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.

In all my test games with 5th, the games have been generally faster. Protracted close combats don't slow the game down. Scattering templates doesn't take any longer than how you do it in 4th either. It's about the same amount of time to resolve hit/casuaties.

Capt K

jfrazell wrote:Also, a heavy flamer on a tank means the tank has to get close to use the flamer. This generally considered a bad thing, at least where guard are considered (remember all those marines you're flaming can minimum glance your tank now in cc). Thats also why the hellhound is sweet.

flamers on
Lemans no
Hellhounds yes
Landraiders potentially
screamers you know it baby!

No only that, but in assault, you attack rear armor. Very bad for tanks with crappy rear armor to be close to the enemy.

Which is about all of them at A 10...

Vindicator? hmmmm

I haven't played much 40k lately, but when I do my favorite army is Necrons.

I am concerned about the new glancing hits at -2 to the roll. Now the only way to destroy an armored vehicle with Necrons is a Monolith or Heavy Destroyers. Disruption fields are now useless.

Any thoughts for the ancient enemy?

Smatticus wrote:I haven't played much 40k lately, but when I do my favorite army is Necrons.

I am concerned about the new glancing hits at -2 to the roll. Now the only way to destroy an armored vehicle with Necrons is a Monolith or Heavy Destroyers. Disruption fields are now useless.

Any thoughts for the ancient enemy?

It's destruction through attrition. Each immobilized result after the first destroys a weapon. If a weapon destroyed result is rolled when there are no more weapons, the vehicle becomes immobilized. If the vehicle is both immobilized and has all its weapons destroyed and suffers either of these results it is destroyed.

So Necrons should be able to tear vehicles apart through sheer volume of damage.


They should have an easier time than Tyranids whose only real anti-vehicle weapon (the Venom Cannon) now suffers the same issue but Tyranids tend to have a whole lot less of this shooting than Necrons do (since every unit in the Necron army can hurt a vehicle for the most part).

Is that confirmed Yakface-that it follows V4 on the damage chart (Immobile + allWeapons Destroyed + additional I or WD=dead tank?)

Yes

Smatticus wrote:I haven't played much 40k lately, but when I do my favorite army is Necrons.

I am concerned about the new glancing hits at -2 to the roll. Now the only way to destroy an armored vehicle with Necrons is a Monolith or Heavy Destroyers. Disruption fields are now useless.

Any thoughts for the ancient enemy?

How about you ask the question, with glances at a -2, how can anything hurt your monolith unless it is s9 or 10 or AP1. The monolith just got tougher.

Yea it did, but....

You don't need 6s anymore to hit skimmers in the air, and a running carnifex, I think would do the job just fine because monoliths are slow...

They were always beasts anyway.

Questions I have not seen answered (apologies if I missed them - its a long thread!):

1) How does Tank Shock work - is still the same lame "LD test; fail = run away, pass = stand aside unless you want to Death or Glory"? I want to be able to RUN SOMEONE OVER AND KILL THEM when I Tank Shock them, dammit! (Thats how it works in real life and RTS games!)

2) Do Ordinance weapons no longer gain any bonus on damage results against vehicles?

3) If you ram something, can you cause a penetrating hit or glancing only?

4) Is it just me or are Necron Monoliths even more unkillable in 5th Edition? It's hard enough to hurt them as is and now with 5th you can't destroy them via glancing (because the weapons don't get destroyed by Weapon Destroyed results, they just get less shots).

5) Vehicles assaulted in combat are hit on their rear armor. Are Walkers still hit on their front armor?

6) How does the Rending rule work now - roll to wound as normal but a roll of 6 ignores armor save? (i.e. no more auto-wound redonkness)

7) Can Bikes still Turbo Boost to move 24" or has that been reduced to 18"?

8) If you fail your LD test from losing combat, how does it work - still the "both sides roll D6+Initiative; combat winner wins/ties roll = losers all die, otherwise losers run away"?

yakface wrote:the rules say that any deocrative features modeled on your base do not count towards blocking LOS.

OK, but a tabard or back banner is OK?

Clever distinction.

yakface wrote:
As Neofright mentioned the rules say that any deocrative features modeled on your base do not count towards blocking LOS. The rules also state that models must be mounted on the base they come with. It says that if you wish to use a larger base for scenic purposes you should make sure to tell your opponent about it.

Thats interesting after what they did with the last couple of editions. That means a lot of models are going to get stuck in the horrendous (and slowed) category of "opponents permission" for no reason.

