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.

 Palindrome wrote:
It just wouldn't work within 40ks rules, there is far too much emphasis placed on squad upgrades so somthing as relatively weak as a heavy stubber would only work if it was optional and free.

There is another option though, Rogue Trader has the Echon pattern assault stubber, a cut down heavy stubber that is used as a personal weapon. I could see special units armed with these weapons (something along the lines of an assault 3 autogun) instead of lasguns.

What's the point?

There's already "assault lasguns" that are more powerful. They're called Hellguns.

And I refuse to acknowledge anyone saying they're called "Hot-shot Lasguns". That sounds like something from a GI Joe cartoon.

 Kanluwen wrote:

What's the point?

There's already "assault lasguns" that are more powerful. They're called Hellguns.

And I refuse to acknowledge anyone saying they're called "Hot-shot Lasguns". That sounds like something from a GI Joe cartoon.

1. variety

2. Completely different effect and usage.

3. They used to be Hotshot lasguns, now a hotshot pack simply makes indivial shots more powerful while degrading the weapon.

My Hotshot Company led by General Hotshot Hogan swear by their hot shot lasguns.

You say "something from a GI Joe cartoon" as though its a bad thing...

 Palindrome wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

What's the point?

There's already "assault lasguns" that are more powerful. They're called Hellguns.

And I refuse to acknowledge anyone saying they're called "Hot-shot Lasguns". That sounds like something from a GI Joe cartoon.

1. variety

2. Compeltely different effect and usage.

3. They used to be Hotshot lasguns, now a hotshot pack simply makes indivial shots more.

If people can't justify using Stormtroopers now, who pack Hellguns(which are NOT the same thing as "Hot-Shot" Lasguns--which are just Lasguns packing a "Hot-Shot" power cell), who can be able to justify using a gimmicky unit packing Stubbers?

Variety is all well and good, but throwing more options in for the sake of throwing more options in when you could actually work off the existing options is silly.

I could very well see Hellguns becoming more widespread though. Veterans could easily be given them as part of the "Carapace" upgrade.

I think they changed it because HELLgun wasn't christian enough.

 Kanluwen wrote:

If people can't justify using Stormtroopers now,

Blame GW and its usual inability to cost and balance things correctly. There is nothing at all wrong with variety.

Didn't I just say what a hotshot pack is?

I remember it being a power pack with some sort of plasma in it to make the shots more powerful, mostly reserved for the long las.

I wouldn't worry too much about Stormies. They've never had good rules. Never. GW is as consistent with giving Stormies bad rules as they are with calling them Storm Troopers (rather than Stormtroopers). If they get good rules it'll be amazing.

 Swastakowey wrote:

As to wheels over tracks, well I. Disagree.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/2wheels98.pdf

This should help you out, wheels are better on road and are cheaper, thats why my country and its tiny arsenal of LAVs all use tyres. As we dont plan on going to war or paying much for our vehicles.

Well, read your source. It states that to benefit from the advantages the vehicle should be heavier than 20 tons.

Army studies unanimously conclude that a tracked configuration is the optimal solution for tactical, high-mobility roles (off-road usage greater than 60 percent), gross vehicle weights in excess of 20 tons,...

So yes, for MBT and heavy tanks there is no alternative to tracks but for APCs, such as the chimera, which is a mediocre-armed troop carrier, wheels are much better. Case in point: BTR-90. Weights ~ 20 tons, swims, 100 km/h cross-country speed possible, jumping height of I think 130 cm (that is, the vehicle can drive over a "step" with 1,30m and differential drive (means it can turn on the spot like a tank). It even looks a bit like a chimera, though GW clearly copied the BMP design for them. Try to get these results with a tracked vehicle.

So what's the current rumor on the new stuff IG gets? I find the first post awfully confusing.

A new veteran/stormtroopers kit, plastic ogryns, and what else?

 Therion wrote:
So what's the current rumor on the new stuff IG gets? I find the first post awfully confusing.

A new veteran/stormtroopers kit, plastic ogryns, and what else?

100+ pages of wish-listing......

