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.

I found an interesting point of note from the 5th edition “leak”. When shooting at a unit, you roll to hit and to wound. After that, the units controller assigns the wounds to squad members (including those out of range and line of sight) in an even fashion (everyone gets 1 before anyone gets 2). Now you can assign those wounds in any order you like. This means that if you have 5 marines being shot at by another marine squad and you take 8 wounds from bolters and 2 from a plasma gun (10 total), you can place the wounds in such a manner as to assign both plasma hits to the same model. Now I’m not sure how often this sort of situation will arise, but any time you take mixed weapon hits to a squad with only a few models left in it, you can seriously manipulate the wound assignment to your advantage.

It's the FOW method of assigning hits.

Doesn't quite mesh with 40K because in FOW there are no save modifiers.

Hmm. Good catch. I'm wondering if this won't be considered 'unfair play' though. One of those rules that are clearly written in the book, but it considered unsportsmanlike, such as shooting a guardian weapon platform from either gunner no matter how far apart the gunners are.

-Leo037

add to that the rules listed for units of multiple wound models and things get pretty wierd.

it seems the sections almost contradict each other in every respect.

Yep. I noticed this one too. I hope in the final version you resolve one weapon type's fire before moving onto the next weapon type. That would this problem and would only take slightly longer.

Put on your tinfoil hats but i think GW will never release 5th in order to spread panic and disorder.

This was the same thing for rending weapons,

Combi Bolters and an Assault Cannon,

wounds 6 times (twice with the Assault Cannon on rends) against 5 marines and put the 2 rends on the same model.

I would assume this is unsportsmanlike and annoying play, yes the rules allow you to do this, but if you do you are seriously playing for the wrong reasons and going to make the game worse for people your playing against.

I hope they fix this hole,
otherwise I love this change, Most people in my gaming group hate it, but it means that would can actually have individual guys in squads with different stats that aren't a complete waste.

This I believe is a good start,
5th edition is definately an improvement (let's hope that people putting the finishing touches actually read what some gamers think about the rule changes and tighten up the wording on the rules.

This I believe is a good start,
5th edition is definately an improvement (let's hope that people putting the finishing touches actually read what some gamers think about the rule changes and tighten up the wording on the rules.

Don't count on it. Just look at the Ork codex.

-Leo037

I think that GW is now trying to punish people who use lots of special and heavy weapons (and I must say I kind of agree). By making things like this possible it limits the effectiveness of what right now are overly effective weapons.

Phoenix wrote:I think that GW is now trying to punish people who use lots of special and heavy weapons (and I must say I kind of agree). By making things like this possible it limits the effectiveness of what right now are overly effective weapons.

Actually they are trying to drive sales.

My 5 man marine squad can take a bunch of bolter fire and lose the lascannon.

If I make it a 10 man squad (or 10-20 in Chaos) odds are I won't.

Conversely, if you take the plasmaguns I've been telling you all not to, you pay the price by killing 1 marine twice instead of 2.

Sales, sales, sales. And more sales.

Phoenix wrote:I think that GW is now trying to punish people who use lots of special and heavy weapons (and I must say I kind of agree). By making things like this possible it limits the effectiveness of what right now are overly effective weapons.

I'm going to make you some cookies, but everytime you eat one I'm going to beat the tar out of you.

If GW doesn't want players to use as many special weapons, well, they design the rules so they can make that happen in a way that isn't so back handed.

The things to remember about wound allocation in the leaked rules are:


1) You only will be able to manipulate wound allocation if you actually score more wounds than there are models in the unit. In the current version of the game that's when you get to use the 'torrent of fire' rule. I know personally the amount of times that actually occurs in a game is pretty small.

For the vast majority of shooting the number of models in a unit will outnumber the wounds available and wound allocation and casualty removal will be quick and simple.


2) When the number of wounds inflicted is greater than the number of models in the unit, yes you are able to dump a bunch of low AP wounds onto a single model, but what you have to also remember is that you'll also have to make separate saves for any models with individual wargear in the unit (like special weapons, heavy weapons and sergeants) and if any of them fail their save *that* model (with their wargear) has to be removed.

This is a lot more deadly than torrent of fire because if you have more than one special model in a unit you'll have to be making saves for all of them and any failures are going to dramatically reduce your unit's effectiveness.

The other thing to consider is that even when there aren't quite enough wounds to cover every model in the unit you may have to be making saves against your specialty models.

For example, say a 10 man marine squad with Las/Plas and vet sgt with a powerfist suffers 8,9, or 10 wounds. In any of those cases you will have to be making individual saves on your special models. This is the 'dark side' of the new casualty removal rules that no one seems to remember. They only see how you can manipulate the removal when the wounds are greater than the models, but the flipside is that you actually lose your specialty models more often then you do in the current game.

