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.
2017/05/19 16:05:22
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
The Q&A yesterday pretty much confirmed Invul saves work as they do now. They are an non-modifiable alternative to armour saves, not an additional save.
Hmm, well, that creates an interesting dynamic - they become almost like a rend limiter.
And it looks like they get at least 4 attacks from the "destroy a knight in a single lucky round of combat."
Another important development is the Super Heavy Detachment, which has the restriction of units from the same faction. So, we've seen 4 (?) of the 14 detachments, so I'm willing to bet there are specific FOCs that restrict to faction and give a hefty command point bonus, which will give you plenty of benefit from your faction specific stratagems.
makes m beyond happy. Trygon went super heavy again like back in the day.
Hopefully it is not a Lord of war but it maybe now.
Looks like we have a lot of new things coming to use in old packaging.
Trygons are CC monsters again. No more getting killed by dreadnaughts like in 7th.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/19 16:07:44
2017/05/19 16:09:50
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
And it looks like they get at least 4 attacks from the "destroy a knight in a single lucky round of combat."
Another important development is the Super Heavy Detachment, which has the restriction of units from the same faction. So, we've seen 4 (?) of the 14 detachments, so I'm willing to bet there are specific FOCs that restrict to faction and give a hefty command point bonus, which will give you plenty of benefit from your faction specific stratagems.
makes m beyond happy. Trygon went super heavy again like back in the day.
Hopefully it is not a Lord of war but it maybe now.
Looks like we have a lot of new things coming to use in old packaging.
Trygons are CC monsters again. No more getting killed by dreadnaughts like in 7th.
Hey as long as they have a better than 6 inch movement, closer to 12. Those things really don't look like they should be so slow.
2017/05/19 16:10:00
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
It used to be a large blast, meaning that it'd do more than one hit against most units and a functionally guaranteed hit on models above riptide or so size. You'd get a pretty predictable effect.
This way you have D3 or D6 shots which then need to roll to wound after- a much more unpredictable impact. Just because the upper bound is a lot higher doesn't mean that it's not less reliable.
You...still had to pen with your one hit. Now you're going to get an average of 1.3 hits on those riptides...and smack a 5 man terminator squad pretty handily without worrying about scatter.
Another important development is the Super Heavy Detachment, which has the restriction of units from the same faction. So, we've seen 4 (?) of the 14 detachments, so I'm willing to bet there are specific FOCs that restrict to faction and give a hefty command point bonus, which will give you plenty of benefit from your faction specific stratagems.
Well, Pete misspoke iirc and there are only 12 detachments.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/19 16:12:17
2017/05/19 16:13:08
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Its a total improvement on previous. Metlas previously fired minimum 1 shot and maximum 1 shot. D3 fires minimum 1, maximum 3 and average 2. Its on average twice as good as before, at best three times, and at worst exactly as before.
Melta cannons were blast weapons.
And were intended to be fired against single models, ie, vehicles. They were never an anti-infantry weapon. Even vehicle squadrons you were likely only ever to get a single hit, as the coherancy for squadrons in 4" not 2, so utitlising maximum space or just the standard 2", a Large Blast was only going to hit 2 vehicles in the rarest of circumstance, and never 3. Against a single target, which was 90% of a Melta target, you now have a 1/3 chance for doing 3, 1/3 chance of 2, and 1/3 of the 1 hit you were used to.
I'm celebrating 8 years on Dakka Dakka!
I started an Instagram! Follow me at Deadshot Miniatures! DR:90+S++G+++M+B+IPw40k08#-D+++A+++/cwd363R+++T(Ot)DM+ Check out my Deathwatch story, Aftermath in the fiction section!
Credit to Castiel for banner. Thanks Cas!
2017/05/19 16:21:03
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Well, I can't say I'm much fan of 1d6 for effect being so prevalent in general, it means that games will be a lot more random and there's a significantly bigger chance of single weapons whiffing anticlimactically, doing a pittance of damage where they have potential to hit like a wrecking ball. Very swingy above and beyond the traditional hit/wound/save cycle.
On a related note, they keep repeatedly claiming that no matter what your army is, it'll be battle forged now if it was battle forged in 7th. The only way that won't prove to be a bare-faced lie at this stage is if there's a pure elite FOC, a pure fast attack FOC and a pure heavy support FOC. Otherwise it'll be impossible to approximate formation based armies such as say, a Destroyer Cult.
