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.
2020/11/02 16:45:02
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
Aspect warriors won't be Core.
Lance weapons may switch to D3+3 damage.
Ravagers may become wych cult and coven options, since they kept those keywords for Reapers.
The Night Shield may change- the Tantalus used to have a Night Shield, but now has a Twilight Field instead which gives it the 5++ against ranged. The Reaper, however, still has a Night Shield which refers to Codex-Drukhari.
One-in-a-million 10,000 year old relic Contemptor Dreadnought: Totally CORE, very much integral to the space marine way of war, obviously included in all buffs and psychic powers and abilities, extremely important. Read the fluff you fake fan.
Eldar Aspect Warriors: I'm sorry, I don't think something as unusual and secondary in the fluff as aspect warriors really deserves to have the CORE keyword, I mean, if you think about how much of the actually FLUFF-ADHERENT eldar force would be made up of guardian units, there would be such a vanishingly small number of aspect warriors it just doesn't really make sense for them to be CORE...
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/11/02 17:07:20
Subject: Re:Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
aspect warrriors might not be core, but they may instead have buffs of their exarch/autach/phoenix lord or something keyed to their respective aspect keywords, so the swooping hawk phoenix lord might give swooping hawks extra movement, or the howling banshee lord extra attacks on the charge, etc. or maybe its just a simple oversight by the rules team that isnt expecting/planning to do craftworld eldar 9th ed for 18+ months.
and yhea, the custodes seem to have come out of this really well. a lot of the posters in the custodes tactics thread are really trying to read into this to see what we can glean. the future looks good for us. Golden, even, if you will excuse the pun.
To be a man in such times is to be one amongst untold billions. It is to live in the cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable. These are the tales of those times. Forget the power of technology and science, for so much has been forgotten, never to be relearned. Forget the promise of progress and understanding, for in the grim dark future there is only war. There is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter, and the laughter of thirsting gods.
Coven of XVth 2000pts
The Blades of Ruin 2,000pts Watch Company Rho 1650pts
2020/11/02 17:10:41
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
Maybe GW is going to use more then just :core:. Maybe they start using :core X: so only specific units buff other units. An exarch, could buff only their own aspect, an autarch can be more buff all eldar, while a phoenix lord could buff all aspects everything no matter what, but of course a dark reaper phoenix lord is probably going to be better at buffing fire dragons or dark reapers, while Jaina is going to work better for the melee dudes.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2020/11/02 17:12:14
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
Karol wrote: Maybe GW is going to use more then just :core:. Maybe they start using :core X: so only specific units buff other units. An exarch, could buff only their own aspect, an autarch can be more buff all eldar, while a phoenix lord could buff all aspects everything no matter what, but of course a dark reaper phoenix lord is probably going to be better at buffing fire dragons or dark reapers, while Jaina is going to work better for the melee dudes.
yeah but as it stands, shadow specters not having core means an autarch buffing <aeldari><core> units wouldnt buff them.
Unless the autarch is straight up buffing <aeldari> units only but then whats the point of core if they do that?
2020/11/02 17:13:56
Subject: Re:Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
xerxeskingofking wrote: aspect warrriors might not be core, but they may instead have buffs of their exarch/autach/phoenix lord or something keyed to their respective aspect keywords, so the swooping hawk phoenix lord might give swooping hawks extra movement, or the howling banshee lord extra attacks on the charge, etc. or maybe its just a simple oversight by the rules team that isnt expecting/planning to do craftworld eldar 9th ed for 18+ months.
and yhea, the custodes seem to have come out of this really well. a lot of the posters in the custodes tactics thread are really trying to read into this to see what we can glean. the future looks good for us. Golden, even, if you will excuse the pun.
After the necron codex I have absolutely 0 faith that CORE won't just be a "non-marine nerf" where everything conceivably not the basic troops of every army except marines doesn't get CORE, and thus loses access to auras and powers and strats.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/11/02 17:14:01
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
the_scotsman wrote: It looks like the stone-crusher lost the 'brood' rule, and gained the ability for the tail weapon to be used for all attacks.I can't see the statline or any number basically at all, but there are no new special rules added like Duty Eternal or Wraith Construct or Ramshackle.
