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.
tneva82 wrote: Quite a few seem to think it's die that gets minimum.
Not that it helps exterminator much...
And not just size of tables that hurts. These days boards are so heavy terrain 30" lane is hard.
But yeah these stats suck and shows gw ran out if ideas. It's just so lolbad vs even battle cannon. Shot difference too few. Even if you roll 1...
Punisher another one that just needs helps. Anti horde when hordes don't die and half shots. Vey ap-1. Aoc nullies that. Just waaaay too niche and even there not that amazing to take outside list tailoring.
Actually, the Punisher cannon just got better against T3 hordes. With the boost to strength it's wounding on 2's, instead of 3's. Most of those horde armies don't have AoC. Also the tank can move the full distance before firing.
Ya. How many hordes you run to have need for punisher that say battlecannon cannot deai sufficiently well to accept huge loss of effect before?
Btw old punisher 4+ to hit s5 vs t3=13 wounds, new 3+ to hit s6 11 wounds...you get worse vs t4...so vs t3 you are worse off.
T5 old better, t6 slightly better for new(like 0.3 more).
That rekd better do lots of work...better face t6 2+ no aoc that's the ideal target for new punisher vs old actually.
Lord Zarkov wrote: Individual infantry taking more hits from explosions because they’ve got no mates is silly, but large things like vehicles and monsters (and to a lesser extent things like battle suits, cavalry, nid warriors, etc) absolutely should take more hits per model because they are bigger and therefore exposed to more of the blast.
Eh. Tank WANTS the blast be spread in larger area of it. The smaller part of tank the explosion focuses the better it is for chances to penetrate...
I was under the impression you can have a Cadian shock troop squad in your custom regiment army, these choices aren't locked out by your doctrines?
They aren't, but those Cadian Shock Troops remain Cadian with all their normal Cadian traits and keywords, they don't become part of your custom regiment. So they (technically) can't represent specialists, just attached actual Cadians.
To me, thats just a unit template. No different to the veteran upgrades of the past in 5th. I guess im just not hooked on the name that much, why would anyone be that hooked on the name? How many eldar are running ulthwe right now in rules name only? Or running some named marines with their own colours and stuff. I prefer this new codexs way of doing it to the lame 9th ed way of doing it by miles.
Key will be keywords. Can your non-cadian officer help those cadian squads? Or not.
If keywords are locked in and buffs work by those it's not really unit template. You either are cadian or you miss out buff.
If it's keyword locked it's no different to running whatever marines you have as blood angels/ultramarines/whatever like people do now. So no different to now.
Togusa wrote: The more I look at it the more I think that if you remove the two front mounted stubbers, and the weirdly placed top stubber, along with the sponsons, the better the tank looks. The twin battle cannon or the single cannon with Autocannon look good. No major issues with that. And the Body of the tank looks good. It's just all the copy pasted on extra guns that look silly. And sponsons on a WW2 style tank...yuck!
All that stuff is optional at least. It looks like the only mandatory weapons are the main turret gun and the front hull gun.
Of course they might be "voluntary" like free weapons in kragnos. Sure you don't have to...but you miss on free weapons.
cuda1179 wrote: So, what is the better setup? Dakka platform with Stubbers, heavy bolters, and gatling cannon or the anti-tank version with multi-meltas, and meltaguns?
The models look great. Proportionally, they look far, far better than the ancient Cadian kit we've had for years. Yes, they're out of scale with current space marines. Which makes me wonder if that scale increase was required to balance the better proportions of the models and the detailing. But scale has always been an issue. When the original smaller Cadians came out, Space Marines were smaller. So, in a sense... nothing has really changed?
So the scale is whack. As it always is. But the models are great. But the scale is whack. But the models are great. They really are very good.
And we can't always have everything.
So basically you are wondering if GW miniature designers are totally inept which is bit rich but only way they would need to artificially increase size here. Models were more than big enough to details and proportions.
ekwatts wrote: Yes, they're out of scale with current space marines. Which makes me wonder if that scale increase was required to balance the better proportions of the models and the detailing.