2017/05/19 16:22:33
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Verviedi wrote: I'm sure there will be a 1-LoW or 2-LoW detachment, don't worry.
Yea I bet it would be a 1-2 with 0 CP.
It's 3-5 with 3 CP.
I think you missed what was being discussed. Currently there is no way to take a single LoW so there needs to be some detachment to allow for it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
changemod wrote: Well, I can't say I'm much fan of 1d6 for effect being so prevalent in general, it means that games will be a lot more random and there's a significantly bigger chance of single weapons whiffing anticlimactically, doing a pittance of damage where they have potential to hit like a wrecking ball. Very swingy above and beyond the traditional hit/wound/save cycle.
More swingy than a lucky hit then pens and explodes an entire riptide?
Good thing you saved your CP, right?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/19 16:24:02
2017/05/19 16:25:13
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
On a related note, they keep repeatedly claiming that no matter what your army is, it'll be battle forged now if it was battle forged in 7th. The only way that won't prove to be a bare-faced lie at this stage is if there's a pure elite FOC, a pure fast attack FOC and a pure heavy support FOC. Otherwise it'll be impossible to approximate formation based armies such as say, a Destroyer Cult.
Andy Smilie just posted this on his Twitter:
Andy Smilie wrote:4 minutes ago
That's right, this is a legal army in new 40K.
2017/05/19 16:26:50
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
On a related note, they keep repeatedly claiming that no matter what your army is, it'll be battle forged now if it was battle forged in 7th. The only way that won't prove to be a bare-faced lie at this stage is if there's a pure elite FOC, a pure fast attack FOC and a pure heavy support FOC. Otherwise it'll be impossible to approximate formation based armies such as say, a Destroyer Cult.
Andy Smilie just posted this on his Twitter:
Andy Smilie wrote:4 minutes ago
That's right, this is a legal army in new 40K.
So we can play an "Assasin's Creed Brotherhood" army? Noice
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
2017/05/19 16:27:19
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Red Corsair wrote: This reaffirms my suspicion that I should take las canons over multimeltas, so far all the big things are turning out to be at the T8 mark meaning that 3+ to wound at double range will me much better then 4+ to wound at suicide range
Glad my Iron Warriors pack lots of lasers
I am betting even the land raider is capped at T8, though I won't be too shocked if it is uniquely sitting at 9.
Melta's niche seems to be how reliably it can wound.
Well, more like how much damage it can do is more consistent. Las Canons will actually wound T8 and 9 targets more often, and from range at that.
On a related note, they keep repeatedly claiming that no matter what your army is, it'll be battle forged now if it was battle forged in 7th. The only way that won't prove to be a bare-faced lie at this stage is if there's a pure elite FOC, a pure fast attack FOC and a pure heavy support FOC. Otherwise it'll be impossible to approximate formation based armies such as say, a Destroyer Cult.
Andy Smilie just posted this on his Twitter:
Andy Smilie wrote:4 minutes ago
That's right, this is a legal army in new 40K.
And also heresy...
I'm celebrating 8 years on Dakka Dakka!
I started an Instagram! Follow me at Deadshot Miniatures! DR:90+S++G+++M+B+IPw40k08#-D+++A+++/cwd363R+++T(Ot)DM+ Check out my Deathwatch story, Aftermath in the fiction section!
Credit to Castiel for banner. Thanks Cas!
2017/05/19 16:30:11
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Well, sure an all-assassin army is legal to field - but in what format?
It's not completely crazy if there are elite-only detachments, but keep in mind that Open and Narrative play can allow very different 'legal' armies than Matched play.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/19 16:33:32
2017/05/19 16:32:06
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
On a related note, they keep repeatedly claiming that no matter what your army is, it'll be battle forged now if it was battle forged in 7th. The only way that won't prove to be a bare-faced lie at this stage is if there's a pure elite FOC, a pure fast attack FOC and a pure heavy support FOC. Otherwise it'll be impossible to approximate formation based armies such as say, a Destroyer Cult.
Andy Smilie just posted this on his Twitter:
Andy Smilie wrote:4 minutes ago
That's right, this is a legal army in new 40K.
