FatBoyNoSlim wrote:
Outflanking platoons are still viable as we have not heard of anything saying that Creed no longer allows one unit to outflank.

It is speculation that it works this way, and even if it does it commits you to taking Creed, which may not be an appealing option in the new codex. Plus, the Al'rahem lists from the current codex can take both him and Creed, to outflank a supporting unit along with the platoon.

And the changes to conscripts points, combined with the points being saved by not paying for send in the next wave and Chenkov means that whilst you can not get infinite men, you can field a lot more conscripts to start off with. Also nothing is stopping a foot general from putting some of his conscripts in reserve and bringing them on as a "next wave" if they are worried about a crowed DZ.

But it's still a pointless nerf. SITNW might not be point-efficient compared to new conscripts, but it was fun. Now the character is gone for no good reason, and you have to try to approximate the same effect some other way.

In fact I would argue in favour of this codex being better to for foot guard as the ability to put cheap priest and commisars in conscripts and giving them massive buffs is a huge boost to that unit. add to this the order to "move shoot and run" and those foot slogging conscipts have the potential to move up field quickly!

Who cares about priests and commissars? You've already got inquisitors available, and even if it works it's an incredibly one-dimensional list. That's not very impressive as the best part of the new codex.

Combine this with the rumours of HWS being only 45 points to start (coming with 3x morters) and we getting some serious fire power.

Even cheap HWS are still bad. It's still a BS 3 unit with no extra wounds, extreme vulnerability to instant death, and no mobility. Dropping the cost a bit doesn't do anything to fix the real problems with them in the current codex.

with by Platoon squads with AC and GL

Eww, no. AC/GL is how you waste units. Never do this if you want to win.

HWS armed with Rockets for AA

Eww, no. Flak missiles are stupidly overpriced. I can't think of a single situation where I'd want to use them. Even snap firing LCs is probably a better plan, if you're stubbornly determined to keep real AA units out of your list.

I can't remember if Hydras have gone down in points from 75 but I only just realised that the Marine Stalker costs 75 points and is just far and away better at AA than the new Hydra and more durable.

Hydra: BS3, 4 TL Autocannon shots. Armour 12, 10, 10 & open-topped.

Stalker: BS4, 4 TL Autocannon shots, Armour 12, 12, 10 not open-topped and can fire 4 shots at two different targets at BS2 if it wants (which I use for causing grounding tests). Plus a Stormcannon array is ONE weapon not two twin-linked weapons like the Hydra so you can move 6" and still fire at full BS all 4 shots.

Yes you can't squadron them but that's just sad how much worse the new Hydra is compared to all other dedicated AA choices since 6th hit.

At 50 points I'd consider a squadron of 3 for the price of 2 old Hydras just so there is one to explode as soon as the enemy airpower arrives.

Wait...Punisher Leman Russes gained shred? I...um...the Leman Russ I like just got awesome. Back to buying the book!!

I'll just get permission from friends to run Marbo identical to his 5th edition statline.

 Peregrine wrote:

Biophysical wrote:
The same 6 plasma guns in the 6th edition codex costs 270 points.

Except it doesn't just cost 270 points, because you're ignoring the cost of the transport. The current codex is 340 points for two plasma vet squads in Chimeras, the new codex is 465 points, a 36% increase. And that's if you're using Chimeras. Valkyries make it even more expensive, and of course Vendettas aren't an option at all anymore.

I specifically said mech vets were worse, and then specifically said I was just examining foot vets.

Exact Leman Russ costs, from L'astropate:

150 LRBT
130 Exterminator
135 Vanquisher
120 Eradicator
170 Demolisher
140 Punisher
155 Executioner

Henry says they're in the exact order as the 5th ed Codex, which either means the above as the tanks are laid out on the non-cost page or:

120/130 -LRBT/Exterminator
135 - Vanquisher
140- Eradicator
150- Demolisher
155-Punisher
170-Executioner

This, in the same order of rising costs as in 5th

For the first changed the points in order as the old codex 150 130 135 120 170 140 155 and there are psikers with divination

http://astropate.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/nuova-astra-militarum-foto-del-codex-e.html

I'm also wondering now if the Hydra never lost its ignores jink saves rule, and if the rule has instead been moved to the weapon profile (where hence it would be explained in the armoury), as is the new trend in 6th.

 TheKbob wrote:


The concept of getting them a 4+ save, or more bodies AND a 4+ armor save is something to think about. However, a lot of the game's current "better" things are usually S6-7, Ap4. Thus the extra points may be a waste. Time will tell on that one.

Camo cloaks may be a better option. I don't know right now, and it probably depends on a lot of factors. Either way, there's a certain amount of synergy with Armored Sentinels that's probably worth thinking about.

Rob451 wrote:
I can't remember if Hydras have gone down in points from 75 but I only just realised that the Marine Stalker costs 75 points and is just far and away better at AA than the new Hydra and more durable.

Hydra: BS3, 4 TL Autocannon shots. Armour 12, 10, 10 & open-topped.

Stalker: BS4, 4 TL Autocannon shots, Armour 12, 12, 10 not open-topped and can fire 4 shots at two different targets at BS2 if it wants (which I use for causing grounding tests). Plus a Stormcannon array is ONE weapon not two twin-linked weapons like the Hydra so you can move 6" and still fire at full BS all 4 shots.

Yes you can't squadron them but that's just sad how much worse the new Hydra is compared to all other dedicated AA choices since 6th hit.

At 50 points I'd consider a squadron of 3 for the price of 2 old Hydras just so there is one to explode as soon as the enemy airpower arrives.

Good points, I expect we're missing something on the Hydra's rules after reading this. Sucks if GW didn't consider this but it won't stop me from using them.

If the rumour that ignores jink is gone is true, the only real advantages the Hydra's getting is the ability to be squadroned and a heavy bolter, which is pretty sucky.

 B0B MaRlEy wrote:
For what it's worth GW's weird translation team decided to not translate 90% of the units names (they're in english).
This team had a trend of not translating the vehicles, which could be argued for (marines vehicles for example never were translated, but all other races' were) but now even infantry squads aren't translated anymore, which just looks stupide with the french fluff text right under it.
Sigh


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, were the relics revealed? I've had a glance at them

I dont think so. at least i haddent seen them.

anything good?

Cheaper Russes seem cool. Pask in an Exterminator with HB, assuming he's 70 as rumoured and the HB prices didn't change, clocks in at 220 points and sounds positively deadly.

May well be too little, too late though, for this codex. I'm still not convinced that a buff to a handful of units is enough to cancel the outright deletion of several fun, effective and useful options.

I'm hoping the Hydra has some benefits to it, I really do. If it loses jink the jink rule, then the Hydra becomes a pure point sink if your enemy doesn't bring any flyers. Because to make up for the durability of 1 hydra, you know you'd be taking 2-3 at 140-210 points.

Compare that to a Bastion with quad gun. Bastion is AV 14 building, using a 48" Twinlinked 4 shot AC with skyfire & interceptor. For 125 points. Alternatively you can have an aegis with quad gun for 100 points.

And if your gaming group allows, take the imperial strongpoint and take both and Aegis and Bastion with Quad Guns for 225 points. Now you have 2/3rds the firepower of a Hydra battery, but more durable (at least for the bastion) that also has interceptor, allowing them to shoot oncoming flyers, or harass enemy ground at full BS. For 15 less points then 3 hydras. Oh, and all this is NOT using one of your Heavy Support slots.

I will also point out that Platoon Commanders have BS 4, so these guns can be at BS4 even if you go with blob squads instead of vets.

I'm hoping that we might see a skyfire change in the future (like, making them choose air or land and haivng interceptor only grant shots on incoming aircraft). Otherwise those playing with the expanded rules quite simply have better options available.

The points costs on the Russes seem low. I wonder if they'll lose Heavy or something. I don't expect it, it just seems like 20-30 point drops are a lot to get without a corresponding loss in ability.

On the other hand wouldnt the Hydra without interceptor for around 75 points be the equivalent of the current SM Stalker? Trading in side armor for longer range on the weapons?

 Desubot wrote:

 B0B MaRlEy wrote:
For what it's worth GW's weird translation team decided to not translate 90% of the units names (they're in english).
This team had a trend of not translating the vehicles, which could be argued for (marines vehicles for example never were translated, but all other races' were) but now even infantry squads aren't translated anymore, which just looks stupide with the french fluff text right under it.
Sigh


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, were the relics revealed? I've had a glance at them

I dont think so. at least i haddent seen them.

anything good?

Honestly nothing struck me as awesome, there's a meh pistol (S5 AP 4 ?), A relic that helps out your order-giving (Auto-reliquary or something equally silly) , a very expensive one that allows units very close (I think it was 6") to choose to pass or fail leadershop checks (probably morale, it'd be silly otherwise) (60 points IIRC), an ok one granting a few special rules to the bearer (IWND, EW?) for 30 points. The good thing was that they were quite cheap, except the one I mentionned. Nothing awe-inspiring though

 Sir Arun wrote:
On the other hand wouldnt the Hydra without interceptor for around 75 points be the equivalent of the current SM Stalker? Trading in side armor for longer range on the weapons?

The longer range on the weapons is largely irrelevant outside of an Apoc game, and the Stalker has BS4 and its split-fire rule too.

 Paradigm wrote:
Cheaper Russes seem cool. Pask in an Exterminator with HB, assuming he's 70 as rumoured and the HB prices didn't change, clocks in at 220 points and sounds positively deadly.

May well be too little, too late though, for this codex. I'm still not convinced that a buff to a handful of units is enough to cancel the outright deletion of several fun, effective and useful options.

The loss of the artillery sucks, but I don't own any of the models thankfully (have been planning on buying some forever but tend to just use my friend's or proxy them with Chimeras). I do have a bunch of Russes and they look to be more useful, so I guess I made out pretty well there. I'm hoping that they at least buff a few of the more useless remaining units and release a codex that can be played in a few different ways. I actually purchased a decent sized Grey Knight army earlier this year because I was getting sick of setting up, pushing around, and packing up a hundred models every game. It'll be just my luck that the update will make massive Conscript/Priest/Commissar blobs the only viable option in anything more than a fluff game.

The characters are more of a personal preference to me though - I used Marbo almost every game so I'm pretty that he's gone, there better be a dataslate! Harker I used on occasion, and did go so far as to convert a model for him but I can deal with not having him. Al'Rahem and Chenkov with his much fluff and very Russia were more of an entertaining side show for me and never really changed the game. Bastonne and Kamir were useless IMO and I never bothered to use them.

From a practical standpoint I won't be bothered too much by the special character losses and can probably convince my friends to let me use old Marbo, but having plenty of unique flavor is part of what gives the guard so much character and makes them so much fun. I won't say I used all of those fun options all the time, but there's something to be said for having the option. For now, I guess we can hope for dataslates to replace some of the losses, but it's ridiculous that they shouldn't just be included in the codex and will cost us more in the future if GW goes down that road...

I'll still buy it, but I never pre-ordered and will stop by the FLGS to at least give it a look first.

I still want my Solar Macharius back....I have the model, I want rules for him.

Biophysical wrote:
The points costs on the Russes seem low. I wonder if they'll lose Heavy or something. I don't expect it, it just seems like 20-30 point drops are a lot to get without a corresponding loss in ability.

If the points are dropping without any other change in rules, it is just to make up for the change of Lumbering Behemoth to Heavy. When the previous prices were chosen, a Russ could fire all it's guns every turn; Ordnance Russes can't do that any more and they deserve a price break if Lumbering Behemoth isn't returning.

can someone do the math?

3 heavy bolters firing at bs 3 wont kill much more than 3 heavy bolters firing at bs 1, will they?

Biophysical wrote:
The points costs on the Russes seem low. I wonder if they'll lose Heavy or something. I don't expect it, it just seems like 20-30 point drops are a lot to get without a corresponding loss in ability.

I could see them dropping a hull point, to make them 3HP like most other tanks.

3 BS3 HB against marines = ~1 dead marine

3 BS1 HB against marines = ~0.33 dead marines.

 Sir Arun wrote:
can someone do the math?

3 heavy bolters firing at bs 3 wont kill much more than 3 heavy bolters firing at bs 1, will they?

Well, three times as much. But it's three times "not a lot," so....

AGainst Orks (the prime target): 9 shots at Bs1: 1.5 hits, 1.25 wounds. 9 shots at BS3: 4.5 hits, 3.75 wounds.

 Thatguyoverthere wrote:

Biophysical wrote:
The points costs on the Russes seem low. I wonder if they'll lose Heavy or something. I don't expect it, it just seems like 20-30 point drops are a lot to get without a corresponding loss in ability.

