So GW ave us the new stat line.M8 W18 T8 Sv3+, we still have no point cost nor any special rules but we do have some weapon profiles.
Just how durable do we expect them to be and is this M8 enough or are they still too slow ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Morkanaut rules stats are here -> https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/07/new-warhammer-40000-big-stuff-may7gw-homepage-post-4/

Weapon profiles are here -> https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/26/warhammer-40000-weaponsgw-homepage-post-4/

Well 2" faster movement will help, won't be sure if It'll be enough until we see stat lines for other factions' Units and vehicles.
T8 will make current anti tank weapons more likely "to wound"
(E.g Lascannon will wound on a 3+ while in 7th needs a 4 to glance) but likely to have a save (pathetic as a 6+ will be)
18 Wounds is a lot. On average it looks like it'll take 5/6 unsaved Lascannon wounds to kill it. (So it won't shrug off a Lascannon Devastator squad with a clear shot, but nor should it really)

Also I like that the damage isn't too quick to kick in (I was expecting degradation after every 3/4 wounds)

Looks good to me. I'm not huge on having tons of superheavies on a board (though I like the idea of the occasional Apocalypse game kind of thing) but this will mean that Imperial Knight armies will be able to be withered down a little.

I wonder, though, if the lack of lucky one-shot kills will make IKs more impossibly tough to defeat if you're not set up for it.

Nice to see the bizarre gaps/rules issues between X and Y be resolved though. It should be a huge boon for players with armies who had useless superheavies (looking at the entire Imperial Guard armour lineup).

What are you looking for in a walker? 48" movement.?

An 8" movement means it starts at 12" then jumps to 20" on turn 1, then shoots or runs another 1d6" Since, you are able to make it to the 36" mark by turn 3. You probably are fine. That assume your opponent completely ignores the horde running down their throat of orks to shoot the one walker for 18 wounds.

Oh another thought occurs.
Now we've seen that the current armour 12 Dreadnought is T7
and that the current armour 13 Morka/Gorkanaut is T 8
It would seem that the current armour values will scale as follows:
Armour 10= T5 (That one in particular doesn't look good for the lightest vehicles)
11= T6
12 = T7
13 =T8
14=T9
15=T10.

8 inches is better then 6 at least. When it mentions how it's end life is that of a seMI mobile shooting fortress I wonder if it will allow transported models to shoot out in some capacity this time. Sounds like assaulting after disembarking from transports will be the norm so at least that solved the Naught's curious lack of assault transport rules in 7th. So far it looks good.

Jbz` wrote:
Oh another thought occurs.
Now we've seen that the current armour 12 Dreadnought is T7
and that the current armour 13 Morka/Gorkanaut is T 8
It would seem that the current armour values will scale as follows:
Armour 10= T5 (That one in particular doesn't look good for the lightest vehicles)
11= T6
12 = T7
13 =T8
14=T9
15=T10.

Probably won't be quite that literal. Armour save could vary too, so av10 could be T6/7 but with only a 4+/5+ save.

I hope they don't just alter the toughness but the save too. Something along the lines of
AV10 = T6 Sv 4+
AV11 = T6 Sv 3+
AV12 = T7 Sv 3+
AV13 = T8 Sv 3+
AV14 = T8 Sv 2+

That way you wouldn't get completely useless Land Speeders and LRs would still be easy enough to kill with high S weapons even with their high wound count.

 ProwlerPC wrote:
8 inches is better then 6 at least. When it mentions how it's end life is that of a seMI mobile shooting fortress I wonder if it will allow transported models to shoot out in some capacity this time. Sounds like assaulting after disembarking from transports will be the norm so at least that solved the Naught's curious lack of assault transport rules in 7th. So far it looks good.

Forgot about that one it might actually be a viable transport now.

