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.

Interesting is not the word i would use. the word i would use would be

Walker vehicles can run...!

Woop-di freaking do. we have walkers that cannot hold objective, cost more, shoot less, need to hug terrain to survive....oh and they can run and not shoot or assault.....not really worth it for an extra d6 of movement.

Fast vehicles have been slowed down,

Slowed down, nuetered and made more fragile.

Total Annihilation gives one the fewest points for destroying Troops. One will want to go after the non troop choices to gain the most points.

Ignore his troops , the opponant takes more objectives and wins by default. VP won't really matter.

What is the status of Ordinance in the new book, can it be fired in addition to other weapons? Will Leman Russ Sponsons have any purpose, especially the heavy flamer ones? I suppose the same goes for the briefly excellent Baal Predator.

Pretty much covered under the basic rule-move 6" fire one gun above S4 and nothing else save S4 or less guns, or fire ordinance and nothing else.

So no sponson weapons are worthless unless you intend to sit still, which incidently under the new rules you will be doing as your big scary armored vehicle hides for its life in area terrain to get cover saves.

Quite a interesting thread. Most of it is offbase, but whatever talk is always good even when the underlying presumptions are incorrect.

Here's the problem with most of what you are discussing.

From 1st edition through 4th edition, I've always refused to play by GW's slowed ruleset and instead played by my own. It's given me constant success, and until the design studio understands that players cannot be railroaded into doing what they've been told to, it will continue to bring me success through 5th and 6th editions.

Only a new style of 40k, one based around a standard mission with small tweaks to said mission, will change the way I play.

The way I play is to beat my opponents army. Then worry about 'objectives'. I'm very successful in shooting away the other guys army. I used to be very successful in assaulting it away, but the design studio didn't like that so they nerfed it and I adapted to shooting. The planned changes will make shooting even more devastating, with the tweak that every army will play like the Tau--if you shoot well, you'll suck in CC and if the other guy can get to you, you'll suffer for daring to be so good at shooting.

Problem is without Escalation, the game will be even easier to dominate with a huge shooting list because assault troops won't be given any real advantage. What, you think 'running' is it? Let me show you my fast vehicles I will suicide into your army to prevent you from running. I mean, marching. Putting Fantasy rules into 40K is what got 2nd edition such high praise (I find it funny that sooo many people remember 2nd edition fondly--must be all Eldar players cause 2nd edition was pure sh*t), oh right 2nd edition was a junk ruleset cobbled together and it took 3rd, 3.5, and 4th edition to finally make the game playable.

Alot of you guys seem to think these new rules or the new scenarios are well thought out. They aren't. Far from it, in fact. There are so many flaws and ways to abuse the current playtest rules I can't even begin to playtest them.

A FOW scenario system with a different system than IGOYOUGO is something GW needs to consider.

The endless nerfbat reactionary game design is just annoying people to no end.

All I can tell you is, the new ruleset is a lark. It's got so many gimmicks to slow gameplay down, the 10 year olds are going to quit. Which, in my view, is a good thing.

I really can't wait for the first set of tournament games where the other guy thinks he has it all wrapped up with his 'balanced' army and I win via VP's.

Oh well. As things change, they stay the same.

Alot of talk for very little actual change.

Absolutely no innovation, and fun to be found nowhere.

I can only hope the Apoc amendments don't make it into the ruleset, because alot of you will be very upset if they do.

I also hope the date of 2009 is held to, so they can get more results in from playtesters outside of the UK.

Mughi3:

Total Annihilation gives one the fewest points for destroying Troops. One will want to go after the non troop choices to gain the most points.

Ignore his troops , the opponant takes more objectives and wins by default. VP won't really matter.


I don't think you understand the mission Total Annihilation. The objective is to kill your opponent's army, plain and simple. Each Elite, Fast Attack and HS unit is worth 2 points if destroyed or broken; HQ's worth 3 points and Troops worth 1 point. If, at the end of the game, it is a draw, then you go to VP's.

the 1,2 and 3 vp puts an emphasis on highpoint squads instead of multiple scoring units. Now a squad of 3 speeders gives 1/3 the vps as 3 squads of 1 speeder. It certainly makes point cost less important. Maybe this is to combat min/maxing? Now I think we'll start to see things like 20 man plague marine squads and Orks will be out of control. Congrats! You just killed did 31 wounds to my 250 squad, here's your 1 vp.

Does anyone know the specifics on marching vs. fleeting? I'm dying to know.

-Leo037

A unit wishing to run forfeits shooting: roll a d6 and move that amount in inches during the shooting phase. (just like the current Fleet rules)

However, those units may not launch assaults.

Models with Fleet give the same movement, but are allowed to launch an assault.

So fleet gets 2d6 if they don't assault?

