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.

Avatar 720 wrote:Passively increasing the strength =/= Causing damage.

GK Psyker Henchmen get +1 to the strength of their psychic attack for every psyker in the squad, and yet there is only a single attack being made; by your logic there should be an equal number of attacks to psykers in the squad.

Also, what about Fire Prism cannon links? If another Prism links and increases the strength and AP of another, then why are they not getting two blasts?

The reason neither of those work the way Vibro Cannons do is because of how they are described in the books. Niether one says the GK Psyker Henchmen nor the Fire Prism gets extra attacks nor do they say they get an extra template. But the description for the Vibro Cannon DOES say it gets a single glacing hit for a vibro cannon. It doesn't say it gets that for the battery of vibro cannons, it says it gets it for "a" vibro cannon.

Sent off the question to GW. We'll see if and how they respond. Crossing the fingers I'm about to get three hits. Hee hee.

As to the fire prism cannon example. I would say that actually supports my argument. An additional tank has increased the damage caused. Your adding strength and lowering ap for every fire prism you ad in.

If the idea is the vibro cannon has increased strength but not hits, it should be that with more then one in the battery it becomes a penning hit. It's not written that way at all though, so that won't happen right now. New rulebook would be nice.

I am of course looking through rosy eldar glasses with hopes of making the best use of my old codex.

I'm not failing to grasp anything. It is most certainly up for debate.

Either way, it doesn't make a difference because you will continue to believe it works the way you see it and I will continue to believe it works the way I see it. Until GW actually comes out and explains it better in a FAQ or Codex update then we will just have to agree to disagree.

Okay, i'm going to try once more, using the most basic method I can.

You have a battery of 3 Vibro Cannons.

Each cannon in the battery successfully scores a hit.

A single line is drawn from one of the cannons.

This line passes over a model with an armour value.

The rules for Vibro Cannons targeting models with an armour value tell us that a target with an armour value that is hit by a vibro cannon suffers a single glancing hit.

Since there is only a single line coming from a single Vibro Cannon, the vehicle has been hit by a Vibro Cannon, and consequently suffers a single glancing hit.

You are not instructed to repeat this for the other cannons in the battery. You are not instructed to add any hits for other weapons in the battery. You are not instructed to draw anything more than a single line from a single cannon in the battery, and you are not instructed to inflict more than a single glancing hit.

Please tell me where, if anywhere, I lost you in this explanation.

Look. I already told you we will have to agree that we both disagree on the way they work. Since I don't know you personally and will probably never play you personally then there is no need to try to win me over to your way of thinking. It doesn't matter. People will have to decide for themselves how it works until we get a FAQ or a new codex (hopefully with a more clear way of explaining it)

What I can tell you is that this is not the only game Vibro Cannons have appeared in. In the Epic Space Marine game they work the way I think they work. They add more damage to vehicles when more vibro cannons are firing. They can even take out the leg of a titan and bring down buildings. But not if you are only firing one cannon. The more you add the more powerful it gets.

I was typing as you posted; I'm not omniscient, nor a clairvoyant, so I couldn't know that you had posted until I did.

That aside, Epic's rules have less than 0 weight in 40k; trying to justify your standpoint using a completely different game is laughable.

I wasn't justifying anything. I was mentioning them as a side note. Anyway, enough de railing the thread. back to 6th's effects on Eldar.

Read the full rules of the vibrocannon. Your roles "to hit" do not target anything, you just make a roll for each cannon. No matter how many hits you roll, you draw a single line from one of the cannons.
Now tell me how you figure which units were "hit" by the vibrocannon?
Not from the die rolls, because you're not targeting anything. It's by the line you draw from a SINGLE cannon, not a line drawn from each cannon that hits. The die rolls are only used to see if a line is drawn, not the number of lines and also to figure the strength of the attack. Since the strength of the attack has no meaning vs vehicles, it doesn't matter how many hits you roll over one. Since there is only ever one line drawn, there can only be one hit on a vehicle per round of firing by this battery of weapons.