I could see them dropping a hull point, to make them 3HP like most other tanks.

Ridiculously, they already have only 3 hull points. As far as I can recall only Land Raiders and Battlewagons have 4.

Leman Russ tanks have always had 3 Hull Points, unless I've missed something for two years.

tomjoad wrote:

 Thatguyoverthere wrote:

Biophysical wrote:
The points costs on the Russes seem low. I wonder if they'll lose Heavy or something. I don't expect it, it just seems like 20-30 point drops are a lot to get without a corresponding loss in ability.

I could see them dropping a hull point, to make them 3HP like most other tanks.

Ridiculously, they already have only 3 hull points. As far as I can recall only Land Raiders and Battlewagons have 4.

Biophysical wrote:Leman Russ tanks have always had 3 Hull Points, unless I've missed something for two years.

... Well gak.

I am still not seeing where Marbo has gone away.

 tomjoad wrote:

 Thatguyoverthere wrote:

Biophysical wrote:
The points costs on the Russes seem low. I wonder if they'll lose Heavy or something. I don't expect it, it just seems like 20-30 point drops are a lot to get without a corresponding loss in ability.

I could see them dropping a hull point, to make them 3HP like most other tanks.

Ridiculously, they already have only 3 hull points. As far as I can recall only Land Raiders and Battlewagons have 4.

Monoliths and both types of Necron Arks also have 4.

 Anpu42 wrote:
I am still not seeing where Marbo has gone away.

That's cause he's too damn sneaky.


But here it is: http://natfka.blogspot.com/2014/04/astra-militarum-vendetta-and-sly-marbo.html

If the basic LRBT is still unchanged at 150 points, they may have changed the cannon from ordnance to heavy 1. Otherwise, I see no point in taking it over exterminator or executioner, or ... well any other Leman Russ without ordnance.

These prices levels are outstanding, for I viewed russes as already worth their points, and counting among the rare vehicles still worth their points, still worth playing in 6th edition. Now they are so tempting and easy to include in army lists. Considering these prices, I would be very surprised to not see Leman Russes widely played in Guard top tournaments lists.

 rabidguineapig wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I am still not seeing where Marbo has gone away.

That's cause he's too damn sneaky.


But here it is: http://natfka.blogspot.com/2014/04/astra-militarum-vendetta-and-sly-marbo.html

Ok, so we are trusting natfka again I see.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 rabidguineapig wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I am still not seeing where Marbo has gone away.

That's cause he's too damn sneaky.


But here it is: http://natfka.blogspot.com/2014/04/astra-militarum-vendetta-and-sly-marbo.html

Ok, so we are trusting natfka again I see.

Yeah that's basically all anyone is going on as far as I know. Really hoping he Commando'd his way into the dex.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 rabidguineapig wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I am still not seeing where Marbo has gone away.

That's cause he's too damn sneaky.


But here it is: http://natfka.blogspot.com/2014/04/astra-militarum-vendetta-and-sly-marbo.html

Ok, so we are trusting natfka again I see.

These are pretty "old" news, and have been almost confirmed since (can't remember if it was the spanish or italian source).

There's too much to keep track of in the rumorsphere, just posting what I remembered.

I'm interested to see which of the random variations of Leman Russ point costs is correct, seems like the foreign language stuff has been sort of unclear on that front.

 Peregrine wrote:

FatBoyNoSlim wrote:
Outflanking platoons are still viable as we have not heard of anything saying that Creed no longer allows one unit to outflank.

It is speculation that it works this way, and even if it does it commits you to taking Creed, which may not be an appealing option in the new codex. Plus, the Al'rahem lists from the current codex can take both him and Creed, to outflank a supporting unit along with the platoon.

And the changes to conscripts points, combined with the points being saved by not paying for send in the next wave and Chenkov means that whilst you can not get infinite men, you can field a lot more conscripts to start off with. Also nothing is stopping a foot general from putting some of his conscripts in reserve and bringing them on as a "next wave" if they are worried about a crowed DZ.

But it's still a pointless nerf. SITNW might not be point-efficient compared to new conscripts, but it was fun. Now the character is gone for no good reason, and you have to try to approximate the same effect some other way.

In fact I would argue in favour of this codex being better to for foot guard as the ability to put cheap priest and commisars in conscripts and giving them massive buffs is a huge boost to that unit. add to this the order to "move shoot and run" and those foot slogging conscipts have the potential to move up field quickly!

Who cares about priests and commissars? You've already got inquisitors available, and even if it works it's an incredibly one-dimensional list. That's not very impressive as the best part of the new codex.

Combine this with the rumours of HWS being only 45 points to start (coming with 3x morters) and we getting some serious fire power.

Even cheap HWS are still bad. It's still a BS 3 unit with no extra wounds, extreme vulnerability to instant death, and no mobility. Dropping the cost a bit doesn't do anything to fix the real problems with them in the current codex.

with by Platoon squads with AC and GL

Eww, no. AC/GL is how you waste units. Never do this if you want to win.

HWS armed with Rockets for AA

Eww, no. Flak missiles are stupidly overpriced. I can't think of a single situation where I'd want to use them. Even snap firing LCs is probably a better plan, if you're stubbornly determined to keep real AA units out of your list.

1) I think arguing the creed point back and forth is not gonna help our discussion, as you pointed out its speculation at this time, so sorry for bringing that one up!

2) I see what you are saying about the SITNW removal. I used that rule all the time and I admit that I am sad that it not available any more. I was just pointing out that it is possible to get a similar effect for the same points cost, just trying to make the best out of bad situation.

3) Personally I care very much about the new priest and commisar rules! I collect a pure IG army and do not feature allies. Please do not think I am anti allies, I think using allies is a ligit strategy. And many of the players that I have come across both near and far away from where I live have a similar mindset. The priests and commisars are a nice nod to pure guard players.

4) HWS are key if you are playing a pure foot guard list. You need them to get concentrated heavy weapons fire that you can order to bring it down. I know you pointed out why many IG players do not take them but they are essential for a pure IG foot list. I know you will want to say "But just use saber platforms instead and other forge world". Unfortunately my local tournament scene only allows the use of one FW unit. So even with a squad of sabers i'm still gonna need HWS in my pure infantry list to fill a gap. This is same for many tournaments who do not allow forgeworld models or restrict them.

5) AC/GL is great please explain why you do not like them? My reason for liking them is it the most cost effective way at getting you platoons squads anti infantry. AC wounds infantry on 2+ and GL blast adds 2-3 more lasgun equivalent hits to the pool. Never lets me down and I win quite a lot with my pure infantry list (trying not to sound boastful) (:

6) And why eww to flakk? It the only AA a pure infantry list can get outside of a single ADL quadgun.

Thanks for the quick response BTW and please do not feel like I am trying to be awkward, I just appreciate your view points on the subject and the chance to see things from another IG players view! Plus there is nothing like a good discussion (:

Double checking the translation :

Q :
Per quanto riguarda i costi dei leman?ci puoi chiarire la situazione?e poi c'è traccia di psikers cn divinazione nel codex? grazie e scusa se assillo.
A :
Per la prima sono cambiati i punti in ordine come sul vecchio codex 150 130 135 120 170 140 155 e si ci sono gli psikers con divinazione

Q :
Concerning Leman russ costs, can you clarify the situation ? And is there any trace of divination psykers in the codex ? Excuse if I bother you.
A :
For the first, the points are changed, in the order of the old codex : * list * , and yes there are divination psykers.

So taking my V5 codex, heavy support Leman Russ section, I can confirm the listing (Provided that the source has copied them right of course) :
LRBT : 150
exterminator : 130
vanquisher : 135
eradicator : 120
demolisher : 170
punisher : 140
executioner : 155

I would add that these prices seems coherent with my gaming impressions, except for the executioner, which deserves the ~170 point range pricing, more than the demolisher IMHO. In current rules, and at least in my metagame, he is just that good.

 Mr.Omega wrote:
Exact Leman Russ costs, from L'astropate:

150 LRBT
130 Exterminator
135 Vanquisher
120 Eradicator
170 Demolisher
140 Punisher
155 Executioner

Henry says they're in the exact order as the 5th ed Codex, which either means the above as the tanks are laid out on the non-cost page or:

120/130 -LRBT/Exterminator
135 - Vanquisher
140- Eradicator
150- Demolisher
155-Punisher
170-Executioner

This, in the same order of rising costs as in 5th

For the first changed the points in order as the old codex 150 130 135 120 170 140 155 and there are psikers with divination

http://astropate.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/nuova-astra-militarum-foto-del-codex-e.html

I'm also wondering now if the Hydra never lost its ignores jink saves rule, and if the rule has instead been moved to the weapon profile (where hence it would be explained in the armoury), as is the new trend in 6th.

Looking at the 5th edition codex, I'm going with the second list you've posted.

120 - LRBT
130 - Exterminator
135 - Vanquisher
140 - Eradicator
150 - Demolisher
155 - Punisher
170 - Executioner

If this is the case, and accurate, I'm actually quite happy with how the Leman Russes have shaken out. My current theoretical guard list is fielding an HQ Squadron of Leman Russes consisting of a Vanquisher which will (assuming hull lascannon upgrade costs stay the same and the rumored cost of the standard HQ upgrade is 30 points/Heavy Stubber cost is 5 points) cost me 185 points. I'll have a full bore dakka Punisher (sponson/hull mounted HB's and a pintle mounted heavy stubber) rolling with it and will be using the divide fire order from the commander 9 times out of 10, with the popping smoke order being used once a game, generally early typically.

My other Leman Russes will consist of a standard LRBT and either an Exterminator with full dakka complement (See above Punisher complement) or a Demolisher, depending.

The points savings for the LRBT, Vanquisher, Exterminator, and Punisher more than make up for the 10 point price increase per Chimera transport I field (Typically only two of them)

-30 points from the LRBT, -20 points from the Exterminator, -20 points from the Vanquisher, and -25 points from the Punisher. Net point savings: 95 points. That's enough to completely pay for a chimera with extra armor and a pintle heavy stubber and still leave you a surplus.

Now of course, that doesn't factor in upgrade costs for certain tanks. In the instance of the Vanquisher, if the hull lascannon upgrade costs the same as it does in the current I.G. codex, then you're still saving points, but only about 10 if you don't run sponsons on it.
The Punisher on the other hand makes out like a bandit in my opinion. You can buy a Punisher and (again assuming sponson costs are the same) put sponson heavy bolters on it, as well as a pintle heavy stubber for five points (if the rumors are accurate) and it costs the exact same as it did for just the turret and hull weapon in the previous I.G. codex. What once cost at least 200 points for just the tank and sponsons now only costs you 170 points with the sponsons and pintle stubber.

Buh. That's all I have to say. Buh.

I'm still miffed about not having the Artillery tanks in the codex (Griffon/Medusa/Colossus) but I can still use/run them with the I.A. rules/points costs and nobody in my gaming group will bat an eye at it, I've already asked.

We'll see what else shakes out. I'm looking forward to sitting down with the new codex and seeing what kind of lists I can build for my Vostroyan firstborn.

Take it easy for now guys.

-Red__Thirst-

Thanks! The 5 point increase for the demolisher seems strange, and I doubt I'll be taking any standard LRBTs at 150. Executioner and Punisher seem like great bargains though, especially if the rending rumors with Pask are true. That's a pretty hefty point decrease on the pair from the 5E if those prices are correct.

I find it really hard to believe the Demolisher went from 3rd most expensive to most expensive. The vanilla version staying the same while most of the other specialist versions got cheaper is also very odd.

 Ravajaxe wrote:
Double checking the translation :

Q :
Per quanto riguarda i costi dei leman?ci puoi chiarire la situazione?e poi c'è traccia di psikers cn divinazione nel codex? grazie e scusa se assillo.
A :
Per la prima sono cambiati i punti in ordine come sul vecchio codex 150 130 135 120 170 140 155 e si ci sono gli psikers con divinazione

Q :
Concerning Leman russ costs, can you clarify the situation ? And is there any trace of divination psykers in the codex ? Excuse if I bother you.
A :
For the first, the points are changed, in the order of the old codex : * list * , and yes there are divination psykers.

So taking my V5 codex, heavy support Leman Russ section, I can confirm the listing (Provided that the source has copied them right of course) :
LRBT : 150
exterminator : 130
vanquisher : 135
eradicator : 120
demolisher : 170
punisher : 140
executioner : 155

I would add that these prices seems coherent with my gaming impressions, except for the executioner, which deserves the ~170 point range pricing, more than the demolisher IMHO. In current rules, and at least in my metagame, he is just that good.

