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.

Technically not 'always' fixed. RT/2nd did not.

Ghorros wrote:

The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.

Exalted, best narrative ever. A complete story of this situation needs to be written for 4chan.

I like it. Need to see how the rest of the rules play but this way of handling large models seems very promising. Time to dust off those devastators!

 oldzoggy wrote:

 ProwlerPC wrote:
8 inches is better then 6 at least. When it mentions how it's end life is that of a seMI mobile shooting fortress I wonder if it will allow transported models to shoot out in some capacity this time. Sounds like assaulting after disembarking from transports will be the norm so at least that solved the Naught's curious lack of assault transport rules in 7th. So far it looks good.

Forgot about that one it might actually be a viable transport now.

It would be really funny if they could be taken as dedicated transports for certain units.

One interesting thought. One of the big draws of the morkanaut over the gorkanaut was it used a blast template so it was much easier for orks to hit. I know that flamer templates are confirmed gone, but what about blast templates? If blast templates are truly gone, it will be much harder for the morkanaut to hit anything. Will this make the gorkanaut more viable?

 Vitali Advenil wrote:
One interesting thought. One of the big draws of the morkanaut over the gorkanaut was it used a blast template so it was much easier for orks to hit. I know that flamer templates are confirmed gone, but what about blast templates? If blast templates are truly gone, it will be much harder for the morkanaut to hit anything. Will this make the gorkanaut more viable?

It would probably make it do 2d6 hits

 TheLumberJack wrote:

 Vitali Advenil wrote:
One interesting thought. One of the big draws of the morkanaut over the gorkanaut was it used a blast template so it was much easier for orks to hit. I know that flamer templates are confirmed gone, but what about blast templates? If blast templates are truly gone, it will be much harder for the morkanaut to hit anything. Will this make the gorkanaut more viable?

It would probably make it do 2d6 hits

So now it really is a baby Gargant.

 Vitali Advenil wrote:
One interesting thought. One of the big draws of the morkanaut over the gorkanaut was it used a blast template so it was much easier for orks to hit. I know that flamer templates are confirmed gone, but what about blast templates? If blast templates are truly gone, it will be much harder for the morkanaut to hit anything. Will this make the gorkanaut more viable?

I'm also really curious about blast templates.

I think they represent blasts in AoS in different ways, but also certain weapons get a bonus to hit for every ten models in a unit. That could help make up for orky accuracy. On the other hand, the KMK hasn't traditionally been meant to wipe out hordes, so who knows.

I'm curious to see if they give the Morkanaut a "Gaze of Mork" type of weapon. I don't have my ork codex in front of me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure it didn't have one despite the model having what appears to be a weapon coming out of one eye.

Now if you want to not be ...some people...and talk about an actual issue that has arisen from this system and could be an problem if not properly handled(but isn't yet something we should worry about too much) The damage table CAN influence which monsters people are willing to take

An example, A frostlord on stonehorn loses almost no effectiveness as his wounds go down, the Stardrake also has a very forgiving table and these models are extremely powerful.

The pheonix takes an absolute swan dive in effectiveness as it takes wounds but still sees play because it's ridiculous durability makes it a hard target.

Most of the Seraphon monstrous creatures are worse than a line trooper by the time they hit the bottom of their charts.

Basically I hope they kept an eye to these charts and how they compare to each other; the thing they said about the morkanaut going from a CC wreckingball to more of a turret makes me think they have. Still THIS is something that could end up causing a disparity that might need to be addresses.

Unlike Grots killing knights. That's. never going to be a thing.

ERJAK wrote:
Now if you want to not be ...some people...and talk about an actual issue that has arisen from this system and could be an problem if not properly handled(but isn't yet something we should worry about too much) The damage table CAN influence which monsters people are willing to take

An example, A frostlord on stonehorn loses almost no effectiveness as his wounds go down, the Stardrake also has a very forgiving table and these models are extremely powerful.

The pheonix takes an absolute swan dive in effectiveness as it takes wounds but still sees play because it's ridiculous durability makes it a hard target.

Most of the Seraphon monstrous creatures are worse than a line trooper by the time they hit the bottom of their charts.

Basically I hope they kept an eye to these charts and how they compare to each other; the thing they said about the morkanaut going from a CC wreckingball to more of a turret makes me think they have. Still THIS is something that could end up causing a disparity that might need to be addresses.