-Leo037

Under the new rules the Leman russ seems to be slightly improved. It never relied upon special rules to make enemy's weapons glance, assault cannons are a much reduced threat vs. its high front armour and Ordinance seems to have lost its penalty to hit for moving. Cover now negates hits on a 5+ (or more) instead of causing glancing hits on a 4+.

Offensively the battle cannon now has a larger effective area as partials are gone and still has two dice of penetrating power.

The non-ordinance Leman russ variants are however totally boned.

Cypher: No. Think of it this way: all the infantry (not sure about monstrous creatures) can forfeit shooting to move an extra d6" in the shooting phase. However you can not launch an assault unless you have the 'Fleet' special rule.

No 2d6

The non-ordinance Leman russ variants are however totally boned.

Pretty much any tank with more than 1 gun is boned. welcome back to 3rd edition pillboxes er i mean tanks

I don't think you understand the mission Total Annihilation. The objective is to kill your opponent's army, plain and simple. Each Elite, Fast Attack and HS unit is worth 2 points if destroyed or broken; HQ's worth 3 points and Troops worth 1 point. If, at the end of the game, it is a draw, then you go to VP's

I understand that just fine. it's a meat grinder. i also understand that other missions require objective capturing.

hey mughi3 time to model sandbags on my tanks lol hey check your PM

something i just realised-
1k sons armies and death guard armies are going to own in 5th edition. they are heavily troop based and resilant as hell.

hey mughi3 time to model sandbags on my tanks

yeah for those of us mobility and vehicle lovers 5th edition is

I just wish they would hurry up and come out with 5th edition. Just so threads with rumours can finally be killed off

mughi3 wrote:

The non-ordinance Leman russ variants are however totally boned.

Pretty much any tank with more than 1 gun is boned. welcome back to 3rd edition pillboxes er i mean tanks

Why does everybody keep saying that?

Did anybody here actually *play* 3rd Edition?

In 3rd Edition, Ordnance was move-or-fire.

In 5th Edition, Ordnance is very different, and *much* improved from a rules perspective as they're must less exotic / arcane and more "ordinary".

From what I can see, "Ordnance" is merely a (Large) Blast weapon. So you place and scatter just like a Frag missile. Ordnance can't fire other weapons, and usually scatters a bit farther on the move (max of 2d6), but it's definitely move-and-fire. Direct Ordnance fires on the move, as only Ordnance Barrage is move-or-shoot.

So I don't see any real changes to my Russes at all.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

mughi3 wrote:

The non-ordinance Leman russ variants are however totally boned.

Pretty much any tank with more than 1 gun is boned. welcome back to 3rd edition pillboxes er i mean tanks

Why does everybody keep saying that?

Did anybody here actually *play* 3rd Edition?

In 3rd Edition, Ordnance was move-or-fire.

In 5th Edition, Ordnance is very different, and *much* improved from a rules perspective as they're must less exotic / arcane and more "ordinary".

From what I can see, "Ordnance" is merely a (Large) Blast weapon. So you place and scatter just like a Frag missile. Ordnance can't fire other weapons, and usually scatters a bit farther on the move (max of 2d6), but it's definitely move-and-fire. Direct Ordnance fires on the move, as only Ordnance Barrage is move-or-shoot.

So I don't see any real changes to my Russes at all.

I say it because i did play 3rd.

These rules affect more than just ordinance on tanks. look at the big picture.
if your a hammerhead, falcon, predator, and yes leman russ (if the cannon is blown off)-moves it basically looses it effective firepower by half or more.

So the only way for them to stay effective units will be for them to stay(or the equivalent of) immobile.

The only exception to this will be the land raider thanks to the machine spirit, although aside from the crusader even they loose some firepower.

not that its going to matter much when almost no area terrain will block LOS. it is a return to the static stand off armies of 3rd edition.

The effective game becomes-i stand here, you stand there. we shoot at each other until we get our assault units into your lines or march some unit off to take an objective.

JohnHwangDD: Actually the more I read these rules the more vindicated I feel about the vehicle configurations I chose. Certainly I've never regretted leaving the sponsons off my Leman Russ, but I think I'm going to feel somewhat smug about it in the coming months. While I had a bone to pick with the 3rd edition of 40k (gave up on 40k until half-way through 4th) I never had problems with moving vehicles, particularly my tanks. Shoot and scoot is my plan. The changes to Ordnance and Blast weapons is pretty exciting. Perhaps we'll see a resurgence in Plasma Cannons?

Nurglitch wrote:JohnHwangDD: Actually the more I read these rules the more vindicated I feel about the vehicle configurations I chose. Certainly I've never regretted leaving the sponsons off my Leman Russ, but I think I'm going to feel somewhat smug about it in the coming months. While I had a bone to pick with the 3rd edition of 40k (gave up on 40k until half-way through 4th) I never had problems with moving vehicles, particularly my tanks. Shoot and scoot is my plan. The changes to Ordnance and Blast weapons is pretty exciting. Perhaps we'll see a resurgence in Plasma Cannons?

