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.

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
I don't understand why they posted the old FAQs as well. For example, Grey Knights and Necrons have FAQs for codices that are now outdated and OOP...

Because they're a disorganized publishing house? "Take down old FAQs" should be a check list line item somewhere before "Release new Codex for sale". It takes literally minutes or less to take a file down from a website.

The funny thing is, when I looked a few minutes ago, the GW site has a Chaos Daemons FAQ from August, while the Black Library page has the newer one from November (which grants a summoning roll to each of Fateweaver's heads).

So not only are they showing FAQs for out of date books, they're showing conflicting versions as well.

SW Cyberwolves +1T. What a random change.

I don't know you can think whatever you like, i just personally think that Warbikers should also benefit from the Waaagh, the Fluff behind it is they go ballistic and rush into combat as quickly as possible. Why wouldn't the bikers also do the exact same thing regardless of the risk of losing control of their bikes....it seems rather unorky that the bikers wouldn't benefit from the Waaagh. On top of that wouldn't the warboss be a bit upset about them not doing this after he spent all that time and energy yelling across the entire battlefield for them to hear?

 insaniak wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
They sorted skimmers being immobilised and jink, ...

They actually didn't. They tried to... but wrote it badly.

What they said is:
"Skimmers that are not also Heavy vehicles or are immobilised have the Jink special rule."

Which actually gives the Jink rule to immobilised vehicles... If the vehicle is not Heavy, or the vehicle is immobilised, it has the Jink rule.

What it should have said is:
"Skimmers that are not also Heavy vehicles or immobilised have the Jink special rule."

Even better would've been "Skimmers have the Jink special rule, unless they are also Heavy or are immobilised."

 Byte wrote:
SW Cyberwolves +1T. What a random change.

It's not really that random. They were supposed to be T5 from the start. They were T5 previously and making them T4 was an error. In fact, in the back of the book in the Profiles section they are listed as T5 but since they were listed as T4 in the front of the book we had to play them that way for a while.

 NightHowler wrote:

 Byte wrote:
SW Cyberwolves +1T. What a random change.

It's not really that random. They were supposed to be T5 from the start. They were T5 previously and making them T4 was an error. In fact, in the back of the book in the Profiles section they are listed as T5 but since they were listed as T4 in the front of the book we had to play them that way for a while.

Makes sence. Don't play with or against them so never noticed.

 insaniak wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
They sorted skimmers being immobilised and jink, ...

They actually didn't. They tried to... but wrote it badly.

What they said is:
"Skimmers that are not also Heavy vehicles or are immobilised have the Jink special rule."

Which actually gives the Jink rule to immobilised vehicles... If the vehicle is not Heavy, or the vehicle is immobilised, it has the Jink rule.

What it should have said is:
"Skimmers that are not also Heavy vehicles or immobilised have the Jink special rule."

As expected from GW, but their intention is clear.

 NightHowler wrote:

 Byte wrote:
SW Cyberwolves +1T. What a random change.

It's not really that random. They were supposed to be T5 from the start. They were T5 previously and making them T4 was an error. In fact, in the back of the book in the Profiles section they are listed as T5 but since they were listed as T4 in the front of the book we had to play them that way for a while.

One can only hope that the same logic results in Death Company being made WS5. I would also accept making DC T5 as well.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:

 Byte wrote:
SW Cyberwolves +1T. What a random change.

It's not really that random. They were supposed to be T5 from the start. They were T5 previously and making them T4 was an error. In fact, in the back of the book in the Profiles section they are listed as T5 but since they were listed as T4 in the front of the book we had to play them that way for a while.

One can only hope that the same logic results in Death Company being made WS5. I would also accept making DC T5 as well.

No, our profiles are the same at the back and unit entry. So I don't think it will happen.

 DarthOvious wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:

 Byte wrote:
SW Cyberwolves +1T. What a random change.

It's not really that random. They were supposed to be T5 from the start. They were T5 previously and making them T4 was an error. In fact, in the back of the book in the Profiles section they are listed as T5 but since they were listed as T4 in the front of the book we had to play them that way for a while.

One can only hope that the same logic results in Death Company being made WS5. I would also accept making DC T5 as well.

No, our profiles are the same at the back and unit entry. So I don't think it will happen.

That is true. This is hardly random then, since the intent was unclear.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 DarthOvious wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:

 Byte wrote:
SW Cyberwolves +1T. What a random change.

