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.

Swara wrote:

winterman wrote:

Slackermagee wrote:Wait... vehicles confer relentless on infantry inside them, so does this mean that everyone's favorite deffrolla wagon in going to very quickly become a lootawagon? Get to 18", have a field day.

Ditto for rhino rush and IG weapons teams in chimeras.

As long as it remains stationary (or in the case of fast vehicles counts as stationary). If a battlewagon moves only one loota can fire regardless of relentless. Also seems suicidal to me with only an 18" range. Then remain staionary and get hit on 2's vs most shooting and autohit in CC.

Tankbustas could work though, since you can disembark, shoot and embark all in the same turn.

Why can only 1 shoot? Not arguing with you, just wondering.

I think it's stated in the rules that only one model can fire out of a moving vehicle.

Found it. Needs to be a fast vehicle then for it to move and everyone shoot.

Shooting from moving transports
If the transport is damaged or moves fast, this
affects also the shooting performance of any
embarked unit. If the transport cannot perform
Stationary actions or has lost its multi-targeting
rule (temporarily or permanently), each embarked
unit can only perform a single Shooting action.
For example, only a single model of an embarked
unit can fire a weapon if the transport is shaken
or has moved at combat speed (or in the case of a
fast transport, has moved at cruise speed). If the
transport cannot perform Shooting actions,
embarked units cannot perform Shooting actions
either - the passengers are shaken as well or the
fire points are destroyed.

So it's a bunch of Loota Trukks, then? Like the IA Loota Wrekkin' Krew?

Or think DE with Splinter Racks on Raiders become usefull....hmmmm.....

Fishboy wrote:Or think DE with Splinter Racks on Raiders become usefull....hmmmm.....

Well, DE could already move combat speed and fire everything out of a transport. In fact, currently they can move cruising speed and fire everything. This is a nerf to firing from transports in every situation.

ph34r wrote:

Fishboy wrote:Or think DE with Splinter Racks on Raiders become usefull....hmmmm.....

Well, DE could already move combat speed and fire everything out of a transport. In fact, currently they can move cruising speed and fire everything. This is a nerf to firing from transports in every situation.

Except that currently no one may fire out of a vehicle that moves over 6", so this change isn't a nerf.

ph34r wrote:

Fishboy wrote:Or think DE with Splinter Racks on Raiders become usefull....hmmmm.....

Well, DE could already move combat speed and fire everything out of a transport. In fact, currently they can move cruising speed and fire everything. This is a nerf to firing from transports in every situation.

Right now if the Raider moves over 6" none of the passengers can fire. In these rules the Raider can move 8" and all the passengers can rapid fire 2 shots out to 18" and fire a dark lance if they have it (or fire a splinter cannon's 6 shots) It's a huge bonus!! It could even move 16" and allow a passenger to fire a heavy weapon. All this and marines will need 4s to hit in shooting and 5s to hit in CC! And open topped isn't nearly as bad as it was.

airmang wrote:

ph34r wrote:

Fishboy wrote:Or think DE with Splinter Racks on Raiders become usefull....hmmmm.....

Well, DE could already move combat speed and fire everything out of a transport. In fact, currently they can move cruising speed and fire everything. This is a nerf to firing from transports in every situation.

Right now if the Raider moves over 6" none of the passengers can fire. In these rules the Raider can move 8" and all the passengers can rapid fire 2 shots out to 18" and fire a dark lance if they have it (or fire a splinter cannon's 6 shots) It's a huge bonus!! It could even move 16" and allow a passenger to fire a heavy weapon. All this and marines will need 4s to hit in shooting and 5s to hit in CC! And open topped isn't nearly as bad as it was.

Good point, totally forgot that if you move 12" you have to hop out to shoot.

My chimera-nerf frustrations must be spilling over from my IG to DE.

And now you can hop out, shoot, and hop back in, so there's no real need to stay in the transport other than to fire a heavy weapon.

Gavin Thorne wrote:
Honestly, I think this edition goes a long way to allowing players to dust off armies and units that have had limited effectiveness in 5th edition and bring them back to the table. I, for one, am looking forward to fielding Banshees again.