I think when he says the *list* he's referring to page numbers 48 and 49 in the I.G. codex, *NOT* Page 102 where the points costs are listed. It doesn't make sense for the Demolisher to cost 170 points when it should be around the 150 to 160 point range at absolute most.

I may very well be wrong, and am not saying you are wrong either Ravajaxe, just looking at it objectively. We'll see what's right soon hopefully.

Take 'er easy for now.

-Red__Thirst-

Edit: I no check good when sleep deprived. Please ignore the above post.

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
Double checking the translation :

Q :
Per quanto riguarda i costi dei leman?ci puoi chiarire la situazione?e poi c'è traccia di psikers cn divinazione nel codex? grazie e scusa se assillo.
A :
Per la prima sono cambiati i punti in ordine come sul vecchio codex 150 130 135 120 170 140 155 e si ci sono gli psikers con divinazione

Q :
Concerning Leman russ costs, can you clarify the situation ? And is there any trace of divination psykers in the codex ? Excuse if I bother you.
A :
For the first, the points are changed, in the order of the old codex : * list * , and yes there are divination psykers.

So taking my V5 codex, heavy support Leman Russ section, I can confirm the listing (Provided that the source has copied them right of course) :
LRBT : 150
exterminator : 130
vanquisher : 135
eradicator : 120
demolisher : 170
punisher : 140
executioner : 155

I would add that these prices seems coherent with my gaming impressions, except for the executioner, which deserves the ~170 point range pricing, more than the demolisher IMHO. In current rules, and at least in my metagame, he is just that good.

I think when he says the *list* he's referring to page numbers 48 and 49 in the I.G. codex, *NOT* Page 102 where the points costs are listed. It doesn't make sense for the Demolisher to cost 170 points when it should be around the 150 to 160 point range at absolute most.

I may very well be wrong, and am not saying you are wrong either Ravajaxe, just looking at it objectively. We'll see what's right soon hopefully.

Take 'er easy for now.

-Red__Thirst-

Kind of weird to not agree with a simple listing. Haha !
I checked my french codex (p.48-49 and p.102) : the list order is the same. Are they rearranged in english version ? This may not be the case in italian version he is referring to.

The list order is the same between 48-49 and page 102. I'm not sure what red is referring to

At least in english. Maybe different in Italian? If so, would be...odd

Be odd for the Exterminator to cost more than the Splat Cannon..

Posting right after waking up is not advised, especially when you just worked a 12 hour shift and have only gotten ~5 hours of sleep.

Herp-a-derp.

Disregard, I thought for some reason the listing on pages 48 and 49 was a little different from page 102. I'mma go get some coffee now.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Definitely gonna buy and use the new Hydra Kits, partially to steal the turrets to use for use as Hydra Platforms on occaison. (Seeing as they still have the Auto Targeter and sit at 50 points a piece). Although until I see the full codex in person I won't believe the loss of that auto-targeter on the Codex one.

Still excited for this codex as it largely buffs my guard ( 9+ Russes and plenty of Sentinels and Hellhound variants in my army ), and I also love autocannons everywhere on my vehicles (So both Taurox do benefit me). Gonna use the Taurox for all of my Veteran Squads as well

The italian guy (Enrico) explains that executioner low pricing is due to overheating (gets hot) though it is rolled only once (if he recalls correctly).

Hahahaha, man, you have GOT to love the constant regression of technology in 40K. In the course of 5th to 6th edition, the imperium of man has not only forgotten how to add coolant systems to their vehicles, but now every Executioner tank ever built is suddenly defective. Amazing. I applaud you gee dub.

Are you being sarcastic? It makes perfect sense in the setting.

For interested parties, looks like IG has shipped early. I got my tracking number today.

It would make perfect sense in the setting if each edition is a leap forward in time, but they aren't. Everything is always stuck at 2 minutes to midnight. It comes off as the regression of technology because reasons.

 Bull0 wrote:
Are you being sarcastic? It makes perfect sense in the setting.

Yeah, balance wise it makes sense as well. Lobbing 5 plasma blasts a turn without penalty is kinda nuts.

Even the tide suffers GH.

Ergh gets hot on the executioner hurts

 Bull0 wrote:
Are you being sarcastic? It makes perfect sense in the setting.

Irrc, the fluff for the old Executioner Cannon was that they had extremely advanced cooling systems that countered the heat from the plasma. Between 5th and 6th, they forgot how the coolant system works.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
It would make perfect sense in the setting if each edition is a leap forward in time, but they aren't. Everything is always stuck at 2 minutes to midnight. It comes off as the regression of technology because reasons.

GW: "Hmm, let's adjust that unit, and hey, we can do it in a fluffy, in-universe thematically consistent way!"

Creeping-Deth87: "You idiots!" *flips table*

 Thatguyoverthere wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
Are you being sarcastic? It makes perfect sense in the setting.

Irrc, the fluff for the old Executioner Cannon was that they had extremely advanced cooling systems that countered the heat from the plasma. Between 5th and 6th, they forgot how the coolant system works.

Now, that's a retcon. GW is infamous for those.

I miss my pariahs and melta-proof monoliths.

 Thatguyoverthere wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
Are you being sarcastic? It makes perfect sense in the setting.

Irrc, the fluff for the old Executioner Cannon was that they had extremely advanced cooling systems that countered the heat from the plasma. Between 5th and 6th, they forgot how the coolant system works.

That's what it said in that book, and this is what it says in this book. Does that totally rock your world? Like you've never heard of a minor retcon before?

 Thatguyoverthere wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
Are you being sarcastic? It makes perfect sense in the setting.

Irrc, the fluff for the old Executioner Cannon was that they had extremely advanced cooling systems that countered the heat from the plasma. Between 5th and 6th, they forgot how the coolant system works.

Could it be that sneaky grotz defecated all over the original STC at Forgeworld Ryza when WAAAGH! Grax returned and they were only able to salvage parts of it?

 Bull0 wrote:

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
It would make perfect sense in the setting if each edition is a leap forward in time, but they aren't. Everything is always stuck at 2 minutes to midnight. It comes off as the regression of technology because reasons.

GW: "Hmm, let's adjust that unit, and hey, we can do it in a fluffy, in-universe thematically consistent way!"

Creeping-Deth87: "You idiots!" *flips table*

...wow, was that really necessary? Do you normally do this when people disagree with you on the internet? I don't understand how anyone can think of an arbitrary change as consistent. There is nothing consistent about retconning the Executioner's coolant away, just like there was nothing consistent about adding gets hot to 6th edition when the whole basis for not having it in 5th was the totally logical assumption that vehicles had coolant.

...Yes. Executioners main gun now being subject to gets hot is pretty darn rageworthy. It was bad enough I stopped taking the pure plasma bus because the sponsons weren't worth the risk, but now the main gun can do it too? Screw that noise.

Thanks GW, for taking my favorite MC hunte/Terminator Hunter, and turnign it to gak.

On the plus side, I now have a replacement in pask/punisher. Its a shame that he lost the Monstrous Creature part of crack shot though (crack shot game +1 to armor pen, not rerolls, and rerolls to wound on MCs)

Bull0 wrote:

 Thatguyoverthere wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
Are you being sarcastic? It makes perfect sense in the setting.

Irrc, the fluff for the old Executioner Cannon was that they had extremely advanced cooling systems that countered the heat from the plasma. Between 5th and 6th, they forgot how the coolant system works.

That's what it said in that book, and this is what it says in this book. Does that totally rock your world? Like you've never heard of a minor retcon before?

Grimskul wrote:
Could it be that sneaky grotz defecated all over the original STC at Forgeworld Ryza when WAAAGH! Grax returned and they were only able to salvage parts of it?

I'd be alright with it, if they bring it up in the fluff. Otherwise it's just an annoying inconsistency.


I'm pro the Guard getting Nerfed. I miss playing the underdog.

 kir44n wrote:
...Yes. Executioners main gun now being subject to gets hot is pretty darn rageworthy. It was bad enough I stopped taking the pure plasma bus because the sponsons weren't worth the risk, but now the main gun can do it too? Screw that noise.

Thanks GW, for taking my favorite MC hunte/Terminator Hunter, and turnign it to gak.

On the plus side, I now have a replacement in pask/punisher. Its a shame that he lost the Monstrous Creature part of crack shot though (crack shot game +1 to armor pen, not rerolls, and rerolls to wound on MCs)

To be fair, it's still only on a roll of a one, and the vehicle ignores the glance on a 4+.
It's not as if they didn't reduce the price either; apparently the tanks are now less to compensate for this added risk.

Anybody who really cares about retcons (as opposed to actually being upset because the functionality of a unit they are already using has changed) should only be using stuff that appears in the very first Guard Codex....


anything added after that is a retcon (to introduce tech or units that were not present before) since the settings timeline has not changed

Executioner overheating would certainly hurt, I almost stopped using the plasma sponsons suddenly after 6th ed' dropped (and some game-breaking hull point losses).
I asked him directly to confirm, we will see.

anonymous source on Faeit 212 wrote:Here's some info I gleaned from the upcoming White Dwarf.

Nork Dedogg will come with Bullgryn boxsets, you will have to sacrifice 1-2 models to build him and he acts as a bodyguard for an HQ choice.

There is a 3rd box set being released alongside the Hammer of Cadia and Astra Militarum Defense Forces, Catachan Jungle Fighters set. Set includes 2 squads of Catachans, a command squad, a heavy weapons squad, a chimera and a Russ.

Bullgryns are heavily featured in both the battle report (Orks vs AM) and in their own section. Bullgryns are WS 4 BS 3 STR 5 TO 5 IN 2 A 3 LD 6 Arm 4+, Bone 'ead adds +1 A and LD. They come with Hammer of Wrath, Very Bulky and Stubborn and can take the Taurox or Chimera for transport. Can be taken as a squad of 10.

For the cost of roughly 3 marines they come with Grenade Launchers (12' Range, Assault, Str 4 AP 6 blast) and special shield that gives +1 to cover to any model obscured by them AND +1 to the Bullgryn's armor save if they are adjacent to another model with the same shield.

For the cost of another marine each the Bullgryns can be equipped with Power Mauls and Brute Shields. Brute Shields allow rerolls to Hammer of Wrath wounds and confer a 5++ to the Bullgryn.

The battle report introduces a custom scenario that rewards the Orcs bonus VP based on how far up the battlefield they make it, which seemed pretty orky.

Wait, so we are talking about a T5 3W 3+ unit that gives a defensive boost to soldiers behind it, and can lob blasts around? That sounds pretty nifty.
They are probably going to be very pricy though...

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 kir44n wrote:
...Yes. Executioners main gun now being subject to gets hot is pretty darn rageworthy. It was bad enough I stopped taking the pure plasma bus because the sponsons weren't worth the risk, but now the main gun can do it too? Screw that noise.

Thanks GW, for taking my favorite MC hunte/Terminator Hunter, and turnign it to gak.

On the plus side, I now have a replacement in pask/punisher. Its a shame that he lost the Monstrous Creature part of crack shot though (crack shot game +1 to armor pen, not rerolls, and rerolls to wound on MCs)

To be fair, it's still only on a roll of a one, and the vehicle ignores the glance on a 4+.
It's not as if they didn't reduce the price either; apparently the tanks are now less to compensate for this added risk.

Put Pask in an executioner and reroll those ones. If you get a one yet again, it was simply meant to be.

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Calling it now... Wyvern will be auto include in 1 month. The thing is a beast. Really no jk. Put me on record as having said it. I think it will top whirlwinds and TFcannons for sure.

Quoted for the future !
We will see, for the moment given the nerf on hydra, it sounds like wyvern is the superior option in the kit. Having four TL barrages means 8 potential scatter rolls at your disposal, to snipe and optimise yield of your shots. It replaces more or less the Griffon, except having much less power against opposing vehicles. This tank is at the same price than chimera, and given its bulk, can hide small units easily.

Is anyone else more than a little concerned about the disaster that will be trying to lay out four scatter blast templates, re-rolling each? Take a squad of three wyverns and everyone, including you, will hate yourself every time they fire. It's such a clunky way to emulate accuracy, just have it -1" from the scatter! Easy solution.

 TheSilo wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Calling it now... Wyvern will be auto include in 1 month. The thing is a beast. Really no jk. Put me on record as having said it. I think it will top whirlwinds and TFcannons for sure.

