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.

Platuan4th wrote:

Skriker wrote: It is a rare day indeed when a unit with rapid fire weapons (that aren't plasma guns!) gets glancing hits on anything that is AV10, and pretty much impossible for them to do so against AV12.

Since I'm a smart ass: Necron Warriors have rapid fire guns that can glance AV12.

Yes and your smart ass comment ignores the last sentence of my post which specifically states that the Necrons are the only real exception to this.

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mercury14 wrote:This post is really kind of absurd and denies reality. Str4 and up guns will take a hull point from a War Walker or Vyper - and they only have two hull points. They were already low durability units as you say, but then 6e came along and they went from fragile to so delicate any light breeze can kill them. Staying out of range isn't really an option in a game full of flyers, deep strikers, fast units, and long-range weaponry. And our War Walkers move 6 inches - how do you expect them to stay out of range? Scatter lasers are only 36" bro.

Actually no. Str 4 guns *can* take a hull point from a War Walker or Viper, not *will*. You still have to roll a 6 for penetration to cause that glancing hit. It isn't guaranteed and since you complain that a 5+ cover save is useless one can extrapolate that since making a 5+ is so tough getting a 6+ isn't going to happen much at all. A Str 5 weapon needs a 5+ to glance, and again since a 5+ cover save is useless needing a 5+ for a glancing hit is also kind of useless too, isn't it? A str 4 weapon has always had the "chance" of glancing an AV10 vehicle, but now a unit only armed with str 4 weapons can ultimately destroy the AV10 vehicle with enough concentrated fire. This isn't the end of the world and just means that you can just charge your Vypers up to a line of marines and kill them with impunity and little risk. Heaven forbid you should have do something more tactically sound than driving stright up to your target and shooting them point blank.

As for your complaints about dropping off your assault troops here is a simple solution: Don't disembark them out in the open right in front of the enemy shooting line. A duh..

You are welcome to whine and moan and complain all you want that you army is now useless and ragequit and sell them on ebay. Doesn't change that fact that I think you are wrong. Eldar have ALWAYS been fragile, but whining that your light vehicles are now useless because they are vulnerable to the *same* exact weapons as before is just silly.

Skriker



Automatically Appended Next Post:

mercury14 wrote:I don't know about anyone else, but I usually kept my WWs in cover in 5e. I'll do the same in 6e, only my WWs will die much more easily. Also there's a new rule where you can target models not in cover when the majority of the unit is. That way there's no cover save but hits can only be applied to the part of the unit not in cover. So no more putting 2 WWs in cover while the third sticks out for a nice line of fire.

Oh noes! A cheesy tactic that tried to cheat the rules has been nerfed and you actually have to *be* in cover to get the protection of cover. How sad for you.

Skriker

Skriker wrote:
[size=9]

Actually no. Str 4 guns *can* take a hull point from a War Walker or Viper, not *will*. You still have to roll a 6 for penetration to cause that glancing hit. It isn't guaranteed and since you complain that a 5+ cover save is useless one can extrapolate that since making a 5+ is so tough getting a 6+ isn't going to happen much at all. A Str 5 weapon needs a 5+ to glance, and again since a 5+ cover save is useless needing a 5+ for a glancing hit is also kind of useless too, isn't it? A str 4 weapon has always had the "chance" of glancing an AV10 vehicle, but now a unit only armed with str 4 weapons can ultimately destroy the AV10 vehicle with enough concentrated fire. This isn't the end of the world and just means that you can just charge your Vypers up to a line of marines and kill them with impunity and little risk. Heaven forbid you should have do something more tactically sound than driving stright up to your target and shooting them point blank.

Oh that's a good point. Because you know, that's exactly what I was doing. I've always driven my Vypers and WW up to point blank range to shoot things.

Yeah bro. Way to assume a bunch of completely false crap.

Skriker wrote:As for your complaints about dropping off your assault troops here is a simple solution: Don't disembark them out in the open right in front of the enemy shooting line. A duh..

So disembark Banshees a little out of the way - but somehow also in assault rangefor the next turn. I don't know what kind of players you face but the people I play against aren't stupid enough to intentionally sit their units next to Banshees the turn after they disembark. They'll move away. Not to mention that disembarking locations that are "out of the way" and in assault range at the same time often do not exist depending on the terrain.

