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.

60pts

So a 90 point squad of Warriors with rifle, on a 60 point Raider with a 5 point upgrade (155 point total) can get rapid fire, re-roll to hit, 4+ poison . . . I like =D

Drive-bys a go go . . .

Oshova

I think its even more hilarious given that the raider (or was it the ravager?) pilot seems to have a bandana tied around his helmet...

I wonder if that upgrade only counts for the crew, not the embarked passengers?

Oshova wrote:So a 90 point squad of Warriors with rifle, on a 60 point Raider with a 5 point upgrade (155 point total) can get rapid fire, re-roll to hit, 4+ poison . . . I like =D

Drive-bys a go go . . .

Oshova

That's just it though - I think it's a bit misleading; if you move over 6", the embarked passengers aren't shooting anyway. And, without the 5++, you're going to zoom up (nigh unprotected) into the face of the enemy and hope to live so you can fire all those weapons from the prow of your raider. Or, you're going to creep along like a rhino and use that to unleash a volley of shots. I think the 5++, the re-roll to morale and the tank shocking upgrades are the most worthwhile.

Edit: Unless, of course the +2D6" movement doesn't affect the "speed" at which you moved. Then that one as well. Move 6" to stay at combat speed, move an additional 2D6", then rapid fire 12". So, a 20"- 30" threat range.

puma713 wrote:Thing that I think is important to remember is while we're seeing FNP on every other unit (it seems like), Str. 6 still discounts FNP in this army. Archons, Lelith, Wyches - just about everything that may or may not get FNP will have it negated by Scatter Lasers, Multi-lasers, Flamestorms, Str. 6 CC, etc., etc.

"Etc etc?" You mean, and a few more to bring your total to five weapons?

Thanks for the news flash, captain obvious. Are you next going to tell us that it's meant to only mitigate small arms?

Or highlight the fact those weapons typically have no reason to be fired at warriors, wyches in the first place?

One rumor I heard was that units could not disembark if you took the extra 2D6" move on raiders. This would be a bit too broken with Wyches on board!

Defiler wrote:

puma713 wrote:Thing that I think is important to remember is while we're seeing FNP on every other unit (it seems like), Str. 6 still discounts FNP in this army. Archons, Lelith, Wyches - just about everything that may or may not get FNP will have it negated by Scatter Lasers, Multi-lasers, Flamestorms, Str. 6 CC, etc., etc.

"Etc etc?" You mean, and a few more to bring your total to five weapons?

Thanks for the news flash, captain obvious. Are you next going to tell us that it's meant to only mitigate small arms?

Wow, did I say something that offended you? What's with the attitude? (You do know what etc. means don't you? "a number of other, unspecified things")

Generally, FNP is on models of Tough 4 or higher. People may have this notion so ingrained in their head (a la, 4th Edition rules moving to 5th Edition) that they don't stop to think about the fact that only Str. 6 will negate the FNP. It was a simple observation. But, I guess it was like I slapped your mother. o.O

Defiler wrote:Or highlight the fact those weapons typically have no reason to be fired at warriors, wyches in the first place?

Really? You don't use Flamestorms to drop entire swaths of troops? Even better if the troops will get no save and will get no FNP? What about 24 Str 6 shots from a warwalker squadron? You couldn't fathom that being used to take down a unit of Wyches that is about to assault your fire dragons, which you'd rather use on a Ravager or maybe Vect's Dias? Guess you'll only use Bolter fire and lasgun shots - the ones that they will get FNP from.

Yeah. . .

Right if the rumoured WWP is true, gunlines would struggle because you would just start one person on the board in a raider and then in your first just zoom 24" and if able the +2D6 so thats 31" on aveage and next turn bring in tons of wych and stuff like talos thus making it in to combat first turn there on the board or is this the wrong idea for WWP i may have miss read it?

Actually Oldone that wouldn't work. You can't deploy it from inside a vehicle and you can't debark if you move over 12". Though a variation of this strategy could work if the +2d6" doesn't count toward the total distance moved. I kinda like the idea but we'll need to read the codex first

Ahhh damn i hadn't thought about being in the raider i just asume you could, sorry =P.

Hulksmash wrote:Actually Oldone that wouldn't work. You can't deploy it from inside a vehicle and you can't debark if you move over 12". Though a variation of this strategy could work if the +2d6" doesn't count toward the total distance moved. I kinda like the idea but we'll need to read the codex first

Also, didn't it take an entire turn for it to open? Meaning, the squad moves forward, plants it and then has to wait till their following turn when it stabilizes? Giving the enemy a chance to negate the entire army by killing the WWP holder?

Wonder if they mitigated that. Like making it indestructible when it is placed.

From what I read they have taken that part out Puma. Now it just counts as that models shooting (so he can't fire his weapon but the rest of the squad can) and that's it. The only condition is that he has to be on foot. Can't thorw it off the side of a raider . I'm so dying to see the codex but it's not in store yet.....

-sigh-

Poison Weapons are Sx... AGAIN.

2nd time now GW will have to errata this.

It's almost like they deliberately refuse to write rules correctly.

Gwar! wrote:It's almost like they deliberately refuse to write rules correctly.

The HELL you say!! Well, we'll get a nice FAQ and errata sheet that answers roughly 10% of our questions in 4-6 months, so why the long face? Oh yeah, there's also the distinct possibility of nerfing/un-nerfing the army via these FAQs depending on how well or poorly they are selling, so that's always a hoot.

I would hope, in this case, that in an army filled with lance and melta-lance weapons that we could just not shoot poison weaponry at vehicles. Can we just agree this is not a proper course of action? Please?

