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.

Beardedragon wrote:
Well. i dont know about the rest of the horde armies, but Orks at least, are going to suck.

The faction in 8th was mediocre but now with all the changes and point changes they're being hit real hard with the nerf hammer for no apparent reason.

Ive heard that the Tyranids were raped pretty hard with the point changes too.

I play mainly nids and orks, nids are 100% better off than orks as vigilus was scrapped (which is a good thing, just not a good thing for orks and gsc). Not saying nids are in a good spot, they probably are not, but orks are in a much worse spot (unless spamming boyz against armies kitted out to kill armour, but I don't think many ork players will want to do that, we are all bored to death with boyz spam) .

 vict0988 wrote:
Good for you, I hope to see some big mobs around as well and that things don't devolve into all Mek Gunz all the time. I wish you good luck getting it to work because the game seems to have made a lot of changes to hurt you, blast is just one of those. With nerfed SAGs and tagging no longer working on vehicles I think you'll be in hell against Dakkabots and Punisher Tanks with Orks especially, but maybe you guys can brew up a counter for that. The first few posts in the thread were all about how it was all pts and mission dependent and we couldn't draw hasty conclusions about blasts wiping or not wiping hordes from the meta. For me I have been wishing for blasts for quite some time, I think it's a great idea and the rule seems to have just the right amount of impact, I just don't like the time it has come, with morale being the only windfall for big units and fighting units on top of fences and ruins being the only buff for melee considering many competitive events engineered their terrain around 8th having poor terrain rules, better terrain rules will mostly help what was bad terrain in 8th be effective terrain in 9th.

I doubt that mek guns will be going away though, they haven't gotten worse and with lootas basically losing everything that made them work, they are the only fire support option left for infantry-based armies.

If boyz are dead to the meta - and I'm not sure of that - it won't be because of blasts, but because of the 1/2 inch rule, vehicles shooting in combat, coherency, multi-charge nerf, less space to deep strike, point hikes and more difficult access to additional clans. On the other hand, morale is quite a huge buff for them as people can't shoot down 15-20 boyz and hope for the rest to disappear. Endless green tide is now a lot more reliable to pull off. The other big buff is the 5" vertical engagement range, which turns ruins from "immune to melee" into deathtraps you can't fall back from. Tagging also isn't completely dead, as many relevant guns are blast, and falling back is no longer free for flying units. It's different now.
So the thing to tip the scales for boyz is pretty much how well missions and secondaries reward going into melee with a large number of objective secured models. There is no way to theory-hammer that, I'll have to play a bunch of games myself and see some games by people who actually know their way around orks (almost all of the playtesters don't).

My meta already was full of punishers, aggressors, tf cannons, dakkabots, tesla necrons and noise marines. Losing 60-90 boyz in one turn was expected. If the one AM player brings wyverns intead of punsihers, more power to him. All others don't have wyverns and kill boyz just as well as before.

Beardedragon wrote:
Well. i dont know about the rest of the horde armies, but Orks at least, are going to suck.

The faction in 8th was mediocre but now with all the changes and point changes they're being hit real hard with the nerf hammer for no apparent reason.


Ive heard that the Tyranids were raped pretty hard with the point changes too.

Stealers suffer a bit, but in general Tyranids didn't have any crazy point increases. Our midsize bugs actually came out pretty well.

Lictors, Pyrovores, guards and so on became much better.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
How did SAGs get nerfed? Or are we talking about the restriction of the relic SAG from competetive play?

massive pricehike on the regular aswell..

Ah, gotcha. I haven't kept up 100% on all the points changes.

Yeah, the first time I read it I thought it was a mistake TBH. It looked to me like they hiked his points by 40pts because they were going to make the SAG 0 points (because they split the old "Big Mek" datasheet into "Big Mek with KFF, Big Mek With SAG, and Big Mek with Mega Armor" separate profiles, which means the SAG is now a mandatory piece of wargear only one unit has) but then they just...forgot to make the SAG 0 points, and left it with his datasheet getting a 40pt nerf and the SAG still at 35pts.

Buuuuuuuuuuut then they didn't FAQ it, so WoRkInG aS iNtEnDeD I guess.

the_scotsman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
How did SAGs get nerfed? Or are we talking about the restriction of the relic SAG from competetive play?

massive pricehike on the regular aswell..