IIRC that was the case in Index 8th, and the restriction that only one attack can be made with the tail weapon was added in the codex. If we're going back to being able to put all of one's attacks into scythe tails, that may mean GW has recognized the inability of monsters to deal with chaff.
Upon further review, we both misread: The only weapon profiles on the Stone-Crusher entry are the Bio-Flail and Wrecker Claws; the weapon that does double attacks and can be used for all of your attacks is the Flail. The Dimachaeron entry has the same 'only one bonus attack' restriction for its tail weapon as the current codex.
Copying the things I noticed IG in general getting from the IG tactics thread. If it wasn't mentioned in this just i assume I found it to be meh to terrible, or DKOK specific. Spent a lot of time staring at still on 1080p youtube to figure it out but I'm pretty confident I read the IG stuff correctly for the most part.
Spoiler:
*Avenger strike fighter bolt cannon is fixed. Heavy 10, S6, Ap2, 2 damage. Downside is it went down to T6 and is only BS4. Also it can't take any additional weapons, you get two lascannon and the bolt cannon, plus a dinky stubbed, that's it. 165pts. Might work well for hunting characters
*The new artillery crew rules mean all guardsmen crew are essentially decorative, the only thing that matters is the gun itself. This includes the rapier. Basilisk and medusa field guns are 120pts, pretty useless since they have way less wounds and a worse save for minimal pts difference. Rapier is 85pts
*The new cyclops is pretty vicious for the points, I can see myself running these, if only to get to stuff hiding in combat. A few of these combined with Valhallan conscripts would be a fun way to mess with combat armies. Fun tidbits, the cyclops can only hit models it can see and always has a flat 6" range. You can have an officer standing on the other side of a wall 2" away and he'd be fine, same for enemies. For 50pts seems like a steal for 2d6 S9 d3 damage hits on everything in a 6" radius. Hide them behind walls or tanks and wait for some poor sap to charge your infantry screen or even keep it near a target you know the opponents elite melee unit wants to hit. You can also stick them in transports for some reason, but they can't be blown up the turn you disembark them.
*Armageddon Medusa may become a competitive artillery choice for IG, especially with custom regiment. Heavy d6, S10, ap3, d6 damage that ignores LOS with 36" rsnge is not bad especially with 9ths smaller tables. Might try a couple in my catachans combined with the tank ace manticores. Looks like 140 but I might be reading costs wrong, if heavy bolters isn't included it's 155.
*Vulture lost a ton of weapon options. Basically you can take two MRP and two hellstrikes, or you can take twin punisher, that's it. 190pts the way you know you're gonna take it.
*Vendetta can carry 12 guys again, pretty sure that's a change from 8th, 210 pts, pricey for 6 lascannon shots. still doesn't get roving gunship, best it will ever hit on is 4's
*Hellstrikes got the melta rule by the way, but it's always on. Kind of nice, but on the vendetta for example you get 4 lascannon or 2 hellstrikes shots, I'm not sure why you would ever pick the hellstrikes if you have an option.
*Hades breaching drill can be taken in any regiment, as long as you take a vet or combat engineers unit to go with it. Doesn't have any guns but might make a nice distraction since it's got a nasty melee profile for the cost. I think it's 80pts but might be 60, might not be a bad choice for plasmavets or something.
*Thunderers still don't have grinding advance, but are 120pts. Would rather have the medusa if I'm gonna have a non leman Russ Demolisher cannon style weapon that can't grinding advance.
*The CRASSUS ARMORED ASSAULT TRANSPORT is 240pts
These are just things I noticed rewatching the video on 1080p. I'm sure I missed some stuff. Overall the superheavies seem like letdowns.
'I've played Guard for years, and the best piece of advice is to always utilize the Guard's best special rule: "we roll more dice than you" ' - stormleader
"Sector Imperialis: 25mm and 40mm Round Bases (40+20) 26€ (Including 32 skulls for basing) " GW design philosophy in a nutshell
2020/11/02 17:33:29
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
tneva82 wrote: Makes BS4+ vanquisher about 4 times as good as battle cannon vs tanks.
Makes good finishing blow shot.
4 times as good as Dd6 battlecanon?
Because we also have that in the same preview.