 Kosake wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

As to wheels over tracks, well I. Disagree.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/2wheels98.pdf

This should help you out, wheels are better on road and are cheaper, thats why my country and its tiny arsenal of LAVs all use tyres. As we dont plan on going to war or paying much for our vehicles.

Well, read your source. It states that to benefit from the advantages the vehicle should be heavier than 20 tons.

Army studies unanimously conclude that a tracked configuration is the optimal solution for tactical, high-mobility roles (off-road usage greater than 60 percent), gross vehicle weights in excess of 20 tons,...

So yes, for MBT and heavy tanks there is no alternative to tracks but for APCs, such as the chimera, which is a mediocre-armed troop carrier, wheels are much better. Case in point: BTR-90. Weights ~ 20 tons, swims, 100 km/h cross-country speed possible, jumping height of I think 130 cm (that is, the vehicle can drive over a "step" with 1,30m and differential drive (means it can turn on the spot like a tank). It even looks a bit like a chimera, though GW clearly copied the BMP design for them. Try to get these results with a tracked vehicle.

yea I know, but (I cant remember if it was in there) Tyres are very vulnerable to any type of weapon, greaty reducing its practicality if they get damaged. So chimeras riding towards enemy firing positions with tyres is not the best idea. On top of that who knows where the chimera will be fighting. Even see a digger with wheels? (here in NZ they all have tracks due to our dense forests). So in my opinion from reading around tracks are the "safe" option for the style of warfare in 40k as its gonna work on all terrain (even water... ) and tracks are a bit sturdier to against a lot of weapon types over tyres.

In saying that a tank with no tracks is stuck, a car with flat tyres can at least move.

I understand the benifits for both but I see tracks on a chimera designed to go anywhere in any situation as a more practical solution to tyres.

But im no military engineer/mechanic etc haha so its just opinion.

 Therion wrote:
So what's the current rumor on the new stuff IG gets? I find the first post awfully confusing.

A new veteran/stormtroopers kit, plastic ogryns, and what else?

Plastic Ogryn with some sort of assault shield option

Plastic stormtrooper/vet kit

Possibly new all in one artillery kit

Possibly adding FW units to codex like Thunderer and Destroyer

Possible name change

 BrookM wrote:
I think they changed it because HELLgun wasn't christian enough.

Has an entire faction based on what are essentially sex crazed homicidal legions from hell, A OK.

Hellguns, PROTECT THE CHITLINS!

Sounds about right

Truthfully I think the change was because they added the stupid "Hellrifle" to the armaments for the Inquisition.

There's more to it than that, but I don't think I'm allowed to say anything.

Suffice to say it, the Hot-Shot Lasgun never should've been removed and it's back for a reason.

 Kosake wrote:

So yes, for MBT and heavy tanks there is no alternative to tracks but for APCs, such as the chimera, which is a mediocre-armed troop carrier, wheels are much better. Case in point: BTR-90. Weights ~ 20 tons, swims, 100 km/h cross-country speed possible, jumping height of I think 130 cm (that is, the vehicle can drive over a "step" with 1,30m and differential drive (means it can turn on the spot like a tank). It even looks a bit like a chimera, though GW clearly copied the BMP design for them. Try to get these results with a tracked vehicle.

Damn Godless Commies stealing GW's IP for their military vehicles. Don't they have shame?

On topic how about a stubber for IG squads priced like the flamethrower or the GL?

M.

I think I'll go with Hot shot hellgun from now on.

Yes

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 Therion wrote:
So what's the current rumor on the new stuff IG gets? I find the first post awfully confusing.

A new veteran/stormtroopers kit, plastic ogryns, and what else?

Plastic Ogryn with some sort of assault shield option

Plastic stormtrooper/vet kit

Possibly new all in one artillery kit

Possibly adding FW units to codex like Thunderer and Destroyer

Possible name change

Ogryn I'm sure almost noone wants. Stormtroopers/vets are great and probably the most important kit in a long time. The all new tanks that already exist from Forgeworld of course are nearly useless, and I'm pretty surprised they're not adding anything actually new.