 Shadox wrote:
I hope they don't just alter the toughness but the save too. Something along the lines of
AV10 = T6 Sv 4+
AV11 = T6 Sv 3+
AV12 = T7 Sv 3+
AV13 = T8 Sv 3+
AV14 = T8 Sv 2+

That way you wouldn't get completely useless Land Speeders and LRs would still be easy enough to kill with high S weapons even with their high wound count.

That would almost certainly be better.
Of course it's all speculation as they only showed us one example today (Instead of 2/3 like they should have)

The statline looks okay really and I'll take that 8" M stat as a nice improvement. Like you say the points cost will really determine how useful they'll be but I would half expect the G/Morkanauts to be decent this edition considering how terrible they've been since release. Hopefully GW hasn't failed to notice that. They've got a decent amount of wounds when considered against the weapon profiles we've seen so far but we'll need to see what Lance, Melta, Grav etc does before deciding how durable it is. We've got +2 S on a Dreadnaught for whatever that will be worth (what will DCCW and the Klaw of G/Mork do?). This will be interesting food for thought!

Honestly, the nauts' biggest problems were

A) The ability to be one-shotted
B) Slow movement
C) Poor accuracy at range

This completely solves the first problem and starts making up for the second problem. They're no longer the garbage they were, and pretty much guarantees this walker list I've been planning. I don't know if they'll be fantastic, but bottom line is, they won't be as bad as they were last edition.

Not looking good so far. Maybe they will be 50 points?

Pancakey wrote:
Not looking good so far. Maybe they will be 50 points?

We can hope! What's not to like though?

Pancakey wrote:
Not looking good so far. Maybe they will be 50 points?

what are you on?

8th is shaping up to be the "super eazy gee whizz edition".

Pancakey wrote:
8th is shaping up to be the "super eazy gee whizz edition".

I saw your posts in other threads complaining about how you're not liking the rules for this edition, but we're asking why you think the morkanaut seems awful.

I feel this will give the walkers at least some chance of playing. The only thing that made people even try to field them was giving them Ere' We Go so they can benefit from WAAAGH!!!ing and run and charge. Now it seems a lot better. Let's just hope everything scales to it decently.

While 18 wounds seems like a lot, the ability to do damage in the new edition will make you wish the gork had 30 wounds.

Anyway, anyone have conversion ideas for the nauts? The squig morkanaut in the painting/modelling thread looks fantastic, but I was wondering if anyone else had any ideas. I'm probably going to try to move the legs down a bit so it doesn't look like such a belly-dragger.

 Vitali Advenil wrote:
Anyway, anyone have conversion ideas for the nauts? The squig morkanaut in the painting/modelling thread looks fantastic, but I was wondering if anyone else had any ideas. I'm probably going to try to move the legs down a bit so it doesn't look like such a belly-dragger.

Ive got a halfway dont MR potato head

Pancakey wrote:
While 18 wounds seems like a lot, the ability to do damage in the new edition will make you wish the gork had 30 wounds.

This may be, but we're looking at a small snippet of the unit. Does it have a KFF? Does it have the ability to repair? We don't know. I'm impressed looks like I might actually see them on the table top which is exciting.

Jbz calculated that it would take 5 to 6 unsaved lascannon wounds to take it down. That means it would take about 11 or 12 actual shots. I'd hardly call that "easy damage."

Pancakey wrote:
While 18 wounds seems like a lot, the ability to do damage in the new edition will make you wish the gork had 30 wounds.

We still need the whole picture to know that. Part of the problem in 7ed was that guns and models were cheap so you had a lot of them in an army. But if things get more expensive you'll have less damage on the table to those wounds will last t longer then they would now.

I know it sounds exciting, but wait until you see the full picture. This is GW we are talking about. Dont forget the new "always wound on 6" rule. I cannot wait until a guardsman kills the emperor himself. Is that fluffy?

The gork will still hold its place firmly on your shelf until they reduce the points cost next year in 40k generals handbook #2

Pancakey wrote:
I know it sounds exciting, but wait until you see the full picture. This is GW we are talking about. Dont forget the new "always wound on 6" rule. I cannot wait until a guardsman kills the emperor himself. Is that fluffy?

