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.

 daedalus wrote:
So with the Necron Barge thingy being T6 W8 Sv4+, what's everyone thinking as far as their tankbusting at this point?

Where's that information from?

It's in the vehicle page they did:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/18/new-warhammer-40000-vehicles-may18gw-homepage-post-4/

Profile is for "Annihilation Barge".

I don't know if that's going to be an accurate baseline for most vehicles, but I'm operating under the assumption that anything less than a Land Raider/LR is going to be roughly around that statline, plus or minus maybe a point on any given stat. At least, that's what I'm assuming. And converting my new mordians to be ready to deal with.

 daedalus wrote:
It's in the vehicle page they did:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/18/new-warhammer-40000-vehicles-may18gw-homepage-post-4/

Profile is for "Annihilation Barge".

I don't know if that's going to be an accurate baseline for most vehicles, but I'm operating under the assumption that anything less than a Land Raider/LR is going to be roughly around that statline, plus or minus maybe a point on any given stat. At least, that's what I'm assuming. And converting my new mordians to be ready to deal with.

I would guess that most AV 10 things will be toughness 6 at most.

 daedalus wrote:
It's in the vehicle page they did:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/18/new-warhammer-40000-vehicles-may18gw-homepage-post-4/

Profile is for "Annihilation Barge".

Ah, cheers. I was wondering if I'd missed a Necron preview.

IG is going to be much better off because the heavy bolter and lascannon aren't jokes.

I wonder if Lord Commissars will have a point in this edition.

 Leth wrote:
I would guess that most AV 10 things will be toughness 6 at most.

We have seen what an AV 10 open topped skimmer looks like. T5


We have seen what an AV 11 vehicle looks like. T6


We have seen what an AV12 walker looks like T7


We have seen what an AV13/13/12 walker looks like. T8


We have seen an AV 13 knight : T8


We have some of the stats of the LRBT : T8


At this point, we don't have enough information to guess what will make for good AM builds.
I have heard Reece say in his playtesting (on the FLG podcast) that he had a tough time maneuvering all his tanks between ruins. He cracked about how it's no longer 'parking lots' but 'rush hour traffic'. This is a suggestion that armored firsts might be pretty good. There might even be multiple builds that are really good. We only have a few more weeks until we find out.

Edit
------
Reece also mentioned in his Faction Review that Sentinels are really good. If they are T5 with 6 wounds, that makes them much more durable than they are in 7th.
How good they are really depends on their point cost and their weapon loadout.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 Leth wrote:
I would guess that most AV 10 things will be toughness 6 at most.

We have seen what an AV 10 open topped skimmer looks like. T5

Spoiler:

We have seen what an AV 11 vehicle looks like. T6

Spoiler:

We have seen what an AV12 walker looks like T7

Spoiler:

We have seen what an AV13/13/12 walker looks like. T8

Spoiler:

We have seen an AV 13 knight : T8

Spoiler:

We have some of the stats of the LRBT : T8

Spoiler:

Leman Russes, for example, have Toughness 8 and a 3+ save, so they won’t be slowing down until they’ve lost half of their 12 Wounds.

At this point, we don't have enough information to guess what will make for good AM builds.
I have heard Reece say in his playtesting (on the FLG podcast) that he had a tough time maneuvering all his tanks between ruins. He cracked about how it's no longer 'parking lots' but 'rush hour traffic'. This is a suggestion that armored firsts might be pretty good. There might even be multiple builds that are really good. We only have a few more weeks until we find out.

Edit
------
Reece also mentioned in his Faction Review that Sentinels are really good. If they are T5 with 6 wounds, that makes them much more durable than they are in 7th.

How good they are really depends on their point cost and their weapon loadout.

One thing I think they highlighted in the terrain rules was that only infantry really get free reign in ruins. So vehicles have to move around them. Something to consider.

Leth, that is a very good point. But, that would require people to actually put a decent amount of terrain on the table to begin with. Most games I have seen barely have any since it is an inconvenience to a lot of people. My group seemed to be the only people that packed terrain into our games.

