Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
|
2006/08/22 07:56:33
Subject: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Fresh-Faced New User
|
|
|
|
|
2006/08/22 08:02:25
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Plastictrees
Amongst the Stars, In the Night
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006/08/22 08:42:25
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Dakka Veteran
|
Bravo, GW. I have been pleasantly surprised by this. First they admit a mistake and change the FAQ, and admit to a second mistake, and fix it again. And instead of being totally nerfed, synapse actually got better, becoming immune to wraithcannons and possibly other Instant Death situations
|
|
|
|
2006/08/22 09:03:31
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Araqiel
|
I love how in their editorial on armies affected under 7th ed, they do not refer at all to the removal of targetting restrictions being applied to skaven weapon teams. Unless there's something we all do not know, this rules change makes them pretty much garbage.
Le sigh.
|
|
|
|
2006/08/22 09:36:30
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Regular Dakkanaut
|
So Im looking through the Black Gobbo and I see this page: http://us.games-workshop.com/games/40k/tyranids/painting/carnifex_conversions/1.htm
The 'Toxic-Lasher' carnifex has two lash whips for weapons. So does this mean that lash whips are cumulative? Or do they have monkeys as writers/editors?
Looking at some of the other carnifex conversions, Im quite convinced that whoever wrote this has never actually played with Tyranids before.
|
|
|
|
2006/08/22 10:38:53
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Wraith
|
Posted By jojo_monkey_boy on 08/22/2006 2:03 PM I love how in their editorial on armies affected under 7th ed, they do not refer at all to the removal of targetting restrictions being applied to skaven weapon teams. Unless there's something we all do not know, this rules change makes them pretty much garbage. Le sigh.
How does that relate to the Skaven book that specifically says they can't be targetted?
|
|
|
|
2006/08/22 18:46:56
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Sergeant First Class
|
it relates since the wording in the skaven book says they are treated as characters for shooting purposes, which now means they can be shot at (and magicked) in 7th ed. It also means Doomseekers can be shot at.. Its like Alessio toned down two of the cheesiest things in warhammer with one rule, awesome. Now you won't see the stupid 4 or more ratling gun armies, and the slayer list now isnt completely broken any more. I love it.
|
|
|
|
|
2006/08/22 19:34:24
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Lieutenant General
|
Am I the only one who noticed in the Tactica article that they recommend the Siege Shells stratagem for the Basilisk even though the Earthshaker is only S9 and therefore can not make use of siege shells?
|
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim |
|
|
|
2006/08/23 00:19:34
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests
Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.
|
I also liked their reccomendation for taking Master Snipers for Tau, forgetting that Tau don't have Snipers. And let's not even get into the 'strength' of the Eldar being 20-man Guardian units. Who writes these things? Who believes them? GW 'tacticas' strike again. BYE
|
|
|
|
|
2006/08/23 08:25:40
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Regular Dakkanaut
Bucharest, Romania
|
I'm a little concerned about an archery unit not being able to target multiple targets. Primarily, goblin fanatics. I'd hate to waste one unit's shots on one stinking fanatic. That just seems silly. Hopefully the rules or an FAQ will clairy
-Jmz
|
"In The Grim Darkness Of The Far Future, There Is No Reason To Be Ashamed Of An Unfurnished Basement." ~ Jester (talking about Wraithlord gibblies) |
|
|
|
2006/08/23 10:31:52
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Araqiel
|
Its like Alessio toned down two of the cheesiest things in warhammer with one rule, awesome. There was likely an easier way to tone down rattling guns with out making them worthless. With the new targetting rules I can be ensured that my guns will be the first thing to die in my army with little I can do to prevent this from happening. I guess that leaves me waiting a minimum of a year before they're usable again. :/
|
|
|
|
2006/08/23 10:35:17
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
Los Angeles
|
Anyone have the exact wording from the Skaven book? I don't have one, but I'm curious if they have their very own "no targeting" rules or if they're just treated like characters." That would make a big difference RE: the ratling gun nerf or lack thereof.
|
"The last known instance of common sense happened at a GT. A player tried to use the 'common sense' argument vs. Mauleed to justify his turbo-boosted bikes getting a saving throw vs. Psycannons. The player's resulting psychic death scream erased common sense from the minds of 40k players everywhere. " - Ozymandias |
|
|
|
2006/08/23 10:49:38
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Guardsman with Flashlight
|
The wording in the army book says they must deploy within 3" of their parent unit, but thereafter they count as a separate unit. A few sentences later it says they can be fired at with the same limitations as when targeting single characters on foot.
So, yeah, they can be picked off like a character now.
It won't change my battle plans much, really. I'll just move them to the rear of my units until that unit charges. Then move the weapon team enough to the side that they can see the target unit and fire away.
|
|
|
|
2006/08/23 10:51:01
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Dakka Veteran
Pirate Ship Revenge
|
Beat me to it.
|
|
|
|
|
2006/08/24 05:10:29
Subject: RE: Black Gobbo and 'Nids FAQ round three.
|
|
Regular Dakkanaut
|
About the skaven weapon teams - barring magic, most armies will have to use entire units (at least 10 man strong missile troops) to take out weapon teams. And that's provided they have line of sight - Skaven players can still nestle them between regiments to restrict line of sight (unless of course, the missile troops are on a hill.) Compound that with the -1 to hit modifier for shooting at skirmishers, I don't think shooting at weapons teams is necessarily the best course of action all the time. I certainly doubt I'll see Skaven players lose all of them in a single turn or two. And every shot struggling to snipe a weapons team in one less shot targetting the big juicy regiments. Anyway, just some food for thought. Good gaming!
Clarence
|
|
|
|
|