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.

I'm hoping the same for 6/6, 6/5 and 6/6 results being needed.

Not a deal breaker if it isn't though!

 Valander wrote:

 davou wrote:
Hmmm, I wonder if a lascannon does d6 wounds.... do you roll to save once agianst the hit and then apply the wounds if you fail, or count the wounds and then roll to save each individually?

If they follow AoS (which I would assume is likely), it's Roll to Hit -> Roll to Wound -> Roll to Save -> Apply damage (which if variable, is rolled at this point).

The implication from the wording is that this is the case as they state:-

This stats effectively lets a single hit deliver multiple wounds to one model. So, as we can see, the bolter does a single would per hit, and so is optimised for shooting models that have a single wound themselves, whereas the lascannon, one of the most powerful man-portable weapons in the game, kicks out D6 damage, allowing it to blast chunks off large vehicles and monsters and kill light vehicles and characters in a single hit.

The last bit being particularly notable.

So what is your guys guess for the first new faction? Kind of hinted to drop by the release of the new edition

In 2nd that's how you dealt with stuff...i.e. multiple wounds. Your lascannon did 2D6 wounds, but a Bloodthirster had 10 wounds. So you "could" snipe the crap out of them if you were lucky, or it could take five friggin' shots. (for reference a Carnifex had 3+ armour on 2D6 with 10 wounds...it was effectively as hard to kill as a ten man terminator squad --- and even had a 9+ save on 2D6 vs. a lascannon or crack missile.) Sometimes you got lucky, sometimes you didn't.

The silly "doubling out" nonsense only appeared when people realized it was stupid for a character to take 3-4-5 lascannon shots to kill them in the game. Honestly randomized wounds is far more "cool" for story telling.

RE: The Multimelta being outshone by the Lascannon. That wasn't really true at all...they each served a purpose.

The Lascannon had 60" range, Strength 9, 2D6 wounds -6 save.

The Multi-Melta had 24" range (+1 at close range), Strength 8, 2D12 wounds, -4 save and a potentially better armour piercing value...using a friggin 2" template.

The Multi-Melta rarely showed up models because they weren't available as kit pieces for Marine devastators etc. They were present on some dreads and the landspeeder though and were brutally efficient at wiping out crowds of marines and heavy armour.

 Mezmerro wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Looking forward to fielding Godhammer Land Raiders. It's been a while.

Actually they're called Phobos.
Godhammer is the patern of a TL lascannon sponson

Yah yah, but Godhammer sounds better. I could have just gone with Real/True Land Raider but then I would have sounded pompous.


Very curious as to the new stats for the Heavy Bolter and Missile Launcher.

So far everything shown has been just space marines right?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I'm hoping the same for 6/6, 6/5 and 6/6 results being needed.

Not a deal breaker if it isn't though!

Thought about the same thing, it would complicate reroll wound mechanics though.

When would you reroll ? At the original d6, or the second d6, or both?

Just my 2cents

 Allot wrote:
So what is your guys guess for the first new faction? Kind of hinted to drop by the release of the new edition

Orks. They always drop Orks first and then cackle as they start to show their age right away and ultimately become the punching bag for the Imperium again in short order.

Nah, all kidding aside, Orks.

Well, we know Death Guard are becoming a faction.
And they're seemingly in the starter set.

Sooo...Death Guard.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Well, we know Death Guard are becoming a faction.
And they're seemingly in the starter set.

Sooo...Death Guard.

Yea, but we knew about them and they aren't a "new" faction. My guess would be Guilliman's marines.

They are technically new, they aren't available now but will be in the new edition.

Just assume it's DG, prevents any disappointment.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Well, we know Death Guard are becoming a faction.
And they're seemingly in the starter set.

Sooo...Death Guard.

Yea, but we knew about them and they aren't a "new" faction. My guess would be Guilliman's marines.

Doesn't matter if we knew about them or not.

Death Guard, as they stand right now, are not a faction in their own right. They're an alternate version of CSM.

Yeah I think people are getting way too hung up on "new" meaning completely new and unseen before in the game. I don't think that's the case at all. I think we're simply seeing a model wave launch of an existing property in the game (or at least a heavy presence in the fluff).

Depends on what GW mean when they say a "new" faction. IMO the last time 40k got a totally new never before seen faction was the Tau. Every "new" faction since then has already existed in some form in the background and in some cases already had a minor table top presence.

Is there a summary i can look at to find out the changes that we know so far?

