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.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
I'm sure the Sisters of Battle Meltagun will have worse stats.

Rightfully so

 Deadshot wrote:

 oni wrote:
The battle cannon is definitely changing its role to anti-elite & anti-single model - which isn't bad. I can get behind this.

I think the new rules make it better. While you're not guaranteed to hit your target; you are guaranteed to not scatter onto your own units. For this reason alone I think the new rules are better.

I agree with this and makes it more appealling and fluff in my eyes. It had enough firepower to total a squad of tacticals and characters before, but wasn't really used for such, as well as wound most MCs fairly easily. I do like the idea of Leman Russ firing a shell at point blank down a Carnifex's throat.

Only to miss half the time since they still have to roll to hit.

AoS and 40k are very different on the weapons and options front still.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

dalloskid wrote:
2 quick questions from someone who only recently heard about the new rules being released:

1. All I have heard about release date is "not yet but this year" - have we heard anything more concrete than that?

2. I use to be in the hobby but haven't been in for a while, and haven't got any models, rules etc. Am I better off waiting for the new rules and such to release or just jumping in?

1. Nothing concrete but we're expecting early June.

2. Waiting isn't a bad choice. I bought some models for an army (building Black Templars) but outside of the basic Marines I haven't tried to branch out to anything else yet because it's impossible to know what could be fun to play in the new edition.

If you get anything now, keep it simple and don't go hog wild on stuff yet. That'll keep you from feeling like you wasted an investment.

Thanks for that info man, appreciate the advice.

dalloskid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

dalloskid wrote:
2 quick questions from someone who only recently heard about the new rules being released:

1. All I have heard about release date is "not yet but this year" - have we heard anything more concrete than that?

2. I use to be in the hobby but haven't been in for a while, and haven't got any models, rules etc. Am I better off waiting for the new rules and such to release or just jumping in?

1. Nothing concrete but we're expecting early June.

2. Waiting isn't a bad choice. I bought some models for an army (building Black Templars) but outside of the basic Marines I haven't tried to branch out to anything else yet because it's impossible to know what could be fun to play in the new edition.

If you get anything now, keep it simple and don't go hog wild on stuff yet. That'll keep you from feeling like you wasted an investment.

Thanks for that info man, appreciate the advice.

I would stick with some basics - or some models you really favor (if you like the look of landspeeders, for example). As stated, just don't get too many of any one thing.

If you played marines, maybe something like this;
One dred, one tac squad, one razorback, one drop pod, etc. maybe one unit of terminators......

If it were tau;
One squad of firewarriors, one box of suits, one hammerhead, etc.

Necrons;
One ghost ark, one set of warriors, one unit of wraiths. etc.
(I would still prolly avoid a monolith...but here is hoping).

I'm assuming combi-weapons are gonna get a price bump, cause with these new rules why would you ever NOT take them over the regular special weapons?

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I'm assuming combi-weapons are gonna get a price bump, cause with these new rules why would you ever NOT take them over the regular special weapons?

Are there really that many units where there's a choice in the matter?

I mean, they are strictly better than a special weapon, but I don't think there's that many units where you have a choice between one or the other. Basically all it does is add another consistent special weapon to squads where previously the combi weapon was a nice to have one-shot.

Combiflamers... heh. No need to care overmuch about the roll to hit penalty!

I bet the combi weapon set is flying off the forgeworld store.

Gentle nudge back on topic, folks. "Should I start/what should I buy" type questions don't belong in this thread (though you're welcome to have that conversation down in 40k Discussions).

 Fenris-77 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

2.28 wound sounds nice. But remember wound count has also gone way up so it's not improvement.

I think it is. Previously you're looking at something like .25 of a roll on a damage table if my quick math is right. Less impressive on the whole, or least less reliable, which is maybe why I like the new rules better. I like reliable. I'll take an average of 2.28 out of a total of 12 or whatever over the very real chance of doing nothing for 3 turns. I just think it's easier to plan and to manage target selection when the outcome is more reliable.

7th ed battle cannon was actually fairly reliable at knocking of HP's out of a dred. New one all too easy to roll 1 on a d6 and whoops there went that.