The gork will still hold its place firmly on your shelf until they reduce the points cost next year in 40k generals handbook #2

Wasnt it a guardsman that killed horus originally after horus nuked the emperor? They retconned it away and then kinda brought it back in the HH books....

Pancakey wrote:
I know it sounds exciting, but wait until you see the full picture. This is GW we are talking about. Dont forget the new "always wound on 6" rule. I cannot wait until a guardsman kills the emperor himself. Is that fluffy?

The gork will still hold its place firmly on your shelf until they reduce the points cost next year in 40k generals handbook #2

Even if you're always wounding the morkanaut on a 6, let's see how many bolter shots it would actually take. We need to do 18 wounds to the guy. Let's use the trusty bolter to see how many shots this would take. Let's give it the best coniditons- double tap range at full BS. Two (2) shots will hit 1.332 times, and wound 0.222 times. The naut will have its 3+ save, so that brings it down to 0.0726 times. That means we would need two-hundred and forty eight marines shooting at double-tap range at full BS to take this thing down with bolters.

People are complaining about this rule but not taking into account how many wounds vehicles have now. This would have been a very powerful rule last edition, but with how many wounds and saves vehicles get, it really doesn't matter at all.

Always wound on 6 totally changes the way units interact. Also everyone seems to forget, there will be MULTIPLE weapons that do D6 wounds. Melta migh be even better than d6! Also they are introducing the MORTAL WOUND concept.

How can you listen to gw say "everything will kill/die a lot faster!" , read the rules, then watch gw up wounds to 18 and not see why.

Pancakey wrote:
Always wound on 6 totally changes the way units interact.

Yeah its like how all of those FMC die all the time while swooping becauase everything hits them on a 6 and they only have 4-5 wounds

oh wait

Pancakey wrote:
Always wound on 6 totally changes the way units interact.

I just proved that it would take more than 200 bolter marines to take down the naut. People aren't going to go naut hunting with squads of marines, that's just stupid. Anyone who charges a bunch of tac marines at a naut thinking they can hurt it with bolter fire clearly don't know how to play the game. It won't change anything. People are still going to prioritize shooting heavy weapons at heavy things because it's the most efficient way to kill it.

Also everyone seems to forget, there will be MULTIPLE weapons that do D6 wounds. Melta migh be even better than d6! Also they are introducing the MORTAL WOUND concept.

How can you listen to gw say "everything will kill/die a lot faster!" , read the rules, then watch gw up wounds to 18 and not see why.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Always wound on 6 totally changes the way units interact.

Yeah its like how all of those FMC die all the time while swooping becauase everything hits them on a 6 and they only have 4-5 wounds

oh wait

.

Oh wait. Everything wounds on 6's. Oh. Wait.

It does change how they interact some, but i would not waste 300 lasgun shots to try to take down a Morkanaut when they will be way more effective against other units. Yes some things weren't able to damage others before, but then again even if it could most of the time we didn't rely on the 6's wounding in the previous edition much, unless it has an instant death mechanic. Tell me the last time you saw 7 squads of Guardsmen in double tap range focusing on a single Daemon Prince (without upgrades besides armor) instead of the daemons around them that are easier to kill. It mattered mostly when it worked with vehicles with low HP, but now that has been mitigated.

Pancakey wrote:
Also everyone seems to forget, there will be MULTIPLE weapons that do D6 wounds. Melta migh be even better than d6! Also they are introducing the MORTAL WOUND concept.

How can you listen to gw say "everything will kill/die a lot faster!" , read the rules, then watch gw up wounds to 18 and not see why.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Always wound on 6 totally changes the way units interact.

Yeah its like how all of those FMC die all the time while swooping becauase everything hits them on a 6 and they only have 4-5 wounds

oh wait

.

