Imateria wrote:
By the looks of things people wont be happy with the Battle cannon until it's one shotting Titans. It's had a noticable boost to it's ability to hit and people are complaining that it's bad.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Unless other rules say other(and note battlecannon has no special rules...) they work same way.

Which would no doubt be the logical way to go. However I have long learned not to always expect logic from GW. So I prefer clarifications right off the bat.

 thenewgozoku wrote:
Battlecannon is like a better lasscanon now. Why is that a bad thing?

 JohnU wrote:

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:
I like how every leak brings with it it's own lasgun vs. land raider argument.

And if the rules allow conscripts and scorpions to be fielded together... Gork help us all.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 JohnU wrote:

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:
I like how every leak brings with it it's own lasgun vs. land raider argument.

And if the rules allow conscripts and scorpions to be fielded together... Gork help us all.

Yeah, that's the dread fear that keeps me awake at night: mass ranks of conscripts blowing away Landraiders, and Striking Scorpions hacking everybody down with mortal wounds.

The game hasn't even been realised yet, and already, it's broken...

tneva82 wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Unless other rules say other(and note battlecannon has no special rules...) they work same way.

Which would no doubt be the logical way to go. However I have long learned not to always expect logic from GW. So I prefer clarifications right off the bat.

So what would separate heavy bolter and battlecannon to identify which causes automatic hits and which not? We have the stat lines so answer must be there.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

Spoiler:

 Latro_ wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Unless other rules say other(and note battlecannon has no special rules...) they work same way.

Which would no doubt be the logical way to go. However I have long learned not to always expect logic from GW. So I prefer clarifications right off the bat.

So what would separate heavy bolter and battlecannon to identify which causes automatic hits and which not? We have the stat lines so answer must be there.

As far as i read its just a GW fb comment that suggests its one roll to hit with the BC. It could be that with any weapon with random shots (HB is not random) you make one roll to hit.
Unless anyone has anything more concrete then its a bit up in the air

They could have up their sleeve a rule that says that, unless otherwise noted, you only need to roll to hit once for weapons that have a random number of shots. If you hit, all shots rolled hit.

Saves some dice rolling.

 Ratius wrote:
Whats todays update going to be about?

 Rippy wrote:

Deadawake1347 wrote:

Spoiler:

Datasheets
Q: Warhammer 40,000 How many of you man this page? Or is did some poor guardsmen just get locked up in a room to field the unending wave of questions?
A: Just one of us... One soul standing against the tide. Much like Sly Marbo, but somewhat less heroic and chiseled.

Q: Warhammer 40,000 hey can we have the slightest hint of necron stuff in the next teaser please? the red harvest must begin!
A: *This message has been formatted so only true Necrontyr can read it.

Q: Hey guys @Warhammer 40,000, would you consider doing deep strike rules preview ?
A: We can consider it...

Q: You guys are savage and have no chill when it comes to absolutely destroying people, how can I become a member of the community team?
A: You should have seen the quadra-savage reply we typed out... but then thought better of it...!

Q: will weapons have point value's?
also if an aspiring sorcerer can move 6" and the rest of hits unit can move 5" doesn't that mean the sorcerer can only move 5"?
A: It means he can move slightly faster, so long as he stays with his unit.

Q: Give me the new protocols for my Necron minions or you will be harvested.
A: Errrr.....sure thing! We'll get right on it!

Q: Hey GW, will you release a datasheet for khorne berzerkers anytime soon?? (Hopefully before 8th hits) Ever since the CSM faction focus, i am super hyped to see what you have in mind with those lobotomised nutjobs
A: We haven't released anything yet.... but by Jimminy.... they are just as good in combat as you hope them to be....

Q: Well.. definitely will take some getting used too. I do like the effort to balance out the game.
A: It's just not the same without your Marbo memes.

Q: Love all the articles! We would love you to throw us a little more Xenos examples. We have heard a ton about the factions of Man, and just a splash about Orks. Can we please have more splashs of Xenos? <3
A: We like splashing Xenos.... all over the wall with a boltgun.

More Xenos bits on the way REAL soon...