The LR wasn't killing anything close to .7 terminators a round on average in 7th, so its an improvement, plus there's the chance to kill 2 or 3 on a good roll when the save is only 4+ and you're rolling d3 for damage. Against multi-wound stuff that doesn't also have a 2+ save the damage goes up a bunch too, and against those targets the difference is even more significant. Diference of opinion maybe, since we don't know what special rules some of the other mutli-wound stuff like Tyranid Warriors will have, but I'm willing to bet the BC will end up being a lot better at killing that kind of target, on the whole, than it used to be. Which seems good to me.

It still sucks against terminators. Yes 7th ed wasn't good there either but only newbies will shoot new battle cannon vs termies.

And as for monsters...Just use vanquisher. Now battle cannon is only good against monsters/tanks and vanquisher does that better so only lack of points is reason to not take vanquisher. Against infantry only reason to shoot at them is no monster or tank in sight. It plain SUCKS against those.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I am just wondering about this: Russ's can come in threes. That quickly becomes 3d6 chances to hit and increases the chance of rolling more 2s and 3s. Mix that with the three Las Cannons + whatever is in the Sponsons, that could quickly take down a Multi-Wound Model quickly.

Better terminator etc killers can come in multiples too. It's not like russes are unique in ability to be taken in multiples...And you also pay 3 times the point. Unless your efficiency goes up by more than 3 it's just as lousy in 3 as it's in 1.

theocracity wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I'm assuming combi-weapons are gonna get a price bump, cause with these new rules why would you ever NOT take them over the regular special weapons?

Are there really that many units where there's a choice in the matter?

I mean, they are strictly better than a special weapon, but I don't think there's that many units where you have a choice between one or the other. Basically all it does is add another consistent special weapon to squads where previously the combi weapon was a nice to have one-shot.

True - in 7th

Frankly we don't know which units will get what in 8th - we know all currently-legal stuff still is, so combiweapons on Sternguard and Chaos Terminators are certain (and as a Chaos player I'm over the moon!) but we don't know whether other units will get the option added, and some of those may well have a combiweapon option instead of or alongside a special weapon

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

So the D6 on the Battlecannon is HITS not SHOTS? Roll to hit, if you do, roll a D6 on the unit for the number of models hit? Anyone else reading it that way?

That seems like an appropriate way to read that response, though I would take that with a grain of salt.

Other sources (including, IIRC, FLG, who were playtesting this edition) have suggests its merely the number of shots, and that you still have to roll to-hit as normal.

But IF its auto-hits and not merely shots... well, that would boost the effectiveness of a Battlecannon significantly.

(I'm guessing it isn't, since blast weapons traditionally had a to-hit equivalent, Scatter Dice, where templates did not)

I was wondering if it was a single shot that you'd roll to hit that would then turn into D6 hits on a successful hit. But that might make too much sense.

You shouldn't really want that though as that basically makes it worse. Same average hits, much more extreme cases. You could have games where it hits nothing whatsoever. When average is same you should prefer less variable one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

They are probably going for a high risk, high reward sort of thing, where melee is much deadlier than shooting, but you have to reach them first. Whether or not they do it right is another matter.
Transports will probably play a role. They haven't covered those yet.

That's what it's been for past several editions. You get to combt and you make one hell of a mess. Problem has never been efficiency IN combat. Problem has been getting there without being blown to so many bits in the process you either don't make it or make it in too small pieces to make up for earlier losses! And in future 1 or 2 small units that made it are even more of a disadvantage so you need more guys get to the enemy.

Unless there's some weird h2h weapons that make up extra casualties to units out of combat doubtful more powerful weapons will help much.

 Gamgee wrote:
Dark Eldar focus when? I want to know how they balance them out since they are not great beneficiaries of the twin-link rule right now. I'm curious to see how poison works.

You want a DE faction focus? Just fill in the blanks below as you see fit:

GW Marketing Team wrote:When the great new edition of the 40K rules hit, all [insert faction name here] players are going to rejoice. We've taken a look at all of [insert faction name here]'s units, and believe that we have rebalanced them in such a way that they'll all be useful.

