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.

 Yarium wrote:

xlDuke wrote:
I'm going to assume that there's a misprint when it says twin-linked weapons fire twice as many shots at half range, a bit of confusion between Rapid Fire and Twin-Linked?

Large blasts look to be very dangerous indeed, as does Melta!

It's a doubling for Twin-Linked at Half Range. Rapid Fire is ALSO a doubling at Half Range. Ergo; if you have a twin-linked Bolter (like on a Land Raider Crusader), you get 1 shot, but that goes up to FOUR shots at half-range!

That was apparently a typo: the article now just says that TL translates to double ROF. So I'd guess those TL plasma talons will be Rapid-Fire 2 (which was mentioned yesterday in the Faction Focus piece about Guard). And incidentally, it makes perfect sense to handle Rapid-Fire like that - we've had a Rapid-Fire 3 weapon since at least 5e: the hurricane bolter!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Luciferian wrote:

JohnMarik wrote:
I'm also wondering what happens to weapons that were Rapid Fire and Twin Linked? *Thinks about his plasma talons on Black Knights*

Like I said, they just got many times more likely to kill YOU!

Assuming they still have the whole Gets Hot! bit. ISTR they didn't have that in 2e, and I wouldn't be shocked to see that gone, as much as folks will gripe about fluff-mangling.

So far, everything seems to be geared to anti elite and tank. Even flamers got better at single target killing.

But they haven't really shown anything that's anti-horde yet.

If Heavy Bolters are still only heavy 3 but AP-1, they seem better equipped to take out mid range infantry, even better now against MEQ's. Battlecannons now seem better against TEQ's and characters, urather than large groups under a pie plate.
Lascannons and meltas are obviously anti-tank.

I could be wrong, and you math hammer guys might prove that. But to me, from what they've shown, it looks like horde armies are going to flourish and elite armies are going to get utterly wrecked

The real winner? The lowly Tau gun drone.

A landraider can now pump out 5d6 wounds per turn now. Hide your Rowboat!

I know vehicles could die in one shot in 7th to ap2/ap1. I actually liked the armor value system (no we dont grav spam in the champagne room) from 7th because it made vehicles different and gave the game added flavor. But thats all besides the point now.

My personal "crusade" as it was called is just to highlight that things are going to die so fast in 8th, your head is going to spin! Like really really really fast! Damage potential for all units has gone way off the charts!

Pancakey wrote:
So on a good day a battle cannon can do 18 wounds in one go.

LOL at the morkanaughts "massive" 18 wounds. This is going to be the shootiest mcshootface one shot edition!

Good thing IC can't get one killed in one shot if they are under 11 wounds! Unless they are the cloest model , it's tuesday, you're name is jeff or randy, and you own your own flgs.

These rules stink of crowd sourcing.

So 0.00000186% of the time the battlecannon can do 18 wounds....I'm shaking

Dear god, my IG is in love. I don't know how IG is gonna stack up once the dust settles, but so far they seem to reaping the benefits of almost every change made so far.

Breng77 wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
So on a good day a battle cannon can do 18 wounds in one go.

LOL at the morkanaughts "massive" 18 wounds. This is going to be the shootiest mcshootface one shot edition!

Good thing IC can't get one killed in one shot if they are under 11 wounds! Unless they are the cloest model , it's tuesday, you're name is jeff or randy, and you own your own flgs.

These rules stink of crowd sourcing.

So 0.00000186% of the time the battlecannon can do 18 wounds....I'm shaking

Yeah it's new stats are actually pretty mediocre. Averaging at killing maybe 1 termie, if you're lucky

The only thing I'm not a fan of is the change to Combi-Weapons.

A simple, universal cost of 5 points like on Space Wolf and Chaos Terminators would've been the easiest way to go about it. If they were going to go this route, I would've preferred a much bigger negative modifier.

Outside of that, loving the profiles for the Battle Cannon, Melta Gun, and TL rules.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The only thing I'm not a fan of is the change to Combi-Weapons.

