expansion there and it's more consistent with GW's existing business model.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230208.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230208.page GMT

Any nid army starts with two or three gunfexes -- without them the army is a cruel joke.[/quote]

I'm staying philosophical about it.

I figure that vehicle use will diminish overall, which should help. Being able to more easily destroy vehicles in CC will be an incremental improvement. And horde Tyranids are getting some pretty significant buffs overall, so while they'll struggle to pop tanks they're going to still kill the crap out of the infantry. *shrug*

Tyranids look to play a lot more like their 2nd and early 3rd edition versions, IMO. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230217.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230217.page GMT
It would make more sense to me to have solid rules that are fun to play. That would sustain interest (rather than having 80% of players leave within 2 years as GW says is the case). Instead of selling a few new units to the hardcore players every rules change, both casual and serious players would invest more money buying multiple armies. There are 15 armies or so for 40K - few players own all of them. There's tons of room for expansion there and it's more consistent with GW's existing business model.[/quote]

Hey, I agree. Not having GW's data, I can't vouche for how effective their strategy is, but they clearly have one. Assuming 80% of people leave the hobby after 2 years, that means GW would need to sell 5 armies to each vet in 2 years to replace each noob. Now, as you pointed out, if the rules were better, people felt more secure in the hobby, etc. then maybe only half would leave. this is an old debate of course, so I'll simply say that I'm assuming GW figures it can make more money selling to newbs and re-upping vets than by having people build new armies, and that's because new armies offer diminishing returns on fun to the veteran gamer. Your first 40k army allows you to play, a 2nd might allow you play in a very different manner, but it's still the same game. Your third army is even less distinct, etc. YMMV.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230219.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230219.page GMT
I don't even know why that rule needed changing. Sure, it was hard for footslogging infantry to move right across the board and assault people, but that seemed pretty sensible, almost a good thing. Running all the way across the battlefield should be a bad idea.

At the end of the day, I guess that's why I keep doubting these rumours. I like a few of the other changes, the 5+ cover save for skimmers, allocating armour saves (should do wonders to hidden powerfists), but I just can't believe the rumours as long as the forced march is in there. GW has released some slipshod rules in the past, but nothing has ever been entirely broken. I can't see how a 5th ed game with infantry moving 12" would be anything other than broken.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230227.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230227.page GMT
There is another rumour that states that CC hits are resolved against a vehicles rear armour so I imagine that Genestealers or (Str 4) Hormagaunts will be the way forward for Nids vs. vehicles with only the Demolisher and the Land raider having rear armour above 10 off the top of my head (feel free to remember some other ones). It's still possible to shoot vehicles with Zoanthropes and Hive Tyrants (who can now fleet (sort of, if the run rumour is true) if they're out of range with Warp Blast. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230231.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230231.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230236.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230236.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230248.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230248.page GMT
The current "torrent of fire" rule does allow the attacker to impose save on the hidden pwoerfist but it is not well explained in the 4the dition book.

It will be interesting to see the detail on this rule, particularly whether it allows the attacker to allocate powerful AP value wounds to specific models.

(This would of course once again make Tau shield drones pointless.)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230255.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230255.page GMT
Still is weird with vehicle speeds, though.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230258.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230258.page GMT
The main issue will be speed. If the march rules are true, then I see more footsloggin list in the future. I do see that the 6 man las/plas squads becoming a thing of the past, especially if hit with enough shots. Speed kills the zilla list, mainly because I have a CC fex and run only 2 dakka fexes.

Thus I see the pendulum swinging with the Tyranid list, moving from TMC's to the swarm or even stealer shock. I am not sure if people will be taking more tanks in this version.

I would agree with Ed in the sense that tanks are great in apocalypse but in the main game with these new changes I am doubtful that they will see much light of day.

I guess I am at the end of a cruel joke as I see my zilla's become less effective in this new edition. As longshot said, if the zilla's had a better way of popping tanks then it wouldn't be so bad.

As I said before I relied on the four venom cannons and the 2 plus barbed stranglers to try to get some serious hurting on tanks. It was all about rolling lucky glancing hits, now if I am lucky I will get immobilization, but I don't want to be focusing my guns on those tanks until they explode more than what is necessary.

Again this is just my 2 cents, I miss the days of Rogue Trader that's for sure!

Chappy P!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230261.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230261.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230265.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230265.page GMT BS or its bead on.

dunno about scouts giving scout to a vehicle they ride in. land raiders and falcons comming in behind nemy lines and stuff, if of course, the rumor about scouts getting flank march is true.

guh.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230268.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230268.page GMT
Still is weird with vehicle speeds, though.[/quote]

It is necessary if we assume the "only Troops can score" rule is true.

Players will tend to take a lot more troops who currently are not needed for scoring and they will have to be marched up to the objectives.

In a 6 turn game current Troops can only move half the width or 2/3ths the depth of a table, less if they stop to shoot.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230277.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230277.page GMT
I wonder how that will work with Plasma Cannons, where is the overheat roll? A barrage of plasma cannon blasts hitting all that they touch, Nice.

I think it is nice that glancing weapons will have to build up to a destroyed result. Light skimmers will still go down in flames, but most higher armour tanks become much tougher. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230282.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230282.page GMT
so a skimmer moving more then 6 inches gets a 5+ save and then my fire prism could ONLY fire the PC and not the SC as well? i dunno, on top of the fact that the PC will now scatter, making its bew higher BS worthless.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230285.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230285.page GMT

Any nid army starts with two or three gunfexes -- without them the army is a cruel joke.[/quote]

Being able to Run means that it'll be much easier to get Carnifexes into CC with vehicles, at which point they're tossing 4-6 S10+2d6 swings your way. Which isn't to say that they'll be just as good as they are now, but frankly Nids needed a foil, and tanks make perfect sense for that.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230294.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230294.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230297.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230297.page GMT D6(like fleet is currently) but without assaulting, whereas models with fleet could still assault. That makes good sense to me, and doesn't make transports useless.

I like the 5+ cover save for smoke/smf. It makes vehicles like Rhinos more survivable, preserves lighter skimmers like Speeders or Pirhanas, but will go a long way towards making Falcons and Hammerheads not function as perfect VP denial units. Ultimately it narrows the gap between skimmers and regular vehicles.

I also really dig the blast template rules. I was so fed up with all the partials and B.S. This will be huge for Plasma Cannons. They will be more risky, but will also be far deadlier when they do hit. It will make bunched up troops targets of opportunity again.

The new screening/LOS rules look a bit problematic to me. I can forsee a lot of abuse, arguments, and cheese arising from this system. I play IG and felt that the whole IG gunline days were ridiculous. The description in the leak is too vague to start worrying about, but I hope that they tread really carefully on that one.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230299.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230299.page GMT No more invulnerable saves for turbo-boosting bikes? Now that's more like it! It's been too long since Tzeentch last got tzcrewed and I was starting to get anxious. This is finally starting to sound like a proper new edition of 40k!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230300.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230300.page GMT str. 4 or less. Vehicles in 4th could actually move and fire their payloads effectively in 4th. Falcons being overpowered had nothing to do with being able to move and fire their weapons.

Also, moving turbo boosting to cover saves will work for about 3 minutes, till someone remembers soul seeker ammo.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230303.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230303.page GMT
It would seem to me that they want to turn the attention to the basic trooper, in which case I might jump ship and go for more warmachine/hordes.

I think other game companies out there should thank GW for helping boost their sales, cause I see more PP buys in the near future.

Just my 2 cents

Chappy P![/quote]

I'm sorry, I'm having a really hard time feeling sorry for you (or any Nidzilla player). GW wants to turn the attention to the basic trooper and you want to jump ship? Here *holds door open* have fun!

Ozymandias, King of Kings]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230305.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230305.page GMT
You bought the freakin army because you knew it was hardcore. Amazingly hardcore and top-tier. I want to see a Tyranid player with a maxed out TMC army before 4th edition? Hm? Where are the hand? Oh noes, no hands there! That's because they weren't hard as nails before! Come, you ain't stupid, if you buy an army just for the cheese of it, prepare to be hit by a big fat nerf stick with the new codex/edition.

Oh, you may replace Nidzilla with Falcon.

The other changes are looking good. All the screening sounds a strange, but workable.

I like the blast change, especially for my Dark Reapers fast shooting missle launcher exarch. I may need him for all the hordes out there.

Vehicle won't suck. If area terrain gives them Cover saves (reduce to glance saves) while they can still shoot at the enemy, they will be dead hard.

And by the way, what#s that silly talk with troops moving 12"? Do you play with weighted dices or what? The average is 3,5" buddies! 3,5"! So if the troops don't shoot and run they will move 9,5" a turn. And have you seen the point costs of rhinos these days? 35 or so points? That a steal! So what if it gets blown up, you can speed up, pop smoke and even if some if them get wrecked, the passengers won't be as dead and entangled as before. Other than that, if transports can pick up any unit and non-troops can't hold objectives, you need to taxi some guys around.

I'm optimistic...

Greets
Schepp himself]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230310.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230310.page GMT VC toting fexes in my nid list, but if the intent was to have them eventually roll a 6 to destroy then it was the wrong intent. my whole thing is as long as i can stop the tank from shooting then im in the clear for another round.

i think a solid nerf to nidzilla is needed, the army is broke.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230311.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230311.page GMT No more invulnerable saves for turbo-boosting bikes? Now that's more like it! It's been too long since Tzeentch last got tzcrewed and I was starting to get anxious. This is finally starting to sound like a proper new edition of 40k![/quote]

Yeah, we wouldn't want to screw over all of those bike-heavy Tzeentch armies (all 2 of them).

I think a cover save makes more sense, as the turbo-boost makes the bikes harder to hit, like how cover makes you harder to hit. Plus a 3+ cover save means its a boost for Eldar jetbikes and ork bikes.

Ozymandias, King of Kings]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230320.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230320.page GMT
[quote=Toreador]Not so overpointed if gaunts can screen them......[/quote]

Hooray for vehicles shooting over screens.

[quote=Ozymandias]Plus a 3+ cover save means its a boost for Eldar jetbikes and ork bikes.[/quote]

Actually Eldar bikes were Armor Save 3 anyway so it doesn't really change anything.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230324.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230324.page GMT
Ozymandias, King of Kings]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230331.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230331.page GMT
What they should do though is have any squad that is pinned, whether by Get Down or any other means, not block LOS. That would make pinning even more valuable (even if tough to achieve).


[quote=Ozymandias]Fine, then Dark Eldar Jetbikes.[/quote]

Fair enough. Wasn't trying to be pedantic.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230337.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230337.page GMT
I'm still reeling about these changes. With one decent 'run' move on turn 1, Wraithcannons can be in range to shoot on turn 2. I think the run rule would have the biggest affect on shooty armies. They look to lose a turn or two of shooting before the assaults hit their lines.

I do not like defensive weapons at str 4. Str 5 should be the lowest they go. Vehicles will not be any more survivable with fast moving meltabombs and MC's slamming into their stationary sides.

The idea of all models blocking LOS bothways has some serious implications for anything that moves and shoots downfield. Oblits, Termies (maybe not for long), even attack bikes can use a marine shield and skim along the edge of it, slowly sweeping the enemy from right to left and minimizing the return fire and concentrating on one unit at a time.

I'm thinking Marine Attack Bikes will be the new in thing to take. 150pts gets you 3 Heavy Bolters or 3 Multimeltas that can be screened by friendly models, move carefully around those models to fire 3 heavy weapons at a target while maintaining LOS protection from the rest of the enemy body. 150pts for 3 heavies will also be a steel in an army losing cheap troop choice heavy weapons.

Troops lose more than half the heavy weapons they can fire back and vehicles can be out manuevered by the attack bikes who can skirt around and force the Predators to move and lose 2 shots in order to fire once. The attack bikes are also swift enough to keep away from 'running' troops who wish to assault them, at least fast enough to get a few extra round of fire in.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230371.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230371.page GMT str. 4 or less. Vehicles in 4th could actually move and fire their payloads effectively in 4th. Falcons being overpowered had nothing to do with being able to move and fire their weapons.

Also, moving turbo boosting to cover saves will work for about 3 minutes, till someone remembers soul seeker ammo.[/quote]

It also makes bikers meat for Tau who can use markerlights to reduce cover saves.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230391.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230391.page GMT
I believe as the rules stand now, in any given situation you can opt to take a cover save or opt to stay with your armor save. I don't think it will be any different in a new version.

[quote=DarthDiggler]The idea of all models blocking LOS bothways has some serious implications for anything that moves and shoots downfield. Oblits, Termies (maybe not for long), even attack bikes can use a marine shield and skim along the edge of it, slowly sweeping the enemy from right to left and minimizing the return fire and concentrating on one unit at a time.[/quote]

Don't discount vehicles firing over screens, elevated firing positions (hills, buildings, etc.) firing over screens, deepstrikers, infiltrators coming on from different table edges, etc. It won't be unstoppable.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230397.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230397.page GMT
You bought the freakin army because you knew it was hardcore. Amazingly hardcore and top-tier. I want to see a Tyranid player with a maxed out TMC army before 4th edition? Hm? Where are the hand? Oh noes, no hands there! That's because they weren't hard as nails before! Come, you ain't stupid, if you buy an army just for the cheese of it, prepare to be hit by a big fat nerf stick with the new codex/edition.

[/quote]

To keep the record straight, the reason there were no "Nidzilla" armies before 4th edition, was because you couldn't make a Nidzilla army before 4th edition. Specifically, until the 4th ed Tyranid book came out. And I'd be willing to be a bunch of people ran out and went Nidzilla becaue of the awesome new plastic carnifex AND the white dwarf spread that showed that one guy's awesome Nidzilla army when they first came out.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230424.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230424.page GMT
Since GW never balance things, there will always be L33t armies and units.

What matters for most players is not what is the most effective competition build, but whether they can have fun with the armies they have now, plus some new items.

For example, most people with Orky armies are the old-timer Ork players, rejuvenated by a well-deserved new codex. If they get a big leg up from the new rules, well they are already playing Orks anyway. We just have to hope that someone elses' army isn't completely nerfed.

In this respect, GW making a rule that the no.1 rule is to "have fun" is stupid and pointless and an abdication of their responsibility. Players will find their own way to adapt to changes.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230436.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230436.page GMT MC per 500 points. Most of the time i play with 3 MCs at 2000 points, so this can hardly be called Nidzilla.

Having said that, i really depend on my Hive Tyrant (Venom Cannon, TL Deathspitter) the Dakkafex, my VC/DS Warrior squad and the Sniperfex to stun vehicles and finally kill them.

Now all those configurations suck extremely, because the VC will not be able to kill anything (which would be okay), and now does care about fast moving vehicles and cover. (cover saves instead of a reduction to glancin). At the same time my twin linked Deathspitter at BS4 is a waste of points. (the deathspitter hardly was a overpowered choice, i liked the looks and the idea of a specialiced medium tank hunter).

Now with those options heavily reduced i seriously wonder, how my other critters are supposed to kill vehicles (especially Eldar skimmers), without me suddenly going Nidzilla my self (this time with a Flyrant and Ninjafexes).

Biovore? Come on...
Zoanthrope? Most of the time they are nullified (psychic hood) or they blow themself up (rune of whatever).

Genestealers and Raveners now hit the rear armour? Who cares. They had rending (which gets toned down). In the past i had a real chance to kill the vehicle, now i have to glance and glance and glance again.

The funny part is (and these ones i really like): Winged Warriors will become the number one vehicle hunters (S5...) after Flyrants and Lictors will actually kick donkey! But only against non-skimmers. Oh, and Dreadnaughts. They will be a problem too.

I hate Nidzilla as most of the people here and i like all the changes, that actually make swarmy Nids better. But how the heck am i supposed to deal with mobile tanks other than glance them until round 6?

Maybe it's all balanced with mission objectives, etc. but i don't consider it fun to not have a real chance against a whole class of enemy units with my army.

The new fast skimmer rule is great for all other armies, but it is the worst, that could have happened to Nids.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230438.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230438.page GMT I guess GW needed FW to sell more Nid wings...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230447.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230447.page GMT LOS changes are the biggest step backwards in this whole list of changes? I mean, the new system for targetting priority _worked_. If this LOS change is mean to balance something else in the new rules, I can't tell what that would be. It looks like swallowing the spider to catch the fly, to me.

And I find the idea of driving up and unloading flamers being the best way to deal with turbo-boosting bikes completely ridiculous. Sure, psycannons broke the turbo rule, but they were a pretty limited problem (and hell, Grey Knights deserve _something_ in their favor).

Speaking of "if it ain't broke don't fix it", I really hope they keep TOF in there. It s was a great rule if it had just been better explained, as an earlier poster pointed out.

These rules reek of pre-playtesting guess work. I'd be surprised if even half of them made it to the final edition. Unless, of course, Gav or Alessio have their hammy little fists in them.

This report seems to break the "40K more like Fantasy" theme that we've seen. I wouldn't be surprised if things like no running within 12", morale mods for CC, etc. just got missed by the OP.

Finally, a question: with the changes to Scout moves and LOS as well as vehicular cover saves,do you fellows think that the all-Sentinel army may actually be a viable build?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230453.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230453.page GMT HtH armies will be too powerful]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230475.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230475.page GMT
I would jump ship cause GW can't seem to get things right. I kind of agree with HBMC in the fact that I like the Fluff of 40k, but not so much the rules.

Lately I just prefer PP and the fine ruleset they have with Warmachine/Hordes. They are both solid games with great rule mechanics. At least with that game I can create a viable themed army and not get the million min/maxer's out there saying the army will get hosed by this, or that.

I understand that GW is in the business of making money and to do so is to make unit x AWSOME so all the fanboyz run out and build uber army based on unit x, then when that milk train runs dry, then GW moves onto unit y, then onto z.

What sucks is when you build an army based upon unit x, then a few months later it sucks. I feel for the High elf players who had all-calvary list with lots of Silver helms. I was gonna make such a list, but decided to wait. I am glad I did or else I would be stuck with a bunch or basically worthless models.

I feel for the chaos players. That codex sucked, and before that DA and to some degree BT, now we have the Ork codex which in the area I play the hardcore ork players think the codex sucks.

Another thing that I find is that within the PP comunity there seems to be less bitchiness than in the 40k circles. I started the game when it first came out back in the mid-late eighties.

I was in junior high then and I loved the background, I loved the various influences I saw GW take from popular sci-fi at the time. When I saw the first IG guys, I thought cool these guys remind me of the colonial marines from Aliens.

But since that time I feel like GW lost something. When second edition came out, that's when I felt a sort of min/maxing feel came into the game. When people looked at units and thought how best to exploit them or how they could fit the maximum number of uber unit into their list. I had a god friend do it and it ruined the game for me.

It was no longer take the stuff that you think looks cool and have fun, it was take this ultimate list and crush...These are a few of the reasons why I would jump ship. These are a few of the reasons why I like the Apocalypse expansion.

I would love to see GW wipe the slate clean and start all over again. Try to go through each codex and balance it with one another. To make each unit viable and worthy of fielding.

As it is, I can see Pathfinder armies become viable with this new edition. I can see how BA marines will be pretty powerful, screen the assualt units or veteran assault units with either tanks or rhino's or even the cheapest troop choice possible.

I can see the Million man march BT's Marines become viable. 1 Emperor's champ and a couple of cheap Chaplains leading 20 man strong units doing the new march move, plus righteous zeal move and on and on....

Anyway enough of my rant, I am not a troll and apologize if it seems like I am flame baiting to which I am not, it just that GW frustrates me and I think others as well. who knows maybe I am totally wrong and barking up the wrong tree.

Sorry,
Chappy P! ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230484.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230484.page GMT GW seriously wants to sell a lot of bikes and no tanks. They didn't sell any Rhinos during the entire 4th edition so I guess it's fine by GW.

On the other hand, armor 14 looks insane good. Lascannons have to roll a 6 to even get a chance to destroy a Monolith. Railguns are the only thing that seem to have a reliable chance of killing it, and even that chance is smaller than it is in the 4th edition. Meltaguns have to roll a 6 to glance, and then 6 to destroy. Ork Rokkits and Kannons are now completely unable to destroy the Monolith, as are Barbed Stranglers and Venom Cannons, as are rending attacks.

[quote]Falcons being overpowered had nothing to do with being able to move and fire their weapons. [/quote]
...and in a manner that GW has grown accustomed to, they nerfed skimmers with a sledgehammer and condemned them to the shelves for the next four years. They didn't just want to change the SMF rule to something more balanced, they also had to nerf their speed and firepower. A fire support tank can park behind some ruins, get a 4+ cover save or better and fire all weapons each turn, while more expensive skimmers have to move each turn to get a weaker cover save for their weaker armour while firing less weapons. Something is wrong here. Someone at GW has to think that balance isn't good for business, and that it's better to have overpowered and underpowered units. My actions will prove GW right, because I'm going to buy two new completely overpowered armies next summer.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230510.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230510.page GMT For shooting, it sounds like regular Vehicles are unchanged and Fast Vehicles are simply Vehicles with +6" movement. This is actually a good little simplification and makes things more playable.

[quote]Vehicle damage chart: 1-2 is the can't shoot/move thing, 3 is weapon, 4 is immobilized, 5-6 destroyed/annihilated). Glance is a -2. [/quote]
This is as expected for the Penetrating chart. I'm surprised that Glancing is -2 instead of -1, as you can't directly destroy a (non-Skimmer) vehicle via Glancing hits. Overall, vehicle survivability went up in a big way, especially with Hull Down giving a cover save for no effect.

[quote]Transports: If your transport is destroyed, passengers now take a Str 4 hit, saves allowed (instead of a 4+). If an open-topped transport is destroyed, it's a Str 3 hit because its easier to disembark.[/quote]
Suck to be Guard, Tau, & Eldar, esp. Harlequins. Yay for the Marines, esp. Plague Marines. Personally, balance-wise, 4+ is a lot fairer - it's not like the T3 infantry needed to be wounded more often. Guard are going to lose almost half their guys when a Chimera blows up. Ouch.

[quote]LOS: I'm pretty sure that it's units that block LOS, so you shouldn't worry about spending 45 minutes drawing LOS from each individual trooper to each individual target.
There's an entire chapter on ruined buildings and how they affect line of sight (like a mini Cities of Death). [/quote]
OK, it's good to see GW dealing with area terrain separate from volume terrain / buildings.

[quote]Running can be done w/in 12" of an enemy. You just can't charge if you run.[/quote]
Also good not to have premeasuring. Fleet can charge, so it's better.

[quote]After shooting and wounding, you can choose to become pinned. You get a +1 to cover save (or a 6+ if you're in the open). It's the "get down!" rule.[/quote]
This is awesome, and exactly what should have been in place from the beginning.

[quote]Gets Hot! is back to the 3rd ed version.[/quote]
Woo hoo! IG troopers can double-tap Plasma again.

[quote]Ground vehicles that move at full speed and cross dangerous terrain roll 2D6 for their test. If one "one" is rolled, they're immobilized. If two "ones" are rolled, the vehicle flips over and is considered destroyed. [/quote]
Heh. That's pretty funny. I wonder if this also applies to Bikes. (it should).

[quote]Flamers: You now determine wounds for all template weapons firing from a squad before you take saves or remove casualties!!![/quote]
Yes! More killy!

[quote]Bikes all now get a 3+ cover save for their turbo-boost. So the psy-cannon thing is out the window.[/quote]
Do they still blitz 24", or only 18". If Bikes go faster than Grav Tanks and Landspeeders, that would be dumb.

[quote]A unit with Scouts that is inside a vehicle confers that ability to the vehicle!!! Let the Pathfinders and Possessed Marines rule![/quote]
That's wierd, but solves a rules argument, so OK.

[quote]Blast weapons don't roll to hit, they just scatter. However, they now operate like template weapons in that any model touched by the blast is hit. None of this "roll 4+ for partial" stuff. A unit firing multiple blast weapons (a SM Dev squad being the example) fires like a multiple barrage unit would in 4th edition. [/quote]
This works. No sniping, lots of utility, standardized mechanic. All good.

[quote]No shooting of defensive weapons if you move full speed.[/quote]
With Defensive weapons being S4 or less, this doesn't matter so much, though it'd have been nice.

[quote]3) Yes, vehicles can now get up to a 3+ cover save, depending on what they're hiding behind.[/quote]
Predators in cover are going to rock very hard.

[quote]Smoke launchers are a 5+ cover save.[/quote]
Ha, I knew it. Good change.

[quote=Voodoo boy]This is overall, in my opinion, a good thing for 40K. [/quote]
I agree.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230516.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230516.page GMT
Have to agree there.

'Zilla 'Nids are [i]not[/i] 'Nids. 'Nids are supposed to be about carpets of little gribbleys punctuated by the odd big critter. Current 'Nids is played in the opposite manner. Anything that forces people to play 'Nids like 'Nids should be is a good thing.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230518.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230518.page GMT Totally agreed.

It should be:
3+ cover save for moving 12-18",
5+ cover save for moving 6-12".]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230519.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230519.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230523.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230523.page GMT
Have to agree there.

'Zilla 'Nids are [i]not[/i] 'Nids. 'Nids are supposed to be about carpets of little gribbleys punctuated by the odd big critter. Current 'Nids is played in the opposite manner. Anything that forces people to play 'Nids like 'Nids should be is a good thing.

BYE[/quote]

Sounds like alot of whining to me.

Maybe you guys should play the 200 model Tyranid list at a GT, let me know how fun it was.

I know it sure as shit drove me to shelve my Nids because moving 200 guys FOURTEEN times in a game is lame.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230525.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230525.page GMT TL Deathspitter) the Dakkafex, my VC/DS Warrior squad and the Sniperfex to stun vehicles and finally kill them.[/quote]

Of course you do. So do the other 3 non-Nid Zilla Tyranid players in the world. It's no fair in the slightest for the Tyranid players that do play 'Nids like 'Nids, and we feel sorry for you.

But this is GW my friend! They [i]always[/i] make sweeping core game changes to fix specific problems, thereby creating other problems elsewhere. If the problem is Zilla 'Nids, they amend the damage charts and change the missions so that you need troops and Venom Canons start sucking rather than, y'know, actually [i]fixing[/i] 'Zilla nids. Falcons a problem too aren't they? So what do they do? Dramatically alter the rules for vehicles!!!

I can't think of anyone else who makes basic game changes to fix specific Codex problems, but this is GW's MO through and through. You shouldn't be surprised. I'm not saying be happy about it, I'm just saying that this is normal.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230530.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230530.page GMT
The new system for target prioruty was _dumb_.

It made small firepower units and vital HQ units (Guard HW squads, CHQs, Dark Reapers, etc.) unworkable. And all that was required was an Ld check, something everyone does almost automatically due to the high amounts of Ld9 and Ld10, and then the biggest army without Ld10 as standard (Marines) then got that thanks to the Rites of Battle rule! It was a hopeless sham, and a step backwards from the screening hell of 3rd Ed.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230535.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230535.page GMT GT, let me know how fun it was.[/quote]

Oh get over yourself. I didn't specifically mean Tyranid armies with 200 models. I meant armies that actually take Gaunts, Warriors and things other than TMCs and 'Stealers. True mixed armies of lots of smalls and some bigs (smalls being everything that isn't a TMC).

Right now the closest thing to that is Stealer Shock, and that's another army that's about to get Nerfed thanks to sweeping general rules changes.

Not since the new Codex came out have 'Nids acted like 'Nids.

BYE
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230543.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230543.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230546.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230546.page GMT str 4 weapons being defensive, woot go ork battlewagons with 4 bolt on big shootas and 2 sponson ones.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230550.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230550.page GMT HtH, rather than shooting them? Wow.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230554.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230554.page GMT HtH, rather than shooting them? Wow.[/quote]

Brings a smile to my face just thinking about that.

This might be one area where you and I, John, might actually see eye-to-eye on something.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230558.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230558.page GMT Brings a smile to my face just thinking about that.

This might be one area where you and I, John, might actually see eye-to-eye on something.
[/quote]
Remember that rending claws can only glance, so the Nids are placing their hopes on the lumbering non-scoring MCs to make close combat with tanks that are faster than they are.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230562.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230562.page GMT Brings a smile to my face just thinking about that.

This might be one area where you and I, John, might actually see eye-to-eye on something.
[/quote]
Remember that rending claws can only glance, so the Nids are placing their hopes on the lumbering non-scoring MCs to make close combat with tanks that are faster than they are.[/quote]

not that much faster, if the rumors are true....]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230563.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230563.page GMT
I don't mind Tyranids and I do see your point in the fact that nids should be a horde type army, but obviously the designers thought otherwise.

Such as the new Plastic Carnifex kit. How do we sell these en masse, I know say Phil Kelly, I'll allow up to 8 TMC's in a list. I remember when the codex first came out and people laughed at the idea of the zilla list. I remember people telling me it would never be a viable list, then suddenly it becomes top tier (build depending of coarse.)

The problem with nids specifically comes to their inability to tank bust effectively. Try getting a CC carnifex into combat. Usually my CC fex ends up grabbing a table quarter or an objective because the guy I am facing runs away from him.

Again this is where I look at the game designers and say what the heck were you thinking!?!? They should go to each list and say this army should be seen as this and make the rules flow and follow the fluff they have written.

Again this is why I like PP's stuff, because when you read the fluff of Warcaster X, the fluff is then translated excellently into X's rules.

Recent example would be the Pirate warcaster Shae, he lives, eats and breaths life on a ship and is used to the rolling deck of his ship, so in combat he gets an ability to not be knocked off his feet with his ability aptly named "sealegs."

This is what I want from GW. I am reading Brothers of the Snake by Dan Abnett and I love his work, this is not as good as say his Guants Ghost, but still very good. However if you wanted to play the Iron Snake Chapter you have to ditch some of the fluff due to the rules. I have thought about doing an Iron Snake army, but I am scared about getting all the stuff I need only to have it nerfed in a few month with either a new set of rules or a new codex.

Again my 2 cents,

Chappy P! ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230565.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230565.page GMT MCs to make close combat with tanks that are faster than they are.[/quote]

They can still penetrate the armour normally with regular Strength+D6 attacks.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230576.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230576.page GMT
Chappy p!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230586.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230586.page GMT D6 is glancing 10 on the rear. They can change that with toxin sacs though. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230587.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230587.page GMT
Yeah, I know. At some point the vision of what Tyranids should be, and what they actually are (a Codex full of junk units with a few good ones) has to collide.

That said I don't think they really thought there'd be a problem. I think they actually think that they made a nice balanced Codex, rather than a Codex that suited two styles of play correctly and made others impossible. Oh well, 'Nids will decent to the bottom of the army latter soon, and we won't have to worry about it until they make a new Gaunt plastic kit and give them killer rules.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230588.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230588.page GMT HtH, rather than shooting them? Wow.[/quote]

I am afraid, but if these rumours are true, we might see the radical change of Nids not being able to kill vehicles rather than shooting them!

I did some mathhammer. You need about 100 Genestealer attacks to finally bring down a vehicle with 4 weapons. And this target mustn't move or we are talking about 200 or even 600 attacks...

The only thing that could reliably bring down vehicles (non skimmers!) would be... surprise... cc MCs...
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230589.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230589.page GMT LOS changes leave me with mixed feelings. Units block LOS, but terrain doesn't? WTF?

At this point though, I don't care. So long as I don't have to have a five minute discussion before each game explaining what the rule book says to a new opponent, and everyone is on the same page.

Clearing up the LOS rules so everyone 'knows' what they mean would be an enormous improvement IMHO.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230591.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230591.page GMT HtH, rather than shooting them? Wow.[/quote]

I am afraid, but if these rumours are true, we might see the radical change of Nids not being able to kill vehicles rather than shooting them!

I did some mathhammer. You need about 100 Genestealer attacks to finally bring down a vehicle with 4 weapons. And this target mustn't move or we are talking about 200 or even 600 attacks...

The only thing that could reliably bring down vehicles (non skimmers!) would be... surprise... cc MCs...
[/quote]
If we're talking about Monoliths that can't really even be hit in close combat the Tyranids or Orks simply [i]don't[/i] destroy them. It's fun to have unkillable models around.

[quote]and what they actually are (a Codex full of junk units with a few good ones)[/quote]
You're right and I voiced my concerns about that when the codex was released. Same applies to Eldar of course, and they'll suffer largely the same fate as Nids. If an army book is so bad that you can make only one competitive build out of it, and that build then gets obliterated because of rules changes, you're left with nothing but junk. Making a good unit worse doesn't make the terrible units any better.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230592.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230592.page GMT CC Carnifex has never seen action in all the times I have played my zilla's.

@Stingray_TM: Yeah that's the real issue...It'll take a lot of CC attacks to bring down vehicles now. Who wants most of their army tide up trying to bring down a tank when the other guy is just pulling back systematically picking apart your army.

Thanks,
Chappy P!

PS: I am sorry to be so focused on nids, but it's just what I know best currently and am the most familiar with. I also see how these new changes will make the $300 plus dollar army I build and make it complete crap! Thanks GW for boning a loyal buyer yet again. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230594.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230594.page GMT CC, and that if vehicles have to dance around to avoid your Carnifex from peeling it open like an aluminum can they're not shooting much.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230596.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230596.page GMT CC, and that if vehicles have to dance around to avoid your Carnifex from peeling it open like an aluminum can they're not shooting much.[/quote]

Well, i hoped, that i don't need to use an additional Carnifex in order to do, what my swarm was able to do until now. No one wants more Godzilla, but this is the direction.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230597.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230597.page GMT
Thanks,
Chappy P!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230598.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230598.page GMT If we're talking about Monoliths that can't really even be hit in close combat the Tyranids or Orks simply [i]don't[/i] destroy them. It's fun to have unkillable models around.
[/quote]

No, it's not. That's not my idea of fun, if i don't have a chance to kill a certain unit. That's bad gamedesign. There should be a Tyranid way of dealing with this threat not "Sorry, you are playing the wrong army. But don't worry, it's fun (for me) that you can't hurt my tank".]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230600.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230600.page GMT TMC's in a list.[/quote]
And yet the Eldar didn't get 6+ Wraithlords for their new plastic kit. Funny, that. It's almost like the Eldar Codex writers didn't get the message to pump model sales of the new Wraithlord...

[quote]The problem with nids specifically comes to their inability to tank bust effectively. Try getting a CC carnifex into combat. [/quote]
First, he can't spend half his game hiding in cover. Second, he'll have Fleet of some sort.

[quote]Again this is why I like PP's stuff, because when you read the fluff of Warcaster X, [/quote]
I played Warmachine waayyy back when it first came out and battles were still about the 'Jacks. Still have my Cryx. To me, with the non-customizable Warcasters, it's kind of like playing a card game: "Denigra, I choose YOU!"

Certainly, I would not be excited about having to buy a stack of quarterly rules supplements to stay on top of the game. It's nice to just buy the one Codex and have it for a few years. And rule-wise, I got to wonder if the original Slayer is still points-competitive. I'm thinking he's now rules-obsolete, meaning unsalvageable unit PP decides to do a full-game rebalance and refresh.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230601.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230601.page GMT We should expect a new Necron Codex to follow shortly after 5th Ed releases. Rules-wise the Necrons are an absolute disaster.

If WBB becomes FNP and Gauss becomes (nerfed) Rending, that will solve the two most basic problems. Then it's simply a question of cleaning up "Living Metal" (always Glancing) and Phaseout (less than 2 Scoring units of Necron Warriors).]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230604.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230604.page GMT Have a look at Apocalypse. It's marketed as something completely imbalanced and stupid and that's exactly what I think it is. GW has got this idea that whenever they don't want to spend the time to write balanced rules, they'll put in the disclaimer "remember that this game is supposed to be more about fun than anything else." When six Fire Prisms come from reserve and drop 6 S10 AP1 apocalyptic barrage templates on top of your army and annihilate you, we're talking about GW's idea of fun.

The fact is that a new rulebook like this makes people who want to stay in the game buy new models, and the people who don't want to stay in the game undoubtedly get replaced by new people. GW has a new CEO and the company hasn't been doing all that well recently so it's time for a major revamp. If you for a second think that GW would place your idea of fun ahead of making money you're being childish. Some armies will be incredibly underpowered for the entirety of the 5th edition because of these new rules, while others will prosper. The players who want to keep winning buy new models and new armies.

[quote]Gauss becomes (nerfed) Rending[/quote]
That would be a significant buff to Necrons. 18 Necron Warriors rapid firing would then be able to kill a 4 wound TMC. The funny thing about 40K points costs is that they're so completely off that it's unreal. The Monolith could easily cost 285 points and noone would complain.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230606.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230606.page GMT PP decides to do a full-game rebalance and refresh. [/quote]

You would rather go 4 or 5 years with a worthless codex instead?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230609.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230609.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230612.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230612.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230613.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230613.page GMT
In the meantime, my falcon-free competetive foot-slogging eldar just got stronger with all the new rules.

Ha-Ha!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230617.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230617.page GMT TMC. The funny thing about 40K points costs is that they're so completely off that it's unreal. The Monolith could easily cost 285 points and noone would complain.[/quote]
That assumes that Warriors don't get a sizable cost increase in their new book. If Gauss becomes Rending they'd easily be worth 22-25 points apiece.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230618.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230618.page GMT
Don't be intentionally obtuse John. He's speaking generally.

If a worthless Codex was written (and there have been many of those in the past, but we'll ignore that for the time being), I think that players would be happier with updates and such rather than just being told 'Sorry, wait 4-8 years for a revision'.

I think the Ork players here would agree...

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230619.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230619.page GMT I refuse to believe your footslogging Eldar are anything even remotely like competitive, but as an Eldar player I'd be glad to be proven wrong.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230621.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230621.page GMT I refuse to believe your footslogging Eldar are anything even remotely like competitive, but as an Eldar player I'd be glad to be proven wrong.[/quote]

Its not Nidzilla or Falcon spam competetive, but its 77 fearless foot troopers with a fortuned avatar and 6 guided warwalkers played by someone who knows what his AND your army can do competetive.

I've been competetive and not a push-over with it. Thats not to say that really smart players with the Uber lists cannot beat me.

....its still getting better in the new system though from these rumours, and I wont have to change my tactics with an army I'm used to. Its part of the bonus that people get that dont buy into totally easy armies to win with.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230627.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230627.page GMT FAQ, probably won't).

Oh well, welcome to the Ork players world before the new Codex. "Oh you're uncompetitive, well sorry - wait till we finish these other armies first and then we'll address your problems."]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230628.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230628.page GMT GW followed the PP model, you wouldn't even *get* a Codex, only an endless stream of piecemeal updates (additions).

Your CSM might just be CSM, Defilers, and Havocs. But mixed in you'll also have Shoota Boyz, Heavy Destroyers, War Walkers, and Stormtroopers.

Then next quarter, you buy another book to get rules for Possessed & Terminators. Along with Death Company, Wave Serpents and Basilisks. And 4 chapters of Dan Abnett's latest novella.

And so on.

It's the never-ending treadmill of PP stuff that I'm protesting.


Also, given that I've got several largish armies with lots of options, the odds that one of them will be strong easily offsets the odds that another one or two might be weak. So if my Eldar (or parts of my Eldar) spend 4-8 years on the shelf, I'm OK with that, because it just means my Marines or Guard get more play.

Plus, as I've retooled towards more "balanced" armies, I think I'll be even more "future-proofed" against rules changes.

If, by some strange miracle, all of my 40k armies are "unplayable", then I can always play Fantasy, Gothic, Necro, Mord, or any of a number of other GW / non-GW games. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230631.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230631.page GMT str 10 at 18"? Since when is Str 10 weak? Monoliths have short range guns and cheap bugs can screen Zopes until they get in range. Besides all that, what's wrong with causing a Necron phase out to kill the Monolith?

As for Land Raiders, I don't think it was the Vennom Cannon that has kept the Land Raider out of the top lists. I think it is the enemy Lascannons, Meltaguns, Brightlances, etc... that keep Land Raiders off of the top table armies.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230634.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230634.page GMT
I have about 6k of IG, so while my armies might never be top teir, I can reliably field a pretty competitive build, whatever that is from the codex.

On the other hand, a gamer with exactly 1850 of nidzilla dreads every change, because a few or nearly all of the models he owns will be affected, leading to more purchases and painting.

It doesn't make one side or another right, but it probably explains at least some of my eagerness for a new edition.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230637.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230637.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230649.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230649.page GMT str 10 at 18"? Since when is Str 10 weak? Monoliths have short range guns and cheap bugs can screen Zopes until they get in range. Besides all that, what's wrong with causing a Necron phase out to kill the Monolith?