I mean, you all remember how [insert unit type here] used to perform (or underperform amirite)? Well don't worry. [Insert unit type here] in the new rules has been redesigned, and with the new way [insert game phase here] works, they'll be at the forefront of all your armies!

Plus, thanks to [rule change we've yet to mention elsewhere], you'll even be taking [insert unit type here] again! That's right, a unit most people don't even own will be back with a vengeance, and we're sure that [insert faction name here] players won't go to battle without at least one! Maybe even two!!!

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Grinshanks wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Megaknob wrote:
Orks are getting 2 wounds confirmed.

Taking cues from AoS for that?

I haven't seen this confirmed anywhere.

I'm guessing they're looking at the Orruks for how GeeDubs might update them.

Of course even that's not accurate. New ELITE orks got multiple wounds. Basic orruks are still 1 wound guys.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So... that Meltagun profile. The whole Melta special rule is written out on its profile. They're not going to do that for every single instance of the Meltagun where ever its printed, are they?

Yes they will.

 Fenris-77 wrote:

Also just realized that against terminators that are basically new target of choice it's like 0.7 dead terminator when in open. Not that hot...

Right now the cheapest dead Terminator is worth 33 points (Wolf Guard with Storm Bolter and Power Sword with no extra equipment), with most being worth 40 points. On dead 40 point terminator is worth 8 Guardsmen (almost 7 for a barebones WGT), which is more than a decent tally, especially because less lethal anti-infantry weapons will have an even harder time dealing with them (2 wounds), I mean would you complain if the gun was on average killing 7-8 guardsmen instead? You can reasonably expect 1 dead Terminator at least (compare that to the pitful damage the battlecannon dealt to them until now), with it being two (80 points) or even three (120 points!) when you get lucky, and that's just the main gun, which doesn't include the at minimum free heavy bolter, which also has a 72" range AFAIR and is statistically still better against vehicles/monsters than a lascannon. Sure, point costs will very likely change, but if the points remain relatively the same for both, this still stands. Wouldn't be surprised if the LRBT was getting even cheaper pointswise.

Also there is still stuff like the Plasma Russ and Demolisher to consider.

Overall Russes definitely are getting better, the removal of the vehicle damage table (let's not forget that even the BEST result on it meant that the tank wasn't able to fire for AN ENTIRE TURN) alone is a big buff, not to mention them being able to fire all their weapons at full BS at different targets.

davethepak wrote:

dalloskid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

dalloskid wrote:
2 quick questions from someone who only recently heard about the new rules being released:

1. All I have heard about release date is "not yet but this year" - have we heard anything more concrete than that?

2. I use to be in the hobby but haven't been in for a while, and haven't got any models, rules etc. Am I better off waiting for the new rules and such to release or just jumping in?

1. Nothing concrete but we're expecting early June.

2. Waiting isn't a bad choice. I bought some models for an army (building Black Templars) but outside of the basic Marines I haven't tried to branch out to anything else yet because it's impossible to know what could be fun to play in the new edition.

If you get anything now, keep it simple and don't go hog wild on stuff yet. That'll keep you from feeling like you wasted an investment.

Thanks for that info man, appreciate the advice.

I would stick with some basics - or some models you really favor (if you like the look of landspeeders, for example). As stated, just don't get too many of any one thing.

If you played marines, maybe something like this;
One dred, one tac squad, one razorback, one drop pod, etc. maybe one unit of terminators......

If it were tau;
One squad of firewarriors, one box of suits, one hammerhead, etc.

Necrons;
One ghost ark, one set of warriors, one unit of wraiths. etc.
(I would still prolly avoid a monolith...but here is hoping).

Sweet, thanks for that, I'll keep the model spread wide rather than ultra focused on one thing.

 Janthkin wrote:
Gentle nudge back on topic, folks. "Should I start/what should I buy" type questions don't belong in this thread (though you're welcome to have that conversation down in 40k Discussions).