Q: I have only one burning question for 8th -
Will Shadow Captain Shrike's new datasheet reflect his ascension to Chapter Master of the Raven Guard?
A: If that's your only question, we're doing something right. Not sure on that specific detail right now - we will have wait for the rules to appear.

Q: So given that the Rubric Marines have no special ability that allows them to charge after using Rapid Fire and Heavy weapons in the shooting phase, am I correct to assume all units can do that now?
A: Assumptions are a dangerous thing, Oliver...!

Q: That is a seriously better format than how it was handled in the past, very well done.

BUT, are the point costs cropped out of the datasheet or are there going to be multiple versions? Might get bloaty..
A: No bloaty-ness here. Loads more on points coming tomorrow.

Q: I didn't get to post this in time yesterday to be relevant but here we go. First, I'd like to say the new rules are cool. But, I do have a concern. As a chaos player who favors his dinobots and dragons, I'm concerned that the weapon loadouts for the forgefiends (2 hadesautocannons and plasma cannon at +25pts) and heldrakes (with either a baleflamer, whos profile no longer works in 8th, or a single hadesautocannon) were somewhat wanting for the 175 point costs but now units that are cheaper with more weapon sets and/or twinlinked weapons will not only be better (as they kinda were with upgrade capabilities) but completely outshine them or render them useless?
A: Fair comment, James. Chances are that our exstensive group of playtesters will have looked at this and a new, appropriate points value assigned. We aren't just about to change how good a model is without changing it's points value.

Q: Hello new(tm) games workshop, i'd like to ask a badly worded question about whether you'll answer this question and if you do do so will this question be answered? Also if you're doing an article on points values could you tell us how many points my personal favourite, the haruspex, will cost. (How can you not love that face?)
A: Hello, Peter - we'd like to provide a suitably vague yet teasing response about being more than happy to answer your question.

The Haruspex definitely has a points value, but we haven't revealed it yet. As such,we can't mention it yet, despite your obviously adorable face.

Q: This all looks great!!! *Oliver Twist-style pleading request* Adeptus sororitas faction feature/teaser?? cough cough 'obligatory plastic sisters comment' cough cough
A: The Faction Focus article is on it's way for sure.

Q: Love the articles!
Can we expect to see some info on the inquisition? Really want to know how they will be in 8th, like are they a full force on their own, or are they more of an add-on to other armies?
A: Indeed - there will be a focus article on the Imperial Agents for sure.

Q: I assume that point costs is kept separate from unit profiles in order to facilitate easier updates in the future, without invalidating the entire book, or are points supposed to be kept completely outside the codices, in a dedicated book?
A: Assuming is a dangerous past time, Marcin! Check out tomorrow's article on points for more.

Q: On the data sheet it doesn't say what an icon of flame does (unless I missed it), will there be a section of banners and such that all armies have access to?
A: Maybe! It wouldn't be a teaser if we just flat our told you everything, now would it?!

Q: I feel like the page is very busy. And I'm curious about the power rating.... Are the matched play points cost going to be a big list like in AoS's General's Handbook?
A: You will find out loads more in tomorrow's points article.

Q: Nice. So much info on one sheet. Loving it.
First look at melee weapons too. No range - so who gets to fight in cc?
A: More on that real soon.

Q: Will there be a points version of these data sheets for more balanced games?
A: Sounds like you need to tune in to tomorrow's article all about points!

Q: Nice. So the aspiring champion only knows smite? Or will there be another table / sheet for what powers he has access to ?
A: We haven't covered that yet; more on psychic powers coming later.

Q: But GW, where oh where will the points values be listed for matched play?
A: There's every chance that will be covered by tomorrow's "points and power levels" article...

Q: DANGEROUS ASSUMPTION ALERT

I'm assuming that psychic powers will be assigned from a book via keyword as I see no other reference there?
A: DANGEROUS ASSUMPTION DETECTED
Fear not, Assumptee... loads more information will be coming. Enlightenment is coming to these dark times.

Q: the lack of points scares the bejesus out of me... and i'm still not happy about losing templates!... going to need a lot more detail before i'm sold
A: What up, Leigh; Guildford represent! Points are still a thing, my fellow Baboon Samurai. Watch out for more on those tomorrow in the "points and power level" article.

