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.

str00dles1 wrote:
Was I right in reading this weekend GW is putting up the PDFs of all 10 armies on the website? Swore I did read that buried somewhere in here...

Yes, they are. Not sure if all of them are going up or just the lists not in the main rulebook.

xerxeshavelock wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Well, here's hoping that this game is giving basic weaponry extra stats to differentiate them, and this isn't the kind of stuff we see in base 40k. You'd quickly reduce anything but a basic 2+ armor save to something you'd almost never get or benefit from if we've got chainswords reducing space marines to a 5+ and boltgun rounds with a basic -1.

I'm particularly interested in whether the Lasgun has any save modifier. Are they just porting wholesale, or making selective adjustments. The post that said Flak armour was only 6+ would suggest a straight port, but equally that could be a reason to drop the -1 so a guardsman at least gets a chance against the lasgun.

The Lasgun has no save modifier, and yeah Flak is 6+, 5+ against template weapons. Dravis posted the quick reference sheet earlier this morning.

Lasguns used to have a -1 Modifier?

Dunno if they do in this though.

A Chainsword in 2nd ed. had a -1 armour save modifier. The most powerful armour save modifier was -6, which still gave Terminators a chance of ignoring it (effectively representing an invulnerable save). 9+ on 2D6 was tough but it happened.

Terminators did not have invulnerable saves in addition to their 3+(2D6) save unless they were characters with a field purchased (and you roll fields before armour, because that's what an attack would hit first).

Lasguns did have a -1 save modifier etc. Also the ranges are mostly whacky on all of the weapons in the SWA stuff listed. So, while the rules look very similar to Necromunda, a lot has changed (and I suspect these weapon profiles will be very indicative of 8th ed.) Overall, pretty disappointed with the dumbing down of another reborn product. it was quite expected, but it's sad that they didn't bother pushing deeper into the mechanics.

I will just leave this ...
http://imgur.com/a/heMlh

Ahhh the Hiding rule. Subject of many pages of disagreement on forums.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
so heres a question, and maybe this speaks to me not understandin how all this save mod stuff works:

Flak Armor is a 6+ save, and gives 5+ against weapons that use blasts and templates. But when I go to look at a basic flamer, it's got a -2 save mod! Wouldn't that 5+ be useless anyway?

Save mods seem really REALLY strong compared to normal armor saves tbh, and that's got me worried. I mean, shoot a flamer at a model wearing terminator armor and he's got a 5+ save on 2d6? That's so wimpy!

EDIT: if I'm reading the melee rules correctly, a S4 space marine holding a chainsword lowers a terminators armor save to a six! Really??

is there a mechanic I'm missing that raises a model's armor save? If not, why do -5sv weapons exist in a game with only 3+ saves?

Terminator saves are on 2D6, so -5 is useful.

Flamers SHOULD immolate people wearing glorified mattresses. Flak Armour is largely ineffective, such as it always was. May stop the odd autogun round or shotgun shell, no good against torrents of flame or mass-reactive Coke-can-sized 'splodey bulletrockets.

Take cover, people. This ain't your 'stride down the middle of a barren table' tournament 40K game! Armour should be a precarious thing against the many lasery and melty forms of death available!

Hiding and Overwatch were two things I hated about 2nd Ed. Overwatch just brought games to a standstill.

"Uhh... all my stuff's on Overwatch. Your turn."
"Ok... umm... yeah. All my stuff is on Overwatch then. Your turn."
"Still on Overwatch. Your turn."
"Ditto. Back to you."
"Still watchin' over y'all!"
"Me too."

Uhh...

 aracersss wrote:
I will just leave this ...
http://imgur.com/a/heMlh

Shotguns don't have a blast option any more?

There's no reason to shoot anything but slugs then...

Pick missions where you have to do stuff. Make the bugger move.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nostromodamus wrote:

 aracersss wrote:
I will just leave this ...
http://imgur.com/a/heMlh

Shotguns don't have a blast option any more?

There's no reason to shoot anything but slugs then...

Not if they removed 'Ignores Cover To Hit modifier' on Scatter shot. Damn. That was a classic odds-evening technique. Trade stopping power for ignoring cover and having a chance of making the shot. Removing the blast and making it base-contact-only splash damage happened a while back, if that's gone no biggie.