I'm an Eldar player and even I wouldn't try to convince someone that my weapons could do more than the simple rules that govern them.

Ok, so how are foot Dire Avengers right now? Because I was thinking about having some two or three 10 man squads tooled up hard (dual-cats, defend, bladestorm).
I don't know if this is a -move but with current bladestorm + bladestorm on overwatch + defend those guys could do some damage and hold their ground.
Couple this with some Ranger support to try to snipe all the flamers and maybe a foot-council to be the anvil. Small units of Jetbikes/Vipers/Spiders to disable vehicles and harass, plus WW or WLs for heavy longer ranged support.
Or are they too fragile and in forthcoming foothammer won't last long to anti-infantry?

wuestenfux wrote:

You can Footslog Eldrad, the Farseer, and the two Archons with the 10 guardians across the board. Put two archons in the front of the unit and Eldrad and the other Farseer in the middle.

Well, I don't like this tactics. Footslogging is a slow way to die.

Stelek's comments are here: http://yesthetruthhurts.com/2012/07/eldar-6th-edition-primer/

Stelek is not an idiot. Stelek is the Rush Limbaugh of 40k. He sometimes has some good points, and has a strongly devoted following. He has the personality of sandpaper and occasionally makes statements that make you go
if you can stomach reading his posts or listening to his interviews, more power to you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Roadkill Zombie wrote:Look. I already told you we will have to agree that we both disagree on the way they work. Since I don't know you personally and will probably never play you personally then there is no need to try to win me over to your way of thinking. It doesn't matter

Here is where it does matter. If you go to the NOVA open, and try to use that ruling you may be in for a bit of a shock.

Tourneys are the baseline for why most of us argue rules. Who cares if your playing your buddy on a sunday afternoon. The only time it matters is when your playing competitively.

labmouse42 wrote:Stelek is the Rush Limbaugh of 40k.

I almost just spit my drink out all over my keyboard and monitor.

That's harsh dude.. but thank you for the laugh, that made my day.

Another plus for Swooping Hawks is that as there will be more emphasis on infantry, you'll have more targets for your deepstrike pie plate. I definitely see me trying them against IG.

Quick question, if you shoot (a haywire grenade) into a vehicle, and destroy it, can you then charge a different vehicle in the assault phase, effectively giving you a chance to damage/destroy 2 vehicles per turn?

Only if the new vehicle was part of a squadron with the now destroyed vehicle.

Yea I was about to say in most cases, no.

It seems plasma has become the new in thing from what I've seen, but what is the take on fire dragons these days? Are larger squads more viable now? Seems like a serpent isn't worth the points anymore.

Serpents are still great. I run 5 in all my lists from 1500 points. It's still a lot of focused shooting to bring down even 1 of them, and with Divination I always give the lead tank a 4+ invulnerable when I roll it up.

Not to mention it's a platform to carry 6 Str6 shots. I usually keep them beefed up with Prescience. Eldrad can usually keep two firing on all cylinders.

Fire dragons are still good. I usually bring a single serpent with a group of 6-9 these days. I either immediately beeline for whatever has an AV higher than 12/12/10 or use them as TEQ hunters.

But Eldar vehicles are still useful. I usually bring 2 prisms and about 3-5 other tanks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

seapheonix wrote: Seems like a serpent isn't worth the points anymore.

Remember, these aren't Rhinos. 12+ on the front and sides, Energy Shields, access to a 4+ invul for vehicles and 5+ jink saves, 4+ if flat out, and usually a 2/3+ during nightfight missions.

I think the Eldar ability to move, fire two guns at full BS and still get a jink save is what will be the saving grace of the book. Wave serpents, vypers, Falcons all with 2 guns running and gunning is where it's at. Maybe with some Tau allies to provide some higher AP, higher str shooting.