Q: Power ranking besides points? Ohhh no.... "We finally really did it. You maniacs! You blew it up!"
A: There will be both! Tune in to the article all about points tomorrow.

Q: Rubrics! Huzzah! I have to wonder... what does the Icon of Flame do...?
A: Looks like you'll have to wait to find out that one!

Q: Awesome job! Any chance you'll go over the difference between Force weapons & Power weapons in a future article?
A: Of course we can. More articles planned in the future about melee weapons.

Q: Will these sheets be available in cards similar to Psychic Power cards?
A: No news on that right now. .

Q: What exactly is power rating? Is it the same thing as power level that you wrote later in the article?
A: All will be covered in tomorrow's article, fear not.

Q: If the Matched play points aren't going to be on the sheets where will they be? Will we need another book to view these?
A: Tune in tomorrow for the points and power level article and all will be revealed...

Q: Will there be another Datasheet for competitive game?
A: If you mean a points value, then looks like you need to tune into tomorrow's article entitled "points and power levels"....

Q: You tell us what... Death to the False Emperor does? **cheeky grin
A: Not yet...

Q: Will we have a look at the real points system before the release ?
A: Hey Quentin - sure thing - watch out tomorrow for an article all about points.

Q: Great article!!! Will you make an article about Renegades ?
A: You mean the Forge World models? We are focusing on the main Citadel factions for the articles.

Q: I thought invulnerable saves were gone?
A: Not at all - they are right there!

Q: Great stuff but why not call them "dataslates"
A: ...because they are on a sheet. We wanted to put them on slate but it made the rules too heavy...

Q: Can we get a look at Ork boyz?? Please!!
A: There are literally hundreds of units in the game and we wish we had the time to sho...*SMACK*.

"Give us da roolz,you puny 'umie! Don't make 'im ask again else I'll krump yer good"

Eldar Faction Focus
Q: If you say Banshees will be one of the fastest troops in the game then i really wonder what you guys have in store for Harlequins!
Can i expect my fellow clowns to be at the same speed or even faster?!
A: We shall but see!

Q: Are we going to be seeing Aspect Warriors in plastic any time soon, or are we still going to be relegated to Finecast?
A: We have no news on models right now, Andrew - if we ever do hear anything, you will see it here first!

Q: Wait, didn't Fulgrim kill an Avatar by putting it in a headlock and strangling it to death? If so, Guilliman shouldn't fear anything.
A: Besides... Guillian kills three Avatars every day before breakfast. For fun. With a butter knife.

Or so we heard.

Q: You guys better release a skitarii or cult mech (or maybe both) faction focus or the might of the Omnissiah shall make all your computer's unbearably slow.
A: We were wondering why the internet was dropping like a Guardsman in a trench. Now we know.

Q: I'm hoping the Wraithseer will get a datasheet and awesome rules.
A: Guys -with models like that, we are not sure about what is coming yet as FW haven't released information on their rules. As soon as we have it, we will be able to let you know.

Q: When we will have some love for the Custodian Guard?

Soon™, Really Soon™...?

And also, will we have this articles until release? Or will they continue after 8th is available?
A: There will indeed be some more articles coming Real, Real Soon!™

Q: I think Warhammer 40,000 is holding off on the Ork faction preview trying to build up the Waaagh...
A: Savin' da best fer later!

Q: Isn't Reece Robbins the Frontline gaming guy with them awesome Youtube batrep videos?
A: It is indeed him. He has the coolest voice!

Q: This information is completely wrong ... please see the Imperial Infantryman's Uplifting Primer for correct info on the Eldar. If you see anyone reading this info please report them to your Commisar!
A: That's how you get promoted around here, trooper!

Q1: Any chance of seeing a Necron profile soon?
A1: You mean.... like this?
Q2: Oh...
Games Workshop.
A2: I know what you're thinking. You're thinking "These guys are better than that, right?!".

But we're not. If there is a pun to be had, we will take it.

Q: Will Ynnari remain or have that army just been discarded?
A: You will 100% be able to use that army.