The marcharius battle tank already had a D6 battle cannon though, iirc, so i wouldn't read too far into this. But the D9 vanquisher is absolutely hilarious for the fact that it always leaves its target with like 1 wound. I'd like to see something similar for the railgun and regular vanquisher, though really it should be out damaging a battle cannon, not breaking even.
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
2020/11/02 17:38:10
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
the_scotsman wrote: It looks like the stone-crusher lost the 'brood' rule, and gained the ability for the tail weapon to be used for all attacks.I can't see the statline or any number basically at all, but there are no new special rules added like Duty Eternal or Wraith Construct or Ramshackle.
IIRC that was the case in Index 8th, and the restriction that only one attack can be made with the tail weapon was added in the codex. If we're going back to being able to put all of one's attacks into scythe tails, that may mean GW has recognized the inability of monsters to deal with chaff.
Upon further review, we both misread: The only weapon profiles on the Stone-Crusher entry are the Bio-Flail and Wrecker Claws; the weapon that does double attacks and can be used for all of your attacks is the Flail. The Dimachaeron entry has the same 'only one bonus attack' restriction for its tail weapon as the current codex.
So did the stone crusher just loose it's tail weapon?
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
2020/11/02 17:54:22
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
The only edge the seer has is the psychic power, and 2" of movement, which admittedly has some pretty solid options: He can make himself 2+/4++, which does actually make him more durable than the dread vs almost everything, or he can move twice.
Well not realllyyyyyyyy, a Wraithseer has a list of 3 gakky powers it can cast, none of which do those things. Those powers are from the Runes of Battle discipline, which can only target infantry. Theoretically a Farseer could give the Wraithseer some decent buffs (5+++, re-roll hits, Doom), but that's outside the scope here. Honestly, I think Wraithseers were really good and got a lot worse here; I'd definitely rather take the dread.
2020/11/02 18:26:40
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
The only edge the seer has is the psychic power, and 2" of movement, which admittedly has some pretty solid options: He can make himself 2+/4++, which does actually make him more durable than the dread vs almost everything, or he can move twice.
Well not realllyyyyyyyy, a Wraithseer has a list of 3 gakky powers it can cast, none of which do those things. Those powers are from the Runes of Battle discipline, which can only target infantry. Theoretically a Farseer could give the Wraithseer some decent buffs (5+++, re-roll hits, Doom), but that's outside the scope here. Honestly, I think Wraithseers were really good and got a lot worse here; I'd definitely rather take the dread.
Ahhhh, good catch. It could only use the Debuff versions of the runes of battle powers (though there are 6 of them, not 3). The best one would probably be Jinx, as anything with 3+sv or better would otherwise get a save against the ghostspear. Or you could use Ennervate on something you're looking to go fight, which would give it a pretty good chance of making it wound on a 5+ or 6+ vs the seer's T8.
Or, obviously, you could use the wraithseer to buff some friendly infantry if you wanted.
the_scotsman wrote: It looks like the stone-crusher lost the 'brood' rule, and gained the ability for the tail weapon to be used for all attacks.I can't see the statline or any number basically at all, but there are no new special rules added like Duty Eternal or Wraith Construct or Ramshackle.
IIRC that was the case in Index 8th, and the restriction that only one attack can be made with the tail weapon was added in the codex. If we're going back to being able to put all of one's attacks into scythe tails, that may mean GW has recognized the inability of monsters to deal with chaff.
Upon further review, we both misread: The only weapon profiles on the Stone-Crusher entry are the Bio-Flail and Wrecker Claws; the weapon that does double attacks and can be used for all of your attacks is the Flail. The Dimachaeron entry has the same 'only one bonus attack' restriction for its tail weapon as the current codex.
So did the stone crusher just loose it's tail weapon?
no, the flail thing is what it had before - I just didnt realize it was a tail. My apologies, I'm very unfamiliar with nid stuff, I just saw that most factions' various dreadnought-sized medium vehicles seemed to be getting some kind of boost-up and was curious to see if carnifexes also got one.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/02 18:27:45
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/11/02 18:34:02
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
Lance845 wrote:So did the stone crusher just loose it's tail weapon?
the_scotsman wrote:no, the flail thing is what it had before - I just didnt realize it was a tail. My apologies, I'm very unfamiliar with nid stuff, I just saw that most factions' various dreadnought-sized medium vehicles seemed to be getting some kind of boost-up and was curious to see if carnifexes also got one.