Again, you're assuming I'm an idiot that puts his units intentionally in harm's way, devoid of any rational thought. Is there any way you could argue your position without relying on such dim assumptions?

Skriker wrote:You are welcome to whine and moan and complain all you want that you army is now useless and ragequit and sell them on ebay. Doesn't change that fact that I think you are wrong. Eldar have ALWAYS been fragile, but whining that your light vehicles are now useless because they are vulnerable to the *same* exact weapons as before is just silly.

Skriker

No you're flat-wrong. Before Wave Serpents and Falcons were tough as hell, not fragile. Wave Serpents were even tougher than Land Raiders against Melta. And go look at the odds of wrecking a Holo-Falcon, even without cover or fortune.

And in 6e, WS and Falcons are still costed for being tough as hell to bring down. Only they're easy to bring down.

Regarding light vehicles, they're far more vulnerable to the same weapons as in 5e. This is an undeniable fact that you willfully ignore.

So disembark Banshees a little out of the way - but somehow also in assault rangefor the next turn. I don't know what kind of players you face but the people I play against aren't stupid enough to intentionally sit their units next to Banshees the turn after they disembark. They'll move away. Not to mention that disembarking locations that are "out of the way" and in assault range at the same time often do not exist depending on the terrain.

Movement is now 6 + d6(run)

Movement with charging is 6 + D6 with 2D6. With fleet you get to reroll run and one D6 in the 2D6

If you cannot outrun them with a potential 24", your dice luck is just truly horrible.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

So disembark Banshees a little out of the way - but somehow also in assault rangefor the next turn. I don't know what kind of players you face but the people I play against aren't stupid enough to intentionally sit their units next to Banshees the turn after they disembark. They'll move away. Not to mention that disembarking locations that are "out of the way" and in assault range at the same time often do not exist depending on the terrain.

Movement is now 6 + d6(run)

Movement with charging is 6 + D6 with 2D6. With fleet you get to reroll run and one D6 in the 2D6

If you cannot outrun them with a potential 24", your dice luck is just truly horrible.

Most definitely this.

The changes don't exist in a void and if you only focus on one aspect of things and complain about it ignoring things like this that also can make a big change to the same situations in assault arguing is kind of pointless.

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mercury14 wrote:Oh that's a good point. Because you know, that's exactly what I was doing. I've always driven my Vypers and WW up to point blank range to shoot things.

Yeah bro. Way to assume a bunch of completely false crap.

Sorry mate, but the way you are complaining this is what it sounds like you want to be able to do. Keep at range and those rapid fire weapons aren't a threat at all. Of course you've complained that keeping at range is just impossible too, so whatever.

mercury14 wrote:So disembark Banshees a little out of the way - but somehow also in assault rangefor the next turn. I don't know what kind of players you face but the people I play against aren't stupid enough to intentionally sit their units next to Banshees the turn after they disembark. They'll move away. Not to mention that disembarking locations that are "out of the way" and in assault range at the same time often do not exist depending on the terrain.

Again, you're assuming I'm an idiot that puts his units intentionally in harm's way, devoid of any rational thought. Is there any way you could argue your position without relying on such dim assumptions?

Considering that movement and charge rules have changed for fleet troops your charge range is much longer now. When we play we have a lot of terrain on the table to limit the impact of the longest range weapons. This leaves us plenty of cover and terrain to use to get closer to our enemies and to assault without just being out in the open for a turn first. Also, if an enemy unit is sitting on an objective they aren't just going to abandon it just because their unit is threatened.

mercury14 wrote:No you're flat-wrong. Before Wave Serpents and Falcons were tough as hell, not fragile. Wave Serpents were even tougher than Land Raiders against Melta. And go look at the odds of wrecking a Holo-Falcon, even without cover or fortune.

And in 6e, WS and Falcons are still costed for being tough as hell to bring down. Only they're easy to bring down.

Regarding light vehicles, they're far more vulnerable to the same weapons as in 5e. This is an undeniable fact that you willfully ignore.

Yep I am willfully ignoring it. My point is that they are not going to autodestroyed just because they are light vehicles. It is all about movement, range, and staying in motion. This is even more so for the Eldar which are supposed to be about maneuver anyway. One of my armies is Dark Eldar and it isn't as if their light vehicles are so much better than Eldar vehicles. I just don't consider the rules changes the end of the world as you apparently do and the Dark Eldar have a very current codex compared to the ancient Eldar codex. Sorry that your Wave Serpents aren't tougher than land raiders anymore. They certainly don't cost as much as a land raider either.