A simple, universal cost of 5 points like on Space Wolf and Chaos Terminators would've been the easiest way to go about it. If they were going to go this route, I would've preferred a much bigger negative modifier.

Outside of that, loving the profiles for the Battle Cannon, Melta Gun, and TL rules.

We have no idea what any of these weapons will cost....

 Carnage43 wrote:
Oh boy. These are some BIG changes. I'll assume there's a typo or mistake in the information about double shots at half range.



Battle cannon. D6 shots? I mean....eww. That's only going to average what, 1.75 hits per turn? That's not super amazing. This is a carry through for our big blast template now too. So, whirlwinds, vindicators....etc, are D6 shots now? Small blasts will be D3 I assume.




.

I wonder if all blasts will be the same. To me it seems feasible that some lower S blasts meant for anti-infantry (like a whirlwind) could do 2D6 shots (or more) but only 1 wound. The same could hold true for small blasts. I'd be fine with plasma cannons being D3 and Mortars being a D6 or 2D3 etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The only thing I'm not a fan of is the change to Combi-Weapons.

A simple, universal cost of 5 points like on Space Wolf and Chaos Terminators would've been the easiest way to go about it. If they were going to go this route, I would've preferred a much bigger negative modifier.

Outside of that, loving the profiles for the Battle Cannon, Melta Gun, and TL rules.

Combi-weapons will need to increase in cost substantially, as it stands they are straight up better than non-combi versions. My hope is that each are costed at a different price point as a combi-melta seems better in most circumstances than a combi-flamer (though that is still good.)

To all the mathhammer dudes. Its about potential damage. A lemon rust when form potentially doing 1 wound on a sigle model like Rowboat to doing UP TO 18.

1 < 18

Combi is another good example of the massive power boost.

A combi melta went from doing potentially 1 wound a game to 6d6 wounds a game. That is an insane power boost!

1 < 36

 Tiberius501 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
So on a good day a battle cannon can do 18 wounds in one go.

LOL at the morkanaughts "massive" 18 wounds. This is going to be the shootiest mcshootface one shot edition!

Good thing IC can't get one killed in one shot if they are under 11 wounds! Unless they are the cloest model , it's tuesday, you're name is jeff or randy, and you own your own flgs.

These rules stink of crowd sourcing.

So 0.00000186% of the time the battlecannon can do 18 wounds....I'm shaking

Yeah it's new stats are actually pretty mediocre. Averaging at killing maybe 1 termie, if you're lucky

Yup it averages as stated elsewhere about 1.75 wounds pre-save and marines are getting a 3+ save. The other guns on the russ (sponsons etc) seem to be where the power is. Also other versions of the Russ seem likely to be better.

Breng77 wrote:

 Tiberius501 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
So on a good day a battle cannon can do 18 wounds in one go.

LOL at the morkanaughts "massive" 18 wounds. This is going to be the shootiest mcshootface one shot edition!

Good thing IC can't get one killed in one shot if they are under 11 wounds! Unless they are the cloest model , it's tuesday, you're name is jeff or randy, and you own your own flgs.

These rules stink of crowd sourcing.

So 0.00000186% of the time the battlecannon can do 18 wounds....I'm shaking

Yeah it's new stats are actually pretty mediocre. Averaging at killing maybe 1 termie, if you're lucky

Yup it averages as stated elsewhere about 1.75 wounds pre-save and marines are getting a 3+ save. The other guns on the russ (sponsons etc) seem to be where the power is. Also other versions of the Russ seem likely to be better.

You gotta hope so haha

Pancakey wrote:
To all the mathhammer dudes. Its about potential damage. A lemon rust when form potentially doing 1 wound on a sigle model like Rowboat to doing UP TO 18.

1 < 18

No, it's about average damage.

Hurricane Bolters will be legit now.

Rapid fire 3 twin linked = 6-12 shots per bolter depending on range.

This is the edition of "Bring max squad sizes of troops to absorb the punishment". As stated earlier, elite min unit armies look dead.

