Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site ; UPDATE 28/04 Psychic Phase

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.

**Sinful Hero**

Mymearan wrote:
Sinful Hero wrote:
amanita wrote:
Not having read the whole thread so my apologies if this has been discussed, but if a weapon such as a lascannon does D6 hits/wounds is it then possible to kill up to 6 space marines with a single shot? If so, is there a point to having blast weapons? Just curious, as I'm barely catching up on the latest rumors.

A Lascannon will hit one model and deal d6 wounds to it. A flamer will hit d6 models and deal 1 wound to each.

Where did you read the last part? I assume Flamers will do D6 hits, and those hits will do wounds in the normal way, i.e. Six wounds would kill three two-wound models.

I was just trying to keep my example simple. I wasn't going to get into how it would distribute damage to multiple wound models.

**casvalremdeikun**

zerosignal wrote:
So, given a dreadnought is 8W, you're going to have to hit it with on average three wounding lascannons...

Wonder how many wounds the Land Raider has. Looks like no more one-shotted vehicles...

Expect points compensation.

You mean Land Raiders are FINALLY going to be worth 250 pts? Say it ain't so!

**sturguard**

casvalremdeikun wrote:
zerosignal wrote:
So, given a dreadnought is 8W, you're going to have to hit it with on average three wounding lascannons...

Wonder how many wounds the Land Raider has. Looks like no more one-shotted vehicles...

Expect points compensation.
You mean Land Raiders are FINALLY going to be worth 250 pts? Say it ain't so!

How do you know that? Until we see how many wounds LRs have and all the weapons profiles, for all we know 2 hits from a railgun could blow one up.

**tneva82**

jamopower wrote:
It's interesting to see how the former blast weapons are done as the damage doesn't carry over. I guess it will need some extra ruling like "Blast D6: each hit causes D6 hits". I guess it doesn't make too much difference which way it goes as the other option could have been to give some weapons something like: "Anti-tank D6: this weapon does D6 damage against VEHICLES". This just makes it bit clumsy to do weapons that have multiple damage and blast, as they will be very powerful against single models.

d6 hits like flamer is different to d6 damage. Plasma cannon could be heavy d3 with damage 1.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

jamopower wrote:
Wouldn' there still be different propabilities in limited number of dice rolls for different outtcomes it you comapre stuff like 1 shot that makes 6 damage to 6 shots that do 1 damage. I would say in a wargame context the latter is better almost always as it's more reliable. Getting zero damage and getting max damage have high propabilities, where in the other case getting no damage has quite low propability.

That's why I said smoother curve. Damage first, save second doesn't affect AVERAGE result. Does result in different looking curve for probability of X amount of wounds.

So yeah damage first, save second would be where to go if you want to reduce chance of extreme results.

Albeit it has side effect of more dice rolled=slower game.

**Rippy**

AlchemicalSolution wrote:
Games Workshop is the abusive boyfriend that you finally managed to tear yourself away from after years of maltreatment following a particularly brutal battering one night.

GW coming to me, hat in hand, saying "we've changed, we've grown as a company, we understand your needs now, we were selfish and stupid and we needed help, and we've gotten that help, just give us a chance" is too little too late.

I've moved on, I'm with another games company now, they treat me well, the way I deserve. I'm happy, for the first time in years, I'm happy. I couldn't face myself in the mirror if I was so weak I gave into the temptation to let GW back in again.

GW was important to me, I'll always have the memories we shared, there were some good times, but it's time to let go.

On the other hand, maybe they really have changed. I know that deep down, GW loves me as a customer. Maybe just a little box of new marines wouldn't hurt, I can always ebay them if it doesn't work out.

Or a starter set......just to test the waters. I know what I'm doing.

Great post

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Youn wrote:
Why would you expect points compensation? The only army in game that cannot take vehicles is Tyranid. And they will have a very easy time taking down a dreadnought.

On a random note, there isn't much difference between MCs and Vehicles anymore..

**tneva82**

JohnnyHell wrote:
frozenwastes wrote:
Crimson wrote:
Exactly. The AOS style of doing this is just bad. You get difference without distinction, like a weapon with D6 attacks that do one damage and a weapon with one attack that do D6 damage to the unit. There is no real difference between those two.

Just because two weapons produce the same average wounds per attack doesn't mean those results are distributed the same way. There is only no difference for sample sizes way larger than you'll see in an average game.