As for Land Raiders, I don't think it was the Vennom Cannon that has kept the Land Raider out of the top lists. I think it is the enemy Lascannons, Meltaguns, Brightlances, etc... that keep Land Raiders off of the top table armies.[/quote]

Zoanthropes are excellent, but experienced play has demonstrated they're unreliable AT at best. Having to close within 18" will force you out into the open, the 'thropes are pretty tough but will quickly perish to any opponent keen to kill them and protect his tanks. You're also a single shot BS 3 weapon, and vulnerable to enemy librarians. A list relying on zoanthropes for AT is likely to punished by any list fielding mutliple armour units.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230683.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230683.page GMT
As far as PP goes, it is not so much a treadmill as it was put earlier. You can choose to get whatever expansion you want when you want, and it doesn't effect the game. With the new Remix book of prime, it contains all the rules you need, plus PP is great at FAQ's and keeping said faq up to date, unlike GW. When was the last time they put out a faq??

The other thing I love about PP is that all units have some sort of viability. True some people favor a particular unit over others, but they all have a place. I buy what I like and what I think looks cool and it all comes out in the end.

@Plonius: I would agree, if you have 6k points in whatever army then new changes don't effect you, but some of us in the gaming community do not have that, nor do new gamers. I know my gaming expenditures is not what it used to be, so with each new codex/army book revision, I do cringe wondering what will work and what won't.

Again just a few thoughts
Thanks,
Chappy P!

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230698.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230698.page GMT
@Plonius: I would agree, if you have 6k points in whatever army then new changes don't effect you, but some of us in the gaming community do not have that, nor do new gamers. I know my gaming expenditures is not what it used to be, so with each new codex/army book revision, I do cringe wondering what will work and what won't.

[/quote]

That was pretty much my point: people with smaller collections are more likely to be worried about a new edition. At risk of sounding obnoxious, I'd imagine people with generalist armies are less worried than those with narrow themed armies. It's times like this where all gamers really have to remind themselves that the GW hobby isn't just painting and playing with GW minis, it's buying, painting, and playing with GW minis. To reuse a tired joke, if you don't want to buy more miniatures, you might be in the wrong hobby. To be clear, I'm mocking GW more than any poster, of course.

The big advantage GW has is that they're betting it'll be cheaper in the long wrong for a hobbyist to rebuild an army and keep playing 40k than to get into a new game, especially since now new game has lasted much longer than 4-5 years in competition to 40k. PP is really making a legit run at it, and they might be the one to really break out as the solid #2 mini gaming company. If you don't think PP's business model involves a way to get you to buy new models every year, you might be disappointed. It's the way of the world.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230757.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230757.page GMT PP does stuff is there is less waiting. Whenever an expansion comes out, everyone gets stuff. Ork players had to wait 9 years before they got a new codex. The witchhunters aren't even going to get a 4th edition codex. The idea of giving everything something new is an awesome way of alway keeping the game interesting. On top of that, rules questions gets taken care of quickly. I really hate how GW never takes care of rules issues, and when they do take care of rules issues, more problems crop up. I'm looking at you Tyranid FAQ...

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230770.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230770.page GMT str 10 at 18"? Since when is Str 10 weak? Monoliths have short range guns and cheap bugs can screen Zopes until they get in range. Besides all that, what's wrong with causing a Necron phase out to kill the Monolith?
[/quote]

It's not only about Liths. This is what i have to do in order to kill (or better: to penetrage) a Landraider with.

- get inside 18"
- don't screw up the pschic test
- don't get cancelled by Librarian
- hit on 4+
- penetrate on 4+

Now the whole army has three of those shots. That's less firepower than a single SM Devastator squad has.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230782.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230782.page GMT And yet the Eldar didn't get 6+ Wraithlords for their new plastic kit. Funny, that. It's almost like the Eldar Codex writers didn't get the message to pump model sales of the new Wraithlord...
[/quote]

Well, they already got way overboard with Harlequins, giving that treatment to other new units would have been too obvious, even for GW...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230783.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230783.page GMT
All this time I've been cramming in as many Terminators as possible to complement my already large Troops base of fatty Crusader Squads. If 5th Edition throws Forced March and Infantry Screening back into the mix, I imagine that Black Templars (as well as all the other horde lists out there) will make a solid comeback and become a fairly common, respected opponent, instead of being relegated to a sub-par level as they have in the past.

CK]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230788.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230788.page GMT
One of the problems with 2nd ed was that you never saw troops fire as they advanced. Units with heavy weapons stood still and fired all their guns. Units wanting to assault gave up their chance to shoot by running and then charging. All those orks with pistols never, ever shot them as they were too busy running at the enemy.

Starting with third ed, 40K took things in a new direction, getting rid of the run/walk/charge options, and giving everything a chance to move the average amount. They then gave them weapons options, meaning troops properly equipped with assault weapons could maintain their fire as they advanced. Tyranids and orks could march forward under these new rules and fire supporting rounds. GW largely buggered this up by making shoota boyz rapid fire (but they've fixed that now) and making dual purpose tyranid warriors too expensive (still wrong), but the principle is sound.

But with the proposed rule buggers that up. if you're interested in assaulting you'll happily ignore those shots for the opportunity to close with the enemy a little sooner. You won't see assault weapon used to support the advance anymore.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230796.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230796.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230816.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230816.page GMT
I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that this is a regressive step that will undo much of the rules structure put in place for third and fourth ed. Maybe we're better off with a different system with a mechanic for running, but if that's the case the only sensible thing is to throw out the whole rapid fire/assault/heavy categories, probably along with the move/shoot/charge sequence.

The proposed rule change, taken at face value and assuming no other significant rules changes are to be announced, is a weird hybrid where many rules will exist for no particular reason. Either this is an extremely preliminary GW idea, or an idea made up by a fan who didn't really think it through, or there are other significant rules changes to come, or GW are about to release a really goofy set of rules.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230831.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230831.page GMT
Whilst no-one is suggesting that the existing rumours are finished work, the past history of GW releases does not fill one with confidence that all the loose ends, ambiguities and unfortunate unexpectedly large effects will be wrapped up neatly in the finished product.

We may find that troops with assault weapons are allowed to move, shoot and pseudo-fleet, and troops with RF weapons are allowed to move and shoot to max range, but not pseudo-fleet the same turn.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230837.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230837.page GMT LOS rules.

Anyone have any insight to this?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230842.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230842.page GMT
Not kidding, it just seems to me that you can treat woods as a group of individual trees in which case everyone will need a laser pointer to figure out the LOS, or else you treat it as area terrain. The problem with the area terrain system now is not that it is a bad idea but that it is badly explained.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230847.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230847.page GMT LOS I'm out of here. The game sucketh much at that point. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230858.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230858.page GMT
I played against a similar list with my pre-nerf IW and I was only able to to pull off a solid victory. The fearless aspect means you have to kill his units 100% to get the full VPs, so even having 1 dude hiding from shooting / melee means that you can only ever get 1/2 VPs from him.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230870.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230870.page GMT str 10 at 18"? Since when is Str 10 weak? Monoliths have short range guns and cheap bugs can screen Zopes until they get in range. Besides all that, what's wrong with causing a Necron phase out to kill the Monolith?

As for Land Raiders, I don't think it was the Vennom Cannon that has kept the Land Raider out of the top lists. I think it is the enemy Lascannons, Meltaguns, Brightlances, etc... that keep Land Raiders off of the top table armies.[/quote]

Zoanthropes are excellent, but experienced play has demonstrated they're unreliable AT at best. Having to close within 18" will force you out into the open, the 'thropes are pretty tough but will quickly perish to any opponent keen to kill them and protect his tanks. You're also a single shot BS 3 weapon, and vulnerable to enemy librarians. A list relying on zoanthropes for AT is likely to punished by any list fielding mutliple armour units.[/quote]


Many Godzilla Nidz lists take 3 Zopes, 2 sniper fexes and at leat one venom cannon Tyrant. That's 5 units for anti-tank. Multiple armor units will not have a lot of armor 14 all around. Those multiple armor units will consist mostly of armor 10 in the back and assaults now target the enemy rear armor. Anything with an armor 10 in the back can be brought down by str 4 assaults (Genestealers, Raveners, boosted Hormagaunts) so armor 14 all around was the big problem. 18" range seems short except Monoliths have to get within 24" to do anything to you and that is one turns walking for a Zope to be in range. Zopes seem much more survivable if they are screened by 20-25 fearless 5pt spinegaunts. It appears only Monsterous creatures and Vehicles can get to them. But I'm not sure MC's won't be able to block LOS to anything behind them like they do now and Zopes once agains get their meat shield back.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230874.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230874.page GMT str 10 at 18"? Since when is Str 10 weak? Monoliths have short range guns and cheap bugs can screen Zopes until they get in range. Besides all that, what's wrong with causing a Necron phase out to kill the Monolith?
[/quote]

It's not only about Liths. This is what i have to do in order to kill (or better: to penetrage) a Landraider with.

- get inside 18"
- don't screw up the pschic test
- don't get cancelled by Librarian
- hit on 4+
- penetrate on 4+

Now the whole army has three of those shots. That's less firepower than a single SM Devastator squad has.[/quote]


With an 18" threat range and 12" deployment zones, the Zopes can reach any spot on the board by turn 3 with a concentrated Warp Blast. The psychic test is on leadership 10 and enemy librarians have a 34% chance to cancel the power each turn (less if the Tyrants have psychic scream and get close). Hitting and wounding is a dice roll, but you do have 3 Zopes and with screening by fearless Spinegaunts it is not unrealistic to expect all three get into range to shoot. I'm not saying they will bring down an armored company by turn 3, I'm just saying it is not as dire for the Bugs as it seems.

And we're only talking about Land Raider, Monoliths and Leman Russ Demolishers. Every other tank can be brought down in HtH from those rear atacks. Monoliths and Demolishers have generally short range weapons which bring them even closer to the Zopes and Land Raiders still are not seen regularly on the top tables so once you get out of round 1 with a win, the chances are you won't see one.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230878.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230878.page GMT
Capt K]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230888.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230888.page GMT
Perhaps. However, if screening by units really does come back into the game, we'll be able to screen them with Gaunts. I might not even bother with extended carapace then.

How are we going to take objectives? I dunno. I think the Tyranid plan is going to be wipe out the other guy's Troops and try to win on straight VPs. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230889.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230889.page GMT LOS I'm out of here. The game sucketh much at that point. [/quote]

I think it has something to do with units rather than individual bases.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230893.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230893.page GMT TMC's would gain the new March move ability.

I am under the current understanding that only small based sized and maybe terminator size models would be eligible for said move. If that is ture and the move rules out TMC's, then zilla nids get totally boned.

As far as their weaponry goes, what's the point of taking a venom cannon? Sure the barbed strangler is still useful against horde armies. In my current nid army, I went purist, so I don't have a unit of Zoe's and have had to reply on 4 venom cannons to get any anti-tank jobs done, even then it was with luck of the dice if I managed to get a destroyed tank on a glancing hit.

As it is in this current edition, movement is key for and against nid zilla. It can be incredibly frustrating to try and get the big guys close enough to my opponent to do the work that needs to be done.

A smart player in this new 5th edition might or might not use tanks first and foremost. If he does and he's facing nids, then he can just keep his tanks far enough away and just blast away.

I agree with Sebster and Stingray about Zoe's. They can be good for AT, but they are not the best and with the new glancing rules, you cannot get a vehicle destroyed hit with guns that you once could.

Unless in the next Tyranid codex, whenever that may come out, they allow venon cannons to get penetrating hits. But my suspicion is that with a new edition of the tyranid codex, the zilla list will no longer be viable. This just seems the way of GW.

Scudman Said:
"What I like about how PP does stuff is there is less waiting. Whenever an expansion comes out, everyone gets stuff. Ork players had to wait 9 years before they got a new codex. The witchhunters aren't even going to get a 4th edition codex. The idea of giving everything something new is an awesome way of alway keeping the game interesting. On top of that, rules questions gets taken care of quickly. I really hate how GW never takes care of rules issues, and when they do take care of rules issues, more problems crop up. I'm looking at you Tyranid FAQ..."

QFT...I like PP's way of putting out supplements. I would rather put out money for decent books, and fast up-to-date faqs, then wait for years for essentially a shoddy product with little or no support in terms of a faqs, that will become obsolete a short time later . I also like the fact that the customers can say and voice opinions to PP and that the creators listen and seem to care.

Again, my 2 pence,
Thanks,
Chappy P!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230902.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230902.page GMT LOS I'm out of here. The game sucketh much at that point. [/quote]

I think it has something to do with units rather than individual bases.[/quote]

Like Fantasy? It would make it much easier if I only needed to poke out one of my crisis suits to fire if that's the case.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230906.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230906.page GMT LOS I'm out of here. The game sucketh much at that point. [/quote]

I think it has something to do with units rather than individual bases.[/quote]

Like Fantasy? It would make it much easier if I only needed to poke out one of my crisis suits to fire if that's the case.[/quote]

from the first page of this thread.

[quote]LOS: I'm pretty sure that it's units that block LOS, so you shouldn't worry about spending 45 minutes drawing LOS from each individual trooper to each individual target. You draw LOS from the eyes of the model. Area terrain gives cover saves. There's an entire chapter on ruined buildings and how they affect line of sight (like a mini Cities of Death). I honestly don't remember if 6" of terrain blocks sight or not.[/quote]

if I get what you're saying, you'd still have to move the entire squad. But you wouldn't have to worry about spaces between the screening models bases like was necessary in 3rd ed.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230908.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230908.page GMT
Whilst no-one is suggesting that the existing rumours are finished work, the past history of GW releases does not fill one with confidence that all the loose ends, ambiguities and unfortunate unexpectedly large effects will be wrapped up neatly in the finished product.

[/quote]

FWIW, it looks like the unfinished draft the Warseer poster was referring to has leaked to the web.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230921.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230921.page GMT ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230926.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230926.page GMT
[quote]Ok I have a copy of what I think is the same document (only had a quick browse)

The chart for missions says
1-2 = Recon
3-4= Take and Hold
5-6 = Total Anihiliation

Recon = You role for d3+2 objectives and if you have troops within 3" and the other guy doesnt at the end of the game, you hold that objective. The one with the most objectives wins.

Take and Hold = Is similar, except each player choses an objective within their deployment zone, not in impassible terrain, and not within 24" of the other objective.

Total Anihilation = Get 'Kill Points' for units destroyed or falling back. HQ=3pts. Fast, Heavy, Elite = 2pts Troops=1pt


Oh and later on its says VPs are used to decide draws. Units destroyed are worth their points, half strength units worth half their points. You need at least a 10% difference in VPs based on the points of the game to win (i.e. their example 1,500 points requres a 150 pints difference to register a win)

There is also a 'deployment' chart which I will put on in the morning (too tired) if someone else hasn't done it already. As noted earlier, only troops are scoring, except if falling back / it is a transport? / it has a specific rule saying it isn't scoring.

One funny thing about the deployment chart. One of the deployment types is called "Dawn of War"[/quote]]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230928.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230928.page GMT
As for the nids going back to swarms/footsloggers then fine by me! Comments were made in the 'should SM get strength increase', mostly by me, complaining that zillas get to your line and hack sah eat dribble etc. until your power armours massed up. After a few comments I came to the conclusion that fluff wise marines are fine, it's actually army composition that's wrong. Look at the artwork and stories - foot troops clearly outnumber anything else, there's 100's of them for each big tank/monster etc. Turning down the use of tanks/monsters gets my vote if the standard foot trooper becomes more 'valuable'. If it was that easy to field 3 carnifexs/2tyrants etc then where are they in the fluff? Bringing the balance back in favour of footsloggers to me is a v. good move.

But an army of 100 troops who can run olympic speed at the enemy? I may be wrong but isn't a 40K turn estimated at 6-10 seconds? That's a long way the standard trooper could run - across an uneven battle field while being under heavy fire. Keep it to 6" move and fleet for the rare faster troops I say. just my opinion]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230933.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230933.page GMT str 4 assaults (Genestealers, Raveners, boosted Hormagaunts) so armor 14 all around was the big problem. 18" range seems short except Monoliths have to get within 24" to do anything to you and that is one turns walking for a Zope to be in range. Zopes seem much more survivable if they are screened by 20-25 fearless 5pt spinegaunts. It appears only Monsterous creatures and Vehicles can get to them. But I'm not sure MC's won't be able to block LOS to anything behind them like they do now and Zopes once agains get their meat shield back.[/quote]

You've changed your argument. People were commenting that 'nids will struggle to knock out AV14 if their glancing venom cannons were nerfed. You replied that the zoan's warp blast was fine. A few of us pointed out that zoan's limitations were considerable... I even recognised they're excellent units but not strong enough to rely on for AT by themselves.

You then changed your assertion, making zoan's part of 'nidzilla list with multiple 'fex and tyrants. Which is considerably different to your original assertion, and nonsensical in a conversation about 'nid AT when venom cannons are no longer effective.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230940.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230940.page GMT
Some observations:

Pg 3 - Blast markers now hit if they cover any part of the base. This is a nice boost for Frag Missiles, and Ordnance.

Pg 4 - The term 'model is much more explicitly defined than before. This is a good sign.

Pg 15 - 'Running' works exactly like Fleet of Foot does now.

Pg 16 - They explicitly say you can't shoot a Space Marine's back banner. That's good to have explained since I play with some obtuse players.

"Models are not allowed to fire through the gaps in an intervening unit."

You can shoot over friends if you're on a hill. This is done via the Laser Pointer method to see if the hill is high enough to not clip the heads of a friendly unit ahead of you. You can also shoot through your own unit with no problems. The 'Covering Fire' rule cuts down on some obvious abuses - but this still looks problematic to me.

Pg 18 - BS6+ works by providing a reroll when a one is rolled. e.g. 2/6 2/5 2/4, etc.

Pg 19 - Majority toughness is still used.

Pg 20 - Allocating wounds is model by model. This means all wounds must be rolled individually - not just special/heavy weapons and sergeants. This is because a failed saving throw of a particular trooper could affect line of sight or range of subsequent firing units or knock the unit out of coherency (EDIT: nope, they allow you to remove another model with an identical stat-line (p 23), things aren't as bad as they looked from this page alone). This looks like it could seriously slow the game down.

Pg 21 - Cover is better than before. It ranges from 5+ - 3+ and is generally 1 better than similar cover was in 4th.

Pg 22 - If you're deep in cover in area terrain, your opponent gets a cover save. The way wounds are allocated makes partial cover simple to resolve.

You can elect to be Pinned on your subsequent turn to get a +1 cover save. It's an interesting option.

Pg 23 - They reversed the fluff rationale for heavy weapons' saves - either he was the only one trained or the weapon was damaged.

That's movement and shooting. I'll post general impressions/rumours from other sections as I read them.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230941.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230941.page GMT
[quote]Ok the deployment chart isn't as complex (surprise!) as I thought, so I will try to outline it quickly:

1-2 - Spearhead (table quarters) as usual, except that is seems that the person that won the initial roll deploys their entire force and then the other player deploys theirs. The person who 'won' the initial roll then goes first.

3-4 - Pitched Battle (long table edges) Normal deployment (well 12" from the middle of the table anyway, can't remember the rules from current ed.) Again, winner deploys first, then the other player then the 'winner' goes first.

5-6 Dawn of War (Table Halves) Same as above, except you place 1HQ and 2 Troops (including infiltrators). Everyone else is placed in reserve and comes on in turn 1; and the first turn is night fighting.[/quote]]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230942.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230942.page GMT
Pg 27 - Rapid Fire remains 12", not 1/2 range as Tau players want. Blast weapons don't roll to hit - it scatters a d6. The rules for multiple blasts strike me a tad unruly though.

Pg 28 - Gets Hot! is only on a 1.

Multiple templates are done by counting all the hits first, then allocating wounds, etc.

Pg 29 - All Sniper weapons hit on a 2+, wound on a 4+ and are Pinning and Rending.

Rending - 6 to wound automatically causes an AP2 wound regardless of toughness. Against vehicles you add a d3 on a 6 to pen.

The next Chapter is assault.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230949.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230949.page GMT
Rending - 6 to wound automatically causes an AP2 wound regardless of toughness. Against vehicles you add a d3 on a 6 to pen.

[/quote]


Interesting. This would mean stealers would get a max of str 13 to affect vehicles. Not enough to affect Land Raiders and Monoliths, but enough to hurt everything else. I wonder if they can only glance with this or if they can pen also.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230958.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230958.page GMT
[quote]Ok the deployment chart isn't as complex (surprise!) as I thought, so I will try to outline it quickly:

1-2 - Spearhead (table quarters) as usual, except that is seems that the person that won the initial roll deploys their entire force and then the other player deploys theirs. The person who 'won' the initial roll then goes first.

3-4 - Pitched Battle (long table edges) Normal deployment (well 12" from the middle of the table anyway, can't remember the rules from current ed.) Again, winner deploys first, then the other player then the 'winner' goes first.

5-6 Dawn of War (Table Halves) Same as above, except you place 1HQ and 2 Troops (including infiltrators). Everyone else is placed in reserve and comes on in turn 1; and the first turn is night fighting.[/quote][/quote]

This is interesting. I don't know if I like it yet, but it could go a long way towards relieving the issue of "Whoever gets first turn wins" myth that some people judge 40K by.

GG]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230962.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230962.page GMT You've changed your argument. People were commenting that 'nids will struggle to knock out AV14 if their glancing venom cannons were nerfed. You replied that the zoan's warp blast was fine. A few of us pointed out that zoan's limitations were considerable... I even recognised they're excellent units but not strong enough to rely on for AT by themselves.

You then changed your assertion, making zoan's part of 'nidzilla list with multiple 'fex and tyrants. Which is considerably different to your original assertion, and nonsensical in a conversation about 'nid AT when venom cannons are no longer effective.[/quote]


Not changing the argument at all. Simply answering your worry that "A list relying on zoanthropes for AT is likely to punished by any list fielding mutliple armour units." You talk about multiple armor units and not only about the Land Raider and Monolith the other posts were talking about. 3 Zopes are fine vs. a few Land raider or Monoliths and yes the Nid player can not rely on "Zopes only" when facing Multiple armor units (or armies) such as steel legion. Those are two different arguments that I tried to answer together. Zopes vs. armor 14 all around, other nid nasties vs. other armor units.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230963.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230963.page GMT
This seems powerful to me, for when your squad is below half you won't fall back.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230968.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230968.page GMT
p 37 - Wounds are allocated like with shooting.

p 38 - The rumours that combat resolution was like in Fantasy don't match up with this draft - it's about the same as 4th ed.

p 42 - Friends falling back can trigger a morale check. This is big for Guard and Tau.

p 43 - You can shoot while falling back.

p 44 - You can bonuses to regrouping checks for being inside area terrain or not being able to see the enemy.

p 46 - Characters with retinues cannot leave them.

p 47 - Characters are treated as a separate unit in close combat. (Note that the new wound allocation does lessen the power of hidden 'Fists, so they've moved up in relative terms).

p 48 - Perils of the Warp is an automatic wound with no armour or cover save allowed - per previous rumours.

p 49 - City Ruins are area terrain. Different heights are measured base to base as usual. You use movement to move up and down and any excess beyond what's needed to move onto a level is wasted and you can't end up between levels.

p 51 - Blasts are fired at a particular level.

p 53 - Monstrous Creatures get Move Through Cover.

p 61 - Vehicles have the 'Relentless' special rule that allows them to fire weapons as if stationary. This clears up the ambiguity about Rapid Fire weapons. (Bikers get this too.)

If you move you can only fire one weapon, except for defensive weapons (S4 or lower). There's no exception for Tau or pintle-weapons.

Line of sight is measured from the weapon's barrel.

Other rumours accurate.

p 70 - Dedicated transports can transport other units later. Yay!

p 72 - Ramming rules for vehicles. Should be fun to do Gorkamorka in the middle of a fight when Orks fight Orks.

p 78 - The 'Eternal Warrior' special rule means immunity to instant death. Remember that Daemon Herald have this special rule and people wondered what it meant.

'Fleet' lets you assault if you run in the movement phase. Great for Gaunts, of mediocre value for Guardians.

p 85 - Missions as just stated. Only non-vehicle Troops count as scoring. This is huge, obviously.

p 87 - Army lists are not secret.

p 89 - There's a mishap table if you deepstrike within 1" of an enemy model.

No mention of Escalation.

Everything here is courtesy of [b]widderslainte[/b], address your kudos to him.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230972.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230972.page GMT
I certainly have some doubts about a few of the rules (only Troops as scoring, scattering Blast weapons chief among them), but overall it looks fairly solid. The invisible Powerfist has received a bit of a nerf and GW has listened to the fans and defined their terms much better than in the past.

Army selection will certainly be effected. But I don't think it will be quite as broken as people thing. For example Combat Squads are really vulnerable to the new wound allocation rules, so they won't dominate the field with lots of scoring units.

Things I missed: Smoke Launchers give a 5+ cover save, Fast Vehicles have a top speed of 18" now rather than 24" (which makes Star Engines more useful).

Fast Vehicles can fire all their weapons if they move at Combat Speed - Falcons won't be stationary. They can fire one weapon when moving up to 12". A skimmer moving at Cruising Speed or Flat Out (up to 18) gets a 5+ cover save. So a Falcon could move 6" and fire everything, up to 12" and fire one gun but get a cover save, or 18" and not fire anything.

Due to the way models are defined, I think you can fortune a Falcon or Wave Serpent now. I'd need to check my Eldar Codex to be sure.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230983.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230983.page GMT
[/quote]

Also, other close combat weapons can no be used with power fists (unless another power fist or equivalent).]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230984.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230984.page GMT
Let me get this right, Asmodai, units block LOS but just to the enemy. Friendly units can shoot through other friendly units right?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230992.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230992.page GMT
I won't be distributing copies. You can check with widderslainte if you want. This is classic GW viral marketing to get people excited about 5th, but I don't want to get into trouble for spreading it. If GW has any trouble with these leaks, I'll delete the posts.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230996.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230996.page GMT
Let me get this right, Asmodai, units block LOS but just to the enemy. Friendly units can shoot through other friendly units right?[/quote]

Nope. Friendly units block line of sight too. So if you have a Tactical Squad in front of your Devastators, the Devastators can't fire.

This makes buildings, hills and other high ground extremely important.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230997.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230997.page GMT
[/quote]

Also, other close combat weapons can no be used with power fists (unless another power fist or equivalent).[/quote]

Thanks. I missed that. I guess it provides a purpose of the Gauntlets of Ultramar and lessens the role of the Powerfist Sergeant even more - he'd have one less attack than he does now.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230998.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/230998.page GMT
"Nominate one Eldar unit with a model within 6" of the Farseer."

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231008.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231008.page GMT
That means that Wave Serpents and Falcons without SMF aren't quite the death traps people feared as long as you have a Farseer to keep them Fortuned (~55% or so chance to ignore each hit).]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231009.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231009.page GMT
The new vehicle damage chart is good news as long as you can get yourself glanced, because it lets decoy launchers be very effective.
There's a lot more cover saves going on so markerlights will be more useful.
Pathfinders finally get a Scout ability for their obligatory Devilfish.
The replaced LOS screening will allow Crisis Suits to use FWs or Kroot as shields via the jump-shoot-jump-back move.
Freeing up transports to carry anyone is useful. It makes an upgraded D'fish into a useful battletaxi-cum-light fire support unit.
Template weapons have improved a bit.

However there is also a lot of bad.
Less firing of weapons from vehicles.
FW are weak in H2H and will not like all the assault armies getting faster.
Kroot lose their ability to see through more than 6 inches of forest cover.
The allocate saves rule makes shield drones less useful though not entirely useless.
Tau sniper rifles are not Sniper and derive no benefit from that rule.
Piranhas get a lot slower without any benefits.
The new morale rules are going to hurt Ld7 armies.

It is hard to say if the overall effect is up, down or sideways.

I am looking forwards to some assessments about the other factions.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231016.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231016.page GMT FWIW, it looks like the unfinished draft the Warseer poster was referring to has leaked to the web.[/quote]

PM me the location please!

Capt K]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231017.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231017.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231019.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231019.page GMT
That means that Wave Serpents and Falcons without SMF aren't quite the death traps people feared as long as you have a Farseer to keep them Fortuned (~55% or so chance to ignore each hit).[/quote]

Can you cast psychic powers out of vehicles now? I never understood why a model would be able to shoot out of a vehicle (given a fire point) but not cast a psychic power.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231024.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231024.page GMT LOS screening will allow Crisis Suits to use FWs or Kroot as shields via the jump-shoot-jump-back move.[/quote]

The models aren't the same height, so you can be 'seen' over your friends.

Hopefully a nice list of what's "big" and what's "normal" size will appear and define everything for us.

I have my doubts.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231025.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231025.page GMT LOS screening will allow Crisis Suits to use FWs or Kroot as shields via the jump-shoot-jump-back move.[/quote]

The models aren't the same height, so you can be 'seen' over your friends.

Hopefully a nice list of what's "big" and what's "normal" size will appear and define everything for us.

I have my doubts.
[/quote]

I'll convert all my crisis suits to lying down.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231026.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231026.page GMT FWIW, it looks like the unfinished draft the Warseer poster was referring to has leaked to the web.[/quote]

PM me the location please!

[/quote]

I imagine the mods don't want this site to be a hub for trading of copyright infringing materials. What I saw, while interesting, was incomplete and not in a playable state, so I took a look, noted a bit of the rumoured info then deleted it. Try browsing file-sharing websites and the depths of the internet, which is where I saw it. The same sort of places the codex leaks were found. I imagine it will become increasing easy to come by if people on warseer have it.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231029.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231029.page GMT
Capt K]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231032.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231032.page GMT the run rule combo'd with Waaaagh! is insane. Slugga hordes will roll gaily across the battlefield to swamp opponents in hordes of attacks. It also makes warpheads even less useful. (Oh well, it's a nice model)

The changes to power claws are probably a good thing. Yeah it de-powers them slightly, but it makes sense and since they are "must have" and the army no longer sucks, that's a good thing. Maybe Uge Choppas might actually get used in some builds now, who knows?

Screening is going to make terrain placement massively important, and seizing the high ground is going to become like a little sub mission in every other mission. Shooty squads in ruins with improved cover and low morale (lootas, I'm looking at you) are happy campers, almost literally.

The new deployment stuff is actually a fairly elegant solution to the first turn problems this game has had since I started playing it.

We are going to struggle with AV14 tanks if they are used well, as the only reliable S9+ things in the army are warboss and Nob PK attacks and we're getting less of them. Not nessicarily a bad thing, tanks need to be good, and orks do need a weakness. It will be nice to see tanks coming with a little infantry support to keep the tank free of PKs for a turn while they leg it. Monoliths just became that much harder to kill. If the commentators here are right, that makes necrons even more difficult to fight.

Ramshackle actually makes sense now that everyone's transports aren't deathtraps.

All in all, I think the new changes will be pretty okay. As long as there is enough high terrain for shooters to deploy on. I think my club should start working out terrain guidlines for a balanced game now, so that we're ready for the changes. The run rule is unbalanced I reckon, and makes orks broken. But we'll see.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231039.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231039.page GMT
now this in very interesting. now I have to remodel my Warboss. the one I just finished....

*looks through Codex...*

forget that, combi-weapons are stupid anyway....]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231046.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231046.page GMT
That means that Wave Serpents and Falcons without SMF aren't quite the death traps people feared as long as you have a Farseer to keep them Fortuned (~55% or so chance to ignore each hit).[/quote]

Can you cast psychic powers out of vehicles now? I never understood why a model would be able to shoot out of a vehicle (given a fire point) but not cast a psychic power.[/quote]

I didn't see that. I was referring to using the Psychic Power on the vehicle.

It says you use the rules as shooting unless specified otherwise, so I don't see why you couldn't use a Psychic Power as long as the vehicle had a fire point to use it from.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231050.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231050.page GMT FWIW, it looks like the unfinished draft the Warseer poster was referring to has leaked to the web.[/quote]

PM me the location please!

[/quote]

I imagine the mods don't want this site to be a hub for trading of copyright infringing materials. What I saw, while interesting, was incomplete and not in a playable state, so I took a look, noted a bit of the rumoured info then deleted it. Try browsing file-sharing websites and the depths of the internet, which is where I saw it. The same sort of places the codex leaks were found. I imagine it will become increasing easy to come by if people on warseer have it.

[/quote]

That was my approach. I read it, posted a 'live-blog' of my impressions reading it, and deleted.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231051.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231051.page GMT
Copyright fair dealing allows the quotation of rules in order to discuss and criticise them.

GW should perhaps have kept them under better guard, but then again, many companies allow these kind of leaks specifically to do viral type marketing and get uncensored customer feedback.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231058.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231058.page GMT
Capt K[/quote]

What do you mean useful again? The wave serpent has always been useful. Just ask all of the player's who faced it in Vegas. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231061.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231061.page GMT
This seems powerful to me, for when your squad is below half you won't fall back.[/quote]

Not necessarily. If you read the 4th ed rules carefully, Pinning stops a unit from making Fallback moves, but doesn't automatically Rally them. They'll resume falling back when they come unpinned.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231063.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231063.page GMT
Fleeing units can cause other units to flee was in previous editions. Did the "rally in cover" rule return? That rule was supposedly dropped because many players 'forgot' it.

The auto scattering blast markers rule: How does one nominate the target before scattering? can one target the ground like in RT days? Does one have to target a particular model? Will lining guys up in a straight line in cover minimize any chances of templates hitting models?

Combat speed rings a bell. Do the vehicles have 3 speeds again?

Wasn't Eternal Warrior described in the most recent Codex: Eldar for the Phoenix Lords?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231073.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231073.page GMT
Yes, being in area terrain gives you +1 leadership when rallying.

"The auto scattering blast markers rule: How does one nominate the target before scattering? can one target the ground like in RT days? Does one have to target a particular model? Will lining guys up in a straight line in cover minimize any chances of templates hitting models?"

You place the template over a model. I don't recall if the hole needs to centered or not.

The vehicles have Combat Speed and Cruising Speed. Fast vehicles have third 'Flat Out' speed.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231075.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231075.page GMT
[quote]Pg 3 - Blast markers now hit if they cover any part of the base. This is a nice boost for Frag Missiles, and Ordnance.
Pg 4 - The term 'model is much more explicitly defined than before. This is a good sign. [/quote]

Agreed on both, though I'm worried that the scattering blasts will slow down play.

[quote]Pg 16 - They explicitly say you can't shoot a Space Marine's back banner. That's good to have explained since I play with some obtuse players. [/quote]

That’s already in the 4th ed rulebook, but if they did make LOS clearer, it’s obviously doubleplusgood.

[quote]"Models are not allowed to fire through the gaps in an intervening unit."
You can shoot over friends if you're on a hill. This is done via the Laser Pointer method to see if the hill is high enough to not clip the heads of a friendly unit ahead of you. You can also shoot through your own unit with no problems. The 'Covering Fire' rule cuts down on some obvious abuses - but this still looks problematic to me. [/quote]

In Warhammer Fantasy both friendly and enemy units block LOS, and you can’t see through the gaps in a unit of skirmishers. Units on higher ground can see over intervening units, and units defined as Large Targets can see and be seen over other units. Forests are very much like 4th ed area terrain (though you can only see through 2”, not 6”). Technically LOS is model’s eye view other than that, though house rules to make other terrain (specifically hills) abstract are extremely common. I’m very interested in how much abstraction is used here and how well it’s explained. LOS is obviously an extremely important issue which needs to be explained better in 5th.

[quote]Pg 21 - Cover is better than before. It ranges from 5+ - 3+ and is generally 1 better than similar cover was in 4th.
Pg 22 - If you're deep in cover in area terrain, your opponent gets a cover save. The way wounds are allocated makes partial cover simple to resolve. [/quote]

I’m interested to see the rules for how you determine who’s in cover and who’s not. The 4th edition rules are better than 3rd, but still have a couple of holes.

[quote]p 31 - You can only assault the unit you shot at.

p 47 - Characters are treated as a separate unit in close combat. (Note that the new wound allocation does lessen the power of hidden 'Fists, so they've moved up in relative terms).

p 46 - Characters with retinues cannot leave them.

p 43 - You can shoot while falling back.

p 49 - City Ruins are area terrain. Different heights are measured base to base as usual. You use movement to move up and down and any excess beyond what's needed to move onto a level is wasted and you can't end up between levels. [/quote]

These five are already rules in 4th.


[quote]p 42 - Friends falling back can trigger a morale check. This is big for Guard and Tau. [/quote]

This was part of the Trial Assault Rules in 3rd edition.


[quote]p 48 - Perils of the Warp is an automatic wound with no armour or cover save allowed - per previous rumours. [/quote]

This might actually reduce the number of Eldrads wandering around.

[quote]p 51 - Blasts are fired at a particular level. [/quote]

Good call. More rules taking multi-level buildings into account would help.

[quote]p 61 - Vehicles have the 'Relentless' special rule that allows them to fire weapons as if stationary. This clears up the ambiguity about Rapid Fire weapons. (Bikers get this too.) [/quote]

If it’s a USR, unfortunately Chaos Terminators will be left out.

[quote]p 70 – Dedicated transports can transport other units later. Yay![/quote]

This one is very interesting. Particularly since this had been a big question and common point of confusion for new players ever since 3rd ed first came out. There are some distinct potential abuses here with elite units which aren’t normally permitted a Transport option.

[quote]p 78 - The 'Eternal Warrior' special rule means immunity to instant death. Remember that Daemon Herald have this special rule and people wondered what it meant. [/quote]

CSM Daemon Princes and Eldar Phoenix Lords have it already. Makes sense as a USR.


[quote]p 87 - Army lists are not secret. [/quote]

A distinct departure from Warhammer Fantasy, and an interesting nod to tournament/competitive play.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231076.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231076.page GMT p 61 - Vehicles have the 'Relentless' special rule that allows them to fire weapons as if stationary. This clears up the ambiguity about Rapid Fire weapons. (Bikers get this too.)

If you move you can only fire one weapon, except for defensive weapons (S4 or lower). There's no exception for Tau or pintle-weapons.

[/quote]

I'm not following this part about the vehicles since the special rule seems to overrule the move & fire rule. Or is this mostly for bikes and rapid fire weapons?

Also, do bikes get the option to 'Run' as well? Any other changes to bikes?

Thanks!


]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231079.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231079.page GMT
I'm just picturing players using an Ork Trukk to transport Repentia in an Apocalypse game. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231080.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231080.page GMT
The new vehicle damage chart is good news as long as you can get yourself glanced, because it lets decoy launchers be very effective.
There's a lot more cover saves going on so markerlights will be more useful.
Pathfinders finally get a Scout ability for their obligatory Devilfish.
The replaced LOS screening will allow Crisis Suits to use FWs or Kroot as shields via the jump-shoot-jump-back move.
Freeing up transports to carry anyone is useful. It makes an upgraded D'fish into a useful battletaxi-cum-light fire support unit.
Template weapons have improved a bit.

However there is also a lot of bad.
Less firing of weapons from vehicles.
FW are weak in H2H and will not like all the assault armies getting faster.
Kroot lose their ability to see through more than 6 inches of forest cover.
The allocate saves rule makes shield drones less useful though not entirely useless.
Tau sniper rifles are not Sniper and derive no benefit from that rule.
Piranhas get a lot slower without any benefits.
The new morale rules are going to hurt Ld7 armies.

It is hard to say if the overall effect is up, down or sideways.

I am looking forwards to some assessments about the other factions.[/quote]

If the "models' LOS is taken from models' eye view" rumor is correct, Tau goes back to playing with Stealth suits again. Huge shame.
Bonded firewarriors will essentially get two rolls for rallying if they choose to "get down."
Vespid can be useful if they follow behind skimmers or interact with aggressive crisis teams.
Large Kroot units in woods or ruins may be taken for screening.