Ah, gotcha. I haven't kept up 100% on all the points changes.

Yeah, the first time I read it I thought it was a mistake TBH. It looked to me like they hiked his points by 40pts because they were going to make the SAG 0 points (because they split the old "Big Mek" datasheet into "Big Mek with KFF, Big Mek With SAG, and Big Mek with Mega Armor" separate profiles, which means the SAG is now a mandatory piece of wargear only one unit has) but then they just...forgot to make the SAG 0 points, and left it with his datasheet getting a 40pt nerf and the SAG still at 35pts.

Buuuuuuuuuuut then they didn't FAQ it, so WoRkInG aS iNtEnDeD I guess.

We'll this is the fourth time an edition changes for my orks, and GW has always made sure to heavily nerf everything that was considered competitive in the previous edition. This time is no different.

Spoletta wrote:

Beardedragon wrote:
Well. i dont know about the rest of the horde armies, but Orks at least, are going to suck.

The faction in 8th was mediocre but now with all the changes and point changes they're being hit real hard with the nerf hammer for no apparent reason.


Ive heard that the Tyranids were raped pretty hard with the point changes too.

Stealers suffer a bit, but in general Tyranids didn't have any crazy point increases. Our midsize bugs actually came out pretty well.

Lictors, Pyrovores, guards and so on became much better.

Pyrovores are probably about the same but I still think they're overrated. 25 points for a heavy flamer isn't great (I can't remember their 9th cost and I can't be bothered to look it up). Hive Guard will get -1s to hit a lot more than they used to, but they're still going to be great. I don't know what makes Tyrant Guard better.

And finally, the Lictor still does nothing.

So yeah, disagree. The points increases for Nids didn't do anything to fix the very mediocre datasheets of a couple of these units.

 Jidmah wrote:
A wyvern was barrage if my memory serves right, so it could easily get 20 [u[hits[/u] even against a properly spaced out unit of boyz and was almost guaranteed to vaporize them if they were clumped up after combat or from a chokepoint.

Now we are talking about 24 shots, not hits, so sorry for not being terrified of something like that. If wyverns are the worst the blast unit has to offer, it will not have an impact on how many boyz or pox walkers I will bring in a unit.

I'd also like to point out that the thread went from "blasts are the end of horde units" to "wyverns are the end of termagants". I hope you made sure you have raised your banners high on all those goalposts.

And to reinforce the perspective -

A Wyvern used to kill 3.5 KFF Boyz. Now it will kill 6. There is no more specialist detachment to worry about (for now). This does not seem to be an overwhelming issue. People can certainly add mortars and other such weapons, but then are they going to be turning into skew and suffering against non-horde armies?

BUT if you're not running KFF or Catalyst, etc you'll feel that pain a little more sharply - e.g. Termagants - but it is AP0 after all.

Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CC bs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CC bs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th

Sort of a side point - but why are Tyranid players so bullish on warriors? (Speaking as someone who tried to be bullish through 8th, but was never entirely convinced.)

One unit with the Blood of Baal buffs makes sense - but I think they got a reasonable points hike. Hasn't A venom cannon+2 deathspitters+boneswords trio gone 82 to 99 points I think - about a 20% jump.
Maybe ditch the boneswords to make some saving, but still.

 Jidmah wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
How did SAGs get nerfed? Or are we talking about the restriction of the relic SAG from competetive play?

massive pricehike on the regular aswell..

Ah, gotcha. I haven't kept up 100% on all the points changes.

Yeah, the first time I read it I thought it was a mistake TBH. It looked to me like they hiked his points by 40pts because they were going to make the SAG 0 points (because they split the old "Big Mek" datasheet into "Big Mek with KFF, Big Mek With SAG, and Big Mek with Mega Armor" separate profiles, which means the SAG is now a mandatory piece of wargear only one unit has) but then they just...forgot to make the SAG 0 points, and left it with his datasheet getting a 40pt nerf and the SAG still at 35pts.

Buuuuuuuuuuut then they didn't FAQ it, so WoRkInG aS iNtEnDeD I guess.

We'll this is the fourth time an edition changes for my orks, and GW has always made sure to heavily nerf everything that was considered competitive in the previous edition. This time is no different.

