Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

All gained a 3+ save

Dragoons gained a 4th attack

Taser goad gains an AP

Jezzail gaining 2 AP

Cognis autocannon going from 4 to 6 attacks and assault

Cognis Lascannon going from D6 to D3+3 and assault

Can we get all Lascannons to be 3+D3 kthxbye.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Can we get all Lascannons to be 3+D3 kthxbye.

It's baffling they won't do that. The only explanation I can think of is they think that's what Laser Destroyers are for? But how many Imperial/Chaos units get those?

Making the autocannon Assault instead of the silly rules it currently has makes sense. It's basically an inferior Herakles now.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Can we get all Lascannons to be 3+D3 kthxbye.

I'm curious to see what neutron lasers will do now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


Making the autocannon Assault instead of the silly rules it currently has makes sense. It's basically an inferior Herakles now.

I think it's more to prevent Mars giving +1S. We'll have to see what the book brings on that end though.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Can we get all Lascannons to be 3+D3 kthxbye.

I'm curious to see what neutron lasers will do now.

If they handle them the same as the Neutron Lasers in the Compendium (Valdor Tank Hunter, Cerberus Heavy Tank Destroyer, Sicaran Venator), then it'll be a flat D6 if the unit remained stationary in your previous movement phase.

Do you know your thread title keeps setting off Dakka’s "too many exclamation marks" warning?

Lascannon isn't changing now. Had change been on cards it would have come along marine codex

Normal Imperial Lascannons should be the worst of their type. Dark Lances, Gauss Destructors and Cognis Las should all be (and currently are) better.

Here's hoping Bright Lances get a similar glow up.

Two huge images here:


So the houndbois lose one wound and gain one toughness, which seems like a nerf..
The phosphor blast pistol becomes d3 shots instead of 1 shot.
The Arc Maul/power maul gain +1S and improves from AP-1 to AP-2
Edit: Oooh, and everyone got an extra attack on profile
Edit 2: Someone else noted that the galvanic carbines got AP-1 as well
Edit 3: The sulphur breath gets the standard upgrade to 12" range and also improves its AP to -2 (from AP-1)
Also, the phosphor blast rifle goes from 4 shots to 2d3 shots. Which is statistically the same of course but seems like a weird change. Are all phosphor weaponry going to random amount of shots? Because then Kastelans will feel that as a giant nerf.

9th seems hell-bent on increasing the lethality even more than 8th and faster... I'mm baffled

I find it somewhat funny yet not surprising I get the horse guys finally only to see them lose a wound..sad. Was going to buff the squad sizes out but I'm going to pump the brakes on that and see what shakes out from the new stuff.

That said I do always say to get what you like and not whats good at the time, I have time to figure it out not like I'll be playing any time soon still.

 Cybtroll wrote:
9th seems hell-bent on increasing the lethality even more than 8th and faster... I'mm baffled

Yes and no. Armor saves and new damage mechanics have popped up. These changes bring units in line - as noted there's nerfs here, too.

The picture will still be unclear until the dex is out.

 Cybtroll wrote:
9th seems hell-bent on increasing the lethality even more than 8th and faster... I'mm baffled

I mean, are you shocked? Are you really?

Seems like half the units in the game are walking around with 2-3 wounds 2+/4++ and half of those only get wounded on 4s. Lethality HAS to go up because durability smashed right through the roof.

Ugh. Save me from 2d3 shot weapons. The epitome of pointless dice rolling with a strong average of 4, and the need to roll for every model in the unit. [Though the plasma inceptors are still even worse, since you have to worry about which one might die on overcharged shots]

I do find the binary (or should that be binaric) titling that crops up around admech disproportionately pleasing

 Bosskelot wrote:
Normal Imperial Lascannons should be the worst of their type.

Why?

Because they're the generic basic Lascannon, whereas the AdMech keeps the good stuff for themselves.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Because they're the generic basic Lascannon, whereas the AdMech keeps the good stuff for themselves.

 Bosskelot wrote:
...worst of their type. Dark Lances, Gauss Destructors and Cognis Las should all...

Admech have Dark Lances and Gauss Destructors now? How heretekal...
Less facetiously, I'm more wondering why regular lascannons have to be "the worst", not why equivalents should be better.

 waefre_1 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Because they're the generic basic Lascannon, whereas the AdMech keeps the good stuff for themselves.

 Bosskelot wrote:
...worst of their type. Dark Lances, Gauss Destructors and Cognis Las should all...

Admech have Dark Lances and Gauss Destructors now? How heretekal...
Less facetiously, I'm more wondering why regular lascannons have to be "the worst", not why equivalents should be better.

Well, Dark/Bright Lances and Multimeltas are S8. I think people take the S9 on las for granted. It's nice to always wound on 3s.

It's frustrating that Lascannons are d6, but they're the most easily spammable long-range AT. I get why GW would keep them with a bit more swinginess.

 waefre_1 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Because they're the generic basic Lascannon, whereas the AdMech keeps the good stuff for themselves.

 Bosskelot wrote:
...worst of their type. Dark Lances, Gauss Destructors and Cognis Las should all...

Admech have Dark Lances and Gauss Destructors now? How heretekal...
Less facetiously, I'm more wondering why regular lascannons have to be "the worst", not why equivalents should be better.

Because the wider Imperium is not as technologically advanced as races like the Aeldari or the Necrons.

Their Lascannons should be the worst available, but be the cheapest and most spammable to represent the mass-produced and easily replaceable nature of Imperial war materiel.

 Bosskelot wrote:

...be the cheapest and most spammable...

Ahhh, I see - when you said "the worst", I though you might mean that they should be absolutely inferior to lances etc. in every regard (including stuff like cost, spammability, etc).