Oh wait. Everything wounds on 6's. Oh. Wait.

It doesn't change how the math works. Hitting on 6s and wounding 4s has the same effect as hitting on 4s and wounding on 6s

Math aside. It will now be possible for a grot to kill an imperial knight.

 Vitali Advenil wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Always wound on 6 totally changes the way units interact.

I just proved that it would take more than 200 bolter marines to take down the naut. People aren't going to go naut hunting with squads of marines, that's just stupid. Anyone who charges a bunch of tac marines at a naut thinking they can hurt it with bolter fire clearly don't know how to play the game. It won't change anything. People are still going to prioritize shooting heavy weapons at heavy things because it's the most efficient way to kill it.

It's not that you are going to kill them fully with bolters. It's that you can even cause couple wounds and destroy them that way is completely silly. You simply cannot penetrate armour of that kind of vehicle with lasgun, bolter, autogun etc.

Go ahead and try to stop M1A2 abrams with AK-47. They won't even bother to kill you for a long time as you pose zero threat. Irrelevant whether you shoot them second or 1000 years you ain't going to cause a dent.

Pancakey wrote:
Math aside. It will now be possible for a grot to kill an imperial knight.

And ?

I fail to see the issue with this

I'm both excited for ork players getting to use their m/gorkanaughts, but vey afraid for my nids. They will have (likely tfex and tervigon) approaching 12 wounds. Which probably means 10 or 11. Which means one or two decent rolls on dmg from lascannon/melta means dead bug. Because I have no expectation of TMC toughness going up.

I'm excited. Vehicles and the like will be usefully again

Pancakey wrote:
Also everyone seems to forget, there will be MULTIPLE weapons that do D6 wounds. Melta migh be even better than d6! Also they are introducing the MORTAL WOUND concept.

How can you listen to gw say "everything will kill/die a lot faster!" , read the rules, then watch gw up wounds to 18 and not see why.

Yes, and those weapons are supposed to do more damage to vehicles. I don't understand what you want. Do you just want an invincible morkanaut? Are you seriously complaining that someone can kill your vehicle with a weapon that is designed to kill vehicles?

Also, sure, a grot could kill a knight on an extremely lucky shot, but only after every other wound has been taken off the night which will still require a lot of anti-tank rounds. You're acting like this is going to make vehicles even more fragile than before.

Pancakey wrote:
While 18 wounds seems like a lot, the ability to do damage in the new edition will make you wish the gork had 30 wounds.

Well either you just broke an NDA or you have no idea if that's true or not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

StarHunter25 wrote:
I'm both excited for ork players getting to use their m/gorkanaughts, but vey afraid for my nids. They will have (likely tfex and tervigon) approaching 12 wounds. Which probably means 10 or 11. Which means one or two decent rolls on dmg from lascannon/melta means dead bug. Because I have no expectation of TMC toughness going up.

You mean 2 PERFECT rolls on lascannons. You have a 1/36 chance of rolling 2 6s on 2 dice and that's after to hit, to wound, and saves. Statistical average is what, 9 shots? 2 dev squads and change. Doesn't seem too unfair.

Don't let yourself fall into the worst case scenario trap.

 oldzoggy wrote:
So GW ave us the new stat line.M8 W18 T8 Sv3+, we still have no point cost nor any special rules but we do have some weapon profiles.
Just how durable do we expect them to be and is this M8 enough or are they still too slow ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Morkanaut rules stats are here -> https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/07/new-warhammer-40000-big-stuff-may7gw-homepage-post-4/

Weapon profiles are here -> https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/26/warhammer-40000-weaponsgw-homepage-post-4/

I was posting in reply to the thread. No I do think they will fare well.

Reason#1 - not enough wounds
Reason#2 - fixed to hit rolls
Reason#3 - every weapon wounds on 6

NDA? come at me bro!

tneva82 wrote:

 Vitali Advenil wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Always wound on 6 totally changes the way units interact.