They're also simply not the same.

Flamer - D6 shots doing 1 damage vs a unit can kill D6 1W models or put up to D6 wounds on a multi-W model.
Lascannon - 1 shot doing D6 damage can kill a single 1W model, or put up to D6 wounds on a multi-W model.

Why aren't people grasping this crucial difference?

The flamer can kill up to 6 models, but is unlikely to do the multiple wounds on big stuff due to low S and Save Mod.
The lascannon has high S and high Save Mod, so will likely do multiple wounds to a big target but can only ever kill one model per turn.

Methinks people are seeing the word 'unit' when 'model' is written.

They are talking about how it works in AOS so why you bring lascannon into this?

**casvalremdeikun**

sturguard wrote:
casvalremdeikun wrote:
zerosignal wrote:
So, given a dreadnought is 8W, you're going to have to hit it with on average three wounding lascannons...

Wonder how many wounds the Land Raider has. Looks like no more one-shotted vehicles...

Expect points compensation.
You mean Land Raiders are FINALLY going to be worth 250 pts? Say it ain't so!

How do you know that? Until we see how many wounds LRs have and all the weapons profiles, for all we know 2 hits from a railgun could blow one up.

The point being is that it is highly unlikely that they are going to be underpriced just because they can survive a salvo of Lascannon shots.

**jamopower**

There is also one fundamental thing with weapons doing high damage to single models. What if there aren't any suitable targets? That's why psycannon type weapons have been (and will be) better than lascannon type, even if they would destroy tanks equally well, it's always better to have the gun with more variety. Also the cost for a weapon is harder to get right if the usefulness can vary greatly between the games depending on what you are against. This is where AoS shines as most of the statline is "always as good" not dependant on what is on the other side of the table. Of course there is some variety lost, but if balance is the goal, that is imo the way to go, whereas variable toughnesses and such are fluffier.

**macluvin**

So flamers will still murder blobs and multiwound models like HQ's. I always wanted flamers to be worth taking. If only they remain a cheap upgrade to the probably still useless bolter...

**eauxlune**

jamopower wrote:
There is also one fundamental thing with weapons doing high damage to single models. What if there aren't any suitable targets? That's why psycannon type weapons have been better than lascannon type, even if they would destroy tanks equally well, it's always better to have the gun with more variety. Also the cost for a weapon is harder to get right if the usefulness can vary greatly between the games depending on what you are against. This is where AoS shines as most of the statline is "always as good" not dependant on what is on the other side of the table. Of course there is some variety lost, but if balance is the goal, that is imo the way to go, whereas variable toughnesses and such are fluffier.

I think this lends towards bringing TAC armies with a variety of weapons. It might not in the competitive setting, but I'd love to have to maneuver my hormagaunts against a squad of flamers so he cant get the shots off at me, while he tries to make sure his lascannons can see my carnifexes and aren't hit by little gribblies. I just really like specialization. It makes the game more flavorful, rather than have everything be a "3+/3+" or "3+/4+"

**Red__Thirst**

Bolters will do work, for sure, as they always have.

I for one am looking forward to seeing how my Blood Angels tactical squad with a heavy flamer, flamer, and combi flamer on the sergeant work when dumping out of a drop pod. I don't foresee them doing amazing things to a high toughness target/vehicle, hurt it, sure, but against infantry they should be able to dump some pretty impressive wound counts onto infantry or standard targets.

Certainly exciting times to be sure.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

**Crimson**

jamopower wrote:
There is also one fundamental thing with weapons doing high damage to single models. What if there aren't any suitable targets? That's why psycannon type weapons have been (and will be) better than lascannon type, even if they would destroy tanks equally well, it's always better to have the gun with more variety. Also the cost for a weapon is harder to get right if the usefulness can vary greatly between the games depending on what you are against. This is where AoS shines as most of the statline is "always as good" not dependant on what is on the other side of the table. Of course there is some variety lost, but if balance is the goal, that is imo the way to go, whereas variable toughnesses and such are fluffier.

Then why have different weapons at all? Just have same profile for every weapon, so that they're equally good against all targets! Perfect balance achieved!