I am truly excited to see how the basic infantryman navigating freely through cover changes the game, and, if we get any mobility boosting orders.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:
Leth, that is a very good point. But, that would require people to actually put a decent amount of terrain on the table to begin with. Most games I have seen barely have any since it is an inconvenience to a lot of people. My group seemed to be the only people that packed terrain into our games.

I am truly excited to see how the basic infantryman navigating freely through cover changes the game, and, if we get any mobility boosting orders.

Yeah then its going to impact how things work for you. I play at least 25% with one or two LOS blockers on each side of the table. Otherwise its just a shooting gallery and that is boring.

The new rules for cover will affect AM; it appears that in order to get a cover save the entire unit must be in or on a terrain feature. If that is the extent of the rules for cover then it will be nearly impossible for a large Guard blob to get a cover save.

From what I understand I think the advanced rules has more rules for terrain. Since we know that terrain types are affected by the unit type we can infer there is more specific information to come.

 Otto von Bludd wrote:
The new rules for cover will affect AM; it appears that in order to get a cover save the entire unit must be in or on a terrain feature. If that is the extent of the rules for cover then it will be nearly impossible for a large Guard blob to get a cover save.

Then build or convince the guys at your club to build large terrain elements.

OK easier said than done...

I think that large blobs of Guard moving upfield may be viable again:

-Defender removes casualties, so no losing inches anymore and you can keep all your good models safe at the front

-Can use rapid fire weapons and still charge

-Charger goes first

-Templates are no more, so you can squash as many bodies together as can fit. This allows insane concentration. It used to be that a 50 man blob was really hard to move around and generally a lot more trouble than it was worth. Possibly not anymore.

The death of the power blob was the inches you would lose from casualties as well as losing power weapons before combat. Now, as long as Guard get some kind of morale negating buff, large power blobs may be back!

We also have no idea what the mission objectives are or how things like an aegis work. Plenty of awesome potential for the guard.

 Otto von Bludd wrote:
The new rules for cover will affect AM; it appears that in order to get a cover save the entire unit must be in or on a terrain feature. If that is the extent of the rules for cover then it will be nearly impossible for a large Guard blob to get a cover save.

Why? AM don't have to worry about blast templates any more. I'm planning on using movement trays 10 guard wide and 5 guard deep, or slightly differently shaped if blobs can still have 5 heavy weapon teams embedded in them.

 Leth wrote:
We also have no idea what the mission objectives are or how things like an aegis work. Plenty of awesome potential for the guard.

An ADL will most likely be +1 or +2 cover.
If it's +2 cover, that will be insanely good, giving the blobs behind it the same saves as MEQ.

Even if it's +1 cover, and you stick your LRBT behind it, they will be getting a 2+ save -- making them much more durable against many weapons.
Of course, the flaw with the ADL is that it limits your movement. I don't expect guard to play like a leaflower list again.

The entire unit must be on or in a terrain feature. Seems difficult to get all 50 guardsmen on or in a terrain feature to me, but I guess it depends on the terrain you use.

I've been out of the game for all of 7th edition, but 8th ed is reeling me back in. The stats for grenades have me wondering the great red-headed stepchild of special weapons might have a better role in the world of armor save modifiers. Grenade Launchers might be true multipurpose weapons if they're cheap enough to be spammed in a platoon command squad or special weapon squad, if those make the transition intact. 3 grenade launchers would be 3d6 s3 attacks at 24", even while advancing. Alternatively, the krak option is actually a threat to higher armor saves, and is potentially very useful in the world of multiwpund models everywhere. The plasma gun, with its modulated power, looks like a major winner, but the price might be prohibitive to bring in the huge numbers that AM can bring special weapons.

Special weapons aside, AM look like one of the armies that can really generate a lot of CPs, either through a brigade detachment or multiple battalion detachment (if that's a thing that's possible). Even with just the standard ways to spend CPs, if you can amass 9 CPs, you can drive an old-style powerblob pretty hard. You could feasibly counterattack every turn that matters, blunting the ability of high offense, low defense attackers to shank a lot of guardsmen. Alternatively, liberal use of CPs to automatically pass Battle Shock could keep a front line squad fighting after sustaining horrendous casualties. This is all assuming combined squads are possible, so who knows.