The Skimmer rules also state that skimmer bases have to remain on during the game unless the vehicle is immobilized or destroyed at which point the stand is removed.

This to me is another problem, not so much for what it means rules wise but actually with the models themselves. The skimmer bases were very badly designed. They break off inside the vehicles all the time, necessitating drilling and new stands frequently if used. I simply stopped using them after my first couple games with skimmers (3 of those bases broke off inside skimmers) and they don't balance well all the time either. If GW wants this to become the norm, it would really be nice to have a much stronger and balanced skimmer base. Say like the current one but with four spokes instead of one with thicker attachements to prevent breaking.

Vaktathi wrote:

yakface wrote:
The rules also state that models must be mounted on the base they come with. It says that if you wish to use a larger base for scenic purposes you should make sure to tell your opponent about it.

Thats interesting after what they did with the last couple of editions. That means a lot of models are going to get stuck in the horrendous (and slowed) category of "opponents permission" for no reason.

If the base conversion is minor and purely decorative, or upsizing to the current model's base, then I doubt any reasonable player will have an issue. OTOH, if we're talking about Grots on CDs, then yeah, there's probably a problem.

Vaktathi wrote:

yakface wrote:
The Skimmer rules also state that skimmer bases have to remain on during the game unless the vehicle is immobilized or destroyed at which point the stand is removed.

The skimmer bases were very badly designed. They break off inside the vehicles all the time, necessitating drilling and new stands frequently if used. I simply stopped using them after my first couple games with skimmers (3 of those bases broke off inside skimmers) and they don't balance well all the time either. If GW wants this to become the norm, it would really be nice to have a much stronger and balanced skimmer base. Say like the current one but with four spokes instead of one with thicker attachements to prevent breaking.

The problem is that you are using the skimmer base as-is. The skimmer bases are only usable for small plastic models.

What I do is to immediately break off that stupid little tip, and then re-drill the hole to accept the larger stem. This is a friction fit that simplifies transport and avoids constant breakage of the tip.

okay so I skimmed the article and I"m not sure if this was covered but here goes.

Where the immobilized vehicles in a squadron are destroyed because they are abandoned and destroyed by their crew as the rest of the squad advance. first if you think this is unrealistic and they'd just stay inside and shoot go rent black hawk down.

As far as fluff is concerned, marines can only deploy one vehicle in squadrons (not apoc.) and thats the landspeeder. the crew of any other vehicle will go to great lengths to protect its sacred hull. or they take great pride in it 'orks' and don't want to lose their trophies, etc etc.

Looks like landspeeders just got a good reason to fly in squads though. now they can ignore can't move/shoot results to get behind cover and their destroyed on an immobilized result anyway.

with the news of LS becoming transports for small squads of scouts (and making scouts cheaper) I'm excited for the new codex. my marines can now move up the field, use my masters LD and get the assault with counterattack, make a new fire base and scouts move to hold objectives and LS harass like they always do.

edit: my LS are the old school pewter oop ones. a plastic base can not support it at all (especially not the little hex it comes with) I used a close hanger and green stuffed it to make it sturdy and drilled the hole bigger.

so you have to use it with the base it came with/ask permission? In regular games i"m not worried but I don't want to be screwed over in a tournament because I don't have a little hex under my speeders. Also the way I have the bases built my skimmers are 6" to 9" off the table, how will that work for LOS?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Take a small blast marker. Put it over some infantry. Now move it 5" away from them. You've basically missed unless you're firing at a big unit, or a very spread out unit.

If it were 2D6 picking highest, then the 'touch = hit' thing would be a good balance, but as it stands, most blast markers will miss by a long way.

And what's the bet Demolisher Plasma Cannons will go up in price when GW gets around to the Guard Codex again, citing that the 'touch = hit' makes them really powerful.

BYE

Its an average of 4" not 5", not that it makes a huge difference. This hurts high BS armies more that it does Guard.

Bearing in mind I have not played 5th ed there are a few points Id like to make:

Against marines (lets face it most peoples most common opponent) it is a non event as krak missiles will be the choice (surely?). This applies to Necrons too. Against mob armies you WILL have a better chance of a hit in many situations. Obviously surrounding units could be hit and first turn firing will be a free for all if you get the first turn depending on mission of course. A generalisation but as valid as yours.

Excluding marine and mob armies this basically means your point is really only valid against Eldar, DE and Tau.

