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.

Sooooo what does this mean for the humble Hurricane Bolter?

something like12/24 (forgot if it was 3 or 6 twin linked bolters) shots per sponson at 12"?

Pancakey wrote:
What is the chance it will do 6 wounds?

To get 6 wounds, it needs to get 3 damage twice.
So 1/3 chance of getting 3 damage and everything but a 1 is at least twice...


(1/2 * 1/2 * 2/3 * 5/6 * 1/3 ) = 10/216 or 1/22 shots

Also, a battlecannon only causing an average 1.75 hits is a bit disappointing.

I for one am welcoming my dakkajets back to hopefully being useful. though I hope they are a bti more durable than tissue paper this edition

Dakkadreads with double ACs might be decent now - pumping out 8 shots on a tough(ish) platform.
And Ork bikers now put out 6 str5 shots? Grab a mob of 10 of them and thats 60 shots?
Scats on Serpents now 8 shots a piece. Not too shabby either.

Grab those dice buckets.

 Ratius wrote:
Dakkadreads with double ACs might be decent now - pumping out 8 shots on a tough(ish) platform.
And Ork bikers now put out 6 str5 shots? Grab a mob of 10 of them and thats 60 shots?
Scats on Serpents now 8 shots a piece. Not too shabby either.

Grab those dice buckets.

Mother of god...think of Tyranids! Spinefists are twin linked assault X... I need more spinefists. What's more, is that they are practically pistols... Raveners will be fun as well as the rest of the Warrior genus. Here's the BIG question. If they rule spinefists as pistols, and consider a pair as a single weapon for the cost of Gunslinger...that's roughly 12-16 shots per warrior genus that can be used outside and inside of CC.

 Nazrak wrote:
Also, a battlecannon only causing an average 1.75 hits is a bit disappointing.

Yea, but also 1/36 chance of straight up dealing 12 damage to an enemy Leman Russ

That's not "Never going to happen", That's "Happens every other game."

That's the chance of rolling Double 6s

I imagine we will have a lot of the weapon profiles adjusted to account for.....oddities like those. Or at least the points cost adjusted to be in line with it.


I dunno about tyranids man. I see spinefist becoming pistol weapons actually. The real question is twin-linked devourers on tyrants and carnifexes. Those could be absolutely lethal.

Pancakey wrote:
Why doesn't potential matter? Is it not a consideration in game design?

Game design is about probability, and the probability of one shotting a morkanuat is so small that you might expect it to happen once in the entirety of 8th edition. Humans are running monkey firmware on lizard hardware so we are not well equipped to think of events less common than say 1 in 20, so when I tell you it's a 1 in 537,634 occurrence people tend to round up to a 1 in 20 or judge it to be impossible, when neither of those is really the case.

 Talamare wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:
Also, a battlecannon only causing an average 1.75 hits is a bit disappointing.

Yea, but also 1/36 chance of straight up dealing 12 damage to an enemy Leman Russ

That's not "Never going to happen", That's "Happens every other game."

That's the chance of rolling Double 6s

So if the Battle Cannon now takes the roll of, sort-if-anti-tank, what will a Vanquisher be like? And what will take the place of anti-squad? I really hope a basilisk will be dishing out more pain to Units

So, what's the point of twin-linked anymore?

Take my Punisher Vulture 20 shots twin-linked means 40 shots! Why not just say it has 40 shots and be done with it, why do we need the special rule, and not just a change in stat line?

So does this mean the battle cannon can kill at most 6 people or at most 18 people?

 Tiberius501 wrote:

 Talamare wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:
Also, a battlecannon only causing an average 1.75 hits is a bit disappointing.

Yea, but also 1/36 chance of straight up dealing 12 damage to an enemy Leman Russ

That's not "Never going to happen", That's "Happens every other game."

That's the chance of rolling Double 6s

So if the Battle Cannon now takes the roll of, sort-if-anti-tank, what will a Vanquisher be like? And what will take the place of anti-squad? I really hope a basilisk will be dishing out more pain to Units

Battle Cannon has always taken the roll of "effective against everything"

Vanquisher has plenty of room to be more effective than a Battle Cannon at being Anti-Tank since the Battle Cannon is on average worse than even a Lascannon at being Anti-Tank.

The difference tho between a Lascannon and a Battle Cannon is what some people have been trying to convey...
POTENTIAL

A Lascannon at it's maximum Potential is only 6 damage
A Battlecannon at it's maximum potential is 18 damage

 Grimgold wrote:
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.