 Humble Guardsman wrote:
If the Trygon example is anything to go by, they'll need to roll a 9 on the 2D6 charge roll. A risky endevour, but I don't doubt assault heavy armies won't at least try it. They would probably be saving their Command Point re-rolls for that exact moment. What I'm not sure about is 'deep-striking' transports. Is disembarking from a vehicle over 9" from the enemy an easy way to cut that distance down before the charge?

It's clear that bubble-wrapping attractive targets with inexpensive infantry squads is going to be more vital than ever.

Fortunately, I do not think disembarking from a deep strike vehicle is a legal exploit. It seems that arriving from reserves/deep striking is in and of itself a movement in the movement phase. Hence regular deep strikers only get to attempt to charge after they arrive-- no moving or advancing between showing up and attempting to charge. And since disembarking must occur before movement, deep striking transports will likely end up a very poor tactic. Except for Orks with their 'Ere We Go reroll, I wouldn't be *too* concerned about this strategy (a little caution will go a long way, of course).

 deltaKshatriya wrote:
So, we're starting to learn more and more about the 8th Edition of Warhammer. One of the thing's I was really looking forward to is how the Guard was going to fair in this new update. And now that they've added some updates:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/09/warhammer-40000-faction-focus-astra-militarum/

And the source for general updates of course:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/warhammer-40000/

So I'm personally seeing a much more competitive Guard in this edition. It looks like vehicles in general are getting a boost with the new rules. As some of you here know, I've really loved running the Guard tank armies, even though they were woefully underpowered and very easily blown up by melta and grav guns. The new Leman Russ rules are basically stating that they have 12 wounds and toughness 8, along with a 3+ Armor save. That I think should make a huge difference in armored warfare in general, since one of the biggest issues with tanks (in particular LR) was that they don't have any sort of save, like jinking.

Orders are now automatic, and seem to be better, plus tons of lasgun shots from Guard armies that all have a chance to hurt will probably bring just about any kind of unit to its knees eventually.

I'm curious to hear what others thing though.

I'm also super excited about how tough normal Leman Russes are! And since everything in 8th edition is going to be point-costed appropriately, their toughness plus the awesomeness of the 8th edition Battle Cannon ensures that it'll be the best 30 point model in the game!

Do you guys think infantry-IG might become viable again?

 vipoid wrote:
Do you guys think infantry-IG might become viable again?

Well they got a large boost from how the core rules work, though it really depends on the list itself and how it is organised. Things I have seen that make IG infantry more effective:

-Removal of blasts makes movement and force concentration so much easier.
-Defender chooses casualties. No more worrying about putting weapons/characters at the front of a unit. Also, no more losing inches of movement to deaths.
-Can use rapid fire and charge.
-Chargers goes first in combat.
-Can get saves against a lot more weapons that previously.
-Split fire, so no more worries about mixing weapon types.
-Can exit combat, so enemy can't stay safe from your firepower.
-Terrain doesn't seem to slow movement, so no more 50 men moving 1".

That's just off the top of my head. What waits to be seen is how Commissars work. If they have to sit out of units then they will be sniper fodder. I am hopeful for this edition, as I love running 2 types of Guard: Armoured Company and infantry wave.

 Trickstick wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Do you guys think infantry-IG might become viable again?

Well they got a large boost from how the core rules work, though it really depends on the list itself and how it is organised. Things I have seen that make IG infantry more effective:

-Removal of blasts makes movement and force concentration so much easier.
-Defender chooses casualties. No more worrying about putting weapons/characters at the front of a unit. Also, no more losing inches of movement to deaths.
-Can use rapid fire and charge.
-Chargers goes first in combat.
-Can get saves against a lot more weapons that previously.
-Split fire, so no more worries about mixing weapon types.
-Can exit combat, so enemy can't stay safe from your firepower.
-Terrain doesn't seem to slow movement, so no more 50 men moving 1".