Agreed. Almost every rules change here either makes the game simpler, or lets you take an old unit that really sounds great in principle but previously wasn't, and use it like you feel it ought to be used. I'm really, really hoping this is the way 6th Ed goes, because it will lead to far more real choice in army selection than ever.

Ian Sturrock wrote:

Gavin Thorne wrote:
Honestly, I think this edition goes a long way to allowing players to dust off armies and units that have had limited effectiveness in 5th edition and bring them back to the table. I, for one, am looking forward to fielding Banshees again.

Agreed. Almost every rules change here either makes the game simpler, or lets you take an old unit that really sounds great in principle but previously wasn't, and use it like you feel it ought to be used. I'm really, really hoping this is the way 6th Ed goes, because it will lead to far more real choice in army selection than ever.

Except for DE Mandrakes D:

MasterSlowPoke wrote:And now you can hop out, shoot, and hop back in, so there's no real need to stay in the transport other than to fire a heavy weapon.

I don't think you can. The embark action requires disembarked status, which you don't get if you disembarked this turn.

• If the transporting model has not moved during
the current game cycle, the disembarking unit
can perform any Move action except those with
the Disembarked type. The transport model can
move at a later point during the Movement
phase or in a different turn.

Also, you can only disembark if the transport has not moved, or has only made a combat move (6"). So no moving 12" then hopping out to shoot.

Posit wrote:

MasterSlowPoke wrote:And now you can hop out, shoot, and hop back in, so there's no real need to stay in the transport other than to fire a heavy weapon.

I don't think you can. The embark action requires disembarked status, which you don't get if you disembarked this turn.

• If the transporting model has not moved during
the current game cycle, the disembarking unit
can perform any Move action except those with
the Disembarked type. The transport model can
move at a later point during the Movement
phase or in a different turn.

Also, you can only disembark if the transport has not moved, or has only made a combat move (6"). So no moving 12" then hopping out to shoot.

Embarking isnt a move action, being done in the consolidation phase. You should be able to disembark, shoot (baring what move was done) and then embark back again during consolidation.

Anvildude wrote:Also, Nobz are still one of the units that can do wound shenanigans pretty well- You can have a Nob with his basic 6+, one with 6+/5++, one with 4+, and one with 4+5++, meaning 4 wound groups. So you can still have 8 Nobz differentiated to the extent that there's only 2 in each wound group, which may actually benefit them slightly- and it simplifies list building, and allows you to have more concentrated firepower, since now there's nothing keeping you from giving them all Powerklaws, or Big Choppas, or Kombi-skorchas or whatnot.

I don't think that works anymore because wounds must be allocated to fill a group before the next group takes wounds. So using your example if they take 4 wounds they don't take 1 each, but two groups take 2 wounds each. If they fail both then you lose 2 models, if they both save one, then at the end of the turn, using 'patch-up' you transfer 1 wound to the other model, removing it, and restoring the original model to full wounds.

Cheers

Andrew

Unless of course I completely missed something.

Anvildude wrote:So it's a bunch of Loota Trukks, then? Like the IA Loota Wrekkin' Krew?

Trukks are dedicated transports for boyz and 'ard boyz, I don't think you can put Lootas in them? Unless you purchase the trukk for another squad, disembark and embark a loota squad.

Am I wrong in thinking that, or playing it that way? I do not believe ArmyBuilder allows you to purchase trukks for lootas, nor are you able to purchase trukks independent of their squad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

lazarian wrote:
Embarking isnt a move action, being done in the consolidation phase. You should be able to disembark, shoot (baring what move was done) and then embark back again during consolidation.

If these turn out to be valid rules, they are likely playtest versions and that rule will likely be updated or changed. It makes not sense to allow a unit to disembark, fire, and reembark all within the same turn. Otherwise, we even have firepoints or 'firing from a stationary vehicle' rules

lazarian wrote:Embarking isnt a move action, being done in the consolidation phase. You should be able to disembark, shoot (baring what move was done) and then embark back again during consolidation.

I'm pretty sure they mean for no action to be allowed with the 'disembarked' type when you disembarked that turn, and that it's still a move action, even though it's done in the consolidation phase. Otherwise the way they describe several of the actions ceases to make sense.