I just read the first 6e battle report in White Dwarf. Not a single vehicle in the game was taken out so much more quickly because of Hull points at all and there were plenty of vehicles on each side. The vehicles still did their usual jobs, they brought lots of mobile fire power to the game and were hard hitting as usual. They didn't magically pop because they now have hull points. They all took heavy weapons fire to destroy or were attacked by monstrous creatures. All the hull point changes mean is that people don't *have* to have melta, lances, or lascannons in every army just because an opponent might bring something heavy to the table. Someone can take out a land raider with a lot of krak missile shots. They aren't the end of the world and vehicles will still be useful in the game.

Sorry, but just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I am willfully ignoring anything. It just means that I disagree with you.

Skriker

Vaktathi wrote:
Counterattack, Acute Senses, and that all important CCW that tac marines don't get, for *15* points.

Long Fangs can get 5 weapons for 140pts with 6 dudes. It costs Vanillla Marines 180pts for 4 heavy weapons with 5 dudes. That's a significant difference, especially for min/max alpha strike armies.

Point taken. But even though this does not fully compensated for it what you've said above, vanilla marines do have access to stuff that SW's don't. And...SW isn't as bad as GK .



Automatically Appended Next Post:

mercury14 wrote:
What are Eldar players supposed to do for the next 18 months?

I've been playing 40K since the 90's bro. 18 months is not that long to wait for a codex. I'm sure you'll get your codex and then everyone will be whining about how OP Eldar are. Be patient and have faith. ... in the emperor.

I've been playing 40K since the 90's bro. 18 months is not that long to wait for a codex. I'm sure you'll get your codex and then everyone will be whining about how OP Eldar are. Be patient and have faith. ... in the emperor.

Oh god not again, 4th edition was already bad enough and having Falcon Spam all over again would just be such a disappointment.

Point taken. But even though this does not fully compensated for it what you've said above, vanilla marines do have access to stuff that SW's don't. And...SW isn't as bad as GK .

And SW's have access to better stuff that Vanilla marines don't, what exactly is this trying to prove?

They are cheaper (shouldn't be)
They are better (still cheaper, they should be at least 17 points due to CCW/BP combo over the vanilla)
And being not as bad as the worst thing..Yeah no that still didn't excuse DE or VC back in fantasy.

I think units that employ auto glance weaponry like Haywire grenades, haywire blasters, emp grenades, etc. are things that are going to be devastating to vehicles.

Best part is removing hull points just wrecks the vehicle, not exploding it, so your not killing your own guys when the tank drops.

10 haywire grenades/blaster shots will drop any tank in the game that has moved 12" or less.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Movement is now 6 + d6(run)

Movement with charging is 6 + D6 with 2D6. With fleet you get to reroll run and one D6 in the 2D6

If you cannot outrun them with a potential 24", your dice luck is just truly horrible.

I think there was a rulebook source that said there is no assaulting after running. Fleet or no fleet. Fleet gives reroll to one or both die on assault, nothing more.

Skriker wrote:Yep I am willfully ignoring it. My point is that they are not going to autodestroyed just because they are light vehicles. It is all about movement, range, and staying in motion. This is even more so for the Eldar which are supposed to be about maneuver anyway. One of my armies is Dark Eldar and it isn't as if their light vehicles are so much better than Eldar vehicles. I just don't consider the rules changes the end of the world as you apparently do and the Dark Eldar have a very current codex compared to the ancient Eldar codex. Sorry that your Wave Serpents aren't tougher than land raiders anymore. They certainly don't cost as much as a land raider either.

That is partially true, at least in shooting. In CC serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck now. They may not cost as much as land rider but they are 2x or 3x times the price of Chimera, Rhino (a typical, scatter serpent is 105).
And now range, movement and staying in motion means little. IoMs weapons have the same or more range. Movement? No difference. They get longer turbo-boost (non-fast can turbo-boost too) but that means no shooting. Staying in motion? 3+ to hit no matter if you're fast or not. There are nice things about the serpent but it don't magically out-run and out-range other armies. And it did loose more than Rhino or Chimera. It definitely isn't the end of the world, not even close, but it is getting worse while being behind already.

