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.

 Leth wrote:
Just thought I would share this.

Apparently vehicles only explode on a "7" on the chart.

So I am guessing that the ap modifiers are staying in, but now if you are not ap 2 or 1 you cant destroy a vehicle in one shot.

Pretty big IMO

I'm just irritated Armored Vehicles dont get Armor Saves. I know its mostly useless with low ap weapons being shot at them, but they should have some sort of inherent save.

 Leth wrote:
Just thought I would share this.

Apparently vehicles only explode on a "7" on the chart.

So I am guessing that the ap modifiers are staying in, but now if you are not ap 2 or 1 you cant destroy a vehicle in one shot.

Pretty big IMO

Source?

You could always ask. Most FLGS carry what folks are interest in but can special order nearly every game.

They like making money, so I'm sure they'd be happy to sell new stuff.

It's just really sad that people would preorder anything site unseen these days. Video games get demos, books are like $20, but an $85 rules set with no open play testing or chance to demo them?

That's nuts. Almost all the competition to GW open play tests in some fashion for free or cheap. Wish GW fans would realize this.

I wish they'd drop the Av system for just toughness and wounds since they totally said eff it with regards to what's a walker and what's an MC. More realistically they saw that MCs sold better, so Riptides and Wraithknights got a T and W stat line.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Just thought I would share this.

Apparently vehicles only explode on a "7" on the chart.

So I am guessing that the ap modifiers are staying in, but now if you are not ap 2 or 1 you cant destroy a vehicle in one shot.

Pretty big IMO

Source?

The "source" appears to be someone wishlisting on the exact same page...

 Lobukia wrote:
I would love to see "explodes" removed from the damage chart. if 5-6 immobilized, then suddenly vehicles matter again.

I am not sure if this has been mentioned yet. The explode result is on a 7 now. vehicles can not be one shotted without an Ap1 or 2 weapon. This is not wishlisting but from my GW Rep.

 TheKbob wrote:
You could always ask. Most FLGS carry what folks are interest in but can special order nearly every game.

They like making money, so I'm sure they'd be happy to sell new stuff.

It's just really sad that people would preorder anything site unseen these days. Video games get demos, books are like $20, but an $85 rules set with no open play testing or chance to demo them?

That's nuts. Almost all the competition to GW open play tests in some fashion for free or cheap. Wish GW fans would realize this.

I wish they'd drop the Av system for just toughness and wounds since they totally said eff it with regards to what's a walker and what's an MC. More realistically they saw that MCs sold better, so Riptides and Wraithknights got a T and W stat line.

Does seem harder to wound that T8 Wraitknight that gets built in armor saves than that AV 14 landraider than can be popped in one hit with no built in saves...

 Vaktathi wrote:
HP's are really what I don't like, tank's don't just stop working or die after X number of hits, if it doesn't hit something critical it keeps going.

But that was called 5th edition and everyone hated it, apparently.

I just heard it from my LGS who got off the phone with his rep. Rulebook was confirmed at 85, psychic cards are 15, and objective cards at 8

 Alex C wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Just thought I would share this.

Apparently vehicles only explode on a "7" on the chart.

So I am guessing that the ap modifiers are staying in, but now if you are not ap 2 or 1 you cant destroy a vehicle in one shot.

Pretty big IMO

Source?

The "source" appears to be someone wishlisting on the exact same page...

'tis what I was thinking. But, you know... hope and all that.

Given that it's compatible with existing codexes, it's not exactly buying something sight unseen. While small changes can make a big impact on game play, basically every version of the rules and every codex from 3rd through 7th edition is compatible. So it's not buying something new without seeing whether or not it's worth it in advance, it's buying something again without seeing whether or not it's worth it in advance.

 Vaktathi wrote:
I'm fine with tank kills being somewhat "random", that's really how they should be, it either penetrates the armor and does something critical, or it doesn't. HP's are really what I don't like, tank's don't just stop working or die after X number of hits, if it doesn't hit something critical it keeps going.

As long as the same is done for multiwound models then I'd support it. As it stands, somehow every wound but the last on non vehicles only apparently shoots pinkie toes and earlobes. If vehicles can be one shorted by a melts, so should a riptide.

So two people saying GW folks are saying it's a 7 on the chart. Interesting.

It's not the one-shotting that makes vehicles suck though, it's glances removing HP. If they made one penetrating hits remove HP then you could't spam low Str weapons to kill vehicles.

That would be awesome! Imagine a meta where transports are very durable and spammed due to cheap cost and relative efficiency...one can only dream!

...wait.

You can make vehicles effective without making the game revolve around them. GW just doesn't know how or deliberately keeps see-sawing with them because profits.

 Sigvatr wrote:
That would be awesome! Imagine a meta where transports are very durable and spammed due to cheap cost and relative efficiency...one can only dream!

...wait.

Yeah, HP were introduced to kill the parking lot, we don't need the parking lot to come back we just need to balance things a little bit more is all.

Such info. Much leaks. Wow.

Information is coming from so many different sources at a time it's getting more and more difficult for me to keep up to date. I wonder if the rumor-tracking folks (Pretre?) are following or have just given up...

 TheKbob wrote:
You could always ask. Most FLGS carry what folks are interest in but can special order nearly every game.

