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.

 Traditio wrote:
I'm excited about this. I personally would prefer for boltguns to have a -1 rending value (going down to -5 rending for AP 1), but I can see the value of getting rid of AP 5 and 6 altogether. Overall, this is a nerf to boltguns, but a strong buff to vehicles, including rhinos.

I'm eager to see what they do to missile launchers. I suspect that the profile will be 48 inch range, S 8, -2 rending and 1d6 damage for krak, and frag will likely be S 4, -0 rending and either 1d3 or 1d6 hits for frag.

My bet is that rend will cap at 4 and even then rend 4 will be EXTREMELY rare.

ERJAK wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
I'm excited about this. I personally would prefer for boltguns to have a -1 rending value (going down to -5 rending for AP 1), but I can see the value of getting rid of AP 5 and 6 altogether. Overall, this is a nerf to boltguns, but a strong buff to vehicles, including rhinos.

I'm eager to see what they do to missile launchers. I suspect that the profile will be 48 inch range, S 8, -2 rending and 1d6 damage for krak, and frag will likely be S 4, -0 rending and either 1d3 or 1d6 hits for frag.

My bet is that rend will cap at 4 and even then rend 4 will be EXTREMELY rare.

Well, here's what we already know:

Lascannons (AP 2) are rend -3. Boltguns (AP 5) are rend 0.

My suspicion is that they started with AP 4 as rend -1 and worked their way down.

This is easily a buff for terminators (with respect to AP 1 and 2 weapons; though a slight nerf with respect to AP 3 and 4 weapons), which might actually be playable in this edition.

ERJAK wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
For you maybe, but everything I heard so far, except for high strenght weapons doing more than a wound worth of damage, seems to be a kick in the face of the factions I play, so forgive me for have no enthusiasm for the game whatsoever.

how do you know what would be a kick to the faction you play? you have no idea how your faction plays, literally 0. The only people who DO know ANYTHING about how their army plays in 8th are space marines and they know 7 statlines without any context.

Well I already know that blasts are worse than they were, its also a safe bet that all the stuff that was AP 3 (big crutches in my armies) is going to have at best a rend of -3 (which is... eeeeh, tolerable, I guess). There were mentions of deepstrike being limited, but it might have been just a rumour.

Man I love the amount of people that are making massive presumptions with the very little insight we have into the new rule set..

1 Factor to also think off with the theory craft.. is that Cover is apparently going to do the opposite of the AP

Bobthehero wrote:Well I already know that blasts are worse than they were, its also a safe bet that all the stuff that was AP 3 (big crutches in my armies) is going to have at best a rend of -3

Lolno.

I would expect -2 for AP 3.

-1 for AP 4, -2 for AP 3, -3 for AP 2 and -4 for AP 1.

Just a guess, but that's my suspicion.

And yes, I understand your plight, BTH.

It means that you won't be able to slaughter foot slogging marines as easily as you are now.

I'm loving this!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

GodDamUser wrote:
Man I love the amount of people that are making massive presumptions with the very little insight we have into the new rule set..

1 Factor to also think off with the theory craft.. is that Cover is apparently going to do the opposite of the AP

I read a rumor that cover is going to be sigmarized. Basically, if all of the models are in cover/terrain, +1 to all saves.

I did say at best. I am fairly sure its going to be stuck to a pitiful -2.

It will be easier to kill Terminators, but everyone else will be a bigger pain in the rear, its not a trade I want to make, really.

 Bobthehero wrote:
I did say at best. I am fairly sure its going to be stuck to a pitiful -2.

It will be easier to kill Terminators, but everyone else will be a bigger pain in the rear, its not a trade I want to make, really.

The trade-off is that orks and imperial guardsmen are also going to be tougher, since AP 5 and 6 weapons (apparently) no longer ignore armor.

Your tanks should also be much more durable now against anything that's not a dedicated anti-tank weapon.

I don't care about my men surviving and I don't have tanks.

 Traditio wrote:
The trade-off is that orks and imperial guardsmen are also going to be tougher, since AP 5 and 6 weapons (apparently) no longer ignore armor.