I don't buy this as the reason. GW has no problems producing fine details on smaller models like Tau, Grots, etc, so increasing the size of baseline humans should not be necessary.
It may not be a question of detail so much as keeping the weapons about the same size as before for bits compatibility. If they make more human proportions at the same height, the guns will look more oversized on the resulting scrawny models. Lean is not a look GW tends to go for anyway. Their people tend to be more on the bulky side to lessen the impact of oversized heads, hands and feet. So if you can't adjust weapon size or width/bulk, height is the only way left to get closer to human proportions.
Singleton Mosby wrote: Based on the pictures we have seen. Will sentinels go from 60mm to 80mm bases?
Based on the below picture (spoilered for size) I'd say 80mm is the new size. The Command Squad models right next to it are supposed to be on 28mm bases and their bases seem to be about a third of the Sentinel base's width.
Spoiler:
Gw doen't care about bits compatibility with old kits. What you have in box is what you build.
GiToRaZor wrote: Honestly, I would drop it just out of spite. It is a terrible rule.
Absolutely, it's the most counterintuitive piece of nonsense in the game. I doesn't simulate anything in-universe, its a purely abstract mechanical fix to Guard not being killy enough to compete in tournaments. I would never use it.
You basically describes most of stratagems and abilities in 40k
Miguelsan wrote: The more leaked info I heard, the less the new codex interests me. So according to the latest video from Mordian Glory we are going to have a Cadian squad, a Krieg squad, a Catachan squad... And all will have the same rules, and stats but different load outs. What's the point? Probably keywords that allow the player use stratagem X, or stratagem Y. Just what we needed GW.
Also it's kind of annoying that elite armies like Eldar can out horde a horde army because GW keeps limiting the basic squad to 10 guards.
Great job GW.
M.
What is a horde to you? Basic guardians with no heavy weapons are 90pts, which yes, can be taken in 20s, but ultimately you can still take fewer total due to costing more. You can take a brigade with max infantry squads (assuming whiteshields/conscripts are gone or not 20 man units) for a mere 540 pts. That's 1/4 of an army for 90 fully armed guys no other horde army can do that.
I thought it was in the word: a large group of people. Regardeless of the point price (you cannot compare point to point unless you bring stats, saves, abilities, and basic squad equipment to table) the fact is that brigade level you can just place 90 IG vs 180 Guardians, or 180 Orks, or 180 Necrons... and so on.
M.
Guard don't pay basic squad equipment, that's the point. You cannot bring those numbers of infantry with equipment for those armies and have anything else of note in the force. 180 guardians as an example is 1620 points before heavy weapons.
Maybe it's time guard wasn't just an endless group of meatbags whose only purpose is to die easily, maybe the image now should be here's my 90 core troops, armoured support and my veterans, representing the full guard.
Of all the complaints the fact you can only fit 90 guys in the troops slot has to be the weirdest.
And Guardians hit on a 3+ with a 4+ save. With a better base weapon...
It's great that you want guard to be a hardened core of troops backed up by the might of the armor corps but that's not what horde means. If you think that horde stops at 90 let me tell you that 180+ bodies was considered the absolute minimum, and during 9th Ed those 90 dudes with t3 and a 5+ save have been like wet tissue in front of your average army no matter how cheap they are.
To reiterate, do you want to play a combined arms guard? Cool, add armor to your heart's content. But without conscripts, and 12 squads of 10 at best (double batt.) guard cannot horde while elite armies can so it's not a weird complain.
M.
The army with cheaper per model hordes better. By the time eldar runs out of points guard keeps adding bodies.
Kanluwen wrote: Dude's dressed as an anachronistic warmaster of olde, and he's "no more special" than a WHFB empire general...while riding a mechanical horse.
Got it.
Well...Mechanical horse is hardly 40k thing seeing it's also been in fantasy battle
So yeah. FB calling their hero back.
Only the reaver head on base is off in fantasy battle/AOS. But it's sad day when BASE has to sell the story over the model...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/10/31 17:33:42
Polonius wrote: I think they'll more likely keep the new Cadians, but slot in a legacy vehicle like the LRBT to get it up to 25 Power.