AndrewC wrote:

Anvildude wrote:Also, Nobz are still one of the units that can do wound shenanigans pretty well- You can have a Nob with his basic 6+, one with 6+/5++, one with 4+, and one with 4+5++, meaning 4 wound groups. So you can still have 8 Nobz differentiated to the extent that there's only 2 in each wound group, which may actually benefit them slightly- and it simplifies list building, and allows you to have more concentrated firepower, since now there's nothing keeping you from giving them all Powerklaws, or Big Choppas, or Kombi-skorchas or whatnot.

I don't think that works anymore because wounds must be allocated to fill a group before the next group takes wounds. So using your example if they take 4 wounds they don't take 1 each, but two groups take 2 wounds each. If they fail both then you lose 2 models, if they both save one, then at the end of the turn, using 'patch-up' you transfer 1 wound to the other model, removing it, and restoring the original model to full wounds.

Cheers

Andrew

Unless of course I completely missed something.

You are right. Nobz wound shenanigans have been completely removed. Thanks for that.

Am I the only one who noticed the "Teleport" move action for units going through Monoliths? I mentioned it in another thread and no one responded, but I'm fairly certain necron units can't teleport and engage on the same turn because of this.

Also, for naysayers of the "Heavy" entry, it's important to note that
a) nothing in any other army has "heavy" in their unit type
b) with these leaked rules, the monolith would be treated as a SP1 super-heavy, which would apply the "Lumbering" rule that acts almost exactly the same as the current description for "Heavy" in the Necron codex.

Mustakha the Undying wrote:Am I the only one who noticed the "Teleport" move action for units going through Monoliths? I mentioned it in another thread and no one responded, but I'm fairly certain necron units can't teleport and engage on the same turn because of this.

Also, for naysayers of the "Heavy" entry, it's important to note that
a) nothing in any other army has "heavy" in their unit type
b) with these leaked rules, the monolith would be treated as a SP1 super-heavy, which would apply the "Lumbering" rule that acts almost exactly the same as the current description for "Heavy" in the Necron codex.

They can indeed make a engage or combat movement, it is listed as them disembarking from the monolith

The details of how a Teleport move is executed
vary. The exact rules are presented in each Codex
book.

A teleporting unit is barred from using Stationary
actions until it regains combat-readiness in its
Consolidation phase

The codex for necrons list it as disembarking, so they can make one engage or combat movement.

Kazwulf wrote:

Anvildude wrote:So it's a bunch of Loota Trukks, then? Like the IA Loota Wrekkin' Krew?

Trukks are dedicated transports for boyz and 'ard boyz, I don't think you can put Lootas in them? Unless you purchase the trukk for another squad, disembark and embark a loota squad.

Am I wrong in thinking that, or playing it that way? I do not believe ArmyBuilder allows you to purchase trukks for lootas, nor are you able to purchase trukks independent of their squad.

You are, in fact, correct in that you can't purchase Trukks for anyone but Nobz, Meganobz, and 12 or smaller Boyz mobz. However, there's nothing in the Dedicated Transport rules that says you have to be embarked in your transport- just that you can be. So you could start the game with a 12 boyz squad (or Meganobz squad- I like to run them anyways) out of their trukk, and have the Trukk next to the Lootas. Still wouldn't work that great, but that's how you'd do it.


And I have a question about Patch Up- can you patch a model that's lost all it's wounds? So if you have a Nob with 4+/5++ and Powerklaw, and a bare basic Nob, and the Powerklaw Nob fails 2 wounds but the basic Nob is fine, can you sack the basic Nob to patch up the PK Nob?

Wound Shenanigans, though not as powerful, can be helpful, though- if you have hits that have no AP, some hits with AP5 or 6, and some Power Weapon hits, you'd be able to put each onto a group that you either don't need, or that has the best chance of making the save.

No to the patching up models that lost all their wounds -- They're removed from the table as soon as they lose their last wound, and Patch Up doesn't occur until your friendly Consolidation phase.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Mustakha the Undying wrote:Am I the only one who noticed the "Teleport" move action for units going through Monoliths? I mentioned it in another thread and no one responded, but I'm fairly certain necron units can't teleport and engage on the same turn because of this.