I agree with the hazy overall effect. I could see myself taking vespids, kroot, and o'shovah in a very aggressive list. Maybe Mech Tau with firewarrior firing lines and Kroot rushes, with devilfish blocking LOS for concentrated efforts.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231082.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231082.page GMT Some observations:

Pg 15 - 'Running' works exactly like Fleet of Foot does now.
[/quote]

I can't remember - is the armor save restriction on fleet in the main book or was that an older edition or Eldar specific?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231087.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231087.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231092.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231092.page GMT
There's no Armour Save restriction in the 5th leak.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231093.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231093.page GMT
[quote]p 61 - Vehicles have the 'Relentless' special rule that allows them to fire weapons as if stationary. This clears up the ambiguity about Rapid Fire weapons. (Bikers get this too.) [/quote]

If it’s a USR, unfortunately Chaos Terminators will be left out. [/quote]

It is. Slow and Purposeful is still there, but I forgot to see if had been changed at all.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231097.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231097.page GMT RF weapons are allowed to move and shoot to max range, but not pseudo-fleet the same turn.[/quote]
I don't see how this follows from the rumors.

Running ("pseudo fleet") costs both shooting *and* charging.
Fleet costs shooting, but no effect on charging.
Rapid-Fire costs charging.
Assault weapons are the only things that allow movement, shooting, and assault.

So as I see it:
- Run! (pseudo-Fleet), NO shoot, NO charge
- Move & Fleet!, NO shoot, charge
- Move, fire Assault, charge
- Move, Rapid-Fire!, NO charge

- stay, Rapid-Fire long, NO charge
- stay, fire Heavy, NO charge]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231108.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231108.page GMT Pg 23 - They reversed the fluff rationale for heavy weapons' saves - either he was the only one trained or the weapon was damaged.
man that blows most units in the world cross train all guns just for this sort of thing. but still the rules as a whole look good .

now with this one p 48 - Perils of the Warp is an automatic wound with no armour or cover save allowed - per previous rumours.
i now it says cover save do they mean Inv. save ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231109.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231109.page GMT TMC's would gain the new March move ability.

Unless in the next Tyranid codex, whenever that may come out, they allow venon cannons to get penetrating hits. But my suspicion is that with a new edition of the tyranid codex, the zilla list will no longer be viable. [/quote]
I think you'll have to wait for the next Codex. The TMCs shouldn't want to March anyways, as they should be primarily HtH builds with supporting fire, using the same conceptual template as the Defiler. The Defiler got Fleet added and it's a Walker, so you can expect that the Fex will get Fleet added as well.

I don't think Venom Cannons will get Penetrating Hits. That much seems to be settled rules-wise over the past couple editions. I think GW is going to force Nids to be more fighty than shooty, and that the current-style of gun-Fex Zilla Nids are doomed. I think that future claw-Fex Zilla Nids will be fine.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231113.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231113.page GMT The chart for missions says
1-2 = Recon
3-4= Take and Hold
5-6 = Total Anihiliation

Total Anihilation = Get 'Kill Points' for units destroyed or falling back. HQ=3pts. Fast, Heavy, Elite = 2pts Troops=1pt[/quote]
This is beautiful. Most missions based on Scoring units and mobile objectives. The kill scenario is well-done, and most importantly, isn't the 1st starting scenario. Troops are automatic KP denial, where HQs are KPs on a stick. Awesome.

[quote]Oh and later on its says VPs are used to decide draws. [/quote]
Nice! VPs largely don't matter except in rare circumstances. This is very much what I hoped GW would do.

[quote]only troops are scoring, except if falling back / it is a transport? / it has a specific rule saying it isn't scoring.[/quote]
Totally as expected.

The bias is going to shift pretty clearly towards having mobile Troops because 2/3 of the scenarios need them. The KP scenario is a nice translation of the old holdover system, but will be much faster to tally up in nearly all cases.

[quote]Deployment[/quote]
It's nice that they're going with non-alternating deployment. Much faster. And much better in terms of Attacker / Defender. 1st turn is no longer an advantage, as your opponent can react.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231118.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231118.page GMT
GW Epic Fail!

See y'all in 6th Ed...

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231127.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231127.page GMT CC attacks....

Go Power Klaw Nobz ripping Falcons out of the sky! ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231128.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231128.page GMT
I still can't get over how much this annoys me.

Off the top of my head, these are units that get whacked by the new rules.
-tornadoes, predators, crusaders
-chimeras, leman russ (both variations)
-ionheads
-falcons, vipers

Most of these units will no longer see any play. (barring the falcon and leman russ) Whats worse, its an obvious attempt to nerf the Falcon and Tornado, neither one of which was overpowered because of its rate of fire. And both are already getting fixes in the new edition anyway. The change to add defensive weapons was, in my mind, the best change they made from 3rd to 4th. It helped encourage a more mobile style of play. But now you own those units, so GW has no further use for them.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231129.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231129.page GMT
Copyright fair dealing allows the quotation of rules in order to discuss and criticise them.

GW should perhaps have kept them under better guard, but then again, many companies allow these kind of leaks specifically to do viral type marketing and get uncensored customer feedback.[/quote]

I thought it would be both hilarious and awesome if Dakka people/HMBC/some guy edited the pdf with a set of better rule changes and let it loose on the internet.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231131.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231131.page GMT Pg 23 - They reversed the fluff rationale for heavy weapons' saves - either he was the only one trained or the weapon was damaged.
man that blows most units in the world cross train all guns just for this sort of thing. but still the rules as a whole look good .

now with this one p 48 - Perils of the Warp is an automatic wound with no armour or cover save allowed - per previous rumours.
i now it says cover save do they mean Inv. save [/quote]

Cover saves are distinguished from Invulnerable Saves. So Eldar would still get their Ward Save. Being in a bunker won't protect you from the warp though.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231136.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231136.page GMT Nice! VPs largely don't matter except in rare circumstances. This is very much what I hoped GW would do. [/quote]

It should speed up the post-game since you won't need to do math unless it's a draw.



[quote=waterlootian]
I'm not following this part about the vehicles since the special rule seems to overrule the move & fire rule. Or is this mostly for bikes and rapid fire weapons?

Also, do bikes get the option to 'Run' as well? Any other changes to bikes?

Thanks! [/quote]

Sorry. I missed this earlier.

It's mostly for Rapid Fire weapons - e.g. the Land Raider Crusader's Hurricane Bolters. The 4th edition rulebook never clarified how Rapid Fire weapons on vehicles worked. This seems to have been addressed.

Bikes can't run. They can fire one weapon for each rider if I remember right - meaning that Attack Bikes can fire their Bolters and their Heavy.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231140.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231140.page GMT
My unit of 10 takes 30 shots
He rolls 10 dice, with one blue dice nominating my Sergeant 3 times? So it's possible no wounds are done to my regular joes (However unlikely) yet the unit leader could be forced to save 3 times?
What happens if 4 of those shots are plasma instead of bolters? Do you distribute evenly with wrap around where you wish? IE 14 wounds is 13 regular joes and one unit leader wound rolls?

You mentioned 'covering fire'?

Units that block LOS to friendly units will stop some of the abuse...but the new running and old fleet could still see units cha-cha-chaing back and forth in front of reapers/devs/etc...

Thanks Asmo for the rumours.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231143.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231143.page GMT Pg 23 - They reversed the fluff rationale for heavy weapons' saves - either he was the only one trained or the weapon was damaged.
man that blows most units in the world cross train all guns just for this sort of thing. but still the rules as a whole look good .

now with this one p 48 - Perils of the Warp is an automatic wound with no armour or cover save allowed - per previous rumours.
i now it says cover save do they mean Inv. save [/quote]

Cover saves are distinguished from Invulnerable Saves. So Eldar would still get their Ward Save. Being in a bunker won't protect you from the warp though.[/quote]
sweet that also means my Sorcerors get there Invulnerable save ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231144.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231144.page GMT
Copyright fair dealing allows the quotation of rules in order to discuss and criticise them.

GW should perhaps have kept them under better guard, but then again, many companies allow these kind of leaks specifically to do viral type marketing and get uncensored customer feedback.[/quote]

Seeing as how the leaked Codexii have recently been available beforehand, I'm starting to think that GW is intentionally leaking the new rules to monitor the conversations on sites like this and Warseer. It makes good financial sense. If the rules have any huge problems or discrepancies they can alter them. At least I hope they are doing this, if it leads to better clearer rules.

Also, What does it say about ordinance? Is that still move and fire?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231146.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231146.page GMT RF weapons are allowed to move and shoot to max range, but not pseudo-fleet the same turn.[/quote]
I don't see how this follows from the rumors.

Running ("pseudo fleet") costs both shooting *and* charging.
Fleet costs shooting, but no effect on charging.
Rapid-Fire costs charging.
Assault weapons are the only things that allow movement, shooting, and assault.

So as I see it:
- Run! (pseudo-Fleet), NO shoot, NO charge
- Move & Fleet!, NO shoot, charge
- Move, fire Assault, charge
- Move, Rapid-Fire!, NO charge

- stay, Rapid-Fire long, NO charge
- stay, fire Heavy, NO charge[/quote]

I was assuming the rumours are not necessarily the confirmed final rules so there may be changes.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231149.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231149.page GMT
Copyright fair dealing allows the quotation of rules in order to discuss and criticise them.

GW should perhaps have kept them under better guard, but then again, many companies allow these kind of leaks specifically to do viral type marketing and get uncensored customer feedback.[/quote]

Seeing as how the leaked Codexii have recently been available beforehand, I'm starting to think that GW is intentionally leaking the new rules to monitor the conversations on sites like this and Warseer. It makes good financial sense. If the rules have any huge problems or discrepancies they can alter them. At least I hope they are doing this, if it leads to better clearer rules.

Also, What does it say about ordinance? Is that still move and fire?[/quote]
O GW forum watcher if you are here please let us know move a chair or sorry watched taps last night

but for real it would be a smart move to see what people think of the new rules ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231151.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231151.page GMT
My unit of 10 takes 30 shots
He rolls 10 dice, with one blue dice nominating my Sergeant 3 times? So it's possible no wounds are done to my regular joes (However unlikely) yet the unit leader could be forced to save 3 times?
What happens if 4 of those shots are plasma instead of bolters? Do you distribute evenly with wrap around where you wish? IE 14 wounds is 13 regular joes and one unit leader wound rolls?

You mentioned 'covering fire'?

Units that block LOS to friendly units will stop some of the abuse...but the new running and old fleet could still see units cha-cha-chaing back and forth in front of reapers/devs/etc...

Thanks Asmo for the rumours.[/quote]

Welcome.

The way it works if you take 27 wounds in a ten-man Marine squad. You'd allocate one wound to each model before you allocate a second wound to each model, then you begin allocating the third wounds. You'd probably allocate it to the 7 rank and file and none of those to the Sergeant, Plasma Gun and Lascannon.

You then roll 2 saves each for the specialists, and the 21 saves for the rank and file all-together (since you can pick and choose from the identically equipped ones).

Plasma wouldn't allow a save. I'm not completely clear on how it would work. The rules said the controlling player gets to decide which model is wounded - so it looks like you could allocate the Plasma Shots to a RnF. It would seem unsporting if you could allocate all the Plasma to models in cover for a unit in mixed cover, so that might not be how it works.

'Covering Fire' means that you can shoot at a unit partially blocked by a friendly unit if you can't hurt it with any of your weapons. For example if there was Wraithlord between a Guardian Squad with no heavy weapon and a Chaos Marine squad, the Guardians could ignore the Wraithlord and shoot the Chaos Marines. The rule is there to prevent your opponent from using your tanks as cover in an unrealistic manner.


[quote=Samwise158][quote=Kilkrazy]It is an interesting moral and legal question whether we should spread the leaked rules further (assuming they are real.)

Copyright fair dealing allows the quotation of rules in order to discuss and criticise them.

GW should perhaps have kept them under better guard, but then again, many companies allow these kind of leaks specifically to do viral type marketing and get uncensored customer feedback.[/quote]

Seeing as how the leaked Codexii have recently been available beforehand, I'm starting to think that GW is intentionally leaking the new rules to monitor the conversations on sites like this and Warseer. It makes good financial sense. If the rules have any huge problems or discrepancies they can alter them. At least I hope they are doing this, if it leads to better clearer rules.

Also, What does it say about ordinance? Is that still move and fire?[/quote]

Ordnance didn't seem to be covered. It said Ordnance was covered in the vehicle section on page XX, but the vehicle section never touched on it. I suspect it's still to be done.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231157.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231157.page GMT
Did they drop tank shock in favor of ramming? Is their still a Death or Glory option? (that's one of my favorite rules). Did they explain how skimmer tank shock works?

It sounds like all non-large model units will block LOS to each other. This sounds good because I loathed the days of 2x model height in 3ed.

It feels like a big shift back to assault based armies for fifth edition. We won't see rhino rush, but there will be rhino walls galore.

Tanks getting cover saves (and re-rollable ones with fortune) is a big boost and will help counter all the infantry hordes I hope.

Was there any mention of Area terrain? Does a forest block LOS if you are on the other side of it from your target? or do they just get a cover save?

I don't like defensive weapons being Str 4 and hope they keep it at Str 6.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231158.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231158.page GMT
Did they drop tank shock in favor of ramming? Is their still a Death or Glory option? (that's one of my favorite rules). Did they explain how skimmer tank shock works?

It sounds like all non-large model units will block LOS to each other. This sounds good because I loathed the days of 2x model height in 3ed.

It feels like a big shift back to assault based armies for fifth edition. We won't see rhino rush, but there will be rhino walls galore.

Tanks getting cover saves (and re-rollable ones with fortune) is a big boost and will help counter all the infantry hordes I hope.

Was there any mention of Area terrain? Does a forest block LOS if you are on the other side of it from your target? or do they just get a cover save?

I don't like defensive weapons being Str 4 and hope they keep it at Str 6.[/quote]

Tank Shock still exists. Ramming is for vehicle vs. vehicle collisions. Death or Glory is still in there. There's no special rules for skimmers that I noticed - so skimmer tanks could tank shock like everyone else.

Area terrain is mentioned. The forest wouldn't block line of sight (unless it did so physically), but you would get a cover save.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231162.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231162.page GMT 'Covering Fire' means that you can shoot at a unit partially blocked by a friendly unit if you can't hurt it with any of your weapons. For example if there was Wraithlord between a Guardian Squad with no heavy weapon and a Chaos Marine squad, the Guardians could ignore the Wraithlord and shoot the Chaos Marines. The rule is there to prevent your opponent from using your tanks as cover in an unrealistic manner.
[/quote]

Thanks for the clarification on the shooting, although 'covering fire' seems pretty silly to me. So NO vehicles block LOS if the troop is armed with bolters (Or whatever weapons that would not harm the tank)? It would seem strange if I could suddenly shoot through my Land Raiders, in fact if that is the case, Land Raiders could be pretty damn good walls. I would think tanks block LOS all the time, regardless though.

If tanks are not included in 'covering fire', I don't see how often it will come up for use. Bolters are str 4, so really you would need T 8 or higher for it to come into effect...and how many things besides tanks have that?

Thanks again.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231167.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231167.page GMT
The models still get a 4+ cover save though for being partially obscured.

This rule would also seem to prevent the tactic of marching your army up behind a Land Raider. As long as they weren't totally obscured, you could still shoot at them (albeit most of them might have a good cover save).]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231170.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231170.page GMT
My only real complaint is how land tanks and infantry can get 5+ / 3+ cover saves, but skimmers only get 5+ when moving "flat out".

The cover saves should be comparable in both cases. If the tank can hide for a 3+, and a bike can boost for a 3+, then a skimmer should be able to get a 5+ for 6-12", and a 3+ for 12+".

Or Skimmers can go back to only glances...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231171.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231171.page GMT
The models still get a 4+ cover save though for being partially obscured.

This rule would also seem to prevent the tactic of marching your army up behind a Land Raider. As long as they weren't totally obscured, you could still shoot at them (albeit most of them might have a good cover save).[/quote]

Eh, kind of strange....I would assume only the models in the unit that can actually see around the Raider could be shot or shoot though.

All in all, as a Marine Mech I'm digging the new rules. I imagine my Guard buddy won't be a happy camper though. Running for everyone, friendly units block LOS (Heavy Weapon team what?), Russ Heavy Bolters combos useless...etc
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231173.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231173.page GMT
1. Scattering all blast markers (more dice rolls, more measuring, more arguments over which way the arrow is pointing).
2. Barrage for multiple blast markers (more dice rolls, more measuring, more arguments over which way the arrow is pointing).
3. Allocating wounds to individual models (long process before rolling dice).
4. The return to stationary vehicles (if S5 cannot be fired on the move... vehicles will stop moving, and things like Chimeras will dissapear from the game).
5. Vehicles going from 6/12/24 to 6/12/18.


One of the first things we did in the Revisited Project was speed everything up. Infantry that do not fire could run an extra 3". Fleet became a flat 6". Vehicles went from 6/12/24 to 8/16/24 (so not actually faster at the top end, but the breaks were bigger). MCs and Walkers could move 6"/shoot/assauly 6" or simply move 12" and then shoot. Sure it created some inbalances early on, and we've used our Codex revisions to compensate for some of these (increasing the price on Wave Serpents being one example), and in other areas such as increasing the range of guns (all basic weapons in our rules have a 30" range rather than 24", and it really does make a difference). There were other things that went along with this, such as allowing heavy weapons to be moved and fired with a slight reduction in accuracy (-1BS), and increasing the amount of weapons a vehicle can fire on the move. Sometimes we ended up being dead wrong (our Sponsons = Always Defensive turned out to be a bad idea when Predators w/Lascannon Sponsons became instant kings of the battlefield), but considering we don't have to sells models and actually want to have a decent ruleset, we actually playtest these problems out of the rules.

The the biggest impact that all these immediate movement changes had was that the game was opened up. We had tanks rushing across the table blazing away. Infantry formations that would be static in 3rd or 4th Ed could now move about to get better shots without missing a turn. The traditional 'sit & shoot' army ceased being the be-all and end-all of shooty strategy, and with enhanced movement there has been less reliance on screening (which we kept from 3rd Ed, to a degree).


Then we look at GW and we see them dumbing down rules for no reason whilst at the same time adding needless complication and time consumption to things like would allocation and blast markers. It's a true case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, resulting in, as I said before, new mistakes being made, and old mistakes coming back but in slightly different ways.

Is it any wonder we gave up on them years ago...

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231175.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231175.page GMT
My unit of 10 takes 30 shots
He rolls 10 dice, with one blue dice nominating my Sergeant 3 times? So it's possible no wounds are done to my regular joes (However unlikely) yet the unit leader could be forced to save 3 times?
What happens if 4 of those shots are plasma instead of bolters? Do you distribute evenly with wrap around where you wish? IE 14 wounds is 13 regular joes and one unit leader wound rolls?

You mentioned 'covering fire'?

Units that block LOS to friendly units will stop some of the abuse...but the new running and old fleet could still see units cha-cha-chaing back and forth in front of reapers/devs/etc...

Thanks Asmo for the rumours.[/quote]

Welcome.

The way it works if you take 27 wounds in a ten-man Marine squad. You'd allocate one wound to each model before you allocate a second wound to each model, then you begin allocating the third wounds. You'd probably allocate it to the 7 rank and file and none of those to the Sergeant, Plasma Gun and Lascannon.

You then roll 2 saves each for the specialists, and the 21 saves for the rank and file all-together (since you can pick and choose from the identically equipped ones).

... ... ... ... ...

quote]

Okay, I have a question.

In your example given, how do you roll for the saves? If the wounds are allocated three to each Marine, surely the proper way to do it is roll the three saves for SM no.1, then for no.2 and so on. A lot of players will want to roll all 21 saves and remove a Marine for each failed save.

This is a probability issue rather like rolling the twin-linked Crusader hurricane bolters (or whatever they're called.)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231178.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231178.page GMT
You can replace any model killed with a model with the identical equipment, which led me astray. You do have to take each model individually.

Also interesting, and a mate just reminded me, you can allocate both Plasma Gun wounds to the same model if you wanted to minimize casualties. (That's the example they use in the leak.) This constitutes a subtle nerf to Plasma Guns.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231182.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231182.page GMT
You can replace any model killed with a model with the identical equipment, which led me astray. You do have to take each model individually.

Also interesting, and a mate just reminded me, you can allocate both Plasma Gun wounds to the same model if you wanted to minimize casualties. (That's the example they use in the leak.) This constitutes a subtle nerf to Plasma Guns.[/quote]

Interesting. That violates the principle that the maximum number of models should be removed if possible.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231185.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231185.page GMT With the caveat that you CAN assault units that you shot out of their transport.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231206.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231206.page GMT
....Then we look at GW and we see them dumbing down rules for no reason whilst at the same time adding needless complication and time consumption to things like would allocation and blast markers. It's a true case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, resulting in, as I said before, new mistakes being made, and old mistakes coming back but in slightly different ways.

Is it any wonder we gave up on them years ago...

BYE[/quote]

You may have more people join your revolution after the new rulebook is out.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231215.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231215.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231219.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231219.page GMT ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231222.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231222.page GMT
Yep. Despite some passages staying the same, this is much more akin to the 2nd -> 3rd change than the 3rd -> 4th change. I'm already mulling about how it's going to change my army design philosophy.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231225.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231225.page GMT
Honestly I think a lot of these changes are for the better, but there are still some crippling items that just don't make sense or just won't work (allocating wounds to specific models before saves, Defensive = S4, slowing vehicles down whilst speeding infantry up (???), etc.). Then there's the fact that GW is going to have some of the most loosley written rules ever conceived, leading to numerous problems that everyone will find on the day of release, yet none of them were found by them because they can't be bothered to read over before they scramble for that 'create PDF' button and send it off to the printers.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231231.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231231.page GMT FAQ's have been forthcoming is because of the work and changes to 5th. IF they come out with a new book AND come out with FAQs for clarifications it is fine. Most games do this anyway. The big problem with the last edition is that they really didn't FAQ a lot of the important things we found wrong with it.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231234.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231234.page GMT
Yep. Despite some passages staying the same, this is much more akin to the 2nd -> 3rd change than the 3rd -> 4th change. I'm already mulling about how it's going to change my army design philosophy.[/quote]

You know why that is dont you?

When 2nd became 3rd it forced a majority of people to re-buy their armies, then from 3rd to 4th you only had to switch out of few minor things. In other words its about GW screwing us for money, why else would they abandon an edition half way in? Because they care about the rules? HA! The non stop FAQs and awesome quality of the rules are evidence enough of that fact.

The last 4 years were a waste of time and money apparently, and maybe 4 years into 5th they'll decide its not profitable and run us through it all over again.

The one thing I'm looking forward to in all of this is GWs lame excuse. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231237.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231237.page GMT FAQ's have been forthcoming is because of the work and changes to 5th. IF they come out with a new book AND come out with FAQs for clarifications it is fine. Most games do this anyway. The big problem with the last edition is that they really didn't FAQ a lot of the important things we found wrong with it.

[/quote]

Judging by the 91 page PDF and how Eldar onward has been designed with this in mind, I suspect GW has had a fairly clear idea of 5th for about 18 months or so by now. That means they likely procrastinated on writing up FAQs they knew would be obsolete in a year anyway.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231240.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231240.page GMT
It doesn't really look like this will make falcons or zilla nids obsolete, but what it does is put them more on the same level as everything else, and also brings a few armies back more in line with how GW wants the list to play like.

I really don't see this really changing any of the armies I play to a major extent, maybe just some tweaks here and there.

I can see me breaking back out the plasma cannons I had for the DA though, which right now are quite useless (in comparison to the other choices), and makes the marines holding the plasma guns a little more survivable.

Hmm, it also seems grots will be useful, as well as horde nids and guardians (screen those aspect warriors!)

kinda seems like it makes a lot more unit types useful, without truly invalidating a lot. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231241.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231241.page GMT FAQ's have been forthcoming is because of the work and changes to 5th. IF they come out with a new book AND come out with FAQs for clarifications it is fine. Most games do this anyway. The big problem with the last edition is that they really didn't FAQ a lot of the important things we found wrong with it.

[/quote]

Judging by the 91 page PDF and how Eldar onward has been designed with this in mind, I suspect GW has had a fairly clear idea of 5th for about 18 months or so by now. That means they likely procrastinated on writing up FAQs they knew would be obsolete in a year anyway.[/quote]

Well thats rude of them, an FAQ takes an hour of work max, and it would have been appreciated by the people who are using their product if GW put it out shortly after the release instead of making say, the eldar players wait 14+ months saying they're going to release a FAQ then tell us "Oh yeah heres your 5th edition cross over FAQ".

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231245.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231245.page GMT
It doesn't really look like this will make falcons or zilla nids obsolete, but what it does is put them more on the same level as everything else, and also brings a few armies back more in line with how GW wants the list to play like.

I really don't see this really changing any of the armies I play to a major extent, maybe just some tweaks here and there.

I can see me breaking back out the plasma cannons I had for the DA though, which right now are quite useless (in comparison to the other choices), and makes the marines holding the plasma guns a little more survivable.

Hmm, it also seems grots will be useful, as well as horde nids and guardians (screen those aspect warriors!)

kinda seems like it makes a lot more unit types useful, without truly invalidating a lot. [/quote]

I've been fielding a 4x Plasma Cannon Devastator Squad for about 4 years now. It'll be interesting to see how they perform in 5th. My Dark Angels have tons of everything though, so the only change I might consider would be picking up a fourth Tactical Squad for larger games.

I also think that we'll see a return to slightly smaller games. Eldar, Dark Angels, and Orks all featured 1500 or 1600 point sample armies. With these rules being a little more time-consuming, I wouldn't be surprised to see 1500 be the new tournament standard rather than 1850 or 2000 as things were trending towards.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231246.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231246.page GMT FAQ's have been forthcoming is because of the work and changes to 5th.[/quote]

There goes that set of rose-tinted masks you've got Toreador. Please don't be so niave as to put the lack of FAQ's down to their work on 5th. They've had how many years to do FAQs on not just the Codices but the rules themselves? All they've managed to do was release a 1 page FAQ for a couple of Codices once in 5 years. That's a poor effort by anyone's standards, and I really don't think we can blame 5th Ed for that.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231247.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231247.page GMT GWs lame excuse. [/quote]

Personally I'm looking forward to GW's attempt at telling us that none of our armies will change and everything is fine - just like they did between 3rd and 4th... and look how [i]that[/i] turned out.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231248.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231248.page GMT
It doesn't really look like this will make falcons or zilla nids obsolete, but what it does is put them more on the same level as everything else, and also brings a few armies back more in line with how GW wants the list to play like.

I really don't see this really changing any of the armies I play to a major extent, maybe just some tweaks here and there.

I can see me breaking back out the plasma cannons I had for the DA though, which right now are quite useless (in comparison to the other choices), and makes the marines holding the plasma guns a little more survivable.

Hmm, it also seems grots will be useful, as well as horde nids and guardians (screen those aspect warriors!)

kinda seems like it makes a lot more unit types useful, without truly invalidating a lot. [/quote]

True Swarm nids will be back with a vengence for sure, especially since warriors can't be targeted behind the wall of gaunts and warriors can force march now as well.

Really 5th edition is really hurting people that built lists to cater to the 4th ed rules for maximum efficiency.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231250.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231250.page GMT
Most eldar players would disagree with you.

Capt K]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231251.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231251.page GMT FAQ support than ever. So I would look for this "new wave" of changes to also have an affect on FAQs. If they don't, then it really wasn't change at all.

But with no escalation, the combat squad/ vehicle problems go away, along with some other oddities in some of the new codexes.

I don't think full blame can be attributed to it, but I also think we are naive to think they didn't know what was coming, and therefor you put the resources you have pushing new stuff, not exactly supporting the old. Which this year, there has been a lot of new stuff. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231255.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231255.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231256.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231256.page GMT
To me, that just sounds neat.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231259.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231259.page GMT FAQ takes an hour of work max,
[/quote]
It takes an hour to collect the questions, or proofread it, or typeset it, maybe.

But it takes a lot more than an hour to actually puzzle through the questions to give the *correct* answers.

If all you're looking for is droolsboyz to roll a pile of 4+, then yeah, they can probably slap some worthless POS together in an hour.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231275.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231275.page GMT Area terrain is mentioned. The forest wouldn't block line of sight (unless it did so physically), but you would get a cover save.[/quote]

So..trees are now considered individual units that must be so close together you can't see through them to block line of sight? Eh, I like felt/base/area terrain better....I guess in your individual gaming groups you could just state "That felt represents trees taller than any model on the table and growing so close they touch" . Strange though, terrain will only effect movement rates now. Even COD which is relatively new still uses area terrain rules (6 deep, can't see past, etc).]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231278.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231278.page GMT Area terrain is mentioned. The forest wouldn't block line of sight (unless it did so physically), but you would get a cover save.[/quote]

So..trees are now considered individual units that must be so close together you can't see through them to block line of sight? Eh, I like felt/base/area terrain better....I guess in your individual gaming groups you could just state "That felt represents trees taller than any model on the table and growing so close they touch" . Strange though, terrain will only effect movement rates now. Even COD which is relatively new still uses area terrain rules (6 deep, can't see past, etc).[/quote]

I was never a big fan of Size 1, 2, 3 terrain or the way area terrain worked. Actually basing things on how much the terrain actually covers always seemed more intuitive to me. Of course I came from playing Necro, so it could just be that I got used to doing things that way first.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231286.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231286.page GMT HQ=3pts. Fast, Heavy, Elite = 2pts Troops=1pt[/quote]

so "cheesy" armies like the Tyranid Monstrous Creature list, where you have all your points sunk into relatively few hard-hitting units, suddenly gain another advantage in that they provide their opponents with fewer targets from which to gain Kill Points. and those players looking to play a well rounded army with a little bit of everything get shafted, because they're presenting 10+ targets, often almost double that which their cheesy opponent may provide? i feel like this scenario is pushing the game in a bit of a wrong direction. i do like how troops only award one point, though.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231291.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231291.page GMT MCs cannot capture objectives.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231295.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231295.page GMT
Big things can be shot over regular sized models, but can the big things shoot over regular sized models to things behind them?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231305.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231305.page GMT HQ=3pts. Fast, Heavy, Elite = 2pts Troops=1pt[/quote]

so "cheesy" armies like the Tyranid Monstrous Creature list, where you have all your points sunk into relatively few hard-hitting units, suddenly gain another advantage in that they provide their opponents with fewer targets from which to gain Kill Points. and those players looking to play a well rounded army with a little bit of everything get shafted, because they're presenting 10+ targets, often almost double that which their cheesy opponent may provide? i feel like this scenario is pushing the game in a bit of a wrong direction. i do like how troops only award one point, though.[/quote]

These Armies may only have half the targets, but those targets will be worth double the kill points. Surely that balances up?

It does give another incentive to bring larger Troops units though, as a point sink. kill off all 180 ork boyz or gaunts, get 6 kill points as a reward. Alternatively, just take out 2 HQ's for the same score. I know which i think is easier. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231319.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231319.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231323.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231323.page GMT TMCs, that's 2x 3KP for 2 HQs, 6x 2KP for 6 Feces, and 2x 1KP for 2 Rippers = 20 KP total.

If you had 6 huge mobs of 20 PM, that might be only 3 KP for the prince, and 6 KP for Troops = 10 KP total.

What this does is penalize small "throwaway" squads (i.e Stormtroopers, IG Weapons teams, 6-man Las/Plas).

Big mobs of Boyz & MEQs will not be giving up KPs.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231347.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231347.page GMT TMCs, that's 2x 3KP for 2 HQs, 6x 2KP for 6 Feces, and 2x 1KP for 2 Rippers = 20 KP total.

If you had 6 huge mobs of 20 PM, that might be only 3 KP for the prince, and 6 KP for Troops = 10 KP total.

What this does is penalize small "throwaway" squads (i.e Stormtroopers, IG Weapons teams, 6-man Las/Plas).

Big mobs of Boyz & MEQs will not be giving up KPs.[/quote]

Interestingly because it uses the terms 'unit' it looks like Dark Angels are worth 1 KP if they stay together and 2 KP if they use Combat Squads.

Being able to choose whether to be two units (e.g. for holding objectives) or one (for denying KP) is going to be a useful advantage in 5th.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231368.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231368.page GMT SMF aren't quite the death traps people feared as long as you have a Farseer to keep them Fortuned (~55% or so chance to ignore each hit).[/quote]
Fortune doesn't need line of sight so fire points are irrelevant. What is relevant is whether there is a rule that says that characters who are inside transports count as being 'out of the game'. If the Farseer is in game, then he can cast most of his spells from the flying car. The rule isn't exactly unambigous even now but it would be nice if it was clearly possible in the 5th edition. I think the only power that can be used from a Falcon right now is the Eldritch Storm.

Does anyone else think that ordnance might be coming back in a big way? Do partial template hits now affect vehicles normally? Sounds to me like 3rd edition ordnance rules but even better since partials hit all models. How does casualty removal work from under the templates? Are Defilers and Leman Russes coming back?

[quote]
My only real complaint is how land tanks and infantry can get 5+ / 3+ cover saves, but skimmers only get 5+ when moving "flat out". [/quote]
Well, it's hard to understand how GW thinks any skimmer is worth its points now. They aren't fast enough nor resilient enough to justify the points cost especially as transports. 35 points for a Rhino, 165 points for a Falcon. Let me see. To me it seems the best way to use Hammerheads is to land the vehicle behind some 4+ or 3+ cover and shoot the Railgun and SMS from there all game. Fire Prisms can't land so they suck.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231370.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231370.page GMT ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231371.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231371.page GMT TMCs, that's 2x 3KP for 2 HQs, 6x 2KP for 6 Feces, and 2x 1KP for 2 Rippers = 20 KP total.

If you had 6 huge mobs of 20 PM, that might be only 3 KP for the prince, and 6 KP for Troops = 10 KP total.[/quote]

3 kp for the hq and 6kp for the troops = 9kp total.

I will assume you were in a rush

[quote=JohnHwangDD]What this does is penalize small "throwaway" squads (i.e Stormtroopers, IG Weapons teams, 6-man Las/Plas).

Big mobs of Boyz & MEQs will not be giving up KPs.[/quote]

IG will definately suffer. From my assumption on how this works, they can give up 6kp PER TROOP SLOT, with each unit being easilly killed. Most of their support falls into your "throwaway squad" category too. I guess thats the trade off for having so many scoring units for the other scenarios]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231374.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231374.page GMT
If the player knowingly chooses to select an army that cannot win, that is not the fault of the designer.

It is no different than a player choosing to take a less competitive list, take a handicap, or playing for a sporting minor win / draw rather than WAAC Massacre.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231377.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231377.page GMT KP system actually makes it into the final version of the game. It's too easy to abuse and affects army design in a massive way. It isn't fair in any shape or form that if player A destroys 1000 points of players B's army and player B does the same to player A, one of them gets a solid victory since his units were from a different force organisation slot.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231378.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231378.page GMT VP game. So armies that don't have Scoring troops (Ripper swarm troops or Dread troops for Orks) can still attempt to win the game by breaking/killing all the enemy troops then winning the old fashion way.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231379.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231379.page GMT [/quote]

If you're desperate to win so much, just don't take those armies!

I don't know about the End of days nid list, but i was very tempted by a dreadmob when i read the new codex. The way i worked it out, after taking 2 big meks (with force fields), 2 deffdreds (troops) and 9 killa kans you still have around half your points left over in a 1500 point game (depending on your weapons and other upgrades) as well as 4 troop slots. plenty of room for a handful of grot slaves, maybe some mini-kans (ard boys), or whatever you can cram in.
More importantly, it is definatly a "fun" build for use against friends, instead of a serious tournie army. Why not agree for the dreds to count as scoring, or use a scenario where it doesn't matter.

Of course, if you were wanting to play a real dredmob, there is always apocalypse. There's no Force Organisation Table to screw things up there.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231381.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231381.page GMT [/quote]
You're far more charitable than others.

[quote]IG will definately suffer. From my assumption on how this works, they can give up 6kp PER TROOP SLOT, [/quote]
Actually, I think it's 7 KP per slot: Platoon Command, 5 Platoon Squads, & REMNANTS!

Perhaps you were hurried, too?

[quote]I guess thats the trade off for having so many scoring units for the other scenarios[/quote]
Yup.

Players will need to balance Scoring units against risk of giving up KPs.

But with 2/3 of the scenarios being Objectives instead of KPs, it's not hard to see which way to go as a default. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231384.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231384.page GMT
When it states "allocate wounds" it specifically states "allocate wounds to visible models". I thought it was going to be cover saves for the models not visible.
It looks like you can choose not to fire certain models in the unit if you wish as well (This was a grey area with our group)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231385.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231385.page GMT If it's easier to destroy 1000 pts of Troops than 1000 pts of Heavy / Fast / Elite then it's completely fair.

If those Heavy / Fast / Elite concentrate a lot more offensive power per point, then it's completely fair.

The idea that all points or units should be equally valuable from a strategic standpoint is kind of strange.

Particularly as Troops are currently widely considered less valuable per point than non-Troops. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231388.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231388.page GMT If it's easier to destroy 1000 pts of Troops than 1000 pts of Heavy / Fast / Elite then it's completely fair.[/quote]
Correct, but it isn't.

[quote]Particularly as Troops are currently widely considered less valuable per point than non-Troops. [/quote]
I'm not sure what it's like where you play but where I'm from that's not the case at all. Have a look at Ork Boyz. Masses of wounds, close combat orientated, benefit from new run rule, carry S8 anti tank weapons and a S9 power klaw. 30 of them are rock solid beyond your wildest dreams, and they are worth 1KP. They are harder to kill than almost anything in the game, especially if they have cover saves, all the while being a scoring unit and because of the KP rule completely expendable. Boyz, boyz, boyz.

As far as tanks go, after reading some of the opinions on Warseer, I'd like someone to run some maths on killing an AV14 vehicle in 4+ cover (rocks, ruins, hills, etc) with the new damage table. I think you'll find the new '4th ed Falcon' in there.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231391.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231391.page GMT
Railgun kill: 2/3 hit x 1/3 Pen x 1/2 Destroyed x 1/2 Cover = 1/18.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231393.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231393.page GMT Land Raiders are going to be a bit mental though. But still vunerable to close assault.

You're also right about ork boys being insane in the new edition. With running and waaagh!-ing and the new scoring rules, they just went from "Strong and bordering on broken" into "broken". ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231395.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231395.page GMT
Assault: 2 inch kill zone is gone. You can remove any models from your unit in HTH now. This makes Ini mean alot less, makes horde units that barely reach HTH alot better.

Assault: You are a -1 to Ld for each wound you took in HTH (If you lose HTH).

If you get a "Crew Stunned" result you can't disembark. Egh.

You can run the turn you Deep Strike. Deep Strike Mishap table is nasty.


]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231396.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231396.page GMT Is the PDF downloadable somewhere? If anyone has it PM me a link to a torrent or whatever.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231398.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231398.page GMT KP rule completely expendable. [/quote]
I don't think Boyz are any more difficult to kill than 20 Plague Marines, and they're Troops worth only 1 KP.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231405.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231405.page GMT
1) It appears that LOS is measured from modeles eye view (or weapon mount for vehicles). Period. So yes a carnifex can shoot over the gaunts in front of it as long as models eye view wise it can see its target completely unobscured by freind/foe (partially obscured is allowed for terrain or the afore mentioned shooting beyond a friendly vehicle with low S weaponry). And again, Yakface's sig hold true even more in 5ed.

How much are laser pointers?

2) 25% casualty moral check is for each phase -- not just shooting.

"A unit losing 25% or more of its models during a
[b]single phase of the turn[/b] must pass a Morale check
at the end of that phase, with the appropriate
modifiers, or else it will fall back." Emphasis mine.

I think this is potentially huge for non-fearless units. You could win combat, sweep, and still fall back afterward if you lose 25% casualties in the assault phase. Or you could fall back due to dangerous terrain.

3) Which brings up another change. Wrecks are dangerous as well as difficult terrain.

4) Out numbered doesn't affect moral check for running, this is now deteremined by the differnce in wounds you lost by (eg you inflicted 2 wounds, opponent inflicted 6, you lost by 4 wounds, -4 to your ld check).

5) Out numbered still affects fearless much like now, only there is no limit to the number of wounds inflicted (eg 10:1 outnumbered = 10 wounds).

6) falling back is much more dangerous. Basically you go straight back to your board edge 2D6". As mentioned you can fall back straight through friendly models (all friendly models) and if these are non-vehicle models they must take moral test or run too. Difficult terrain does not slow this movement down. The kicker: if the movement is blocked by impassable terrain or enemy models, the model is removed. This is done on a model to model basis, and remember that there is [b]no[/b] rule for moving to avoid anything. You always go straight back toward theboard edge. Could be brutal.

7) Invulnerable save s allowed against Perils of the Warp, but requires two succesful rolls.