Vaktathi wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:Lootas are going to be very powerful under the new rules, almost absurdly so against anything that isn't AV13.
A full squad of lootas is practically assured to kill off anything less than AV13 under the new rules unless it rolls min shots.
Against AV12 with max shots they'll inflict 5 glances/pen's on average, with 2 shots each they'll inflict 3.33 (enough to kill anything with AV12), and with 1 shot they'll inflict 1.66 (so usually 2).
Against anything AV11 or under, even rolling minimum shots, they'll likely kill it regardless.
.

Against anything in 5+ cover, you get:
15 shots - 5 hits - 1.67 glance/pen - 1.1 get through cover.
30 shots - 10 hits - 3.33 glance/pen , 2.2 get through cover
45 shots - 15 hits - 5 glance/pen, 3.3 get through cover
Against AV13, halve all results.

Color me unimpressed. On average, they will fail to hull point to death an AV12 unless parked in the open, and they roll max shots.
That's a 225 point anti-tank unit that has T4 and 6+ save, and each wound cuts into their fire power.
3 Chimeras with heavy stubbers show up at 195. If they shoot first, and both sides have cover, The chimmeras should sweep them from the table.
How about 3 hydras, also 225 points. They fair pretty well in that shoot out as well.

I think people are hitting the panic button way too early.

-Matt

keep in mind that requires the vehicles to get cover, not always possible by any means even in 5E, and there are AV12 tanks in the game other than cheap anti-infantry platforms, you're basically comparing them to quite possibly the best anti-infantry platforms to throw against them (and lets not forget that you can't buy chimeras on their own, and very few people takes stubbers). Against Stormravens, Hellhounds, Fire Prisms, etc, they will be very scary indeed.

new rules, you only need 25% of the vehilce covered to get 5+

Macok wrote:
That is partially true, at least in shooting. In CC serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck now. They may not cost as much as land rider but they are 2x or 3x times the price of Chimera, Rhino (a typical, scatter serpent is 105).
And now range, movement and staying in motion means little. IoMs weapons have the same or more range. Movement? No difference. They get longer turbo-boost (non-fast can turbo-boost too) but that means no shooting. Staying in motion? 3+ to hit no matter if you're fast or not. There are nice things about the serpent but it don't magically out-run and out-range other armies. And it did loose more than Rhino or Chimera. It definitely isn't the end of the world, not even close, but it is getting worse while being behind already.

Skriker will happily ignore the facts you present, just as he ignored mine.

It's pretty cool how he his response to my point about War Walkers being weakened was that they should focus on maneuverability and staying in motion. Because he thinks their 6" move makes them capable of great feats of speed or something. Maybe he thinks walkers get a cover save for moving a couple inches? Or that 6" speed is sufficient to keep opposing transports and jump units at bay?

He'll ignore the fact that Wave Serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck in CC now. He'll insist that comparing WS to land raiders is a more valid exercise than WS to transports. He'll keep arguing through a cloud of hyperbole. And he'll keep assigning me positions that I do not have and then attacking those positions.

hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.

tgf wrote:hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.

Not really,

They might die easier, but they will tear the other army's vehicles apart too.. especially the Psyflemen..

tgf wrote:hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.

Those who bought 9 Venoms are the victim of the same joke. Well anyone who bought any DE really?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ascalam wrote:

tgf wrote:hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.

Not really,

They might die easier, but they will tear the other army's vehicles apart too.. especially the Psyflemen..

vehicle spam is alright I think but there are going to be some lists that are going to come up that will totally eat vehicle spam in a way not seen in 5th. Eventually I think people are going to get tired of carting around the huge vehicle case to fit all those tanks in.

mercury14 wrote:

Macok wrote:
That is partially true, at least in shooting. In CC serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck now. They may not cost as much as land rider but they are 2x or 3x times the price of Chimera, Rhino (a typical, scatter serpent is 105).
And now range, movement and staying in motion means little. IoMs weapons have the same or more range. Movement? No difference. They get longer turbo-boost (non-fast can turbo-boost too) but that means no shooting. Staying in motion? 3+ to hit no matter if you're fast or not. There are nice things about the serpent but it don't magically out-run and out-range other armies. And it did loose more than Rhino or Chimera. It definitely isn't the end of the world, not even close, but it is getting worse while being behind already.

Skriker will happily ignore the facts you present, just as he ignored mine.