Quoted for the future !
We will see, for the moment given the nerf on hydra, it sounds like wyvern is the superior option in the kit. Having four TL barrages means 8 potential scatter rolls at your disposal, to snipe and optimise yield of your shots. It replaces more or less the Griffon, except having much less power against opposing vehicles. This tank is at the same price than chimera, and given its bulk, can hide small units easily.

Is anyone else more than a little concerned about the disaster that will be trying to lay out four scatter blast templates, re-rolling each? Take a squad of three wyverns and everyone, including you, will hate yourself every time they fire. It's such a clunky way to emulate accuracy, just have it -1" from the scatter! Easy solution.

Actually, it's not as clunky as you think. Unlike non-blast weapons, you are allowed to choose if you want to reroll the scatter or not.

So unless the IG player really wants those hits, there shouldn't be that many rerolls.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
It would make perfect sense in the setting if each edition is a leap forward in time, but they aren't. Everything is always stuck at 2 minutes to midnight. It comes off as the regression of technology because reasons.

GW: "Hmm, let's adjust that unit, and hey, we can do it in a fluffy, in-universe thematically consistent way!"

Creeping-Deth87: "You idiots!" *flips table*

...wow, was that really necessary? Do you normally do this when people disagree with you on the internet? I don't understand how anyone can think of an arbitrary change as consistent. There is nothing consistent about retconning the Executioner's coolant away, just like there was nothing consistent about adding gets hot to 6th edition when the whole basis for not having it in 5th was the totally logical assumption that vehicles had coolant.

Do I always what, gently poke fun? Sometimes. Do you always react this badly? Seriously, that was light.

And you're having trouble understanding because I said it was "thematically consistent" and you focussed purely on "consistent". Hope that helps.

Yeah, adding 'thematically' really doesn't help your case. In fact, it actually makes it worse since theme is the whole reason vehicles didn't have gets hot in 5th edition and why the executioner didn't have it either, so it's actually quite thematically inconsistent to arbitrarily make these changes.

This was obviously done to eliminate the triple Executioner squadrons we were seeing winning all the top-tier tournaments

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
Yeah, adding 'thematically' really doesn't help your case. In fact, it actually makes it worse since theme is the whole reason vehicles didn't have gets hot in 5th edition and why the executioner didn't have it either, so it's actually quite thematically inconsistent to arbitrarily make these changes.

While that's agreeable, this could just be the Imperium's attempt at fielding more Executioners for the sheer firepower. What would make sense, though, is having a point costed upgrade to make said executioner one of the original ones whereas it ignores Gets hot! saves.

There's a reason I don't use the Executioner. It's price was one of them (somewhat mitigated now as it's apparently much cheaper)

Secondly, Plasmaboat Leman Russes just didn't feel right, that and any chance to hurt my own vehicle I tended to avoid if possible. That and to field said plasma boat I was paying almost as much as a Land Raider.

Still, may consider running one with just the plasma turret and heavy bolters across the board everywhere else to give it some added dakka. It'll also be much cheaper that way. I prefer not sinking too many points into a single model if I can. I run my standard Leman Russes and Demolishers with just hull mounted Heavy Flamers and other variants typically just get heavy bolter sponsons if that. Heck, I don't even run sponsons on the Vanquisher, opting to just put the Lascannon in the hull and call it a day.

Just my thoughts. Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

 kir44n wrote:
This was obviously done to eliminate the triple Executioner squadrons we were seeing winning all the top-tier tournaments

Executioners were certainly terrifying in my meta. Anyone with marines, terminators, monstrous creatures or light vehicles is terrified of those things, especially if an allied Inquisitor makes them twin-linked. It's even more effective at 1250 since at that level you can fit in three of them plus some troops that don't suck.

 The Airman wrote:

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
Yeah, adding 'thematically' really doesn't help your case. In fact, it actually makes it worse since theme is the whole reason vehicles didn't have gets hot in 5th edition and why the executioner didn't have it either, so it's actually quite thematically inconsistent to arbitrarily make these changes.

While that's agreeable, this could just be the Imperium's attempt at fielding more Executioners for the sheer firepower. What would make sense, though, is having a point costed upgrade to make said executioner one of the original ones whereas it ignores Gets hot! saves.

See, THAT is an elegant solution. I would have been totally cool with that, as it allows the studio to introduce gets hot for vehicles without making it seem like a totally arbitrary change from the last edition.

A demolisher running a Hull Lascannon, and sponson MM used to be a pretty good vehicle/terminator destroyer back in 5th. The removal of Lumbering Behemoth made paying for all those extra guns on a Demolisher a waste of points. I'm not actually sure theres a good main weapon to synergize with the sponson MM's anymore

Well dreadnoughts or sentinels carrying plasma cannons as well as russes with them on their side sponsons now all suffer from gets hot, so i dont really see why the spammed executioner should get special treatment, ESPECIALLY now that its gone down in price by quite a bit and unlike other russes, actually does not suffer from the ordnance nerf. Tank is still viable - are you really that afraid of rolling a 1? Ioncannon Hammerheads and Riptides have to deal with this as well and they arent sucking at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kir44n wrote:
A demolisher running a Hull Lascannon, and sponson MM used to be a pretty good vehicle/terminator destroyer back in 5th. The removal of Lumbering Behemoth made paying for all those extra guns on a Demolisher a waste of points. I'm not actually sure theres a good main weapon to synergize with the sponson MM's anymore

Works great with the Vanquisher. Enemy armor getting within uncomfortable range? Triple the firepower.

 Sir Arun wrote:
Well dreadnoughts or sentinels carrying plasma cannons as well as russes with them on their side sponsons now all suffer from gets hot, so i dont really see why the spammed executioner should get special treatment, ESPECIALLY now that its gone down in price by quite a bit and unlike other russes, actually does not suffer from the ordnance nerf. Tank is still viable - are you really that afraid of rolling a 1? Ioncannon Hammerheads and Riptides have to deal with this as well and they arent sucking at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kir44n wrote:
A demolisher running a Hull Lascannon, and sponson MM used to be a pretty good vehicle/terminator destroyer back in 5th. The removal of Lumbering Behemoth made paying for all those extra guns on a Demolisher a waste of points. I'm not actually sure theres a good main weapon to synergize with the sponson MM's anymore

Works great with the Vanquisher. Enemy armor getting within uncomfortable range? Triple the firepower.

I suppose there is that. So if an enemy deep striked (deep struck?) a Dreadnought in your lines, that loadout could definitely vaporize it. And that loadout (if the sponsons haven't changed cost) would only run 175 pts if the rumors are true. I'm sure Peregrine would argue its an absurd waste of points, but it seems amusing in any case.

 Sir Arun wrote:
Well dreadnoughts or sentinels carrying plasma cannons as well as russes with them on their side sponsons now all suffer from gets hot, so i dont really see why the spammed executioner should get special treatment, ESPECIALLY now that its gone down in price by quite a bit and unlike other russes, actually does not suffer from the ordnance nerf. Tank is still viable - are you really that afraid of rolling a 1? Ioncannon Hammerheads and Riptides have to deal with this as well and they arent sucking at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kir44n wrote:
A demolisher running a Hull Lascannon, and sponson MM used to be a pretty good vehicle/terminator destroyer back in 5th. The removal of Lumbering Behemoth made paying for all those extra guns on a Demolisher a waste of points. I'm not actually sure theres a good main weapon to synergize with the sponson MM's anymore

Works great with the Vanquisher. Enemy armor getting within uncomfortable range? Triple the firepower.

I don't know where this rumour popped up, or even if it popped up at all (from what I can its just a suggestion of what would happen that's now being considered fact) for a start, but allow me to remind you that on average you're losing a hull point every 2 times you fire if the change is put in place.

Murphy's Law dictates that its going to happen at the worst possible time, such as when you're being worn down by long range AT/depending on a glance spammer to roll badly and in a tournament that is unacceptable. You could even roll 3's in a row and lose the tank turn 1- that's far from the least likely thing I've seen happen either.

 Sir Arun wrote:
Riptides have to deal with this as well and they arent sucking at all.

Kinda irrelevant as they get there 2+ armor

But it seems they are getting Divination pyskers anyway so just reroll em 1s lol

I have to agree. The executioner is still a great tank even if it does get hot. I think their is and will be tons of "fail saves" to keep the 1s from sticking and the points decrease helps off set the cost. The executioner will still be there for me as elite and all around troop killer.

I cannot believe the Executioner main gun gets hot.

Gutted beyond belief.

From what I've seen so far, I think that this book will provide me with a good (temporary) stopping point with 40k. Imperial Guard are pretty much the only 40k army that I've ever enjoyed, and this new book appears to be a bit of a kick to the nuts. I'm not really into the habit of paying people $50 to kick me in the nuts, so...

Vehicles never got hot before, the plasma had coolers built in, this is just more make all things the same with a slight difference in syrup over vanilla

Are we forgetting something. Vehicles get a 4+ save to negate the loss of the HP... so it's not super terrible.

 SkaerKrow wrote:
I'm not really into the habit of paying people $50 to kick me in the nuts, so...

Here here! Exalted on that one, that's funny.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheKbob wrote:
Are we forgetting something. Vehicles get a 4+ save to negate the loss of the HP... so it's not super terrible.

Stop reminding folks of the rules they tend to forget...

I've looked around but couldn't find it:
When will the Guard dex be available in stores?

Friday.

 TheKbob wrote:
Are we forgetting something. Vehicles get a 4+ save to negate the loss of the HP... so it's not super terrible.

But it's still a 1/6 chance to lose your shot. So the point drop is pretty much negated by the divination slave you have to drag around to prescience it every turn.

There's my 1%.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I've looked around but couldn't find it:
When will the Guard dex be available in stores?

Saturday (technically Friday at midnight).

However the shipments will be in stores tomorrow sitting in boxes waiting. Some stores will be showing them off and if you're lucky can get them early.

Between the chance (1/12 is still feasible) of losing one of my THREE hullpoints to my own damn shooting, or picking something else to be an MC/Terminator hunter, I'd rather pick a different unit. As it stands, I stopped using plasma sponsons the day I got 2 get hot tests and failed the 4+ save. Killing my own tank made me give that gak up.

There are less suicidal ways to put 3-5 wounds on an MC, or dropping a couple terminators.

I eagerly dread this release, if these rumors hold water Guard with have been given more than just a trimming and I hope this does not set a precedent for the rest of GWs days.

Just GW trying to figure out new ways to sell more models.

I'm looking forward to figuring out the new ways to play. The challenge there is trying to forget how you played before - which is hard.

Especially when you've played through multiple editions.

 Peregrine wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:
Are we forgetting something. Vehicles get a 4+ save to negate the loss of the HP... so it's not super terrible.

But it's still a 1/6 chance to lose your shot. So the point drop is pretty much negated by the divination slave you have to drag around to prescience it every turn.

I was under the impression that, since it's a blast weapon, you can't reroll the Gets Hot roll?

Yeah I am excited for new structure but, I love marbo even though I never used him, and I used the hell out of Chenkov (Yeah I'm a masochist for massive Guard foot slogger armies) If I can at least get Chenkov's abilities or Rahem's abilities in the form of actual Commanders (As they should be) I will be over the moon.

Overall I'm sort of apprehensive about this release, both equal parts excited and dread I suppose.

Has anyone been fiddling with lists that involve ABG's coupled with Wyvern and Hydra support? I think they'll be pricey, but I missed out on the massed armor days of the previous incarnations of IG...er AM, whatever. Either way, I'm sort of interested in what the new 'dex has to offer.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:
Are we forgetting something. Vehicles get a 4+ save to negate the loss of the HP... so it's not super terrible.

But it's still a 1/6 chance to lose your shot. So the point drop is pretty much negated by the divination slave you have to drag around to prescience it every turn.

I was under the impression that, since it's a blast weapon, you can't reroll the Gets Hot roll?

Anything that would grant a "Get's Hot" weapon a reroll to hit (twin linked or otherwise) allows for the reroll of a "Get's Hot" check for blast weapons.

So are we going to see plastic rough riders?

 tjnorwoo wrote:
So are we going to see plastic rough riders?

I'm going to go with no.

I'd be very surprised if it was some sort of additional wave release.

Any word on Hell hound point cost?

 rabidguineapig wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I am still not seeing where Marbo has gone away.

That's cause he's too damn sneaky.


But here it is: http://natfka.blogspot.com/2014/04/astra-militarum-vendetta-and-sly-marbo.html

Look out he's behind you! I bet Sly Marbo has snuck his way past GW's editors.

That idea entertains me way more than it should.