I just proved that it would take more than 200 bolter marines to take down the naut. People aren't going to go naut hunting with squads of marines, that's just stupid. Anyone who charges a bunch of tac marines at a naut thinking they can hurt it with bolter fire clearly don't know how to play the game. It won't change anything. People are still going to prioritize shooting heavy weapons at heavy things because it's the most efficient way to kill it.

It's not that you are going to kill them fully with bolters. It's that you can even cause couple wounds and destroy them that way is completely silly. You simply cannot penetrate armour of that kind of vehicle with lasgun, bolter, autogun etc.

Go ahead and try to stop M1A2 abrams with AK-47. They won't even bother to kill you for a long time as you pose zero threat. Irrelevant whether you shoot them second or 1000 years you ain't going to cause a dent.

but punching them to death was okay? You only have to be S7 to be able to hurt a knight. Or S1 if you had armourbane and rolled boxcars.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pancakey wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:
So GW ave us the new stat line.M8 W18 T8 Sv3+, we still have no point cost nor any special rules but we do have some weapon profiles.
Just how durable do we expect them to be and is this M8 enough or are they still too slow ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Morkanaut rules stats are here -> https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/07/new-warhammer-40000-big-stuff-may7gw-homepage-post-4/

Weapon profiles are here -> https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/26/warhammer-40000-weaponsgw-homepage-post-4/

I was posting in reply to the thread. No I do think they will fare well.

Reason#1 - not enough wounds
Reason#2 - fixed to hit rolls
Reason#3 - every weapon wounds on 6

NDA? com at me bro!

1 how do you know? 2. wat? 3. So?

Just about every weapon in the game wounds a riptide and just about every model in the game hits a riptide on a 3+ and they only have 6 wounds; yet you don't see people talking about how fragile and weak a riptide is do you?

Just about is not the same as all.

Pancakey wrote:
Just about is not the same as all.

in order to not be able to wound t6 you need to be s2. How many s2 weapons are there?

 Vitali Advenil wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Also everyone seems to forget, there will be MULTIPLE weapons that do D6 wounds. Melta migh be even better than d6! Also they are introducing the MORTAL WOUND concept.

How can you listen to gw say "everything will kill/die a lot faster!" , read the rules, then watch gw up wounds to 18 and not see why.

Yes, and those weapons are supposed to do more damage to vehicles. I don't understand what you want. Do you just want an invincible morkanaut? Are you seriously complaining that someone can kill your vehicle with a weapon that is designed to kill vehicles?

Also, sure, a grot could kill a knight on an extremely lucky shot, but only after every other wound has been taken off the night which will still require a lot of anti-tank rounds. You're acting like this is going to make vehicles even more fragile than before.

Yeah I don't understand why some people are upset. Do people want to be able to kill all vehicles easily with small arms fire?

 CrownAxe wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Just about is not the same as all.

in order to not be able to wound t6 you need to be s2. How many s2 weapons are there?

That's actually an excellent question.

Pancakey wrote:
Just about is not the same as all.

Oh i'm sorry a grot in melee. So 1, let me rephrase; Every weapon in the game except for 1 wounds a riptide and you don't see people complaining about how frail and fragile riptides are do you?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Just about is not the same as all.

in order to not be able to wound t6 you need to be s2. How many s2 weapons are there?

That's actually an excellent question.

Well, the bubblechucka is S2 if you roll a 2 for the D6, and grots are S2 in CC.

Flechette blasters. S2, 5 shots, with Shred.

 Vitali Advenil wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Just about is not the same as all.

in order to not be able to wound t6 you need to be s2. How many s2 weapons are there?

That's actually an excellent question.

Well, the bubblechucka is S2 if you roll a 2 for the D6, and grots are S2 in CC.

I suppose this would mean that Pink Horrors, Blue Horrors and Brimstones would be able to throw psychic bs at a big monster and then still be able to do a couple more wounds in cc... Before being stomped to death, splitting and repeat.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Flechette blasters. S2, 5 shots, with Shred.