I wouldn't be surprised if the web way portal acts like the Necron monolith whereas you have to use it as an entry point once it is down. Either way I don't think it is broken considering all your raider mounted squads could deep strike or boost on any ways. it will be interesting to see some variations to lists using this method though. Hopefully it will be a balanced alternative to raider spam.

Skarboy wrote:

Gwar! wrote:It's almost like they deliberately refuse to write rules correctly.

The HELL you say!! Well, we'll get a nice FAQ and errata sheet that answers roughly 10% of our questions in 4-6 months, so why the long face? Oh yeah, there's also the distinct possibility of nerfing/un-nerfing the army via these FAQs depending on how well or poorly they are selling, so that's always a hoot.

I would hope, in this case, that in an army filled with lance and melta-lance weapons that we could just not shoot poison weaponry at vehicles. Can we just agree this is not a proper course of action? Please?

Oh no, according to "Thomas", who works at the GW I went to, they have a "guy who writes FAQs now."

Why they couldn't get him to look at the codex BEFORE it goes to the printers is a mystery.

GW Moves in Mysterious ways it seems.

Gwar! wrote:-sigh-

Poison Weapons are Sx... AGAIN.

2nd time now GW will have to errata this.

It's almost like they deliberately refuse to write rules correctly.

So what's the deal again? Why do they need to errata this?

Luthon1234 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:-sigh-

Poison Weapons are Sx... AGAIN.

2nd time now GW will have to errata this.

It's almost like they deliberately refuse to write rules correctly.

So what's the deal again? Why do they need to errata this?

First of all, Ranged Poision weapons don't work (there are only rules for poisioned CCW).

Secondly, SX means that you could argue that they get the Poison Re-roll on anything with T less than the firing models Strength, which is why they errata'd the Hellfire Rounds to be S1.

It would just be easier if they errata'd-in a "Poisoned" ruleset for ranged weapons. They could literally copy the existing rules, and just change a couple words out and remove the re-roll to wound line.

EDIT: In the other thread, it looks like Cover/Invul saves can be made against the Implosion missiles. This makes me much happier.

Gwar! wrote:Oh no, according to "Thomas", who works at the GW I went to, they have a "guy who writes FAQs now."

Why they couldn't get him to look at the codex BEFORE it goes to the printers is a mystery.

GW Moves in Mysterious ways it seems.

Apparently so. Proofreading and fact-checking is probably considered beardy or something. Jervis probably bellowed, "Dark Eldar wouldn't hire proofreaders, you WAAC douchebags!" Something along those lines. Plus, it's not in the FAQ-guy's best interest to let solid documents out the door; then he'd have nothing to errata.

Frankly, the most disappointing thing about this entire release is the poor performance by the pirate community. No leaked PDF of the codex yet?! Such lazy criminals we have in this generation. Back in my day, we had leaked codexes distributed on parchment BEFORE the harvest, not after. *shakes fist in anger towards "youth"*

Gwar! wrote:

Luthon1234 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:-sigh-

Poison Weapons are Sx... AGAIN.

2nd time now GW will have to errata this.

It's almost like they deliberately refuse to write rules correctly.

So what's the deal again? Why do they need to errata this?

First of all, Ranged Poision weapons don't work (there are only rules for poisioned CCW).

Secondly, SX means that you could argue that they get the Poison Re-roll on anything with T less than the firing models Strength, which is why they errata'd the Hellfire Rounds to be S1.

Ok at first I was considering common sense but yea I get what you mean. Ewww that's really bad on GW's part.

Just out of curiosity, has anyone read anything about warriors and close combat, as well as wyches that aren't carrying special weapons etc? Just b/c their shooting attacks are poison doesn't mean their cc attacks are. CC would still use the models S3 unless specifically mentioned.




If it's written the same as on page 1 of this thread, "Splinter weaponry makes a wound in a 4+" without a reference to poison weapons, then there shouldn't be an issue.

Gwar! wrote:-sigh-

Poison Weapons are Sx... AGAIN.

2nd time now GW will have to errata this.

It's almost like they deliberately refuse to write rules correctly.

Its mostly a case of the design team living in a bubble, since GW feels secrecy about their upcoming products are more important than external playtesting and proof-reading

Added most of todays info in the first page summary (bright red this time), but it is already too much as you can see.
Guess it is about time to stop updating it.

Anyone seen the cost of Scourges or their weapons yet? It's interesting that they increased the unit size to 10 for these weapons. Wonder if it's like, 2 weapon per every 5 unit members or something.

puma713 wrote:Anyone seen the cost of Scourges or their weapons yet?

I have. They're the cost of Marneus Calgar divided by the square root of 2 Termagants multipled by half a Carnifex or half a Land Raider, depending on whether you take the upgrade on your Archon that costs as much as 3 Banshees + 1 Kroot Hound.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

puma713 wrote:Anyone seen the cost of Scourges or their weapons yet?

I have. They're the cost of Marneus Calgar divided by the square root of 2 Termagants multipled by half a Carnifex or half a Land Raider, depending on whether you take the upgrade on your Archon that costs as much as 3 Banshees + 1 Kroot Hound.

Oh ok. Thanks.

HBMC rocks =D

You're hilarity and comedic value is unbound

But yes, I also would like to know the actual cost of the Scourges.

Oshova

I would tell you, but my trip (2 hours on a train) was wasted because the jerky jerks of jerkness wouldn't let me read the codex "Because you guys have had it for 2 hours" (this being 10 mins after I walk in and someone else was reading it).