The foot list with DE allies seems like it will be strong as well. It's too bad you have to take Eldar troops, haha. But at least the Avatar will potentially make all your dark Eldar fearless

hey guys, first time posting....

i have a question about eldrad.... his staff says that he can use a third power if not locked in combat.... FAQ says he mastery 3.... does this means he gets to casts 3 powers every turn no matter in combat or not??? or does his staff now give him a possibility of casting a 4th power if not in combat???

silly 4th ed rules not making sense in 6th ed.....

Im fairly certain that now he can cast three powers whether locked in combat or not.

Four powers as he has spirit stones.

Staff gives him 2 powers to cast.
Stones give him 2 powers to cast.

I think that's right but I may be wrong.

Na, FAQ is fairly clear on Eldrad. The Psyker lvl 3 includes his bonus from Spirit Stones.

He start at 1 (like all farseers)
Stones bump to 2.
Staff jumps to 3.

Falconlance wrote:

labmouse42 wrote:Stelek is the Rush Limbaugh of 40k.

I almost just spit my drink out all over my keyboard and monitor.

That's harsh dude.. but thank you for the laugh, that made my day.

Well, I guess he is. His followers are even more so.

Thunderfrog wrote:Na, FAQ is fairly clear on Eldrad. The Psyker lvl 3 includes his bonus from Spirit Stones.

He start at 1 (like all farseers)
Stones bump to 2.
Staff jumps to 3.

Mastery level 3 but he can cast four powers no? Or at least the same one twice or something. I may just be wrong, don't have codex access right now.

Anyone one else notice that night spinner is a transport now? It says so in the reference area Fast, Tank, Skimmer, Transport. Has it always been this way? have I been out of the loop this whole time? either way, what the gak is the capacity on that thing so I can field mine.

Cypher's Sword wrote:Anyone one else notice that night spinner is a transport now? It says so in the reference area Fast, Tank, Skimmer, Transport. Has it always been this way? have I been out of the loop this whole time? either way, what the gak is the capacity on that thing so I can field mine.

The night spinner has never been a transport.

I'm pretty excited about all the changes so far. I'll drop a few of my opinions on running topics.

Rangers are fun now. Not overpoweringly fun, but precision strikes and ap1 make them a pain if you roll well and pick out special weapons. Buying the pathfinder upgrade isn't worth it though. In higher points games, when it becomes viable, your rangers won't be getting shot at much, so you don't need the defense as much. I think those points are just better spent on other things.

DA get outranged now by rapid fire weapons, so that hurts their foot viability. But they still have a nice rate of fire and bladestorm on overwatch can hurt. If you happened to roll up that psychic power and can do it at bs4, even better. Since you can't kill hordes fast in assault any more, you will need units to wipe them out when they get close. Big squads of DA still put out a large amount of wounds and with smart targetting, can remove half a horde squad with focus fire (hordes almost can never fit their whole squad in cover).

Last but not least: Are people really using Harlequins with both the new and old version of VoT combined? That seems like the worst case of abusing the rules. I would feel like such a terrible person if I was arguing to allow a typo to affect the rules. Especially if anyone used the argument that other languages stated it correctly. Don't make up excuses for why you are using a typo.

@wuestenfux Actually it was. The original forgeworld rules gave it a transport capacity of 6. They took it away when they put it in the white dwarf for some reason.

wuestenfux wrote:

Cypher's Sword wrote:Anyone one else notice that night spinner is a transport now? It says so in the reference area Fast, Tank, Skimmer, Transport. Has it always been this way? have I been out of the loop this whole time? either way, what the gak is the capacity on that thing so I can field mine.

The night spinner has never been a transport.

ah so they will be soon, take a look at the appendix in the new rulebook, it shows night spinner as also being a transport.

@racta Ahreed on the harliquins. Unfortunately for me personally I won't be using harliquins until it is clear one way or another as to what they are supposed to have. FAQ is currently clear but so poorly done it has to be a typo.

It would be nice if they had FAQd the Dark Eldar as well, so at least we could compare, but they flubbed the whole deal by mistyping the Eldar one and not changing the DE ones at all.