Funnily enough they come on a unit that could potentially wreck a riptide in CC.

But the point still stands. Just because you can wound it on a 6 doesn't mean it's suddenly made of paper.

Wish they had actually just repeated the whole stat line as they seem to in AoS for the different steps.

WHFB suffered when they brought in "a six wounds anything" because they didn't up the number of wounds, here glad to see it as they have upped the number, if you get truly desperate you have an option, who knows maybe the dice gods will smile this one time, but otherwise don't worry.

The only time side arms will be fired at vehicles is when there is no better target

Isn't the Morkanaut the Ranged/Quirky version? I'm more curious how speedy the Gorkanaut will be.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Isn't the Morkanaut the Ranged/Quirky version? I'm more curious how speedy the Gorkanaut will be.

Probably the same statline.

Didn't the vehicle damage chart in older editions have a chance to destroy the vehicles on a glancing hit? My only source is TSOALR, so obviously not reliable :V but I don't think the concept of a tank getting destoryed by small arms fires is new to 40k.

For the morkanut itself, seeing it have M 8 does make me think that GW is going to make an effort to make each stat line it's own thing, rather than just lazily porting stuff over to this new system. and 18 wounds? Dang, sounds like I could actually get a 'naugt into melee now.

I think it also confirms orks will have WS +3, which was something I was worried about that we'd get stuck with 4+ to make the space marines more special.

Pancakey wrote:
Always wound on 6 totally changes the way units interact. Also everyone seems to forget, there will be MULTIPLE weapons that do D6 wounds. Melta migh be even better than d6! Also they are introducing the MORTAL WOUND concept.

How can you listen to gw say "everything will kill/die a lot faster!" , read the rules, then watch gw up wounds to 18 and not see why.

Yeah, they will be so much easier to kill now that they can't be one-shot by scatter lasers

Even if there are a lot of multiple damage weapons and the 'always wounds on 6' rule, we still have no idea what other special rules there are, how the actual game plays out, and how long in general the naut actual survives on the battlefield with all these variables and rules.

Bottom line is we don't know. These are only previews that we shouldn't make rash judgements on.

Pancakey wrote:
Math aside. It will now be possible for a grot to kill an imperial knight.

Yeah. It's totally unrealistic that a grot could wriggle in to a battle-damaged hole and gleefully begin tearing out wiring.

Why, it would only take... Lessee... Hitting on 4s, wounding on 6s, 3+ save... 36 Gretchin in 12 inches to cause a single wound.

There are 20 wounds for an Imperial Knight as they said, so a mere 720 Gretchin packed in like sardines within 12 inches shooting at it..

Lessee... Gretchin are 1 square inch in diameter with the base, so assuming the Gretchin are over top of the Knight and circled all the way around mashed together in a dome over the Imperial Knight, you could fit roughly 18^2 Gretchin within 12 inches of the Knight, or roughly 324 Gretchin.

So it takes 3 rounds of concentrated damage by an Imperial Knight literally swarmed by Gretchin like bees in a dome shape as closely packed as possible within range. And the Knight can't move or shoot in that time for the Gretchin to be able to take it down.

So here is how I would explain it:

Imperial Knight commander goes for a coffee and leaves his Knight in the middle of a field of literally nothing but Gretchin. They all swear that they won't touch his Knight and it'll be safe. He wanders off for a few minutes while literally hundreds of Gretchin swarm the thing with hammers, drills and screwdrivers.

Imperial Knight commander comes back to see his Knight has been robbed like a rich man's car left alone in Compton.

The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.

Ghorros wrote:
The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.

Exalted and quoted!