This thread is pretty big, I don't fancy reading through all of it!

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

I would just like to see boltguns being effective against light armoured infantry. I'm not expecting them to be able to gun down landraiders with one shot.

Except you're not arguing that they're "ineffective"--your argument is effectively that Guardsmen should get no armor save period against them.

No. Screw that noise. We had how many editions of "all or nothing"? Build a bridge and get over it.

So will marines be getting a point drop or guard an increase to balance it out because if guard are suddenly shrugging of fire but still killing then same amount of marines then they need.a balanc8ng factor.

I guess guard could stay the same points but have a max squad size of 10 and no platoon bollocks.

 Elbows wrote:
In 2nd that's how you dealt with stuff...i.e. multiple wounds. Your lascannon did 2D6 wounds, but a Bloodthirster had 10 wounds. So you "could" snipe the crap out of them if you were lucky, or it could take five friggin' shots. (for reference a Carnifex had 3+ armour on 2D6 with 10 wounds...it was effectively as hard to kill as a ten man terminator squad --- and even had a 9+ save on 2D6 vs. a lascannon or crack missile.) Sometimes you got lucky, sometimes you didn't.

The silly "doubling out" nonsense only appeared when people realized it was stupid for a character to take 3-4-5 lascannon shots to kill them in the game. Honestly randomized wounds is far more "cool" for story telling.

RE: The Multimelta being outshone by the Lascannon. That wasn't really true at all...they each served a purpose.

The Lascannon had 60" range, Strength 9, 2D6 wounds -6 save.

The Multi-Melta had 24" range (+1 at close range), Strength 8, 2D12 wounds, -4 save and a potentially better armour piercing value...using a friggin 2" template.

The Multi-Melta rarely showed up models because they weren't available as kit pieces for Marine devastators etc. They were present on some dreads and the landspeeder though and were brutally efficient at wiping out crowds of marines and heavy armour.

The melta gun outshone both of them in practice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SeanDrake wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

I would just like to see boltguns being effective against light armoured infantry. I'm not expecting them to be able to gun down landraiders with one shot.

Except you're not arguing that they're "ineffective"--your argument is effectively that Guardsmen should get no armor save period against them.

No. Screw that noise. We had how many editions of "all or nothing"? Build a bridge and get over it.

So will marines be getting a point drop or guard an increase to balance it out because if guard are suddenly shrugging of fire but still killing then same amount of marines then they need.a balanc8ng factor.

I guess guard could stay the same points but have a max squad size of 10 and no platoon bollocks.

No, they are radically changing every aspect of the game but leaving points exactly the same forever.

Eyjio wrote:

EDIT: For fun, before anyone says the vehicle damage chart wasn't ridiculously broken in 5th, the Dread would take 27 shots from an autocannon and 9(!) lascannon shots if it wasn't in cover. That's why everyone used melta - it was the only thing worth a damn against armour, and made basically all armour values into a joke, needing only ~3.5 shots to kill the same Dread... let's not go back to either that level of anti-armour, or that level of durability.

However, the point there is that people moan how one-shot kill ruins vehicle lists, yet in 5th edition chance for 1-shot kill was much higher than in 6th or 7th. And it's not like Autocannons were bad in 5th edition - Hydras and Lootas were very much awesome in 5th.
Also, luck tends to even up over the game: I played Tau during 5th edition (Golden Age of Railgun!) and number of times I blew up or immobilized a big vehicle on first shot, only to see my luck turn and roll Shakes and Weapon Destroyed rest of the game and get rolled. It's only in small points games where a player might have just 1 tank where this was an issue.

And really, is it really that much different in 8th? Roll 6 for Lascannon, Dread has 2 wounds left. Most probably it is now either Immobilized or otherwise has its combat capability seriously reduced. Sure it didn't die, but it's not gonna be much use anymore, and can be finished off with Mid or Low strength shooting which in 7th wouldn't have done anything to it. So I am not convinced things actually changed here in practical terms. May be different for Land Raiders which probably has 12 Wounds.

The burning question is: How many Marines can use a grenade against a vehicle in CC?

Backfire wrote:

Eyjio wrote:

EDIT: For fun, before anyone says the vehicle damage chart wasn't ridiculously broken in 5th, the Dread would take 27 shots from an autocannon and 9(!) lascannon shots if it wasn't in cover. That's why everyone used melta - it was the only thing worth a damn against armour, and made basically all armour values into a joke, needing only ~3.5 shots to kill the same Dread... let's not go back to either that level of anti-armour, or that level of durability.