I don't know what you are talking about. 6th edition KillaKanz and warbikers were the best, and in 7th they were just as amazing....ohh wait. you are right

Granted going from 7th into 8th they didn't nerf that much except for boyz because honestly, orkz were about the worst army in the game in 7th.

As far as 9th, i am still leaning heavily into the idea of a KFF/Painboy protected Green tide list for tournament play. I think it will be sufficiently counter meta to survive. The worst part is that it won't be fun to play and will require a minimum of 180 Ork boyz to function.

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CC bs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th

Yeah, this is all true (and I'm still on the Z'ope bandwagon personally). I guess Spoletta's point was fair, he just listed the wrong units and shouldn't have included Lictors lol.

SemperMortis wrote:
I don't know what you are talking about. 6th edition KillaKanz and warbikers were the best, and in 7th they were just as amazing....ohh wait. you are right

Kanz were a top competitive choice during 5th and slightly worse in 6th due to the loss of the cover rules for shooting through squad members. They were completely obliterated in the 7th edition codex for that.

Granted going from 7th into 8th they didn't nerf that much except for boyz because honestly, orkz were about the worst army in the game in 7th.

So how about power klaws, da lucky stikk, MANz missiles, supa-cybork, mega-force field, exhaust cloud and Thrakka?

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CC bs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th

And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.

By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.

Spoletta wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CC bs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th

And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.

By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.

Warriors are nice but didn't need to go up 5ppm on the most common loadout. And why would you take Lictors when you can take Rippers? All you get is the ability to perform actions. But honestly it's easier to remove Lictors than it is to remove Rippers, so I don't think that's a plus.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CC bs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th

And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.

By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.

Warriors are nice but didn't need to go up 5ppm on the most common loadout. And why would you take Lictors when you can take Rippers? All you get is the ability to perform actions. But honestly it's easier to remove Lictors than it is to remove Rippers, so I don't think that's a plus.

Performing actions is pretty non-trivial. A lot of secondaries can't net you the full 15 VP, but there are several that allow you to muck about in the opponent's deployment zone or center of board and just pull in VPs.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CC bs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th

And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.

By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.

Warriors are nice but didn't need to go up 5ppm on the most common loadout. And why would you take Lictors when you can take Rippers? All you get is the ability to perform actions. But honestly it's easier to remove Lictors than it is to remove Rippers, so I don't think that's a plus.

The fact that they can drop somewhere out of sight and repair a teleport homer is a big plus. Also, they have an innate reroll out of charge, which can many times be useful.

 Jidmah wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
I don't know what you are talking about. 6th edition KillaKanz and warbikers were the best, and in 7th they were just as amazing....ohh wait. you are right

Kanz were a top competitive choice during 5th and slightly worse in 6th due to the loss of the cover rules for shooting through squad members. They were completely obliterated in the 7th edition codex for that.

Granted going from 7th into 8th they didn't nerf that much except for boyz because honestly, orkz were about the worst army in the game in 7th.

So how about power klaws, da lucky stikk, MANz missiles, supa-cybork, mega-force field, exhaust cloud and Thrakka?

Also lobbas and deffkoptas were pretty good in 7th, now a legend unit and a sub-optimal one that has lost almost all the options it could take for customization. Not to mention that all the most competitive HQs of 7th edition were completely squatted when the 8th edition codex was released: biker boss, warboss in megarmor, big mek on bike, painboy on bike. Only the biker boss is alive for now, but it's has been relegated into an odd FW unit.

edit wrong thread

 Jidmah wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

Granted going from 7th into 8th they didn't nerf that much except for boyz because honestly, orkz were about the worst army in the game in 7th.

So how about power klaws, da lucky stikk, MANz missiles, supa-cybork, mega-force field, exhaust cloud and Thrakka?

LMAO! I had completely forgotten those nerfs. Granted I thought MANz missiles were overated and never used Ghaz but the rest were pretty good. But those were the cherries on top of the turd sundae that was the 7th Edition Ork Codex.

Spoletta wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CC bs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th

And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.

By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.

Interesting points Spoletta. The changes do make MORE sense than a lot may initially have thought, but they also still don’t make a lot of sense in many cases. Tervigon, Haruspex, etc? Genestealers didn’t need a 3 pt bump imo altho I can see why GW might have thought that... but yeah the pts changes for Nids aren’t entirely unreasonably at all

 Kanluwen wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The only reason I used mathhammer was because it helps create realistic expectations of what we can see on the table.