Every option should be balanced by rules and point costs, even if some stuff is thematically weaker, it should not be competitively weaker. (Imperial guardsmen vs custodes for example outside weapon options)

No they should be worse in most regards, but just make up for that by being relatively cheaper and more easily spammed.

There's indications melta-type weaponry might be seeing the same sort of thing, if Heat Lances are anything to go by.

At the end of the day every Xenos race aside from like, Orks or Nids, should have superior weaponry on average compared to most Imperial Factions and you can balance and design around this through points costs or other factors like resilience. You represent lore on the table much better while also still having an interesting and varied game system. If Aeldari and Necrons are supposedly incredibly technologically advanced races then this should be represented in some fashion on the tabletop because it just makes the game fundamentally more interesting to have these differences represented.

I do think Lascannons should be useful in some way, and their current stats are problematic, but I also do not think that they should be the equals of Darklight or Gauss.

 Bosskelot wrote:
No they should be worse in most regards, but just make up for that by being relatively cheaper and more easily spammed.

There's indications melta-type weaponry might be seeing the same sort of thing, if Heat Lances are anything to go by.

At the end of the day every Xenos race aside from like, Orks or Nids, should have superior weaponry on average compared to most Imperial Factions and you can balance and design around this through points costs or other factors like resilience. You represent lore on the table much better while also still having an interesting and varied game system. If Aeldari and Necrons are supposedly incredibly technologically advanced races then this should be represented in some fashion on the tabletop because it just makes the game fundamentally more interesting to have these differences represented.

I do think Lascannons should be useful in some way, and their current stats are problematic, but I also do not think that they should be the equals of Darklight or Gauss.

Problem: Current price of a Dark Lance: 15 points. Current price of a lascannon: 15 points. So Chaos and Loyalist Scum are paying the same price for inferior weapons. That ain't cool. Make lascannons Dd6 MINIMUM 3 and cut the points. There's "worse than Xenos", and then there's just "bad".

You know that you can’t take a Lascannon without a wielder, right? It’s the total points (and package) that matters. Not the weapon on its own.

The wielder certainly is a big deal, but nobody's going to take the weapon if it's lacklustre.

 Kanluwen wrote:
The wielder certainly is a big deal, but nobody's going to take the weapon if it's lacklustre.

Which is why no one ever takes Lasguns, right?

If you were only allowed one Lascannon, I'd agree-but the fact that you can load up squads with them and slap them all over the place significantly mitigates its downsides.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
No they should be worse in most regards, but just make up for that by being relatively cheaper and more easily spammed.

There's indications melta-type weaponry might be seeing the same sort of thing, if Heat Lances are anything to go by.

At the end of the day every Xenos race aside from like, Orks or Nids, should have superior weaponry on average compared to most Imperial Factions and you can balance and design around this through points costs or other factors like resilience. You represent lore on the table much better while also still having an interesting and varied game system. If Aeldari and Necrons are supposedly incredibly technologically advanced races then this should be represented in some fashion on the tabletop because it just makes the game fundamentally more interesting to have these differences represented.

I do think Lascannons should be useful in some way, and their current stats are problematic, but I also do not think that they should be the equals of Darklight or Gauss.

Problem: Current price of a Dark Lance: 15 points. Current price of a lascannon: 15 points. So Chaos and Loyalist Scum are paying the same price for inferior weapons. That ain't cool. Make lascannons Dd6 MINIMUM 3 and cut the points. There's "worse than Xenos", and then there's just "bad".

Yeah whilst I could understand 3+D3 for premium antivehicle weapons, Lascannons should get the D6 (Minimum 3) to be a somewhat decent weapon for its current cost

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Problem: Current price of a Dark Lance: 15 points. Current price of a lascannon: 15 points. So Chaos and Loyalist Scum are paying the same price for inferior weapons. That ain't cool. Make lascannons Dd6 MINIMUM 3 and cut the points. There's "worse than Xenos", and then there's just "bad".

The point value of two weapons that will never be in the same army, yet alone on the same model isn't particularly important. Especially when Dark Lances are free on Raiders and Ravager

What is important is the overall package. Is a 140 Triple-Dark Lance Ravager a good point comparison to a 170 point Quad-Lascannon Predator Annihilator?

 alextroy wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Problem: Current price of a Dark Lance: 15 points. Current price of a lascannon: 15 points. So Chaos and Loyalist Scum are paying the same price for inferior weapons. That ain't cool. Make lascannons Dd6 MINIMUM 3 and cut the points. There's "worse than Xenos", and then there's just "bad".

The point value of two weapons that will never be in the same army, yet alone on the same model isn't particularly important. Especially when Dark Lances are free on Raiders and Ravager

What is important is the overall package. Is a 140 Triple-Dark Lance Ravager a good point comparison to a 170 point Quad-Lascannon Predator Annihilator?

Not really. But then again, I've seen people be complaining a gakload that Predators aren't good.

For reference, against a T8 3+ target, they do...

3 shots
2 hits
1 wound
1 failed save
5 damage from the Ravager

vs.

4 shots
8/3 hits
16/9 wounds
80/54 or 40/27 failed saves
140/27 or just over 5 damage from the Predator

So about equal on the offense, on average, against that target. Add a few more targets along with analysis of damage deviation from the average. Then you look at defenses, maneuverability, special rules...

No need to actually do this. The point is you can't look at the upgrade cost of a specific weapon on a specific model and declare "unfair" compared to a different specific weapon on a different specific model in a completely different army. Predators might be crap, but the upgrade cost of a Lascannon on them is not relevant to the upgrade cost of a Dark Lance on a Kabalite Warrior.