9 assassins and 2 bits of masonry? Neat.
More seriously, if they're still elites that's interesting support for my statement.
2017/05/19 16:33:15
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Red Corsair wrote: This reaffirms my suspicion that I should take las canons over multimeltas, so far all the big things are turning out to be at the T8 mark meaning that 3+ to wound at double range will me much better then 4+ to wound at suicide range
Glad my Iron Warriors pack lots of lasers
I am betting even the land raider is capped at T8, though I won't be too shocked if it is uniquely sitting at 9.
Meltas remove all of their save, however, and i'm starting to think you can take both armor and invulnerable.
Why?
Because what is the point of using a -3 or -4 on 3+ armor if they are going to take their 5+ invuln anyway? Even -2 is a moot point.
Your suggesting that because a 5+ is better then 0 save or 6+ that it surely need be an addition to the normal save but that isn't necessarily true. The purpose in an invuln save is to ensure a minimum chance at saving, not to worry about which guns AP is more or less useful. You may well be right, but nothing has hinted to this.
Close Combat Weapons Q: Now I am crying like a baby because you did an article on close combat weapons and didn't mention Orcs at all, no claw no Death Rolla.
A: All you need to know is that Orkz is da best and da most choppy.
Q: Could we see the profile for CSM Chain Axes? I'm really curious about Khorne Berserkers, and if you're going to bring Berserkers, you know they have to bring Chain Axes!
A: Holy Terra. Khorne Bezerkers are utterly, utterly terrifying. Perhaps the best combat unit in the game...
Q: power swords -3 ap, that seems a tad ridiculous in comparison to the power axe.
Also when comparing weapons, can we PLEASE see something that isn't space marine. i'd like to see some ork weapons. And especially if we are getting any new ones
A: Hey Shaun - we tend to show weapons that everyone knows and which most armies get the use out of. That way, it's the most easy example to relate to. While they are da best and da most choppy... not everyone knows what an 'uge choppa is like, compared, say, to a power sword.
Q: Warhammer 40,000, do pistols still give an extra attack for being an off-hand weapon, or are they now just getting the Shooting phase attacks? Still an extra attack in the turn that you charge, or does that go away, as well?
A: Well, we have shown a pistol stat line already in the Datasheet article (linked below). The pistol stat line does not say "you receive an extra attack in combat" like the chainsword does, so it is safe to assume that a bolt pistol does not give you +1 attack in combat.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/11/new-warhammer-40000-datasheetsgw-homepage-post-4/
Q: Do you still get a bonus Attack when wielding an extra close combat weapon? And if so, do Pistols still count as a CCW now that you can actually use them even when locked in CC?
A: It looks like you get an extra attack when using a chainsword, but doesn't mention it anywhere else...
Q: When using the chainsword and another, different CCW (lets say a power sword), does the wielder get to make an additional attack with the power sword, or just an additional attack with the chainsword?
A: Have a read of the chainsword's special rule again...
Knight Faction Focus Q: I just scrolled down to see if the next article would be Sisters of Battle. Seriously. We've been asking for decades for an update and plastic kits and new models. Can't we get any idea if they're getting attention in the new edition? Or does gw still hate the bolter girls?
A: No hate here, Christopher! We haven't forgotten about the Sisters of Battle at all. They will be receiving new rules support in the new edition and there will be a Faction Focus article too.
Q: So, I'd like a clarification on the heavy D* weapons.
Would they resolve like this: roll d6 to see if you hit, then roll d6 to see how many hits you get or is it roll D6 'shots' then resolve to hit for each shot?
A: It's D6 shots. You roll a D6 and then make that many "to hit" rolls.
Q: Will there be special named knights still? Obsidian Knight and such? Maybe Household rules?
A: Perhaps! We haven't seen anything about them yet... but watch this space!
Q: Superheavy detachment? I can field a Stormblade, Shadowsword and Stormlord all at the same time? In a regular game? I'm going to be so unpopular... Might need to buy a couple of Baneblades to round that off!
A: You can indeed.... they are a lot of points, of course...
Q: Will Khorne Daemonkin be getting their own faction focus article or are they lumped in with Chaos Marines and Daemons articles?