It's pretty cool how he his response to my point about War Walkers being weakened was that they should focus on maneuverability and staying in motion. Because he thinks their 6" move makes them capable of great feats of speed or something. Maybe he thinks walkers get a cover save for moving a couple inches? Or that 6" speed is sufficient to keep opposing transports and jump units at bay?

He'll ignore the fact that Wave Serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck in CC now. He'll insist that comparing WS to land raiders is a more valid exercise than WS to transports. He'll keep arguing through a cloud of hyperbole. And he'll keep assigning me positions that I do not have and then attacking those positions.

You mean the way you ignore his too? You complain that rolling 6s for S4 weapons to dmg AV10 vehicles is too easy, and yet you think rolling 5+ to get your cover save is too hard. You quite literally have double the chance to get your cover save than they do of getting their glancing hit. Pick one, is 5+ too rare or is 6 too common? It can't be both.

All kidding and na na nana boo boo aside. This is a good change, in 5th people were avoiding infantry squads or mining them out to get the transports, that tells me transports were far to good. The game is not tank hammer, its about the infantry.

tgf wrote:All kidding and na na nana boo boo aside. This is a good change, in 5th people were avoiding infantry squads or mining them out to get the transports, that tells me transports were far to good. The game is not tank hammer, its about the infantry.

People will still load up on transports just as much as before. They're easier to pop now, but the problem wasn't that. The reason there are so many transports is because:

1) Rhinos are too cheap
2) There aren't enough turns to walk across the map


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orblivion wrote:
You mean the way you ignore his too? You complain that rolling 6s for S4 weapons to dmg AV10 vehicles is too easy, and yet you think rolling 5+ to get your cover save is too hard. You quite literally have double the chance to get your cover save than they do of getting their glancing hit. Pick one, is 5+ too rare or is 6 too common? It can't be both.

If you read my posts, I'm not depending on S4 weaponry to make my argument. I'm mostly talking about WS going from very durable to flimsy, while still being costed as a powerful/durable tank.

mercury14 wrote:
People will still load up on transports just as much as before. They're easier to pop now, but the problem wasn't that. The reason there are so many transports is because:

1) Rhinos are too cheap
2) There aren't enough turns to walk across the map

You can no longer assault out of a stationary vehicle, so that will stop razor/rhino spam in BA.
I'd agree though, shooty marine units hiding in metal boxes won't change, but meh. It's not that powerful anyway.

Looks like my BTs LR will die even quicker now too !!!!!

Orblivion wrote:You complain that rolling 6s for S4 weapons to dmg AV10 vehicles is too easy, and yet you think rolling 5+ to get your cover save is too hard. You quite literally have double the chance to get your cover save than they do of getting their glancing hit. Pick one, is 5+ too rare or is 6 too common? It can't be both.

I really hate to jump in the middle of this, but to quote Ron White "I had the right to remain silent, but I did not have the ability", so here goes.

This is not an "apples to apples" comparison. Rolling a 5+ cover save, each fail is a true fail and can hurt you very badly, so it is important to make most, if not all of them. Rolling a 6+ to glance a vehicle with 20 rapid fire Necron Warriors, a few fails are not that big of a deal, a bunch of fails are not that big of a deal because you only need 3 or 4 successes to wreck the vehicle. So, even though you are twice as likely to pass a 5+ cover save as you are to glance on a 6, you are way more than twice as nervous about failing individual 5+ saves.

Say your 3 hull point vehicle is being hit shot by 20 Necron Warriors in rapid fire range but you have a 5+ cover save. You know that you are twice as likely to make the cover save as the Necron is to make his 6s to glance, so you are feeling good.

Now, we switch to the Necron player's perspective.
20 warriors, rapid fire, 40 shots - Wow, that's a lot of dice, this is gonna be good.
Have to roll 3+, wow I made 26.5 hits - How on earth did I get a .5 hit? Shouldn't it have been 26.666666666666666667 (40*2/3)? Most be a below-average day. Well, let's go with it.
26.5 hits - Gotta roll 6s to Glance. 26.5 dice is still a lot of dice, this is gonna be good.
4.4 glances. Shouldn't that be 4.4166666666667 (26.5*1/6), well I guess still below average, but let's go with it.
Without the cover saves, that vehicle is DEAD! Hope he misses 3 of them.