I'm not sure. I've been using a 4x Plasma Cannon Dev Squad through all of 4th. They're pretty decent - place the template and multiply. Under 5th they scatter away from the squad and the extra templates go randomly around that random spot. Sure, that's great if you're fighting Orks, but that's not what you use Plasma Cannons against anyway. It seems that they'll be considerably less effective against Marines, Terminators and other small units which they'd frequently completely whiff against.

Though I do like how there's a trade off - if you're densely packed there's a better chance of completely avoiding the template, but if you are hit, you'll take more damage.

Many gamers here never put sponsons on their Russ. I'm not sure why it's something to feel smug about. I suppose I could feel smug about my Tri-Lascannon Annihilator because those poor rubes that did TL-LC + HBs thinking they'd be able to move are getting a rude awakening, but I don't.

Oh sure, there's plenty of stuff around that people like to use and is pretty dang effective. Plasma Cannons are one of them. The thing is that there's also what we might call a public perception (or maybe just an Internet perception) that certain things are not 'competitive' or 'top tier'. The trick of designing a Warhammer game seems to be not to balance the actual game, but to balance it in the eyes of those who think the game begins and ends with army selection.

As for smugness, well, since you're not me it's quite reasonable that you wouldn't understand why I might feel somewhat smug about the lack of sponsons. If I said it's something that people in general should feel somewhat smug about, rather than just a personal thing, then maybe your uncertainly about why would be understandable. But I don't pretend my personal feelings on the matter should be shared by everyone, just shared with everyone.

Considering the following changes in the rumoured 5th rules:
1) Tanks will be harder to kill, especially in cover
2) Tanks need to sit still in order to fire all their S5+ weapons
3) Transports will rarely damage their occupants when destroyed

I wonder if it might actually be viable for an IG infantry squad to sit in its Chimera and fire out the hatch?


Chimera, Multilaser, HHB, PHS in 4+ cover, with 10 IG (lascannon, special weapon(?)). The Chimera puts out 9 shots at 36" range, the lascannon shoots out the top hatch at a different target within 48", and the 6 Chimera lasguns fire 6 flashlight shots at 24".

Multiply by 6+ for a fully mechanized army, add a few pie plates from Heavy Support...that's not bad. Especially against Ork Hordes. Any Chimeras still standing can zoom up to the objectives tank-shocking any infantry remaining, and dump off their troops in turn 5. Disembarked squads could run (though they'd have to be *far* from any assaulters).

S8 weapon hits will only glance 1/12, pen 1/6 of the time due to cover saves; and less than S6 weapons are completely useless against the army. Of course, once glanced/penned the Chimeras will be destroyed easier due to the +1 for open-topped - but anything other than destroyed doesn't really do much (Immobilize prevents the objective drop-off rush, but as long as a few are mobile it's ok - the others aren't moving anyways; Weapon Destroyed has three weapons to work through; Stunned/Shaken would severely reduce the firepower but doesn't prevent the squad inside from firing its heavy and the hull lasguns (and Stunned/Shaken is less likely to occur with the +1 for Open Topped).

S9 weapons would be more problematic, but the new codices are allowing fewer lascannons and the 4+ save works just fine against LC hits too. As long as there was sufficient target saturation (7+ vehicles) it might work somewhat.
Platoon Command squads could easily hide behind the Chimeras and rush out with 4 Flamers when assaulters get too close...

Hmmm....

I have a couple of Leman Russ with no sponsons that I was going to upgrade. I don't think I'll bother now.

I wonder if the Conqueror will find a niche in 5th edition. It has a blast weapon so it will always hit something and a co-axial Stormbolter an the option of another Stormbolter or a Stubber.

It's the players with heavy flamer sponsons that are hit hardest by the new rules with the Heavy Flamer's pitiful 8" range.

they need to make Defence weapons S5 or S6 becasue if they don't this well slow tanks down i like my tanks to move and shoot

mughi3 wrote:if your a hammerhead, falcon, predator, and yes leman russ (if the cannon is blown off)-moves it basically looses it effective firepower by half or more.

The only exception to this will be the land raider thanks to the machine spirit, although aside from the crusader even they loose some firepower.

The Falcon is Fast, so it can move up to 6" without losing any firepower.

An Russ without Ordnance and a Rail-less RailHead serves no purpose but to Tank Shock.

And it's good that the Land Raider Machine Spirit finally means something.

JohnHwangDD wrote:The Falcon is Fast, so it can move up to 6" without losing any firepower.

If by fast you mean it moves the speed of infantry, then yes, a falcon is fast. Oh wait, they also added forced march. So fast vehicles are slower than basic infantry if they want to shoot.