A: Michael Ryan you can absolutely use that army in the new rules. Detachments have to be made up of units that share one keyword. "Chaos" and "Khorne" are one keyword.. so you can fill your boots with making detachments of mixed Khorne stuff!
Q: So imperial knights before orks or tyranids really? You forgot those major factions?
A: The Tyranids and Orks are on the way, guys - they are not coming in the order we think they are most important, but rather the order they are written in!
Q: Can Knights be used together with imperial forces? E.g. with astartes, or astra militarum?
A: They absolutely can, yes!
Q: So What Is The Next?
A: We will have to wait and see...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Love that they made it possible to mix daemons and CSM into a single FOC without needing to do multiple detachments now.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/19 16:35:04
2017/05/19 16:35:25
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
On a related note, they keep repeatedly claiming that no matter what your army is, it'll be battle forged now if it was battle forged in 7th. The only way that won't prove to be a bare-faced lie at this stage is if there's a pure elite FOC, a pure fast attack FOC and a pure heavy support FOC. Otherwise it'll be impossible to approximate formation based armies such as say, a Destroyer Cult.
Andy Smilie just posted this on his Twitter:
Andy Smilie wrote:4 minutes ago
That's right, this is a legal army in new 40K.
Well, not for xenos players....
DavePak
"Remember, in life, the only thing you absolutely control is your own attitude - do not squander that power."
Fully Painted armies:
TAU: 10k Nids: 9600 Marines: 4000 Crons: 7600
Actor, Gamer, Comic, Corporate Nerd
2017/05/19 16:36:37
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Red Corsair wrote: This reaffirms my suspicion that I should take las canons over multimeltas, so far all the big things are turning out to be at the T8 mark meaning that 3+ to wound at double range will me much better then 4+ to wound at suicide range
Glad my Iron Warriors pack lots of lasers
I am betting even the land raider is capped at T8, though I won't be too shocked if it is uniquely sitting at 9.
Don't underestimate rend -4 and the more consistent damage. I'm too tired to do the math but extra rend and extra strength should have about the same wounding power against certain save value breakpoints. 3+ here.
The math will come out as a wash because they are so close, one wounds more often while one does more average damage. Tells us little since people assume melta is a close range without factoring in the worse to hit roll for the likely need to move. Both will be solid, I am not gaking on the melta, I just prefer beaming my knights in the eyes from across the map from the word go
Red Corsair wrote: This reaffirms my suspicion that I should take las canons over multimeltas, so far all the big things are turning out to be at the T8 mark meaning that 3+ to wound at double range will me much better then 4+ to wound at suicide range
Glad my Iron Warriors pack lots of lasers
I am betting even the land raider is capped at T8, though I won't be too shocked if it is uniquely sitting at 9.
Meltas remove all of their save, however, and i'm starting to think you can take both armor and invulnerable.
Why?
Because what is the point of using a -3 or -4 on 3+ armor if they are going to take their 5+ invuln anyway? Even -2 is a moot point.
Your suggesting that because a 5+ is better then 0 save or 6+ that it surely need be an addition to the normal save but that isn't necessarily true. The purpose in an invuln save is to ensure a minimum chance at saving, not to worry about which guns AP is more or less useful. You may well be right, but nothing has hinted to this.
Even if the AP value doesn't negate the invul (which is still worse than their 3+ armour save), the weapons we're talking about still can be evaluated based on if you want the ability to hit the knight turn 1 (lascannons) or want more consistent damage once you start shooting it one turn 2 or later (melta).
2017/05/19 16:38:23
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Red Corsair wrote: This reaffirms my suspicion that I should take las canons over multimeltas, so far all the big things are turning out to be at the T8 mark meaning that 3+ to wound at double range will me much better then 4+ to wound at suicide range
Glad my Iron Warriors pack lots of lasers
I am betting even the land raider is capped at T8, though I won't be too shocked if it is uniquely sitting at 9.
Meltas remove all of their save, however, and i'm starting to think you can take both armor and invulnerable.
Why?
Because what is the point of using a -3 or -4 on 3+ armor if they are going to take their 5+ invuln anyway? Even -2 is a moot point.
The Q&A yesterday pretty much confirmed Invul saves work as they do now. They are an non-modifiable alternative to armour saves, not an additional save.