So now it's S4 / -1 save, or S5 / -- VERY SAD!

I do hope the Imperial Guard veterans also have access to the shotgun. Probably not, but one can hope.

 Elbows wrote:

Terminators did not have invulnerable saves in addition to their 3+(2D6) save unless they were characters with a field purchased (and you roll fields before armour, because that's what an attack would hit first).

Ahh you're right. Apologies I think I had also read the Ork Mega-armor rules which was 2+(on 1D6) but had the additional save.

That's got to be a mis-print, OR you get to keep using your remaining alternate ammo. As it stands there is zero reason you'd ever shoot scatter-shot ammo in place of slugs. That's just silly.

If it's like the original rules, scattershot should have the general rule of ignoring cover or models trying to hide.

 BrookM wrote:
If it's like the original rules, scattershot should have the general rule of ignoring cover or models trying to hide.

Pretty much this.

Also, Scatter Shot, according to WD, use the small blast template. So if there's a bunch of goons teetering on a walk way, could be a cunning way to give them all a flying lesson.

Correct, or that silly little 1" blast, but it definitely doesn't have that listed which I suspect is a misprint.

After glancing at the entire weapons sheet...the vast majority of the weapons differ immensely from the 2nd ed. ones (namely in wounds inflicted and save modifiers, etc.). Also they list Terminator armour as having a 3+(2D6) save and THEN a 5+ invulnerable. This, coupled with the max -3 save modifier on most weapons (outside of demo charges) makes Terminators insanely strong/tough.

Also reinforces my dislike when GW felt the need to make every race armed with different weapons with different stats. It added very little to the game. I look at the weapons list and simply think "well, why not just arm Orks with bolters etc. again...much easier".

I'm leaning more and more toward not picking this up. I have all the 2nd ed. books and the Necromunda rulebooks so I could just bash this into my own version if I really wanted to.

 Elbows wrote:
Correct, or that silly little 1" blast, but it definitely doesn't have that listed which I suspect is a misprint.

After glancing at the entire weapons sheet...the vast majority of the weapons differ immensely from the 2nd ed. ones (namely in wounds inflicted and save modifiers, etc.). Also they list Terminator armour as having a 3+(2D6) save and THEN a 5+ invulnerable. This, coupled with the max -3 save modifier on most weapons (outside of demo charges) makes Terminators insanely strong/tough.

Also reinforces my dislike when GW felt the need to make every race armed with different weapons with different stats. It added very little to the game. I look at the weapons list and simply think "well, why not just arm Orks with bolters etc. again...much easier".

I'm leaning more and more toward not picking this up. I have all the 2nd ed. books and the Necromunda rulebooks so I could just bash this into my own version if I really wanted to.

In fairness the Frag Missile doesn't mention the Blast Template either so presumably the Quick Reference sheets aren't the whole picture.

I will say also that the 5+ Invul save on the Terminator armor isn't confirmed to be taken in addition to your 3+ on 2D6 armor save. I mean it's logical given it'd be nigh impossible to negate that completely (Anything go up to -10?) but still the rules could be different. Plus I doubt it'll be a Squad of Terminators, more than likely a single Terminator model backing up the Scouts.

The main draw with shadow wars is fresh blood, if you've already got a committed gaming group that's great, however from personal experience trying to get people to play 2nd ed or Nercomunda is futile, zero interest.

Chances of this running in the local store.. slim to nil. I'm getting two boxes and that may be the extent of the sales with regards to this release.

I dont get why they don't just switch out the bs value to a die roll needed like in lotr or aos. Bs values are just unnecessarily clunky.
Also, the bottle test: Why, why, why? I've lost kill team matches to that rule (break test) and it wasnt fun for any of us. The worst one was where I'd shot out all except one of an opponents' kill team and I had lost one of my eight Chaos chosen. My opponent gets off a lucky shot that kills another of my chosen. I of course roll a twelve on my break test and immediately lose the game. We both agree it's bs as I had the opponents' last model (a Chaos raptor iirc) surrounded and in range of my entire kill team. I end up unhappy because I lost to a single illogical die roll and my opponent was unhappy because he had no sense of achievement for his victory.

 aracersss wrote:
I will just leave this ...
http://imgur.com/a/heMlh

Someone already left that on the previous page.