Pancakey wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:
So GW ave us the new stat line.M8 W18 T8 Sv3+, we still have no point cost nor any special rules but we do have some weapon profiles.
Just how durable do we expect them to be and is this M8 enough or are they still too slow ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Morkanaut rules stats are here -> https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/07/new-warhammer-40000-big-stuff-may7gw-homepage-post-4/

Weapon profiles are here -> https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/26/warhammer-40000-weaponsgw-homepage-post-4/

I was posting in reply to the thread. No I do think they will fare well.

Reason#1 - not enough wounds
Reason#2 - fixed to hit rolls
Reason#3 - every weapon wounds on 6

NDA? come at me bro!

Rolls to hit were always fixed. They are exactly the same. Are you sure you're on the forums for the right game?

Technically not 'always' fixed. RT/2nd did not.

Ghorros wrote:

The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.

Exalted, best narrative ever. A complete story of this situation needs to be written for 4chan.

I like it. Need to see how the rest of the rules play but this way of handling large models seems very promising. Time to dust off those devastators!

 oldzoggy wrote:

 ProwlerPC wrote:
8 inches is better then 6 at least. When it mentions how it's end life is that of a seMI mobile shooting fortress I wonder if it will allow transported models to shoot out in some capacity this time. Sounds like assaulting after disembarking from transports will be the norm so at least that solved the Naught's curious lack of assault transport rules in 7th. So far it looks good.

Forgot about that one it might actually be a viable transport now.

It would be really funny if they could be taken as dedicated transports for certain units.

One interesting thought. One of the big draws of the morkanaut over the gorkanaut was it used a blast template so it was much easier for orks to hit. I know that flamer templates are confirmed gone, but what about blast templates? If blast templates are truly gone, it will be much harder for the morkanaut to hit anything. Will this make the gorkanaut more viable?

 Vitali Advenil wrote:
One interesting thought. One of the big draws of the morkanaut over the gorkanaut was it used a blast template so it was much easier for orks to hit. I know that flamer templates are confirmed gone, but what about blast templates? If blast templates are truly gone, it will be much harder for the morkanaut to hit anything. Will this make the gorkanaut more viable?

It would probably make it do 2d6 hits

 TheLumberJack wrote:

 Vitali Advenil wrote:
One interesting thought. One of the big draws of the morkanaut over the gorkanaut was it used a blast template so it was much easier for orks to hit. I know that flamer templates are confirmed gone, but what about blast templates? If blast templates are truly gone, it will be much harder for the morkanaut to hit anything. Will this make the gorkanaut more viable?

It would probably make it do 2d6 hits

So now it really is a baby Gargant.

 Vitali Advenil wrote:
One interesting thought. One of the big draws of the morkanaut over the gorkanaut was it used a blast template so it was much easier for orks to hit. I know that flamer templates are confirmed gone, but what about blast templates? If blast templates are truly gone, it will be much harder for the morkanaut to hit anything. Will this make the gorkanaut more viable?

I'm also really curious about blast templates.

I think they represent blasts in AoS in different ways, but also certain weapons get a bonus to hit for every ten models in a unit. That could help make up for orky accuracy. On the other hand, the KMK hasn't traditionally been meant to wipe out hordes, so who knows.

I'm curious to see if they give the Morkanaut a "Gaze of Mork" type of weapon. I don't have my ork codex in front of me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure it didn't have one despite the model having what appears to be a weapon coming out of one eye.

Now if you want to not be ...some people...and talk about an actual issue that has arisen from this system and could be an problem if not properly handled(but isn't yet something we should worry about too much) The damage table CAN influence which monsters people are willing to take

An example, A frostlord on stonehorn loses almost no effectiveness as his wounds go down, the Stardrake also has a very forgiving table and these models are extremely powerful.

The pheonix takes an absolute swan dive in effectiveness as it takes wounds but still sees play because it's ridiculous durability makes it a hard target.

Most of the Seraphon monstrous creatures are worse than a line trooper by the time they hit the bottom of their charts.