Now we switch to your point of view.
Wow, 4.4 glances, I better make these 5+ saves!
Have to roll 5+, that might be tough.
4.4 cover saves and you miss 1.4 (average would be 1.4666666667 but you always roll above average)
4.4 glances minus 1.4 cover saves totals to 3 glances, dead vehicle. Bummer


As you can see, rolling 6+ glances is not as nerve-racking as 5+ cover saves because they are very different, individual dice that fail are not important for a 6+ hit because your focus is the successes versus a 5+ save where your focus is the fails. I could do the same example with a hypothetical BS1 AP2 S10 rapid fire weapon on 20 models. Every failed 5+ invuln save is a dead marine, but who cares about a few failed 6+ to-hit rolls because there are so many more dice that will be hits.

mercury14 wrote:Skriker will happily ignore the facts you present, just as he ignored mine.

It's pretty cool how he his response to my point about War Walkers being weakened was that they should focus on maneuverability and staying in motion. Because he thinks their 6" move makes them capable of great feats of speed or something. Maybe he thinks walkers get a cover save for moving a couple inches? Or that 6" speed is sufficient to keep opposing transports and jump units at bay?

He'll ignore the fact that Wave Serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck in CC now. He'll insist that comparing WS to land raiders is a more valid exercise than WS to transports. He'll keep arguing through a cloud of hyperbole. And he'll keep assigning me positions that I do not have and then attacking those positions.

Thanks for putting words in my mouth, mate. I disagree with you and you attack me instead of presenting evidence other than whining. Not wasting my time with you anymore. Just because you are convinced that your army is totally useless doesn't mean others have to agree with you on that fact. Having been through every edition of 40k since Rogue Trader, every time a new version comes out players of army X immediately complain how completely useless their army is and how they'll never win a game again in their life and when it comes down to it and the dice are rolled and the games are played it turns out to *never* be true that army X has become completely useless. So you keep lamenting, and I'll just wait until the numbers really come in from actual games being played.

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Macok wrote:That is partially true, at least in shooting. In CC serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck now. They may not cost as much as land rider but they are 2x or 3x times the price of Chimera, Rhino (a typical, scatter serpent is 105).
And now range, movement and staying in motion means little. IoMs weapons have the same or more range. Movement? No difference. They get longer turbo-boost (non-fast can turbo-boost too) but that means no shooting. Staying in motion? 3+ to hit no matter if you're fast or not. There are nice things about the serpent but it don't magically out-run and out-range other armies. And it did loose more than Rhino or Chimera. It definitely isn't the end of the world, not even close, but it is getting worse while being behind already.

No a serpent doesn't magically outrun or out-range other armies, but if there is enough terrain on the table it also shouldn't just vanish the second the game starts either. Yes they are definitely more vulnerable in CC than before, but pretty much every vehicle is more vulnerable to CC now, especially light vehicles. It is making me rethinki buy scorchas for my newly forming ork army since they are more vulnerable now. Do I really want a buggy that has to get that close to do its thing with a template weapon? Usually the weapons on a serpent, war walker or vyper have a lot more range than the 8" flamer template.

Eldar are definitely suffering from old codex syndrome, no doubt, but it is definitely not the complete end of the world. I think rhinos should be cheaper than chimeras and serpents. They just don't have the same firepower, but chimeras and serpents should be closer in cost, along with razorbacks as they also fill that mobile fire support role after they drop off their charges. A lot of this comes from the fact that GW staff writing new codex books seem to do so in a bubble. It doesn't matter fully what is in the rules or even what is in earlier codex books. If they think something is cool or neat they put it in the book regardless.

The saddest thing is that today people are complaining how useless Eldar are now, meanwhile in a year or so when a new Eldar book comes out people will be complaining the other way. There is no happy medium with GW.

Skriker

tgf wrote:hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.

Grey Knights Dreadnoughts 2x twinlinked Autocannon with psybolt ammo and venerable = hits on 2, re-rolls 1 on hit. Glances AV10 on a 2, AV11 on a 3 = even more deadly than before imo. Regular bolters can pop rear armor of 10 now easy as well (but don't rely on that lol).

Basicly Autocannons, assault cannons, and anything that has a str of around 8 and high number of shots could easily pop AV11 in one volly of fire. I just think they should have just taken hull points off glances and put shaken, stunned, and shaken/stunned results on a D3 or something. I just don't see cinamatic from glancing vehicles to death. 1 of 2 things is going to happen. People stop taken as much armor and heavy weapons or people keep taking them and heavy weapons. We don't know people may favor flying machines or nothing...and force us to bring AA/S2A guns or flying machines ourselves. I for one am not happy I have to find points to incorperate that stuff into my army since I am not willing to risk just shooting them on 6's.