Your tanks should also be much more durable now against anything that's not a dedicated anti-tank weapon.

Gotta remember Bob play DKoK, so any ruleset that isn't good for that particular army has to be bad..


But really I wouldn't be upset until you see what Spec rules FW puts out for them

Well yeah, if a ruleset makes my armies (I also have 1000pts of Stormtroopers) worse than they currently are, I am not exactly going to be jumping out of joy.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Well yeah, if a ruleset makes my armies (I also have 1000pts of Stormtroopers) worse than they currently are, I am not exactly going to be jumping out of joy.

If it's that bad, you could always proxy as basic IG?

 Traditio wrote:
I read a rumor that cover is going to be sigmarized. Basically, if all of the models are in cover/terrain, +1 to all saves.

Do you know if that's supposedly determined by MEV or by units having their bases within the border of a terrain model? Because I would really prefer the latter.

 Traditio wrote:

If it's that bad, you could always proxy as basic IG?

HERESY!

 Luciferian wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
I read a rumor that cover is going to be sigmarized. Basically, if all of the models are in cover/terrain, +1 to all saves.

Do you know if that's supposedly determined by MEV or by units having their bases within the border of a terrain model? Because I would really prefer the latter.

What does MEV stand for?

Model's eye view, thought Dakka would do the fancy rollover thing but I guess I got the acronym wrong.

 Luciferian wrote:
Model's eye view, thought Dakka would do the fancy rollover thing but I guess I got the acronym wrong.

I understand now.

As far as I recall, all that the rumor said is that cover would work as in Age of Sigmar. The AoS rule reads: "If all models in a unit are within or on a terrain feature, you can add 1 to all save rolls for that unit to represent the cover they receive from the terrain. This modifier does not apply in the combat phase if the unit you are making saves for made a charge move in the same turn."

 Traditio wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
Model's eye view, thought Dakka would do the fancy rollover thing but I guess I got the acronym wrong.

I understand now.

As far as I recall, all that the rumor said is that cover would work as in Age of Sigmar. The AoS rule reads: "If all models in a unit are within or on a terrain feature, you can add 1 to all save rolls for that unit to represent the cover they receive from the terrain. This modifier does not apply in the combat phase if the unit you are making saves for made a charge move in the same turn."

So that sounds like it's not model's eye view, then. I'm all for it. I can appreciate the yearning for realism in the current cover rules, but I'm definitely willing to accept an abstraction if it has basically the same results without being so subjective and drawn out.

Yeah TLOS did get annoying at time and slowed things down (the acronym you were looking for)

I personally love the overwhelming fear people have of any models on the opposing side actually getting to roll an armour save. HOW DARE THEY!?

The "sweep your grey plastic off the table with this broom" mentality of current 40K is really a turn off for a lot of people.

 Elbows wrote:
I personally love the overwhelming fear people have of any models on the opposing side actually getting to roll an armour save. HOW DARE THEY!?

The "sweep your grey plastic off the table with this broom" mentality of current 40K is really a turn off for a lot of people.

Agreed.

That's a major turn off for me with respect to 7th edition, the mentality that, in order for a unit not to be trash, it either must:

1. Be practically unkillable

or

2. Have a ridiculous damage output.

In 7th ed, there really are only two categories:

1. OP and 2. trash.

I'm hoping that 8th gives us a happy middle ground.

Yes, how dare I want to have a few units that can ignore the enemy armor save.

 Elbows wrote:
I personally love the overwhelming fear people have of any models on the opposing side actually getting to roll an armour save. HOW DARE THEY!?

The "sweep your grey plastic off the table with this broom" mentality of current 40K is really a turn off for a lot of people.

As a long time (ex-)marine player, I welcome low armour saves actually being a thing in the game. It always seemed like pointless cruft in other editions.

"Oh what's that Ork's save?"
"6+!"
"Cool, I'll just roll..."
"Woah there buddy, you don't actually roll that!"
"Why did they bother writing rules for that?"
"TRADITION!" *musical montage begins*

This opens up design space that was previously closed off almost entirely and it's a good piece of design.