Unlike Grots killing knights. That's. never going to be a thing.

Eh, the stone horn halves the wounds it takes and you take huskards on thundertusks and they can heal it back up to full so I suspect Mek boyz will be able to heal the Gorkanaut.

Is it just me or does Atk 4 seem a tad low?

 TheIronCrow wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Now if you want to not be ...some people...and talk about an actual issue that has arisen from this system and could be an problem if not properly handled(but isn't yet something we should worry about too much) The damage table CAN influence which monsters people are willing to take

An example, A frostlord on stonehorn loses almost no effectiveness as his wounds go down, the Stardrake also has a very forgiving table and these models are extremely powerful.

The pheonix takes an absolute swan dive in effectiveness as it takes wounds but still sees play because it's ridiculous durability makes it a hard target.

Most of the Seraphon monstrous creatures are worse than a line trooper by the time they hit the bottom of their charts.

Basically I hope they kept an eye to these charts and how they compare to each other; the thing they said about the morkanaut going from a CC wreckingball to more of a turret makes me think they have. Still THIS is something that could end up causing a disparity that might need to be addresses.

Unlike Grots killing knights. That's. never going to be a thing.

Eh, the stone horn halves the wounds it takes and you take huskards on thundertusks and they can heal it back up to full so I suspect Mek boyz will be able to heal the Gorkanaut.

My point was that it doesn't really matter what wounds the stonehorn is at because his table is so good but something like a stegadon doesn't get played because it's so buttjacked by it's damage table.

It wasn't really a question of healing or anything.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

GodDamUser wrote:
Is it just me or does Atk 4 seem a tad low?

Not without knowing what damage it does and rend and everything. Keep in mind rowboat only had 6.

Apologies if this is answered anywhere, but do we have a hard confirmation that:

1. Wounds will be determined on a S vs T table?
2. That table will be the same as we know it now?

I know they said "everything can hurt everything" and that "stronger models wound closer to +2 and weaker models wound closer to +6" but have we actually seen anything like a table, or a GW source saying they are expanding the current table?

 3orangewhips wrote:
Apologies if this is answered anywhere, but do we have a hard confirmation that:

1. Wounds will be determined on a S vs T table?
2. That table will be the same as we know it now?

I know they said "everything can hurt everything" and that "stronger models wound closer to +2 and weaker models wound closer to +6" but have we actually seen anything like a table, or a GW source saying they are expanding the current table?

1) correct. Wounds are str vs T

2) Unknown.

Also unknown is what exactly the unit types will be and what the unit types will mean. Do MC still shoot 2 guns? Will walkers? Are tau battle suits still mc or walkers now? Do those unit types even still exist? So much that used to be covered by unit type is now just covered by the core rules and stat line (more wounds the M attribute). Nobody knows anything about any of that.

Pancakey wrote:
Math aside. It will now be possible for a grot to kill an imperial knight.]

Glorious!

GodDamUser wrote:
Is it just me or does Atk 4 seem a tad low?

Not if every attack does 6 damage or something like that.

Yeah, it would be more logical of a gigantic war machine to do fewer, far heavier damage attacks. Makes no sense to give it a dozen attacks...it's just a lumbering machine.

I'll still be sad if something like a Morkanaut can be stopped in close combat by guardsman or something stupid. "tar pitting" is stupid gamey nonsense.

Totally crap! I mean really...T8 and only 18 wounds is just pathetic! By my calculations that will take a squad of 30 Guardsmen at 12" with FRFSRF and lasguns only 375,218,476,698 shots and 934 turns to kill. And I know its true because my calculations are based nearly entirely on assumptions of game rules of which I have no knowledge whatsoever!

 Elbows wrote:
Yeah, it would be more logical of a gigantic war machine to do fewer, far heavier damage attacks. Makes no sense to give it a dozen attacks...it's just a lumbering machine.

I'll still be sad if something like a Morkanaut can be stopped in close combat by guardsman or something stupid. "tar pitting" is stupid gamey nonsense.

You'll be able to freely leave combat in 8th Ed - that's been confirmed.

So to avoid tarpit, waddle in with the Gorkanaut, and have boyz or something just behind. Once it's winkled out the Guards, waddle backwards, send in the Boyz to give 'em a good kicking.

It's a transport. Unleash the nobz that were inside.

You also need to factor in it's now got a save.