Stop picking on people that are bad at math, they suffer enough in life already. So battle cannon goes to ap -2, which we can assume is the same for ap 3 weapons, a heavy bolter is ap -1, and a melta is ap -4. So it looks like they are carrying ap straight across:

AP 4 = AP -1
AP 3 = AP -2
AP 2 = AP -3
AP 1 = AP -4

So now we can start thinking about nerfs and buffs.

Battle Cannon:
Expected Shots Value = 3.5
Expected Hits Value (assuming it didn't move at BS3) = 1.75
Expected To-Wound (assuming T8) = 0.875
Expected Saves (assuming 3+ save base, not in cover) = 66.6% of wounds go through
Expected Wounds Value unsaved wound = 2
Expected Total Damage Per Shot = 1+1/6

Therefore, you can expect a Battle Cannon to deal 1 wound to a vehicle or monstrous creature of these kinds. Not great against a Morkanaut. However, if it's T7 with a 3+ save; then you get 1+5/9 wounds through, on average. It's cool because this gun is sometimes just going to knock off 1 wound, but sometimes it'll get a CRUSHING amount of wounds on a lucky hit!

Pancakey wrote:
To all the mathhammer dudes. Its about potential damage. A lemon rust when form potentially doing 1 wound on a sigle model like Rowboat to doing UP TO 18.

1 < 18

Combi is another good example of the massive power boost.

A combi melta went from doing potentially 1 wound a game to 6d6 wounds a game. That is an insane power boost!

1 < 36

I mean....potentially, sure. That's one way to look at it. A wrong way, but A way.

On average a battle cannon would, let's say, alway hit, wound on a 2+, then have to deal with a 2+ save. Average wounds taken = 0.1388. Battle cannon shots to kill him? Around 43.

Now we have 8th edition. 4+ to hit, 3+ to wound, D3 wounds, -2 to his 2+ save, 9 wounds to chip through. Average wounds per shot = 1.16, 0.77 if he had cover. This is assuming he doesn't have a secondary save as well. Average battle cannon shots to kill when not in cover = 7.75, in cover 11.68. So, be in cover.

This is assuming you can even target him, because he's a character and won't be an eligible target, and assuming he doesn't get a second FnP or invul save as well.

Long story short. Batttle cannons and blast weapons are much better against individual targets and probably worse against large units now. Characters have more wounds. Characters shouldn't be easy to snipe. Cover is still good.

Pancakey wrote:
To all the mathhammer dudes. Its about potential damage. A lemon rust when form potentially doing 1 wound on a sigle model like Rowboat to doing UP TO 18.

1 < 18

Except it is not about potential damage, when that is likely never to happen. My stats did not even include saves (like the 4+ Rowboat would have at minimum). You need to roll a 6 for number of hits, followed by 6 4+s, followed by another 6 4+s (in my example against a morkanaut), followed by 6 5+ (D3 rolls of 3), then fail all those saves (5+ on a morkanaut). When something can potentially happen 1 time out of 10 million (not an exaggeration) it matters that it is unlikely to happen. Did a leman russ battle cannot improve slightly against a single model sure. But it got much worse on average against units. Especially single wound models.

so it matters when you make statements about it being a super shooting edition based on huge statistical unlikelihood.

Why doesnt potential matter? Is it not a consideration in game design?

Breng77 wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
To all the mathhammer dudes. Its about potential damage. A lemon rust when form potentially doing 1 wound on a sigle model like Rowboat to doing UP TO 18.

1 < 18

Except it is not about potential damage, when that is likely never to happen. My stats did not even include saves (like the 4+ Rowboat would have at minimum). You need to roll a 6 for number of hits, followed by 6 4+s, followed by another 6 4+s (in my example against a morkanaut), followed by 6 5+ (D3 rolls of 3), then fail all those saves (5+ on a morkanaut). When something can potentially happen 1 time out of 10 million (not an exaggeration) it matters that it is unlikely to happen. Did a leman russ battle cannot improve slightly against a single model sure. But it got much worse on average against units. Especially single wound models.

so it matters when you make statements about it being a super shooting edition based on huge statistical unlikelihood.