8) I think this was stated but is good to mention again: if a unit destroys a transport, it may assault the disembarking occupants.

9) Monsterous creatures can still fire two weapons (and on the move). They also cannot be pinned (voluntary or otherwise). They can run as far as I can tell.

10) Walkers, like other vehicles cannot fire more then one S5+ weapon if they moved (eg MCs are the better shooting platforms). They can most certainly run like infantry.

11) Jet pack (eg Tau) can fire heavy weapons as if stationary (gogo marker light drones) as well as rapid fire. eg they have relentless, which is for both rapid fire and heavy weapons and there is no caveat at all.

12) skimmers/jetbikes cannot float above terrain at the end of their move. They must take a dangerous terrain test if they end their move above terrain. Skimmers are allowed to end on immpassible terrain if the model will stay there, but must take a dangerous terrain test (i don't think jetbikes can do this however). Huge nerfage.

13) 3+ cover save for vehicles in a very limited circumstance: If you fire at a vehicle and the facing that you'd normally shoot at is 100% blocked, but you can still see a part of another facing, you may shoot at that facing but the extreme angle makes it a 3+ cover save. I can see this being situationally abused by certain vehicles (like land raiders).

14) Using instakill on Force Weapon is now most certainly a psychic power, so 1kson sorcerer can use force weapon and warp time in 5ed.

15) Models, both firendly and enemy are defined as immpassible terrain.

Much more but I'm offline for ahwile.

Enjoy!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231411.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231411.page GMT
Gun drones are on flight stands. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231414.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231414.page GMT
When it states "allocate wounds" it specifically states "allocate wounds to visible models". I thought it was going to be cover saves for the models not visible.
It looks like you can choose not to fire certain models in the unit if you wish as well (This was a grey area with our group) [/quote]
Yeah what I noticed is that the cover save rules read much like they do in 4ed, including models being out of LOS being unable to be removed as casualties. Totally contradicts the wounding section above it. here 's a quote:

"Note that even models that are completely out of
sight and/or out of range of all of the firers
(including those behind intervening models) can
be wounded."

Then a page away in the cover save section:
"Models that are completely out of sight of all of
the firers are not counted in either category, and
they cannot be hit."

It does contradict a bit, except the difference is one is "wounding" and one is "hit". I believe the last quote is only saying that a model out of LOS cannot be counted in determining whether a unit is in cover or out of cover, but no suprise GW has some contradicting rules.

Personally, I don't understand why they wouldn't assign cover saves to models instead of the 4ed way but that is not the way it reads.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231416.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231416.page GMT It will depend on the situation but yeah, that is exactly how I read it (granted I need more time to read it a couple more times.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231417.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231417.page GMT
When it states "allocate wounds" it specifically states "allocate wounds to visible models". I thought it was going to be cover saves for the models not visible.
It looks like you can choose not to fire certain models in the unit if you wish as well (This was a grey area with our group) [/quote]
Yeah what I noticed is that the cover save rules read much like they do in 4ed, including models being out of LOS being unable to be removed as casualties. Totally contradicts the wounding section above it. here 's a quote:

"Note that even models that are completely out of
sight and/or out of range of all of the firers
(including those behind intervening models) can
be wounded."

Then a page away in the cover save section:
"Models that are completely out of sight of all of
the firers are not counted in either category, and
they cannot be hit."

It does contradict a bit, except the difference is one is "wounding" and one is "hit". I believe the last quote is only saying that a model out of LOS cannot be counted in determining whether a unit is in cover or out of cover, but no suprise GW has some contradicting rules.

Personally, I don't understand why they wouldn't assign cover saves to models instead of the 4ed way but that is not the way it reads.[/quote]

Yeah I noticed that too. I'm inclined to believe you can only allocate to visible models considering this is new wording and specifically in the shooting phase section.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231423.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231423.page GMT
Most eldar players would disagree with you.

Capt K[/quote]

That would mean they are bad players. How many times do we have to take Mech Eldar to events, win and get crushed in sportsmanship just to prove this point? And yet, we have the Wave Serpent naysayers out there still. In fact, I shouldn't even say anything. Mutscheller is gonna kill me for even posting on this. Ugh.

Since this is a discussion about 5th ed - I won't digress any further.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231429.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231429.page GMT str 6 shots at 36", fortuned and guided in 4+ cover. OUCH!!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231432.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231432.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231441.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231441.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231450.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231450.page GMT
Unless you buy sensor spines. Then you can be in cover and shoot both your S5 weapons, presumably while still in cover.

So the Tau skimmers will hide behind/in cover and just shoot? I hope I'm wrong about that.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231452.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231452.page GMT
The saves are going to make it very interesting. Fast vehicles can get a save for speeding across open ground, while the rest will have to use cover, but all of it is pretty much one nice even rule. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231457.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231457.page GMT ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231459.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231459.page GMT
Unless you buy sensor spines. Then you can be in cover and shoot both your S5 weapons, presumably while still in cover.

So the Tau skimmers will hide behind/in cover and just shoot? I hope I'm wrong about that.[/quote]

How come? It's pretty nifty. Unless you're using them as assault-blockers, they might as well be hiding behind a good plot of land anyway. You still get a 5+ save if you need to reposition them.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231460.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231460.page GMT 40k newbie here, popping in to see what was up with all these rumors I'd been hearing about.

[quote=Asmodai]That's a good point Kilkrazy. They suggest literally picking up the dice and placing it next to each model that it wounded. You're right that probability-wise, you couldn't use the short-cut I suggested.

You can replace any model killed with a model with the identical equipment, which led me astray. You do have to take each model individually.

Also interesting, and a mate just reminded me, you can allocate both Plasma Gun wounds to the same model if you wanted to minimize casualties. (That's the example they use in the leak.) This constitutes a subtle nerf to Plasma Guns.[/quote]

Wow. I may be new to the game, but this seems like a pretty big deal. Beyond just subtly nerfing plasma guns, it seems to have a significant impact on the attacks of any unit that can put out a mix of armor-penetrating and non-armor-penetrating hits, as well as any unit that relies on causing a large number of saves, particularly when targeted against small units.

An example:

A brood of genestealers charges a 6-man marine squad. The stealers inflict 2 rending and 4 non-rending wounds (the average result for 12 hits). In this case, the marine player removes [b]two[/b] models and makes [b]one[/b] save on each of the rest.

But if I'm understanding Asmodai correctly, if the stealers caused one extra regular wound, for 2 rending and 5 non-rending wounds, the marine player would have to "wrap around" with assigning wounds and could put both rends on the same model. Thus, the marine player removes [b]one[/b] model and makes [b]one[/b] save on each of the rest.

Net result? Rolling one extra non-rending wound has effectively made one of the two rends disappear and spared a marine.

Of course, this could happen with other squads as well. You also run into issues of high-RoF units (like those guided warwalkers) forcing 2 or even three saves per model on small-to-medium units, which will often result in some models failing more than one save, thus causing (slightly?) fewer casualties than they would currently. So such high-RoF units, while gaining better odds of picking off sergeants and heavy weapons, would actually become somewhat [i]less[/i] effective against certain infrantry targets in terms of total killing power.



]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231468.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231468.page GMT This is assuming that the existing rule of handling wounds that don't allow armor saves first and by themselves doesn't make it into the new codex. Somehow I'd be surprised if you end up able to allocate two unsavable wounds to the same model when there are saveable wounds left to allocate.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231474.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231474.page GMT
The effects on high-RoF units would be easier to live with, seeing as the small loss in average casualties caused is a trade-off for increased odds of picking off special models.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231480.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231480.page GMT
My favorite part is the new reserve rules - you can now choose to start in reserve.

Also, starting turn 5, you automatically come in from reserves (no 2+). Very helpful.

I also like because the rules are very clear on the order you roll and bring reserves in (roll all reserve roles first, then bring in units).

Outflanking is cool and will help infiltrating and scout units!

Oh, and one more unrelated thing - having a squad leader with higher Ld actually now (officially) gives you a benefit!

Mez]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231493.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231493.page GMT Is the PDF downloadable somewhere? If anyone has it PM me a link to a torrent or whatever.[/quote]

Can I get that as well?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231494.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231494.page GMT
[i]Edit:

Please don't even help anyone to procure the leak. I'm sure they can find it if they try hard enough.

And please don't ask where to find it here on Dakka.

--yakface[/i]


]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231497.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231497.page GMT That might be a good thing for eldar skimmers carrying assault troops. Come in with star engines from reserve and avoid getting downed on turn one.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231504.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231504.page GMT
After reading through it once, my immediate, self-centered thoughts are as follows:

Mwuahahaaha! Black Templars horde squads FTW!

Vindicators are even better now according to the new Ordnance rules.

But, in relation to Imperial Guardsmen out there:

It's a sad, sad day to those of us who ever thought fielding an Armored Company would be fun. More like Codex: Leman Russ Main Bunker Tank.

S4 Defensive sucks. Horribly. I don't mind skimmers slowing down, but I'd like to see some clarification (and much needed) improvement on tanks, especially now that a Hellhound, which probably weighs in at over 15 tons, cannot shoot a heavy machine gun, flamethrower, and .50 cal in the same turn. Riddle me that one, Gee Dub!

Monoliths are even more broken now that the new Vehicle Damage Chart is the way it is. Maybe my usual Necron opponent (my most common adversary at the moment) will consent to a points hike to 265 points.

I will say though, that with S4 Defensive Weapons being the norm, I see Leman Russes becoming shells. No more Triple HB pimping, no sir. If the tank wants to move at Combat Speed and not shoot its Battlecannon (for fear of obliterating a friendly squad on the scatter, especially now that everything touching the template is hit), then IG players should just buy a Hull Heavy Bolter and either forgo a pintle weapon or take the Stubber.

All I know for sure is that my tanks just dropped in cost from 168 points (HM Las, HB Spon, Smoke) to 148 points (Hull HB, Smoke). Yay, 40 more points freed up.

I'll get back when I re-read the entire thing again.

CK]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231516.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231516.page GMT
This is ridiculous. It solves nothing. Now flamers will ignore the saving throw instead of weapons like psy-cannons. It’s the EXACT same problem but with different weapons.

I really hope it’s “Bikes have the option to take a 3+ cover save” and not “a bike’s armor save [i]becomes[/I] a 3+ cover save".

P.S. I realize we talked about this back on page 3. But I had to comment on it.

~Logic]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231519.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231519.page GMT
Bikes [i]"benefit"[/i] from a 3+ cover save. Much like a unit in a bunker benefits from a 3+ cover save. They can still choose to use their regular save.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231527.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231527.page GMT
Bikes [i]"benefit"[/i] from a 3+ cover save. Much like a unit in a bunker benefits from a 3+ cover save. They can still choose to use their regular save. [/quote]

Maybe. It depends on how GW words it.

Right now bikes that turbo-boost "[i]benefit[/i]" from an invulnerable save... But they "[i]benefit[/i]" from an invulnerable save at the cost of their armor save.

~Logic]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231533.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231533.page GMT Yeah it was a surprising example they gave (and without the example it would cause a YMTC thread to end all threads). But using wrap around to minimize casualties is exactly what is allowed. Honestly, it just makes smaller units a bit more resilient but at the same time those smaller units are more likely to lose a key model. There's a give and take which isn't so bad on my first pass through the rules.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231538.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231538.page GMT GW words it. [/quote]

Umm, that is how they word it the leaked document: "the bike benefits from a Cover Save of 3+"

There is no replacement of their save. There is even a section which talks about choosing to use cover save or regular armor save in the shooting rules.

Honestly, this is a solid change. Nashing of teeth is more warranted on other changes...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231541.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231541.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231545.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231545.page GMT
In scenario one they get 2 rending wounds and 9 normal wounds. The space marine player is then allowed to allocate them as such and rolls:

SM A: rend, rend, normal wound rolls (1) – one very unlucky space marine
SM B: rolls (1), (2)
SM C: rolls (3). (4)
SM D: rolls (3), (6)
SM E: rolls (5), (5)

So even though the space marine squad suffered 2 rends and 3 failed saves, only two guys bite it?

Contract this with Scenario 2, 1 rending wound and 9 normal wounds:

SM A: rend, normal wound rolls (4)
SM B: rolls (1), (4)
SM C: rolls (2). (4)
SM D: rolls (1), (6)
SM E: rolls (5), (5)

So in this hypothetical scenario, twice as many casualties are done (4) even though only one rending wound and three failed saves were suffered?

And in both scenarios you have to roll 5 sets of dice?

This is better how?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231553.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231553.page GMT
Its seems borderline stupid to me that every army in the game is going to have a unit that can come on by the enemies table edge. Stand and shoot armies will suffer horribly for this. I know there are new rules for consolidating into fresh units (not being able to) but coming onto the table with a powerfisted cheap squad of scouts and pummelling a 3 man broadside teams seems just too easy now. Squads like devestators/reapers/broadsides/lootas are all really vulnerable to these types of units that are now all too common.

I really dont like the idea of that. Its always been nearly impossible to defend or prepare for an assault by units like this (Space wolf scouts) now everyone will be bringing one to the table.

...forget snikrot, every infiltrater has his rule now, just bring some komandos with a powerklawed nob.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231558.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231558.page GMT
It's odd that Snipers lost the hit on 2+. Now they rely on BS4+, which isn't so bad, given that they got the nerfed Rending.

It's amusing that Power Fists got nerfed to block the +1A except for double Fists. I guess Lighting Claws are the answer, rather than Fists being the do-it-all no-brainers.

Glaring inconsistencies in the rules:

1. Turbo-boosting is still 24" while Fast Vehicles are 18". This makes absolutely no sense that a Bike having to navigate cross-country can be faster than helicopter or grav-tank that only has to deal with air resistance. Either Turbo-boosting should drop to 18", or else both Jetbikes and Fast Skimmers should be able to move up to 24".

2. Turbo-boosting and deep cover give 3+ cover saves, but Skimmers moving fast only gain a 5+ (like cheap 1-shot Smoke). For better consistency, either bring Turbo-boosting down to a 4+ or (more sensibly), bring Flat Out up to a 3+. At least Skimmers don't have to go Flat Out to get their SMF save, and that Cruising Speed (6+") is enough for the 5+.

3. Assigning wounds to models out of sight / range, but not assigning hits to models out of sight / range. Better to assume models move up and die, as it appears that 40k5 is increasing lethality. The out of sight / range should simply count as non-Exposed for the purposes of determining whether the unit may take Cover Saves.

____

Oh yeah, the Deep Strike Mishap table is great. If you can't place all of the models, 1/2 the time the unit is dead, and 1/2 the time, the opponent places them. Awesome!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231562.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231562.page GMT GW takes these rules back to the drawing board big time. There is a lot of potential, but also a lot of stupidity. Strength 4 or less defensive weapons are useless, I think that they were fine as Str 6. Vehicles need to be able to move and fire, period. The individual allocation of wounds will take forever and will result in a lot of bullcrap about who is hit with what. The line of sight rules are just asking for abuse and the prospect of fortuned vehicles is sickening. I like the vehicle cover save rule, but it shouldn't result in a return to the pillbox tanks of old. If GW hears our criticism and carefully folds it into the new rules to create a better product I will be really happy, but if they just release the same messy rules leaked here, then it will definitely make the game less fun.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231563.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231563.page GMT
"Umm, how, its behind this building. you cant see it."

"Well, if you look from my devestators, im perfectly lined up with that single little window in the building, I can see the side of your tank through that, and we never said that the building cannot be seen thru."

"Are you serious, you're shooting at me thru THAT? Its only just bigger than a marines head."

"Yea, but I can still see your LandRaider thru it!"


....Yay....]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231566.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231566.page GMT
Now you see what I mean by GW dumbing down the rules in many places (damage tables, keeping majority toughness) but at the same time introducing utterly perplexing rules that seem to exist for no other reason than to slow things down (this armour save rule, having to roll scatter for every damned blast marker, fuggin' [i]barrage[/i] for multiple blasts).

Why can't the 5th God of Chaos - Priestley - save us from these incompetants who run 40K now...

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231571.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231571.page GMT
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231577.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231577.page GMT
1. Turbo-boosting is still 24" while Fast Vehicles are 18". This makes absolutely no sense that a Bike having to navigate cross-country can be faster than helicopter or grav-tank that only has to deal with air resistance. Either Turbo-boosting should drop to 18", or else both Jetbikes and Fast Skimmers should be able to move up to 24".

2. Turbo-boosting and deep cover give 3+ cover saves, but Skimmers moving fast only gain a 5+ (like cheap 1-shot Smoke). For better consistency, either bring Turbo-boosting down to a 4+ or (more sensibly), bring Flat Out up to a 3+. At least Skimmers don't have to go Flat Out to get their SMF save, and that Cruising Speed (6+") is enough for the 5+.

3. Assigning wounds to models out of sight / range, but not assigning hits to models out of sight / range. Better to assume models move up and die, as it appears that 40k5 is increasing lethality. The out of sight / range should simply count as non-Exposed for the purposes of determining whether the unit may take Cover Saves.

____

...[/quote]

I'm happy with bikes being the fastest vehicles but I think a 3+ cover save is a bit too good.

The rules on assigning wounds and stuff look like they are going to be as big a mess as the current rules, which I still have difficulty understanding.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231581.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231581.page GMT
I think we'll take credit for that one, along with Shadow of the Warp, something I made a year or so before the 'Nid Codex.

Other things are written in a way to make new players go 'Huh'? Using the BS6+ example again, they talk about a character that's BS7 firing a Plasma Pistol who rolls a 1, and therefore gets to re-roll it. They also mention how it allows him to avoid the Gets Hot! rule. We haven't got to the Gets Hot! rule yet, so mentioning it is pointless as new players won't even have the slightest clue what it is and it's likely to stop them reading so they can leaf through to the weapon section. Why even bother mentioning it - why even mention the weapon, it's immaterial to the example and does nothing but clutter it up, yet they seem to want to include it. Doesn't make sense. Examples as supposed to be clear, not introduce new concepts [i]mid-fg-sentence[/i]

It's idiotic that you have no choice whether IC's join units.

As I've said before, Defensive Weapons = S4 and below = Epic Fail for these rules.

I love their justification of Ordnance being the only weapon that can fire - 'requires the attention of all the crew'. Why? Isn't the point of having multiple crew so the tank can do different things at the same time? Do they all stop to wish the gunner good luck, or deliver a catchy one-liner each time they fire?

The Hull Down in Area Terrain rule is not at all congruent with the Cover Saves in area terrain. Infantry get it no matter how much is touching, and vehicles still have to have 50% covered...

Hit & Run now adds yet another dice roll to the game for no apparent reason.

The Kill Point system is just... oh... words fail me.

VP's are only used in the case of objective-based ties. Wonderful.


No, having read through it, I take back what I said. The 'scoring unit' rules are stupid, the 'Kill Point' rule makes me wonder (and desire) the drugs the Dev team uses for their 'brain storming & sniffing glue' sessions, and their vehicle rules make me thank the Emperor for The Revisited Project.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231589.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231589.page GMT
I'm over the 'ooh and ahh' phase with 40K. Fluff's great, models are great, but I'm looking for a good game with a good core ruleset. S4 defensive weapons, and the effect it has on vehicle use, would be a major detractor for me within that context.

Kudos to GW for great fluff and models, though. 10 out of 10 there, no doubt. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231647.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231647.page GMT
For the most part, it balances the game a lot.

I [b]like[/b] the fact that you can't move and fire gobs and gobs of weapons now. It's about mobility or about shooting, you do not get everything in one easy to use package. More choices mean more mistakes or good moves.

And to balance that, Tanks of all kinds [b]except[/b] Holofield Skimmers got much harder to kill. That would normally be a problem, except VP Denial armies don't really work most of the time now. I don't care if your Falcon isn't dead, I've got troops on an objective - I win.

At the same time, you can neutralize tanks by glancing them. Sure Venom Cannon's can't KILL tanks, but you can stop them from shooting the crap out of your now important troops.

And if you really NEED to kill tanks, you can if you use the right weapons to do the job - which includes things like Meltas or Power Fists, or rending in many cases. Skimmers don't get cover saves from CC attacks, and AP1 helps a lot. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231660.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231660.page GMT CC hits on rear armor, which means most everything in the game can at kleast glance non monolith vehicles. What juicy tidbit did I miss?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231662.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231662.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231663.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231663.page GMT CC hits on rear armor, which means most everything in the game can at kleast glance non monolith vehicles. What juicy tidbit did I miss?[/quote]

That "all H2H attacks hit Rear Armor" thing was bunk. It works just like now.

Hitting vehicles in CC works like now, so you still need 6's to hit skimmers or vehicles moving over 6", but they get no Cover Saves from these attacks.

Basically, you can set it up so your vehicles get Cover Saves in 5th, so when being shot, even tracked vehicles have a good chance of being OK. Skimmers get a 5+ Cover save for moving Fast. If you get Wargear that makes you count as obscured (see tau), you get a 5+ Cover save when obscured. Otherwise you can get a 4+ or 3+ cover save for being behind certain terrain types or have LOS angling issues, etc.

Furthermore, the damage tables are far more forgiving.

Glancing hits can only immobilize at best, unless you're using an AP1 weapon which ends up glancing, in which case a 5 Immobilizes and 6 Destroys.

Even Penetrating hits aren't that bad because of the single table:

1 or less) Shaken
2.) Stunned
3.) Weapon Destroyed
4.) Immobilized
5.) Destroyed
6.) Explodes

AP1 gives +1 to the table. AP - gives -1. Glancing -2. Open Topped +1.

That's it.

Because of the Cover saves and how much more forgiving the Glancing, and even penetrating tables are, plus the fact that you get cover saves now, your vehicles will be able to stick around a lot more.

Rending is nerfed to +D3 to your penetration rolls on a 6 now. So yes, assault cannons can still penetrate Land Raiders; but even still assault cannons are going to be limited in the future.

Likewise, if you can glance it, you can keep it from shooting, so Venom Cannon's aren't "useless". ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231664.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231664.page GMT
"Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a Fast vehicle if it has moved or [b]is going to move Flat Out[/b] in that Movement phase."

To me, the way this is worded could cause the following situtations:

1. Unit A wants to embark onto a fast vehicle, but that vehicle is planning on moving flat out in the current movement phase, so Unit A cannot embark onto it.

2. Unit A is embarked on a fast vehicle at the start of their movement phase. The owning player plans to disembark the unit, then move the fast vehicle flat out. According to the RAW, since the fast vehicle is "going to move flat out in that movement phase" then the unit cannot disembark.

3. Unit A embarks onto a fast vehicle at the start of the movement phase, forcing the fast vehicle to only move 12." ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231665.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231665.page GMT [/quote]

Obviously in the dark grimmness or whatever of the far future, all gun crews are recruited from PA road workers. You need 5 guys standing around smoking and drinking coffee so 2 guys can fire the gun, while 3 others supervise.

Of course, you are on the exact opposite side of the globe, so you probably have no idea what I am talking about... Still, I think it is pretty obvious that the gun crews are union workers, and thus are very rigorous about their rules.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231670.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231670.page GMT
[quote]"Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a Fast vehicle if it has moved or is going to move Flat Out in that Movement phase." [/quote]

This causes a problem with DE Raiders, Ork Trukks, and Tau Piranhas. Does this or the open-topped rule take precedence? You have a "transport fast vehicles" ruleset and "transport open-topped vehicles" ruleset.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231674.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231674.page GMT
"Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a Fast vehicle if it has moved or [b]is going to move Flat Out[/b] in that Movement phase."

To me, the way this is worded could cause the following situtations:

1. Unit A wants to embark onto a fast vehicle, but that vehicle is planning on moving flat out in the current movement phase, so Unit A cannot embark onto it.

2. Unit A is embarked on a fast vehicle at the start of their movement phase. The owning player plans to disembark the unit, then move the fast vehicle flat out. According to the RAW, since the fast vehicle is "going to move flat out in that movement phase" then the unit cannot disembark.

3. Unit A embarks onto a fast vehicle at the start of the movement phase, forcing the fast vehicle to only move 12." [/quote]

It seems OK to me and should save Eldar from last minute land grabs using star engine boosted skimmers. If you want the logic, because the vehicle has to move fast it spedns more time accelerating and less time embarking passengers.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231676.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231676.page GMT
My main reservation is the much greater emphasis on Troops, since Tau troops are weak and have been weakened further. However I can already see a lot of stuff that helps Tau so I think it will balance out.

I suspect Broadsides will go out of favoura gain, but Railheads will make a comeback because of the pieplate shot against horde armies combined with S1 AP1 armour piercing goodness.

We will also see a lot more Pathfinders and markerlights deployed, and now that the Pathfinder's 'Fish can Scout, it will be worth pimping with SMS and so on for extra fire support.

Tau vehicles pimped with SMS are going to be supercool for hiding behind cover and shooting.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231678.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231678.page GMT
Seriously kill, I'm thinking that large Kroot masses will be popular. If Orks and Gaunts will be popular, Kroot are reasonably good at fighting them. Kroot can also flank march and can even take their Krootox buddy with them on devilfish (something I'm gonna enjoy doing).]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231679.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231679.page GMT JSJ with Railguns.

They can however bring up a hell of an interesting bit of rules quandary.

Broadsides are tall, and can see over Stealth Suits. They can shoot "over them" but because they'll be obscured by the Stealths, they can't be shot back.

Stealth Suits, at long range are going to be very hard to shoot because of their rules.

Do they still "obscure" the Broadsides even if they're so far away that their stealth field makes them near impossible to shoot at?

Will we see teams of Broadsides screened by JSJ'ing teams of 3 Stealth Suits at max coherency? ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231687.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231687.page GMT
I'm back-and-forth on them, practically hourly. I like Jervis's willingness to break some eggs, it's just that up until this point, it seems like he's smashed some fresh eggs and spared some rotten ones.

I like aspects of what I'm hearing, although part of it could be nostalgia for the days of 2nd edition. My only fear is that by putting so many aspects of the game into upheaval, there'll be (once again) some significant problems created that won't be apparent until we've all been playing with it for awhile.

I think 5th edition is probably GW's last chance to keep me in the game. If they just end up overhauling everything again in 6th, I'll be gone. It's unfathomable to me how you can have a ruleset this unsettled more than 20 years since its release.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231694.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231694.page GMT
Secondly, The more I hear about the new LOS rule the more the seem like a huge mistake. Aside from the fact that the Area Terrain system worked just fine, it doesn't make sense that a unit of guardsmen could block LOS when a forest doesn't. This will likely take us back into laser pointer days and result in a lot of stupid unit choreography that slows down the game.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231695.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231695.page GMT LOS, just like it works now.

Or it could work where you can shoot through it but it gives a cover save.

Clarify what each piece of terrain is, and does, before the game and you're good.

The GT's and GD Events had terrain packets explaining what each feature was and it's in game effects. Going on this idea that Dave Taylor and co are going to keep up their excellent job, I don't see a reason why this practice won't be continued in the future. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231701.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231701.page GMT
Yes, I agree. Slightly disappointing that the revised area cover rules deprive Kroot of their see through woods ability but even so, they are going to be needed to do the low level H2H work.

And as you say can now be carried in D'Fish.

>>Will we see teams of Broadsides screened by JSJ'ing teams of 3 Stealth Suits at max coherency?

What about if you JSJ your Stealth from behind a screen of Sniper Drones?

Also if the rumour that JSJ troops can move and fire Heavy weapons, then Crisis Suits will be carrying more marker drones.



]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231704.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231704.page GMT I like these rules quite a bit. There are a few strange oddities that I hope they clear up before the actual release.

Of course, anytime you change rules there are going to be unforseen consequences in the codices, but oh well.


A few things that popped out at me (and if I missed something in my read through, my apologies):


1) Psychic Powers still have that ridiculous "unless specified otherwise they follow the shooting rule" garbage sentence. It still isn't nearly specific enough.


2) There is a rule mentioning Last Man Standing but I don't see that rule anymore.


3) They're still using the word "dice" as a single die. Bad GW!


4) The pile in rules still state that you only pile in if not engaged (as opposed to being base to base). Here's hoping they fix the diagram to match!


5) The Fire Point rules state that codices tell you how many models can fire out of each fire point but all the recent codices don't say how many models can fire out.


6) There's still no exemption about vehicles firing templates being immune to hurting themselves.


7) The embarked rules are better (they tell you to measure from the vehicle for effects inside), but they still don't tell you what happens if something wierd happens to the guys inside a vehicle (like a Wierdboy's power goes off) or what happens if a power like FOTD has the vehicle in range: does the unit inside take the test and if they fail do they run out of the vehicle, etc?


8) It appears that you now pile in even if you just freshly consolidated into a new unit, which I kind of like.


9) The rules still don't cover what happens if models can't get into base contact because of intervening terrain (like a guy is behind a barrel). By the RAW if you can't get into base contact you don't count as being in base contact, which makes creative terrain a real impediment to smooth gameplay.


10) The Jet Pack rules are still unclear about whether they turn off when the unit assaults an enemy or stays on (and whether they can turn off the jetpack and move normally in the movement phase either).


11) The artillery rules are still a bit unclear so people will still wonder if artillery can move and fire heavy weapons like vehicles.


12) They got rid of the backwards damage on vehicles, so if you get an immobilized or weapon destroyed it doesn't appear as though you shake or stun the vehicle too. This leads to some REALLY strange situations where, if the vehicle has embarked models you really want to get a stunned result (which pins the unit inside) but not an immobilized or weapon destroyed result (which would allow them to disembark next turn). I really hope they change that before release.


13) The exploding vehicle vs. transported models still isn't clear on the timing so some people could still argue that the disembarking models essentially get hit twice.


14) The vehicle moving rules still seem to allow vehicles to move in any direction, which really should be fixed so that they only move forward or backward (especially since they can pivot any number of times).


15) There still(!) doesn't appear to be any ordnance rules. Is it possible they'll ship two editions in a row both missing the same rules?

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231708.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231708.page GMT The GT's and GD Events had terrain packets explaining what each feature was and it's in game effects. Going on this idea that Dave Taylor and co are going to keep up their excellent job, I don't see a reason why this practice won't be continued in the future. [/quote]

Hopefully someone (I won't hold my breath on GW) will give us a good example of how they did it. If it worked for GTs, then it should be nice for friendly games.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231709.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231709.page GMT JSJ with heavy weapons is ok.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231711.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231711.page GMT Str 4 defensive weapon thing. I know it is going to cause a lot of bunkering up, but so is the cover save rule. This is probably to balance out vehicles being even more survivable. A tank being able to blast away with everything while moving across the battlefield becomes a very good choice, but if you have to make the choice of sitting in a good defensible position and blasting away (thus limiting your targets) or moving to get a better position and firing.

It just seems to work out. Fast vehicles still can shoot at combat speeds, and will try to move in and out of cover, but will lose shots if they want to get the skimmer obscurement save.

It seems you have a lot of choices to make.

I don't know. I think the old 8" howitzer we fired would be considered ordinance, and everyone cowered and or took cover when we fired that thing. There is no way I would want to be on the vehicle trying to shoot another weapon, there would be no way to hit. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231712.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231712.page GMT Assuming Ordnance works likes blasts (and there's no reason to believe it won't) it got a bit better against vehicles, which is a good thing.

Because now if the blast scatters off the vehicle it counts as hitting the side the hole is on (this used to only apply to barrage weapons).

That means you can place your blast/ordnance over the rear section of a vehicle and feel pretty confident that you'll either hit the vehicle or if the center scatters off of it you'll partial the back armor and still have a chance to do some damage.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231720.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231720.page GMT I don't know. I think the old 8" howitzer we fired would be considered ordinance, and everyone cowered and or took cover when we fired that thing. There is no way I would want to be on the vehicle trying to shoot another weapon, there would be no way to hit. [/quote]
I could see that for really big things like Earthshakers etc., but it seems to me that if the Battle Cannon on a Russ is going to be ordnance, they need to reevaluate things.

Possibly the answer is to change the type of the Battlecannon from Ordnance to Large Blast. *shrug* Probably more an issue of over broad catagories than anything.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231722.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231722.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231723.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231723.page GMT [quote=jfrazell]Unless thats changed I don't believe that is accurate. At the current time you have to place the template over the center of the vehicle. If the center scatters off your shot is pretty much wasted at that point. How is this changing that? [/quote]


First off, I think I was unclear. When I said "now" I meant now with the new PDF.


Second, even with the current rules you are allowed to place the marker anywhere with the hole over the vehicle (see the online rulebook FAQ). The change is that in the current rules if the marker scatters off the model the armor facing you use is still in relation to firer vs. target. So if you're firing at the front armor no matter where the blast scatters you count as hitting the front armor (unless its a barrage weapon).


With the new rules, when the blast scatters you count as hitting the side the hole is on, so you can most certainly increase your chances of destroying a vehicle by placing the blast over the back end of the model (where you'd still be able to glance the armor even if your blast is at half strength).

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231728.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231728.page GMT So, a lascannon will have 1/54 chance of destroying an AV14 vehicle hiding behind some rocks/ruins/hills and you like it. You like the rules because they make Orks one of the best if not the best army, and because you love the prospect of playing Orks against Orks. I can't see any other reason for liking the new rules a lot. Like yakface pointed out they're still full of holes, the game seems to become slower and slightly more complicated, and I dare to say even less balanced than it is now.

[quote=Wehrkind]Obviously in the dark grimmness or whatever of the far future, all gun crews are recruited from PA road workers. You need 5 guys standing around smoking and drinking coffee so 2 guys can fire the gun, while 3 others supervise.

Of course, you are on the exact opposite side of the globe, so you probably have no idea what I am talking about... Still, I think it is pretty obvious that the gun crews are union workers, and thus are very rigorous about their rules.[/quote]
That was a good one. I'm pretty sure it's like that everywhere.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231733.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231733.page GMT
Orks are the best because they have a huge issue already vs av14 armies? Or that blast templates will work quite well against large mobs of boyz, and whirlwinds will be even more useful than they have been in the past, especially against orks?

I don't see anything to fear out of orks that I don't already fear with the current rules. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231735.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231735.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231736.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231736.page GMT [quote=Toreador]

I don't see anything to fear out of orks that I don't already fear with the current rules. [/quote]


Running. You should fear massed Orks running on the first turn.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231737.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231737.page GMT Orks are the best because they have a huge issue already vs av14 armies? Or that blast templates will work quite well against large mobs of boyz, and whirlwinds will be even more useful than they have been in the past, especially against orks?

I don't see anything to fear out of orks that I don't already fear with the current rules.[/quote]
Oh okay. You have no trouble with running Orks, or 45 Kommandos showing up from your table edge. Or that the WAAC 1.85K Ork lists have 180 fearless T4 models with invulnerable saves, anti-tank guns and S9 power fists, and are worth 6KP overall and count as scoring units. You don't have any idea how bad the Orks will be do you? The Boyz are all assaulting on turn 3 the latest, but the Kommandos are assaulting on turn two. Have fun wiping them all out before that. No, they won't panic. They are fearless, and yes, they will bust your tanks in close combat.

[quote]In comparison to what is now, yes. I don't see many AV14 models on the battlefield[/quote]
Am I reading this right? First people whine about Falcons non-stop for years, and when Falcons are nerfed people are fine with AV14 vehicles becoming the new Falcons. Let me remind you that a Falcon with discount guns and star engines on top of the other crucial upgrades does cost 210 points. AV13 vehicles will be nearly as tough of course as the old Falcons for almost half the price. The new Falcons on the other hand will be absolute garbage, and you're fine with that too.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231739.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231739.page GMT So I guess this represents your terminators getting a running start before jumping into the teleporter, all Austin Powers-style?

In other news, the Emperor's Children finally discover a reason to swap their predators' sponson heavy bolters for sonic blasters - one edition too late. Suckers!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231741.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231741.page GMT
I'm not really in favour of stationary tanks. I think they should have S5 as defensive, because how many tanks can actually take S4 weapons? Not russes, not battlewagons, not hammerheads or devilfishes, not looted wagons, normal land raiders...
Eldar and Marines are going to be the only mobile ones.
I also don't particularly like the changes to vehicle speeds as they seem nonsensical when compared to infantry speeds. If they had made it so that skimmers couldn't tank shock many of the problems people talk about would have been solved without a strange situation where a horse can outrun an advanced grav tank!
Add onto this the utterly stupid new scoring regieme and you have a recipie for orks winning every damn tourney.
I don't want orks to be the best army in the game. I want a balanced game.
Here's hoping some of the stupider decisions are rectified by the actual release, while keeping the good stuff. (and there is a lot of good stuff in there)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231744.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231744.page GMT
I'm hoping that too. Orks was word for word the same - but that was an advanced version with all the layout and art done. Since this is just an early draft/playtest copy, hopefully they'll listen to the input and tidy things up in the final version.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231746.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231746.page GMT
I posted this issue late last night on Warseer but didn't get much response. From what I understand of the document, it seems that the new allocating wounds process means that small squads with decent saves being hit by a large number of wounds are much more survivable (and similarly, units that rely on large # of high-AP wounds such as war walkers or HB squads are less effective). For instance, if a squad of 5 SM gets hit with 15 wounds. Each wound is allocated to each model, e.g.

SM1 (w,w,w) SM2 (w,w,w) SM3 (w,w,w) SM4 (w,w,w) SM5 (w,w,w)

Then [b]each [/b]model in the unit (regardless of LOS) rolls for its saves. Thus, say SM1 fails 1 save, okay, then it is dead. SM2 and SM3 saves all their wounds, then they are still alive. SM4 rolls terribly and fails all three. It's dead, and those additional fails are simply wasted, since SM5 now gets to roll its 3 wounds, and passes all three.

SM1 (p,f,p) = dead
SM2 (p,p,p) = alive
SM3 (p,p,p) = alive
SM4 (f,f,f) = dead
SM5 (p,p,p) = alive

Grand total of 4 failed saves, but only 2 models die.

Am I understanding this correctly? Unless I've totally misunderstood the document, this is going to make calculating/MathHammer quite a bit more complicated. It is also going to really slow the game down as well. Perhaps with it, the new blast rules, and the emphasis on large troop squads, four turn tournament games will become the norm.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231755.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231755.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231758.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231758.page GMT GW HQ this morning.

Part of me wonders if this leak was intentional, because it appears to be everywhere.

Part of me wonders if this might have been the work of a playtester dissatisfied with the rules and wanting to show GW what the response would be and maybe get a few changes made.

At this point, I wish GW would just harness the power of the web to distribute information. They could just post an official Trial-5th edition like they did with the assault rules prior to fourth.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231761.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231761.page GMT 40k and Fantasy norms. More surprised at the latter, with a lot of other mechanisms seemingly coming in to align the rules of the two more closely.

Of course, the rationale may well be (and probably should be) to pick the Fantasy rules that work and apply well in 40k also. And maybe 40k wound allocation, if done the traditional (and quicker) way just allows too much abuse in mixed complement squads. A more elegant solution would be nice.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231763.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231763.page GMT WAAC army in 5th, then I'm happy I have 46 Berzerkers. 184 attacks on the charge with 3's to hit and 3's to wound. You run, I run, we all run, it is anarchy!!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231766.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231766.page GMT
Lets see if choosing to move or fire worked in 3rd edition. Nope, it looks like vehicles just stood there blasting away for 6 turns. And they only have more incentive to do so now that they no longer count as scoring. Weee...

And who would design a vehicle that couldn't effectively fire on the move. Name one modern tank that can't. (and don't give any WWII era garbage as a rationalization when their fighting in an era with grav tanks/titans/orbital bombardments/planet destroyers)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231767.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231767.page GMT
You're comparing what essentially is a AV14 bunker firing two twin-lascannons from behind cover to a vehicle that, under current rules, can perform battlefield miracles that would make God Almighty look like a 3rd class con artist?

[quote=Wehrkind]Obviously in the dark grimmness or whatever of the far future, all gun crews are recruited from PA road workers. You need 5 guys standing around smoking and drinking coffee so 2 guys can fire the gun, while 3 others supervise.

Of course, you are on the exact opposite side of the globe, so you probably have no idea what I am talking about... Still, I think it is pretty obvious that the gun crews are union workers, and thus are very rigorous about their rules.[/quote]

This gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling that people around the world don't necessarily have it better than me...