I suspect that any weapons that currently have Rending or Bladstorm or similar rule might bump that up. For example an AP4 Assault cannon might actually be AP -2, or Shuriken weapons might be AP -1


Also, for those who are saying "What's the point in Twin-linked/Twin weapons? Just give us 2 guns", I think models will still be limited in the number of weapons they are allowed to fire per turn, so Twin weapons will only count as 1 for this purpose. Just a guess mind you.

-

I think, to some extent, making the "twin-linked" version of a weapon its own entry will prohibit players from 'splitting' twin-linked weapons. So, for Twin-Linked Heavy Bolters, those 6 shots will all go to the same target. It will be the same, I imagine, for Hurricane Bolters and Quad Heavy Bolters, etc.

 Carnage43 wrote:
I imagine we will have a lot of the weapon profiles adjusted to account for.....oddities like those. Or at least the points cost adjusted to be in line with it.


I dunno about tyranids man. I see spinefist becoming pistol weapons actually. The real question is twin-linked devourers on tyrants and carnifexes. Those could be absolutely lethal.

Well, they are twin linked pairs...so I guess it would be 12 shots per pair. What's odd is that I don't feel like most people would auto take TMCs with 2 pairs though. I think people may start diversifying their bugs to take advantage of other bioweapons. Survivability hasn't really changed much for most infantry compared to the standard weapons for us, so it might be better for a flying hive tyrant to take only 1 pair and take something like a heavy venom cannon or stranglethorn.

CommanderRednaxela wrote:
So, what's the point of twin-linked anymore?

Take my Punisher Vulture 20 shots twin-linked means 40 shots! Why not just say it has 40 shots and be done with it, why do we need the special rule, and not just a change in stat line?

In the one twin-linked weapon they showed a profile for, that's exactly what they did do. There's no "twin-linked" special rule at all, just a name with "twin" in it, and double the ROF.

ETA: As others have pointed out, there is one place where this makes a difference: a weapon with double the ROF can fire at one unit, while two of a kind can possibly fire at two separate units. That would make there be a point to being able to choose, like how Crisis Suits work right now for example, and two of a kind would be strictly superior to one twin-linked weapon provided you can fire them both. Of course, that's predicated on the idea that a single model will be able to fire two weapons of the same kind at different targets. (Like, say, multiple storm bolters on a Rhino).

TheLumberJack wrote:So does this mean the battle cannon can kill at most 6 people or at most 18 people?

6 people. 6 models hit, each taking D3 wounds. Wounds will not spill over between models. Eg. A lascannon will do D6 wounds, but only kill a single model, not 6 potentially. At least, that's how it's always worked with GW.

CommanderRednaxela wrote:
So, what's the point of twin-linked anymore?

Take my Punisher Vulture 20 shots twin-linked means 40 shots! Why not just say it has 40 shots and be done with it, why do we need the special rule, and not just a change in stat line?

That is what they are doing, they are just adding Twin to the Twin Linked Heavy Bolter to show that it is not a normal Heavy Bolter.

 Anpu42 wrote:

CommanderRednaxela wrote:
So, what's the point of twin-linked anymore?

Take my Punisher Vulture 20 shots twin-linked means 40 shots! Why not just say it has 40 shots and be done with it, why do we need the special rule, and not just a change in stat line?

That is what they are doing, they are just adding Twin to the Twin Linked Heavy Bolter to show that it is not a normal Heavy Bolter.

Also, there may be spells or buffs that Twin-Link weapons so you'd need a rule for that. Same for if Twin-Linked is a purchasable upgrade and doesn't come standard.

 Talamare wrote:
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 )

Your chances of doing 18 damage seems pretty far off. You would need to roll a 6 for chances to hit (1/6), hit with every single of those 6 shots (1/2^6), wound with every single of those 6 shots(against 1/2^6), and roll a 5+ for each of those 6 hits (1/3^6) so that would be 1/6*1/64*1/64*1/729= 1/17,915,904. Your probability is calculating for a single roll to hit and a single roll to wound. That would only work if the weapon did 2D6*1D3 wounds as its damage. Those are all the things that will need to go right for a russ to do 18 damage.

Mathhammer on things with random shots and random wounds is complex

You can simplify the average to 3.5*1/2* x * 2 for figuring out what to expect, but figuring out a specific value of wounds is terribly complicated

The battlecannon profile is...underwhelming.

It probably mirrors the current capability of the Battlecannon pretty well to be fair, except that more stuff will be getting saves against it, and it has been considered an underperforming weapon for at least 3 editions now.

