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.

Warhammer World wrote:Being inside an exploding vehicle is still bad news. Models inside a wrecked Transport will now die on the roll of a 1.

Emphasis mine. The intended effect of a transport dying seem quite obvious to me. I don't think MANZ missile is dead; it's quite a big gamble, though. Trukk Boyz, on the other hand, will be much more survivable than previously, considering the how frequently a Trukk's death involved an explosion.

Yeah, I'm just hoping it's not the case. That seems pretty harsh on elite units.

Really only harmful to meganobz and, to a much lesser extent, Nobz in heavy armor, other choices barely got onto the table. The biggest thing putting me off about transports is disembarking before movement. Won't be an issue if we have good mobility on foot though.

My recent concern today? Without Move 6 then disembark 6, why bring vehicles? Why not more orkz? Or, since vehicles can assault.. why not all vehicles and walkers?

Edit, and with the template change meaning we deploy in tight blocks, I ask again, why not moar boyz?

Can someone compare the stat lines of 8th edition morkanaut with imperial knight and the swarmlord?

I think namely because we can expect vehicle move statlines to be much better. We already saw the Harlequin Starweaver with a massive move stat, I mean we may see Trukks be 14 or 16". The transport rules are unclear still, but we could be talking about that distance plus an advance turn one for a turn two charge, or even that distance plus a good charge roll for a turn two disembark/charge. That's a huge threat range.

What we need to know is if you can disembark from a vehicle engaged in close combat, and what kind of advantages we expect things like Trukks to have, which were not only Open Topped but also Fast. I also anticipate mixed units in Battlewagons will be fairly strong.

I think it's a safe bet that trukks will move a lot farther than 6".

Assuming trukks go 12" (+d6" from advancing), they would be exactly as fast as slugga boyz right now assuming you can assault on turn 2. If you can't (gun lines will be moving away from you) you gain 6" per turn over footsloggers.

Battlewagons will be mostly for protecting your units and as gun platforms, especially with our S4 shootas now wounding a lot more models on 5+. I also expect them to become fast as well.

To early to assume anything sucks since we don't know what options like boarding planks, or if assault vehicles still exist or if there is any new vehicles coming or what FW transports do. Plus things like gorkanaut are actually a transport that can hold 3 manz.

Not sure if it's funny or sad that, based off current modelling options, our transports have more melee choices than our HQs...

 JohnU wrote:
Not sure if it's funny or sad that, based off current modelling options, our transports have more melee choices than our HQs...

Both

Ashkayel wrote:

 JohnU wrote:
Not sure if it's funny or sad that, based off current modelling options, our transports have more melee choices than our HQs...

Both

"Funny and sad" the official Ork design philosophy since 5th edition.

 JohnU wrote:

Ashkayel wrote:

 JohnU wrote:
Not sure if it's funny or sad that, based off current modelling options, our transports have more melee choices than our HQs...

Both

"Funny and sad" the official Ork design philosophy since 5th edition.

This is sad...

ugh, my feels boss.

It's interesting to see what will happen with the choppa+slugga vs shoota holywar. If choppa grants an extra attack like a chainsword, choppaboyz might have recieved a neat buff. But if it does nothing, we might get back to shoota dominance that we used to have in 5-th and early 6.

My guess is that choppa will grant an extra attack but together with a slugga will cost the same as a shoota. Which is fine by me. As there are still lots of things you don't wana meet up close.

The new "explode" rule is very good for boyz. We lose average 2 models instead of the 5 that was in 7th and its more taxing to marines that they used to lose 1 model. Also if our trukk has a very good speed like 14 or 16 it can assault first turn and the models inside can still shoot full ballistic in the shooting phase before the assaults.

gungo wrote:
To early to assume anything sucks since we don't know what options like boarding planks, or if assault vehicles still exist or if there is any new vehicles coming or what FW transports do. Plus things like gorkanaut are actually a transport that can hold 3 manz.

THIS! it will finally be useful/usable to put orkz in da nauts!