Looks like the weapons stats have been modified to make them more in line with current 40k. Not sure how removing the save mod from a lasgun is "dumbing down", but each to their own.

Shotgun looks a bit odd (Underhive also got rid of the blast template for scatter shells - reduced it to affecting anyone in b2b with the target, which was the same thing, in practice), but it could be that shotguns don't come with both shell types any more. Perhaps you need to buy solid slugs at additional cost.

flak armour appears to be useful against blastshot shells, lasguns and frag grenades - seems about right. I assume the chainsword now has a -2 save mod to make it more effective compared to a regular close combat weapon. In 2nd edition 40k / necromunda, it was S4, -1 sv, which meant in the hands of a Space Marine, a chainsword was no more effective than a sword. Not so much of a problem in Necromunda where most people would be S3 with a normal sword, but here where one faction is made up of S4 Marine Scouts, the change is worthwhile.

Even if this turns out to be a dud (which I doubt), I'll now have a good handle on how units and weapons introduced since 1997 should be statted up in 2nd edition.

Messiah wrote:
I dont get why they don't just switch out the bs value to a die roll needed like in lotr or aos. Bs values are just unnecessarily clunky.

8th says hello from the future. Probably.

I think the real reason behind a bottle or courage test is to keep the game from turning into one or two remaining figures on Overwatch hiding in a corner etc. When you play Necromunda you can expect to get through two, three, or even four games in a single 3-4 hour evening sometimes. It's just a rapid fire game.

You shouldn't get too twisted up about bottling. You just roll your post-game effects and get to the next game. I can see the angst in that if you're doing something like a tournament or competitive play - but in old Necromunda sometimes it was beneficial for someone to bottle so you could try to get some guys healed up, or recovered, or advance some of your characters (not uncommon for someone to voluntarily bottle if things were doing bad).

Having a persistent gang/group/warband introduces a new factor to the casual wargame. You have a vested interest in certain figures/models/characters and there's not benefit to going out guns blazing and actually losing half of your gang in a violent gunfight. Discretion being the better part of valour and some such. It made sense to voluntarily bottle out of a game you were losing badly. Much as you would in a real engagement - don't push a bad angle and get yourself in more trouble.

I would really love to see some vehicle rules in a future White Dwarf for SW: Armageddon. Just for the ability to create some fun scenarios using what is in some of the Start Collecting boxes.

Messiah wrote:
I dont get why they don't just switch out the bs value to a die roll needed like in lotr or aos. Bs values are just unnecessarily clunky.
Also, the bottle test: Why, why, why? I've lost kill team matches to that rule (break test) and it wasnt fun for any of us. The worst one was where I'd shot out all except one of an opponents' kill team and I had lost one of my eight Chaos chosen. My opponent gets off a lucky shot that kills another of my chosen. I of course roll a twelve on my break test and immediately lose the game. We both agree it's bs as I had the opponents' last model (a Chaos raptor iirc) surrounded and in range of my entire kill team. I end up unhappy because I lost to a single illogical die roll and my opponent was unhappy because he had no sense of achievement for his victory.

Whilst bottle tests were not ideal, the sort of situation you describe above is not necessarily unrealistic. There are plenty of times in military history where a small force has scared a much large force into believing they are actually outnumbered. What you know as a player is very different to what your models would know.

I'd rather botch a bottle test than lose most of my team in a protracted fight.

edit: nvm

After taking a close look at the big diorama, and assuming that GW oil barrels are 1" tall, I'm guessing that the stacked levels are 5" tall.

T

Probably 6"; twice the height of a ruined building wall tile.

 flakpanzer wrote:
I would really love to see some vehicle rules in a future White Dwarf for SW: Armageddon. Just for the ability to create some fun scenarios using what is in some of the Start Collecting boxes.

That's a really good idea and shouldn't actually be too hard to do on your own, just maybe leave the Leman Russ battle cannon out of it

Yeah no, all or nothing!