BTW could someone PM me with a torrent location or something? I'm feeling a bit lonely here...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231769.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231769.page GMT

Here come the BA with loads of cheap razorbacks in the trees and their 3 attack bikes can get a multimelta for no cost. 9 multimelta attack bikes, in three squads, for 450pts total might be all the anti-tank you need. Roll out the 50pt razorbacks with 5-man squads, a big death company and you are ready to rumble.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231770.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231770.page GMT
I posted this issue late last night on Warseer but didn't get much response. From what I understand of the document, it seems that the new allocating wounds process means that small squads with decent saves being hit by a large number of wounds are much more survivable (and similarly, units that rely on large # of high-AP wounds such as war walkers or HB squads are less effective). For instance, if a squad of 5 SM gets hit with 15 wounds. Each wound is allocated to each model, e.g.

SM1 (w,w,w) SM2 (w,w,w) SM3 (w,w,w) SM4 (w,w,w) SM5 (w,w,w)

Then [b]each [/b]model in the unit (regardless of LOS) rolls for its saves. Thus, say SM1 fails 1 save, okay, then it is dead. SM2 and SM3 saves all their wounds, then they are still alive. SM4 rolls terribly and fails all three. It's dead, and those additional fails are simply wasted, since SM5 now gets to roll its 3 wounds, and passes all three.

SM1 (p,f,p) = dead
SM2 (p,p,p) = alive
SM3 (p,p,p) = alive
SM4 (f,f,f) = dead
SM5 (p,p,p) = alive

Grand total of 4 failed saves, but only 2 models die.

Am I understanding this correctly? Unless I've totally misunderstood the document, this is going to make calculating/MathHammer quite a bit more complicated. It is also going to really slow the game down as well. Perhaps with it, the new blast rules, and the emphasis on large troop squads, four turn tournament games will become the norm.[/quote]


I think you've understood it perfectly and you're right. In many ways this is a worse solution than the current issue.

The thing you have to remember is that the current wound allocation rules simply do not work as written. Most everyone plays a certain way based off personal preference and what seems right but if you really break down the current rules when it comes to some of the more wacky situations the whole thing is completely cracked.


That said, I really think they need to alter these rules before the book is published. I'm okay with allocating wounds to models before rolling saves because it removes the whole mixed armor debacle but they really need to change the rules for allocation.

Wounds that ignore a model's REGULAR armor save (not invulnerable or cover saves) need to be allocated and resolved BEFORE allocating and resolving wounds that don't ignore a model's basic armor save.

Allowing a single model to have multiple wounds that ignore its armor save while the rest of the unit saves against the basic wounds seems like a real recipe for disaster. The more firepower a unit puts out vs. the smaller the target enemy unit the more players are really able to absorb all kinds of firepower into a single model while leaving most of the unit unscathed.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231773.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231773.page GMT

The real problem is how they treat armor-penetrating wounds (rending, AP2, etc). Asmodai is correct: they actually give an example of putting two plasma wounds on one guy to reduce casualties.

This is just bizarre; it leads to cases where causing [b]more[/b] wounds results in [b]fewer[/b] casualties. Those who've read the pdf can confirm this; this is not only how it works in this draft, there's even an example indicating that it's [b]meant[/b] to work this way.

Example:
2-donkeycannon termies shoot up a squad of six 4+ save genestealers, and do six wounds with the assault cannons, which allow no saves.

6 cannon wounds = 6 dead nids = dead squad

But if they also get, say, 3 stormbolter wounds, the nid player can assign wounds as follows:

G1: 1 bolter wound (gets save)
G2: 1 bolter (save)
G3: 1 bolter (save)
G4-6: 2 cannon wounds each, dead

By causing [b]more[/b] wounds, the nid squad goes from wiped out with no saves to half of the squad getting saves.

[b]More[/b] wounds = [b]fewer[/b] casualties = Whaa??

[i]Edit: Yeah, so this is basically an example of what Yakface just said in a lot fewer words.[/i]]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231774.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231774.page GMT GW may have meant to make it a balancing thing that lets marines/necrons be a little more resilient against the future hordes of orks and gaunts. But, it won't do squat for Tau, Eldar, or DE.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231778.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231778.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231798.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231798.page GMT ...

By causing [b]more[/b] wounds, the nid squad goes from wiped out with no saves to half of the squad getting saves.

[b]More[/b] wounds = [b]fewer[/b] casualties = Whaa??

[i]Edit: Yeah, so this is basically an example of what Yakface just said in a lot fewer words.[/i][/quote]

Different weapons though, which affects the result.

The way the game works you can either do it the 4th edition way, which brings in all the problems with majority armour and toughness and stuff, or you can simplify it they way they are doing and you have this "unfairness" problem. It depends on how people look at things.

I have always regarded the To Hit/To Wound/To Save triple die rolling as a way of squeezing a finer grained percentage probability out of a D6, rather than a literal hit that needs a literal wound and save. Looking at your example, how were the bullets meant to know in advance that some figures would save? And what if no-one had saved, what about the extra unsaved wounds then? Would they have carried on to the next door squad.

It will of course tend to favour small, "hard" units like SMs over hordes like Stonefox said.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231807.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231807.page GMT
Setup is 24" apart now, so even though they are running, they have an extra 6" to make up vs the 18" of before. Trukks are 6" slower than before, so I have a little more time to choose my targets. I can also run to redeploy, and or get into my vehicles (being mech) and redeploy to get out of the way of the masses. The missle launchers I usually field in a tourney style list will be much better now at clearing out orks with frag, while a whirlwind or vindicator will work wonders, especially against massed boyz mobs and hidden lootas.

I don't see anything that tactics and armament can't help me with. With Waagh!, Gahzkull and Weirdboyz you have a fast moving army already.

It really isn't anything I already don't fear. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231808.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231808.page GMT [/quote]

Obviously in the dark grimmness or whatever of the far future, all gun crews are recruited from PA road workers. You need 5 guys standing around smoking and drinking coffee so 2 guys can fire the gun, while 3 others supervise.

Of course, you are on the exact opposite side of the globe, so you probably have no idea what I am talking about... Still, I think it is pretty obvious that the gun crews are union workers, and thus are very rigorous about their rules.[/quote]

LMAO i'm for western pa tis very ture]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231809.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231809.page GMT Take, for example, the demi-rending Sisters have now. On a 6 to wound with Divine Guidance, it's AP1. So even with regular bolters I might have 20 hits, and say 10 wounds vs. MEQ, 3 of which are now AP1. The only really sensible thing to do is to say "Ok, apply all the AP1 shots. Roll saves as appropriate. Ok, apply all the AP5 shots. Rolls saves." Basically treat AP as I in reverse order. That way your opponant can put the low AP hits on redshirts, but you don't get punished for doing more damage.

We sort of play this way now, assigning hits to specific models when there are differing armor saves up until torrent of fire comes into play. It works pretty well when you have an HQ or something hanging out with a troops unit etc. and want to take an invulnerable save against a plasma gun instead of toasting Brother Ryan's privates. 90% of the time it never comes up though, so I don't really see this as being too terribly different. Worries me a bit though.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231863.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231863.page GMT AC takes - together with the rumoured Rending Nerf.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231903.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231903.page GMT
If I shoot the PGs, I get 3-4 hits, probably 3 wounds, each of which is distributed to a different termie. Then they roll their saves. I should kill 2 (1 will make his inv. save).

If I also shoot the 7 bolters from the other PMs, say I get lucky and score 8 wounds (from 12 hits). Now, the termies have 11 wounds on 5 guys. They can legally put all 3 plasma wounds on 1 guy (who will die 26/27 times), and assign 2 bolter wounds to each of the other 4 guys. Each termie has a 1/3 chance of failing one of the two armor saves, so I should kill one more. Same result as just firing the plasma guns.

This is a worst case scenario for the PMs (they scored just enough bolter wounds to allow wrapping the 3rd plasma wound onto the same guy, and the bolter wounds are subject to 2+ saves). Odds are that only one wrap would be allowed, so two termies would be eating plasma wounds. It *is* odd that if the bolters had dealt 7 wounds instead of 8, I'd likely have been able to kill a third termie...

And against anything with worse than 2+ saves, it's definitely worth firing everything. Ok, it's not as bad as I had thought. Just leads to a few weird situations...

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231925.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231925.page GMT
Yet, I'd prefer Yakface's solution.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231938.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231938.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231939.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231939.page GMT
Target player has to distribute the total # of wounds evenly. Thus, if 4 wounds and five models, then target player can decide which model didn't get wounded. If 6 wounds and 5 models, then target player has to give each model a single wound, plus choose which model to give a second wound to. Now imagine that of those 6 wounds, 2 of them are plasma. Then the target player will of course give both plasma to the same model, thus killing only one model. However, if there were only 4 wounds (2 of them plasma), then 2 models would have to take a plasma each.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231948.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231948.page GMT
This goes back to the problem that not all wounds were created equally.

It seems more sensible to distribute hits from weapons as evenly as possible, then do the wounds and saves.

I shouldn't be arguing for it because as a Tau player my shield drones become super-useful if I can pile up the plasma.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231953.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231953.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231954.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231954.page GMT
It's equal distribution of all wounds, regardless of which weapon caused them. If a unit takes 10 wounds, each model must save vs 2. If 2 of those wounds are plasma, it says you can put them both on 1 model. Each model gets 2 wounds, but 1 model sucks up the plasma wounds.

Don't like it. I do like Yak's suggestion.

Edit - wow, looks like answers came while I was reading the thread and replying.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231956.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231956.page GMT
This goes back to the problem that not all wounds were created equally.

It seems more sensible to distribute hits from weapons as evenly as possible, then do the wounds and saves.

I shouldn't be arguing for it because as a Tau player my shield drones become super-useful if I can pile up the plasma.
[/quote]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all wounds are created equal, that they are endowed by the Games Workshop Studio staff with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the right to be stacked in any way desired.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231957.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231957.page GMT
Has anyone confirmed the existence/nonexistence of a penalty to attacking skimmers in CC? Are they still only hit on a 6?

if not, good bye skimmer lists period. If so, it still might be viable.

Looks like the tide of Biel-Tan armies is about to rise. Lucky Snakes (Serpent rush with Fortune) will be the new assault spam. 'Course the Serpents won't be firing more than one weapon after the drop-off, but at least it will keep them cheaper. VE, StarEngines, Stones, that's it. Add Seer on jetbike (or Eldrad giving the kiss-off to two Serpents from the starting line) and hit the accelerator pedal. Do it with 4 assault squads or 2 assault squads and 2 PW/SS Dire Avenger units, and something's going to die. The best part is that they can go rescue Dark Reapers after they've dumped the assault contingent.

At least it's more thematic than walking forwards behind a Rhino wall. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231958.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231958.page GMT
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231959.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231959.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231966.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231966.page GMT Looks like the tide of Biel-Tan armies is about to rise. Lucky Snakes (Serpent rush with Fortune) will be the new assault spam. 'Course the Serpents won't be firing more than one weapon after the drop-off, but at least it will keep them cheaper. VE, StarEngines, Stones, that's it. Add Seer on jetbike (or Eldrad giving the kiss-off to two Serpents from the starting line) and hit the accelerator pedal. [/quote]

In other words 3rd edition, part 2. (plus the most god awful wounding rules they have managed to create yet)

Back to Mechanized Assault Lists and Tanks that never move..]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231972.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231972.page GMT
Counting down till Voodoo reads this and hits the ceiling.

T minus 100..]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231974.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231974.page GMT
The rules aren't even out and we're already discussing them like it was canon? Even though Strangelooper has raised a valid point, that doesn't mean it's going to happen as described. That could give a better use to coloured dice, rather than just characters.

Or, we could also play this like "Overkill". You've got too much firepower for your own good. Don't buy two plasma guns, buy a rhino! :p

Maybe they want to make troops more resilient, as they seem to be crucial in taking objectives - I don't know, I'm just speculating, and we won't know for another 6 or so months, so why bother?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231976.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231976.page GMT
Counting down till Voodoo reads this and hits the ceiling.

T minus 100..[/quote]

Could be an error on my part, but the issue seems to be the combination of the "6" and the total inability to penetrate. If you have "6" plus some reasonable chance of achieving a penetrating hit . . . it's no so bad]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231977.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231977.page GMT
Yet, I'd prefer Yakface's solution.[/quote]

I suppose that distributing hits instead of wounds would slow the game down too much (no more majority toughness...). Too bad - you could have the attacker choose which 'hit group' has to be distributed first, and the defender could decide exactly where the hits go. EG: I hit your termies with 3 plasma hits and 12 bolter hits. I tell you to distribute the plasma hits first; you put one on each terminator except the AC and the sgt. Then you get to distribute the 12 bolter hits: one each goes on the AC and the sgt to complete the '1 wound each' first set, and then each terminator gets 2 more bolter hits each. Then wounding rolls start.

Yeah, it would take too long :( Majority toughness is a huge timesaver.

Ok then, how about: distribute the smaller wound group first? 3 plasma wounds and 8 bolter wounds, 3 plasma wounds is the smaller wound group - each plasma wound must go on a separate model. Then the 8 bolter wounds are distributed (2 to the remaining models, then wrap 5 more at 1 per model, then the last one wraps again to a model of the defender's choice): resulting in 2 termies with one plasma and one bolter wound, 1 termie with one plasma and two bolter wounds (I assume you'd stick the 8th bolter wound on a plasma'd deadman), and 2 termies with two bolter wounds.

If some deathguard havocs instead caused 8 plasma and 3 bolter wounds: first you would have to assign 3 bolter wounds to individual models, then the plasma wounds would start being assigned (and wrapping). This would result in 3 termies with one bolter and one plasma wound, 1 termie with 2 plasma wounds, and one unfortunate sod with 3 plasma wounds.

GW are you listening?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231979.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231979.page GMT
pretty hard for swarms to use their fodder as fodder any more without "without number"]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231989.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231989.page GMT DoW of an Eldar skimmer bearing down on a mob of orks, blasting away, then as it gets close you see a nob getting a running start, leaping off the back of a dead ork or something, and burying his klaw into the underbelly of the falcon, tearing out a chunk and sending the flacon spiraling off to explode on a rock.
That would be so hot.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231992.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/231992.page GMT
Overpriced to the extreme, but useful.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232001.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232001.page GMT
This new system bites many time more than that one did.

Was it the main casualty removal rules that bit, then, or ToB/F? And is there a way to fix casualty removal by expanding/uppowering ToB without getting really intricate?

Seems like a lot of babies got tossed out with the bathwater in these rules. Hope they, like, playtest them. Or something.

One more question: Was there a name/credit on these? By that, I mean do we have proof of the "Hand of Gav" or Alessiofication? I'd liek to know who designed a rulesset this... well, bravely different, actually, but not terribly well-thought-out.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232005.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232005.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232026.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232026.page GMT [quote=Savnock]Okay, could someone please explain to me what was wrong with Torrent of Fire/Blows, other than the way that it wasn't well-pointed-out in the text? I mean, it was a pretty simple system for forcing saves. Sure, those forced saves were relatively rare and then only on one or two models (out of a possible three-plus sergeants/specialweapon troopers in the average squad), but they did _something_ about invisible 'fists without bogging the game down.

This new system bites many time more than that one did.

Was it the main casualty removal rules that bit, then, or ToB/F? And is there a way to fix casualty removal by expanding/uppowering ToB without getting really intricate?

Seems like a lot of babies got tossed out with the bathwater in these rules. Hope they, like, playtest them. Or something.

One more question: Was there a name/credit on these? By that, I mean do we have proof of the "Hand of Gav" or Alessiofication? I'd liek to know who designed a rulesset this... well, bravely different, actually, but not terribly well-thought-out.
[/quote]


Well, these new rules do away with several clunky mechanisms in the old rules. The majority armor rule is removed (which was pretty darn confusing) as well as torrent of fire. There are also several situations that just aren't covered in the current rules: things like how a unit with differing invulnerable saves determines how many times each type of invulnerable save may be used (there are more, though).

Overall I have to say that the new system is vastly more simple to understand but will slow gameplay down quite a bit. Is the trade off worth it? I'm not sure yet until I try actually playing with these rules.

I know everyone's gut reaction is to look at the scenario where a small unit suffers a ton of fire and gets to abuse the allocation system but I think we need to take a step back and think about it. This sort of situation only occurs when a unit suffers more wounds then it has models in the unit. In the current game this is when 'torrent of fire' kicks in. Just think about how often 'torrent' is used in your games. In my experience, it doesn't occur all that often. In the vast majority of units firing you deal with situations in which you have less wounds than models in the enemy unit in which case the new rules work perfectly fine.


With that said, I still think the suggestion I made earlier makes the system much less open to abuse. To expand a bit on the idea, here is what I propose:


During wound allocation, if there are any wounding hits that would ignore the basic armor save of at least one model in the affected unit then those wounds must be allocated before any other wounding hits (although the owning player still chooses where the wounding hit is allocated).

Whenever a wounding hit is allocated to a model who cannot make a save of any type against it, that wound is immediately resolved. Meaning, if you allocate an AP2 wound on a Space Marine who doesn't have an invulnerable or cover save that wound is immediately resolved and if the Space Marine only has a single Wound on his profile he would be immediately removed as a casaulty before allocating any other wounds.



This proposal does two things: It ensures that the killer low AP wounds are spread evenly amongst the unit (as they are allocated before other types of wounds) and it ensures that a model which you know is going to be pasted by a low AP wound can't be loaded up with extra wounds that you know will be effectively wasted.


]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232048.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232048.page GMT
Counting down till Voodoo reads this and hits the ceiling.

T minus 100..[/quote]

I'm already well aware, of course I get 4 PK attacks per Nob on t he charge, and my Boss will get 6 on the Charge in 5th Ed. I'll roll my 6's, and then Penetrate the living hell out of it and bring it down.

Besides it's not like the thing is going to zoom and capture objectives, or deliver a squad that's going to pound me, and if he gets exposed to fire, the tank possibly will die with a decent probability.

Or you know, there's those AP1 Melta Guns other armies have, that can just get through their cover save eventually, and then they go bye bye. And seeing as how the Mech Eldar list generally revolves around those 3 Tanks in heavy just not dying, the list falls apart. Especially with only troops scoring.

5th Ed signals the death of that army, especially with the random game length for every game. No "last turn objective grabs with Jetbikes" because it may not be the last turn, and then they can just go get wrecked in the subsequent phase. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232053.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232053.page GMT I really don't like the current scoring rules. I hope they get changed. The current way encourages monoclonal lists, just in a different way to previously. I'd love to see a system that encourages diversity.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232055.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232055.page GMT I know everyone's gut reaction is to look at the scenario where a small unit suffers a ton of fire and gets to abuse the allocation system but I think we need to take a step back and think about it. This sort of situation only occurs when a unit suffers more wounds then it has models in the unit. In the current game this is when 'torrent of fire' kicks in. Just think about how often 'torrent' is used in your games. In my experience, it doesn't occur all that often. In the vast majority of units firing you deal with situations in which you have less wounds than models in the enemy unit in which case the new rules work perfectly fine.

[/quote]

Rapid firing Marines with Plasma/Meltas pop in everyones head. My dual plasma/Apoth trait marines certainly aren't diggin' it . Then again, my Apoths will probably be 'count as' pretty soon anyways.

I still don't understand how allocating wounds works with LOS. One section it states you only allocate wounds to visible models. Another section states you allocate to everyone. Don't get it.

I still think the biggest change is HTH horde armies. No 2 inch kill zone is huge in my eyes, makes Orks with running/waaghh freaking scary.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232073.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232073.page GMT
I still don't understand how allocating wounds works with LOS. One section it states you only allocate wounds to visible models. Another section states you allocate to everyone. Don't get it.[/quote]


I don't see that in the rules. [b]FIRING[/b] models that are completely out of range or LOS of the [b]entire[/b] enemy unit don't get to fire, but if a firing model is within range and LOS of at least a single model in the unit then all models in the unit are potential casualties. This is the change I was really hoping for with this edition and its here (yay)!


[quote]I still think the biggest change is HTH horde armies. No 2 inch kill zone is huge in my eyes, makes Orks with running/waaghh freaking scary.[/quote]


Well, only models in base contact or within 2" of a friendly model in base contact get to swing, its just that those casualties can affect any model in the target unit.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232076.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232076.page GMT I know everyone's gut reaction is to look at the scenario where a small unit suffers a ton of fire and gets to abuse the allocation system but I think we need to take a step back and think about it. This sort of situation only occurs when a unit suffers more wounds then it has models in the unit. In the current game this is when 'torrent of fire' kicks in. Just think about how often 'torrent' is used in your games. In my experience, it doesn't occur all that often. In the vast majority of units firing you deal with situations in which you have less wounds than models in the enemy unit in which case the new rules work perfectly fine.
[/quote]
I found in my list (SL war walkers + bladestorming DAs), torrent wasn't that uncommon. However, it wasn't so much the chance to snipe a PF that was important to me, but the statistical strength of lots of wounds. With the new wound allocation system, the opponent will be able to blunt the effectiveness of the lots-of-wounds units/builds by putting multiple wounds on single models.

[quote=yakface]
With that said, I still think the suggestion I made earlier makes the system much less open to abuse. [/quote]

I agree. I very much like your idea of first having to allocate the save-ignoring wounds first. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232078.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232078.page GMT I posted it earlier, might be what he is referring too. It is in the cover save rules. Quote:
"Models that are completely out of sight of all of
the firers are not counted in either category, and
they cannot be hit."

EDIT -- Looked at 4ed rulebook and this isn't cut and past from there, so I was wrong on that account]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232085.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232085.page GMT
I still don't understand how allocating wounds works with LOS. One section it states you only allocate wounds to visible models. Another section states you allocate to everyone. Don't get it.[/quote]


I don't see that in the rules. [b]FIRING[/b] models that are completely out of range or LOS of the [b]entire[/b] enemy unit don't get to fire, but if a firing model is within range and LOS of at least a single model in the unit then all models in the unit are potential casualties. This is the change I was really hoping for with this edition and its here (yay)!


[quote]I still think the biggest change is HTH horde armies. No 2 inch kill zone is huge in my eyes, makes Orks with running/waaghh freaking scary.[/quote]


Well, only models in base contact or within 2" of a friendly model in base contact get to swing, its just that those casualties can affect any model in the target unit.

[/quote]

Page 15, under step 5 it states "Allocate Wounds. The owner of the target unit allocates the wounds on the unit's [b]visible [/b]models." Emphasis mine, true this is one statement...but still?

You might still only get to swing if you are within 2'' but that doesn't mean much with kill zone gone. 30 Orks attack Marines in cover led by a Captain, lets say they kill 6 total Orks. Currently, this is a big deal as the Orks won't get many attacks in and the Marines will win combat and bypass making saves.

New edition, you kill 6 Orks....he removes 6 Orks that are in the back of the mob 12 inches away still....yet makes all of his attacks on your Marines from the 2'' Orks. That's a big change.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232088.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232088.page GMT
Flamers are uber (not that weren't useful), especially if you have more than one esp if the multiple templates rule is changing with it.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232089.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232089.page GMT
Flamers are uber (not that weren't useful), especially if you have more than one esp if the multiple templates rule is changing with it.[/quote]

Plasma Devs might be nasty now, although they will lost some effectiveness against deep strikers.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232091.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232091.page GMT
Flamers are uber (not that weren't useful), especially if you have more than one esp if the multiple templates rule is changing with it.[/quote]

Plasma Devs might be nasty now, although they will lost some effectiveness against deep strikers.[/quote]

Plasma Devs sound nasty to me too. The 4 templates count as a scattered barage with no partials. Wherever that thing lands is going to obliterate everything beneath it.

So Plasma Cannons get a boost and the new Starcannon is crap. Eldar are once again screwed by GW! I can't believe they didn't make the Wraithlord T10 in the new book.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232095.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232095.page GMT [quote=AgeOfEgos]
Page 15, under step 5 it states "Allocate Wounds. The owner of the target unit allocates the wounds on the unit's [b]visible [/b]models." Emphasis mine, true this is one statement...but still?

You might still only get to swing if you are within 2'' but that doesn't mean much with kill zone gone. 30 Orks attack Marines in cover led by a Captain, lets say they kill 6 total Orks. Currently, this is a big deal as the Orks won't get many attacks in and the Marines will win combat and bypass making saves.

New edition, you kill 6 Orks....he removes 6 Orks that are in the back of the mob 12 inches away still....yet makes all of his attacks on your Marines from the 2'' Orks. That's a big change.

[/quote]


You're right about that blurb on page 15. However its a summary and the full rules are pretty clear that any model in the unit is a potential casualty. This is an early early draft so hopefully something like that gets fixed.

As for the CC example you give, all 30 Orks would have to be in base contact or within 2" of another Ork in base contact in order to be able to attack. That's a pretty difficult thing to achieve especially on the turn they charge.

Clearly it is a boost in power for assault units, but at the same time shooting units also got a boost not losing attacks due to range limitations on the target unit. Even if only a single model in the target unit is within range then the entire unit is fair game to be blown away.

So I do think it works both ways.


[quote=Tacobake]Plasma Devs sound nasty to me too. The 4 templates count as a scattered barage with no partials. Wherever that thing lands is going to obliterate everything beneath it. [/quote]


But at the same time that's totally feast or famine based on where the first marker scatters. If you roll a 6" scatter for that first marker you stand a really good chance of having all your Plasma Cannons hit nothing that round.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232098.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232098.page GMT
Excellent point. The metadata on it says it was created July 19, 2007 (with QuarkXpress 6.5).

This means that this probably isn't even the version currently in playtest.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232101.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232101.page GMT Devs sound nasty to me too. The 4 templates count as a scattered barage with no partials. Wherever that thing lands is going to obliterate everything beneath it. [/quote]


But at the same time that's totally feast or famine based on where the first marker scatters. If you roll a 6" scatter for that first marker you stand a really good chance of having all your Plasma Cannons hit nothing that round.

[/quote]

True enough. Combined with LoS restrictions where you have to target the unit in front (unless the devs are on a hill, gimping their already short range) maybe there's something to be said for mobile firepower.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232106.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232106.page GMT As for the CC example you give, all 30 Orks would have to be in base contact or within 2" of another Ork in base contact in order to be able to attack. That's a pretty difficult thing to achieve especially on the turn they charge.

[/quote]

I think that's kind of my point. Realistically, in a game when Orks reach CC they might only get 6 within 2''. Normally this would mean a Marine unit could safely wipe out the 5-6 that actually matter, win combat and worry about no casualties that round.

However, with the new "You don't have to remove models within 2 inch kill zone" version, those 6 Orks will still fight in HTH this round and deal out potential wounds.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232110.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232110.page GMT If wounds allocation is any guidance 5th edition doesn't only signal the disappearance of Eldar from the 40K universe, it signals the end of 40K altogether. Let's be honest, the game has never made much sense, and the designers have never known the direction they want to drag the game, but a lot of the new rules are outright laughable. Third edition they wanted to simplify the game. Fourth edition they wanted to weaken assault, remove screening and make the game a mobile firefight. Fifth edition they want screening, bigger armies and more headlong infantry charging than in Warhammer Fantasy Battle, and no mobile firepower at all.

[quote]However, with the new "You don't have to remove models within 2 inch kill zone" version, those 6 Orks will still fight in HTH this round and deal out potential wounds.[/quote]
Anything to make Orks GW's new money machine. [b]You want to play Orks. You need to play Orks. You don't want elite Orks or trukk Orks either. You want tons and tons of Boyz. Boyz are goooood. Buy now, 20€ per 10. Buy 20 boxes and you get a pot of Gnarloc Green for free.[/b]

The last sentence was a joke. Of course you don't get anything for free.

[quote=Toreador]I don't see anything that tactics and armament can't help me with[/quote]
This is quite a statement. Please post your 1.85K Space Marine army list for 5th edition to the army lists forum. We're all curious to see how your all-rounder army deals with the running Orks. I can post the Ork list into your army list thread. By the way, 24" between the armies isn't exactly new.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232112.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232112.page GMT
Excellent point. The metadata on it says it was created July 19, 2007 (with QuarkXpress 6.5).

This means that this probably isn't even the version currently in playtest.[/quote]

I think it might be pretty close though. I wrote a 1000 page textbook that became available to the publisher`s warehouse in March 07. The final draft went to the publisher in late Aug 06. I then received copy edits, with which I could make reasonably small changes. Those were due late Oct 06. The copy edits were then "pored" into the design and page proofs were then generated. I couldn't change anything that would change page flow in those. They were due Dec 06. The actual printing (only 1 color and no hard cover so much quicker) and distribution to the US warehouse then took about 3-4 months. The book didn`t start making its way to the bookstores until about May. Grand total between having a finished Word version and a finished real book in my hands was close to 10 months. Printing more copies, getting them out to a world-wide retail network ... I don`t know, I think that would add on an extra month.

If a July 08 release is planned, then we very well may have seen a rule set quite close to the final one. Again, I could be wrong here, but based on my own experience we might have to live with these rules.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232119.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232119.page GMT GW's process, but they're big fans of vertical integration, so they might be able to cut down on the turn-around time.

The Codex: Orks PDF, which was in a much more finalized state was created on August 2nd 2007 and was dated July 26, 2007 according to a friend I just bugged on MSN to check - so that was a 6 month delay between the finalized version and its release.

That suggests that 40K 5th ed. is already complete and being printed if it comes out in June. This version would be still be about 5 months before finalization though - give or take because it's a rulebook rather than a Codex.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232120.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232120.page GMT
I refuse to play an all infantry army and I refuse to play against most all infantry armies that will be coming my way because of these new rules. But mostly I refuse to play boring games and that sure seems to be what is coming our way with these new rule sets.

Tanks are what got me into this game, and the lack of their utility is what will drive me out.

/rant]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232130.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232130.page GMT

I don't see that in the rules. [b]FIRING[/b] models that are completely out of range or LOS of the [b]entire[/b] enemy unit don't get to fire, but if a firing model is within range and LOS of at least a single model in the unit then all models in the unit are potential casualties. This is the change I was really hoping for with this edition and its here (yay)!



[/quote]

yes.. because one guy sticking his head out from behind a 4 foot thick rock wall is a perfectly good reason for his entire squad of 20 guys to evaporate into a cloud of red mist.

that's retarded and an obvious play to the powergaming fanboys that just want to have their opponents push their models out into the open against their meticulously metagamed top tier list of the month that they bought with their allowance so that they can win quickly and get their "whatever the tournament points are called this month."]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232135.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232135.page GMT
yes.. because one guy sticking his head out from behind a 4 foot thick rock wall is a perfectly good reason for his entire squad of 20 guys to evaporate into a cloud of red mist.

that's retarded and an obvious play to the powergaming fanboys that just want to have their opponents push their models out into the open against their meticulously metagamed top tier list of the month that they bought with their allowance so that they can win quickly and get their "whatever the tournament points are called this month."[/quote]


Wha? Powergaming fanyboys?

If anything "powergaming fanboys" loved range and LOS sniping, which is exactly what these new rules eliminate.

The exact placement of models is an [b]abstraction[/b]. That is why, for instance, the casualty removal rules allow you to pull any model with the same stats/wargear as a casualty because it represents other models rushing forwards (the same thing why you can pull models out of the 2" engagement zone in CC).

I really don't get how this has anything to do at all with so called "power gaming".




]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232156.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232156.page GMT
[quote=AgeOfEgos]

Page 15, under step 5 it states "Allocate Wounds. The owner of the target unit allocates the wounds on the unit's [b]visible [/b]models." Emphasis mine, true this is one statement...but still?

[/quote]


Actually you're even more right than I thought. Page 22 in the section about determining if a unit is in cover or not they again state that models out of LOS cannot be hit, which directly contradicts the casualty removal rules on page 20.

I really hope they catch and correct that error because as it stands now it seems like you only count the models that are within LOS to determine if a unit is in cover or not but then casualties have to be pulled from all models, whether they are within LOS or not. This makes units that are mostly out of LOS very likely not to get a cover bonus which is pretty silly.

I hope they go with: Any unit that has a majority of its models out of LOS gets the cover save of the terrain they are out of LOS behind. If they are out of LOS behind another unit, they count as having a 4+ cover save.

But we shall see what they end up doing when the final rules come out. . .


]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232158.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232158.page GMT LOS thing will affect rapid firing and double-tapping?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232168.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232168.page GMT [quote=Kilkrazy]I wonder how this range/LOS thing will affect rapid firing and double-tapping?[/quote]


If at least one model in the target unit is within the rapid fire range then the firing model fires twice at the target unit. Casualties can come from anywhere in the unit.

So rapid firing is indeed more potent, as are assaults.


]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232179.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232179.page GMT
Marching MEQ spam with assault weapons isn't much better, just more bodies and it takes an extra turn.

I wonder what 'neccesity is the mother of invention' tactics the combination of various new rules is going to open up?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232196.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232196.page GMT
However there seem to be some changes that are going to make things better.

For instance, markerlights are going to be very useful to deal with all the cover saves.

Suits are getting better because they can move and fire heavy weapons (this includes marker drones) and also because it looks like the JSJ manoeuvre will let them hide behind FW or Kroot screens.

The Railhead comes back with its pie plate against horde armies.

Vehicles generally lose a bit of their value because the SMF move will go, but they get a lot back with the new cover rule because they can be pimped out with sensor spines, disruptor pods and smart missiles and do a great job hiding in or behind cover.

Sorry --- misposted by accident
The new shooting rules make a big difference with pulse rifles. Get one enemy model inside 12 inches and you can hit anyone in the unit out to 30 inches with a double-tap.

That seems to be how the logic of the rules works, though I am sure there will be many arguments about that issue.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232210.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232210.page GMT
oic I'm glad you mentioned it because I would have argued for half an hour the other way over that one, shiny new rule book be damned!

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232212.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232212.page GMT
oic I'm glad you mentioned it because I would have argued for half an hour the other way over that one, shiny new rule book be damned!

[/quote]

I think it will cause absolutely furious arguments because horde/assault players are going to hate it. People will be looking back to 4th and so on. As far as I can see it's an important part of saving Tau from the impact of much faster moving hordes who can remove their shot casualties from the rear ranks.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232213.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232213.page GMT
I'm still not nuts about it. It'll destroy the feel vehicles currently have. Just my 2 cents, though.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232228.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232228.page GMT
I'm not very good at reading but I think skimmers block line of sight again, which totally sucks ass for combined arms eldar and fish-of-fury type tactics.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232239.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232239.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232241.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232241.page GMT
However, Reserves is in every mission. Combined with units with Infiltrate or Scout, this looks to be very interesting. You can even match up IC's to units in Reserve, but need to declare it.

Another thing I noticed with the Tau, is they have a piece of vehicle wargear that will make all shooting attacks over 12" count as Obscured. This will in effect give those tanks a 5+ cover save w/o even moving.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232244.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232244.page GMT
I think we will see highly pimped Tau vehicles. The disruptor pod, target lock, sensor spines and decoy launchers become obligatory. Once you've added all that crap you might as well put the SMS on as well. They will be expensive but capable and tough.

I am glad I built all my skimmer chassis with magnetic attachment points for changing all the wargear around.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232248.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232248.page GMT IG tanks will be useless other then static firing bunkers. As I'm a big tankhead and with the cheaper release of apocalypse vehicles I'm in the process of making an armoured company list. Now with all the change to what qualifies as a defensive weapon, and the fact that even if you move you can't really fire these weapon it's changing the entire way I arm vehicles in 5th ed and I don't want to spend all this time and money on building an army on rules that are going to be entirely different in 5th ed.

It actually sounds like it's back to the good old 3rd ed rules of sponson being entirely useless and just buying tanks for their 1 main weapon. Heck with glancing table not having a chance to destroy tanks it seems that I could just move a few leman russes into position and lay way to enemy fire while walking sentinals through the thick of it as they seem to be all that can move and fire.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232252.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232252.page GMT GW is trying to limit how much firing a vehicle may do. Vehicles needed to be a bit more survivable overall. I really never saw complaints at how much they were able to shoot.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232259.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232259.page GMT
[quote=AgeOfEgos]

Page 15, under step 5 it states "Allocate Wounds. The owner of the target unit allocates the wounds on the unit's [b]visible [/b]models." Emphasis mine, true this is one statement...but still?

[/quote]


Actually you're even more right than I thought. Page 22 in the section about determining if a unit is in cover or not they again state that models out of LOS cannot be hit, which directly contradicts the casualty removal rules on page 20.

I really hope they catch and correct that error because as it stands now it seems like you only count the models that are within LOS to determine if a unit is in cover or not but then casualties have to be pulled from all models, whether they are within LOS or not. This makes units that are mostly out of LOS very likely not to get a cover bonus which is pretty silly.

I hope they go with: Any unit that has a majority of its models out of LOS gets the cover save of the terrain they are out of LOS behind. If they are out of LOS behind another unit, they count as having a 4+ cover save.

But we shall see what they end up doing when the final rules come out. . .


[/quote]

Well, don't even attempt to dive into the 'true los' issues....there are too many. It states units block LOS to other units yet I can think of models that could draw LOS from their eyes over their comrades...while getting the obscured safety net from enemy shooting. This encourages guardsmen, for example, to model an entire unit laying prone, another kneeling and yet another standing on rocks so they can offer a nice Zulu firing line.


Please GW, save us from the dark days of kneeling, crawling Wraithlords and Greater Daemons.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232312.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232312.page GMT
4th Edition Wraithlord Conversion/Construction

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/AgeOfEgos/Phantomlord.jpg[/img]

5th Edition Wraithlord Conversion/Construction

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/AgeOfEgos/PhantomlordFinal.jpg[/img]]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232322.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232322.page GMT
I briefly considered cutting the legs off my Sentinels and putting the main hulls on ork wartrack chassis, but then...the thought of walking a bunch of Sentinels up behind a wall of tanks, while still being able to shoot over them and gaining 4+ cover saves...I like!

I just hope that hardened top gets cheaper in the 2010 IG codex.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232332.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232332.page GMT lol by far the best Conversion on all of DakkaDakka maybe my guardsmen can kick it in the face now instead of the other way around ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232339.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232339.page GMT If wounds allocation is any guidance 5th edition doesn't only signal the disappearance of Eldar from the 40K universe, it signals the end of 40K altogether. Let's be honest, the game has never made much sense, and the designers have never known the direction they want to drag the game, but a lot of the new rules are outright laughable. Third edition they wanted to simplify the game. Fourth edition they wanted to weaken assault, remove screening and make the game a mobile firefight. Fifth edition they want screening, bigger armies and more headlong infantry charging than in Warhammer Fantasy Battle, and no mobile firepower at all.

[quote]However, with the new "You don't have to remove models within 2 inch kill zone" version, those 6 Orks will still fight in HTH this round and deal out potential wounds.[/quote]
Anything to make Orks GW's new money machine. [b]You want to play Orks. You need to play Orks. You don't want elite Orks or trukk Orks either. You want tons and tons of Boyz. Boyz are goooood. Buy now, 20€ per 10. Buy 20 boxes and you get a pot of Gnarloc Green for free.[/b]

The last sentence was a joke. Of course you don't get anything for free.

[quote=Toreador]I don't see anything that tactics and armament can't help me with[/quote]
This is quite a statement. Please post your 1.85K Space Marine army list for 5th edition to the army lists forum. We're all curious to see how your all-rounder army deals with the running Orks. I can post the Ork list into your army list thread. By the way, 24" between the armies isn't exactly new.[/quote]

You keep talking about how Orks are going to be the be all end all.

Never mind the fact that templates will wreak them now. IG with three pie plates a turn will do wonders, whirlwinds, etc.

At the same time while you talk about how bad AV14 will be, but it will be NOTHING like what the Falcon is now. Which can capture objectives, easily knock people off them, and deliver shock troops with no risk.

AV14 is only bad when in cover, and it can shoot well. But it doesn't score, and can be neutralized from shooting at long range with a glance, and if you come up and shoot it with a Melta it dies.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232340.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232340.page GMT d6 still?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232350.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232350.page GMT d6 still? [/quote]
Yes. And with AP1 they can still destroy vehilces on a glance and get 3 out of 6 chance to destroy on a pen. Makes melta weaponry much better at killing tanks compared to other weaponry, in comparison to 4ed.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232353.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232353.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232354.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232354.page GMT GW, save us from the dark days of kneeling, crawling Wraithlords and Greater Daemons. [/quote]
Actually these rules totally bone those types of conversions for a shooty MC. A squaty wraithlord can still be shot unless it's LOS is completely blocked (due to Shoot the Big ones rule). If LOS to it is completely blocked, then it can't possibly draw LOS to shoot. Granted, would work ok for a close combat oriented MC (like say a baby fex conversion for cc) or walker (like say a mini killa kan).