Secondly, I wonder whether you will have to roll for each squad separately inside transports. As it could be useful to put a unit of 12 boyz in a BW alongside say 8 flashgitz, if you get wrecked, you roll your death dice and assign them all to boyz. But we will have to see. I wonder whether the waaagh! rule will be similar to what it is now. As that could be quite potent with a transport move and advance turn 1. disembark, move, advance, charge turn 2. That would be some serious board movement.

 thenewgozoku wrote:
The new "explode" rule is very good for boyz. We lose average 2 models instead of the 5 that was in 7th and its more taxing to marines that they used to lose 1 model. Also if our trukk has a very good speed like 14 or 16 it can assault first turn and the models inside can still shoot full ballistic in the shooting phase before the assaults.

Don't forget morale casualties though. For what we know, manz missiles will be more dangerous to perform. Seems that manz belong to wagons now.

Anywayz, the ability to mix squads in transports has singlehandedly made regular nobz viable.

Now that there's the risk to have a multiwound high armored model killed with a roll of a 1 I expect meganonbz to ride in BW. BW that can be quite common in the upcoming edition, now that vehicles are tougher and thanks to the rule that they can carry more units.

Single wound low armored models will benefit from this change, instead. No more eavy armor on boyz I guess, as people won't freak out about the risk of losing half unit when the trukk explodes anymore.

Trukks are cheaper and faster and we will need a lot of units even in 8th edition, that's why they will always be necessary, but BWs have come back, at last

Why no 'eavy armor? It still looks way more useful than it used to be. With cover now being +1 to armor and heavy bolters just forcing it down to -1 instead of simply ignoring it. We might see 3+ boyz vs bolters. It can be worth it. Depending on cost. Too bad we can't take squads of 9 boyz. Cause i'd finally get to use regular nobz in trukk rushes. Nobz might finally get a place in wagons though.

If wagons are still capacity 20, you can put 5 manz, 5 burnas/gits/kommandoes, 3 nobz and an indep or two in there. Now that's variety. Wagon pops and confetti fals out!

Actually, that makes me wonder what's the best variety we can get with a wagon apart from indeps.
3 nobz, 5 kommandoes, 5 burnas, 5 lootas...a kopta? Can koptas ride trukks if everything has identical rules?.. Can trukks ride trukks? Can trukks ride trukks riding trukks?

 koooaei wrote:
Why no 'eavy armor?

If it costs 40% of the model like in 7th it's way overpriced. And most of the times players chose to upgrade their boyz with ea only to mitigate the explosion results, which could hurt trukk boyz quite badly. With no AP anymore but armour modifiers ea may be not useless but I don't see its value if the model that wears it costs almost as much as two regular boyz.

Players disliked 'eavy armor because 'eavy armor was ignored way too often and cover was a plain 5+ or 4+ save. Now the majority of weapons that used to ignore 4+ would bring it down to 5+ and cover would bump it up to 4+ again.
Also, if we can finally mix 'eavy armor with no armor, it'd be a huge buff for hordes. You can take less casualties from shooting => less battleshock casualties and you can kill unarmored boyz with morale. It's all wishlisting though.

Anywayz, i think that 'eavy armor is going to be more useful than it's now. Especially with wagonboyz. Once you've disembarked and obliterated your target, you're now standing there in the open waiting to be bolter-drilled and than moralled to death.

 KommissarKiln wrote:

Warhammer World wrote:Being inside an exploding vehicle is still bad news. Models inside a wrecked Transport will now die on the roll of a 1.

Emphasis mine. The intended effect of a transport dying seem quite obvious to me. I don't think MANZ missile is dead; it's quite a big gamble, though. Trukk Boyz, on the other hand, will be much more survivable than previously, considering the how frequently a Trukk's death involved an explosion.

I am sorry, you are ghazkhull thraka the big boss ork xxxxxx strong, sorry you roll a 1, bye (happen to my admiral in aos yesterday).

