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.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

torblind wrote:
Are those 2 wounds on 2 models each or 4 wounds total against the unit?

Multi-wounds won't spill over. They have said this in FB several times.

So, to clarify: with the battlecannon, if you roll 18 wounds against a squad you can only kill 6 models tops?

Yes. This was confirmed by GW in the Facebook comments today.

torblind wrote:

 Freddy Kruger wrote:
People here need to remember 1 thing: everyone gets split fire.

Use the battle cannon against elite or single models/vehicle types, let the hull gun and side guns dakka the infantry. Also, no scatter means safer shots!

Also, I assume heavy D6 means you roll once to hit, and if it does, you roll a further D6 to determine how many hits in the explosion. And D3 means how badly the unit was hit by the explosion.

They said different models can shoot different targets, did they also say different weapons on one model can shoot different targets?

Yes facebook confirmed it.

Vehicles are looking great and infantry got a defense boost. Sweet!

Not gonna lie, I'm so happy to be able to use a old godhammer pattern land raider without being blown up first turn and actually contributing to the battle!

The change to explosives means bigger units are hurt less, which would be a counter to how battle shock was introduced in a way that now penalizes bigger units

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

torblind wrote:
Are those 2 wounds on 2 models each or 4 wounds total against the unit?

Multi-wounds won't spill over. They have said this in FB several times.

So, to clarify: with the battlecannon, if you roll 18 wounds against a squad you can only kill 6 models tops?

Yes. You hit 6 models, so can kill those 6, maximum. If each is a W1 model, just pick em up and skip the D3 rolls.

 Crimson wrote:

torblind wrote:
Are those 2 wounds on 2 models each or 4 wounds total against the unit?

Multi-wounds won't spill over. They have said this in FB several times.

Ambigious meaning of damage. Does damage indicate that each failed save inflict 1/D3/D6 wounds to the model that failed, or that the unit will suffer D3 wounds per unsaved wound. I'd prefer a plain answer rather than "spill-over" as a shortcut because the meaning is not clear. This could mean "Inflict D6 wounds on model X. Model X takes 2 wounds then dies." Do the remaining 1-4 wounds get lost, and not spill over to other models, or does it mean that each failed save removes D3 remaining wounds from a model? Its a fine line and very important.

 docdoom77 wrote:
Saw this gem on a facebook answer:

"Hey Samuel - we haven't seen the stats for a stormbolter yet! We reckon they will do oh, so many shots..."

Sounds like Storm bolters will retain Assault X. I'm thinking Assault 3 this time around. That's a nice balance to a TL Bolter's Rapid Fire 2.

Might even find a use for all those Storm Bolter Sisters that are gatehring dust.

Is that an individual D3 per wounded model or one roll for all?

It's not ambiguous.

"Does damage indicate that each failed save inflict 1/D3/D6 wounds to the model that failed"

Yes. To the model. Roll a D3 for each, separately.

"or that the unit will suffer D3 wounds per unsaved wound."

No.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

So, to clarify: with the battlecannon, if you roll 18 wounds against a squad you can only kill 6 models tops?

Yes, absolutely.

This is a huge boost for Tau XV-8 let me tell you. Going to be seeing twin-linked dual weapons. So that would bring their burst cannon capability of a single XV-8 up to 16.

If they don't let us twin-link both weapons then it's a cost saver and opens up the possibility of bringing other things with the spare points or upgrading your suits with upgrades now instead of taking them dirt cheap.

Edit
I remember now that twin-linking counts as two. So it is the latter option. Still this is good news. This brings down the costs of crisis suits greatly.

 Deadshot wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

torblind wrote:
Are those 2 wounds on 2 models each or 4 wounds total against the unit?

Multi-wounds won't spill over. They have said this in FB several times.

Ambigious meaning of damage. Does damage indicate that each failed save inflict 1/D3/D6 wounds to the model that failed, or that the unit will suffer D3 wounds per unsaved wound. I'd prefer a plain answer rather than "spill-over" as a shortcut because the meaning is not clear. This could mean "Inflict D6 wounds on model X. Model X takes 2 wounds then dies." Do the remaining 1-4 wounds get lost, and not spill over to other models, or does it mean that each failed save removes D3 remaining wounds from a model? Its a fine line and very important.