And I used those numbers for morale because they were nice and round and in both cases the unit was auto-failing morale checks. I was doing quick math in my head, not trying to spend more hours crunching numbers on morale.

And that's the whole issue for me.

You didn't factor those numbers in to start with. You had to use "quick math in your head", rather than having incorporated those numbers in the first place while espousing how great the numbers are...and even then you chose two wildly different platforms to compare rather than using the same for both!

A Wyvern and its 4(minimum of all 1s vs sub-6 models or assuming you roll a 1 plus you get the 3 'free' shots for targeting a 6+ model unit) 3+D6(assuming you're targeting a 6+ model unit) to 24 shots(rolling all 6s or targeting an 11+ model unit) vs a Leman Russ and its 1-3-6 shots is a huge difference to be seeing when comparing a sub-6 model unit, a 6-10 model unit, and an 11+ model unit.

I understand that you can't necessarily math out every single exchange and that obviously you use averages, but that your averages didn't work out the morale bit to start with? It's silly when presenting it as the "end all, be all".

Sorry to drag this one up but it's incorrect, a wyvern doesn't magically generate +3 shots for targeting a 6+ unit, it actually makes no difference to the wyvern. It's minimum number of shots is 4 right up to 11 model units when it jumps to 24.

Dudeface wrote:
Sorry to drag this one up but it's incorrect, a wyvern doesn't magically generate +3 shots for targeting a 6+ unit, it actually makes no difference to the wyvern. It's minimum number of shots is 4 right up to 11 model units when it jumps to 24.

Part of me thinks that they meant the rule to be per die. That's not what they wrote though. The Wyvern would be scary with minimum 12 shots against 6-10 models.

 Trickstick wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Sorry to drag this one up but it's incorrect, a wyvern doesn't magically generate +3 shots for targeting a 6+ unit, it actually makes no difference to the wyvern. It's minimum number of shots is 4 right up to 11 model units when it jumps to 24.

Part of me thinks that they meant the rule to be per die. That's not what they wrote though. The Wyvern would be scary with minimum 12 shots against 6-10 models.

Per die would give the Thunderfire 12 shots against 6+ model units which would be stupid broken for it's points.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Sorry to drag this one up but it's incorrect, a wyvern doesn't magically generate +3 shots for targeting a 6+ unit, it actually makes no difference to the wyvern. It's minimum number of shots is 4 right up to 11 model units when it jumps to 24.

Part of me thinks that they meant the rule to be per die. That's not what they wrote though. The Wyvern would be scary with minimum 12 shots against 6-10 models.

Per die would give the Thunderfire 12 shots against 6+ model units which would be stupid broken for it's points.

Yup, would only work for d6. Same with how plasma cannons get full shots at 6+ models now. You would need a slightly more complex system, like "minimum half rounding down/up" or something, and more complex rules bring their own problems.

Dudeface wrote:

Sorry to drag this one up but it's incorrect, a wyvern doesn't magically generate +3 shots for targeting a 6+ unit, it actually makes no difference to the wyvern. It's minimum number of shots is 4 right up to 11 model units when it jumps to 24.

If a Blast weapon targets a unit that has between 6 and 10 models, it always makes a minimum of 3 attacks So if, when determining how many attacks are made with that weapon, the dice rolled results in less than 3 attacks being made, make 3 attacks instead For example, if a Grenade D6 weapon with the Blast rule targets a unit that has 6 or more models, and you roll a 2 to determine how many attacks are made, that roll is counted as being a 3 and that weapon makes three attacks against that unit

That's the 'long-form' version of the rule.

Blast Weapons: Minimum three attacks against units with 6+ models. Always make maximum number of attacks against units with 11+ models.

This is the 'bullet-point' version of the rule.

I'll totally agree this is something that is worth bringing up for a FAQ...but as of right now, what you posted is essentially what I said.

A Wyvern and its 4(minimum of all 1s vs sub-6 models or assuming you roll a 1 plus you get the 3 'free' shots for targeting a 6+ model unit) 3+D6(assuming you're targeting a 6+ model unit) to 24 shots(rolling all 6s or targeting an 11+ model unit)

It's messy as hell for the way it's worded but given that it just says "Minimum three attacks against units with 6+ models"? That's what I used for my 3 'free' shots and the assumption of rolling a 1 on your fourth D6.