However this type of conversion will be effective for non MC/vehicle models that shoot. Hell, even non-converted models will benefit: tyranid warriors, tau crsis suits/broadsides, necron destroyers, any normal models behind swarms (yep swarms still screen as far as I can tell); lootas behind grots. The list goes on.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232356.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232356.page GMT GW events, especially for players pissed about pillbox tanks and turbo-boosting infantry.

On a separate note, it looks like magnet sales are about to go way up




]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232364.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232364.page GMT can you say ebay baby ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232365.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232365.page GMT los' issues....there are too many. It states units block LOS to other units yet I can think of models that could draw LOS from their eyes over their comrades...while getting the obscured safety net from enemy shooting. This encourages guardsmen, for example, to model an entire unit laying prone, another kneeling and yet another standing on rocks so they can offer a nice Zulu firing line.


Please GW, save us from the dark days of kneeling, crawling Wraithlords and Greater Daemons.[/quote]

Maybe thats just me but the obscure rule states that you can't shoot [b]through gaps[/b] in intervening units not [b]above[/b] units. Of course it might be argued that since you cannot see the legs of that ork you can't shoot it in the head but hey, we all love discussions. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232377.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232377.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232378.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232378.page GMT
I used the term 'obscured' in reference to the rules governing targeting models behind other models. In one place the rules state that you can shoot at any model you can get LOS to provided you trace LOS to an arm, head, or torso. Next it states you cannot shoot [i]through[/i] gaps in intervening units. Next it states that if you're high enough you can shoot [i]over[/i] intervening units (provided LOS is completely free of other models).

That may mean that if I keep grots in BtB contact with the boyz behind them, the boyz can never be targeted (with the exception of orbital lance strike). Cool.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232380.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232380.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232381.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232381.page GMT
They won't. Sales here we come!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232397.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232397.page GMT VPs)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232430.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232430.page GMT IG with three pie plates a turn will do wonders, whirlwinds, etc. [/quote]
Haha. Who do you think you're kidding? Flamers aren't any more effective against Orks than before unless you're talking about units like Burna Boyz. Are you trying to make yourself believe Orks aren't the be all end all, just so that all of our upcoming massacre victories with Orks would taste a little better? Sure, Whirlwinds are going to cause more casualties than before when they shoot. Guess what, GW has us covered. Firstly, there's no area terrain anymore that would block los so the Whirlwinds can be shaken from anywhere. Secondly, everyone is running so the Whirlwinds won't get to fire [b]as many times as before[/b] untill its already too late. Lastly, everyone can now get as many units of the bona fide Wolf Scouts as they like in order to shake/destroy the ordnance batteries hiding in the backfields. The reason you're not worried about tanks anymore is because there will be so many Orks on every table that it will put the O&G WFB armies to shame, and the S9 power klaws will smash through the rear armours like the tanks werent even there since cover doesn't work in close combat.

I'm talking about AV14 being bad against regular armies because it will be. 1/54 chance for a lascannon to kill one behind some terrain, and you find it justifiable because it [i]only[/i] fires that amazing pie plate you keep talking about in another sentence plus a couple other heavy weapons, and does not tank shock like Falcons did. Did you play 40K in the third edition? If you did you probably remember people running three or four Defilers per army that were all hull down behind the smallest terrain pieces one can imagine. It was hard as hell to kill them or even stop them from shooting, and nobody liked it and everyone was happy that they were nerfed. I guess it's fine now, as long as you play Orks. You can always take so many models and so many scoring units that the enemy won't have a chance in hell. Even if the Orks and their enemy both destroy eachother the Orks will win since they will be worth much less KPs than their opponents. Justice for all.

All we need now is Codex Space Wolves having a special rule saying they can disembark and assault from Rhinos moving max speed so that everyone can take six squads of Blood Claws in Rhinos, and we're happily back in third edition (although a slightly more retarded version of 3rd ed).

I must say the introduction of 4+ and 3+ cover saves will make MEQ much less attractive than ever before. Why would you pay for armour if you can get invulnerable saves for free?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232481.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232481.page GMT
And don't ****ing get me started on zoanthropes. On average, without taking into account vehicles running away, cover and special anti-psyker stuff, a trio of zoanthropes will drop one armor 14 vehicle in a game.

Throw in all that crap and zoanthropes aren't dropping anything.

(Couple this with a necron rumor I heard that phase out will be removed and three monoliths becomes the "I win" button when taking on nids or orks.)

Yeah, sure, so swarms are great now. Too bad swarms aren't how you kill vehicles. They weren't then, they're not going to be now. Basically, the new rulebook's goal is to attempt to even things out by making vehicles bad against shooty armies, so that you'll take less of the big ones. I don't see this working.

Just so you know, nidzilla needed a nerf. What the tyranids didn't need, however, was an inability to destroy a vehicle-heavy list.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232505.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232505.page GMT Yes they are. Each unit has 3 anti-tank weapons and an anti-tank squad leader. If you think these are slow hordes in the conventional sense you're wrong. They all fleet now. By the way, count the amount of scoring units/models you can squeeze into a 1500p Necron army with 3 Monoliths.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232507.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232507.page GMT
I personally feel that the "run" special rule will break the game. The gaming table is just not big enough to allow for these types of movement for 6-7 turns. It takes away most all advantages that transports used to give. I saw where it specifically said bikes couldn't run, but nothing was said of jump troops. Jumpackers just got insane on how fast they can move across the table.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232515.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232515.page GMT
Now, the run rule could be nice in Apocalypse, with the "no running within 12 inches" modifier. But in regular 40K, it's going to screw everything up big time. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232528.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232528.page GMT Ork Stormboyz move 12+D6+D6, while a Falcon or Trukk next to them moves 18". Isn't it great?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232598.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232598.page GMT
You go ahead and enjoy needing 4s, then 6s, then a crapload of 5s and 6s.

And it isn't about how many scoring units you can squeeze into an army with 3 monoliths. It's about how many scoring units the other guy has left after you're finished.

You know what, I just realized that this doesn't make nidzilla any worse against normal armies. Being able to always score some kills with the barbed strangler and the warp blasts only make nidzilla better. The only real problem will actually be a lot of monoliths as a lot of venom cannons can still whittle down land raiders and predators, or at least remove the more dangerous weapons.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232613.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232613.page GMT Ork Stormboyz move 12+D6+D6, while a Falcon or Trukk next to them moves 18". Isn't it great?[/quote]

I know, I'm pretty much royally pissed at this. Added to the insane movement I also completely hate the new mission objectives and especially that every game uses random game length. It completely destroys the current endgame movement strategy. If your playing an army that has minimal scoring units in the first place, or are pretty much not very survivable in the first place. You can do you best to protect them all game long and then make that last mad dash to the objective counter. But wait, normally with smart movement you can make sure they get there and have a strong possibilty of them stay alive. But if the game suddenly goes 1 turn longer that can royally fubar your plans an litterally cost you the game because of 1 stupid die roll. Thats not fun, thats *bleep*ed up. Seriously, anyone here really think a unit of 10 firewarriors can hold an objective better than say 10 battle sisters if the game suddenly goes longer.

For some armies, every game... every single game is just going to have to be an annilation game for them, regardless of what else was rolled?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232620.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232620.page GMT
If armies have to actually move their troops towards objective and try to defend them, this makes for a more fun game where both sides actually get to shoot at / charge one another and, you know, fight. Rather than counting on a couple of fast vehicles to hide and then seal the deal just because they for sure can't be killed in the bottom of turn 6 (an artifact of the fixed turn system).

That Stormboyz will be faster than fast vehicles...yeah, that sucks. But Stormboyz/Jumppackers/Jetpackers in 4th ed are already faster than normal vehicles (12"+6" assault, vs 12") and nobody seemed to think that was a problem...

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232642.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232642.page GMT
If armies have to actually move their troops towards objective and try to defend them, this makes for a more fun game where both sides actually get to shoot at / charge one another and, you know, fight. Rather than counting on a couple of fast vehicles to hide and then seal the deal just because they for sure can't be killed in the bottom of turn 6 (an artifact of the fixed turn system).

That Stormboyz will be faster than fast vehicles...yeah, that sucks. But Stormboyz/Jumppackers/Jetpackers in 4th ed are already faster than normal vehicles (12"+6" assault, vs 12") and nobody seemed to think that was a problem...

[/quote]

Trying to figure out your logic.

It's bad for a fast vehicle to swoop out 24" on the last turn to seize the objective, but it's good for Blood Angels Assault Marines to hide the whole game and swoop out 18" on the last turn to grab the objective.

I'm not sure I get why the 6" is going to make all the difference in terms of this tactic.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232645.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232645.page GMT I think I will be making a bunch of custom missions for the new edition. I can see what they were going for (Troops really being the core of the army) but I really take exception to the way they did it. It's going to cut down on list diversity massively.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232646.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232646.page GMT
If armies have to actually move their troops towards objective and try to defend them, this makes for a more fun game where both sides actually get to shoot at / charge one another and, you know, fight. Rather than counting on a couple of fast vehicles to hide and then seal the deal just because they for sure can't be killed in the bottom of turn 6 (an artifact of the fixed turn system).

That Stormboyz will be faster than fast vehicles...yeah, that sucks. But Stormboyz/Jumppackers/Jetpackers in 4th ed are already faster than normal vehicles (12"+6" assault, vs 12") and nobody seemed to think that was a problem...

[/quote]

But this was taken care of by making troops the only scoring unit. There are no troops that can go 24" to grab an objective. But careful use of transports could get your troops there. But why bother with transports when you own guys can just walk just as far. Its crap when you look at the whole picture rather than just the parts. Its just GWs way of overcompensating, rather than just making adjustments towards balance.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232649.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232649.page GMT
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232650.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232650.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232661.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232661.page GMT LOS so tall hills would do it or thick stand of trees with hedges round the outside, or tall buildings with no windows.

I think they will have to leave area terrain in as an option for woods.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232665.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232665.page GMT
yes. My forests block LoS, they're very woodsy. I just assume the rest of the table is sparsely covered. It's a "swirling melee".]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232671.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232671.page GMT
Having representative style rules (such as removal of range-sniping and casualty eligibility within a squad) make a lot more sense to me, and these 5th Ed rules only serve to confuse and annoy me.

So just because a unit of 10 Terminators had ONE of its party end up within 1" of an enemy model, that unit is effectively out of the game? Never mind the fact that they still have a 50% chance of coming in on the board - if my opponent plops them down in the far corner of a 4'x6' board, those 440 points are wasted as they reposition themselves for the remainder of the game. At least in 4th Edition you could suffer the consequence of losing that one model, or in 3rd Edition, you could shift the models around under that Large Blast template to get as many in as possible.

Is it me, or are the TechnoMagi of the Adeptus Mechanicus getting worse at repairing their teleporter technology? Oh wait, I forgot, that's just the fluff - the Dev team came up with that one at their last bong-pounding session.

HBMC, if you have any pointers as to how to go about refining the the 4th Edition rules to the point of being playable, while incorporating the scarce good stuff from 3rd and 5th, please let me know - on this thread or in a PM.

I may not be the most hardcore of 40K players out there, but I definitely feel that I am along the same line of thought as many of my fellow players. This weekend was the first time that I had enough models to play a decent sized (4000 points per side) Apocalypse game - it was a lot of fun, despite the game's glaring tendency to highlight the brokenness of Assets such as Flank March and units such as Immortals, Turbo-Boosting Destroyer Lords, and Baneblades (especially when they're the only Super Heavy on the table, despite being on the 4000 points side against the 5000 points side).

My point is that I've been playing this game for 10 years, and have been eagerly awaiting some fixes to some severly description-deficient rules problems. I play Black Templars and Imperial Guard, and currently own around 4000 points of BT and 3000 points of IG (which includes a Baneblade). I've spent close to a couple thousand dollars on models, terrain, paints, and time and effort. To me, a poor college student with little free time and even less money, that means a lot. I'm sure that there are many of you out there that are either in the same boat or understand what I'm getting at, and it is that I'm really sick and tired of some really stupid rules mechanics.

I don't mind seeing some overpowered units in each army. In fact, one of the things I like about this game is seeing my opponent's eyes glimmer when he plops down Sgt. Joe Shmoe and his friends as Doom Squad X, because I know that I've probably got something equally powerful in my list too. But at the same time, fighting broken configurations and one-dimensional units that require only a brain stem to understand their uses just aggravates me.

I like some of the things GW is adding. Making the entire squad eligible for casualty-removal, and the Run! rule are both things I like, especially as an infantry-heavy Templar player. On the other hand, making tanks immobile battle bunkers irks me greatly, especially as an IG player.

I don't think that making a solid ruleset involves reinventing the wheel. I do think that it requires developers that actually play the game, and writers that understand how to explain something that is seemingly complicated in simple, grammatically correct English.

Maybe I'm asking for too much from GW though. Then again, I occasionally have these bursts of wishful thinking. Homebrew ruleset, here I come.

As for 5th Edition - if it doesn't have some major changes made to it between the current PDF version and the final print, then I'm done keeping up to date with the rules.

Sorry for the long post - I'm just really frustrated right now, and needed to dish out my 2 cents.

CK]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232674.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232674.page GMT GW don't want people deepstriking so much.

It is only risky if you slap them down into a congested area.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232677.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232677.page GMT
Pshah.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232713.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232713.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232718.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232718.page GMT
Space Marine (Or Ravenwing) Bikes, Eldar Jetbikes and Ork Bikers can do it, and are troops. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232731.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232731.page GMT Trying to figure out your logic.

It's bad for a fast vehicle to swoop out 24" on the last turn to seize the objective, but it's good for Blood Angels Assault Marines to hide the whole game and swoop out 18" on the last turn to grab the objective.

I'm not sure I get why the 6" is going to make all the difference in terms of this tactic.[/quote]

Let me be clearer then. Right now (in 4th edition), it is a valid tactic to take 2nd turn, hide one or more Landspeeders/Pirahnas all game (behind a piece of LOS-blocking terrain) and use them to claim/contest objectives with a 24" move in the bottom of turn 6. These cheap fast skimmers don't take up many points in an army, so it's not too detrimental for them to not contribute to the army's shooting during the game. Another valid tactic is to use Falcons (which have a very low chance of being immobilized/destroyed) as last-turn objective grabbers. They're not as cheap as the little guys, but they are almost as survivable as an LOS-blocking AV10 vehicle and they can contribute to the game by dropping off troops and possibly getting a pulse laser shot off once or twice (if they get lucky and spend a turn un-shaken).

I dislike the fact that this tactic exists, as it strains verisimilitude - the army wouldn't know that the opposition was going to give up after turn 6, so they'd never hang a fragile AV10 speeder out to claim. It's only the player's knowledge that turn 6 is the last one, and their AV10 skimmer can't be shot at at all, that allows this tactic.

If these 5th edition rumours pan out, fast vehicles only get to move 18" and they don't score anyways. Jump-packers do get to move 13-18" (18" if an assault target presents itself) and fleet Stormboyz/jetbikes can get 17-24" in that case, true. However, a unit of jump-packers is going to be both more expensive than an AV10 skimmer, and less survivable than a holofielded Falcon. Not to mention more vulnerable to indirect blasts when hiding behind terrain (if they find some terrain that actually blocks LOS... ). But the fact that it's not certain when the game will end makes the tactic of "hide, then claim in the bottom of the last turn" really risky - there may well be another turn where your throwaway fast unit gets killed, and cannot contest/claim. Also, the random d6 of the run/fleet move makes the tactic even riskier. And yes, 18" vs 24" is a big deal when you're hiding behind something but want to get within range of a particular objective.

So in 5th, it will be much more expensive and much less certain to hold a fast claiming unit out of the game until the 'last turn' (or thereabouts) to swoop in and claim/contest an objective. Perhaps not worth it? I hope so.

Wargaming for me is the most fun when the armies actually fight in a way that mimics how such armies might actually fight (verisimilitude). The less 'gamey' trix that hinge on game elements which strain verisimilitude (eg last-turn objective claims, casualty-removal trix in close combat etc.), the more fun the game will be for me.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232769.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232769.page GMT Why isn't that fair? Deep Strike position is set by the player. If the player wants to gamble on placing close (for a game-breaking Boo! with Heavy Flamer against IG / Tau or something) then he risks a bad scatter. That is balancing risk for high reward.

[quote]Is it me, or are the TechnoMagi of the Adeptus Mechanicus getting worse at repairing their teleporter technology? [/quote]
Huh? It's far more accurate than before - the squad is only lost 1/2 of the time.

Personally, I would have preferred to see that 40k5 go back to the original 40k3 rules for Deep Strike - Lost in the Warp for double 1s, off the board, or within 1" of the enemy.

[quote]I play Black Templars and Imperial Guard, and currently own around 4000 points of BT and 3000 points of IG (which includes a Baneblade). [/quote]
Not bad. I've got over 8k worth of Eldar, 4k of SM, 3k of IG, 3k of CSM, 1k of SoB, and 1k of Inq. The way I see it, the changes all balance out in the end.

[quote]On the other hand, making tanks immobile battle bunkers irks me greatly, especially as an IG player.[/quote]
I dunno about that... As far as I'm concerned, there's no real change. My Russes are Ordnance-throwers, so secondary / other weapons don't matter. My Hellhounds & Chimeras usually only move 6" and shoot. And my Bassies don't move. So everything is about the same.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232807.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232807.page GMT eg last-turn objective claims, casualty-removal trix in close combat etc.), the more fun the game will be for me.
[/quote]
QFT.

This is why I intensely dislike super-accurate Deep Strike & Drop Pods.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232808.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232808.page GMT
But your Chimeras and Hellhounds now put out about 1/2 the firepower when they move 6" and shoot. That's not really about the same.

To me, it seems like it would totally kill the role of the Chimera as an IFV advancing beside the troops and providing covering fire for them.

Likewise I always liked the Hellhound because it was a fun tank to use. You could run it up the board and flame down enemy troops. Under 5th (as rumoured anyway) it will just be another static pillbox. At that rate, I might as well just take another Russ or Basilisk.

Guard benefits from this rules in other ways - e.g. the new blast rules - but it seems like the competitive builds will very much be a big spam of infantry platoons supported by big tanks with much less of a role for Chimeras, Storm Troopers, Techpriests, Hellhounds, and other favorite units of mine. It's not bad per se, but I think it's a sad thing when an army gets shoehorned into only a couple competitive builds.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232813.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232813.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232816.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232816.page GMT
a model with bs of 6 or better may re roll his to hit roll but he now needs a 5 instead of his normal 2 ....lame

this is just one example of the crap comming out im reading and ill up date when im done]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232824.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232824.page GMT you may now shoot through area terrain
quote
if a model shoots through area terrain the target recieves the cover from the interveining terrain, even if the unit is completely visable to the firer. this does not apply to shots that go over the terrain

i see many people boycotting this and running 4th edition rtt's and tell gw to stick it]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232827.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232827.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232830.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232830.page GMT D6 that ignores terrain but if you run you may not assault

a unit that runs may not shoot that turn.. gee everyone gets a form of fleet how special is that ?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232831.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232831.page GMT To me, it seems like it would totally kill the role of the Chimera as an IFV advancing beside the troops and providing covering fire for them.[/quote]
Not really. I'll go from 2 HBs & PMHS to 1 HB & PMHS, so it's not so huge. Guardsmen are still going to need their Chimeras for mobility and survivability.

[quote]Likewise I always liked the Hellhound because it was a fun tank to use. You could run it up the board and flame down enemy troops. Under 5th (as rumoured anyway) it will just be another static pillbox. At that rate, I might as well just take another Russ or Basilisk.[/quote]
That presumes you haven't filled all 3 Heavy slots. Even under the new rules, you can still move 6" and fire the Inferno Cannon & PMHS.

[quote]Guard benefits from this rules in other ways - e.g. the new blast rules - but it seems like the competitive builds will very much be a big spam of infantry platoons supported by big tanks with much less of a role for Chimeras, Storm Troopers, Techpriests, Hellhounds, and other favorite units of mine. It's not bad per se, but I think it's a sad thing when an army gets shoehorned into only a couple competitive builds.[/quote]
OTOH, Guard have a pretty outdated Codex. I'm hoping that the Guard get a new-style update after Planetstrike, so we can have our Valkyries for Fast Skimmer Transport. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232837.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232837.page GMT gw's not understanding anything

force weapons just got nerfed any unit that is immune to instant death cannot be killed by a force weapon.... all you nids players can start partying you will rule the battle field from hear on out]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232839.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232839.page GMT LOS if it is tall enough. So a forest is going to block LOS, but a level 1 series of sandbags or high grass, then why is it unreasonable to shoot past it?

It still seems that, depending on what you and your opponent dictate in terms of height, terrain will play mostly the same role it does now.

But if you can just shoot through terrain without worry, this does seem to balance the fact everyone can fleet, so an IG gunline has more of a chance to gun down the mass of fleeting orks.

At this point though, I think having the fleet thing is much more of an advantage.

I must say that with the new rules, it does seem pretty damn stupid that the heavier, slower tanks, can't just fire mostly everything if they aren't going full out. If a massive heavy tank isn't designed to slowly roll forward laying suppressing fire, why isn't every tank just artillery then? I more than embrace not being able to fire ordinance and other weapons in the same turn, but taking some maneuverability out of tanks is the last thing they need.

I must say I am intrigued to see how the new CC system works out with the morale modifiers, I imagine close combat is going to be a lot faster with lots of fleeing guard, tau, and orks if they get whittled down enough. I do kinda enjoy the unlimited outnumber, seems like it might be fun.

Overall, I kinda like the new rule set, although there are some serious things that doesn't sit well, the biggest to me, the new wound allocation system.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232841.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232841.page GMT OTOH, Guard have a pretty outdated Codex. I'm hoping that the Guard get a new-style update after Planetstrike, so we can have our Valkyries for Fast Skimmer Transport. [/quote]

I'll agree with you on that. I'm also hoping that Tech-Priests get their rules cleaned up (retinue not counting as wargear, maybe not taking up a slot ala DA's Techmarines).

I disagree that 1 ML, 1HB + 1PMHS ==> 1HB + 1PMHS isn't a major change. Assuming you have the PMHS you're losing about 40% of your firepower. If you don't have that upgrade, you're losing half.

The HB or ML are nice because of their S5/6. That really helps them put some wounds on Orks and Marines, where the PMHS struggles a bit. I'm not going to go into mathhammer, but I think it's pretty clear that it's a significant reduction.

The Chimera also loses mobility since it's not that much faster than a Guardsman - 12" max a turn vs. average of 9.5" a turn. If they both shoot while they advance then they're both confined to 6". Given that the Chimera is slightly more than the cost of the squad it transports (usually) and it doesn't hold an objective, I think that it will increasingly be phased out in favour of more Infantry Platoons.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232845.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232845.page GMT
lunatics running the asylum
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232850.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232850.page GMT
Yeah, huge change there, and a major red flag for me.

It's not really that I think you should be able to hide special weapons in a squad. That's not "realistic" nor is it necessary for the game to work. If you built a game system that didn't allow for it, that's perfectly fine.

However... The fact that GW thinks they can turn that rule on its head without totally screwing up game balance... Well, it's a clear demonstration that they don't understand rules design, or the limits of their own playtesting capability.

It'd be one thing if every army had special weapons in squads, and now those weapons go away at roughly the same rate as everyone else. Whatever, still balanced. But that's NOT what they have. The system has armies that depend on those special weapons (Marines, Guard, Orks, etc. etc.) and those that don't (Tyranids, Necrons). By making the change they have, they SIGNIFICANTLY alter the balance of the game, and not in any uniform way that makes sense. It's an across the board change that helps armies that don't need it (Tyranids) and hurts armies that need help (Guard).

Again, it's not that this sort of system is inherantly wrong, it's just that making it at this point in time demonstrates a total lack of clarity on GW's part.

I won't even start on the insanity I've heard about target priority and screening, but I guess it's back to 3rd Edition when I could castle up my Necrons and win every game without even paying attention.

All we can do is cross our fingers and hope that they sort all of this out before unleasing it on us. I've heard a few good ideas as well, so it's not all bad, but the general attitude seems to be one of poking and hoping rather than actually knowing how to design a coherant system and how to maintain the playability of a rules base that is imprved and updated at a glacial pace.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232856.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232856.page GMT
[quote]
Hello AdamSouza,

We at 40kTerra have obtained the Pre-Release version of the new 5th edition rulebook. We will be constantly revealing new things that are coming to the new rulebook.


Example preview:

Snipers provide Rending + Pinning

Rending - Roll to hit the same, on a wounding '6' it is AP 2
Against vehicles = If penetration is a roll of 6 - further D3 penetration is given.
This is exactly the same in CC and Shooting.

Poison Weapons - Wounds on 4+, gets re-roll if failed.

Gets Hot Rule - Only gets hot on a 1, even if rapid fire.

Pinning - A Unit PINNED gets +1 cover. If the unit is not in cover they get 6+ cover save.



Check it out at www.40kterra.com
Under the Rumors and News section.


Ikarus
[/quote]

On my way to check it out now

EDIT: Direct link to info is here: http://www.40kterra.com/forums/f41/5th-edition-preleak-info-giveout-4708.html

[quote]
Things with greater than BS 5 will get roll benefits -> BS 6,7,8,9,10 possible


BALLISTIC SKILL OF 6 OR BETTER
Very rarely a model may have a BS of 6 or
even more. If a model has a BS of 6 or higher,
it gains a re-roll whenever it rolls a 1 to hit
with ranged attacks. The second roll has
normally a lower chance of hitting, and the
number needed is given in the chart below in
italics after the slash.

BS 6+ will get a re-roll to hit if they get a to hit roll of a '1' BUT, the 2nd chance has less likely part to hit.
BS 6 - Hits on 2+, if Misses 2nd chance on 6+
BS 7 - Hits on 2+, if Misses 2nd chance on 5+
BS 8 - Hits on 2+, if Misses 2nd chance on 4+
BS 9 - Hits on 2+, if Misses 2nd chance on 3+
BS 10 - Hits on 2+, if Misses 2nd chance on 2+


For example, a model with BS 7 fires a shot
with its plasma pistol. It rolls a 1 and so it can
re-roll the dice (and conveniently the weapon
does not Get Hot!). This time, however it
won’t hit on a 2, but rather on a 5 (and a
second one would mean its weapon has
overheated).
If a model has a special rule that already
confers it a re-roll to hit (like a master-crafted
weapon, for example), then that re-roll takes
precedence and the chances to hit on the reroll
are the same as the first shot, regardless
of the firer’s BS. [/quote]

[quote]
Tanks -
Combat speed - Vehicles moving up to 6'' considered as Combat Speed - 1 Gun allowed to shoot
Cruising Speed - Vehicles move up to 12'' considered as Cruising Speed - No gun Allowed.
Flat Out Speed - Vehicles move up to 18'' (Given to Fast Vehicles - no 24'' movement)


Fast Vehicles -

Can shoot all at Combat Speed
Can shoot 1 at Cruising Speed
Can shoot nothing at Flat Out Speed


Skimmers -
Vehicle Ignores Terrain
Vehicle must move at Cruising Speed or Flat Out to get OBSCURED bonus

Obscured - If tank is obscured it gets a 4+ sv to ignore Glance or Penetration results.


Walkers-
Can shoot one gun at Combat Speed



Defensive Weapons - Str 4 or under


Pintle & Turret Mounted Weapons get 360 Degress LoS
Sponson = 180 Degrees LoS
Hull = 45 Degrees LoS

AP1 - Adds +1 to Damage table results
AP 0 - Subtracts -1 to Damabe Table results



Single Universal Vehicle Damage Table -
1 or less : Crew Shaken
2 : Crew Stunned
3 : DAMAGED -Weapon Destroyed
4 : DAMAGED - Immobilized
5 : DESTROYED - Vehicle
6 : DESTROYED - Vehicle Explodes (d6'' Str 3 AP - explosion)

Glancing = - 2
AP - = -1
AP 1 - = + 1
Opened Top + 1

Affects on Passengers -
Passengers on a Vehicle Shaken ed - Crew no Affected
Passengers on a Vehicle Stunned - Can not Disembark
Passengers on a Vehicle Damaged 4 - No Effect
Passengers on a Vehicle Destroyed 5 - Disembarks Vehicle + Pinning test
Passengers on a Vehicle Destroyed 6 - Disembarks Vehicles + Suffers Str 4 AP - Hit + Pinning test



Assault Against Vehicles - If vehicles move in this speed then ->
Stationary - Auto Hit
Combat Speed - 4+
Cruising Speed - 6+
[/quote]

[quote]
Snipers provide Rending + Pinning

Rending - Roll to hit the same, on a wounding '6' it is AP 2
Against vehicles = If penetration is a roll of 6 - further D3 penetration is given.
This is exactly the same in CC and Shooting.

Poison Weapons - Wounds on 4+, gets re-roll if failed.

Gets Hot Rule - Only gets hot on a 1, even if rapid fire.

Pinning - A Unit PINNED gets +1 cover. If the unit is not in cover they get 6+ cover save.
[/quote]

[quote]
RUN! - New Infantry Rules
In their Shooting phase units may choose not to fire and run instead, immediately moving D6” inches
(a rather popular choice for units that do not have ranged weaponry!).
Running movement is not affected by difficult terrain – it is always a flat D6” (but models running
through dangerous terrain must test as normal).
Units that run cannot assault in the following Assault phase.
[/quote]

[quote]Scoring units
Normally a campaigning army employs the squads
making up the bulk of its fighting force to dig in
and consolidate any territorial gains, while the
most specialised units forge ahead to engage the
enemy with lightning-fast assaults and massive
armoured trusts.

The concept of scoring units is central to two of
the Standard Missions, which are won or lost by
capturing and holding more objectives than the
enemy, and only scoring units may do that.
An army’s scoring units are all the units that come
from its Troops allowance. There are only three
exceptions when a unit of Troops does not count
as scoring:
• if it is falling back at the end of the game
• if it is a vehicle
• if it has a special rule specifying it never counts
as scoring.

STANDARD MISSIONS CHART
D6 Roll Mission
1-2 Recon
3-4 Take and Hold
5-6 Total Annihilation [/quote]

Ikarus promise to update daily with new tidbits.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232874.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232874.page GMT 40K and spend it on other games. I've never seen a game take so many leaps backwards as 40K is taking.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232875.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232875.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232877.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232877.page GMT 40k competitively, so as a more casual player, I don't think the new rules are going to keep me from occassionally attending a local tourney or playing as much as I can.

If the leaked pdf is true, I'll still play and hopefully still have fun, although if it just takes too long, house rules and using 4th edition are still viable options.

A lot of rules seem fine to me, but yah there are a few that really suck and I hope this isn't the final version like the ork leak was, but if it is, I'll deal. But then I suppose if I was a more competitive player I might be pissed as hell. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232879.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232879.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232888.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232888.page GMT That gives me a vague hope that some of the more ridiculous ideas got dumped in playtesting.
It's fun to compare and contrast how wizards are dealing with 4th edition D'n'D to how GW are dealing with 5th edition 40K in terms of transparency and advertising.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232895.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232895.page GMT
Cogito]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232911.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232911.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232952.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232952.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232953.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232953.page GMT FW krieg - malcador etc) look great and conjour up images of trundling forward firing guns supporting troops, won't happen like that in the game! I edjoyed 2nd edition but it didn't flow as well. Tanks in my mind shouldn't be pill boxes, If they are I'd prefer to stick to heavy weapon squads myself. And wound allocation before saves....took a while to get used to this changing to the current but now I'm used to it I'd rather not go back. It makes more sense but slows down the game too much. The only thing I miss from 2nd is the character, especially the wackyness of the orks, the new ones look better but they've lost the comidy. It is nice to see things like the shokk attack comeing back but it's the character that got me into the game, then the rules. Having played now for years I think the current ruleset is very playable, it does have a few faults but it doesn't need the sort of changes that the rumours are talking about. Some of it is very good (sniper rifles etc) but get rid of the pill boxes, the 'running' (I'd say this is the maximum speed alllowed (6") why walk over a battlefield as standard pace when you're being shot at? Sometime yes you may want to go slower, so go slower and take atvantage of the new get down, but don't allow every one to fleet. how fast will that make orks with the waagh rule? Orks are descibbed as a huge wave of green, not a supper fast moving alien! Sorry, bit of a rant there. Personally I think I'm gonna stick with the current rules if some of these changes go ahead.

It also concerns me that some seem like quite big changes. Can't think of any examples but I'd put money of them not being in line with several rules in codexes, or some special rules don't work - anyone fancy waiting 3-4 years for them to fix the codex?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232955.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232955.page GMT IG with three pie plates a turn will do wonders, whirlwinds, etc. [/quote]
Haha. Who do you think you're kidding? Flamers aren't any more effective against Orks than before unless you're talking about units like Burna Boyz. Are you trying to make yourself believe Orks aren't the be all end all, just so that all of our upcoming massacre victories with Orks would taste a little better? Sure, Whirlwinds are going to cause more casualties than before when they shoot. Guess what, GW has us covered. Firstly, there's no area terrain anymore that would block los so the Whirlwinds can be shaken from anywhere. Secondly, everyone is running so the Whirlwinds won't get to fire [b]as many times as before[/b] untill its already too late. Lastly, everyone can now get as many units of the bona fide Wolf Scouts as they like in order to shake/destroy the ordnance batteries hiding in the backfields. The reason you're not worried about tanks anymore is because there will be so many Orks on every table that it will put the O&G WFB armies to shame, and the S9 power klaws will smash through the rear armours like the tanks werent even there since cover doesn't work in close combat.[/quote]

I said templates, that means Ordinance. AV14 is very hard to deal with at range for Orks now, not even counting them in cover, which makes it even harder. Three pie plates will put large dents in this unstoppable Ork horde you keep talking about. And now that the KFF Mek isn't untargetable anymore, you can concentrate on a squad and make him run away with your pie plates.

And you keep going on about area terrain. If you somehow assume that all of a sudden tables of 40k will be near clear killing fields for guns with cover saves, you're being completely unrealistic. People will discuss terrain just like now before the game and there will be pieces that block LOS, pieces that don't but give good cover saves (4+), and the like.

I don't need any kind of statements to make myself feel better about using Orks. I already decided not to build the Shoota Horde, because after playing with it for a while using my proxy models, I'm just not going to bother building and painting 100+ shootas just so I can be a dick at a few tournaments. I'm going to run Kult of Speed mainly, and a mix of footsloggers. And despite what you think about 5th, the horde Orks will be far from unbeatable. They'll be good sure, but I doubt they'll be as dominant as Mech Eldar or Godzilla now, as long as people build their armies well.


[quote]I'm talking about AV14 being bad against regular armies because it will be. 1/54 chance for a lascannon to kill one behind some terrain, and you find it justifiable because it [i]only[/i] fires that amazing pie plate you keep talking about in another sentence plus a couple other heavy weapons, and does not tank shock like Falcons did. Did you play 40K in the third edition? If you did you probably remember people running three or four Defilers per army that were all hull down behind the smallest terrain pieces one can imagine. It was hard as hell to kill them or even stop them from shooting, and nobody liked it and everyone was happy that they were nerfed. I guess it's fine now, as long as you play Orks. You can always take so many models and so many scoring units that the enemy won't have a chance in hell. Even if the Orks and their enemy both destroy eachother the Orks will win since they will be worth much less KPs than their opponents. Justice for all.[/quote]

First off, I said it's justifiable because while it puts out offensive power, it's not as bad as "unkillable Falcons" because they can't score anymore, they can't drop off specialists without any risk to the player, and they can't play a dumb ass VP denial game. That's why AV14 becoming so survivable at long range in 5th is OK, where as Falcons are a problem now.

And as I pointed, there are ways to neutralize those AV14 tanks, using infiltrators/scouts. You're the one who seems stuck on a duplicity here. Are they "unkillable" or are they super easy to neutralize because of scouts or fast moving Melta Carriers?

You talk about the Ork Horde being unstoppable, except at the same time you're talking about 3 Pie Plate tossers being hard to neutralize even when they're AV12 like defilers that are hull-down. How is this Ork horde going to shrug off 2-3 turns of shelling from pie plates?

[quote]All we need now is Codex Space Wolves having a special rule saying they can disembark and assault from Rhinos moving max speed so that everyone can take six squads of Blood Claws in Rhinos, and we're happily back in third edition (although a slightly more retarded version of 3rd ed).[/quote]

So rushing with assault troops and having little risk is bad if you're in 3rd Ed and playing Marines, but it's just fine and dandy if you're using Falcons and Harlies in 4th?

[quote]I must say the introduction of 4+ and 3+ cover saves will make MEQ much less attractive than ever before. Why would you pay for armour if you can get invulnerable saves for free?[/quote]

Because cover won't be everywhere you need it to be? Because maybe the rest of their stat lines make them pretty good? Because Marines in the new edition are going to play drastically different than they do in 4th? And maybe, just maybe, it would be nice if playing a MEQ style army wasn't so appealing that a large percentage of the player base went with them? Or that other armies could compete with them without resorting to "Godzilla" or "Holofield Spam"?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232990.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/232990.page GMT AV14 is very hard or impossible for everyone to deal with at range. Do you even understand what 1/54 means? That's for [b]one vehicle[/b] inside some trees. Orks however probably won't have to bother with ranged weapons at all.

[quote]They'll be good sure, but I doubt they'll be as dominant as Mech Eldar or Godzilla now, as long as people build their armies well.[/quote]
Both of those armies have been doing well but they haven't been nearly as dominant as for example Chaos Space Marines were under their previous codex with Siren Princes, Iron Warriors, Daemonbombs and whatnot. IIRC the UK GT or any of its qualifying heats has never been won by Tyranids, and the last time the Eldar won the UK GT final was with Ulthwé Seer Councils. I could be wrong, but the point is that they aren't nearly as dominant or popular as the Dakka metagame would like to suggest.

[quote]specialists without any risk to the player, and they can't play a dumb ass VP denial game.[/quote]
What exactly is wrong with VP denial? It's an interesting aspect of the game. WHFB for example has plenty of it, and in both games it usually means that faster armies with weaker killing power are trying to compete by grabbing mission objectives and preserving units. Those Harlequin specialists you talk about cost nearly 30 points each (t3 models with no armour saves) once you factor in the shadowseer, and their transport costs 25 points less than a Monolith. How imbalanced. You can get 60 Slugga Boyz at the price of one skimmer and six space clowns.

[quote]And as I pointed, there are ways to neutralize those AV14 tanks, using infiltrators/scouts. You're the one who seems stuck on a duplicity here. Are they "unkillable" or are they super easy to neutralize because of scouts or fast moving Melta Carriers?[/quote]
Some have ways to deal with them (neutralise is too strong of a word), some don't. That's what I was saying all along.

[quote]How is this Ork horde going to shrug off 2-3 turns of shelling from pie plates?[/quote]
2 turns if the Orks don't get the first turn. Easily. You're also forgetting the kill point system. Ork infiltrators bust a Whirlwind, and now the Marines have to kill 60 Slugga Boyz to get the points back. It just isn't going to happen.

[quote]So rushing with assault troops and having little risk is bad if you're in 3rd Ed and playing Marines, but it's just fine and dandy if you're using Falcons and Harlies in 4th?[/quote]
Comparing third edition assault style (outrageously tough Rhinos once they're smoked) where everything assaults on turn two or three, with the delicate scalpel that is Mech Eldar, is just ludicrous. If the Harlequins could assault from moving Falcons you might have a point, but alas, you don't.

[quote]Because cover won't be everywhere you need it to be? Because maybe the rest of their stat lines make them pretty good? Because Marines in the new edition are going to play drastically different than they do in 4th? And maybe, just maybe, it would be nice if playing a MEQ style army wasn't so appealing that a large percentage of the player base went with them? Or that other armies could compete with them without resorting to "Godzilla" or "Holofield Spam"?[/quote]
Cover will be everywhere you need it to be. All of the expensive and static models will find themselves plenty of cover for some free invulnerable saves. Isn't it great that a six point model can get the same armour save as a 30 point model by standing inside some terrain? No, it really isn't. Terrain should only be a negative hit modifier.