That's just off the top of my head. What waits to be seen is how Commissars work. If they have to sit out of units then they will be sniper fodder. I am hopeful for this edition, as I love running 2 types of Guard: Armoured Company and infantry wave.

They can't be in units. NOTHING that was a character can join a unit.

Anything less than a certain Wound value cannot be targeted by ballistic weapons unless they have "Sniper".

 Kanluwen wrote:

They can't be in units. NOTHING that was a character can join a unit.

Anything less than a certain Wound value cannot be targeted by ballistic weapons unless they have "Sniper".

Well IG Commissars and Priests have a history of weird rules when it comes to joining units, so it is not beyond the realm of possibilities. Either that, or they need a large boost in resilience, as a 1w model is just going to die to snipers. I think that snipers are going to be a lot more common now, as almost everyone can get a small unit of scout snipers, ratlings or something. I guess they could just turn normal Commissars into something similar to the old Lord Commissar, it probably fits the fluff better anyway.

Thinking about snipers, the 5 model command squads are going to be really vulnerable without an additional rule. Would be nice if they counted as characters for that sniper rule, so they don't just die turn 1 and you have no orders.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

They can't be in units. NOTHING that was a character can join a unit.

Anything less than a certain Wound value cannot be targeted by ballistic weapons unless they have "Sniper".

Well IG Commissars and Priests have a history of weird rules when it comes to joining units, so it is not beyond the realm of possibilities. Either that, or they need a large boost in resilience, as a 1w model is just going to die to snipers. I think that snipers are going to be a lot more common now, as almost everyone can get a small unit of scout snipers, ratlings or something. I guess they could just turn normal Commissars into something similar to the old Lord Commissar, it probably fits the fluff better anyway.

Who said they're going to remain 1 Wound?

You have to understand that a big part of how they did things in Age of Sigmar is that anything that was a character before now has a minimum of 4-5 Wounds in exchange for not being able to hide in a unit..

Thinking about snipers, the 5 model command squads are going to be really vulnerable without an additional rule. Would be nice if they counted as characters for that sniper rule, so they don't just die turn 1 and you have no orders.

From what's been said, the officers are going to be individual models with a Wound boost and the 4 model Command Squads are going to give them some kind of additional protection when purchased.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Who said they're going to remain 1 Wound?

Yeah that is what I meant by making them more like the Lord Commissar, boosting the wounds a bit. I actually like the idea of Commissars being vulnerable to snipers somewhat, as they would really be the #1 target of any sniper unit.

Out of the leaks I've seen the Rhino is coming in 5 more points than the razorback.

Does anyone have any guesses as to why that might be the case?

I was thiking that's probably going to be the price point for the IG transports

 labmouse42 wrote:
Out of the leaks I've seen the Rhino is coming in 5 more points than the razorback.

Does anyone have any guesses as to why that might be the case?

I was thiking that's probably going to be the price point for the IG transports

It is the point cost without weapons. A naked 10 person transport is more expensive than a naked 6 person transport.

You know what's going to be great about Astra militarism? So many units buff or improve or have special keywords that expand this army. Scions, inquisitors, ecclesiastical, sisters units like Celestine, gene stealer cults and likely renegade all inherently benefit and buff the guard. I am sure we will have one of the better armies with the amount of synergy that's being leaked.

gungo wrote:
You know what's going to be great about Astra militarism? So many units buff or improve or have special keywords that expand this army. Scions, inquisitors, ecclesiastical, sisters units like Celestine, gene stealer cults and likely renegade all inherently benefit and buff the guard. I am sure we will have one of the better armies with the amount of synergy that's being leaked.

A commissar is not as tough or strong as a C:SM captain in power armor.
That's a good thing. I means that the buff-characters for AM will be cheaper and more common than other armies.

 Trickstick wrote:
It is the point cost without weapons. A naked 10 person transport is more expensive than a naked 6 person transport.

Good point.