Sorry bout that, my bad.

dalloskid wrote:
2 quick questions from someone who only recently heard about the new rules being released:

1. All I have heard about release date is "not yet but this year" - have we heard anything more concrete than that?

Nothing concrete but there's suspicious white dwarf delay for june from start of month to mid-june. I'm on theory they want new 40k be released same time as WD covering it so as WD is on june 16 I'm banking on june 17 being the date.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:
You can reasonably expect 1 dead Terminator at least, with it being two (80 points) or even three (120 points!) when you get lucky, and that's just the main gun, which doesn't include the at minimum free heavy bolter, which also has a 72" range AFAIR and is statistically still better against vehicles/monsters than a lascannon. Sure, point costs will very likely change, but if the points remain relatively the same for both, this still stands. Wouldn't be surprised if the LRBT was getting even cheaper pointswise.

No. You count on less than a terminator per shot. And lol at "if you get lucky". Well if I get lucky 10 lasguns could have killed 2++ rerollable with 4+++ with 10 wounds!

You don't count luck.

And other weapons you know don't help battlecannon...So what russ has "free" heavy bolter(it's not free btw). Battlecannon still sucks.

Also there is still stuff like the Plasma Russ and Demolisher to consider.

Which just makes it worse for battlecannon. Look at the exterminator. That weapon is even better against terminators and doing okay on monster section. Positively murders lighter infantry over russ. Exterminator is the new jack of all trade russ supplementing battle cannon variant from the position.

Vanquisher meanwhile will be russ to go for against monsters/tanks.

Basically only role battlecannon russ has is russ to take if you are out of points.

That's a good point with the white dwarf push back, nice.

tneva82 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Grinshanks wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Megaknob wrote:
Orks are getting 2 wounds confirmed.

Taking cues from AoS for that?

I haven't seen this confirmed anywhere.

I'm guessing they're looking at the Orruks for how GeeDubs might update them.

Of course even that's not accurate. New ELITE orks got multiple wounds. Basic orruks are still 1 wound guys.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So... that Meltagun profile. The whole Melta special rule is written out on its profile. They're not going to do that for every single instance of the Meltagun where ever its printed, are they?

Yes they will.

If every model in a 30 strong unit of boyz had only 2 wounds, that would be a nightmare to keep track of. Of course, it might make more sense for MANZ and 'Ard Nobz to have 3 wounds. That would be interesting, but then Ork HQs would wander into the realm of these hypothetical normal sized models with 11 wounds. Currently, Warbosses have 3 wounds and Ghazkull Thraka has 4 wounds. How many would he need to be good? If every ork that has graduated to "not a mook" has 3 wounds, do warbosses get 5? 7? 9?

dalloskid wrote:
That's a good point with the white dwarf push back, nice.

All information in OP, hidden by spoilers to easily see the topics you wish to know

 Powerfisting wrote:
If every model in a 30 strong unit of boyz had only 2 wounds, that would be a nightmare to keep track of. Of course, it might make more sense for MANZ and 'Ard Nobz to have 3 wounds. That would be interesting, but then Ork HQs would wander into the realm of these hypothetical normal sized models with 11 wounds. Currently, Warbosses have 3 wounds and Ghazkull Thraka has 4 wounds. How many would he need to be good? If every ork that has graduated to "not a mook" has 3 wounds, do warbosses get 5? 7? 9?

Well luckily it wouldn't be THAT bad. "wounded" marker is enough. The moment unit suffers wound the wounded guy gets lost. It's not track by model. At least assuming it works like in AOS.

Battleshock would be rough for big ork mobs though.

tneva82 wrote:

 Powerfisting wrote:
If every model in a 30 strong unit of boyz had only 2 wounds, that would be a nightmare to keep track of. Of course, it might make more sense for MANZ and 'Ard Nobz to have 3 wounds. That would be interesting, but then Ork HQs would wander into the realm of these hypothetical normal sized models with 11 wounds. Currently, Warbosses have 3 wounds and Ghazkull Thraka has 4 wounds. How many would he need to be good? If every ork that has graduated to "not a mook" has 3 wounds, do warbosses get 5? 7? 9?

Well luckily it wouldn't be THAT bad. "wounded" marker is enough. The moment unit suffers wound the wounded guy gets lost. It's not track by model. At least assuming it works like in AOS.

Battleshock would be rough for big ork mobs though.

They have confirmed that wounded models need to take the wounds first.

I doubt Ork Boyz are getting two wounds each, if Marines didnt get two wounds.