What actually pisses me off is that you can have 5 models (lets say Vespid) out of sight in LOS blocking terrain with just one of their number in LOS to a unit of say 10 Lootas. Suddenly the entire unit of vespid could be wiped out if the Lootas roll well. Where as only the one vespid could have fired at the lootas when they finished their movement last turn.

Thats crap. Udder crap. I firmly believe in if you can shoot me, I can shoot you. 40K works that way. This new way just does not sit well with me.

Anyway, I also feel that the stacking of armor defeating blows is a little off, but its not that bad, especially with what seems like the plethera of cover saves that will be available.

The new wound allocation system also reduces the lethality of units that pump out a lot of high strength, high AP wounds. For instance, I could count on three War Walkers with 2 SLs each to generally inflict around 10 wounds (more if fortuned), and then kill between 3-4 MEQs. Against smaller squads, that predictability is gone.

As well, this new system is not just for shooting wounds but also for close combat wounds. That 10 man squad of vetern assault marines with 2 PWs has just attacked my smallish squad. With all those wounds coming my way, I'll be sure to allocate all the power weapon wounds to 1 or perhaps 2 models.

Is this a reasonably accurate scenario?

3 Fireknife suits rapid firing a 5 man combat squad assumes all hits wound (2+ wound roll)

3 missile pod hits
3 plasma rifle hits

Current system: 3 dead marines, remaining 2 split 3 armor saves
Rumored System: 2 dead marines, remaining 3 take 1 armor saves each

3 Fireknife suits rapid firing a 10 man SM squad

3 missile pod hits
3 plasma rifle hits

Current system: 3 dead marines, 3 armor saves
special weapons can be killed based on weapon range and LoS limits
Rumored system: 3 dead marines, 3 armor saves
Special weapons are more resilient due to all squad members being eligible targets.

Combat squads are going to be sick in if this rule goes through. Split the 10 man squad and create 2 5 man squads that will seriously mess with the LOS and hit allocation rules. If you think you've been cheesed in the past, wait till SM in 5th. Example:

SM player splits squad in 1/2, allocates all heavies to the rear squad. The front squad provides screening against the enemy heavy weapons, while the rear squad fires on the edges at targets the present themselves. The enemy, say squad of fire warriors rapid firing into the squad. That's 12 hits and 8 wounds. Without combat squads, all but 2 models are hit by the fire warriors through wound allocation. This means AT LEAST 2 heavy weapons and the sergeant have to take saves. With combat squads, all 8 wounds are piled on the 5 screening guys, leaving the heavy weapons free from even taking an armor save or risking a leadership test. This will also screw up assaults as shooting on the way in is always dangerous, but with 5 man squads, it'll be even more dangerous as you can't charge a different target if you wipe it out during the shooting phase.

Once again, SM get an advantage, a potential of 12 troops, while everyone else except guard is stuck with 6. New scoring units are troops only, coincidence, I think not.

Yes yes, space marines are gods.

Till you play another army, and pwn their faces off.

Try those 'uber' combat squads in close combat against say 30 gaunts.

You won't fething like it one damn bit.

Overpowered my ass. Smurfs suck. Have since 40K was invented.

Movie marines, now there's real men!

Well, honestly, I don't think I'll allow people to pull that crap with me. My power weapon scores 2 wounds, 2 people are dying. Perhaps in tournaments where winning is everything that's fine, but in fun games I don't consider all my special models dying off and all of my special weapons being half or 1/3 as useful very much fun at all, and I'll slap anyone who tries that. RAW can stuff it.

Spellbound wrote:Well, honestly, I don't think I'll allow people to pull that crap with me. My power weapon scores 2 wounds, 2 people are dying. Perhaps in tournaments where winning is everything that's fine, but in fun games I don't consider all my special models dying off and all of my special weapons being half or 1/3 as useful very much fun at all, and I'll slap anyone who tries that. RAW can stuff it.

YEAH!!! SLAP 'em! Slap your opponent 'round and 'round!

Spellbound wrote:Well, honestly, I don't think I'll allow people to pull that crap with me. My power weapon scores 2 wounds, 2 people are dying. Perhaps in tournaments where winning is everything that's fine, but in fun games I don't consider all my special models dying off and all of my special weapons being half or 1/3 as useful very much fun at all, and I'll slap anyone who tries that. RAW can stuff it.

Rules are written to be used as the designers want the game to be. While I understand the use of house rules and your opinion on my particular cheese strat, it still exists. I don't write the rules, I only use them as they are written. If that happens to be OP or cheese to some people, please send your comments to the developers at GW.