Everything is going to play slightly different than before, not just Marines. What makes me really sad about your approach to the fifth edition is that hopelessly optimistic fanboys like you always think that when some old cheese is eradicated the game automatically becomes better. Not necessarily. The game should be updated in smaller patches instead of massive system shutdowns and reboots for that to happen. If you're still playing in five years you'll be replying to these same kind of threads telling people you want a change to the "troop choice spam" and that people should be able to win without resorting to "running infantry hordes".]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233005.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233005.page GMT SMs even more.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233024.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233024.page GMT [quote=Voodoo Boyz]
I said templates, that means Ordinance. AV14 is very hard to deal with at range for Orks now, not even counting them in cover, which makes it even harder. Three pie plates will put large dents in this unstoppable Ork horde you keep talking about. And now that the KFF Mek isn't untargetable anymore, you can concentrate on a squad and make him run away with your pie plates.[/quote]
Yes I'm sure that spacing out your guys in a line will make pie plates very effective. Unless you're talking about some weird rule, the pdf clearly uses the word "unit" in all references to blast/barrage weapons. Pie plates won't be killing models from multiple units and hurray, 4-5 models killed from every template.

[quote]
I don't need any kind of statements to make myself feel better about using Orks. I already decided not to build the Shoota Horde, because after playing with it for a while using my proxy models, I'm just not going to bother building and painting 100+ shootas just so I can be a dick at a few tournaments. I'm going to run Kult of Speed mainly, and a mix of footsloggers. And despite what you think about 5th, the horde Orks will be far from unbeatable. They'll be good sure, but I doubt they'll be as dominant as Mech Eldar or Godzilla now, as long as people build their armies well.[/quote]
Yes I'm sure that since you say you won't make a retardedly powerful army, everyone else won't either.
[quote]
First off, I said it's justifiable because while it puts out offensive power, it's not as bad as "unkillable Falcons" because they can't score anymore, they can't drop off specialists without any risk to the player, and they can't play a dumb ass VP denial game. That's why AV14 becoming so survivable at long range in 5th is OK, where as Falcons are a problem now.[/quote]
You said you were making KoS, so you should have some trukks and bikes and stuff. Why aren't these guys covering the back door of the falcon?

[quote]
You talk about the Ork Horde being unstoppable, except at the same time you're talking about 3 Pie Plate tossers being hard to neutralize even when they're AV12 like defilers that are hull-down. How is this Ork horde going to shrug off 2-3 turns of shelling from pie plates? [/quote]
You'll be making conga lines of orks.
[quote]
Because cover won't be everywhere you need it to be? Because maybe the rest of their stat lines make them pretty good? Because Marines in the new edition are going to play drastically different than they do in 4th? And maybe, just maybe, it would be nice if playing a MEQ style army wasn't so appealing that a large percentage of the player base went with them? Or that other armies could compete with them without resorting to "Godzilla" or "Holofield Spam"?[/quote]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but even in 3rd edition KoS and tyranid swarms were pretty viable. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233029.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233029.page GMT AV14 is very hard or impossible for everyone to deal with at range. Do you even understand what 1/54 means? That's for [b]one vehicle[/b] inside some trees. Orks however probably won't have to bother with ranged weapons at all.[/quote]

So AV14 is as resistant to damage from a Lascannon, as long as it's in cover, as a Falcon is now basically all the time.

Orks can't deal with AV14 at range, but we'll need the firepower elsewhere. I doubt you'll see people stop using Lootas.

[quote=Therion]
Both of those armies have been doing well but they haven't been nearly as dominant as for example Chaos Space Marines were under their previous codex with Siren Princes, Iron Warriors, Daemonbombs and whatnot. IIRC the UK GT or any of its qualifying heats has never been won by Tyranids, and the last time the Eldar won the UK GT final was with Ulthwé Seer Councils. I could be wrong, but the point is that they aren't nearly as dominant or popular as the Dakka metagame would like to suggest. [/quote]

They sure as hell seem to do fine last I saw. This coming UKGT is the first one where Mech Eldar can run around without worrying about Iron Warriors. If you hadn't noticed how many Mech Eldar armies have been doing in the Heats then I suggest you look at the results sheets. So many Skimmer lists have been present at the UKGT's that people are taking Necrons because it's a foil to Skimmer lists.

And Godzilla (along with Nids in general) have been doing very well out here in the US.

[quote]
What exactly is wrong with VP denial? It's an interesting aspect of the game. WHFB for example has plenty of it, and in both games it usually means that faster armies with weaker killing power are trying to compete by grabbing mission objectives and preserving units. Those Harlequin specialists you talk about cost nearly 30 points each (t3 models with no armour saves) once you factor in the shadowseer, and their transport costs 25 points less than a Monolith. How imbalanced. You can get 60 Slugga Boyz at the price of one skimmer and six space clowns.[/quote]

Because having a game where my opponent does nothing but not engage and runs away until about the last turn when the specialists come out to get a VP advantage around when they will face little to no retaliation and then the tanks that can't be hurt run off to score isn't exactly a "fun game".

All while the rest of the army hides and the only targets are Holofield Tanks that you just have be incredibly lucky to kill, or you get no points AND they Score.

[quote]Some have ways to deal with them (neutralise is too strong of a word), some don't. That's what I was saying all along.[/quote]

Which army is going to have a hard time neutralizing them? Necrons can keep them from shooting with just one glance that gets through. It's not hard to get a few glances off when your entire army can do it. Marines can get fast moving Meltas or deepstrikers, Chaos gets infiltrating Chosen, or deepstriking Combi-Melta termies, or Oblits. Eldar get Fire Dragons in Wave Serpents or Falcons, or Hawks. Dark Eldar will need help, unless they just mass Lances, one glance keeps a pie plate from flying at you.

And of course the only armies with AV14 that will sit in cover is IG, who need SOMETHING to be good. It's nice to see their main tanks, which are supposed to be an advantage, actually be a threat, instead of the Joke that they are now. Land Raiders need to deliver troops to be very effective, and Battlewagons need to be close to throw their pie plates, so using cover all the time isn't going to be the easiest thing in the world. And then there's the Monolith, who generally won't be in cover, or can't because it's a skimmer. It'll be a beast, especially if you have to shoot it through something that gives it a cover save, but that's what you have to do. Lascannons, Railguns, S9 Spears, they need a 6 to get through it now to be effective anyway.

[quote]
2 turns if the Orks don't get the first turn. Easily. You're also forgetting the kill point system. Ork infiltrators bust a Whirlwind, and now the Marines have to kill 60 Slugga Boyz to get the points back. It just isn't going to happen.[/quote]

In one mission, if the Infiltrators actually show up on the table edge that lets them get to the whirlwind (it's random after all). Or they spend 265 Points for the special character and his squad, who can then be killed by surrounding marines that they can't assault because they took out the Whirlwind. And whatever that infiltrator squad is for the Orks, it still gives up just as many KP as the Whirlwind they came in to kill just gave up.


[quote]
Comparing third edition assault style (outrageously tough Rhinos once they're smoked) where everything assaults on turn two or three, with the delicate scalpel that is Mech Eldar, is just ludicrous. If the Harlequins could assault from moving Falcons you might have a point, but alas, you don't.[/quote]

Calling Mech Eldar a "delicate scalpel" is what's ludicrous. You hide and turbo boost till you can come out late game and get ahead, or just score because your tanks are near impossible to destroy and can move 24 - 36" in a turn.

The difference between dumb rush armies in 3rd and Mech Eldar now is that you have to wait a turn before you can assault (which can be mitigated by the fact that your stupid tanks shrug off almost all firepower), and that you can just grab objectives at the end. How exactly is it a "delicate scalpel" to use such high speeds and resilience to just run away until the end of the game?

None of the really good "competitive" armies are really delicate scalpels, they generally are pretty dumb, and just become that much harder when played by someone who isn't brainless.

[quote]
Cover will be everywhere you need it to be. All of the expensive and static models will find themselves plenty of cover for some free invulnerable saves. Isn't it great that a six point model can get the same armour save as a 30 point model by standing inside some terrain? No, it really isn't. Terrain should only be a negative hit modifier.[/quote]

If cover is setup fairly, it sure as hell won't be. Boyz will still need a KFF to get their boyz where they need it, and now with a tank on a hill with some ordinance or a lot of fire, can force that to go away. And if they're advancing through this terrain, then they're not moving that fast.

And if you bring enough guns to the party, you can shoot down that first line, buying you more time to shoot the horde. And if less terrain Blocks LOS, then you should be able to shoot more if you deploy right.

[quote]Everything is going to play slightly different than before, not just Marines. What makes me really sad about your approach to the fifth edition is that hopelessly optimistic fanboys like you always think that when some old cheese is eradicated the game automatically becomes better. Not necessarily. The game should be updated in smaller patches instead of massive system shutdowns and reboots for that to happen. If you're still playing in five years you'll be replying to these same kind of threads telling people you want a change to the "troop choice spam" and that people should be able to win without resorting to "running infantry hordes".[/quote]

I'm a fanboy now? I'm just not blatantly hating the new edition. I'd like to think that from my posts I'm about as neutral as you can get on GW. I certainly am not too happy about having an Ork army that just flat out BLEW because of the 4th Ed rules and all the wonderful new codex's and their lovely abilities that made a mockery of my 9 year old Codex.

All I know is that I read the rules and I'm generally happy about a lot of them. Sure things need cleaning up like the LOS rules for models, but I can just hope for the best.

We'll see how this goes when the rules are released anyway, I'm not worried. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233048.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233048.page GMT Yes I'm sure that spacing out your guys in a line will make pie plates very effective. Unless you're talking about some weird rule, the pdf clearly uses the word "unit" in all references to blast/barrage weapons. Pie plates won't be killing models from multiple units and hurray, 4-5 models killed from every template.[/quote]

Space them in a Konga Line? Reading the PDF section on blasts, it even talks about how the scatter can make it hit your own troops, or other models out of range/LOS. It clearly says that any MODEL that has its base partially touched by the template is hurt.

And I'll be amazed to see a Konga Line of 30 Orks marching straight across a table. You will have to make a second or third row to deploy them, and since the "Squad" is in LOS, you can place the template in the center of this squad, and you don't even need to have the center hole over a model anymore, so you can set it up so you get a nice clump. And if it is this giant horde, spaced at max coherency, then the guys in the OTHER squads, are going to be at the other table edge based on deployment.

And lord help the player who has that many models in a table quarters mission. One of the reasons I DON'T want to play the horde after play testing it for these past few months has been cleanse. Good lord that sucks, especially if your opponent has templates NOW, let alone when all partials are hits.

[quote]
Yes I'm sure that since you say you won't make a retardedly powerful army, everyone else won't either.[/quote]

Given that retarded powerful armies exist no matter what happens, what do you want me to say? If Orks get a retarded build like some current armies have, then that's what happens. I still don't think it will be the be-all end-all that some people do. Possibly because I see what happens when playing something similar to it now.

[quote]
You said you were making KoS, so you should have some trukks and bikes and stuff. Why aren't these guys covering the back door of the falcon?[/quote]

KoS is fast and by it's nature somewhat fragile. While on one hand I'm not worried about an assault of Harlequins, I generally can't hurt the Tanks anyway, and you can't "block" shots that hit your AV10 Vehicles or bikes that have small squad sizes and that wonderful LD7.

The problem with Mech Eldar is the fact that they can run off and nab objectives, and tank shock you into wonderful formations when things just don't go their way; or they want you off an objective. And the fact that unless you "get lucky" and down the tank, you're just hosed. Or maybe you haven't had the "fun" of playing Cleanse, or Secure and Control (with say, 4 tokens) vs. Mech Eldar.

[quote]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but even in 3rd edition KoS and tyranid swarms were pretty viable. [/quote]

I'm talking about 4th, not 3rd. Everyone bitches about how Marines and MEQ's are overplayed. Now non-MEQ troops benefit from cover greatly, and people bitch that no one will play Marines anymore. Now the biggest "non MEQ" armies, are either Godzilla, which focuses on tons of MC's with T6 and 3+ (or better) Saves, or Mech Eldar or Mech Tau, which are more about their vehicles and units with 3+ saves (generally) than they are about the rest of the army. Orks just arrived and are something that can make a strong non-MEQ style army, and there are posts on dakka about how nice it is to see a "horde army be viable". ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233054.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233054.page GMT 1/54 is resistant? You just called Falcons something that can shrug of all firepower. Three Leman Russes in cover can therefore shrug off all enemy firepower, and that's okay, because you think Imperial Guard deserve it. Great games designing.

[quote]I doubt you'll see people stop using Lootas.[/quote]
Why would people use Lootas? It's not like anyone will be using skimmers, their primary target.

[quote]They sure as hell seem to do fine last I saw. This coming UKGT is the first one where Mech Eldar can run around without worrying about Iron Warriors.[/quote]
Oh wow, what a painfully long period of success. One UK GT before they come crashing down to the bottom of the food chain. It must have been hard for you to endure.

[quote]Because having a game where my opponent does nothing but not engage and runs away until about the last turn when the specialists come out to get a VP advantage around when they will face little to no retaliation and then the tanks that can't be hurt run off to score isn't exactly a "fun game". [/quote]
To me that sounds much more interesting than most 40K games.

[quote]Which army is going to have a hard time neutralizing them? Necrons can keep them from shooting with just one glance that gets through. It's not hard to get a few glances off when your entire army can do it. Marines can get fast moving Meltas or deepstrikers, Chaos gets infiltrating Chosen, or deepstriking Combi-Melta termies, or Oblits. Eldar get Fire Dragons in Wave Serpents or Falcons, or Hawks. Dark Eldar will need help, unless they just mass Lances, one glance keeps a pie plate from flying at you. [/quote]
That's just so idiotic I don't even think you're being serious. Half of that stuff is unbelievable crap now [i]and/or[/i] in the fifth and certainly neutralise nothing at all.

[quote]
In one mission[/quote]
...out of a massive [i]three[/i].

[quote]
Calling Mech Eldar a "delicate scalpel" is what's ludicrous. You hide and turbo boost till you can come out late game and get ahead, or just score because your tanks are near impossible to destroy and can move 24 - 36" in a turn. [/quote]
Cry me a river. You're fine with 1/54 tanks and completely indestructible Monoliths but you whine because 210 point av12 vehicles are actually [b]fast[/b]. You seem traumatised by something.

[quote]
If cover is setup fairly, it sure as hell won't be. Boyz will still need a KFF[/quote]
And what a horrible price to pay that is. If you make conga lines and cover a measly three squads of Boyz with the KFF the price of the invulnerable save will be less than 1 point per model.

[quote]
All I know is that I read the rules and I'm generally happy about a lot of them. We'll see how this goes when the rules are released anyway, I'm not worried. [/quote]
The only rule that I think is an actual improvement is the clarification that ICs can join units before deployment. The rest of the stuff is just, sad. It's nothing but shifting of balance from one end to another in order to sell the type of armies and units noone had before.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233065.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233065.page GMT 1/54 is resistant? You just called Falcons something that can shrug of all firepower. Three Leman Russes in cover can therefore shrug off all enemy firepower, and that's okay, because you think Imperial Guard deserve it. Great games designing.[/quote]

Except you can neutralize it with Infiltrators/deepstrikers with Meltas, infiltrators with Power Fists. Hell just get up close with a few Meltas and away it goes.

Or you can get side shots (AV12) from the AV14 vehicles that are the ones that will sit in cover. You will need to move to neutralize them, rather than now which is "take lots of Lascannons, deploy, and kill them".

And they won't score (like Falcons do now), and they don't transport squads of specialists (who also score as of now). They deny VP's but that only matters in draws, unlike almost all the time like now.

You don't see the difference?

[quote]
Why would people use Lootas? It's not like anyone will be using skimmers, their primary target.[/quote]

Tau skimmers are still good, as are wave serpents. In fact the only [b]vehicle[/b] in the game that got easier to kill with the new rules are the dumb Holofield tanks.

[quote]
Oh wow, what a painfully long period of success. One UK GT before they come crashing down to the bottom of the food chain. It must have been hard for you to endure.[/quote]

I've been "enduring" it since the dex came out and I've had to face it. Not everyone played Iron Warriors vs. them. And it's not even a matter of not being able to beat them. I've beaten them at tournaments, it's just never a fun game even if you win. Mainly because if you win, you probably killed a tank and "got lucky".

You're talking about how unfun and stupid the game is going to be because of some other abusive list. You think the current abusive armies are fun to play against?

[quote]
To me that sounds much more interesting than most 40K games.[/quote]

Maybe you're playing the wrong kind of 40k then. Obviously the designers are looking to make that kind of list suck after seeing how it came to exist.

[quote]
That's just so idiotic I don't even think you're being serious. Half of that stuff is unbelievable crap now [i]and/or[/i] in the fifth and certainly neutralise nothing at all.[/quote]

How are lots of Meltas up close going to not kill an AV14 tank? Even in Cover, most units that take the Meltas will take multiple in a unit, so it's generally not that hard to get the kill.

Necrons can reliably put glances on it, that stops it from shooting. And even now we're talking about Leman Russes, the only tanks that are going to sit in 4+ Cover with AV14 at long range and lob pie plates. The other AV14 tanks won't work in that scenario and can be dealt with when they're used.

[quote][quote]
In one mission[/quote]
...out of a massive [i]three[/i].[/quote]

Except that the deployment types of the mission actually drastically change how the mission will be played, so it's more variable than that. But I do want there to be more missions. Besides, in the tournaments I've played in here in the US, generally they use special missions made up by GW or by the organizers (some even come from sites like this).

[quote]
Cry me a river. You're fine with 1/54 tanks and completely indestructible Monoliths but you whine because 210 point av12 vehicles are actually [b]fast[/b]. You seem traumatised by something.[/quote]

Except those tanks can be neutralized by the right weapons, or by the right units. So it's never going to be 1/54 to kill them, all the damn time, like with the current Holofield. And again, those tanks don't score, they don't hide VP's that are as crucial as they are now. And they don't transport specialists where you want them, when you want them, with little risk.

And Monoliths aren't going to be sitting in said cover most of the time (they're skimmers, they can't land in it). And you need to penetrate a Monolith now to reliably hurt it anyway. How is this going to be different?

And what makes you think that the Monolith won't have its rules changed when Necrons are redone?

[quote][quote]
If cover is setup fairly, it sure as hell won't be. Boyz will still need a KFF[/quote]
And what a horrible price to pay that is. If you make conga lines and cover a measly three squads of Boyz with the KFF the price of the invulnerable save will be less than 1 point per model.[/quote]

I'm not complaining about the KFF. I'm refuting the fact that you're saying "Cover will be everywhere you need it to be", which is just flat out untrue. You think all of a sudden all blocking LOS terrain is going to be gone from the game. Suddenly all non armored troops will be able to always get a great cover save no matter where they are, or where the objective they have to get to is (that their opponent can place no less).

[quote]
The only rule that I think is an actual improvement is the clarification that ICs can join units before deployment. The rest of the stuff is just, sad. It's nothing but shifting of balance from one end to another in order to sell the type of armies and units noone had before.[/quote]

Right, so because if you built up an army of exactly 1500 or 1750 points that was comprised of only the most broken and powerful combos so you can dominate at tournaments, then you're screwed and have to buy new armies if you want to keep using the most broken thing you can. If that's how you buy your armies, then yes, [b]every single rules change for your codex or the main rules are going to affect your purchases.[/b] That's what happens when you build to the absolute most competitive list you can and nothing else.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233082.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233082.page GMT LOS. It clearly says that any MODEL that has its base partially touched by the template is hurt.[/quote]
Correct. "In these cases hits are worked out as normal." AFAIK, you only have one target unit that you resolve hits against.

[quote]
And I'll be amazed to see a Konga Line of 30 Orks marching straight across a table. You will have to make a second or third row to deploy them, and since the "Squad" is in LOS, you can place the template in the center of this squad, and you don't even need to have the center hole over a model anymore, so you can set it up so you get a nice clump. And if it is this giant horde, spaced at max coherency, then the guys in the OTHER squads, are going to be at the other table edge based on deployment. [/quote]
200+ models across a 6'x1' plot: Six feet = 72", 1"base+2" separation = 24 models. 24x12" front to back = 288. If you have vehicles it will eat up some of these spots. Yeah I guess it'd be unfortunate for those 6 models wrapped around and placed behind the first row. Even placed to get max models, you'd get maybe 6 models under there, 4" separation+3x1" bases across.

[quote]Given that retarded powerful armies exist no matter what happens, what do you want me to say? If Orks get a retarded build like some current armies have, then that's what happens. I still don't think it will be the be-all end-all that some people do. Possibly because I see what happens when playing something similar to it now.[/quote]
It seemed like you felt justified in defending your position by saying "I wouldn't..." and now add "but others will." I'm not saying it (footsloggers) is wrong, but dude, you just tried to say that it's not that bad since you won't do it yourself.
[quote]
KoS is fast and by it's nature somewhat fragile. While on one hand I'm not worried about an assault of Harlequins, I generally can't hurt the Tanks anyway, and you can't "block" shots that hit your AV10 Vehicles or bikes that have small squad sizes and that wonderful LD7.[/quote]
The standard Tau tactic against Falcons is to keep the rear door pinned shut and keep the thing shaken. And we DO worry about the assault. Tau players are generally content with that. Don't wanna say this but...so should you. I'd feel more sympathetic if you played footsloggers, but KoS is similar to Mech Tau and we keep that rear door shut pretty nicely.

[quote]
I'm talking about 4th, not 3rd. Everyone bitches about how Marines and MEQ's are overplayed. Now non-MEQ troops benefit from cover greatly, and people bitch that no one will play Marines anymore. Now the biggest "non MEQ" armies, are either Godzilla, which focuses on tons of MC's with T6 and 3+ (or better) Saves, or Mech Eldar or Mech Tau, which are more about their vehicles and units with 3+ saves (generally) than they are about the rest of the army. Orks just arrived and are something that can make a strong non-MEQ style army, and there are posts on dakka about how nice it is to see a "horde army be viable". [/quote]
Nevermind. I read it incorrectly. I do agree here. If I played more games I would probably still enjoy playing against eldar/nidzilla than hurr spase mariernz.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233091.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233091.page GMT LOS. It clearly says that any MODEL that has its base partially touched by the template is hurt.[/quote]
Correct. "In these cases hits are worked out as normal." AFAIK, you only have one target unit that you resolve hits against.[/quote]

I guess we're reading it differently. I take it to read that the hits are worked out as normal, ie. you roll to wound, save, etc. There is no separate section for stating how your deal with your own models that are hit by the template (which is a possiblity given as an example in the rules). I'm just not seeing it as a restriction to a single squad as far as casualties go.

[quote]

200+ models across a 6'x1' plot: Six feet = 72", 1"base+2" separation = 24 models. 24x12" front to back = 288. If you have vehicles it will eat up some of these spots. Yeah I guess it'd be unfortunate for those 6 models wrapped around and placed behind the first row. Even placed to get max models, you'd get maybe 6 models under there, 4" separation+3x1" bases across.[/quote]

Vehicles, terrain placement, tons of stuff stop that. You deploy like that and you're not charging on turn 2. You won't even have a lot of models engaged to fight if you spread out that far.

I do not see that kind of deployment as even possible to get something into assault as a threat. And if there are multiple squads of this, then you can hit somewhere in the middle, but I'm reading the rules and nothing is stopping casualties coming from other units that are hit by the blasts.

[quote]
It seemed like you felt justified in defending your position by saying "I wouldn't..." and now add "but others will." I'm not saying it (footsloggers) is wrong, but dude, you just tried to say that it's not that bad since you won't do it yourself.[/quote]

I'm not sure how it came across, but my point is that this "horde Orks" style army isn't going to be as bad as people are making it out to be. It's not because I personally won't play it. I just don't see it as some kind of "auto-win" style army. I think that lots of templates and the mission types being laid out will very much deal with it.

Also look at the one deployment type, you get TWO troops and an HQ on the table and that's it. Everything else comes in from the long table edge. That's one mission that this army will fail at by its nature.

[quote]
The standard Tau tactic against Falcons is to keep the rear door pinned shut and keep the thing shaken. And we DO worry about the assault. Tau players are generally content with that. Don't wanna say this but...so should you. I'd feel more sympathetic if you played footsloggers, but KoS is similar to Mech Tau and we keep that rear door shut pretty nicely.[/quote]

I've played footsloggers (old edition), and KoS (army evolved), and I've played a number of games with the new rules using both kinds of armies (I have a lot of Orks).

Mech Eldar are a foil to Kult of Speed since generally if they can shoot our transports, we get stuck not doing a whole lot, and they can whittle down the lower numbers of Boyz in the list. And we still can't kill the tanks. Not being able to kill tanks is a problem in 4th Ed with Falcons because they can zoom 24" or more and score objectives, and they can drop off assaulters or Dragons which will give them a huge VP differential in the late game and you can't block the hatch for that sort of thing.

But my entire point isn't about dealing with Mech Eldar. The point is that having AV14 tanks in 4+ cover being very hard to kill with long range anti-tank (Lascannons) is not something you can compare to the Falcons which are already that unkillable.

The Falcons score.
The Falcons always have that kind of resilience.

The proposed AV14 tank does not score.
Its resilience can be negated by a number of different scenario's that are easily achievable, where as the falcon's generally can not.

[quote]
Nevermind. I read it incorrectly. I do agree here. If I played more games I would probably still enjoy playing against eldar/nidzilla than hurr spase mariernz.[/quote]

I'd rather face Marines (with my Xenos armies, or my own Marines) than Nidzilla or Eldar. Then again, I generally don't have to play against a ton of Marines as it is. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233102.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233102.page GMT gw's not understanding anything

force weapons just got nerfed any unit that is immune to instant death cannot be killed by a force weapon.... all you nids players can start partying you will rule the battle field from hear on out[/quote]

Because we all know that the only way to ever beat Tyranids is using Force Weapons. Against any army that doesn't have force weapons Nids auto-win.

Seriously? I'm having a great time laughing at all the knee-jerk reactions to changes that ultimately will have little affect on the game.

Ozymandias, King of Kings]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233104.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233104.page GMT [/quote]

I thought so too at first, but they actually did change the blast/ordnance rules. In the current ruleset, ordnance says something to the effect of "all models under the template are hit/partials." I say the "hits your own models" is an exception to the rule, and the new ordnance/blast rules will probably be the center of a few YMDC topics, but yeah I think we're reading it differently.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233118.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233118.page GMT [/quote]

I thought so too at first, but they actually did change the blast/ordnance rules. In the current ruleset, ordnance says something to the effect of "all models under the template are hit/partials." I say the "hits your own models" is an exception to the rule, and the new ordnance/blast rules will probably be the center of a few YMDC topics, but yeah I think we're reading it differently.[/quote]

To be honest, if your rules interpretation is correct, then yes the hordes will be more painful to deal with, but I'm almost positive that it's not limited to a single unit.

Though I don't want to get into a YMDC debate over these leaked rules, as it'd be kinda silly. But basing it on the fact that all partials hit, and you'll get multiple squads even if they set them up in lines, is the reasoning that these horde armies will be easier to deal with.

Also the whole thing with the one deployment setup with 2 Troops and 1 HQ max, and the table corner deployments, etc.

I just don't see it as dominating as some people do. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233126.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233126.page GMT VP denial? It's an interesting aspect of the game. [/quote]
No, not really. VP denial delays and avoids contact. It is inherently non-interactive. I find VP denial to be boring to play against. It's cowardly and uninteresting. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233170.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233170.page GMT VP denial? It's an interesting aspect of the game. [/quote]
No, not really. VP denial delays and avoids contact. It is inherently non-interactive. I find VP denial to be boring to play against. It's cowardly and uninteresting. [/quote]

The game is supposed to be about the engagement of the forces after all. Similarly, VP denial is non-conducive to simulationism. It's a concept created from game mechanics that is unrelated to the reality or story the game is supposed to portray. This means it breaks suspension of disbelief and makes the game less interesting to play. 40K is about creating an epic battle for our amusement, not about pushing pieces of plastic around on a table. That's just the road to the goal.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233184.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233184.page GMT VP sniping in warmachine is probably worse than VP denial.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233185.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233185.page GMT gw's not understanding anything

force weapons just got nerfed any unit that is immune to instant death cannot be killed by a force weapon.... all you nids players can start partying you will rule the battle field from hear on out[/quote]

Because we all know that the only way to ever beat Tyranids is using Force Weapons. Against any army that doesn't have force weapons Nids auto-win.

Seriously? I'm having a great time laughing at all the knee-jerk reactions to changes that ultimately will have little affect on the game.

Ozymandias, King of Kings[/quote]

I've seen this posted over and over so it must be addressed in a FAQ somewhere, but the Nid codex says specifically that Nids in synapse range are immune to instant death caused by weapons with a strength double the defenders toughness. It does not say they are immune to instant death [b]such as[/b] that caused by weapons that are double the defenders tougness. So if there isn't a FAQ to clear that up, Nids in synapse still die from force weapons. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233190.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233190.page GMT VP denial? It's an interesting aspect of the game. [/quote]
No, not really. VP denial delays and avoids contact. It is inherently non-interactive. I find VP denial to be boring to play against. It's cowardly and uninteresting. [/quote]

The game is supposed to be about the engagement of the forces after all. Similarly, VP denial is non-conducive to simulationism. It's a concept created from game mechanics that is unrelated to the reality or story the game is supposed to portray. This means it breaks suspension of disbelief and makes the game less interesting to play. 40K is about creating an epic battle for our amusement, not about pushing pieces of plastic around on a table. That's just the road to the goal.[/quote]

I know we are getting off topic with the whole VP denial thing, but lets face it VP denial is part of the game as the game is designed in 4th edition. I.E. it is what it is. I don't personally like it, but the designers didn't acount for it's abuse in 4th edition. I suspect there will still be some aspect VP denial abuse in 5th. It really comes down to difference of opinons of what constitutes "fair" play. I.E. one mans VP denial heartburn is another mans idea of great tactics. It's kind of like the ancient Cheese debate, it really comes down to a matter of opinion.

GG]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233194.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233194.page GMT VP Denial ?
VP Denial ?

I always thought the point of the game was to completely annihlate your opponents forces

It's not over untill your models are the only ones left on the board.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233195.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233195.page GMT VP Denial ?
VP Denial ?

I always thought the point of the game was to completely annihlate your opponents forces

It's not over untill your models are the only ones left on the board.

[/quote]

I played at the FLGS and that seemed to be their default way of playing. Which I suppose means they won't be overly affected by the Troops as scoring thing.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233209.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233209.page GMT
This is of course a very "Clausewitzean" philosophy and does not fit the modern world.

However, the concept that "I lost 1,000 troops but you lost 1,001 so I WIN!" is surely the heart and soul of the grim darkness of the far future.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233210.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233210.page GMT
I've seen this posted over and over so it must be addressed in a FAQ somewhere, but the Nid codex says specifically that Nids in synapse range are immune to instant death caused by weapons with a strength double the defenders toughness. It does not say they are immune to instant death [b]such as[/b] that caused by weapons that are double the defenders tougness. So if there isn't a FAQ to clear that up, Nids in synapse still die from force weapons. [/quote]

The rumored new rule is that Force Weapons now cause Instant Death. This is good as it doesn't require a FAQ to know how it works. I'm a big fan of not having multiple rules that all do essentially the same thing but with small, confusing differences.

Ozymandias, King of Kings]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233231.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233231.page GMT
First off, the rules for VPs in armies helps simulation-ism, not hinder it. Are most armies of the 41st Century made of Elite units? Or does anyone not bring troop choices anymore? Maybe the designers got sick of seeing armies with 2HQ 3Elite, 3 Heavy and 2 Troops. Heaven forbid an army be mostly comprised of _troops_.

And for you people whining about Running, christ almighty, does the concept of a Foot Army being viable scare you that much? Holy Hell! So a Black Templar Foot Slogging army is viable! Oh noes! Fleet is still special because it _allows_ you to do things that everyone else _can't_ do.

Seriously, 5th Edition is perhaps the best writing of the rules thus far. The _only_ issue here, is still the Line of Sight Rules, which while fantastic and amazing have tiny quirks in them, otherwise they're perfect, True LOS will help a lot better in these gaming circles than that Bullcrap area terrain before.

Vehicles while not the mobile forces of destruction, are back to being a survivable, thank god they wont be instantly annihilated against Necrons, and I can actually Transport a squad of marines somewhere and not have to wait two turns in order to use them if they get blown up.

So you people can keep crying wolf all you want, the games my group has played with these rules have _all_ been fun and interesting.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233236.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233236.page GMT

(hope you got your asbestos suit on...) ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233245.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233245.page GMT
The thing is, that that army should be as likely to win as an army of 1 HQ and 6 Troops choices. Not to mention that the power of troops choices varies from army to army. It's a hamfisted, 'my way is the only right way to have fun' way of game design, not to mention a bad one. That's what people are complaining about.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233246.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233246.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233256.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233256.page GMT
The thing is, that that army should be as likely to win as an army of 1 HQ and 6 Troops choices. Not to mention that the power of troops choices varies from army to army. It's a hamfisted, 'my way is the only right way to have fun' way of game design, not to mention a bad one. That's what people are complaining about.

[/quote]

Yep. As I've said. I've never had a problem playing against themed armies. If playing against a Blood Axe themed Ork army with three units of Kommandos or a Adeptus Mechanicus themed Guard army with three Tech-Priests is something you're unable to deal with, you should look for another game.

Troops make sense in some lists, they don't in others. It's extremely rude for you to tell me that I shouldn't be able to field my army in the way that the game rules clearly says I can. Look! That Eldar player is fielding three units of Shining Spears in their Saim Hain army! Quick, burn them at the stake!

"First off, the rules for VPs in armies helps simulation-ism, not hinder it. Are most armies of the 41st Century made of Elite units?"

Are most armies in the 41st Millennium made of Space Marines?

No?

Simple solution, no Space Marine units ever count as scoring. Problem solved.

I'm sure no one would object. After all, it's identical to the logic you used to explain the Troops scoring thing. It should also help 'simulationism' in your mind that if the entire Ultramarines 1st Company and one Gretchin are standing on a rock, clearly it's the Gretchin that controls the objective. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233260.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233260.page GMT
Cool! It's a great idea.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233264.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233264.page GMT
Cool! It's a great idea.
[/quote]

Lets just get rid of space marines altogether. Only snot nosed newbies use 'em anyhow.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233266.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233266.page GMT
You should see people who complain about people not taking enough troops. Oh wait.

[quote=strange_eric]First off, the rules for VPs in armies helps simulation-ism, not hinder it. Are most armies of the 41st Century made of Elite units? Or does anyone not bring troop choices anymore? Maybe the designers got sick of seeing armies with 2HQ 3Elite, 3 Heavy and 2 Troops. Heaven forbid an army be mostly comprised of _troops_.[/quote]

Maybe I want to field a commando unit, you ever think of that? Maybe the troop quality in the game is radically different depending on what army you play, you ever think of that? Maybe people don't have the time or money to assemble and paint 100 guys, you ever think of that? Of course not, your one of those nitwits who think sitting troops 12" apart and firing on each other for 6 turns is not only interesting, but the only way the game should be played.

[quote=strange_eric]And for you people whining about Running, christ almighty, does the concept of a Foot Army being viable scare you that much? Holy Hell! So a Black Templar Foot Slogging army is viable! Oh noes! Fleet is still special because it _allows_ you to do things that everyone else _can't_ do.[/quote]

Its not like there is already a tier 1 (if you don't know what that means walk away now) list of undercosted footslogging models already. (orks) So of course, the fact that it can almost be guaranteed to be in CC by turn 2 is irrelevant right?

[quote=strange_eric]Seriously, 5th Edition is perhaps the best writing of the rules thus far. The _only_ issue here, is still the Line of Sight Rules, which while fantastic and amazing have tiny quirks in them, otherwise they're perfect, True LOS will help a lot better in these gaming circles than that Bullcrap area terrain before.[/quote]

Are you sure you don't work for GW's PR department? I wonder what adjectives you would use to describe well written and defined rules.

[quote=strange_eric]Vehicles while not the mobile forces of destruction, are back to being a survivable, thank god they wont be instantly annihilated against Necrons, and I can actually Transport a squad of marines somewhere and not have to wait two turns in order to use them if they get blown up.[/quote]

Mobile forces of destruction, funny. And Necrons are the reason that ground based vehicles were unplayable. (lol)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233275.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233275.page GMT Its not like there is already a tier 1 (if you don't know what that means walk away now) list of undercosted footslogging models already. (orks) So of course, the fact that it can almost be guaranteed to be in CC by turn 2 is irrelevant right?
[/quote]

d6" additional movement is hardly [i]guarenteed[/i] to help footsloggers cross an additional 12" by round 2.

Additonally Orks are not undercosted. They can't shoot straight and have crap armor saves, while costing about as much as IG infanrty, who are comparable. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233282.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233282.page GMT IG have similar enough statlines/weapons to be both worth 6 pts? Orks are tougher, (T:4) stronger, (S:4 with Choppa) hit harder, (A;2)
have a better weapon, and are almost always fearless. IG don't have a single thing that can compete with that. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233289.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233289.page GMT Movement: Comparable, leaving out their better transport options, and access to fleet.
WS: Orks are better.
BS: Orks are worse, but it's made up for by the fact that they fire 18" S4 guns. Run the numbers and you'll find they are comparable to lasguns.
S: Furious charge. Thank you!
T: T4 means that against AP 6 and lower guns the orks are still basically as survivable as gaurd. Against AP- guns they are tougher.
W:Yup, equal, except on the Nob.
I: Lower, but furious charge makes this irrelevant most of the time.
A: Better, much better.
LD: Far better as long as you have numbers.

Now, other factors. Shootas are assault, making orks more flexible tactically, and outrange gaurd guns. Squad upgrades for orks include a power claw nob, a CC monster who can take down anything in the game with a bit of luck and some back up. Gaurd don't have anything comparable. The only area gaurd win out in is specials, and those are over costed. Orks are better than gaurdsmen. Faster, as shooty if not better, far, far tougher in hand to hand, as survivable and with more morale and better options.
Add in the fact that the rest of the options are really good too, and you have a recipie for guard whooping.

Though I think that IG are overcosted, rather than orks being undercosted really.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233291.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233291.page GMT Da Boss said.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233292.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233292.page GMT I said that Orks were NOT undercosted.
I believe that.

Points values are not decided by a solid formula in 40K.
Troops are priced relative to other models in the army, and other army factors.

Orks will die crossing the board, to make use of their CC abilities. You will need lots of them, and they are priced accordingly.

Think of them as Gaunts who can't shoot effectively or use fleet of foot.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233309.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233309.page GMT I agree that in 4th edition they are not overcosted. But come 5th, they are going to be ridiculous.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233314.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233314.page GMT str 6 or lower) on the move then the game is going to be skewed in favor of infantry big time. Templates hitting everyone they touch will put a few nice dents in horde armies, and if the designers have half a brain then the run rule won't apply to troops with jump packs. It is worrisome to think that some of these rules might make it unchanged into the 5th Ed Book.

It seems obvious from people's reactions on the board that these new changes won't really improve the game but rather skew it in a different direction. I really like a lot of the rules proposed, but they need to be refined big time. If GW won't do this, then the fans will have to do it.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233324.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233324.page GMT
I've seen this posted over and over so it must be addressed in a FAQ somewhere, but the Nid codex says specifically that Nids in synapse range are immune to instant death caused by weapons with a strength double the defenders toughness. It does not say they are immune to instant death [b]such as[/b] that caused by weapons that are double the defenders tougness. So if there isn't a FAQ to clear that up, Nids in synapse still die from force weapons. [/quote]

The rumored new rule is that Force Weapons now cause Instant Death. This is good as it doesn't require a FAQ to know how it works. I'm a big fan of not having multiple rules that all do essentially the same thing but with small, confusing differences.

Ozymandias, King of Kings[/quote]

I don't think I can make this any clearer than I did the first time, but what I said is the Tyranid Codex doesn't say "Tyranids in Synapse are Immune to Instant Death, period"- it says they are immune to instant death caused by being wounded by a weapon with Strength double their toughness. It does not have the [b]such as[/b] qualifier. It seems that RAW as well as RAI do not prevent Nids from dying from Force Weapons in 5e, just as they didn't in 4e. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233334.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233334.page GMT I don't think I can make this any clearer than I did the first time, but what I said is the Tyranid Codex doesn't say "Tyranids in Synapse are Immune to Instant Death, period"- it says they are immune to instant death caused by being wounded by a weapon with Strength double their toughness. It does not have the [b]such as[/b] qualifier. It seems that RAW as well as RAI do not prevent Nids from dying from Force Weapons in 5e, just as they didn't in 4e. [/quote]

Tyranid FAQ overrules that though. They're immune to any and all 'Instant Death' effects.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233336.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233336.page GMT
Once nice clarification is the whole 4th ed mess of "models carrying rapid fire weapons cannot shoot and assault".