The Bio-Flail is not a tail weapon, the Thresher Scythe is, and it's still there.
Let me try to clear this up: The Stone-Crusher appears to be able to take two Bio-Flails or two Wrecker Claws as its primary weapon. Either way, it gets a Thresher Scythe as a tail weapon. The Thresher Scythe's stats are not on the datasheet because they are not unique to the Stone-Crusher; presumably you would reference your codex. The stats on the datasheet are just for the Stone-Crusher's two weapon options.
The Stone-Crusher lost the option to choose between no tail weapon, a Thresher Scythe, or a Bone Mace- you just get a Thresher Scythe, which is part of the Stone-Crusher model kit. You also can't take Bio-Plasma anymore, which is odd as that's what the FW studio model has.
The weird/unintuitive change is that the Stone-Crusher model can't actually have two Bio-Flails; it's always been one Wrecker Claw (right arm) and one Bio-Flail (left arm), with the option to replace the Bio-Flail with a second Wrecker Claw. Presumably we'll be expected to count the claw+flail loadout as the dual flails.
Wow... yeah the 2 flails thing is weird. When I started reading your response I thought "That has got to be 1 wrecker 1 flail not 2 flails". Maybe it's another one of GWs famous typos to be day 1 errata'd.
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
2020/11/02 19:00:18
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
T'au Empire Rail weapons may have gotten a bit of a boost, depending on exactly how many parallels we try to draw.
The Swiftstrike Railgun went up in strength (from Heavy Rail Rifle to Railgun level), increased its damage from 1d6 to 1d3 +3 (~43% increase in damage per hit), and its Mortal Wound generation mechanic became on ANY successful wound, not on wound rolls of 6+.
The Ta'unar and Tigershark Heavy Rail Cannons have no direct Codex parallel, but they previously shared the same Mortal Wounds generation mechanic as our Hammerhead Railguns - namely, 1d3 MW on a 6+ to wound. They got two boosts: it happens on any successful wound AND it is a flat 3 MWs.
IF all of that applies, we might expect the following:
Heavy Rail Rifle: 10 -4 d3+3D, 1 MW on successful wound
(Hammerhead) Railgun: 10 -4 d3 +3D, 3 MW on successful wound
I'm not confident about the strength increase, but the damage and MW generation mechanic seems likely to carry over.
Applying similar principles and a touch of guesswork...
Rail Rifle: 7? -4 3D, 1 MW on successful wound
Magna Rail Rifle: 11? -4 6D, 1 MW on successful wound
High Capacity Railgun: like hammerhead w/2 shots
And man, would it ever fit GW's style to put our best method of clearing Gravis on a Pathfinder chassis...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/02 19:01:11
2020/11/02 19:13:29
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
Actually according to your analysis, the hammerhead would be quite nice too, killing 2 in a single hit. You just need to hit and wound on 2+. Not really bad.
2020/11/02 19:14:19
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
Spoletta wrote: Actually according to your analysis, the hammerhead would be quite nice too, killing 2 in a single hit. You just need to hit and wound on 2+. Not really bad.
I've always contended that the hammerhead should cause catastrophic damage to a target. It should just pay for that ability.
2020/11/02 19:17:05
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
Unusual Suspect wrote: T'au Empire Rail weapons may have gotten a bit of a boost, depending on exactly how many parallels we try to draw.
The Swiftstrike Railgun went up in strength (from Heavy Rail Rifle to Railgun level), increased its damage from 1d6 to 1d3 +3 (~43% increase in damage per hit), and its Mortal Wound generation mechanic became on ANY successful wound, not on wound rolls of 6+.
The Ta'unar and Tigershark Heavy Rail Cannons have no direct Codex parallel, but they previously shared the same Mortal Wounds generation mechanic as our Hammerhead Railguns - namely, 1d3 MW on a 6+ to wound. They got two boosts: it happens on any successful wound AND it is a flat 3 MWs.
IF all of that applies, we might expect the following:
Heavy Rail Rifle: 10 -4 d3+3D, 1 MW on successful wound
(Hammerhead) Railgun: 10 -4 d3 +3D, 3 MW on successful wound
I'm not confident about the strength increase, but the damage and MW generation mechanic seems likely to carry over.