Why not give the model with the stubber the slow and purposeful rule, so he can be more mobile but he slows the squad down still. That way its an in between support weapon crewed by one guy.

A special weapon that gives THE USER slow and purposeful.

I cant see any holes in that one but who knows, its 40k

 Swastakowey wrote:
Why not give the model with the stubber the slow and purposeful rule, so he can be more mobile but he slows the squad down still. That way its an in between support weapon crewed by one guy.

A special weapon that gives THE USER slow and purposeful.

I cant see any holes in that one but who knows, its 40k

Why does this have to be so complicated?

Just use the cultist rules for one.

5pts. Heavy 3. One man. Takes up special weapon slot. Might be fun to stick in a cheap meatshield platoon of guardsmen in low points games. Pretty much pointless, but would be fun to model.

Because I want a mobile machine gun, not a weak half heavy bolter lol.

Its not complicated to know that your squad cant run or over run but can move and fire its stubber. (in my opinion).

 Swastakowey wrote:
Because I want a mobile machine gun, not a weak half heavy bolter lol.

Its not complicated to know that your squad cant run or over run but can move and fire its stubber. (in my opinion).

It is mobile, you'll just be hitting on 6's.

Honestly you could just make it assault 3 and at 5pts it still wouldn't be broken.

Also, you'd be having a single special weapon out of several choices that doesn't just affect the guy carrying it but the entire squad. Giving an entire squad Slow and purposeful can have some unintended side effects (If I remember correctly, a single model having Slow and Purposeful gives the rule to the entire squad, similar to stubborn) Suddenly your IG platoon would be able to fire all it's heavy weapons at full ROF on the move with 0 penalties.

That's why it would be too complicated. It would open up the door to a lot of shenanigans and honestly, if a massive heavy weapon like a lascannon doesn't slow a squad down, why on earth would a single stubber do so?

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Because I want a mobile machine gun, not a weak half heavy bolter lol.

Its not complicated to know that your squad cant run or over run but can move and fire its stubber. (in my opinion).

It is mobile, you'll just be hitting on 6's.

Honestly you could just make it assault 3 and at 5pts it still wouldn't be broken.

I wouldnt mind that either.

 alarmingrick wrote:

 Therion wrote:
So what's the current rumor on the new stuff IG gets? I find the first post awfully confusing.

A new veteran/stormtroopers kit, plastic ogryns, and what else?

100+ pages of wish-listing......

Exalted!
Simple, plain and true answer! Well done!

 Therion wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 Therion wrote:
So what's the current rumor on the new stuff IG gets? I find the first post awfully confusing.

A new veteran/stormtroopers kit, plastic ogryns, and what else?

Plastic Ogryn with some sort of assault shield option

Plastic stormtrooper/vet kit

Possibly new all in one artillery kit

Possibly adding FW units to codex like Thunderer and Destroyer

Possible name change

Ogryn I'm sure almost noone wants. Stormtroopers/vets are great and probably the most important kit in a long time. The all new tanks that already exist from Forgeworld of course are nearly useless, and I'm pretty surprised they're not adding anything actually new.

I want affordable(points cost) Ogryn in the worst way. Commissar Yarrick Rollin deep with a unit of Ogryn is a dream of mine. Plus, I'm workin on a themed army that they would fit so well in.

Also bring back stormbolter to officier/commissar armory please

Mods. Can we please have one thread for actual news, and another for wishlists.

Is it certain about the sentinels being the same regardless of armor or not? That's kind of a bummer for me.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Is it certain about the sentinels being the same regardless of armor or not? That's kind of a bummer for me.

I'm currently building 9 Armored Sentinels--so naturally the new book will make them far far inferior to what they are now.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
Is it certain about the sentinels being the same regardless of armor or not? That's kind of a bummer for me.

I'm currently building 9 Armored Sentinels--so naturally the new book will make them far far inferior to what they are now.

I too can vouch for the Sentinwall, it is truly a glorious sight to behold!

A glorious, glorious, fragile sight to behold!