Before, an Autocannon damaged AV12 on a 5 or a 6. Sure, it's AP meant it damaged rather than destroyed, but provided it's S remains 7, it's still on a 5+ to wound the Gorkanaut, who should then get some kind of save (4+ would be my bet, just a gut thing though). Same with Plasma really, which given AP2 Lascannons have a -3, Plasma will likely have that or -2.

That's a pretty big boost to overall survivability, as it's only properly vulnerable to the biggest of the big guns.

Doc,

I know you can voluntarily withdraw, but I hope they'll have rules which allow certain machines to simply push through infantry models. If you can block a Knight or Morkanaut etc. with infantry figures it's almost as good as tar pitting. I hope there is an "Unstoppable" keyword which can ignore any non-Unstoppable models for purposes of moving, etc.

The 8" move will also make the nauts more viable as transports since we know Marines will move 6", orks will likely move less (hopefully the same). The only thing ive ever transported in a naut was burna boyz with maxed meks for repair.

3 MANZ in there would make a solid krumpin unit now

 Nithaniel wrote:
The 8" move will also make the nauts more viable as transports since we know Marines will move 6", orks will likely move less (hopefully the same). The only thing ive ever transported in a naut was burna boyz with maxed meks for repair.

3 MANZ in there would make a solid krumpin unit now

That actually makes me wonder if Bulky will be a thing still along with the small morkanaut transport size.

Well, guess I should finish building and painting my Naut then!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(I mean, I was going to anyway, but this is just a nice added incentive)

 3orangewhips wrote:
Apologies if this is answered anywhere, but do we have a hard confirmation that:

1. Wounds will be determined on a S vs T table?
2. That table will be the same as we know it now?

I know they said "everything can hurt everything" and that "stronger models wound closer to +2 and weaker models wound closer to +6" but have we actually seen anything like a table, or a GW source saying they are expanding the current table?

Very true we don't know how S v T works anymore, everyone just assumes it is the same.

IF S < (T-1) 6+
IF S< T 5+
IF S = T 4+
IF S > T 3+
IF S> (T+1) 2+

But we don't know that is how it works they could easily expand the ranges a bit so maybe it is

IF S < T-2 6+
IF S < T 5+
IF S = T 4+
If S > T 3+
IF S > T+2 2+

So as an example in this case Using T 6 it would be
S 3 or less wounds on 6+
S 4 and 5 wound on 5+
S 6 wounds on 4+
S 7 and 8 wound on 3+
S9 + wounds on 2+

We really just don't know.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
apparently I wasn't too far off, I was actually a bit conservative. Lascannons will wound the morkanaut on a 3+ (everything below a S 16 weapon will do so).

Breng77 wrote:


Very true we don't know how S v T works anymore, everyone just assumes it is the same.

IF S < (T-1) 6+
IF S< T 5+
IF S = T 4+
IF S > T 3+
IF S> (T+1) 2+

But we don't know that is how it works they could easily expand the ranges a bit so maybe it is

IF S < T-2 6+
IF S < T 5+
IF S = T 4+
If S > T 3+
IF S > T+2 2+

So as an example in this case Using T 6 it would be
S 3 or less wounds on 6+
S 4 and 5 wound on 5+
S 6 wounds on 4+
S 7 and 8 wound on 3+
S9 + wounds on 2+

We really just don't know.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
apparently I wasn't too far off, I was actually a bit conservative. Lascannons will wound the morkanaut on a 3+ (everything below a S 16 weapon will do so).

They just released the wound chart.

S double or more than T 2+
S more than T 3+
S=T 4+
S less than T 5+
S half or less than T 6+

Any new thoughts on the survivability of this thing now that the new charts have been shown (above)?

xlDuke wrote:
Any new thoughts on the survivability of this thing now that the new charts have been shown (above)?

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/725317.page

18 wounds is crazy good... High toughness also means most things are struggling to wound this... a 5+ or 6+ wound chance is not at all reliable, when you still have to roll to hit, AND this thing gets a 3+ save.

Hit Roll: 4+
Wound Roll: 6 (strength 3)
Damage: 1 (basic gun)

Discarding expected results, and using standard deviation to come up with an effective "100%" chance to kill this from a probability standpoint, you'd need to fire an even 700 shots. In short, 2 standard devations (unfavorably) from the mean of 700 shots is 18.01.

So to guarantee killing a Morkanaut with that profile you'd need to shoot 700 times.