You can't kill more models than the number of hits you rolled - for any weapon.

 Imateria wrote:

We've already seen the Morkanaught has 18 wounds, the Leman Russ has 12 and they've hinted that a Knight will have more than 20.

Definitely, but what I'm saying is that I wish the other stats reflected this. While it seems like we've gone away from the old strength/toughness table, having something like a T12 Land Raider could have been interesting in the attempt to re-balance vehicles.

All I'm arguing is that we could be seeing a more granular system than what we currently have, where it seems like most things are still stuck on the 0-10 chart (though this might not be true for things like Baneblades, Warhounds, etc.)

We'll have to wait and see.

 Crimson wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

So, to clarify: with the battlecannon, if you roll 18 wounds against a squad you can only kill 6 models tops?

Yes, absolutely.

... RIP Battlecannon.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:
You just bend over and take it like a good chum? I'm thinking Khorne might have something against it (giftss that make your champion count as a psyker for the purpose of dispelling powers and what not) but... what if you don't have a psyker?

Ohhhhhh fun!

The same as pre-magic phase. Tons of spells getting through and yeah you are either way going to be just taking it. You have 1 psyker in 8th ed he's not able to even try to stop all spells from opponents 8 psykers. So there no change really to 7th ed. Opponent has more psykers than you he's casting at will. Biggest difference is there will be lot more spells attempted and unless he tries hardest spells all the time lot more succesfull casts as well.

For all 7th ed magic phase gets flak at least it cut number of spells cast per psyker. Albeit power level rose up. Now let's see if power level drops to compensate more spells per psyker going off.

 Gamgee wrote:
This is a huge boost for Tau XV-8 let me tell you. Going to be seeing twin-linked dual weapons. So that would bring their burst cannon capability of a single XV-8 up to 16.

If they don't let us twin-link both weapons then it's a cost saver and opens up the possibility of bringing other things with the spare points or upgrading your suits with upgrades now instead of taking them dirt cheap.

We can't anyway, as each takes 2 hardpoints. However, 1 TL + 1 normal will be the new hot (unless some of the support systems are so awesome we cannot leave them behind)

Silly us thinking assault would be buffed or be viable again. Seems like these shooting changes blow everything out of the water. I don't see why you'd want to run close combat units that get same number of attacks as before just to get hit with twin linked guns and falling back from combat.

 lessthanjeff wrote:

 nintura wrote:


No, I totally 100% agree on the hiding of regular sized characters. I'm 100% in disagreement that Robutt should be able to hide. He's freaking massive and it feels to me that the whole 10-11 wound rule was made with him in mind instead of base size or size of model. This just harkens back to my paranoia of all things Ultramarines getting the special treatment.

If they were showing Ultramarine favoritism just to make him as good as possible then why didn't they make him 10 wounds so he could just barely hide? Making him a wound lower than that seems to indicate they weren't designing the cutoff around him.

One could be paranoid and say they were sneakier than you give them credit for and give him 9 wounds precisely to fool you thinking 9 or 10 isn't as big difference as 10 or 11. And any 11-12 wound character would gladly trade spare wounds and be 9 wound.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

So, to clarify: with the battlecannon, if you roll 18 wounds against a squad you can only kill 6 models tops?

Yes, absolutely.

... RIP Battlecannon.

Really? Because you could put a stonking amount of wounds on a single model with good rolls.

 Vector Strike wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
This is a huge boost for Tau XV-8 let me tell you. Going to be seeing twin-linked dual weapons. So that would bring their burst cannon capability of a single XV-8 up to 16.

If they don't let us twin-link both weapons then it's a cost saver and opens up the possibility of bringing other things with the spare points or upgrading your suits with upgrades now instead of taking them dirt cheap.

We can't anyway, as each takes 2 hardpoints. However, 1 TL + 1 normal will be the new hot (unless some of the support systems are so awesome we cannot leave them behind)

So a 50% fire output increase. This is fantastic. This more than makes up for the loss of AP 2 to AP 3 on human targets with burst cannons. GW you clever bastards I need to go and buy more kits now lol for twin-linking purposes.

