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.

 TheSilo wrote:
Omg everyone fails at math.

Perils of the warp = 1/18 attempts

Executioner gets hot = 1/6 per shot, lose a hull point 1/12 shots fired. 3 shots per turn, average 0.25 hull points per turn. Way more dangerous than perils of the warp. Won't kill the tank outright, but will likely damage itself at least once per game, 50% chance to do two HPs in a 6 turn battle.

Gets hot is more dangerous than perils of the warp.

You might want to notice that what we were talking about was the odds of the tank blowing itself up in one round, not the odds of losing a hull point. In other words, it's not math that's being failed at, it's reading comprehension.

The chance of it blowing itself up in a single round of shooting is obviously pretty low and hardly worth worrying about, but I reckon doing 1-2HP damage to your own tank over the course of a game is pretty bad for a model that costs 155+pts.

An executioner, if equipped with plasma sponsons, should kill itself over a 7 turn game if it fires each turn, on average.

I can't think of any other unit that is as much of a danger to itself. Ridiculously punitive.

It's only 35 shots over 7 turns, it'd need 36 to on average do 3 HP. /nitpick

 Vaktathi wrote:
An executioner, if equipped with plasma sponsons, should kill itself over a 7 turn game if it fires each turn, on average.

I can't think of any other unit that is as much of a danger to itself. Ridiculously punitive.

The entire "gets hot" rule is stupid IMO, I'm hoping it gets changed in 7th edition. On a vehicle, at absolute WORST, it should be "can't fire next turn as weapon cools". What sort of idiot designs a vehicle that can absorb heavy fire more safely than it can fire it's own guns, then what sort of idiot decides he's going to get in that vehicle and ride to war


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It's only 35 shots over 7 turns, it'd need 36 to on average do 3 HP. /nitpick

It actually has a 56.7% chance of destroying itself in 7 turns of firing, so you're more likely to kill yourself than not

 Ailaros wrote:

ThunderFury wrote:I'm very, very disappointed that rough riders are nerfed to the point of not even fluffy games.

Rough riders actually got better with this codex. At least they got their proper +S and +I back again.

What do you mean by this?

RR's in 5th and 6th both have the same stat-line, and the weapon has the exact same affect.

The only difference between 5E and 6E RR's is that the 6th edition ones cost more.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
An executioner, if equipped with plasma sponsons, should kill itself over a 7 turn game if it fires each turn, on average.

I can't think of any other unit that is as much of a danger to itself. Ridiculously punitive.

The entire "gets hot" rule is stupid IMO, I'm hoping it gets changed in 7th edition. On a vehicle, at absolute WORST, it should be "can't fire next turn as weapon cools". What sort of idiot designs a vehicle that can absorb heavy fire more safely than it can fire it's own guns, then what sort of idiot decides he's going to get in that vehicle and ride to war

I was really hoping they'd ditch it entirely instead of making it even worse. It made sense when plasma guns were 5pts at the dawn of 3rd edition. Now? They serve no legitimate gameplay purpose, especially as most of the time weapons seem to be costed without thought to GH being included.

Aye, really regretting giving my Executioner plasma Sponsons.

I think you need to read some 40k novels. Your statement on how imperial guard works is cleary derived from codex artwork.

IG actually works very similair to soviet mechanized armor doctrine. What this codex does is nothing more than market the new models.

I must grant you this though, its not a bad codex ruleswise. And personally I like the fact that priests, psykers and commissars all have become more usefull.

My chimera will now become mobile command vehicles for my command squads and I still refuse to buy the Taurox. Its a crowdcontrol vehicle and shouldn't have a place on a 40k battlefield.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:
Omg everyone fails at math.

Perils of the warp = 1/18 attempts

Executioner gets hot = 1/6 per shot, lose a hull point 1/12 shots fired. 3 shots per turn, average 0.25 hull points per turn. Way more dangerous than perils of the warp. Won't kill the tank outright, but will likely damage itself at least once per game, 50% chance to do two HPs in a 6 turn battle.

Gets hot is more dangerous than perils of the warp.

You might want to notice that what we were talking about was the odds of the tank blowing itself up in one round, not the odds of losing a hull point. In other words, it's not math that's being failed at, it's reading comprehension.

I was referring to your comment: "Honestly, I'm not sure I did that right, but regardless the odds are pretty silly. People still use Psykers despite the (comparatively) massive 1/18 risk of Perils of the Warp."

The threat from perils of the warp is less than the threat from gets hot, which would be the opposite of "comparatively massive." Both rules remove one wound or one hull point.

 aliusexalio wrote:
...I still refuse to buy the Taurox. Its a crowdcontrol vehicle and shouldn't have a place on a 40k battlefield.

It is more of an MRAP than a crowd control vehicle.