I haven't heard of anything, but with the price of Leman Russ tanks dropping like bricks, Hellhounds have to be going down too. Several Russes are in the 120-130 point range, which is what you pay currently for Hellhound variants. I'd expect a 10-20 point drop.

 Las wrote:
Ergh gets hot on the executioner hurts

Executioner plasma cannons don't get hot. As long as you don't have the PC sponsons you won't have the gets hot issue.

I've seen a few people saying that Priests and Psykers don't add much when you can already get Inquisitors, but there are a couple of things which I think make them worthwhile. They offer similar buff abilities for fewer points and you can take loads of them. I can't really see you not wanting to take a priest with your bullgryns, or divination dudes for pretty much every major shooty unit (a whole platoon with orders and multiple divination buffs has got to be pretty nasty).

Chimeras getting a price hike is bad, but somewhat offset by the fact that they now have reasonably priced upgrades. If you run them with Dozer Blades, Stubbers and Extra Armour, they actually got cheaper. Of course, nobody gave their chimeras all those upgrades because they were overpriced.

The Hydra and Vendetta do compare poorly to the Stalker and Storm Raven now, but I think those are two of the better vehicles in the SM codex and the difference isn't that great. The HB makes the Hydra slightly better against infantry, so it's actually less of a dedicated AA vehicle than the Stalker. Not quite sure how tank commands work, but there seems to be some possibility that their orders might also make Hydras a little better.

Every veteran build except for melta vets has got a boost. Melta vets can be replaced by Scions (who get two melta in a squad or up to four in their command squad) or possibly with melta/demolition vets if the demolition doctrine has been dropped in price by a similar amount to the others. Depending on cost and options, command squads and special weapon squads may also be viable in that role (the company command squad already offers better tank-killing power than a veteran squad for fewer points, although at the cost of durability and being far less available).

There's also a faint possibility that you might be able to take combi-meltas on some characters. If you can give one to a sergeant and one to a priest/commissar/psyker, then you actually get more melta shots from a single Chimera than you did before. If psykers are cheap enough, then they can use prescience to effectively buff melta-chimera units, making them more deadly than before. I wouldn't say that the mechanised melta squad is any less viable until we see the full codex.

 Zuul wrote:

 Las wrote:
Ergh gets hot on the executioner hurts

Executioner plasma cannons don't get hot. As long as you don't have the PC sponsons you won't have the gets hot issue.

The recent leak has the executioner at 155pts with the gets hot rule on its main cannon.

I'm strongly considering a full Veteran build for my Vostroyans, so far I've got five full squads of Veterans, all will likely be fielded with the grenadiers doctrine except for one.

(Points estimated to be the same as current codex, except for the plasma pistol on one sergeant being more expensive by 5 points, and the revised prices for Grenadiers, or assumed price of the Demolitionists doctrine for the melta drop squad)

Two of them will have voxcasters Lascannon & 2x Sniper Rifles - 120 each

One will have a voxcaster, 2x Plasmagun & Plasma Pistol Sgt. (Chimera squad) - 125 + Chimera cost

One will be 2x Meltagun with the Demolitionists doctrine (Valkyrie squad) - ~90 to 95 + Valkyrie Cost

One will have a voxcaster, Lascannon & 2x Flamers. - 105.

All of my troops, minus vehicles noted for them, will cost me 530 points total. Not bad for 50 guys, all of which are BS:4, the majority of which are 4+ save.

I'll run a single CCS for one of my HQ choices with a Company Standard, Medic, voxcaster and a spare plasma gun for purpose, along with an attached MotF, and Astropath. I anticipate this squad will run me ~140ish points.

That's less than 700 points for 55+ infantry, leaving me in excess of 1100 points remaining to build an 1850 point army to put vehicles in the list and/or add in an ally if I so choose.

Of course I could also do the power blob, but I like the thought of having a Veteran themed army all wearing Carapace armor that isn't Scions. How viable will it be? Who knows, but it gets me excited to try it and see if I can make it work.

Still bummed about not having Griffon Heavy Mortars in the codex, but I'll still be able to field them typically and hopefully we'll get a method to include them later in some form or another, be it a supplement or digital release.

Time will tell, Sufficient to say, I'm looking forward to getting my hands on the new book this week.

Take it easy for now guys.

-Red__Thirst-

 Red__Thirst wrote:
I'm strongly considering a full Veteran build for my Vostroyans, so far I've got five full squads of Veterans, all will likely be fielded with the grenadiers doctrine except for one.

(Points estimated to be the same as current codex, except for the plasma pistol on one sergeant being more expensive by 5 points, and the revised prices for Grenadiers, or assumed price of the Demolitionists doctrine for the melta drop squad)

Two of them will have voxcasters Lascannon & 2x Sniper Rifles - 120 each

One will have a voxcaster, 2x Plasmagun & Plasma Pistol Sgt. (Chimera squad) - 125 + Chimera cost

One will be 2x Meltagun with the Demolitionists doctrine (Valkyrie squad) - ~90 to 95 + Valkyrie Cost

One will have a voxcaster, Lascannon & 2x Flamers. - 105.

All of my troops, minus vehicles noted for them, will cost me 530 points total. Not bad for 50 guys, all of which are BS:4, the majority of which are 4+ save.

I'll run a single CCS for one of my HQ choices with a Company Standard, Medic, voxcaster and a spare plasma gun for purpose, along with an attached MotF, and Astropath. I anticipate this squad will run me ~140ish points.

That's less than 700 points for 55+ infantry, leaving me in excess of 1100 points remaining to build an 1850 point army to put vehicles in the list and/or add in an ally if I so choose.

Of course I could also do the power blob, but I like the thought of having a Veteran themed army all wearing Carapace armor that isn't Scions. How viable will it be? Who knows, but it gets me excited to try it and see if I can make it work.

Still bummed about not having Griffon Heavy Mortars in the codex, but I'll still be able to field them typically and hopefully we'll get a method to include them later in some form or another, be it a supplement or digital release.

Time will tell, Sufficient to say, I'm looking forward to getting my hands on the new book this week.

Take it easy for now guys.

-Red__Thirst-

I really like that list.

I am going to be running mechanised vets, tanks and now scions (got to read through the new book, I fell in love with the fluff).

Have we seen the stats for the Punisher's cannon? I don't have my Apocalypse book handy, but I seem to recall the Stormlord's gatling cannon only getting something like 12 shots (or less, as I said, don't have my book). If GW has ANY brains left, I can't see them letting the Punisher stay as-is in the dex.

 Happygrunt wrote:

I really like that list.

I am going to be running mechanised vets, tanks and now scions (got to read through the new book, I fell in love with the fluff).

Thanks, Happygrunt. Glad you like it.

I'm debating putting another 10 man squad of veterans in the list with a pair of flamers in a second chimera to run with the plasma crew and help saturate the area with additional firepower. Also, running six troops squads makes me happy.

I may yet get a small squad of Scions to run with my Vostroyans, haven't made up my mind yet, but the Vostroyan Firstborn don't strike me as being a Regiment that "plays well with others" even if they're Scions. I like their look overall (painted up in similar colors they would blend in well with my Firstborn force) but I would almost rather spend those points on more Veteran infantry that can score and having six troops squads.

Also, I have a fully painted Psyker Battle Squad that I'm going to be interested in finding ways to plug in and use. Might try and break them into two five man squads since I don't anticipate having any elites in the army outside of them (That may change, who knows) and have some extra prescience or other powers floating around to support my infantry. Telekinesis and Pyromancy might also be fun powers to roll out and try to see what I can get to use for gits and shiggles.

Guess we'll see what we can see. Hoping I can get my hands on a codex and at least look through it before Friday/Saturday and at least start seeing what's in, what's out, and stop going on rumor finally.

Take it easy for now, and best of luck with your force Happygrunt Hope I might see some pictures of it later once you've got some of it painted.

-Red__Thirst-





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stormonu wrote:
Have we seen the stats for the Punisher's cannon? I don't have my Apocalypse book handy, but I seem to recall the Stormlord's gatling cannon only getting something like 12 shots (or less, as I said, don't have my book). If GW has ANY brains left, I can't see them letting the Punisher stay as-is in the dex.

The Stormlords gatling cannon is vastly superior to the Punisher Cannon.

For one, it's a Vulcan Megabolter, ST:6, AP:4 (Or 3?, I don't recall exactly) with Rending if my memory serves. It's Heavy 15 I think, and if the Stormlord is stationary it can fire TWICE in one round for 30 shots at a single target. It's got a 36" range also. Plus, the stormlord can carry 40 models. Forty. Infantry.

The Punisher Cannon is ST:5, AP:-, Heavy 20, no rending (unless you have Pask in it) and it's range is shorter at 24". Yes it can shoot more on the move than a Stormlord if they're both moving, but I know I'd rather have the Punisher Cannon Shooting at me than the Vulcan Mega Bolter.

What exactly do you want to change about it? It's not a terribly broken weapon. Even with prescience on the tank allowing for rerolls, you'll only average ~15 hits, with ~10 wounds or so on average. That's two or three dead marines or one to two dead terminators. Not horrible, but nothing to scream cheese about either. Heck the Executioner Leman Russ will kill more marines on average with just two of it's three Plasma blasts (Cover not withstanding).

Just offering my thoughts on that, would you care to elaborate on where you're coming from? I'm confused (Not being snarky, I'm genuinely confused).

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

 Red__Thirst wrote:


The Stormlords gatling cannon is vastly superior to the Punisher Cannon.

For one, it's a Vulcan Megabolter, ST:6, AP:4 (Or 3?, I don't recall exactly) with Rending if my memory serves. It's Heavy 15 I think, and if the Stormlord is stationary it can fire TWICE in one round for 30 shots at a single target. It's got a 36" range also. Plus, the stormlord can carry 40 models. Forty. Infantry.

The Punisher Cannon is ST:5, AP:-, Heavy 20, no rending (unless you have Pask in it) and it's range is shorter at 24". Yes it can shoot more on the move than a Stormlord if they're both moving, but I know I'd rather have the Punisher Cannon Shooting at me than the Vulcan Mega Bolter.

What exactly do you want to change about it? It's not a terribly broken weapon. Even with prescience on the tank allowing for rerolls, you'll only average ~15 hits, with ~10 wounds or so on average. That's two or three dead marines or one to two dead terminators. Not horrible, but nothing to scream cheese about either. Heck the Executioner Leman Russ will kill more marines on average with just two of it's three Plasma blasts (Cover not withstanding).

Just offering my thoughts on that, would you care to elaborate on where you're coming from? I'm confused (Not being snarky, I'm genuinely confused).

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

It is heavy 15 S 6 ap 3 range 60 but no rending and can be fired twice at the same target or different if it didn't move for the mega bolter. I fully agree that the storm lord is vastly more powerful then the Punisher but it also costs much more.

Thanks for the correction White Ninja. Yea I figured I was a little off on the Vulcan Mega Bolters stats, though not much thankfully (Mostly just missed the range).

And yea, considering you can get two (or even three perhaps) Punisher toting Leman Russes for the cost of one Stormlord, I for one would rather have the three Punishers vs. one Stormlord.

60 ST:5 AP:- shots on the move > 30 ST:6 AP:3 shots from a stationary vehicle.

Just my opinion

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Depends on what you are shooting I'd say. Marines will fare far worse against 30 AP3 than 60 AP -

While Conscripts are dirt cheap and probably too effective for their cost, are they worth the $150 USD to field them as a full squad?

Regardless, the shenanigans you can pull off with dual fifty man Conscript blobs, provided you can put a couple of priests in there. 300+ dollars well spent?

 Red__Thirst wrote:
60 ST:5 AP:- shots on the move > 30 ST:6 AP:3 shots from a stationary vehicle.

Not really. The Stormlord has considerably better firepower against anything with a good armor save, a much better chance of killing a vehicle target, and much longer range that allows it to not care about moving while the LR Punisher has to constantly worry about whether it can get its 24" gun within range. Oh, and it's a lot more durable and acts as a bunker for a few units to shoot out of.

Does anyone know where to get the old priest models with the eviscerator from? The only priest like models on the GW website are the 2 Missionary's with chainsword models and the Missionary with Plasma gun.

FatBoyNoSlim wrote:
Does anyone know where to get the old priest models with the eviscerator from? The only priest like models on the GW website are the 2 Missionary's with chainsword models and the Missionary with Plasma gun.

You are going to need to ebay it, trade someone for it, or kitbash your own.

Black Library wrote:Thank you for your email. We have a small Digital Editions team who work on the Codexes and digital content for our game systems. As such the Codex: Militarum Tempestus is only available on iTunes. We do not have any current plans to produce this title as a standard eBook, but we will endeavor to bring out as much of our content out as standard eBooks as the schedule allows.