Which yet again makes las canons superior IMHO, since the ap against anything with a 5+ invuln becomes moot. Heck even a missile launcher which will likely have rend 2, leaves a knight with the exact same chance to save.
theocracity wrote: Well, sure an all-assassin army is legal to field - but in what format?
It's not completely crazy if there are elite-only detachments, but keep in mind that Open and Narrative play can allow very different 'legal' armies than Matched play.
That would be an unfortunate technicality which would annoy a lot of people. Still, they did specify battle forged, and the other two game modes are basically unbound and "we're pretending that playing to a scenario is a third game mode".
To reveal my own stake in this: I own 18 destroyers, 12 heavy destroyers and 2 destroyer lords. It's one of the gimmick armies I don't use very often because the formation bonuses make it too strong unless my opponent is also using a power build, but I'd be sad to see it go entirely.
2017/05/19 16:38:39
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Future War Cultist wrote: I hope they can make vanquishers into true titan killers. How would you guys do it? 72" range, strength 8, ap -3 damage 2D6 heavy 1?
Well in the past it was an ap2 long range melta gun that didn't care about half range. My guess is it will be S8 Ap-3 Damage 2D6 drop the lowest.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/19 16:41:44
More seriously, if they're still elites that's interesting support for my statement.
I'm confused, is this supposed to be something people are unhappy about?
An army that's just a gang of assassins sounds awesome to me...
Honestly I don't even get how it's news since you can build an army out of Assassin detachments and any legal army in the game stays legal....
That said, considering that he's only got those few models on the table there and says it's a complete legal army....the army will still be heavily hampered by its small size unless we see some serious buffs to the assassins.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/19 16:42:53
2017/05/19 16:51:39
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Honestly I don't even get how it's news since you can build an army out of Assassin detachments and any legal army in the game stays legal....
That said, considering that he's only got those few models on the table there and says it's a complete legal army....the army will still be heavily hampered by its small size unless we see some serious buffs to the assassins.
It's news, because it gives credence to other specific detachments that allow for the remaining unit roles.
2017/05/19 16:51:51
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Red Corsair wrote: This reaffirms my suspicion that I should take las canons over multimeltas, so far all the big things are turning out to be at the T8 mark meaning that 3+ to wound at double range will me much better then 4+ to wound at suicide range
Glad my Iron Warriors pack lots of lasers
I am betting even the land raider is capped at T8, though I won't be too shocked if it is uniquely sitting at 9.
Meltas remove all of their save, however, and i'm starting to think you can take both armor and invulnerable.
Why?
Because what is the point of using a -3 or -4 on 3+ armor if they are going to take their 5+ invuln anyway? Even -2 is a moot point.
Your suggesting that because a 5+ is better then 0 save or 6+ that it surely need be an addition to the normal save but that isn't necessarily true. The purpose in an invuln save is to ensure a minimum chance at saving, not to worry about which guns AP is more or less useful. You may well be right, but nothing has hinted to this.
Even if the AP value doesn't negate the invul (which is still worse than their 3+ armour save), the weapons we're talking about still can be evaluated based on if you want the ability to hit the knight turn 1 (lascannons) or want more consistent damage once you start shooting it one turn 2 or later (melta).
This is what I already said.... Not sure you need to reply to EVERY post though I am impressed with your current in thread count
Honestly I don't even get how it's news since you can build an army out of Assassin detachments and any legal army in the game stays legal....
That said, considering that he's only got those few models on the table there and says it's a complete legal army....the army will still be heavily hampered by its small size unless we see some serious buffs to the assassins.
It's news, because it gives credence to other specific detachments that allow for the remaining unit roles.
Fair enough I guess. I mean we already knew that, but if it helps people sleep better at night, then fair enough.
Red Corsair wrote: This reaffirms my suspicion that I should take las canons over multimeltas, so far all the big things are turning out to be at the T8 mark meaning that 3+ to wound at double range will me much better then 4+ to wound at suicide range
Glad my Iron Warriors pack lots of lasers
I am betting even the land raider is capped at T8, though I won't be too shocked if it is uniquely sitting at 9.
Meltas remove all of their save, however, and i'm starting to think you can take both armor and invulnerable.
Why?
Because what is the point of using a -3 or -4 on 3+ armor if they are going to take their 5+ invuln anyway? Even -2 is a moot point.