Against Tau krak missiles are better off used against the battle suits - no effect. If you cant see them then there is a slight loss of effectivness. While against Eldar/DE there will be a potential loss of effectivness here, no argument.

meh, duplicate

wash-away wrote:

Looks like landspeeders just got a good reason to fly in squads though. now they can ignore can't move/shoot results to get behind cover and their destroyed on an immobilized result anyway.

They are only destroyed on an immobilised result if they were moving flat out (getting the 4+ save) or are in squadrons. Below this speed they just cant move anymore as per normal tanks. According to the rules the base has to be removed, but if it is glued thats ok as the grav plate is not damaged, just the engine......

Plastic Parody wrote:Many single lines of text separated by a single space each

When did this become an acceptable post format? It hurts to read it.

bigchris1313 wrote:

Plastic Parody wrote:Many single lines of text separated by a single space each

When did this become an acceptable post format? It hurts to read it.

lol

above post edited just for your sore brain/eyes

"tanks are very vulnerable to close-up attacks with sticky bombs, etc. (the equivalent of Krak grenades)- or at least the WII ones were"

I don't really think thats the case though with some vehicles, such as the Tau skimmers that are completely enclosed or the landraider. To sight a current example of hard to kill in close tanks would be the Abrams. It doesn't have any viewparts it uses cameras so unless the hatch is open there is really no way in unless you throw a grenade down the barrel. (and I don't even think that would work all that well)

I think a more suitable thing to do would have been to add -1 modifiers in close combat for every viewport on the tank... Though I guess its a bit late.

Actually I don't use any Monoliths. I use an all metal Necron army built from 2nd edition models, but ya the Monolith will be tough.

Plastic Parody wrote:

wash-away wrote:

Looks like landspeeders just got a good reason to fly in squads though. now they can ignore can't move/shoot results to get behind cover and their destroyed on an immobilized result anyway.

They are only destroyed on an immobilised result if they were moving flat out (getting the 4+ save) or are in squadrons. Below this speed they just cant move anymore as per normal tanks. According to the rules the base has to be removed, but if it is glued thats ok as the grav plate is not damaged, just the engine......

what about los to a skimmer? I played a game today and they where the same height as most of the buildings or taller. I really don't want to have to cut them down and put them only a few feet above ground. hell the guy's in mine have respirators and when was the last time you saw any flying vehicle just float a couple feet above the ground in combat?

also is there any news on the LS transport?

BloodySabers wrote:Questions I have not seen answered (apologies if I missed them - its a long thread!):

1) How does Tank Shock work - is still the same lame "LD test; fail = run away, pass = stand aside unless you want to Death or Glory"? I want to be able to RUN SOMEONE OVER AND KILL THEM when I Tank Shock them, dammit! (Thats how it works in real life and RTS games!)

2) Do Ordinance weapons no longer gain any bonus on damage results against vehicles?

3) If you ram something, can you cause a penetrating hit or glancing only?

4) Is it just me or are Necron Monoliths even more unkillable in 5th Edition? It's hard enough to hurt them as is and now with 5th you can't destroy them via glancing (because the weapons don't get destroyed by Weapon Destroyed results, they just get less shots).

5) Vehicles assaulted in combat are hit on their rear armor. Are Walkers still hit on their front armor?

6) How does the Rending rule work now - roll to wound as normal but a roll of 6 ignores armor save? (i.e. no more auto-wound redonkness)

7) Can Bikes still Turbo Boost to move 24" or has that been reduced to 18"?

8) If you fail your LD test from losing combat, how does it work - still the "both sides roll D6+Initiative; combat winner wins/ties roll = losers all die, otherwise losers run away"?

1) Tank shock is pretty much the same. They cleaned up the wording a bit but it functions essentially the same as it does now.


2) Same Ordnance bonus vs. vehicles. 2D6 pick the highest.


3) Ramming can clause penetrating hits. Walkers (who are being rammed on their front or sides) can attempt a death or glory attacks against rammers but if they fail to stop it they are hit on their rear armor. If they don't attempt a death or glory attack they 'brace for impact' and use the armor facing they are being rammed in.


4) Yep, Monoliths are definitely beefy. But they are *much* easier to kill in close combat now as Skimmers aren't any harder to hit than regular vehicles now (so at most it will take a '4+' to hit a Monolith) and the fact that all infantry can run makes it easier to get to Monoliths in CC.


5) Yes, walkers are hit on their front armor in CC.


6) Yes, rending is now done on the wounding roll (or the AP roll with vehicles). Rending vs. vehicles now only gives an extra D3 instead of D6.