Many thanks,

Black Library Customer Services

anonymous source on Faeit 212 wrote:Astra Militarum Defence Force (1x cadian command squad, 2x cadian shock troops, 3x heavy weapon squads, 1x leman russ battle tank, 1x chimera transport)

Hammer of Cadia (3 hellhounds, 3 leman russ battle tanks aaaaaaaaaaaaand (fanfares) 1x hellhammer!!!)

anonymous source on Faeit 212 wrote:I had the chance to look through next weeks white dwarf. The new IGbattleforce comes with 3 heavy weapons teams ( I checked because it was a question in your comments) and retails for 165 US. The Armored spearheadcosts 330 US. Ogryn cost 47 US. Both a cadian and catachan version of thebattleforce will be available.

Did the math today, and assuming all the rules are true, you could do a list that looks like

Pask in a standard LRBT (190)
LRBT (120)
LRBT (120)
LRBT Executioner (170)
LRBT Executioner (170)
LRBT Executioner(170)
Veteran Squads, /w 2 Flamers, Carapace Armor (80)
Veteran Squads, /w 2 plasma guns (90)
Veteran Squads, /w 2 plasma guns (90)
Valkyrie (100)
Valkyrie (100)
Valkyrie (100)

6 tanks, three fliers and three vet squads for 1500 points. Shift Pask around or exchange Executioners to taste. Completed mech'd up.

I think the Valkyrie costs 125 points base now according to the rumor pages I've seen floating around.

Otherwise your costs look pretty close to what I've seen. And yea, all 'mech all day. Looks like an interesting list. Hope the opponents brought anti-tank firepower, they'll need it.

Take 'er easy.

-Red__Thirst-

 The Airman wrote:
While Conscripts are dirt cheap and probably too effective for their cost, are they worth the $150 USD to field them as a full squad?

Regardless, the shenanigans you can pull off with dual fifty man Conscript blobs, provided you can put a couple of priests in there. 300+ dollars well spent?

Dont buy from GW. I am very sure you can quickly make that amount of models for very cheap using 3rd party companies.

 Red__Thirst wrote:
I think the Valkyrie costs 125 points base now according to the rumor pages I've seen floating around.

Otherwise your costs look pretty close to what I've seen. And yea, all 'mech all day. Looks like an interesting list. Hope the opponents brought anti-tank firepower, they'll need it.

Take 'er easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Ahhhh, did not know that. I wonder what the extra 25 points is paying for.

Good catch.

 The Airman wrote:
While Conscripts are dirt cheap and probably too effective for their cost, are they worth the $150 USD to field them as a full squad?

Regardless, the shenanigans you can pull off with dual fifty man Conscript blobs, provided you can put a couple of priests in there. 300+ dollars well spent?

Better question: Are they worth wasting half your life in the movement phase and the other half unpacking and repacking your army

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Ahhhh, did not know that. I wonder what the extra 25 points is paying for.

The fact that Valkyries are "overpowered" and need nerfing, like everything else in the current codex. Though it's actually not too bad, rocket pods were mandatory anyway and they got a price drop, so the total cost for a real Valkyrie is pretty much the same.

FatBoyNoSlim wrote:
Does anyone know where to get the old priest models with the eviscerator from? The only priest like models on the GW website are the 2 Missionary's with chainsword models and the Missionary with Plasma gun.

Watch out though, the codex only has a shotgun or a plasmagun option now, no more IG priests with eviscerators

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Calling it now... Wyvern will be auto include in 1 month. The thing is a beast. Really no jk. Put me on record as having said it. I think it will top whirlwinds and TFcannons for sure.

Quoted for the future !
We will see, for the moment given the nerf on hydra, it sounds like wyvern is the superior option in the kit. Having four TL barrages means 8 potential scatter rolls at your disposal, to snipe and optimise yield of your shots. It replaces more or less the Griffon, except having much less power against opposing vehicles. This tank is at the same price than chimera, and given its bulk, can hide small units easily.

Is anyone else more than a little concerned about the disaster that will be trying to lay out four scatter blast templates, re-rolling each? Take a squad of three wyverns and everyone, including you, will hate yourself every time they fire. It's such a clunky way to emulate accuracy, just have it -1" from the scatter! Easy solution.

Actually, it's not as clunky as you think. Unlike non-blast weapons, you are allowed to choose if you want to reroll the scatter or not.

So unless the IG player really wants those hits, there shouldn't be that many rerolls.

No different than a thudd gun with prescience.

Roll to hit for the lead shot, reroll if you don't like the result.

Figure out the max# of hits possible on a hit for trailing shots

Roll a big handful of scatter dice and reroll scatters.

It's really not bad as long as you buy a bunch of scatter dice from a bits shop.

 schadenfreude wrote:


No different than a thudd gun with prescience.

Roll to hit for the lead shot, reroll if you don't like the result.

Figure out the max# of hits possible on a hit for trailing shots

Roll a big handful of scatter dice and reroll scatters.

It's really not bad as long as you buy a bunch of scatter dice from a bits shop.

You don't even need to do that. I've always found that in an instance such as this, you do as follows.

Declare target, check range, if the target is in range of the barrage weapon (A pair of Griffon Heavy Mortars, in my case) I would place the template over a target model in the unit I'm shooting at and roll scatter + 2D6. If I didn't like the result, I would re-roll the scatter + 2D6 and take the result. Where-ever the template winds up, I check for number of hits. Shot one, complete. Second mortar remains to be resolved now. I then pick up JUST the scatter dice and roll it to see which direction the template 'flips'. As before, accurate bombardment allows me to re-roll the scatter dice if I don't like the result of the first scatter dice roll. I then 'flip' the template in the direction shown on the scatter dice (or in whatever direction I like if I rolled a 'hit') and count up number of hits. Add the number of hits from the first Mortar round to the number of hits from the second Mortar round and roll that many to-wound. Opponent resolves saves if any.

That's all there is to it.

Barrage such as this would be resolved the exact same way, as I've interpreted the rules correctly, the Wyvern has a pair of heavy 2, Twinlinked Mortars on the turret. So each tank would have two independent two-shot small blasts, each resolved as a pair in their own right, and then all to-wound rolls would be rolled together at the end.

So: Pick up small template, declare target, check range, place template on a model within range, roll scatter + 2D6, if not content with the roll, reroll the entire thing (Scatter + 2D6) and keep the second result. Find out how many models were hit, note that down and roll the scatter again to see what direction the template moves. Reroll the scatter dice one time if you're not happy with the second roll, count up total hits for that weapon. Then do it again for the second cannon on the Wyvern.

Do that for each tank in the squadron twice, then roll to wound, re-rolling failed to-wound rolls once due to Shred.

If you have a squadron, then resolve each tanks hits on the unit individually then tally up total hits and roll that many dice (re-rolling failed to wound once again) and let your opponent resolve armor saves.

I don't see it as that difficult, but I'm weird that way I guess.

Take it easy for now guys.

-Red__Thirst-

 Kroothawk wrote:

Black Library wrote:Thank you for your email. We have a small Digital Editions team who work on the Codexes and digital content for our game systems. As such the Codex: Militarum Tempestus is only available on iTunes. We do not have any current plans to produce this title as a standard eBook, but we will endeavor to bring out as much of our content out as standard eBooks as the schedule allows.

Many thanks,

Black Library Customer Services

Huh, now where did I put that snare, I need to trap a few crows for several people around here to eat. You know, the ones who insisted that anyone concerned that GW's iBook deal with Apple would make owning an iPad a requirement to legally have access to all the digital exclusive stuff were nutters, because we could just get the epub/mobi versions and view them on PC....

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:


No different than a thudd gun with prescience.

Roll to hit for the lead shot, reroll if you don't like the result.

Figure out the max# of hits possible on a hit for trailing shots

Roll a big handful of scatter dice and reroll scatters.

It's really not bad as long as you buy a bunch of scatter dice from a bits shop.

You don't even need to do that. I've always found that in an instance such as this, you do as follows.

Declare target, check range, if the target is in range of the barrage weapon (A pair of Griffon Heavy Mortars, in my case) I would place the template over a target model in the unit I'm shooting at and roll scatter + 2D6. If I didn't like the result, I would re-roll the scatter + 2D6 and take the result. Where-ever the template winds up, I check for number of hits. Shot one, complete. Second mortar remains to be resolved now. I then pick up JUST the scatter dice and roll it to see which direction the template 'flips'. As before, accurate bombardment allows me to re-roll the scatter dice if I don't like the result of the first scatter dice roll. I then 'flip' the template in the direction shown on the scatter dice (or in whatever direction I like if I rolled a 'hit') and count up number of hits. Add the number of hits from the first Mortar round to the number of hits from the second Mortar round and roll that many to-wound. Opponent resolves saves if any.

That's all there is to it.

Barrage such as this would be resolved the exact same way, as I've interpreted the rules correctly, the Wyvern has a pair of heavy 2, Twinlinked Mortars on the turret. So each tank would have two independent two-shot small blasts, each resolved as a pair in their own right, and then all to-wound rolls would be rolled together at the end.

So: Pick up small template, declare target, check range, place template on a model within range, roll scatter + 2D6, if not content with the roll, reroll the entire thing (Scatter + 2D6) and keep the second result. Find out how many models were hit, note that down and roll the scatter again to see what direction the template moves. Reroll the scatter dice one time if you're not happy with the second roll, count up total hits for that weapon. Then do it again for the second cannon on the Wyvern.

Do that for each tank in the squadron twice, then roll to wound, re-rolling failed to-wound rolls once due to Shred.

If you have a squadron, then resolve each tanks hits on the unit individually then tally up total hits and roll that many dice (re-rolling failed to wound once again) and let your opponent resolve armor saves.

I don't see it as that difficult, but I'm weird that way I guess.

Take it easy for now guys.

-Red__Thirst-

The thing is, the rules for multiple barrage stay constant. It doesn't say to roll seperately for each gun. You are rolling together for the ENTIRE unit. So the first shot is the ranging shot, determining the general area where the rest will hit. If it doesn't land where you want, reroll. If it ends up where you want, add up the number of wounds, then roll the scatter for the following shots. The rules state that the following blasts MAY cover the same exact area as the original if you roll a hit. You must roll to wounds seperatly for each blast BUT it does not say a model must be under said template to be removed(assuming we are talking about the core blast area), you just have to follow the "closest from the center" rule.

So put the original blast in the densest concentration of enemies, having all following"hits" land in the same location (thus giving you the largest pool of hits). And set aside dice so you can remember how many wounds come from the center of any scatters that didn't get re-rolled back on target.

Basically, the wyvern will encourage you to have multiple blast markers & lots of dice to keep track of wound pools, but shouldnt be that bad once you get used to how to do it.

 kir44n wrote:

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:


No different than a thudd gun with prescience.

Roll to hit for the lead shot, reroll if you don't like the result.

Figure out the max# of hits possible on a hit for trailing shots

Roll a big handful of scatter dice and reroll scatters.

It's really not bad as long as you buy a bunch of scatter dice from a bits shop.

You don't even need to do that. I've always found that in an instance such as this, you do as follows.

Declare target, check range, if the target is in range of the barrage weapon (A pair of Griffon Heavy Mortars, in my case) I would place the template over a target model in the unit I'm shooting at and roll scatter + 2D6. If I didn't like the result, I would re-roll the scatter + 2D6 and take the result. Where-ever the template winds up, I check for number of hits. Shot one, complete. Second mortar remains to be resolved now. I then pick up JUST the scatter dice and roll it to see which direction the template 'flips'. As before, accurate bombardment allows me to re-roll the scatter dice if I don't like the result of the first scatter dice roll. I then 'flip' the template in the direction shown on the scatter dice (or in whatever direction I like if I rolled a 'hit') and count up number of hits. Add the number of hits from the first Mortar round to the number of hits from the second Mortar round and roll that many to-wound. Opponent resolves saves if any.

That's all there is to it.

Barrage such as this would be resolved the exact same way, as I've interpreted the rules correctly, the Wyvern has a pair of heavy 2, Twinlinked Mortars on the turret. So each tank would have two independent two-shot small blasts, each resolved as a pair in their own right, and then all to-wound rolls would be rolled together at the end.

So: Pick up small template, declare target, check range, place template on a model within range, roll scatter + 2D6, if not content with the roll, reroll the entire thing (Scatter + 2D6) and keep the second result. Find out how many models were hit, note that down and roll the scatter again to see what direction the template moves. Reroll the scatter dice one time if you're not happy with the second roll, count up total hits for that weapon. Then do it again for the second cannon on the Wyvern.