Your suggesting that because a 5+ is better then 0 save or 6+ that it surely need be an addition to the normal save but that isn't necessarily true. The purpose in an invuln save is to ensure a minimum chance at saving, not to worry about which guns AP is more or less useful. You may well be right, but nothing has hinted to this.
Even if the AP value doesn't negate the invul (which is still worse than their 3+ armour save), the weapons we're talking about still can be evaluated based on if you want the ability to hit the knight turn 1 (lascannons) or want more consistent damage once you start shooting it one turn 2 or later (melta).
This is what I already said.... Not sure you need to reply to EVERY post though I am impressed with your current in thread count
Eh, I was posting by tablet at the time, by the time I was done fat fingering the digital keyboard I would miss other replies that said the same thing. Now that I'm on a PC for the moment I can avoid that.
And now that you mention it, I'm surprised at how much posting I've been doing too. Filtering the thread down to my posts leaves sixteen pages (and counting) of stuff.
I must be a little excited for the new edition.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/19 16:55:27
2017/05/19 16:56:32
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition Summary - 18 May 2017: Vehicles/Live QA 2 summary(All info in OP)
Honestly I don't even get how it's news since you can build an army out of Assassin detachments and any legal army in the game stays legal....
That said, considering that he's only got those few models on the table there and says it's a complete legal army....the army will still be heavily hampered by its small size unless we see some serious buffs to the assassins.
It's news, because it gives credence to other specific detachments that allow for the remaining unit roles.
Fair enough I guess. I mean we already knew that, but if it helps people sleep better at night, then fair enough.
I don't think that's a fair statement. People new of the initial three charts, this informs people of another. Furthermore the Q&A confirms that a detachment only needs share a single keyword. So key word Imperial is going to REALLY turn things into a sandbox. More so then last edition apart from unbound, only now you get command benefits, how many is still unknown though.
Honestly I don't even get how it's news since you can build an army out of Assassin detachments and any legal army in the game stays legal....
That said, considering that he's only got those few models on the table there and says it's a complete legal army....the army will still be heavily hampered by its small size unless we see some serious buffs to the assassins.
It's news, because it gives credence to other specific detachments that allow for the remaining unit roles.
Fair enough I guess. I mean we already knew that, but if it helps people sleep better at night, then fair enough.
Red Corsair wrote: This reaffirms my suspicion that I should take las canons over multimeltas, so far all the big things are turning out to be at the T8 mark meaning that 3+ to wound at double range will me much better then 4+ to wound at suicide range
Glad my Iron Warriors pack lots of lasers
I am betting even the land raider is capped at T8, though I won't be too shocked if it is uniquely sitting at 9.
Meltas remove all of their save, however, and i'm starting to think you can take both armor and invulnerable.
Why?
Because what is the point of using a -3 or -4 on 3+ armor if they are going to take their 5+ invuln anyway? Even -2 is a moot point.
Your suggesting that because a 5+ is better then 0 save or 6+ that it surely need be an addition to the normal save but that isn't necessarily true. The purpose in an invuln save is to ensure a minimum chance at saving, not to worry about which guns AP is more or less useful. You may well be right, but nothing has hinted to this.
Even if the AP value doesn't negate the invul (which is still worse than their 3+ armour save), the weapons we're talking about still can be evaluated based on if you want the ability to hit the knight turn 1 (lascannons) or want more consistent damage once you start shooting it one turn 2 or later (melta).
This is what I already said.... Not sure you need to reply to EVERY post though I am impressed with your current in thread count
Eh, I was posting by tablet at the time, by the time I was done fat fingering the digital keyboard I would miss other replies that said the same thing. Now that I'm on a PC for the moment I can avoid that.
And now that you mention it, I'm surprised at how much posting I've been doing too. Filtering the thread down to my posts leaves sixteen pages (and counting) of stuff.
I must be a little excited for the new edition.
hey I am right there with you, I have super clumsy fingers which makes my replies constantly late Also sharing the excitement with you I filtered the thread out of curiosity to see how many pages were all you, I was impressed and a bit concerned you may be turning to the dark gods...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/19 16:58:46
I filtered the thread out of curiosity to see how many pages were all you, I was impressed and a bit concerned you may be turning to the dark gods...