I'm just wondering if IG are going back to 6+ or staying at the 5+ they were given when Flak armour was simplified for 3rd Edition. Now that a shoota wont ignore flak and a lasgun doesn't ignore [gubbinz wat orkses use for armur] there doesn't really seem to be a reason to split them (especially since I doubt frag munitions will come with an AP, thus negating the need for flak to have a special dispensation to get a 5+ versus blast attacks).

Either way, interesting times with most of the saves in the game not getting outright ignored anymore. Horde infantry should be able to stick around longer and get stuck in in larger numbers (or keep firing for longer). Even if it only results in negating 1/3rd to 1/6th of casualties, that is a pretty big deal (especially given how Battle Shock works).

 Bobthehero wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
For you maybe, but everything I heard so far, except for high strenght weapons doing more than a wound worth of damage, seems to be a kick in the face of the factions I play, so forgive me for have no enthusiasm for the game whatsoever.

how do you know what would be a kick to the faction you play? you have no idea how your faction plays, literally 0. The only people who DO know ANYTHING about how their army plays in 8th are space marines and they know 7 statlines without any context.

Well I already know that blasts are worse than they were, its also a safe bet that all the stuff that was AP 3 (big crutches in my armies) is going to have at best a rend of -3 (which is... eeeeh, tolerable, I guess). There were mentions of deepstrike being limited, but it might have been just a rumour.

You don't know ANY of that to be true, at all. You are making presumption based on a tiny tiny amount of information about 8th. For all you know the new blasts system could be a billion times more deadly than the old one. Sh*t for all you know large blasts could now be 288D6 distributed to any 3 tables within 45 miles.


The point is you are cobbeling together assumptions based on a few tidbits of 8th, some trends from 7th, and your own fears of irrelevance. You are creating an environment for yourself where you're convinced your army will be worse than it currently is when you have no f**king clue yet. You WANT to be upset so you're making yourself an echo chamber of disappointment out of nothing and it's clearly not helping you or anyone else.

Jbz` wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

I hope you weren't referring to the Bolter as one of the most common weapons in the galaxy.

One of.
Probably the 4th/5th most prevalent firearm. (Almost every AOTI faction has some access to them)

More common would obviously be Lasgun/Autogun/Shoota
maybe pulse and splinter rifles

(And three of them have similar penetrative power to boltguns)

You know Marines are outnumbered by billions to one by Guard right? That's not mentioning all the Xenos.
Even if every Guard Sergeant and above level carried a Bolt weapon they'd still be outnumbered by at least five to one by AM meat shields.

On power levels.
Ork guns are crazy powerful, Ork shooting is just crazy.
Bolter weapons are launching explosive rounds that will mess you up if they hit the ground near your feet. Being hit by one is first being impacted by a self propelled shell roughly the size of a tennis ball then having it explode, that's assuming it doesn't have the setting and velocity to drill right through you and keep travelling until it hits something that isn't squishy.

ERJAK 724417 wrote:You don't know ANY of that to be true, at all. You are making presumption based on a tiny tiny amount of information about 8th. For all you know the new blasts system could be a billion times more deadly than the old one. Sh*t for all you know large blasts could now be 288D6 distributed to any 3 tables within 45 miles.

Guy A: Alright, so I'll just move my Dire Avengers here...
Guy B: Ok, that's it for movements. Shooting phase?
Guy A: Yes, so, I'm going to use these dire avengers to...

A bell jingles as the door to the FLGS opens. A man comes rushing through the door, breathless, with a bag full of dice in hand.

New guy: WAIT! HALT THE GAME!!!!!!!!

The FLGS owner, noticing the disturbance, walks over:

FLGS owner: Can I help you?

New guy: I'm from the next town over. I drove here as fast as I can, but it was still an hour drive! I need to do this!

FLGS owner: Do what?

New guy: I'm using a Death Stroke, and it's my shooting phase.

New guy runs over to the game table and dumps the bag of dice onto said gaming table.

Guys A and B frantically begin doing calculations, rolling saves and removing models from the table...

 Dakka Wolf wrote:


You know Marines are outnumbered by billions to one by Guard right? That's not mentioning all the Xenos.
Even if every Guard Sergeant and above level carried a Bolt weapon they'd still be outnumbered by at least five to one by AM meat shields.

