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.

1hadhq wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:In 5th Ed. they created the "Barrage" type for weapons to replace the "guess" type weapon rules.

To anyone who's seen the codex have you noticed they made the demolisher cannon a "barrage" weapon in the new codex?

Barrage??
No . Demolisher is ordnance.
The Earthshaker is the only imperial gun that is a barrage weapon.

In the new Space Marine Codex, the Demolisher is a Barrage Weapon. However, in the current Imperial Guard Codex, it is not.

Somnicide wrote:Don't forget the mighty mortar ;-) There is also the whirlwind.

Your mighty mortar has returned to IG??

Seems like a Whirlwind is a missile launcher. :S
But there was a Land Raider conversion with a earthshaker.......

MinMax wrote:
In the new Space Marine Codex, the Demolisher is a Barrage Weapon. However, in the current Imperial Guard Codex, it is not.

wouldn't it be weird ? A barrage weapon with 24"
Barrage: fires direct or indirect. So I could have a demolisher hurling a big explosive over a small terrain piece?

Codex Sm (german) : demolisher = ordnance 1

abadabado!! - You're right about logic for chaos. I do think it implied if your codex sucks you shold pay more (as it needs to suck more!)

1hadhq wrote:

MinMax wrote:
In the new Space Marine Codex, the Demolisher is a Barrage Weapon. However, in the current Imperial Guard Codex, it is not.

wouldn't it be weird ? A barrage weapon with 24"
Barrage: fires direct or indirect. So I could have a demolisher hurling a big explosive over a small terrain piece?

Codex Sm (german) : demolisher = ordnance 1

Yup. Consider that Tau have a barrage weapon with even shorter range. The Airbursting Fragmentation Projector only has 18" range.

Now this will be a interesting question:

who quotes a dex that is in his possession?

I have a codex on my desk.

No copy.
No website.

just a original new Codex Space Marines.

The problem with that is one thing, GW's cross language support and translation has never been 100%. Your codex may say one thing, but the original English one may be completely different.

InquisitorFabius wrote:The problem with that is one thing, GW's cross language support and translation has never been 100%. Your codex may say one thing, but the original English one may be completely different.

therefore I'm asking for quotes from a non-german dex.


copys from alpha-versions might be changed.

Chad Warden wrote:lord_blackfang (like MDG) is just a warseer fanboy that's only here because he got banned, logic doesn't work on him

If the points were the other way around he'd be coming up with reasons why Assault Marines should cost more than Raptors

Of course, anyone who doesn't throw a tantrum whenever the development of a game of toy soldiers doesn't go his way is a fanboy, while those who cry and whine and moan and threaten to leave the hobby and make fun of the games devs' children are level-headed individuals with balanced opinions.

That said, I really don't know how some of you can be so thick that you swallow "CSM have less assault troops than SM" without all the sarcasm bells going off. Isn't this the kind of thing Dakka is famous for?

I really have to try to not launch into an Anti-Warseer rant, so I'll just do this:

Warseer wrote:
USE TACTICS!!!!!!!

... and walk away...

BYE

EDIT:

H.B.M.C. wrote:I really have to try to not launch into an Anti-Warseer rant, so I'll just do this:

Warseer wrote:
USE TACTICS!!!!!!!

... and walk away...

BYE

Fine Viperion


QFT

PistolWraithCaine wrote:QFT

You know you have to QUOTE SOMETHING before it's "Quoted for truth", right?



I think everyone needs to take a day off this thread, there hasn't been a nice (let alone on-topic) post for some time now...

Viperion

I noticed that the demolisher is infact barrage. Thats groovy for 2 reasons. First its barrage with no minimum range, unlike the bassy. Second if you choose to use it that way you can remove the option cover saves when shooting at stuff that is getting saves from models in front of it. S10 and AP2 means lots of dead stuff. That's awesome. Its probably why I'm taking 3 in my SW army.

When you think about it, the demolisher is constantly referred to in the fluff as a siege weapon and a barrage weapon is definitely more suited for a siege than a direct ordinance.

Quick note, the Ironclad (sp) dread can get a chain fist, but nothing changes the attack I of the chain fist to 4 instead of the rules stated 1.

Does GW play test anything? Or do they just ask fluff masters if it makes sense to them, and then it passes?

GW: What about this?
FM: Wow, looks "siege-like" cool.
GW: mmmm overpower the rules they sell tons....$50 a model...sure add it.

*opens door and looks*

Nope, most people still seem unable to keep on topic.

The thread was specifically about "facts". Two posts in, it turn into a combination wishlist/whinethread. Amazing.
Anyway anybody with an ounce of internet savvy will have the codex by now.

*closes door*

Fact: hunter-killer missile price drop from 15 to 10.

Should we use more H-K M now?

InquisitorFabius wrote:Quick note, the Ironclad (sp) dread can get a chain fist, but nothing changes the attack I of the chain fist to 4 instead of the rules stated 1.

...With the possible exception that models with Chainfists (and Powerfists) strike at Initiative 1.

I wonder if the barrage bit in the Marine Dex is a mistake they will never own up to..... And that was how all demolisher cannon ended up barage weapons in 5th ed.

Come now, you should know better than to trust the summary page. There is no "Barrage" in the main Vindicator entry.

1hadhq wrote:Fact: hunter-killer missile price drop from 15 to 10.

Should we use more H-K M now?

thats becose of apoc rangles is realy hard for apoc.
whit 5 edion made to be played more in apoc ( they saw how many there were played on my lokal gw we have 1 evry saterday.

quietus86 wrote:

1hadhq wrote:Fact: hunter-killer missile price drop from 15 to 10.

Should we use more H-K M now?

thats becose of apoc rangles is realy hard for apoc.
whit 5 edion made to be played more in apoc ( they saw how many there were played on my lokal gw we have 1 evry saterday.

1 hunter-killer missile (UNLIMITED RANGE) per transport or tank / 2 per ironclad dread => Missile rain in APOC
First turn apoc: 10-20 HK missiles against any light vehicle/transport at full range.

it les over powert when its 15 pnts than when it was 10 pnts in apoc one thing thet got more resenabal.
and the codex isent that overpowert it has some sweet units but they don't realy score.

They are also blisteringly expensive.

and how many time's have you seen them hit home

your home was hit by hunter-killer missile?


3+ = 66% to hit

Plastic Parody wrote:I wonder if the barrage bit in the Marine Dex is a mistake they will never own up to..... And that was how all demolisher cannon ended up barage weapons in 5th ed.

Well not all demolishers really, BA and DA dont have barrage on theirs. Pitty...


//Edge

i just skimmed through the codex but could not find the entry that lets dreds be taken as elites and heavy, could someone gimme the page number or entry where i can find that? i was hoping to base an army around 6 dreds. i assumed it was in the MoTF section but maybe im blind.

thanks

studderingdave wrote:i just skimmed through the codex but could not find the entry that lets dreds be taken as elites and heavy, could someone gimme the page number or entry where i can find that? i was hoping to base an army around 6 dreds. i assumed it was in the MoTF section but maybe im blind.

thanks

page 133