AFAIK, you don't cease to roll for these shots. You're just cutting out the ability to get less than 3 shots minimum...which poses its own set of craziness when you get above 3D6 attacks for weapons.

Given that 4>3, Dudeface would be correct in saying that the rule has no impact on the Wyvern as things stand.

For attacks at targets with 6-10 models, it looks like weapons using a single d3 don't need to roll, but everything else does. If the total number of shots rolled is less than 3 - impossible for the Wyvern, given 4d6 - you increase that total to 3. At no point are you removing any of the dice before the roll and replacing them with a 3, as you appear to be implying.

I would say that a multiple dice weapon example would really have helped there, in addition to the Grenade D6 example given.

I do think you could've formatted your sentence about shot counts a bit better in the post Dudeface was quoting, though, Kan - I was going to comment on it yesterday, but gave up trying to parse it after a while.

I'm mathly challenged and that was the only way it was making sense to me, so I typed it as it was. Numbers and me get along about as well as...two things that really don't get along. It's a big part of why I dislike people hucking spreadsheets my way to showcase "efficiency". I'm not a robot, don't expect me to know these things!

Like I said though, I would definitely agree this is a thing that should get addressed in the FAQ.

Spoletta wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CC bs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th

And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.

By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.

I am really looking forward to using my Warriors in 9th. The only thing that bugs me is that I'll be penalized for running units larger than 5 because of Blast. Maybe I'll run piles of units of 3, but that sounds pretty annoying too.

AFAIK, you don't cease to roll for these shots. You're just cutting out the ability to get less than 3 shots minimum...which poses its own set of craziness when you get above 3D6 attacks for weapons.

It does not cause any craziness. The blast rule is really clear. Against 6-10 models, you get minimum three for the _weapon_. 'Math' doesn't matter here. The number of dice rolled does not factor here. All blast weapons are simply given a minimum of 3 shots against 6-10 models.

The only way it would be weird is if there was a d2 blast weapon, as the blast rule would give it a third shot (from nowhere) against 6-10 models, and back down to 2 shots vs 11+.

So you do roll for the shots, but since a 4d6 (or more) weapon can't go below 4 (or thus, above the minimum of 3 vs 6-10 models), it never actually matters.

Voss wrote:

AFAIK, you don't cease to roll for these shots. You're just cutting out the ability to get less than 3 shots minimum...which poses its own set of craziness when you get above 3D6 attacks for weapons.

It does not. The blast rule is really clear. Against 6-10 models, you get minimum three for the _weapon_. The number of dice does not factor in any way at all. 'Math' doesn't matter here. The number of dice rolled does not factor here. All blast weapons are simply given a minimum of 3 shots against 6-10 models.

The only way it would be weird is if there was a d2 blast weapon, as the blast rule would give it a third shot (from nowhere) against 6-10 models, and back down to 2 shots vs 11+.

So you do roll for the shots, but since a 4d6 (or more) weapon can't go below 4 (or thus, above the minimum of 3 vs 6-10 models), it never actually matters.

I quoted the whole of the rule in a post.

Yes, it's clear that you make a minimum of 3 attacks...and then it goes on to give this:

Warhammer 40,000 Core Rules wrote:If a Blast weapon targets a unit that has between 6 and 10 models, it always makes a minimum of 3 attacks So if, when determining how many attacks are made with that weapon, the dice rolled results in less than 3 attacks being made, make 3 attacks instead.

For example, if a Grenade D6 weapon with the Blast rule targets a unit that has 6 or more models, and you roll a 2 to determine how many attacks are made, that roll is counted as being a 3 and that weapon makes three attacks against that unit

I agree that the rule is really clear...when we're talking about a single instance of a D6 being rolled. If we go off of that bit though, these kinds of cornercase <Insert Number Here>D6 weapons might be dealing their minimum damage in multiples of 3 vs 6-10 models.

Because it actually says "the dice rolled results in less than 3 attacks being made", which seems to be suggesting that you're not simply granting 3 attacks minimum, you're altering the values of the rolled dice to be a 3.

I'm inclined to agree with the idea of it being 4 minimum--but that's because like you said, you'd still roll and effectively it never becomes different at the 6-10 bracket.