7) Turbo boost is pretty much exactly the same.


8) Yep. The big difference is the Ld modifier for losing combat is determined solely by the difference in casualties caused by each side. That means it is very easy to get a very high modifier if you cause many more casualties than the opposing side. Also, 'No Retreat' wounds now equal the amount you lost combat by (with no maximum cap) so Fearless units who get beat in combat can easily suffer many extra wounds.

wash-away wrote:

what about los to a skimmer? I played a game today and they where the same height as most of the buildings or taller. I really don't want to have to cut them down and put them only a few feet above ground. hell the guy's in mine have respirators and when was the last time you saw any flying vehicle just float a couple feet above the ground in combat?

also is there any news on the LS transport?

LOS for the whole game is true WYSIWYG, including skimmers. If you don't want to lower your Skimmers then don't. There really isn't any huge pressing need to do so.

I'm just concerned about the table that's hills and forests. any unit can pick away at them.

I can kind of see people putting fire prism's up high especially with the new template rules.

Ratbarf wrote:"tanks are very vulnerable to close-up attacks with sticky bombs, etc. (the equivalent of Krak grenades)- or at least the WII ones were"

I don't really think thats the case though with some vehicles, such as the Tau skimmers that are completely enclosed or the landraider. To sight a current example of hard to kill in close tanks would be the Abrams. It doesn't have any viewparts it uses cameras so unless the hatch is open there is really no way in unless you throw a grenade down the barrel. (and I don't even think that would work all that well)

I think a more suitable thing to do would have been to add -1 modifiers in close combat for every viewport on the tank... Though I guess its a bit late.

What about if you break the camera lenses, or squirt petrol in the radiator, or break a track link. These things are not easy, but they are certainly not impossible.

Fact is, tanks are very vulnerable to infantry close up since they cannot see or shoot at them effectively. Even Tau skimmers, though enclosed etc. have vulnerable points like attachment points for fuelling, hatches, external weapons.

Skimmer height: Perhaps it's a good idea to keep several bases handy, with rods from 1/4" to 6" high (or for the really advanced modeller, an extendo-base that's hidden inside the craft's which could telescope to any length desired).

Walkers: Does anyone know if grenades can be wielded in CC against walkers still? With PFs getting a nerf, they might be more of a threat again. However I wonder how No Retreat affects walkers in CC. If they take extra hits, that might be a problem- but if not, this might be the Day the Dreads Came back.

Savnock wrote:Skimmer height: Perhaps it's a good idea to keep several bases handy, with rods from 1/4" to 6" high (or for the really advanced modeller, an extendo-base that's hidden inside the craft's which could telescope to any length desired).

Walkers: Does anyone know if grenades can be wielded in CC against walkers still? With PFs getting a nerf, they might be more of a threat again. However I wonder how No Retreat affects walkers in CC. If they take extra hits, that might be a problem- but if not, this might be the Day the Dreads Came back.

They still can be used and still hit on a 6. I dont recall if there was any change to the armour value always being the front though.

Plastic Parody wrote:

Savnock wrote:Skimmer height: Perhaps it's a good idea to keep several bases handy, with rods from 1/4" to 6" high (or for the really advanced modeller, an extendo-base that's hidden inside the craft's which could telescope to any length desired).

Walkers: Does anyone know if grenades can be wielded in CC against walkers still? With PFs getting a nerf, they might be more of a threat again. However I wonder how No Retreat affects walkers in CC. If they take extra hits, that might be a problem- but if not, this might be the Day the Dreads Came back.

They still can be used and still hit on a 6. I dont recall if there was any change to the armour value always being the front though.

yes, as I read it any vehicle with a WS you hit the front. also there's going to be a AV 13 seige dread.

I was so excited to have scout snipers buzzing the field and taking objectives in LS but I'm kind of skeptical now... well lets chop the hell out of a $5 ebay speeder and hope for the best.

What I've done with my Tau tanks is to reject the indequate official stands. I've cemented a plastic pipe in the fuselage; this takes a thin steel rod or wire. The other end of the rod will be cemented into a drilled out stalk on the base.

It sounds as if the rules do not allow Tau tanks to land, despite them having landing gear. I think this is a pity.

Plastic Parody wrote:

bigchris1313 wrote:

Plastic Parody wrote:Many single lines of text separated by a single space each

When did this become an acceptable post format? It hurts to read it.

lol

above post edited just for your sore brain/eyes

Thanks!