Nobz, im sure, but not Boyz.

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

Right now the cheapest dead Terminator is worth 33 points

31. CSM terminator with combibolter and power weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
keeping track of multiple wounds in a huge horde army would be impossible!

I expect to see an armory page, i don't think that all the weapons will be listed on the model every time.

In AoS the model and the weapon form a single entry stats wise. The same weapon in different hands has different stats. In fact models in AoS do not have an Attack stat, that's a property of the weapon.

In 8th we have already seen that the model stats and the weapon stats are separate entries. To get the stats for an attack, you need to apply a weapon entry to a model entry. The same weapon in different hands has the same stats. The number of attacks in melee depends on the model not on the weapon.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Alcibiades wrote:

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

Right now the cheapest dead Terminator is worth 33 points

31. CSM terminator with combibolter and power weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
keeping track of multiple wounds in a huge horde army would be impossible!

Wound tracking no longer exists, only 1 model in a unit can be wounded.

I seriously would hope weapons are always written on the stat block/data card - that's part of the point for me of this system.

Put all the info you need in once place not have to keep flicking back and forth in different books or even worse watching people scroll desperately slowly on their tiny phone screens.

I agree. As long as they amount of special rules is QUITE low everything should be on a single page/card. So much easier to play with.

 Mr Morden wrote:
I seriously would hope weapons are always written on the stat block/data card - that's part of the point for me of this system.

Put all the info you need in once place not have to keep flicking back and forth in different books or even worse watching people scroll desperately slowly on their tiny phone screens.

Look at all the weapon options on the Tactical Space Marine sprue, not to mention all the other options they can have. Missile Launcher, Flamer, Melta, Plasma, Grav, Combiweapons, Chain/Powersword, Plasma/Grav/Las Cannons, and more...

It would be a LONG data card if all of those were on it.

EDIT: I haven't seen much discussion on a neat tidbit from the FB roundup - that all tanks can now fire their weapons at different targets. Maybe it was just assumed by everybody when it was revealed that individual infantry could split fire.

But I look forward to using my Dreadnoughts and Stormtalons much more flexibly now.

davethepak wrote:
I suspect some melee weapons will be combined - I mean, is a chain sword and chain axe really that different? If they were the same cost and effect, would it matter?

yes chain axes are ap4 and so far ap4 has transformed into a -1 armour save in 8th, plus my khorne berzerkers have loads of them so no no combine these XD

 Mr Morden wrote:
I seriously would hope weapons are always written on the stat block/data card - that's part of the point for me of this system.

Put all the info you need in once place not have to keep flicking back and forth in different books or even worse watching people scroll desperately slowly on their tiny phone screens.

Agreed. Just browsing through the current IG codex is a fricking pain, unit rules and profile on one page, unit specific weapons on another page, point costs and most of the unit upgrades on another yet another bestiary page and when you come to the most important bit, the special weapons, it just says "look up the special weapons armory list page", without even giving you the bloody page number for that (it is completely hidden away somewhere in the general upgrades section). Three or even four bloody pages you need to look up just to select upgrade choices and check up the unit's special rules, meanwhile you still need to browse the rule book for the profiles of common weapons (that includes the mostly IG/Stormtrooper exclusive hot-shot weapons for extra hilarity) and USR.
And that's just casual browsing, if I was still actively playing (stopped at the end of the 5th, where while it wasn't perfect you still had all the upgrades, unit exclusive special rules and weapons and point costs on one frickin page in the bestiarium), just thinking about actually having to work with that for list building and checking up stuff while playing gives me nightmares already.

It sucks, unit warscrolls that unify ALL the information on one page can't come fething soon enough. If there is not enough space for the fluffy lore description left I don't mind if they have a lore focused bestiary page somewhere early in the codex. Having 7 to 10 all encompassing printed A4 pages for all my units on one corner of the table will be a blessing and huge step up. Heck, you'll even be able to hand them to hand them to your opponent and vice versa before the match so you can both glance over them quickly, see what you are facing and pre-emptively eliminate half of the rule discussions that would happen later. Meanwhile the App with all the scrolls will be a nice bonus for those with decently fast smartphones (mine isn't and I prefer paper).