Now its specifically says "Models that wish to assault into close combat in the Assault phase may not shoot with rapid fire weapons in the Shooting phase." [pg 26]

No more inane debate about whether the newer marines/CSM's can choose to fire their pistol and charge.

EDIT: Hmmm speaking of which, no more pistol double-tap. Pistols are "effectively assault 1"]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233337.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233337.page GMT
4+ Cover
Fortune
Holofield
Falcon
???
Profit
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233341.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233341.page GMT I don't think I can make this any clearer than I did the first time, but what I said is the Tyranid Codex doesn't say "Tyranids in Synapse are Immune to Instant Death, period"- it says they are immune to instant death caused by being wounded by a weapon with Strength double their toughness. It does not have the [b]such as[/b] qualifier. It seems that RAW as well as RAI do not prevent Nids from dying from Force Weapons in 5e, just as they didn't in 4e. [/quote]

Tyranid FAQ overrules that though. They're immune to any and all 'Instant Death' effects.[/quote]

Thanks, that's precisely what I was asking.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233342.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233342.page GMT The Falcons always have that kind of resilience. [/quote]
No, the Falcons don't have that resilience on turn one. Additionally, when Falcons suffer the immobilised result they lose their resilience. They are easier to destroy than the 4+/3+ cover AV14 tanks of 5th ed.

[quote]I'm not complaining about the KFF. I'm refuting the fact that you're saying "Cover will be everywhere you need it to be", which is just flat out untrue[/quote]
Not untrue at all. If you use a couple squads of Lootas you can find enough cover for them on your deployment zone, for some free armour saves. The rest of the troops have KFF.

[quote]And you need to penetrate a Monolith now to reliably hurt it anyway. How is this going to be different? [/quote]
Because Meltaguns can't penetrate it anymore, and because actual penetrating hits need 5+ to kill it?

[quote]I just don't see it as dominating as some people do.[/quote]
You're dodging one issue constantly. What happens in most games when Orks take 6 units of Boyz, one HQ and one unit of Elites? The army is worth 11KP total. The normal Eldar armies that people play will be worth 18KP or even 20KP. It's arguable if the Eldar have any chance of actually avoid getting wiped off from the table, but my point is that even if they do manage to make an actual fight out of the game, they will simply lose because of the KP system.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233348.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233348.page GMT gw's not understanding anything

force weapons just got nerfed any unit that is immune to instant death cannot be killed by a force weapon.... all you nids players can start partying you will rule the battle field from hear on out[/quote]

Because we all know that the only way to ever beat Tyranids is using Force Weapons. Against any army that doesn't have force weapons Nids auto-win.

Seriously? I'm having a great time laughing at all the knee-jerk reactions to changes that ultimately will have little affect on the game.

Ozymandias, King of Kings[/quote]

I've seen this posted over and over so it must be addressed in a FAQ somewhere, but the Nid codex says specifically that Nids in synapse range are immune to instant death caused by weapons with a strength double the defenders toughness. It does not say they are immune to instant death [b]such as[/b] that caused by weapons that are double the defenders tougness. So if there isn't a FAQ to clear that up, Nids in synapse still die from force weapons. [/quote]

obviously you didnt read.. the new rules will state that a model that is immune to instant death (as nids are when they are in syanapse range) are immune to being killed by force weapons.. end of statement

now what part of that dont you comprehend? last time i checked fexes are their own synapse thus they cannot be killed by force weapons as the new leak is currently stating

so before you jump all in my face saying the faq says this and the faq says that which im not denying mind you im saying the new rules will nerf force weapons.. cant make it any clear if it was it would be invisible]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233352.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233352.page GMT Biker Warboss 140

6x30 Slugga Boy mobs with Power claw nobs (who needs rokkits when you'll be running all day anyway?)
215 each, 1290 total.
With your remaining 70 points you could sprinkle in something like a kannon battery for some extra antitank (though you probably won't need it).
At 1500, I can think of a lot of armies that are going to struggle to deal with that kind of list. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233358.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233358.page GMT Especially as if the Orks kill 90% of the enemy army, and lose 90% of their own army in the process, they get a 20-0 victory.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233361.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233361.page GMT And the thing about that list is that it is BORING.
Whatever anyone says about the game being all about troops, that's not the whole story. Elites, HQ, Fast Attack and Heavy Support spice things up and make them interesting. I would much prefer a ruleset that made them all useable rather than encouraging Troops spam.
And I'm someone who builds his armies around troops choices btw.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233368.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233368.page GMT
4+ Cover
Fortune
Holofield
Falcon
???
Profit
[/quote]

Yep. They won't be as godly as they are now, but my Falcons will still see good use in 5th ed. Eldar isn't nearly as badly hurt by the skimmer changes as Tau is.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233379.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233379.page GMT Da Boss]6x30 Slugga Boy mobs with Power claw nobs[/quote]
First, they got to make 180 Orks! ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233388.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233388.page GMT Da Boss]And the thing about that list is that it is BORING.[/quote]
Welcome to Jervishammer 40,000. Am I the only one getting the impression that Jervis' idea of a good tactical game of 40k is 2 identical 10-man tactical squads running around shooting each other with bolters all day?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233390.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233390.page GMT GW pulls everything but Tac squads armed with Bolters from the game, I'll agree with you.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233391.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233391.page GMT IG, Grots, Boyz, Gaunts).

They rarely have fun moving all those models.
They can't get them all into hand to hand.
They die horribly to AOEs
They take forever and a day to build and paint
They usually give up on them pretty quickly.

Will people do it ? Yes.

Is it something I will lose sleep over ? No.

Will Orks specifically be btter in 5th Edition ? I don't know, but I sure hope so. They haven't been top tier, anywhere around here, in a long time.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233392.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233392.page GMT GW pulls everything but Tac squads armed with Bolters from the game, I'll agree with you.[/quote]
JohnHwang, you were not put on this earth to agree with me.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233401.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233401.page GMT
Deepstriking vehicles count as having moved 12"... Deepstriking landspeeders become an option again.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233421.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233421.page GMT
4+ Cover
Fortune
Holofield
Falcon
???
Profit
[/quote]

Yep. They won't be as godly as they are now, but my Falcons will still see good use in 5th ed. Eldar isn't nearly as badly hurt by the skimmer changes as Tau is.[/quote]

Au contraire, Tau vehicles are improved by the new rules.

Sensor spines let you go in cover without penalty.
Disruptor pod gives you a 5+ cover save in the open, at longer ranges.
Target lock lets you move and shoot as a Fast vehicle. (There aren't any Tau vehicles with more than 2 weapons anyway.)

The Piranha is probably a bit worse off.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233427.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233427.page GMT
Au contraire, Tau vehicles are improved by the new rules.

Sensor spines let you go in cover without penalty.
Disruptor pod gives you a 5+ cover save in the open, at longer ranges.
Target lock lets you move and shoot as a Fast vehicle. (There aren't any Tau vehicles with more than 2 weapons anyway.)

The Piranha is probably a bit worse off.[/quote]

Actually I think they've gotten worse to be honest. Sensor spines and the disruptor pod haven't gotten better, but are more useful because the skimmer moving fast rule is now worse than getting a hull down result rather than the other way around. Before these bits of wargear weren't needed because you could just get their bonuses by moving over 6". Now you're better off hiding behind cover so you get a better cover save and so you can fire your secondary hammerhead weapons (I'm not sure what you mean about Tau vehicles not having more than two weapons. Hammerheads certainly have two or more S5+ weapons and will only be able to fire one of them moving fast thanks to the S4 defensive weapon cut off). So they've gone from mobile firepower to a pillbox like all other tanks are now.

Not to mention your submunitions scatter now. That hurts since it was pretty simple to make it BS5.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233430.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233430.page GMT
Au contraire, Tau vehicles are improved by the new rules.

Sensor spines let you go in cover without penalty.
Disruptor pod gives you a 5+ cover save in the open, at longer ranges.
Target lock lets you move and shoot as a Fast vehicle. (There aren't any Tau vehicles with more than 2 weapons anyway.)

The Piranha is probably a bit worse off.[/quote]

Actually I think they've gotten worse to be honest. Sensor spines and the disruptor pod haven't gotten better, but are more useful because the skimmer moving fast rule is now worse than getting a hull down result rather than the other way around. Before these bits of wargear weren't needed because you could just get their bonuses by moving over 6". Now you're better off hiding behind cover so you get a better cover save and so you can fire your secondary hammerhead weapons (I'm not sure what you mean about Tau vehicles not having more than two weapons. Hammerheads certainly have two or more S5+ weapons and will only be able to fire one of them moving fast thanks to the S4 defensive weapon cut off). So they've gone from mobile firepower to a pillbox like all other tanks are now.

Not to mention your submunitions scatter now. That hurts since it was pretty simple to make it BS5.[/quote]

Those burst cannons scare my guardians when they're following up a rail cannon blast and they're coming in at BS5 w/ no conceal save from markerlights. It's literally the only time that they actually been killed to a man from shooting. I can imagine the wtf look on my face when it happened.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233431.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233431.page GMT
So, I think everyone will start to see 3 Monolith Necron armies. They actually improved one of the most unkillable, lowest costed tanks in the game. You can't even kill it now on glances? Did every necron player dance a jig when they saw that? My pie plate hits everything it touches now? You just have to pump warriors into bigger units, to accept the charges of those big foot-slogging armies. Then teleport with your Lord, WBB you're guys back up, and bring cheer and happiness to your opponent by delivering pie for everyone. Well, pie plates anyway.

Man, and monoliths don't even have to be stationary pillboxes. If anyone can PM me with practice games with or against Necrons, I would enjoy knowing how they play with these rules.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233432.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233432.page GMT Disruptor pod gives you a 5+ cover save in the open, at longer ranges.
Target lock lets you move and shoot as a Fast vehicle. (There aren't any Tau vehicles with more than 2 weapons anyway.)[/quote]

Or you can sit in 4+ cover, use your Landing Gear to land, and shoot your Railgun and other gusn all game.

And why are people sitting Falcons in cover? Fire Prisms in cover people! Holo-Fields + 4+ cover!!!

Edit: HBMC using my account... :-)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233439.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233439.page GMT Disruptor pod gives you a 5+ cover save in the open, at longer ranges.
Target lock lets you move and shoot as a Fast vehicle. (There aren't any Tau vehicles with more than 2 weapons anyway.)[/quote]

Or you can sit in 4+ cover, use your Landing Gear to land, and shoot your Railgun and other gusn all game.

And why are people sitting Falcons in cover? Fire Prisms in cover people! Holo-Fields + 4+ cover!!!

Edit: HBMC using my account... :-)[/quote]

Actually the landing gear is no longer a need wargear item. Skimmers don't appear to allow you to shoot under them anymore (goodbye Fish of Fury. I never used you, but you meant Tau could win at a competitive level so I'll miss you all the same), and you don't die on immobilised results for moving under 6" so being landed is fairly moot.

The point is we don't want to sit back behind cover. We want to run forward and dakk people in the face with our short ranged burst cannons rather than hope they'll wander into range. We buy our tanks so we get some mobile firepower rather a Broadside with an armour value.

I do hope they don't let you Fortune vehicles. Otherwise a Hellhound is going to be as good at killing Eldar Vehicles behind cover as a lascannon.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233466.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233466.page GMT
I was thinking of using SMS rather than twin Burst. Extra range and no LOS requirement.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233494.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233494.page GMT
So, I think everyone will start to see 3 Monolith Necron armies. They actually improved one of the most unkillable, lowest costed tanks in the game. You can't even kill it now on glances? Did every necron player dance a jig when they saw that? My pie plate hits everything it touches now? You just have to pump warriors into bigger units, to accept the charges of those big foot-slogging armies. Then teleport with your Lord, WBB you're guys back up, and bring cheer and happiness to your opponent by delivering pie for everyone. Well, pie plates anyway.

Man, and monoliths don't even have to be stationary pillboxes. If anyone can PM me with practice games with or against Necrons, I would enjoy knowing how they play with these rules.[/quote]

True, but only for the time-being. The Necron codex is a 3rd edition, and the whole game is being re-balanced. I think necrons will balance logically with the 5th edition core ruleset. they might even get a cover save for 'living metal'. Whatever. Generally speaking, I like the direction the game is taking. I think it'll work out very well for the games and crons once Necrons get their 5th edition dex.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233521.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233521.page GMT Da Boss]A fairly gimpy ork army at 1500 for an annihalation game-
Biker Warboss 140

6x30 Slugga Boy mobs with Power claw nobs (who needs rokkits when you'll be running all day anyway?)
215 each, 1290 total.
With your remaining 70 points you could sprinkle in something like a kannon battery for some extra antitank (though you probably won't need it).
At 1500, I can think of a lot of armies that are going to struggle to deal with that kind of list. [/quote]

Nah. It's definitely a competitive build, but it does down fast to templates and armaments of basic infantry. I'd say it's metagame changer (this is a good thing). Once the metagame changes away from anti-MEq to anti-horde, it'll be manageable--as well as fun for both players IMHO.

A classic BA build with all assaulters, a large DC, and Lord Dante HQ will give it a good game. 4 assault squads, lord dante, and a 10 man DC in 1500 is possible and looks like an excellent match/fun game for it, as just one example.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233532.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233532.page GMT PK Nobz does not make an uber list.

Oh sure, it's great in Total Annihilation, but then you roll up the Dawn of War deployment setup, or the table quarter deployment setup, and you're essentially hosed.

With literally Zero shooting and no cover saves, and that many models you're looking at 3 Whirlwinds in plain line of Sight having a field day. 3 Railheads, would work wonders, just about everything would.

Even Eldar, using things like Dire avengers on foot could have a field day. That Fleet move where you can charge is once per game for the Boyz, and using multiple units of Avengers (in Serpents even) with Blade Storm, Guide and Doom, could eliminate squads. A Fire Prism could do wonders against them, while staying out of being charged.

Yes, in the straight up kill points, against a number of armies without the tools to take it down (templates), that list is good.

And then it will meet foils, even Mech Tau in their new 5th ed lists would go buck wild on those Boyz. And I'd love to see someone move that many models, twice per turn, while maintaining max coherency to avoid template death, actually finish a game in 2 to 2.5 hours.

And even in the situations where everything works great and the front mobs consistently run 5 or 6 inches and then get a high fleet roll to actually GET that 2nd turn charge, there are counters, and mobile armies can get away.

Yes, your armies that are made up of a few really hard to kill units, that almost always exist outside of "Troops" with a few token "high damage, throw away" squads are going to fail in 5th Ed. Maybe the Designers saw players making lists based on these setups and decided that wasn't how they wanted 40k to be played?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233560.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233560.page GMT
4+ Cover
Fortune
Holofield
Falcon
???
Profit
[/quote]

Yep. They won't be as godly as they are now, but my Falcons will still see good use in 5th ed. Eldar isn't nearly as badly hurt by the skimmer changes as Tau is.[/quote]

Au contraire, Tau vehicles are improved by the new rules.

Sensor spines let you go in cover without penalty.
Disruptor pod gives you a 5+ cover save in the open, at longer ranges.
Target lock lets you move and shoot as a Fast vehicle. (There aren't any Tau vehicles with more than 2 weapons anyway.)

The Piranha is probably a bit worse off.[/quote]

Great, so now my 180 point hammerheads and 120 point devilfishes just became 10 points more expensive each. Where the hell am I supposed to find 50 points. Its pretty tight in there as it is. Not to mention I've gone from 12" of movement and still shoot all my guns to only 6" of movement. If you think our tanks don't need to shoot all its guns every turn, clearly you don't play Tau. I'll admit we are not as bad off as other armies, but this is still a serious blow to a army list design that HAS to get it done in the shooting phase. We can't reliably use the assault phase to do our killing like a lot of other armies.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233598.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233598.page GMT
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233621.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233621.page GMT
Now, Orks will simply become the new MEQ, meaning that every army will simply need to be able to deal with 120+ boyz. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233629.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233629.page GMT MEQ, meaning that every army will simply need to be able to deal with 120+ boyz. [/quote]

I think if an army can deal with 120+ boyz with a variety of armour support they can handle pretty much anything.

Edit: which of course I suppose is exactly what you just said .]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233633.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233633.page GMT
Now, Orks will simply become the new MEQ, meaning that every army will simply need to be able to deal with 120+ boyz. [/quote]

Well the question is how do you go forward with the new run rules. Do you go Shootas, and run turn 1, and just shoot a lot in turn 2 forward? Or do you go mass sluggas (yay my old 3rd Ed Codex armies are back) and run every turn till you can Waaagh?

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233661.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233661.page GMT
What's interesting is that many of the sub par units such as burna boys and meganobs have been given a boost.

I think I'm going to stop thinking about this in abstract and go playtest a few games with what we have.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233663.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233663.page GMT
Now, Orks will simply become the new MEQ, meaning that every army will simply need to be able to deal with 120+ boyz. [/quote]

Well the question is how do you go forward with the new run rules. Do you go Shootas, and run turn 1, and just shoot a lot in turn 2 forward? Or do you go mass sluggas (yay my old 3rd Ed Codex armies are back) and run every turn till you can Waaagh?

[/quote]

I can't imagine taking more than 2 mobs of shootas. Running gives you a good chance of a turn 2 assault, and virtually garantees turn 3. Shootas will be useful, however, for dealing with enemy hordes. Shootas are the best anti-slugga unit, after all. Since you can't shoot when charging into an assault, I'd say sluggas will be better on the whole than shootas.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233679.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233679.page GMT
Great, so now my 180 point hammerheads and 120 point devilfishes just became 10 points more expensive each.
[/quote]

There are always going to be winners and losers. 10 points per vehicle isn't going to decide the game by itself.

[quote=Jayden63]
Where the hell am I supposed to find 50 points. Its pretty tight in there as it is. [/quote]

You'll have to find 50 points by taking something else out of the list. Those vehicle upgrades will be pretty much compulsory because they are too good to pass up.

[quote=Jayden63]
Not to mention I've gone from 12" of movement and still shoot all my guns to only 6" of movement. If you think our tanks don't need to shoot all its guns every turn, clearly you don't play Tau. I'll admit we are not as bad off as other armies, but this is still a serious blow to a army list design that HAS to get it done in the shooting phase. We can't reliably use the assault phase to do our killing like a lot of other armies.[/quote]

My guess is the benefits of being hit less because of cover or obscurement will outweigh the problem of being glanced all the time as an SMF and getting stunned so you can't shoot anything.

The worst that can happen is you move over 6 inches and lose the shooting from one burst cannon from your Hammerhead. That's three shots at a range of 18 inches. One FW squad will put out 12 shots to 30 inches, and if you move it into RF range it is going to rain death on a Ork unit.

Look at how much more important markerlights are with the revised cover rules. If you don't use Pathfinders or Sniper Drones now, I think they are definitely worht looking at.

So I haven't played the new rules and it's "theoryhams" but I really don't see these changes as being the end of all things.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233785.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233785.page GMT
If this has already been covered, I apologize for wasting everyone's time. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233793.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233793.page GMT GW pulls everything but Tac squads armed with Bolters from the game, I'll agree with you.[/quote]
JohnHwang, you were not put on this earth to agree with me.[/quote]

HA!

I hear you there!

I'm still trying to figure out who is the Genestealer Patriarch and who are the Tyranids that he's calling in.

Toss up right now between JohnHwang, Nurglitch, Toredor, Stelek and Ozymandias...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233797.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233797.page GMT

But if Abby and I ever do agree, duck and cover cause the bomb's about to go off.

Ozymandias, King of Kings]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233834.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233834.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233940.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/233940.page GMT init 1 when assaulting into cover)? ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234394.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234394.page GMT
If you lose a guy with grenades, so that the number of models in the unit depicted with grenades drops to lower than majority, they lose their grenades. But if you then lose another guy who doesn't have grenades, the unit gets its grenades back.

I love it!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234411.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234411.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234423.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234423.page GMT IC with grenades joins a unit without. I've encountered some discussions as to whether the squad benefits from the grenades as the wording in 4th (IIRC) was ambiguous.

The Eldar Codex says the Shadowseer's entire squad counts as having plasma grenades, so its not an issue.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234428.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234428.page GMT IC with grenades joins a unit without. I've encountered some discussions as to whether the squad benefits from the grenades as the wording in 4th (IIRC) was ambiguous.

The Eldar Codex says the Shadowseer's entire squad counts as having plasma grenades, so its not an issue.[/quote]

GW will need to phrase the rule carefully and unambiguously or there will be trouble.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234448.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234448.page GMT GW will need to phrase the rule carefully and unambiguously or there will be trouble.[/quote]
Hahaha. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234473.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234473.page GMT
So essentially, all Tau vehicle upgrades are nearly mandatory now. I suppose I could drop the multi-tracker and just use the SMS from behind/in cover. Doesn't sound like the game I enjoy now where I move my troops around and actually capture objectives or hop out to fire on a partial unit. Just sounds like gun line guard with a +1 save.

Screens with FCW or Kroot for crisis suit spam. Virtually mandatory 220+ points for a full Pathfinder squad to remove cover saves or ameliorate bad deep strike rolls. I'm certainly not going to come on my opponent's board edge with them.

No thanks. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234492.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234492.page GMT
Yes, my mistake. It is 6 months since I cracked open the Tau codex.

Still, the point remains. The new tank rules are arguably pretty favourable to Tau tanks though they do become more expensive.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234633.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234633.page GMT
Intermixed units (i.e., two units essentially occupying the same space).. can both units shoot and be shot? Even though most models would need to be shooting through most of the space between models of another squad? Or not? Making them un-shootable as they march across the field?

New rending rules are on the same page as new sniper rifle rules.. the latter of which includes rending. How does that work against sniping vehicles, when AP is still 2d6? Either die coming up a 6 invokes the +D3? Two 6's = +2D3? Or any combined roll of 6+??

Ah well.

Apologies if these have been mentioned already.. it's a lot of posts to slog through. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234910.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234910.page GMT 2D6, and it specifically included rending (atleast in the copy i've seen).

However intermixed squad is an interesting rules question. Assuming the eye level and target of both units is identicle: I think geometricaly this would cause one units LOS to be blocked by the leading edge of another, while models making up that leading edge can shoot and be shot. Probably some outlier of the non-leading unit could draw LOS as well (or shoot another target perhaps).

You could argue that there's the possiblity of precise placement such that the leading edges of both units are exact and those models could both shoot and be shot, but the precision required is beyond the scope of a wargame IMHO. Even ignoring that, LOS for intermixed units will take some measuring.

Anyone more mathmaticaly inclined is welcome to interject.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234943.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234943.page GMT GW would be well advised to make a rule against it.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234957.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/234957.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235010.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235010.page GMT GW never addressed the "can't assault within 1" of a unit that you are not in combat with" rule. If someone wants to go crazy, the unassaultable unit configurations still there.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235300.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235300.page GMT Or even better-
"Bikes all now get a 3+ cover save for their turbo-boost. So the psy-cannon thing is out the window. "
If that holds up, every Waaagh! will need the supreme cover of a unit of nob bikers with painboy roaring down the field. 3+ cover, 4+ FNP will hold up to the round or so it takes them to get into close combat.[/quote]

Yes because the 3+/4+ save they will get is SOOO much better then the 4+/4+ they have now.

Mind you it is better

But cover save is actually worse then and invunerable save. Just ask any Tau player. Had one use marker lights to remove the cover save from my Nob bikers then light them up with railguns. Ouch three dead nob bikes.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235523.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235523.page GMT init 1 when assaulting into cover)? [/quote]

I notice that it made grenades useless for orcs. We go from strike last without them to strike last with them. WOO HOO! ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235524.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235524.page GMT GW is taking any player skill-based rules out of the game.

First, Guess range weapons went. Now it's the kill zone going away. It was a mark of player skill to be able to set up a charge or shot to get the best result. It was the equivalent of getting a flank or rear charge in Fantasy.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235552.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235552.page GMT GW is taking any player skill-based rules out of the game.

First, Guess range weapons went. Now it's the kill zone going away. It was a mark of player skill to be able to set up a charge or shot to get the best result. It was the equivalent of getting a flank or rear charge in Fantasy.[/quote]

Guess range weapons went somewhere ?

That's the first I've heard of it.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235556.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235556.page GMT GW is taking any player skill-based rules out of the game.

First, Guess range weapons went. Now it's the kill zone going away. It was a mark of player skill to be able to set up a charge or shot to get the best result. It was the equivalent of getting a flank or rear charge in Fantasy.[/quote]

Guess range weapons went somewhere ?

That's the first I've heard of it.[/quote]

Yep, in the transition to 3rd to 4th it just became an increased chance of scattering further.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235570.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235570.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235584.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235584.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235592.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235592.page GMT ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235605.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235605.page GMT d6 and don't require a to hit roll.....

Vanilla change for me. I liked guessing, it was fun, but like IntoTheRain said it wasn't really guessing once you got good at it.

The new way should be faster, and alot better for people who never got the knack of guessing range.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235614.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235614.page GMT d6 and don't require a to hit roll.....

Vanilla change for me. I liked guessing, it was fun, but like IntoTheRain said it wasn't really guessing once you got good at it.

The new way should be faster, and alot better for people who never got the knack of guessing range.

[/quote]

Yep. I prefer the new way. I want to test my tactical skills, not my ability to estimate distances using an archaic measuring system.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235631.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235631.page GMT 40K, but I've had moments where I've laughed soo hard soda shot out of my nose watching people guessing distances in centimeters, when they are used to inches, while using Nova Cannons in Battlefleet Gothic]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235634.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235634.page GMT d6 and don't require a to hit roll.....

Vanilla change for me. I liked guessing, it was fun, but like IntoTheRain said it wasn't really guessing once you got good at it.

The new way should be faster, and alot better for people who never got the knack of guessing range.

[/quote]

Yep. I prefer the new way. I want to test my tactical skills, not my ability to estimate distances using an archaic measuring system.[/quote]

It's been a great while but I distinctly recall a player in our local gaming group who was pathetic at judging guess distances. Well, we all decided to play in a tournament at the local game shop and later in the day I was told he was cheating with guess weapons. He had two subtle marks on his arm for distance...I kid you not. I can only assume he was pointing at units when he guessed distances and people didn't pick up on it.

Anyways, one of the guys in the know got ready to play him, he said "Go to the bathroom and wash your farking arm before we play". It still makes me glow inside remembering....]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235669.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235669.page GMT
The 2" kill zone can do that too. Now with things like the lash you have people setting up conga lines (and they used to do it somewhat without lash) just to kill the one or two guys they needed. It's taking advantage of a rule to get the desired effect, not really a rule that adds anything to the game. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235697.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235697.page GMT
But the scatter roll is still a pain. There are so many people that can’t judge the direction of the arrow! I’ve seen people that are off by as much as 90 degrees. I try to remain nice about it. But in a tournament setting when the shot counts, you have no choice but to call over a judge to verify the direction of the arrow. And many people take it as an insult that they are proved wrong. I can just see the sportsmanship scores going down whenever that happens...

~Logic]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235719.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235719.page GMT
Good sports will always rate you high, while jerks who exhibit poor sportsmanship themselves will frequently mark you low to hurt your rating, becuase you know, they are poor sports.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235723.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/235723.page GMT d6 and don't require a to hit roll.....

Vanilla change for me. I liked guessing, it was fun, but like IntoTheRain said it wasn't really guessing once you got good at it.

The new way should be faster, and alot better for people who never got the knack of guessing range.

[/quote]


No, guys, I've got the 5th ed. PDF right in front of me, there's no change to the blast weapon rulings.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236208.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236208.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236214.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236214.page GMT GW community for some time, but they're making a new edition of 40k already!?

They've only just released the Orks codex and Apocalypse and now they're readying to make a transition to a new edition and bring out new codexes?! ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236390.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236390.page GMT IG, DE, and Necrons (end of 2009?) are on the way.
At the same time, GW will bring a new expansion of 40, Planetstrike, with plastic drop pods...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236391.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236391.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236402.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236402.page GMT [quote]What I like about the rumors:
1. Blast weapons getting better again
2. A single chart for vehicle damage
3. Even vehicles getting cover saves
4. Being able to run away from combat
5. Transports aren't total death traps
6. Faster, easier combat resolution
7. The option to run
8. Failing a psychic test is an auto-wound.
9. "get's hot" is only on a role of 1. That Ork character was more likely to kill himself than the enemy.

What I don't like:
1. Vehicles seem to loose out on offensive capabilities. Being able to move a vehicle and fire a lot of weapons is great in 4th edition.
2. Only TROOPS can capture objectives. (Why can't a guy with identical stats take an objective when he is simply an elite?)
3. If troops can run now, what is the point of a transport
4. Fast vehicles only moving 18 inches.
5. Everything blocking line of sight, even friendly units. (this might still be okay if you can simply take a target priority test to get around it.)
6. Removing area terrain. No more hiding indirect fire units.[/quote]

In fact, the Eldar codex will be outdated after the release of this rule set.
Why the pt increase of the Tornados in the DA and BA codices when they will nerf skimmers.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236416.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236416.page GMT
Some armies don't even have 4th edition codexes yet.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236445.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236445.page GMT
Some armies don't even have 4th edition codexes yet.[/quote]

True, but that doesn't mean anything.
All the newer codecies work fine with the changes, especially the Ork one.

Greets
Schepp himself]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236458.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236458.page GMT ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236462.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236462.page GMT
they probably don't want to have to redo eldar anytime soon though, so they're balancing skimmers with core rules changes. not ideal imo, but it could work out.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236705.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236705.page GMT GW is planning on a standalone Craftworld book following the SM (also CSM). Eldar get a book for every new Edition.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236722.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236722.page GMT DA? if so maybe the dex was made for 5th imo ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236740.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236740.page GMT [/quote]

Actually, I'd wager part of the reason the batte reports and White Dwarf have become less detailed is that they have been using the 5th edition rules for at least the past 6 months if not the better part of the last year. It would pure idiocy on their part not to balance the new books with the new edition due out later this year.



]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236744.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236744.page GMT
But the approach and result of C: Eldar wasn't nearly as refined as the DA book, much less CSM and Orks. The designers have clearly hit their stride with the CSM and Ork books.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236754.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/236754.page GMT GW in 5th. Imo, it doesn't take a serious blow with all these changes and almost all choices are still viable. Never change a running system, i say.

Greets
Schepp himself]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/237071.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/237071.page GMT
But the approach and result of C: Eldar wasn't nearly as refined as the DA book, much less CSM and Orks. The designers have clearly hit their stride with the CSM and Ork books.[/quote]

You say that like its a good thing. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/237081.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/237081.page GMT
But the approach and result of C: Eldar wasn't nearly as refined as the DA book, much less CSM and Orks. The designers have clearly hit their stride with the CSM and Ork books.[/quote]

You say that like its a good thing. [/quote]

Ha! Good point!

It is safe to say that the designers were clearly hitting [i]something[/i] before and possibly during the CSM and Ork Codex design process... ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/237110.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/237110.page GMT
I definitely have to say I think the LOS rule will really mess up the flow of most games. I expect to see a decent number of arguements over what can be seen and what can't. I think it's also sad to see area terrain go, it was basically the only type of terrain that we used at my gaming store and made for much more interesting games. It's good to see that transports aren't horrible death-piles any more at least.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238939.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238939.page GMT
Also running can be very abused, from what i understand it takes the place of a shooting attack, (a bit like fleet now) what's to to stop transport X with 10 people in moving 12 inches, deploing two and then having the gus run D6 in the shooting phase? Seriously abusable ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238941.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238941.page GMT
You're mad John. Do you know that?

They were just re-done. They're not going to be on the re-do cycle for quite some time. Daemons, Space Wolves, Dark Eldar, Necrons, then probably Guard or Marines, and then the opposite of whatever. This takes us through to 2010 at least. Eldar had to wait 8 years or so for their new Codex, Orks even longer. Do you really thing that a year or so after its release they're going to do another one? Have you looked at GW's track record [i]at all[/i]?

Furthermore, they're a miniature company. What shiny new Eldar models have they got to release for us? Models don't accompany a new Codex release, a Codex accompanies a new model release. That's the way it works with GW, and I very much doubt they'll be able to justify re-doing an entire Codex just so they have an excuse to release the new plastic Jetbike we saw a while back.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238944.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238944.page GMT D6 in the shooting phase? Seriously abusable [/quote]

Umm... maybe the rules?

It's really stupid to claim that 5th Ed can be abused when we haven't seen it yet. By all means, complain about the rumours, especially the one about Defensive S4 weapons, but please don't make huge leaps of logic about what's going to be abused and what's not.

BYE]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238945.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238945.page GMT GW is supposedly (as Joey would say) moving everything into some sort of schedule, based on release schedules and number of armies/codeci, I would expect it's about 5 years before Eldar get a new Codex. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238991.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238991.page GMT GW is supposedly (as Joey would say) moving everything into some sort of schedule, based on release schedules and number of armies/codeci, I would expect it's about 5 years before Eldar get a new Codex. [/quote]

Just because a codex came out before 5th edition does not meant it wasn't designed to be compatible with 5th edition. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238993.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/238993.page GMT
A lot is going to change, and you aren't going to see 3 falcon lists dominating anymore. Orks are going to be tough no matter what the rules are in the new book. They are very competitive. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239027.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239027.page GMT D6 in the shooting phase? Seriously abusable [/quote]

Umm... maybe the rules?

It's really stupid to claim that 5th Ed can be abused when we haven't seen it yet. By all means, complain about the rumours, especially the one about Defensive S4 weapons, but please don't make huge leaps of logic about what's going to be abused and what's not.

BYE[/quote]
Uh, I thought everyone was assuming the 5th ed rules will be what's written in the pdf. If its not, of course the units that can be abused will change. But according to this pdf, you can safely say that horde armies are making a comeback and you can run out of a rhino. Its not a huge leap of logic to imagine this.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239044.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239044.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239081.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239081.page GMT You're mad John. Do you know that?[/quote]
Did you know that your habit of taking pot shots is irritating?

[quote]They were just re-done. They're not going to be on the re-do cycle for quite some time. [/quote]
The Eldar get a new book for every edition. That is a fact that I do not see changing.

[quote]What shiny new Eldar models have they got to release for us? [/quote]
Warp Spiders, Wraithguard, Jetbike, Vyper are all getting long in the tooth. Plus we always get a new Farseer and a couple new Warlocks with each edition. And the plastic Guardians could definitely use a refresh and rescale.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239109.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239109.page GMT GW's track record proves that only Marines get a new codex with each edition. Everybody else counts as a definite maybe. The Eldar may get a 5th edition codex, but it won't happen for many years. Most likely right before 6th ed is released.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239147.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239147.page GMT
Guard, Necrons, Space Wolves, and Dark Eldar are all in much more pressing need of editing.

All Eldar need for 5th is a drop in the cost of Falcons and Fire Prisms.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239151.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239151.page GMT GW's track record proves that only Marines get a new codex with each edition. Everybody else counts as a definite maybe. The Eldar may get a 5th edition codex, but it won't happen for many years. Most likely right before 6th ed is released.[/quote]Chaos ALWAYS gets a release ( atleast one) as well.

RT:
SM) Compendium had some Marine stuff
CSM) Realm of Chaos: Slaves to Darkness
CSM) Realm of Chaos: The Lost and the Damned

2nd:
Ultramarines (close enough)
Chaos (BIG)
(Bonus: Space Wolves, Angels of Death[DA/BA])

3rd:
Space Marine pamphlet (seriously, I've read footnotes longer than that)
Chaos Space Marines
Chaos Space Marines 3.5
(Bonus: BA pamphlet, DA pamphlet, DA pamphlet revised, Armageddon [BT/Sallies])

4th:
Space Marines
Chaos Space Marines (Renegades)
(Bonus: Black Templars, Dark Angels)

5th:
SM) ?...though the big rumor is a new SM Codex, which will probably simply be revised
CSM) ?...The CSM (Renegades) was done with thoughts towards the new edition, and maybe the Legions will get something.

So for those that think it's Marine-centric now...look at 3rd edition.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239168.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239168.page GMT If the Legion books are released, than 5th will be VERY marine centric. Who knows, they might even wedge marines into the IG book.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239178.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239178.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239187.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239187.page GMT

Greets
Schepp himself]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239190.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239190.page GMT
Guard, Necrons, Space Wolves, and Dark Eldar are all in much more pressing need of editing.[/quote]
What armies need updates from a rules perspective, and what armies get updates from a sales perspective are 2 entirely different things, with sales dictating which armies actually get their updates. Fairness has nothing to do with anything, only sales.

So while I agree that it is likely that Eldar could get by with their current Codex, the sales dictates that the Eldar are more likely to get an updated Codex or a Biel-Tan Codex before Dark Eldar. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239210.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239210.page GMT GW has publicly noted they'll be out soon~ish.

GW just sold a whole pile of Eldar to the people who are interested in them (I spent about $500 on an Eldar army this year). Those people won't be buying much if a new Eldar Codex comes out next year. They might buy a Space Wolf or Dark Eldar army though.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239220.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239220.page GMT New Edition -> new Space Marines and/or new Orks (there's stuff for the second wave...)

Stuff like that.

Greets
Schepp himself]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239221.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239221.page GMT
GW hasn't released any Dark Eldar teaser pics that I'm aware of, no "leaked" any preview Codices to the Web. So as far as I'm concerned, the Dark Eldar are still dead in the water. Which represents no change from 2004-2005, when they were moved from the active line to "Classic / Collectors".]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239228.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239228.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239231.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239231.page GMT FW work?

Greets
Schepp himself]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239239.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239239.page GMT
About the new rules concerning vehicles, as I can't get the mighty pdf file, could you confirm some points :

Skimmer moving 7-18'' get 5+ save, as tanks in smoke.
Protecting the vehicle behind a crest vill receive 5+ or 4+
and what about, let's say... woods?

How will work ordnance shots at a tank, in terms of penetrating and damage rolls ?


EDIT :OK managed to get the PDF finally.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239369.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/239369.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/243100.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/243100.page GMT ot play ball. And torrents seem to take forever over satellite net connections. Email would be nice, but hey...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/246459.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/246459.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/246480.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/246480.page GMT
Like the replies in the thread say, GW may have wisened up and realized people would spend more money if you did the major releases right after summer starts. For the kids' sake. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253425.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253425.page GMT
You tend to see a dip in releases in June-August and a boost in September.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253504.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253504.page GMT [quote] There is also a 'deployment' chart which I will put on in the morning (too tired) if someone else hasn't done it already.[/quote]
But I couldn't find it. Can somebody please tell me more about the new deployment rules?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253887.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253887.page GMT
You tend to see a dip in releases in June-August and a boost in September.[/quote]

In the US summer = no school for most areas, so a June release here would be a good marketing strategy for them to have time to work on new models/play, although they usually try to do both sides of the ocean at once don't they?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253899.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253899.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253917.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/253917.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/254102.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/254102.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/254108.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/254108.page GMT
so termies and speeders (that have both already been nerfed) will see a further reduction in effectiveness if that turns out to be true.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/255506.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/255506.page GMT Gw style]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/257035.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/257035.page GMT
so termies and speeders (that have both already been nerfed) will see a further reduction in effectiveness if that turns out to be true.[/quote]

That would be perfect. And because it would be perfect so I am sure that won't be the case-they'll nerf my not offensive genestealers/demonettes along with the A Cannon Spam option. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/257277.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/257277.page GMT
Roll to hit as normal using the models ballistic skill.

Take all hits, and then roll to wound. If you roll a 6, you inflict a wound, no armor save allowed. This should be in both close combat, as well as ranged.

As for rending against vehicles, I think that it should work in a similar fashion, but rolling a 6 on armor penetration (rather than the to-wound roll) should result in an automatic glancing hit, with no further dice needing to be rolled, except on the glancing table. You'll only ever glance, as a rending weapon (at range, anyway) is typically a high rate of fire weapon and not exactly designed to punch through armor, but rather inflict punishing amounts of damage to infantry. It can still be effective against armor, but it isn't what it was designed to do per-se.

That's my thoughts on that. Take it easy everyone.

-Red__Thirst-]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/257719.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/257719.page GMT
Never. Never heard moaning before.

I'm going to play 'Hello Kitty' MMORPG now....

The 'said' document I have psychically browsed...

Is propaganda.

It's spelt too well and makes too much grammatical sense to be a GW production ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/258400.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/258400.page GMT http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/266062.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/206861/266062.page GMT