Maybe they wanted the battlecannon to be used differently in this edition to make cannons like the punisher mini gun to be more anti-unit? Speculation of course, but perhaps they wanted to shift around the focus of the cannons.

Pancakey wrote:
Why doesnt potential matter? Is it not a consideration in game design?

Not really.

I mean, it's potentially possible to wipe an entire army off the table first turn if you have enough shots to do it. 1 lascannon per vehicle, 1 lasgun per troop for example. But it's also almost mathematically impossible as well.

You don't build a game on 1 in 10 trillion chances, you build it on the average and typical outcomes.

Can we agree on some terms

Expected Damage = Average
Potential Damage = Maximum

Pancakey wrote:
Why doesnt potential matter? Is it not a consideration in game design?

sure it matters, it is why the battle cannon doesn't have 2D6 shots, or do D6 wounds. Because then the likely potential of a ton of wounds is high. But as a concern for it being OP when 1/10,000,000 times it does 18 wounds to a Morkanaut is not a really important factor in balance, because if your morkanaut got taken out in that manner it would be fairly exciting that someone rolled so ridiculously well. Lets put it this way, the chance of a morkanaut being one shot is much higher right now than the chance of it getting killed by a battle cannon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tiberius501 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
To all the mathhammer dudes. Its about potential damage. A lemon rust when form potentially doing 1 wound on a sigle model like Rowboat to doing UP TO 18.

1 < 18

Except it is not about potential damage, when that is likely never to happen. My stats did not even include saves (like the 4+ Rowboat would have at minimum). You need to roll a 6 for number of hits, followed by 6 4+s, followed by another 6 4+s (in my example against a morkanaut), followed by 6 5+ (D3 rolls of 3), then fail all those saves (5+ on a morkanaut). When something can potentially happen 1 time out of 10 million (not an exaggeration) it matters that it is unlikely to happen. Did a leman russ battle cannot improve slightly against a single model sure. But it got much worse on average against units. Especially single wound models.

so it matters when you make statements about it being a super shooting edition based on huge statistical unlikelihood.

Maybe they wanted the battlecannon to be used differently in this edition to make cannons like the punisher mini gun to be more anti-unit? Speculation of course, but perhaps they wanted to shift around the focus of the cannons.

possibly I would have no issue with variety among russes. Their statement in the article seems to suggest they wanted explosions to be very swingy, so from a competitive standpoint, that may be undesirable. It will be a unit that will do a ton or do nothing, which is similar to blasts now really.

If the Battle Cannon profile says, "D6 Shots," without a bit of text saying something like, "this weapon automatically hits its target," then we will certainly be making To Hit rolls for this weapon system.

Lascannon vs Russ
2/3 * 2/3 * 5/6 (2/3 Cover) = 20/54 (8/27)
12 / (3.5 * (20/54)) = 9.257
12 / (3.5 * (8/27)) = 11.571

Battle Cannon vs Russ (Assuming BS3)
1/2 * 1/2 * 2/3 (1/2 Cover) = 2/12 (1/8)
(12 / (2 * (2/12))) / 3.5 = 10.285
(12 / (2 * (1/8))) / 3.5 = 13.714

I don't know about you, but those values look alright to me.

Not to mention the 1/108 chance of Russ dealing 18 damage.
(1/2 * 1/2 * 2/3 * 1/6 * 1/3 )

Edit
And the fact that a Russ will 1 shot another Russ... Every 1/36 shots
(1/2 * 1/2 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 1/3 )

What is the chance it will do 6 wounds?

Pancakey wrote:
Why doesnt potential matter? Is it not a consideration in game design?

Only if the probability is decently high. If it was a 1 shot weapon that did 18 wounds, it WOULD matter. As a D6 shot that has a very, very small chance to pull 18 wounds, not so much.

Looks like people who complained about Ork weapons being "too random" are going to be FURIOUS. Wonder how the unreliability of Orky tech will be represented now?

I am a bit disappointed that it seems blast weapons now just have a random rate of fire. Seems to me like a nice way to make them more distinct from high RoF weapons would have been to make it so that they do one roll to hit, but if it succeeds you do, for example, D6 hits on the target unit.