**jamopower**

eauxlune wrote:
jamopower wrote:
There is also one fundamental thing with weapons doing high damage to single models. What if there aren't any suitable targets? That's why psycannon type weapons have been better than lascannon type, even if they would destroy tanks equally well, it's always better to have the gun with more variety. Also the cost for a weapon is harder to get right if the usefulness can vary greatly between the games depending on what you are against. This is where AoS shines as most of the statline is "always as good" not dependant on what is on the other side of the table. Of course there is some variety lost, but if balance is the goal, that is imo the way to go, whereas variable toughnesses and such are fluffier.

I think this lends towards bringing TAC armies with a variety of weapons. It might not in the competitive setting, but I'd love to have to maneuver my hormagaunts against a squad of flamers so he cant get the shots off at me, while he tries to make sure his lascannons can see my carnifexes and aren't hit by little gribblies. I just really like specialization. It makes the game more flavorful, rather than have everything be a "3+/3+" or "3+/4+"

Yes, it works if people bring TAC armies, which has always been the most fun way of playing the game for everyone partcipating, but if the game allows it, there will be someone who takes only carnifexes etc. especially if there is advantage on doing that.

My view is that for a normal single game, the list should always be done so that the opposing army on general level is known. That should give the best end result and allows to use the suitable stuff (i.e. if you know that you play against orks, you could pick up your heavy bolters with you). For tournaments it's differnt thing, but there the balancing act is with the increased number of games hat you play which should reduce the tendency of extreme armies. Unfortunately sometimes, if the points costs are determined by certain scenario / tournament setting, then stuff like heavy bolters can be utterly broken against the stuff that they are made for, because the points cost is based on their efficiency against stuff that they are not made for.

**Skerr**

zerosignal wrote:
So, given a dreadnought is 8W, you're going to have to hit it with on average three wounding lascannons...

Wonder how many wounds the Land Raider has. Looks like no more one-shotted vehicles...

Expect points compensation.

I did read on the community page that Foley tweeted there are 3 chances for a lucky explosion as a vehicle degrades. I may not be 100 % accurate.

**CoreCommander**

Skerr wrote:
zerosignal wrote:
So, given a dreadnought is 8W, you're going to have to hit it with on average three wounding lascannons...

Wonder how many wounds the Land Raider has. Looks like no more one-shotted vehicles...

Expect points compensation.

I did read on the community page that Foley tweeted there are 3 chances for a lucky explosion as a vehicle degrades. I may not be 100 % accurate.

Hm, that would mean 3 standard tiers of power for vehicles dependent on their health. Much, much better than a new line in the damage table for every 2 wounds as is in AoS.

**jamopower**

For me it sounds that there will be a "damage roll" every time when certain amount of wounds is inflicted, if there is a possibility of blowing up. And these tables are probably different for each vehicle and for each level of damage?

**Daedalus81**

Skerr wrote:

I did read on the community page that Foley tweeted there are 3 chances for a lucky explosion as a vehicle degrades. I may not be 100 % accurate.

Huh. That's interesting. Not sure how they would work that into an 8W dreadnought.

**docdoom77**

Skerr wrote:
zerosignal wrote:
So, given a dreadnought is 8W, you're going to have to hit it with on average three wounding lascannons...

Wonder how many wounds the Land Raider has. Looks like no more one-shotted vehicles...

Expect points compensation.

I did read on the community page that Foley tweeted there are 3 chances for a lucky explosion as a vehicle degrades. I may not be 100 % accurate.

I hope that's wrong. Kind of kills the whole toughness and wounds thing, if it still randomly explodes. If true, it would be the first thing I don't like about the new edition so far. That, in itself is pretty amazing.

**Kanluwen**

docdoom77 wrote:
Skerr wrote:
zerosignal wrote:
So, given a dreadnought is 8W, you're going to have to hit it with on average three wounding lascannons...

Wonder how many wounds the Land Raider has. Looks like no more one-shotted vehicles...

Expect points compensation.

I did read on the community page that Foley tweeted there are 3 chances for a lucky explosion as a vehicle degrades. I may not be 100 % accurate.

I hope that's wrong. Kind of kills the whole toughness and wounds thing, if it still randomly explodes. If true, it would be the first thing I don't like about the new edition so far. That, in itself is pretty amazing.

Degradation might be a very gradual thing for vehicles but a less gradual thing for MCs.