On power levels.
Ork guns are crazy powerful, Ork shooting is just crazy.
Bolter weapons are launching explosive rounds that will mess you up if they hit the ground near your feet. Being hit by one is first being impacted by a self propelled shell roughly the size of a tennis ball then having it explode, that's assuming it doesn't have the setting and velocity to drill right through you and keep travelling until it hits something that isn't squishy.

We know, we know. The only thing that really matters when discussing rules, however, is how well they balance being a representation of the lore with being playable and balanced. If bolters had a -1 ASM, how much would you have to adjust the points of nearly every SM unit to account for it? If we go by the fluff, one bolt should kill or disable virtually any lightly armored organic target that it impacts, along with many with even better protection. In terms of game balance that just doesn't work as a free, basic infantry weapon. And at the end of the day it doesn't matter whether or not it's one of the most common weapons in the galaxy of the 41st millennium, because it IS one of the most common weapons in the game. If not the most common.

ERJAK wrote:
You WANT to be upset so you're making yourself an echo chamber of disappointment out of nothing and it's clearly not helping you or anyone else.

Do I now? Learn something new everyday I guess

On that note:

Does everyone remember how I once made a thread suggesting that all weapons should wound, regardless of toughness or AV, on a 6?

And does everyone remember how the idea was universally reviled?

Yeah...

Funny how that works, isn't it?

 Luciferian wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:


You know Marines are outnumbered by billions to one by Guard right? That's not mentioning all the Xenos.
Even if every Guard Sergeant and above level carried a Bolt weapon they'd still be outnumbered by at least five to one by AM meat shields.

On power levels.
Ork guns are crazy powerful, Ork shooting is just crazy.
Bolter weapons are launching explosive rounds that will mess you up if they hit the ground near your feet. Being hit by one is first being impacted by a self propelled shell roughly the size of a tennis ball then having it explode, that's assuming it doesn't have the setting and velocity to drill right through you and keep travelling until it hits something that isn't squishy.

We know, we know. The only thing that really matters when discussing rules, however, is how well they balance being a representation of the lore with being playable and balanced. If bolters had a -1 ASM, how much would you have to adjust the points of nearly every SM unit to account for it? If we go by the fluff, one bolt should kill or disable virtually any lightly armored organic target that it impacts, along with many with even better protection. In terms of game balance that just doesn't work as a free, basic infantry weapon. And at the end of the day it doesn't matter whether or not it's one of the most common weapons in the galaxy of the 41st millennium, because it IS one of the most common weapons in the game. If not the most common.

That is a fact - Since Space Marine vs Space Marine is the most common match type I propose that Bolt Weapons be AP3.
Space Marine killers.

 Traditio wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
I'm excited about this. I personally would prefer for boltguns to have a -1 rending value (going down to -5 rending for AP 1), but I can see the value of getting rid of AP 5 and 6 altogether. Overall, this is a nerf to boltguns, but a strong buff to vehicles, including rhinos.

I'm eager to see what they do to missile launchers. I suspect that the profile will be 48 inch range, S 8, -2 rending and 1d6 damage for krak, and frag will likely be S 4, -0 rending and either 1d3 or 1d6 hits for frag.

My bet is that rend will cap at 4 and even then rend 4 will be EXTREMELY rare.

Well, here's what we already know:

Lascannons (AP 2) are rend -3. Boltguns (AP 5) are rend 0.

My suspicion is that they started with AP 4 as rend -1 and worked their way down.

This is easily a buff for terminators (with respect to AP 1 and 2 weapons; though a slight nerf with respect to AP 3 and 4 weapons), which might actually be playable in this edition.

It's not a buff to terminators durability. As you pointed out it is worse for them with ap3 and ap4 weapons. Against ap2 they will now get a 5+... With current rules they get a 5++ against ap2 anyway. With ap1 they will get a 6+... which is worse than a 5++.
Combined with this - so many more units now get a save against shots that they wouldn't have before - against so many types of weapons that terminators didnt need to worry about anyway.

Of course the rules concerning terminator armour could be massively different.