Do that for each tank in the squadron twice, then roll to wound, re-rolling failed to-wound rolls once due to Shred.

If you have a squadron, then resolve each tanks hits on the unit individually then tally up total hits and roll that many dice (re-rolling failed to wound once again) and let your opponent resolve armor saves.

I don't see it as that difficult, but I'm weird that way I guess.

Take it easy for now guys.

-Red__Thirst-

The thing is, the rules for multiple barrage stay constant. It doesn't say to roll seperately for each gun. You are rolling together for the ENTIRE unit. So the first shot is the ranging shot, determining the general area where the rest will hit. If it doesn't land where you want, reroll. If it ends up where you want, add up the number of wounds, then roll the scatter for the following shots. The rules state that the following blasts MAY cover the same exact area as the original if you roll a hit. You must roll to wounds seperatly for each blast BUT it does not say a model must be under said template to be removed(assuming we are talking about the core blast area), you just have to follow the "closest from the center" rule.

So put the original blast in the densest concentration of enemies, having all following"hits" land in the same location (thus giving you the largest pool of hits). And set aside dice so you can remember how many wounds come from the center of any scatters that didn't get re-rolled back on target.

Basically, the wyvern will encourage you to have multiple blast markers & lots of dice to keep track of wound pools, but shouldnt be that bad once you get used to how to do it.

Yep there is only 1 lead shot. Every flip is from the lead and every hit must touch the lead at any point of your choice.

Against a well deployed enemy that is spread out the lead will only yield 1 hit and a flip can hit 3. I start pools of 0,1,2, and 3 hits then add them up. Flips tend to average 1 while hits average 3. Total average tends to be 2.1 hits on follow up shots or 24.22 hits on 12 shots as long as the lead shot hits and you can triangulate a hit to catch 3 models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Note there is still a 44% chance the lead shot will scatter which means the entire barrage may be useless.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also not it's easy force a unit to cluster with a tank shock. If doing so can yield 5 hits on a follow up hit 12 shots will average 36 hits about 56% of the time. The blasts are danger close to the tank but who cares with str 4 blasts.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:

Black Library wrote:Thank you for your email. We have a small Digital Editions team who work on the Codexes and digital content for our game systems. As such the Codex: Militarum Tempestus is only available on iTunes. We do not have any current plans to produce this title as a standard eBook, but we will endeavor to bring out as much of our content out as standard eBooks as the schedule allows.

Many thanks,

Black Library Customer Services

Huh, now where did I put that snare, I need to trap a few crows for several people around here to eat. You know, the ones who insisted that anyone concerned that GW's iBook deal with Apple would make owning an iPad a requirement to legally have access to all the digital exclusive stuff were nutters, because we could just get the epub/mobi versions and view them on PC....

I wait to be proved wrong but the Storm Trooper Codex isn't a digital exclusive. Its available as a book isn't it?. Now if the Battle Sister Codex was iPad only, it would be crow pie time as that was a digital only product..

Latest rumours are saying that Ogryn/Bullgryns are going to be $50/£30, which is strangely under what I expect from GW, for the third time in a row, given that Scions are £21 instead of around £25, and the Hydra is £34 instead of around £40.

Weird.

 Barksdale wrote:

FatBoyNoSlim wrote:
Does anyone know where to get the old priest models with the eviscerator from? The only priest like models on the GW website are the 2 Missionary's with chainsword models and the Missionary with Plasma gun.

You are going to need to ebay it, trade someone for it, or kitbash your own.

 B0B MaRlEy wrote:

FatBoyNoSlim wrote:
Does anyone know where to get the old priest models with the eviscerator from? The only priest like models on the GW website are the 2 Missionary's with chainsword models and the Missionary with Plasma gun.

Watch out though, the codex only has a shotgun or a plasmagun option now, no more IG priests with eviscerators

Thanks both of you. I think I might go for a couple of kitbashed and a couple of chainsword priests (:

 Mr.Omega wrote:
Latest rumours are saying that Ogryn/Bullgryns are going to be $50/£30, which is strangely under what I expect from GW, for the third time in a row, given that Scions are £21 instead of around £25, and the Hydra is £34 instead of around £40.

Weird.

What is the model count supposed to be for the ogryns, 3? Or is it 5? If it's 3 then that's about what I expected the price to be, but 5 would be much more decent.

The Hydra is more than I expected, given it is now the most expensive IG tank (the Leman Russ variants and Manticore are roughly £30- I say roughly because the website is down and I'm going off US prices). The scions I don't have much of a comment on at the moment. But still, in regards to the others, I can't imagine GW could have charged much more without it seeming absurd; right now it's at the level of "well what did I expect?" for me.

No Eviscerators? That's weird. The last time I saw a Priest without an Eviscerator option was the 3rd ed codex. They'd still be awesome, but the gigantic chainsword is something pretty fun.

 Mr.Omega wrote:
Latest rumours are saying that Ogryn/Bullgryns are going to be $50/£30, which is strangely under what I expect from GW, for the third time in a row, given that Scions are £21 instead of around £25, and the Hydra is £34 instead of around £40.

Weird.

See, I still think the Scions are a little overpriced when compared to the Cadian Command box. I appreciate there is a multitude of bits but the Command box was also full of goodies.

Saying that, it hasn't stopped me from picking up some from an FLGS I'm weak but happy.

Plus, as the Ogryns aren't Centurion priced I'm sure when time allows, a new generation of over sized Abhumans will join their predecessors.

Although it's kind of funny that the very first squad of Veterans I ever converted (back when you only got one) had the plasma gun priest as one of the squad's Veterans. In the last Codex a squad of plasma vets was 115 points. It's now 90 points, but the plasma priest is 40 points, so for 15 points compared to the last edition you get an extra body (with an invulnerable save), reduced BS but Precision shots on one plasma gun, Fearless, Hatred, and a variety of close combat options that have a little better than a 50% chance of working. Even with pricier Chimeras, that' a pretty good Mech-Vet squad. It's close to the same firepower, but much stiffer in the inevitable close combat. Against tough stuff, you'll still die super fast, but against the random remainders of the stuff you just shot up, you'll be able to stick around and finish the job.

Biophysical wrote:
Although it's kind of funny that the very first squad of Veterans I ever converted (back when you only got one) had the plasma gun priest as one of the squad's Veterans. In the last Codex a squad of plasma vets was 115 points. It's now 90 points, but the plasma priest is 40 points, so for 15 points compared to the last edition you get an extra body (with an invulnerable save), reduced BS but Precision shots on one plasma gun, Fearless, Hatred, and a variety of close combat options that have a little better than a 50% chance of working. Even with pricier Chimeras, that' a pretty good Mech-Vet squad. It's close to the same firepower, but much stiffer in the inevitable close combat. Against tough stuff, you'll still die super fast, but against the random remainders of the stuff you just shot up, you'll be able to stick around and finish the job.

Do Veterans still have their Krak Grenades? That's a pretty big sticking point...

 schadenfreude wrote:

 kir44n wrote:

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:


No different than a thudd gun with prescience.

Roll to hit for the lead shot, reroll if you don't like the result.

Figure out the max# of hits possible on a hit for trailing shots

Roll a big handful of scatter dice and reroll scatters.

It's really not bad as long as you buy a bunch of scatter dice from a bits shop.

You don't even need to do that. I've always found that in an instance such as this, you do as follows.

Declare target, check range, if the target is in range of the barrage weapon (A pair of Griffon Heavy Mortars, in my case) I would place the template over a target model in the unit I'm shooting at and roll scatter + 2D6. If I didn't like the result, I would re-roll the scatter + 2D6 and take the result. Where-ever the template winds up, I check for number of hits. Shot one, complete. Second mortar remains to be resolved now. I then pick up JUST the scatter dice and roll it to see which direction the template 'flips'. As before, accurate bombardment allows me to re-roll the scatter dice if I don't like the result of the first scatter dice roll. I then 'flip' the template in the direction shown on the scatter dice (or in whatever direction I like if I rolled a 'hit') and count up number of hits. Add the number of hits from the first Mortar round to the number of hits from the second Mortar round and roll that many to-wound. Opponent resolves saves if any.

That's all there is to it.

Barrage such as this would be resolved the exact same way, as I've interpreted the rules correctly, the Wyvern has a pair of heavy 2, Twinlinked Mortars on the turret. So each tank would have two independent two-shot small blasts, each resolved as a pair in their own right, and then all to-wound rolls would be rolled together at the end.

So: Pick up small template, declare target, check range, place template on a model within range, roll scatter + 2D6, if not content with the roll, reroll the entire thing (Scatter + 2D6) and keep the second result. Find out how many models were hit, note that down and roll the scatter again to see what direction the template moves. Reroll the scatter dice one time if you're not happy with the second roll, count up total hits for that weapon. Then do it again for the second cannon on the Wyvern.

Do that for each tank in the squadron twice, then roll to wound, re-rolling failed to-wound rolls once due to Shred.

If you have a squadron, then resolve each tanks hits on the unit individually then tally up total hits and roll that many dice (re-rolling failed to wound once again) and let your opponent resolve armor saves.

I don't see it as that difficult, but I'm weird that way I guess.

Take it easy for now guys.

-Red__Thirst-

The thing is, the rules for multiple barrage stay constant. It doesn't say to roll seperately for each gun. You are rolling together for the ENTIRE unit. So the first shot is the ranging shot, determining the general area where the rest will hit. If it doesn't land where you want, reroll. If it ends up where you want, add up the number of wounds, then roll the scatter for the following shots. The rules state that the following blasts MAY cover the same exact area as the original if you roll a hit. You must roll to wounds seperatly for each blast BUT it does not say a model must be under said template to be removed(assuming we are talking about the core blast area), you just have to follow the "closest from the center" rule.

So put the original blast in the densest concentration of enemies, having all following"hits" land in the same location (thus giving you the largest pool of hits). And set aside dice so you can remember how many wounds come from the center of any scatters that didn't get re-rolled back on target.

Basically, the wyvern will encourage you to have multiple blast markers & lots of dice to keep track of wound pools, but shouldnt be that bad once you get used to how to do it.

Yep there is only 1 lead shot. Every flip is from the lead and every hit must touch the lead at any point of your choice.

Against a well deployed enemy that is spread out the lead will only yield 1 hit and a flip can hit 3. I start pools of 0,1,2, and 3 hits then add them up. Flips tend to average 1 while hits average 3. Total average tends to be 2.1 hits on follow up shots or 24.22 hits on 12 shots as long as the lead shot hits and you can triangulate a hit to catch 3 models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Note there is still a 44% chance the lead shot will scatter which means the entire barrage may be useless.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also not it's easy force a unit to cluster with a tank shock. If doing so can yield 5 hits on a follow up hit 12 shots will average 36 hits about 56% of the time. The blasts are danger close to the tank but who cares with str 4 blasts.

That's alot of math for something thatis not absolute. Seeing as my opponents rarely have robotic arms carefully plotting coherency.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Biophysical wrote:
Although it's kind of funny that the very first squad of Veterans I ever converted (back when you only got one) had the plasma gun priest as one of the squad's Veterans. In the last Codex a squad of plasma vets was 115 points. It's now 90 points, but the plasma priest is 40 points, so for 15 points compared to the last edition you get an extra body (with an invulnerable save), reduced BS but Precision shots on one plasma gun, Fearless, Hatred, and a variety of close combat options that have a little better than a 50% chance of working. Even with pricier Chimeras, that' a pretty good Mech-Vet squad. It's close to the same firepower, but much stiffer in the inevitable close combat. Against tough stuff, you'll still die super fast, but against the random remainders of the stuff you just shot up, you'll be able to stick around and finish the job.

Do Veterans still have their Krak Grenades? That's a pretty big sticking point...

I played 5th Ed IG, frequently using Vets for about 2 years and I only found out a month ago that all Vets get krak grenades stock. Its pretty gutting since I'm fairly sure that knowledge would have won me at least one game.

alphaecho wrote:
See, I still think the Scions are a little overpriced when compared to the Cadian Command box. I appreciate there is a multitude of bits but the Command box was also full of goodies.

Saying that, it hasn't stopped me from picking up some from an FLGS I'm weak but happy.

Plus, as the Ogryns aren't Centurion priced I'm sure when time allows, a new generation of over sized Abhumans will join their predecessors.

GW didn't mean to hit your wallet and I know they love you, baby. I'm sure they won't do it again so it's ok to purchase and make up.

 warboss wrote:

alphaecho wrote:
See, I still think the Scions are a little overpriced when compared to the Cadian Command box. I appreciate there is a multitude of bits but the Command box was also full of goodies.