I'm pretty sure you'll pick casualties yourself. So, unless you carry a single character in there, you're fine. Well, unless you roll 20 ones. So...relatively safe.

 koooaei wrote:
I'm pretty sure you'll pick casualties yourself. So, unless you carry a single character in there, you're fine. Well, unless you roll 20 ones. So...relatively safe.

Depends if you roll per unit. As IC's are technically not in the squad. But tbh I am assuming they will let you pick for this exact reason. And if so... well then you can just always have a chaff unit that can eat those wounds. Grots! Grots in vehicles! my my.... what a glorious day to be a grot!

I could see kommando's being a good chaff unit for vehicle explosions. They can be 5 strong, they can carry a burna and a shoota, so you explode, you remove those 3 dudes without the good weapons and done!
Heck, maybe even nobs will become good chaff units. Multiwound... ah no, its a die on 1, not a wound on 1. So no.

Oh yeah, i forgot about ic being a separate squad. So...i guess we might see more footslogging and deepstriking IC. Which ain't bad on it's own. And if we want a mech list with mellee ic, we'll have to take our chances and not overinvest in those characters - which is easilly done with orks. Or there's going to be a special rule about it.

What i do hope is that we'll see fewer biker characters.

 koooaei wrote:


What i do hope is that we'll see fewer biker characters.

Until people get over the fear of a re-rollable blowing up their ICs (or the rule behaves differently for characters), you're probably going to see more bike characters initially.

 koooaei wrote:
What i do hope is that we'll see fewer biker characters.

Not sure how I feel about this... Mainly because I'm currently building a counts-as biker unit, and I was hoping to include a Painboy in the unit... But that may or may not be a very bad idea with IC rules. Guess I'll be leaving one saddle empty till we find out.

 koooaei wrote:
Why no 'eavy armor? It still looks way more useful than it used to be. With cover now being +1 to armor and heavy bolters just forcing it down to -1 instead of simply ignoring it. We might see 3+ boyz vs bolters. It can be worth it. Depending on cost. Too bad we can't take squads of 9 boyz. Cause i'd finally get to use regular nobz in trukk rushes. Nobz might finally get a place in wagons though.

If wagons are still capacity 20, you can put 5 manz, 5 burnas/gits/kommandoes, 3 nobz and an indep or two in there. Now that's variety. Wagon pops and confetti fals out!

"Wagon pops and confetti fals out!" -- have an exalt for that!

I used armor to mitigate mob rule, now not an issue. Because morale and now explosions remove the whole model without saves, armor is less valuable than before, I think.

Armor is useful for what is was supposed to be now rather than wound mitigation from exploding trukks or mob rule. It makes da boyz 'arder to kill and lets them kill moar! Dem footsloggin' Goffs ken git to da fight and krump da 'umies! WAAAGH!!!

 biggie_reg wrote:
Armor is useful for what is was supposed to be now rather than wound mitigation from exploding trukks or mob rule. It makes da boyz 'arder to kill and lets them kill moar! Dem footsloggin' Goffs ken git to da fight and krump da 'umies! WAAAGH!!!

True. Trukk boyz, on the other hand, strike first in combat, hopefully on turn 2, and get shot at less, especially since overwatch can be eaten by the trukk itself.

I used to think that trukk boyz need armor and footsloggers don't. Maybe that is exactly reversed now.

 JimOnMars wrote:

 biggie_reg wrote:
Armor is useful for what is was supposed to be now rather than wound mitigation from exploding trukks or mob rule. It makes da boyz 'arder to kill and lets them kill moar! Dem footsloggin' Goffs ken git to da fight and krump da 'umies! WAAAGH!!!

True. Trukk boyz, on the other hand, strike first in combat, hopefully on turn 2, and get shot at less, especially since overwatch can be eaten by the trukk itself.

I used to think that trukk boyz need armor and footsloggers don't. Maybe that is exactly reversed now.

Yeah, and fluff wise, trukks are fast and light vehicles that should probably me transporting light troops, not heavy armored troops. That's debatable, of course.