Great point, accept that you are still stuck in 5th. No one will be playing vehicles in number if they are easy do destory so your 150 point dread gets to kill maybe 60 points in foot soldiers before getting wasted.

Vaktathi wrote:

Omegus wrote:Well, at least Basilisks have the option of firing indirectly, and since you don't have to hit vehicles with the center of the template, that S9 (does ordnance still get 2d6 pick highest?) is quite potent. On top of that, if you really want to, you can always have guaranteed terrain to hide it behind.

With a minimum range of 36" that encompasses most of the board typically (meaning it can't indirect fire at anything closer than 36"), and with all the flyers/outflankers/deep striking units in the game (not to mention helps to outflanking and DS'ing units in the 6E rumors), they likely won't last long sadly


Still doesn't help stuff like dreads, ravagers, hellhounds, etc :(

You can indirect fire within your minimum range.

You can't assault anymore if you run (page 20 of BRB). So at most it's an 18" charge range as in 5th edition. Now, instead of guaranteed 13" of assault (6+D6+6), is 8" of guaranteed range (6+2D6)

SkyHawk wrote:You can't assault anymore if you run (page 20 of BRB). So at most it's an 18" charge range as in 5th edition. Now, instead of guaranteed 13" of assault (6+D6+6), is 8" of guaranteed range (6+2D6)

Good, they have curtailed the frothing looney's charge range to some thing more manageable for my foot vets.
As for those saying less armour is going to be played, chances are even more will now be played (now that the IG goodies are open for the ally sub FoC).

Besides a tank is still a tank (and with the Guard even more so), no matter how much you bemoan the new HP system you'll still have to kill it before it kills you.

[As was once spoken to me]------- Man up, grow a pair (of what is your choice ), play the game and throw the dice. If you don't like it the go play Warmachine or FoW

I don't like the fact that 6th ed just really seemed to stick it to eldar. They were already a very weak codex with transports that cost 15-20 points more than they should. Now they'll go down a lot easier and our squishy troops won't be able to do anything.

People keep saying that Rhinos and Chimeras have the same problem which is only true to a point. Rhinos carry marines so they're fine. Chimeras can number into the high teens during a game and so will be very hard to bring down.

A standard 1750 of eldar will contain 5-7 transports that are now about 30-40pts too expensive with expensive and fragile guys inside that die very easily.

Guard can bring 30-ish autocannons. Orks can bring roughly the same number. GK's I don't know about you guys but I routinely see about 12 psycannons on the table + 3 Psy-dreads. They'll have NO trouble at all bringing down vehicles.

Our psykers aren't great anymore, 1/2 the armies got access to our powers and everyone can stop them. Our Banshees can now no longer hurt terms, we have no plasma other than star cannons that are 35 pts and BS 3 Assault 2. Our witchblades which used to be great against vehicles are now not and our Harlequins are the only thing that can take down the 100s of terminators that we find on the board and rending isn't consistent.

People who say eldar didn't get hit with a nerf hammer are exactly the same as white people who insist there is no trouble with racism in this country. Delusional.

USE SQUADS. Front stuff gets hit first right? So one tank takes a beating turn 1, rotate his buddy up turn 2. Voila, back in it. Not only that, immobilized doesn't even wreck squad members any more!

SQUADS 4TW!

People who say eldar didn't get hit with a nerf hammer are exactly the same as white people who insist there is no trouble with racism in this country. Delusional.

Thank you for managing to bring race into an issue where there was never needed to be one!

tgf wrote:Great point, accept that you are still stuck in 5th. No one will be playing vehicles in number if they are easy do destory so your 150 point dread gets to kill maybe 60 points in foot soldiers before getting wasted.

I will still have my two GK Dreads in addition to all the terminators I was told were 'useless' back in 5th. By your rationale, it sounds like meching up would be the smart thing; The meta will be expecting infantry armies.

Okay HP are great and crappy at the same time. I think it's great for the player that a vehicle won't wreck rite away as a result of terrain or glancing shots. Hp sucks for the player because e 3-4 glances in close combat (which is very easy for most armies) will shut down the vehicle.