Edit
This means Broadsides railguns are two shots now. I don't think this makes them any more viable truth be told. Their twin-linked high yield missile pods on the other hand are definitely going to be a competitive choice to the Riptide.

 Kirasu wrote:
Silly us thinking assault would be buffed or be viable again. Seems like these shooting changes blow everything out of the water. I don't see why you'd want to run close combat units that get same number of attacks as before just to get hit with twin linked guns and falling back from combat.

That and I am unsure If I want to assault Combi-flamer wielding units....

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

So, to clarify: with the battlecannon, if you roll 18 wounds against a squad you can only kill 6 models tops?

Yes, absolutely.

... RIP Battlecannon.

How!? It simply is better versus big targets which AM has traditionally struggled against in almost every edition. Besides, if you need more anti-infantry weapons in guard army you are doing something very wrong.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

So, to clarify: with the battlecannon, if you roll 18 wounds against a squad you can only kill 6 models tops?

Yes, absolutely.

... RIP Battlecannon.

Really? Because you could put a stonking amount of wounds on a single model with good rolls.

I guess this is just my personal preference but I see it as far too unreliable. Yeah you can rip out a good number of wounds but you can also just take out 1 or 2. I am unsure I would risk fielding a gun that unreliable.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

So, to clarify: with the battlecannon, if you roll 18 wounds against a squad you can only kill 6 models tops?

Yes, absolutely.

... RIP Battlecannon.

Really? Because you could put a stonking amount of wounds on a single model with good rolls.

I guess this is just my personal preference but I see it as far too unreliable. Yeah you can rip out a good number of wounds but you can also just take out 1 or 2. I am unsure I would risk fielding a gun that unreliable.

It used to have a 4/6 chance of scattering an average of 7" and missing completely. It's automatically way better than that now!!! Didn't everyone skip them this edition anyway? I suspect we'll see some back purely as they now don't knacker your other shooting.

 Cryonicleech wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

We've already seen the Morkanaught has 18 wounds, the Leman Russ has 12 and they've hinted that a Knight will have more than 20.

Definitely, but what I'm saying is that I wish the other stats reflected this. While it seems like we've gone away from the old strength/toughness table, having something like a T12 Land Raider could have been interesting in the attempt to re-balance vehicles.

All I'm arguing is that we could be seeing a more granular system than what we currently have, where it seems like most things are still stuck on the 0-10 chart (though this might not be true for things like Baneblades, Warhounds, etc.)

We'll have to wait and see.

Well, you're looking at toughness only. Plenty of high wound counts so far. Reinventing the toughness for common stuff against common weapons would have been more work for little gain.

The battlecannon is now much better at taking down multi-wound model squads. If your using it against bog standard one wound infantry your probably doing something wrong now.

Target prioritization folks. I would only use it against one wound models if I felt my guard line was about to be hit by something nasty in melee.

 Gamgee wrote:
The battlecannon is now much better at taking down multi-wound model squads. If your using it against bog standard one wound infantry your probably doing something wrong now. \

Target prioritization folks.

Given weapons have much more defined roles in new edition, THIS! Absolutely.

Daedalus81 wrote:

Yonasu wrote:

It's not a very strange scenario, You have drop pods landing behind gunlines all the time, all of which you must kill before you can target the lone captain walking up the field. It feels like a side in these discussion dont really understand how it will play out. There will be many times you will try to target characters a foot away and be denied since you have a landraider over on the side 11" away. Characters will be overprotected and it will be gamed to hell and back :(

Yep this may be something that we need to push GW on if it becomes problematic.

Have the protection apply only when within X" of unit AND that unit is closer to shooter than charger.

That would be my solution. No "hiding" next to drop pod half a table away.

What are the chances that not all of the weapons with the twin-linked rule in 7th will get double shots in 8th and instead retain the "to-be-renamed re-roll missed shots" rule?

So, stuff that Sisters don't use a lot (we have twinlinked on immolators only and combi on sisters superior only) get a massive buff, and while the melta gets a nice buff on monstrous creature (somehow balanced by apparently better Toughness and more wounds), it also gets a nerf on IC (not wounding any IC with T5 or more on 2+ anymore), and a big nerf against vehicles (no more one shot, huge toughness, will requires tons of shot to blow anything now!)
Vehicles are going to be mighty annoying now.