It's not really that random. They were supposed to be T5 from the start. They were T5 previously and making them T4 was an error. In fact, in the back of the book in the Profiles section they are listed as T5 but since they were listed as T4 in the front of the book we had to play them that way for a while.

One can only hope that the same logic results in Death Company being made WS5. I would also accept making DC T5 as well.

No, our profiles are the same at the back and unit entry. So I don't think it will happen.

That is true. This is hardly random then, since the intent was unclear.

I think they did it cause the priest now gives +1 WS. I know it's not optimal to put him in DC since they already have FNP but then again putting him DC if they kept their WS5 to make them WS6 would have been totally nuts.

 grendel083 wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
wow GW sucks, almost no updates in their for orks at all.

Apart from Defkoptas, what FAQ's do you think Orks need?

For Cybork to be 5+ Invul again?

What a worthless bunch of crap with no good rules questions actually answered at all. Garbage. Just garbage.

How they didn't FAQ witchfire without a weapon profile is beyond me...

Melevolence wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
wow GW sucks, almost no updates in their for orks at all.

Apart from Defkoptas, what FAQ's do you think Orks need?

For Cybork to be 5+ Invul again?

I almost forgot about the Cybork thing. 5+ invul to a 6+ FNP which is basically useless and ignored by almost every player. better to spend the 50pts to get the painboy.

Really, im the most pissed about the nerf to ghazkuul :-(

 Ghazkuul wrote:

Melevolence wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
wow GW sucks, almost no updates in their for orks at all.

Apart from Defkoptas, what FAQ's do you think Orks need?

For Cybork to be 5+ Invul again?

I almost forgot about the Cybork thing. 5+ invul to a 6+ FNP which is basically useless and ignored by almost every player. better to spend the 50pts to get the painboy.

Really, im the most pissed about the nerf to ghazkuul :-(

Yeah, the Ghaz nerf was pretty unwarrented. He really isn't even suited to the LOW slot, even as he was before. Pretty depressing honestly. Hard to believe THE biggest and baddest Ork is a huge chump on the battlefield. D:

Melevolence wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

Melevolence wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
wow GW sucks, almost no updates in their for orks at all.

Apart from Defkoptas, what FAQ's do you think Orks need?

For Cybork to be 5+ Invul again?

I almost forgot about the Cybork thing. 5+ invul to a 6+ FNP which is basically useless and ignored by almost every player. better to spend the 50pts to get the painboy.

Really, im the most pissed about the nerf to ghazkuul :-(

Yeah, the Ghaz nerf was pretty unwarrented. He really isn't even suited to the LOW slot, even as he was before. Pretty depressing honestly. Hard to believe THE biggest and baddest Ork is a huge chump on the battlefield. D:

Ghazkuul 225pts
vs
2 Warbosses with Mega Armor and 1 with a lucky stick

Same point cost

Ghaz gets 6 attacks on the charge all hitting Init 1 with a S10 AP2 PK hitting with a WS of 6

Two Warbosses in MA and a Lucky stick get 10 attacks on the charge, all hitting init 1 with a S10 AP2 PK hitting with a WS of 6.

The only difference between the two is that Ghaz gets his 2++ on a turn he calls Waaagh, and everyone gets fearless for a single turn.

One of the Warbosses gets re-rolls on hits, wounds and armor saves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
ohh and ghaz is eternal warrior but Big whoop :-P

 tydrace wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
They sorted skimmers being immobilised and jink, ...

They actually didn't. They tried to... but wrote it badly.

What they said is:
"Skimmers that are not also Heavy vehicles or are immobilised have the Jink special rule."

Which actually gives the Jink rule to immobilised vehicles... If the vehicle is not Heavy, or the vehicle is immobilised, it has the Jink rule.

What it should have said is:
"Skimmers that are not also Heavy vehicles or immobilised have the Jink special rule."

Even better would've been "Skimmers have the Jink special rule, unless they are also Heavy or are immobilised."

Apparently, they are still employing the dyslexic intern for writing rules

/joy

Go even crazier and take a Warboss give him a bike a pk and the Da Supa Cybork and you have a Warboss with 5 attacks on the charge, a 3+ Cover save when he turbo boosts, a 4+ regular save and a 5+ FNP which he gets every time because with the bike hes T6. On top of that he becomes eternal warrior and relentless because of Da Supa Cybork and his grand total point cost is.....160!

So what your looking at is a regular run of the mill Warboss with some upgrades and he hits almost as hard and has more survivability. So at what point did Ghazkuul become so weak?