Applying similar principles and a touch of guesswork...
Rail Rifle: 7? -4 3D, 1 MW on successful wound
Magna Rail Rifle: 11? -4 6D, 1 MW on successful wound
High Capacity Railgun: like hammerhead w/2 shots
And man, would it ever fit GW's style to put our best method of clearing Gravis on a Pathfinder chassis...
I agree with basically everything. I just hope HH get 2 shots each with the main turret, because them having only 1 shot is what renders them currently useless.
2020/11/02 19:18:35
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
Or.... represent science correctly and make Tau weapons far more accurate. I'd make the hammerhead BS 2+ reroll 1s. That's about the hit rate of an Abrams or Challenger.
2020/11/02 19:24:54
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
True enough. Overcharged Ion Cannons probably do just about as good, though I wonder if each unmodified 1 will produce 1d3 MWs, as it does for the Ta'unar's Tri-Axis Ion weapons.
Still, it's the Hammerhead Chassis. I wish that was a viable hull.
2020/11/02 20:07:52
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
Unusual Suspect wrote: T'au Empire Rail weapons may have gotten a bit of a boost, depending on exactly how many parallels we try to draw.
The Swiftstrike Railgun went up in strength (from Heavy Rail Rifle to Railgun level), increased its damage from 1d6 to 1d3 +3 (~43% increase in damage per hit), and its Mortal Wound generation mechanic became on ANY successful wound, not on wound rolls of 6+.
The Ta'unar and Tigershark Heavy Rail Cannons have no direct Codex parallel, but they previously shared the same Mortal Wounds generation mechanic as our Hammerhead Railguns - namely, 1d3 MW on a 6+ to wound. They got two boosts: it happens on any successful wound AND it is a flat 3 MWs.
IF all of that applies, we might expect the following:
Heavy Rail Rifle: 10 -4 d3+3D, 1 MW on successful wound
(Hammerhead) Railgun: 10 -4 d3 +3D, 3 MW on successful wound
I'm not confident about the strength increase, but the damage and MW generation mechanic seems likely to carry over.
Applying similar principles and a touch of guesswork...
Rail Rifle: 7? -4 3D, 1 MW on successful wound
Magna Rail Rifle: 11? -4 6D, 1 MW on successful wound
High Capacity Railgun: like hammerhead w/2 shots
And man, would it ever fit GW's style to put our best method of clearing Gravis on a Pathfinder chassis...
You seemed to have missed that the heavy rail cannon lost
48 inches in range and 4 strength
Also it went from 2d6 damage to D3+6 That's less swingy but its only an additional 1 avarage damage. While going from BS2+, fairly sure it was at worst BS3+ in older editions to BS4+ that degrades to BS5+.
If you read across form that hammerheads should be BS4+, that'll be amazing with a Heavy 1 weapon.
Seeker missiles also getting cut from Dd6 to d3 is a serious nerf.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/02 20:10:10
2020/11/02 20:45:54
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
More for the tyranid monsters, all three versions of Scything talons in the FW book now grant a bonus to strength.
If that is applied to the regular codex MCs (massive and monstrous) talons, it will make the monsters much better against vehicles. S6/S7 Nid MCs too often ended up wounding dreadnoughts and vehicles on 5+.
Degradation tables were also shuffled around, new versions aren't as crippling as they used to be.
Talons were changed from d6 to d3+3, keeping up with the general increase in reliability and lethality.
Both FW Tyranid titanic transports act like regular transports, they can carry multiple units up to the total capacity. If a Tyrannocyte is updated to the same system, it will open up a whole new array of options.
The other hope for our drop pod is that chaos drop pods also received the Turn 1 deepstrike exception. We really should get that as well, Nids are the masters of drop pods in the lore after all...
Besides much needed buffs to Dima, no other monster was made more durable in any way. Stonecrushers hit hard but they are slow and almost as easy to kill as ATVs. That's not good for regular fexes, unless we get some stratagems to help with that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/02 20:47:30
2020/11/02 22:53:12
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
You seemed to have missed that the heavy rail cannon lost
48 inches in range and 4 strength
The image leak I've seen is not the best quality, I'll grant, but I see 120" range (same as before). I can't see the strength clearly, but from what I've gathered, Titans aren't as tough as they used to be, so if it is reduced, it probably doesn't make that much of a difference.