Saying that, it hasn't stopped me from picking up some from an FLGS I'm weak but happy.

Plus, as the Ogryns aren't Centurion priced I'm sure when time allows, a new generation of over sized Abhumans will join their predecessors.

GW didn't mean to hit your wallet and I know they love you, baby. I'm sure they won't do it again so it's ok to purchase and make up.

Whoa whoa whoa Sweet Child O Mine, there's no need for that clumsy metaphor

There's no beating, I'm just consumer resistance deficient...and it is my fault!

 Blacksails wrote:

 tjnorwoo wrote:
So are we going to see plastic rough riders?

I'm going to go with no.

I'd be very surprised if it was some sort of additional wave release.

I guess we'll see if I'm right on this pretty soon, but with the rumored website redesign, the Rough Riders might be covered by the FW Tallarn and Death Korps kits. Assuming the redesign goes hand-in-hand with making FW easier to find for people, as well as easier to purchase for non-British customers, GW would be saving themselves a ton of work on remaking these models, but they would also effectively be mooting all the complaints about the lost artillery tanks.

No they would not. I have to budget to buy one codex. I don't want to have to budget to buy another. Since the Griffin was an option since 2nd edition at least.

 Valhalla130 wrote:
No they would not. I have to budget to buy one codex. I don't want to have to budget to buy another. Since the Griffin was an option since 2nd edition at least.

It stopped being an option in 3rd ed, iirc.
Then it was brought back in 5th ed.
Now it's gone again.

Dammit GW, make up your mind!

EDIT: Woops, my mistake. The griffon was indeed a 3rd ed option.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Valhalla130 wrote:
No they would not. I have to budget to buy one codex. I don't want to have to budget to buy another. Since the Griffin was an option since 2nd edition at least.

It stopped being an option in 3rd ed, iirc.
Then it was brought back in 5th ed.
Now it's gone again.

Dammit GW, make up your mind!

EDIT: Woops, my mistake. The griffon was indeed a 3rd ed option.

It was an option in the 3E blackbook list and 1999 3E codex, they removed it in the 3.5E 2003 book, and put it back in the 2009 5E codex

 Vaktathi wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Valhalla130 wrote:
No they would not. I have to budget to buy one codex. I don't want to have to budget to buy another. Since the Griffin was an option since 2nd edition at least.

It stopped being an option in 3rd ed, iirc.
Then it was brought back in 5th ed.
Now it's gone again.

Dammit GW, make up your mind!

EDIT: Woops, my mistake. The griffon was indeed a 3rd ed option.

It was an option in the 3E blackbook list and 1999 3E codex, they removed it in the 3.5E 2003 book, and put it back in the 2009 5E codex

Ah! I must have been thinking of the 3.5 book then.

I have the 3rd ed book on hand, and I just checked that one for the griffon entry.

So yes, GW should really make up their minds about the,

Out of curiosity, did IG players rage back then when the griffon was removed from 3.5?

IIRC they removed it from the 2003 book for the same reason they're removing it now, lack of a mainline kit. GW removed the old Griffon kit (part metal, part plastic) in like ~2001 IIRC, along with the Leman Russ Exterminator kit.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Valhalla130 wrote:
No they would not. I have to budget to buy one codex. I don't want to have to budget to buy another. Since the Griffin was an option since 2nd edition at least.

It stopped being an option in 3rd ed, iirc.
Then it was brought back in 5th ed.
Now it's gone again.

Dammit GW, make up your mind!

EDIT: Woops, my mistake. The griffon was indeed a 3rd ed option.

It was an option in the 3E blackbook list and 1999 3E codex, they removed it in the 3.5E 2003 book, and put it back in the 2009 5E codex

Ah! I must have been thinking of the 3.5 book then.

I have the 3rd ed book on hand, and I just checked that one for the griffon entry.

So yes, GW should really make up their minds about

Out of curiosity, did IG players rage back then when the griffon was removed from 3.5?

I wouldn't say I raged when the griffon was gone as much as I did when every other tank was gone.

In the 3.5 book, we had the regular leman russ, the demolisher and the basilisk for heavy support (oh and heavy weapons platoons).

Seeing how much we lost then, I'm surprised to see all the rage in this thread over the loss of the other artillery tanks that are rumored to happen this time around. I never liked that book that most people here claimed to love because of the doctrines. I always felt that I was writing a list with one hand tied behind my back and I could never use everything that I wanted to. Not to mention how I had to remodel my Vanquishers and Exterminators. then bit ordered an earthshaker cannon to rebuild my griffin.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 The Airman wrote:
While Conscripts are dirt cheap and probably too effective for their cost, are they worth the $150 USD to field them as a full squad?

Regardless, the shenanigans you can pull off with dual fifty man Conscript blobs, provided you can put a couple of priests in there. 300+ dollars well spent?

Better question: Are they worth wasting half your life in the movement phase and the other half unpacking and repacking your army

A better question, what man would be insane enough to buy that many guardsmen direct from GW?

The money on conscripts doesn't concern me so much, its the amount of time it would take to paint all the buggers

And then the entire blob has a 25% chance to not run like sissy girls when a fifth of it dies

As much as I dislike starter set/snap fit models, I don't think it would be a bad idea to use the 5-man Guardsmen snap fit kit as Conscripts. You could buy 10 kits ( 50 models ) for $100. Since they're going to be leaving the board pretty quickly you have to ask yourself not only how much money you want to spend on them, but also how much time assembling and painting.

Although the lack of posing would probably bother me too much to do this, but still, it's something to consider.

Mr.Omega wrote:The money on conscripts doesn't concern me so much, its the amount of time it would take to paint all the buggers

And then the entire blob has a 25% chance to not run like sissy girls when a fifth of it dies

no sane man would run stock conscripts without a SITNW equivalent or Ld buffs. I'm interested in seeing what a 50 blob with a priest and maybe a primaris pysker could do for example. It might make a good tarpit unit or counter assault.

Sir Bubbles wrote:As much as I dislike starter set/snap fit models, I don't think it would be a bad idea to use the 5-man Guardsmen snap fit kit as Conscripts. You could buy 10 kits ( 50 models ) for $100. Since they're going to be leaving the board pretty quickly you have to ask yourself not only how much money you want to spend on them, but also how much time assembling and painting.

Although the lack of posing would probably bother me too much to do this, but still, it's something to consider.

I hate to be that guy, but anyone planning on running guard infantry these days should either buy used or go 3rd party. The plastic Cadians and Catachans are not good kits for the money and the only way that will change is if people don't buy them.

Also, the stormtrooper codex being iTunes only sucks. It means I HAVE to pirate a PDF version (and they are out there) if I wanted to use my army without lugging a laptop around. I was actually thinking about buying the epub version too.

I saw some comments saying russes went down in points but as I went through the pages I couldnt find any pics that leaked them could anyone let me know of any changes that russes got?

Thanks!

 Mr.Omega wrote:
Exact Leman Russ costs, from L'astropate:

150 LRBT
130 Exterminator
135 Vanquisher
120 Eradicator
170 Demolisher
140 Punisher
155 Executioner

Henry says they're in the exact order as the 5th ed Codex, which either means the above as the tanks are laid out on the non-cost page or:

120/130 -LRBT/Exterminator
135 - Vanquisher
140- Eradicator
150- Demolisher
155-Punisher
170-Executioner

This, in the same order of rising costs as in 5th

For the first changed the points in order as the old codex 150 130 135 120 170 140 155 and there are psikers with divination

http://astropate.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/nuova-astra-militarum-foto-del-codex-e.html

I'm also wondering now if the Hydra never lost its ignores jink saves rule, and if the rule has instead been moved to the weapon profile (where hence it would be explained in the armoury), as is the new trend in 6th.

Mr. Omega posted these on p.171

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Mr.Omega wrote:The money on conscripts doesn't concern me so much, its the amount of time it would take to paint all the buggers

And then the entire blob has a 25% chance to not run like sissy girls when a fifth of it dies

no sane man would run stock conscripts without a SITNW equivalent or Ld buffs. I'm interested in seeing what a 50 blob with a priest and maybe a primaris pysker could do for example. It might make a good tarpit unit or counter assault.

Sir Bubbles wrote:As much as I dislike starter set/snap fit models, I don't think it would be a bad idea to use the 5-man Guardsmen snap fit kit as Conscripts. You could buy 10 kits ( 50 models ) for $100. Since they're going to be leaving the board pretty quickly you have to ask yourself not only how much money you want to spend on them, but also how much time assembling and painting.

Although the lack of posing would probably bother me too much to do this, but still, it's something to consider.

I hate to be that guy, but anyone planning on running guard infantry these days should either buy used or go 3rd party. The plastic Cadians and Catachans are not good kits for the money and the only way that will change is if people don't buy them.

Also, the stormtrooper codex being iTunes only sucks. It means I HAVE to pirate a PDF version (and they are out there) if I wanted to use my army without lugging a laptop around. I was actually thinking about buying the epub version too.

If you get it on your computer you can go to a printing place like Kinko's or Fed-Ex and get the thing printed out. (or only the relevant pages.) It's not ideal but it is an option to breaking the law.

Alright thanks!

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Also, the stormtrooper codex being iTunes only sucks. It means I HAVE to pirate a PDF version (and they are out there) if I wanted to use my army without lugging a laptop around. I was actually thinking about buying the epub version too.

It's NOT iTunes only.

It's iTunes and physical. I have the physical book.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
I hate to be that guy, but anyone planning on running guard infantry these days should either buy used or go 3rd party. The plastic Cadians and Catachans are not good kits for the money and the only way that will change is if people don't buy them.

If by used you mean discounted eBay kits that are still new in box, then yeah that's what I do. Last time I actually bought directly from GW was a couple of special characters I couldn't find on eBay whatsoever. I'm not gonna go third party though. I want Imperial Guardsmen, not starship troopers or some other gak. The only thing I would maybe consider is the Arcadians from Victoria Miniatures, but even then, those are still not close enough for me, and they're $50 for 10 models.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Also, the stormtrooper codex being iTunes only sucks. It means I HAVE to pirate a PDF version (and they are out there) if I wanted to use my army without lugging a laptop around. I was actually thinking about buying the epub version too.

It's NOT iTunes only.

It's iTunes and physical. I have the physical book.

I thought the physical codex was out of stock. Are they reprinting it or is it "limited edition"? There have been so many limited editions I just figured this was another one.

Also, its a good $20 more or so for the physical copy. I can kind of stomach $30 for a supplement, but $50 is way too much.

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stormonu wrote:
Have we seen the stats for the Punisher's cannon? I don't have my Apocalypse book handy, but I seem to recall the Stormlord's gatling cannon only getting something like 12 shots (or less, as I said, don't have my book). If GW has ANY brains left, I can't see them letting the Punisher stay as-is in the dex.

The Stormlords gatling cannon is vastly superior to the Punisher Cannon.

For one, it's a Vulcan Megabolter, ST:6, AP:4 (Or 3?, I don't recall exactly) with Rending if my memory serves. It's Heavy 15 I think, and if the Stormlord is stationary it can fire TWICE in one round for 30 shots at a single target. It's got a 36" range also. Plus, the stormlord can carry 40 models. Forty. Infantry.

The Punisher Cannon is ST:5, AP:-, Heavy 20, no rending (unless you have Pask in it) and it's range is shorter at 24". Yes it can shoot more on the move than a Stormlord if they're both moving, but I know I'd rather have the Punisher Cannon Shooting at me than the Vulcan Mega Bolter.

What exactly do you want to change about it? It's not a terribly broken weapon. Even with prescience on the tank allowing for rerolls, you'll only average ~15 hits, with ~10 wounds or so on average. That's two or three dead marines or one to two dead terminators. Not horrible, but nothing to scream cheese about either. Heck the Executioner Leman Russ will kill more marines on average with just two of it's three Plasma blasts (Cover not withstanding).

Just offering my thoughts on that, would you care to elaborate on where you're coming from? I'm confused (Not being snarky, I'm genuinely confused).

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

I missed that the Stormlord can shoot twice if still - I thought it very strange that a bigger tank with two vulcan cannons putting out fewer shots was ... strange.

Still, rolling that many dice to represent the attack (specially since it can glance a squadron to death) seems like poor rules design - I'd have rathered they went with some sort of (apocalyptic) blast template to represent the fullisade of fire (something with no deviation but you have to roll to hit the targets under the blast, does D3 hits per model for the Stormlord version - something like that).