Is anyone else getting tired of the... Hmm... since I don't want to trigger the language filter, let's go with "wise" responses from GW to people's questions? The standout here being the Necron profile one, but there have been several examples in the recent FAQs, including the 8th edition announcements. Once or twice with obviously joking questions might be cute, but this has quickly become annoying to me.

No, I think they are funny. It is better than them being ignored, or "can't say yet" copied and pasted 1000 times.

This may be because of playing mainly Antares, DzC, Batman and Infinity for the time period of 6/7th ed. 40k, and being spoiled by the alternating activation and reaction mechanisms.

Justyn wrote:

This may be because of playing mainly Antares, DzC, Batman and Infinity for the time period of 6/7th ed. 40k, and being spoiled by the alternating activation and reaction mechanisms.

One of the main drawbacks to GW games in my opinion is that they have still not moved past I go, You go. Alternating activation makes for a MUCH more dynamic game.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
So will points levels work as before, but power levels allow for more relevant balance. So you have a 2000 pt game where anything goes, but you could have a 2000pt game with no units over a power level of say 15? So you can't have triple knights showing up with a grav-start etc.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Justyn wrote:

This may be because of playing mainly Antares, DzC, Batman and Infinity for the time period of 6/7th ed. 40k, and being spoiled by the alternating activation and reaction mechanisms.

One of the main drawbacks to GW games in my opinion is that they have still not moved past I go, You go. Alternating activation makes for a MUCH more dynamic game.

Which is why people like me have been banging the drum for Bolt Action and Maelstrom's Edge for ages.

They're not perfect games, but they're far superior to anything GW seems to cook up these days.

Bolt Action is the game 40k should have been.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

They could have up their sleeve a rule that says that, unless otherwise noted, you only need to roll to hit once for weapons that have a random number of shots. If you hit, all shots rolled hit.

Saves some dice rolling.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Justyn wrote:

This may be because of playing mainly Antares, DzC, Batman and Infinity for the time period of 6/7th ed. 40k, and being spoiled by the alternating activation and reaction mechanisms.

One of the main drawbacks to GW games in my opinion is that they have still not moved past I go, You go. Alternating activation makes for a MUCH more dynamic game.

Which is why people like me have been banging the drum for Bolt Action and Maelstrom's Edge for ages.

They're not perfect games, but they're far superior to anything GW seems to cook up these days.

Bolt Action is the game 40k should have been.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

They could have up their sleeve a rule that says that, unless otherwise noted, you only need to roll to hit once for weapons that have a random number of shots. If you hit, all shots rolled hit.

Saves some dice rolling.

It saves rolling, but i'd much rather roll for the individual shots as it is less swingy that way, which I'm pretty sure is the way it will be.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Should be next reveal any time?

 jamopower wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Justyn wrote:

This may be because of playing mainly Antares, DzC, Batman and Infinity for the time period of 6/7th ed. 40k, and being spoiled by the alternating activation and reaction mechanisms.

One of the main drawbacks to GW games in my opinion is that they have still not moved past I go, You go. Alternating activation makes for a MUCH more dynamic game.

Which is why people like me have been banging the drum for Bolt Action and Maelstrom's Edge for ages.

They're not perfect games, but they're far superior to anything GW seems to cook up these days.

Bolt Action is the game 40k should have been.

Well, I would say that Gates of Antares would be the game as it's sci-fi and all, but yeah, I agree. Still, 40k will be the king no amtter what, as the spread, background, plastic model production and marketing is way beyond the competitors.

tneva82 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I'm imagining Mandiblasters won't be as broken as they sound. Maybe something like something you use if the unit got to charge, and it gets the Mortal Wound profile on a to-hit roll of a 6.

Why people assume complains are always about balance? They could be useless and still bad change. Some people care about fluff and don't want it arbitarly changed without good reason. What good reason there is for this change?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I mentioned it a few times but Mortal Wounds may be taking the place of rending. mandiblasters rendingnthrough he weak points of armour is super duper fluffy.

Eyjio wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I mentioned it a few times but Mortal Wounds may be taking the place of rending. mandiblasters rendingnthrough he weak points of armour is super duper fluffy.

But we already saw a rending weapon in the soulreaper cannon. It just had -1 AP more than expected; none of this mortal wounds nonsense.