It'll be nice to have an HQ in these boxes besides the commissar.
Why do I have the feeling that vehicles such as the Leman Russ and Chimera will eventually be phased out?
So first it was firstborn gets squatted, now it's IG?
Guess next it's falcons get squatted Then tyranid warriors etc?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fayric wrote: I can totally get behind a supreme commander of the guard never acually seing battle first hand, and imagine himself riding a horse and commanding the troops with his sword held high.
Question is what the heck he would do on an actual battlefield. Probably the whole thing is a holgram projection of a guy safely tucked away on a holodeck in space drinking tea.
That would be RL logic GW logic the bigger the rank the more he fights.
Have leaks given his rules much yet?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/02 10:06:06
Voss wrote: Huh. Somehow not the statlines I was expecting. Anyone care to count how many of the 9th edition weapons mathematically won't notice the difference between T8 w/ 13 wounds and T9 with 17 wounds?
Anything at S10+ and an average damage of 6 treats those two tanks exactly the same (barring other special rules).
And of course, S5-7 is just a matter of pumping a few more shots in. Only 2 successes for damage 2 weapons.
S
So basically super at weapon's don't much care which target? Sounds about right.
Shakalooloo wrote: Yarrick can't die because Ghazghkull won't let 'im. And the Prophet of the Waaagh has enough Orky "belief = reality" to keep the old man running.
The belibc reality is overhyped by fans. Canon it's not that big thing. More of oil lube than magic. No empty box doesn't shoot because ork believes.
MajorWesJanson wrote: Most weapons are getting inflated, with older units getting left behind. A shadowsword tank now mounts a better volcano cannon than a reaver titan. At least we are starting to see a move towards toughness starting to increase to improve survivability without needing a ton of special saves or rules, with scout sentinels now at 6 and heavy tanks at 9.
Togusa wrote: Personally I wouldn't be too upset about the auto-wound rule. This book will be outdated in less than a month, and will be trash bin material in five months when 10th comes out and resets the entire game...again.
Like 9e made 8e books useless? What daemons played until short time then? What are ig playing atm?
Togusa wrote: Personally I wouldn't be too upset about the auto-wound rule. This book will be outdated in less than a month, and will be trash bin material in five months when 10th comes out and resets the entire game...again.
Like 9e made 8e books useless? What daemons played until short time then? What are ig playing atm?
No more like 7th, when overnight every codex was replaced by an Index, at least that is the rumor so far.
That's speculated a lot but nothing concrete rumours yet so claiming it's so is just stupid.
I can make lots of claim. Doesn't make it so though.
"10th will kill off primaris!"
I bet there will be primaris marines around.
GW hasn't historically done full resets all that often so odds are better it will be more like GW's usual old codexes work more-or-less edition change.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rihgu wrote: I thought so to. In a sane world, they would be, but these aren't sane rules.
Then for added fun GW sells objective markers on 50mm bases
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/10 06:33:35
Miguelsan wrote: The Krieg rule says "an unmodified roll of 1-2 for that attack fails, irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or the model making the attack may have" does that mean no rerolls to wound on a 1?
M.
No. It just expands your usual 1 always fail. If it did there could be no reroll 1's because 1 always fails as per core rules.
Darnok wrote: With the timeline having moved forward the way it did, anybody expecting Yarrick to still be around was fooling himself. He was old by the time of the 3rd War For Armageddon, and that was over 100 years ago by the current point in time.
This is 40k, just give him some rejuvenation procedures or put him into stasis or some stuff.
Wouldn't be the first time someone came back from old age in the grim dark universe.
Plus...marbo ruins that theory. Age wise yarrick is more likely to be around.
But which one has plastic model on sale? That's the reai reason.
I originally thought the Goff Rocker video was a teaser that he was still alive (says "Bale Eye got away" at 46 seconds). But then a few minutes later I started seeing posts talking about how the latest codex killed him.
They certainly keep that option open. Which makes sense. Somebody from design team gets idea to do new model and they need to introduce him back to game. Easier if original going away can be waved away as misinformation inside imperium than literally provenly killed
that's the ideal target for new punisher vs old actually.