A Monster might degrade in effectiveness every 2 or 3 Wounds suffered, for example, while a Vehicle might degrade every 6.

Or hell, it might be that the tables(which are likely set to each vehicle rather than a thing that's shared among all vehicles) differ wildly for the "type" of vehicle.
Eldar Skimmer tanks?
Degrade every 3 Wounds suffered.
Imperial heavy tanks?
Degrade every 8 Wounds suffered.

Etc

**H.B.M.C.**

docdoom77 wrote:
I hope that's wrong. Kind of kills the whole toughness and wounds thing, if it still randomly explodes. If true, it would be the first thing I don't like about the new edition so far. That, in itself is pretty amazing.

Agreed. Can't have your cake and blow it up too.

Either use one set of rules or don't, but don't try to patch part of one on top of another. Hull Points were that, and they were stupid.

**nintura**

Red__Thirst wrote:
Bolters will do work, for sure, as they always have.

I for one am looking forward to seeing how my Blood Angels tactical squad with a heavy flamer, flamer, and combi flamer on the sergeant work when dumping out of a drop pod. I don't foresee them doing amazing things to a high toughness target/vehicle, hurt it, sure, but against infantry they should be able to dump some pretty impressive wound counts onto infantry or standard targets.

Certainly exciting times to be sure.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Im waiting to face such an army with my Salamanders and laughing all the way to the bank

On another note, 1k Sons and Warp Flamers could get very nasty, IF they get rid of the whole giving FNP to your enemies....

**flakpanzer**

I wonder how Open-Topped vehicles will work using this system.

**jamopower**

flakpanzer wrote:
I wonder how Open-Topped vehicles will work using this system.

less wounds / toughness / save? Do they need anything else?

**Bulldogging**

Skerr wrote:
zerosignal wrote:
So, given a dreadnought is 8W, you're going to have to hit it with on average three wounding lascannons...

Wonder how many wounds the Land Raider has. Looks like no more one-shotted vehicles...

Expect points compensation.

I did read on the community page that Foley tweeted there are 3 chances for a lucky explosion as a vehicle degrades. I may not be 100 % accurate.

Phew, I thought for a moment GW was being developed by all new compentant people. The insistence on making vehicles frustratingly random assures me it's the same old crew.

**Ragnar Blackmane**

Skerr wrote:
zerosignal wrote:
So, given a dreadnought is 8W, you're going to have to hit it with on average three wounding lascannons...

Wonder how many wounds the Land Raider has. Looks like no more one-shotted vehicles...

Expect points compensation.

I did read on the community page that Foley tweeted there are 3 chances for a lucky explosion as a vehicle degrades. I may not be 100 % accurate.

Source please. Just checked Foley's entire tweets&answers of the last two days and there was no such comment at all. I think people are making things up again and they go viral.

**flakpanzer**

jamopower wrote:
flakpanzer wrote:
I wonder how Open-Topped vehicles will work using this system.

less wounds / toughness / save? Do they need anything else?

No. Your friendly and informative reply was perfect. Thank you.

**richstrach**

I think this lends towards bringing TAC armies with a variety of weapons. It might not in the competitive setting, but I'd love to have to maneuver my hormagaunts against a squad of flamers so he cant get the shots off at me, while he tries to make sure his lascannons can see my carnifexes and aren't hit by little gribblies. I just really like specialization. It makes the game more flavorful, rather than have everything be a "3+/3+" or "3+/4+"

I look forward to finally finishing off my Deathwatch after the great FAQ confusion!

**Daedalus81**

So define community page? I've been through all his tweets since FAQ and I can't find it.

**Eyjio**

Yeah, I'll throw my hat in and say that, if true, that's a really dumb move. The thing I hate the most is losing centrepieces to a single shot so if that comes back I'll be very annoyed. By all means when it's dead, throw in a roll to see if it explodes or wrecks, but don't just make it randomly explode from whatever random shot hits it - that's why the damage stat is there, right?

**kestral**

jamopower wrote:
For me it sounds that there will be a "damage roll" every time when certain amount of wounds is inflicted, if there is a possibility of blowing up. And these tables are probably different for each vehicle and for each level of damage?

I would like that. I'd like it if the explosion/wreck rules were a bit better though - having things constantly explode leaving a huddle of marines standing in a crater is weird and can be done better. Plus I Like the way blazing wrecks look.