Also it went from 2d6 damage to D3+6 That's less swingy but its only an additional 1 avarage damage.
As poor a quality scan as I have, it reads reasonably clearly as d6+6D, which parallels what they did with the smaller Rail weapon (d3+3 instead of d6, d6+6 instead of 2d6) and is an average increase of 2.5 (and more importantly, reduces low-damage results to ensure it isn't a wasted shot).
Don't have easy access to the Tiger Shark datasheet, I've been looking at the Ta'unar's HRCA entry. If they're the same weapon, then they also got a 2nd shot. That's a huge change... that's 9th edition Multi-Melta levels of change.
While going from BS2+, fairly sure it was at worst BS3+ in older editions to BS4+ that degrades to BS5+.
Yeah, that gutted the AX-10 Tiger Shark.
If you read across form that hammerheads should be BS4+, that'll be amazing with a Heavy 1 weapon.
I think you forgot the "/s" at the end there, but in any case, I don't think it likely. They're bringing Forgeworld's units into line with parallel Codex T'au units - in this case, aircraft, which have been stuck at 4+ BS since they've been introduced, despite BS 3+ equivalents from forgeworld (introduced before the Codex aircraft existed) that could have set the precedent.
It's a relevant thing to bring up in this discussion, but for the reasons above, I also don't think it is very likely.
Seeker missiles also getting cut from Dd6 to d3 is a serious nerf.
Yeah, that's a pretty substantial blow.
2020/11/02 23:06:15
Subject: Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
yukishiro1 wrote: Damage on almost everything went up, durability either stayed the same or went down, except for the -1D built into dreads.
GW appears to be absolutely committed to ramping up the lethality of the game even further than it already has been. They seem to like a game where pretty much everything dies as soon as it is shot at by another unit with the right weaponry to target it.
in fairness anti-tank lethaltiy needed a revisit because it was a joke in some cases.
"this here's a vanquisher canon, a single shell from it can put down a tank" *does 1d6 damage when even a rhino has more wounds*
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
2020/11/02 23:21:31
Subject: Re:Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
yukishiro1 wrote: Damage on almost everything went up, durability either stayed the same or went down, except for the -1D built into dreads.
GW appears to be absolutely committed to ramping up the lethality of the game even further than it already has been. They seem to like a game where pretty much everything dies as soon as it is shot at by another unit with the right weaponry to target it.
in fairness anti-tank lethaltiy needed a revisit because it was a joke in some cases.
"this here's a vanquisher canon, a single shell from it can put down a tank" *does 1d6 damage when even a rhino has more wounds*
While I agree that Vanquisher Cannons and other anti tank weapons were a joke, especially compared to just spamming lower strength weapons more cheaply, D9 seems a bit of an over correction.
Now, if they made Vehicles start at say 20 wounds on the low end, or gave out saves better than 3+ to most of them, or didn't stop Toughness at 8 (outside of the rare edge case), it would be fine. As it stands, if the increase in lethality without an increase in durability continues in the rest of the codexes, that could be a problem.
2020/11/03 00:16:28
Subject: Re:Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
However another thing that's a substantial nerf is Macro as a weapon type is gone.
Removal of the Macro rule is not for a second a bad thing. It made for really, really wonky gameplay (ever seen the face of a guy who brings an Imperator titan to a game, only to have it one shotted Turn 1? I have).
2020/11/03 00:26:11
Subject: Re:Potential "Sneak Previews" in the IA Compendium book
However another thing that's a substantial nerf is Macro as a weapon type is gone.
Removal of the Macro rule is not for a second a bad thing. It made for really, really wonky gameplay (ever seen the face of a guy who brings an Imperator titan to a game, only to have it one shotted Turn 1? I have).
Good or bad for the game it's still yet another nerf to the weapon system on a model thats seen a significant amount of changes and still managed to remain firmly in the overcosted stable.
This was the one hope of getting something of a power boost to a very broken faction for the next 6 months, instead it's a giant pile of doesn't look to bad untill you compair to the loyalist marine stuff in the same book.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/03 00:26:47
Coven of XVth 2000pts
The Blades of Ruin 2,000pts 
Watch Company Rho 1650pts