They like making money, so I'm sure they'd be happy to sell new stuff.

It's just really sad that people would preorder anything site unseen these days. Video games get demos, books are like $20, but an $85 rules set with no open play testing or chance to demo them?

That's nuts. Almost all the competition to GW open play tests in some fashion for free or cheap. Wish GW fans would realize this.

I wish they'd drop the Av system for just toughness and wounds since they totally said eff it with regards to what's a walker and what's an MC. More realistically they saw that MCs sold better, so Riptides and Wraithknights got a T and W stat line.

If thats true about them being able to order that stuff I just might, my FLGS is in dire straits right now being open only three days a week with minimal inventory.

 Sigvatr wrote:
That would be awesome! Imagine a meta where transports are very durable and spammed due to cheap cost and relative efficiency...one can only dream!

...wait.

As opposed to nobody taking them (serpents/ fliers excluded) because they die as soon as someone looks at them funny?

They need a better balance between too soft and too hard.

 TheKbob wrote:

 Jaceevoke wrote:
I to will be getting one for preorder, more to support (and be able to play at) my flgs than anything else.

You could, instead, buy the rules to three to four different games and buy models for each. This supports your FLGS more and it allows them to not to deal with the terrible GW business practices.

If $85 dollars is correct, this could get you the Malifaux rule book, starter box, and a pack of game cards. If everyone in your store did this and waited on the GW book, you'd all be card flipping and supporting a game company that actually listens to their customers.

Spend your money how you wish. I'll be keeping my 40k armies, but until I can get a copy of 7E at $35 or less, it'll be a pass.

I have yet to see a FLGS genuinely enthused about carrying GW products. It's more a necessary beast than a much loved product line.

My small group (those left after 6th decimated our local 40k community) have no interest in 7th edition. Though we will wait and see how the feedback is once the rules are out. Right now, our FLGS put up for interest in pre-orders and not a single person has expressed interest. Of late I have been playing Hell Dorado, Mordheim, Flames of War and, last week, got in a few games of Warmahordes. I will be trying Bolt Action this weekend as it has taken off like hotcakes here and captured the majority of the previous 40k player base that once existed here.

While Warmahordes definitely has a different play style, it was my first games with the MkII rules and I must say, after a few games with those rules you do quickly realize just how amazingly bad the GW rules are and yet, they charge an astronomical premium for them.

My personal opinion is, except for the missions, there is not a single thing I have heard that has impressed me or even sounds good for the game. Unbound, Lords of War standard, and Daemonology, in my opinion, are utter nonsense and ultimately, will be worse for the game than the allies chart was in 6th edition. To me, the game is jumping the shark with this edition and I have a funny feeling this is going to be as wonderful a success as 4th edition D&D was.

This is yet another blatant attempt by GW to simply get people buying bigger, more expensive models and heck be to the fluff, rules and gameplay. They didn't "massage" the rules, they completely are changing the meta of the game which, after 7 editions, should about be perfect.

But, to your point, playing very little 40k nowadays but can get in many other games at my local FLGS that, to me at this point, are much better games than 40k.

 Sigvatr wrote:
That would be awesome! Imagine a meta where transports are very durable and spammed due to cheap cost and relative efficiency...one can only dream!

...wait.

Bolters to the back can still kill many transports and walkers... a far cry from 5th

I am hoping walkers get a much needed buff. It will be interesting to see what happens

Walkers should have HoW and a stomp table to balance them vs MC.

 Lobukia wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
That would be awesome! Imagine a meta where transports are very durable and spammed due to cheap cost and relative efficiency...one can only dream!

...wait.

Bolters to the back can still kill many transports and walkers... a far cry from 5th

A bolter to the rear armor could only glance a vehicle. Under the proposed system that Sigvatr was responding to, glances wouldn't knock-off HP's. So bolters to the back would do nothing.

Haha I apologize for my confusion-causing wishlist, hopefully those sources are legit though!

TBF I shouldnt be able to send Ork Kommandos out flanking and kill a tank with Sluggas

I dont think I have ever heard of a military front line vehicle being knocked out by a hand gun. (scout bikes and things excluded)

My flgs has the may 17 wd... but won't sell it til friday. It has deathguard prince and PMs on cover

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
That would be awesome! Imagine a meta where transports are very durable and spammed due to cheap cost and relative efficiency...one can only dream!

...wait.

Bolters to the back can still kill many transports and walkers... a far cry from 5th

A bolter to the rear armor could only glance a vehicle. Under the proposed system that Sigvatr was responding to, glances wouldn't knock-off HP's. So bolters to the back would do nothing.

Your ignoring the fact that most armies have jumped up in damage output by exponential gains. Missle sides for example. One unit almost puts down more HP's then all 15 of my ML long fangs. I honestly don't think glances should remove HP's. Either that or tanks shouldn't be stunned/shaken anymore. It's basically auto pinning a unit that gains no benefit, unlike jinking. I think only fast skimmers should be able to jink as well. We'll see.

I don't like parking lots but HP's crossed a line for sure.

You're presenting your argument to the wrong guy.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
You're presenting your argument to the wrong guy.

It read to me like you were defending his stance. Sorry if you weren't.