More and more I'm thinking the classic Russ is going to be staying on shelves. Hopefully the variants show better and/or we see some other stuff change, but I don't see much reason to take the Battlecannon Russ, if the Exterminator for example gets 8 S7 AP -1 shots, even with only 1 Damage, it's going to be the generally superior platform.

Talamare wrote:Twin Linked change is a little disappointing

Yes, it's more powerful but the rule was designed to be different

If Twin Linked was just going to be 2 weapons... then they could represent that by... Just giving it 2 weapons...

There is no need for a "Twin Linked" Rule

Twin Linked Heavy Bolter = 2 Heavy Bolters.

CommanderRednaxela wrote:So, what's the point of twin-linked anymore?

Take my Punisher Vulture 20 shots twin-linked means 40 shots! Why not just say it has 40 shots and be done with it, why do we need the special rule, and not just a change in stat line?

I think some people missed the implications presented by the statements regarding the Combi-Weapons.

Firing 2 (and possibly more) Weapons will result in a -1 (and maybe more?) in your To Hit for both Weapons. Twin-Linking allows for firing both Weapons without this modifier. If you want a good reason for Twin-linking a Weapon and not splitting them, there you go. And it looks like EVERYONE will be able to do this (as noted by the inclusion of the Sternguard).

So, it looks like Tau Target Locks and Multitrackers are now useless in their old capacities. I wonder if they will be dropped or converted in to something new.

This also looks like we're back to pre-7th for Shooting so that we are not separating out the Weapons being fired, but that's just an assumption for now. Though, it could be operating under the same assumption as Ordnance was in 7th, that you had to announce you were going to shoot it, one way or another, as it affected all the Shooting the model made for that Phase.

 Talamare wrote:
Twin Linked change is a little disappointing

Yes, it's more powerful but the rule was designed to be different

If Twin Linked was just going to be 2 weapons... then they could represent that by... Just giving it 2 weapons...

There is no need for a "Twin Linked" Rule

Twin Linked Heavy Bolter = 2 Heavy Bolters.

Unless each weapon has to fire at a given target. If a models can fire its different weapons at different targets, but not split up the attacks of the individual weapons, then this is a way to force more shots into a unit and not let it be as flexible as two separate weapons.

Oh, I have two lascannons? I fire one at that Leman Russ, and another at that Chimera.

Oh, I have a Twin-Lascannon? I fire it at the Leman Russ.

 hippyjr wrote:
So combi-melta sternguard can fire a melta shot and poison bolter round every turn? Christ, that will destroy MCs

It's about time. Something has to.

Martel732 wrote:

 hippyjr wrote:
So combi-melta sternguard can fire a melta shot and poison bolter round every turn? Christ, that will destroy MCs

It's about time. Something has to.

it also only does so if combi-weapons aren't say 20 points each.

Sweet sweet Tau buffs.

 Vaktathi wrote:
The battlecannon profile is...underwhelming.

It probably mirrors the current capability of the Battlecannon pretty well to be fair, except that more stuff will be getting saves against it, and it has been considered an underperforming weapon for at least 3 editions now.

More and more I'm thinking the classic Russ is going to be staying on shelves. Hopefully the variants show better and/or we see some other stuff change, but I don't see much reason to take the Battlecannon Russ, if the Exterminator for example gets 8 S7 AP -1 shots, even with only 1 Damage, it's going to be the generally superior platform.

While it may have a low expected value, that just means that 50% of the time it does MORE damage than that, and 50% of the time it does LESS damage than that. The "less" part means that about half the time your Leman Russ is probably just dealing 0 or 1 wounds with the battle cannon, but the "high" side is that it's killing 3 dudes from a squad (good against heavy infantry), or dealing a whopping 8 or so wounds to something bigger.

These changes all make Deathwatch much more viable too. Granted it all depends on if they tone down grav or not.

 Carnage43 wrote:

TheLumberJack wrote:So does this mean the battle cannon can kill at most 6 people or at most 18 people?

6 people. 6 models hit, each taking D3 wounds. Wounds will not spill over between models. Eg. A lascannon will do D6 wounds, but only kill a single model, not 6 potentially. At least, that's how it's always worked with GW.

You would think that a weaponized laser would punch a hole through an infantryman and any of his hapless buddies unlucky enough to be in back of him. Also wouldn't be a single bolt but a beam you could drag across a area target making it effective anti infantry or anti armor if you concentrate the beam at one point.