JohnHwangDD wrote:An Russ without Ordnance and a Rail-less RailHead serves no purpose but to Tank Shock.

Which is why they normally carry back up weapon systems like 3x heavy bolters. Not anymore..


Vehicles are dead.

Hammerheads can get a target lock that lets them shoot as if they were "Fast".

Strangelooper wrote:I wonder if it might actually be viable for an IG infantry squad to sit in its Chimera and fire out the hatch?

It's about the same.

If the Chimera is closed-top, then when it explodes, the Guardsmen take S4 hits, rather than being wounded on a 4+. So 10 Guardsmen take 7 wounds instead of 5 wounds, for at least 2 dead instead of almost 2 dead. 1/3 Explode, 2/3 Wounded = 22%.

If the Chimera is Open-Topped from shooting, then it explodes 1/2 the time instead of 1/3 the time. But you don't lose as many guys from the S3 hits. 1/2 Explode, 1/2 Wounded = 25%, so it's slightly (1/36) worse.

I didnn't put sponsons on my Russes because I think they look bad. With an Alpha-style hull, Russes are almost acceptable-looking. But for sponsons to work, they will need a new tank hull.

IntoTheRain wrote:If by fast you mean it moves the speed of infantry, then yes, a falcon is fast. Oh wait, they also added forced march. So fast vehicles are slower than basic infantry if they want to shoot.

Full-Shoot Tanks are slower than full-Move Infantry? I fail to understand why that should be a problem. To me, it seems like good design balance.

Which is why they normally carry back up weapon systems like 3x heavy bolters. Not anymore..

Who does that? Sponsons have always been wasted points.

Name one modern tank that cannot move and fire its weapons.

So you feel 2 heavy bolters for 10 points is a bad deal? Please, enlighten us as to what you think is a good deal.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Strangelooper wrote:I wonder if it might actually be viable for an IG infantry squad to sit in its Chimera and fire out the hatch?

It's about the same.

If the Chimera is closed-top, then when it explodes, the Guardsmen take S4 hits, rather than being wounded on a 4+. So 10 Guardsmen take 7 wounds instead of 5 wounds, for at least 2 dead instead of almost 2 dead. 1/3 Explode, 2/3 Wounded = 22%.

If the Chimera is Open-Topped from shooting, then it explodes 1/2 the time instead of 1/3 the time. But you don't lose as many guys from the S3 hits. 1/2 Explode, 1/2 Wounded = 25%, so it's slightly (1/36) worse.

I thought explode was only on a penetrating 6 (or penetrating 5-6 if opentopped). So it's more like 1/6 explode, 2/3 Wounded = 11% vs 1/3 explode, 1/2 Wounded = 17%. Then half all of those for the 4+ cover save to give 6.5% and 8.3%...


Another thought I had about the implication of the rumoured 5th ed rules: Tyranid Warriors FTW!!!

Warriors can wade around behind/in swarms of gaunts, gaining a 4+ cover save and shooting over them. With Deathspitters (I know, no one uses them in 4th ed) you don't even need to upgrade the BS of the Warriors. Don't have my codex here, but a Warrior with Toxin Sacs, Deathspitter and ST will be pretty cheap. A nice barrage of 3 or more S6 blasts coming out over top of the gaunts will be sweet. Dakkafexi average what, 6 hits at S6 with reroll to wound for 113 points? 3 Warriors with TS, DS, ST will probably touch about 6 models with a barrage on average, at least against hordes. Though they don't get the reroll to-wound, I'm betting they'll cost less than 113 points. And the AP is better on a Deathspitter.

The SpitWarrior, you heard it here first!

JohnHwangDD wrote:Full-Shoot Tanks are slower than full-Move Infantry? I fail to understand why that should be a problem. To me, it seems like good design balance.

You'd need to be almost completely ignorant of military history to think that tanks would move slower than infantry over open ground. You'd also need to be massively ignorant to think that firing a cannon prevents the other weapons on the tank from firing.

Who does that? Sponsons have always been wasted points.

Sponsons and pintle mounted weapons are only wasted points because the rules don't let all guns on the tank fire at the same time and at independent targets. They are useless only because the rules make them useless.

40k isn't military history. It's military science-fantasy draped over a game; what real tanks do is irrelevant to what they do in the game. Here's where I'd add something insulting about people who thought otherwise, but that would just be crude.

I'll also point out that sponson mounted weapons and pintle mounted weapons will definitely not be useless if the .pdf is any indication. Sponson weapons can still be used at a stop and nothing prevents a vehicle from shooting and scooting, rather than grinding along firing every turn. Pintle-mounted weapons, and additional weapons like hunter-killer missiles, I believe, will be able to fire in addition to the standard complement of weapons on a vehicle.