However, the point there is that people moan how one-shot kill ruins vehicle lists, yet in 5th edition chance for 1-shot kill was much higher than in 6th or 7th. And it's not like Autocannons were bad in 5th edition - Hydras and Lootas were very much awesome in 5th.
Also, luck tends to even up over the game: I played Tau during 5th edition (Golden Age of Railgun!) and number of times I blew up or immobilized a big vehicle on first shot, only to see my luck turn and roll Shakes and Weapon Destroyed rest of the game and get rolled. It's only in small points games where a player might have just 1 tank where this was an issue.

And really, is it really that much different in 8th? Roll 6 for Lascannon, Dread has 2 wounds left. Most probably it is now either Immobilized or otherwise has its combat capability seriously reduced. Sure it didn't die, but it's not gonna be much use anymore, and can be finished off with Mid or Low strength shooting which in 7th wouldn't have done anything to it. So I am not convinced things actually changed here in practical terms. May be different for Land Raiders which probably has 12 Wounds.

What do you consider 'mid strength'? S6 and S7 shooting was why dreads suck in 7th, not Lascannons. Lascannons were actually a gak way of dealing with dread, melta works much better, and scatter lasers fry em up extra crispy.

From playing AoS the damage part of the profile is the best thing that happened. Now railguns won't just plink off one wound and characters who have long sweeping attacks in CC won't just hit one guy.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
On reflection, I should retract my earlier comments and instead start celebrating the fact that Imperial Guardsmen will get a save against boltguns.

I used to play Guard, and nothing annoyed me more than spending hours assembling and painting squads of Guardsmen, only to have to remove them from the gaming table 30 seconds later when a Space Marine disengaged the safety on his bolter.

Dakka, I'm sorry.

I don't wanna sound rude, but there's not really any way to say this without it being at least a little bit sharp.

If you're criticisms of the game are based on how they will directly effect the efficacy models you choose to field, then your input on game design is worth less than nothing.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Loving that change. Makes weapons do what they should! Flamer does D6 attacks each doing 1 wound to a model, lascannon does D6 wounds to one model. PERFECT.

Stops an anti-tank gun mowing down troops, or a flamer over-cooking tough models. Bloody simple and lovely.

Exactly how I am feeling at the moment. Very exciting times!!

You know what's best about all of this? Every unit is probably going to be worth taking to some degree. There's so many units now that are so useless they're worthless. The IG codex is full of them. Not anymore.

Lets be fair, that's a large part of what a lot of people wanted.

Really liked those weapon stats, one thing I was worried about was them being too free with ASM's, but if a bolter doesnt get one and we leave it to bigger weapons thats excellent.

I also can't believe people are complaining that anti-tank weapons are finally good again at their intended purpose without being great at anti infantry as well (well I can, it's just rather sad). I may finally be able to take my triple lance Ravager again and not feel sad about it.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
You know what's best about all of this? Every unit is probably going to be worth taking to some degree. There's so many units now that are so useless they're worthless. The IG codex is full of them. Not anymore.

That's a hell of an asusumption to make


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 buddha wrote:
From playing AoS the damage part of the profile is the best thing that happened. Now railguns won't just plink off one wound and characters who have long sweeping attacks in CC won't just hit one guy.

Not sure if I undertand your post, but damage is not resolved as it is in AOS (thanks god)

 Future War Cultist wrote:
You know what's best about all of this? Every unit is probably going to be worth taking to some degree. There's so many units now that are so useless they're worthless. The IG codex is full of them. Not anymore.

Not so fast, hoss.
Points are still a thing sadly.

When we only had Open Play for AoS, this was the attitude everyone tended to have. "Wow, these units I haven't used since whenever are finally getting used again! Hooray!".

Then points and Matched Play came back and poof, we're basically back to the same metas as before just with different units.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
You know what's best about all of this? Every unit is probably going to be worth taking to some degree. There's so many units now that are so useless they're worthless. The IG codex is full of them. Not anymore.

Not so fast, hoss.

Points are still a thing sadly.

Their stated goal is still to make everything useful.

Shooting is problematic in AoS, currently, yes. But that doesn't mean they aren't doing something about it.

ERJAK wrote:


No, they are radically changing every aspect of the game but leaving points exactly the same forever.

did i miss this?