Also, for naysayers of the "Heavy" entry, it's important to note that
a) nothing in any other army has "heavy" in their unit type
b) with these leaked rules, the monolith would be treated as a SP1 super-heavy, which would apply the "Lumbering" rule that acts almost exactly the same as the current description for "Heavy" in the Necron codex.

They can indeed make a engage or combat movement, it is listed as them disembarking from the monolith

The details of how a Teleport move is executed
vary. The exact rules are presented in each Codex
book.

A teleporting unit is barred from using Stationary
actions until it regains combat-readiness in its
Consolidation phase

The codex for necrons list it as disembarking, so they can make one engage or combat movement.

Did you notice, though, that it specifically notes the Monolith in the description of the ability? Given that the action has the type "move" it's doesn't seem far off to assume that when a Necron Codex update becomes available it's simply going to say that move uses the "Teleport" move action as described in the Rulebook. Either that or when it says the move is explained per codex, it's merely referring to the fact that it's not limited by range and can also pull out reserves, as opposed to the Grey Knights who can teleport up to 36 inches. Either way, the description in the Necron Codex doesn't say they treat it as though they haven't moved, only that they be treated as coming from a transport that moved at combat speed. Given that every unit may perform only 1 "move action" per turn, and the "Teleport" move action is defined as being a move action, after teleporting you're still unable to perform another move action.

Obviously this is speculation, but drawing the conclusion that these rules dated May 2011 will lead to that capability is no better speculation. The only reason I choose to be skeptical of the proposed "Engage" move as being an option is because in the Necron Codex, as it stands in 5th ed, they've basically made the special rules have descriptions that function the way they're intended to (IE Heavy vehicles can't cruise and units can't charge out of it). When 6th ed comes out, the Heavy rule will do the same thing by Rulebook definition so why wouldn't Teleportation get the same treatment? Plus, given that things cannot charge out of it, doesn't that seem significantly more balanced than the alternative?

Believe what you want, but I just don't buy the idea that a monolith will be that stupidly powerful, so giving it one flaw makes much more sense.

Can anyone explain to me what it means at the beginning? It says this is recommended for people with some knowledge of the 'basic rules'. This sounds like the language used in an expansion of sorts. Or does anyone else know why they'd say that?

My guess is that the starter box(es?) will come with a very stripped down version of the rules: enough to let you play exactly what is in the box but not much more. Other games systems (ie, Warmahordes) do this already.

The thing which is niggling me the most about this document's authenticity is the occasional lapses from the 'Queen's English'. Heck Armor (not Rear Armour), etc. Does anyone know if the people in the studio are mostly Brits or if there are some yanks in there as well?

Trasvi wrote:The thing which is niggling me the most about this document's authenticity is the occasional lapses from the 'Queen's English'. Heck Armor (not Rear Armour), etc. Does anyone know if the people in the studio are mostly Brits or if there are some yanks in there as well?

I'm a "yank" and I've never heard of the term "heck armor." The leak seemed very consistent in use, but the term is foreign to me. And Google.

elrabin wrote:

Trasvi wrote:The thing which is niggling me the most about this document's authenticity is the occasional lapses from the 'Queen's English'. Heck Armor (not Rear Armour), etc. Does anyone know if the people in the studio are mostly Brits or if there are some yanks in there as well?

I'm a "yank" and I've never heard of the term "heck armor." The leak seemed very consistent in use, but the term is foreign to me. And Google.

'Heck' is rear in German.

About 40 pages ago it was discussed, this is apparently a german playtest copy, so some of the phrasing might not make sense.

At least thats what i can remember..

Vitruvian XVII wrote:About 40 pages ago it was discussed, this is apparently a german playtest copy, so some of the phrasing might not make sense.

At least thats what i can remember..

Or a mere typo? You know the things GW publications are full of?

Cake and eating cake.
It can't be a Games Workshop product because it's too good.
It must be a Games Workshop product because it's filled with typos.

junk wrote:
It can't be a Games Workshop product because it's too good.

This is a matter of opinion.

junk wrote:
It must be a Games Workshop product because it's filled with typos.

This, however, is not.