Basically I hope they kept an eye to these charts and how they compare to each other; the thing they said about the morkanaut going from a CC wreckingball to more of a turret makes me think they have. Still THIS is something that could end up causing a disparity that might need to be addresses.

Unlike Grots killing knights. That's. never going to be a thing.

ERJAK wrote:
Now if you want to not be ...some people...and talk about an actual issue that has arisen from this system and could be an problem if not properly handled(but isn't yet something we should worry about too much) The damage table CAN influence which monsters people are willing to take

An example, A frostlord on stonehorn loses almost no effectiveness as his wounds go down, the Stardrake also has a very forgiving table and these models are extremely powerful.

The pheonix takes an absolute swan dive in effectiveness as it takes wounds but still sees play because it's ridiculous durability makes it a hard target.

Most of the Seraphon monstrous creatures are worse than a line trooper by the time they hit the bottom of their charts.

Basically I hope they kept an eye to these charts and how they compare to each other; the thing they said about the morkanaut going from a CC wreckingball to more of a turret makes me think they have. Still THIS is something that could end up causing a disparity that might need to be addresses.

Unlike Grots killing knights. That's. never going to be a thing.

Eh, the stone horn halves the wounds it takes and you take huskards on thundertusks and they can heal it back up to full so I suspect Mek boyz will be able to heal the Gorkanaut.

Is it just me or does Atk 4 seem a tad low?

 TheIronCrow wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Now if you want to not be ...some people...and talk about an actual issue that has arisen from this system and could be an problem if not properly handled(but isn't yet something we should worry about too much) The damage table CAN influence which monsters people are willing to take

An example, A frostlord on stonehorn loses almost no effectiveness as his wounds go down, the Stardrake also has a very forgiving table and these models are extremely powerful.

The pheonix takes an absolute swan dive in effectiveness as it takes wounds but still sees play because it's ridiculous durability makes it a hard target.

Most of the Seraphon monstrous creatures are worse than a line trooper by the time they hit the bottom of their charts.

Basically I hope they kept an eye to these charts and how they compare to each other; the thing they said about the morkanaut going from a CC wreckingball to more of a turret makes me think they have. Still THIS is something that could end up causing a disparity that might need to be addresses.

Unlike Grots killing knights. That's. never going to be a thing.

Eh, the stone horn halves the wounds it takes and you take huskards on thundertusks and they can heal it back up to full so I suspect Mek boyz will be able to heal the Gorkanaut.

My point was that it doesn't really matter what wounds the stonehorn is at because his table is so good but something like a stegadon doesn't get played because it's so buttjacked by it's damage table.

It wasn't really a question of healing or anything.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

GodDamUser wrote:
Is it just me or does Atk 4 seem a tad low?

Not without knowing what damage it does and rend and everything. Keep in mind rowboat only had 6.

Apologies if this is answered anywhere, but do we have a hard confirmation that:

1. Wounds will be determined on a S vs T table?
2. That table will be the same as we know it now?

I know they said "everything can hurt everything" and that "stronger models wound closer to +2 and weaker models wound closer to +6" but have we actually seen anything like a table, or a GW source saying they are expanding the current table?

 3orangewhips wrote:
Apologies if this is answered anywhere, but do we have a hard confirmation that:

1. Wounds will be determined on a S vs T table?
2. That table will be the same as we know it now?

I know they said "everything can hurt everything" and that "stronger models wound closer to +2 and weaker models wound closer to +6" but have we actually seen anything like a table, or a GW source saying they are expanding the current table?

1) correct. Wounds are str vs T

2) Unknown.

Also unknown is what exactly the unit types will be and what the unit types will mean. Do MC still shoot 2 guns? Will walkers? Are tau battle suits still mc or walkers now? Do those unit types even still exist? So much that used to be covered by unit type is now just covered by the core rules and stat line (more wounds the M attribute). Nobody knows anything about any of that.

Pancakey wrote:
Math aside. It will now be possible for a grot to kill an imperial knight.]

Glorious!