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.

What if the Land Raider Terminus makes it back? Giggity.

The Battle Cannon is basically Good at shooting EVERYTHING

It's not the best anti infantry with mediocre number of shots, but d6 dudes a turn is pretty good.

It's not the best anti elite infantry with mediocre AP, but -2 AP and potential for d3 damage is pretty good.

It's not the best anti tank with mediocre d3 damage, but being able to deal d6 shots makes it pretty good.

ITS AN ALL PURPOSE TANK

It shouldn't outshine specialized options, but it should be alright at all targets.

It does it's job perfectly.

 Talamare wrote:
The Battle Cannon is basically Good at shooting EVERYTHING

Oh?



Please tell me more. What information are you privy to that makes killing 2 hormagaunts or a single marine sound like "good shooting"? Is the battle-cannon Leman Russ 50 points, or something?

Just a thought but maybe for your crucial rolls you'll be able to use command points to reroll the D6? Or perhaps there is a armor detachment that might offer some benefits? In any case I think it makes sense that an MBT main weapon would be better at killing HVTs. I think anti infantry blast weapons you'll see your D6+X or 2D6 for hits.

I like where this is going.
Excited about everything they have shown about weapons, even got over the loss of templates.
Still suspicious of how hand to hand bubbles and roping in nearby units is NOT going to end up a mass of melee in the middle of the table EVERY game, but will see.
Seems that one fix will be to use fewer points on a 6x4 table so that units can spread out and use the range of specialist weapons to chip away at positions and give lanes of cover fire for units advancing more cautiously to claim objectives, rather than the full scale head on rush to oblivion that the new hand to hand rules seem to invite if the table is too crowded.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:
The Battle Cannon is basically Good at shooting EVERYTHING

It's not the best anti infantry with mediocre number of shots, but d6 dudes a turn is pretty good.

It's not the best anti elite infantry with mediocre AP, but -2 AP and potential for d3 damage is pretty good.

It's not the best anti tank with mediocre d3 damage, but being able to deal d6 shots makes it pretty good.

ITS AN ALL PURPOSE TANK

It shouldn't outshine specialized options, but it should be alright at all targets.

It does it's job perfectly.

Yes, I agree that they seem to have gotten this one right for sure.
Maybe there are better guns for special jobs, but the battle cannon is supposed to be general purpose and this profile sure seems to make it that way,
though we are going to see how it plays first to be sure I guess.

 Talamare wrote:
It's not the best anti elite infantry with mediocre AP, but -2 AP and potential for d3 damage is pretty good.

At the very least, my terminators will be scared of this thing. -2 to my save is no laughing matter (before I still got a 2+ and could largely ignore the thing when it maybe clipped my unit) and it is actually a lot more reliable at hitting at least once than it was before. Given that it counteracts one of the upgrades terminators got in this edition (+1 wound) means that the prospect of that getting leveled at me is scary.

It went from a hit on a terminator dealing 0.14 wounds to a hit on a terminator dealing .83 wounds. That is worrisome, especially considering it gets 1d6 shots and can test for each potential hit separately. If a battle cannon hit my unit square before (rare as it was) then it would deal ~0.7 wounds. Basically, it was unlikely to kill even one terminator. Now? Each individual hit has a better chance of wiping a terminator off the board than nabbing five hits under the old version of the rules. That's nightmare inducing to small, elite units that rely on toughness/saves to survive.

And that the LRBT can still fire all its other guns makes it a potent little package depending on the loadout. The BC may not shred a horde on its own, but backed up by three heavy bolters it can certainly make a dent. It may not be the ultimate slayer of vehicles and MCs (well, it's actually pretty great there, even compared to the lascannon) but sponsob MMs and a hull lascannon will make it a mid-ranged anti-vehicle menace. Or, because of split fire you can dabble a bit with the classic lascannon/HB loadout and not lose out on much while remaining able to use the battle cannon to bolster whatever the other guns are firing at (or vice versa).

It is important to keep in mind that what was ornance no longer has to try to make up for the lack of other weapons firing (which ordnance largely sucked at by being too inconsistent to matter). Now it can be supported and complimented by the rest of the tank's weaponry. This is a pretty huge deal that is getting glossed over quite often. You no longer sacrifice all your other weapons firing to lob a shot with that battle cannon, it is just another gun on the tank, not a replacement for them.

 Talamare wrote:
The Battle Cannon is basically Good at shooting EVERYTHING

It's not the best anti infantry with mediocre number of shots, but d6 dudes a turn is pretty good.

It's not the best anti elite infantry with mediocre AP, but -2 AP and potential for d3 damage is pretty good.

It's not the best anti tank with mediocre d3 damage, but being able to deal d6 shots makes it pretty good.

ITS AN ALL PURPOSE TANK



It shouldn't outshine specialized options, but it should be alright at all targets.

It does it's job perfectly.

Also known as not worth it's points.

Ballasar wrote:


Also known as not worth it's points.

Hey, if you have at the 8th edition points values tucked away somewhere let us all know.

Also, it's tough to gauge the value of now being able to fire all weapons, not just the BC, even if the points remain the same. Personally, if I had an option, in 7th, of the 7th Ed BC and the statline for the new one as Hd6 for the same points, I take the 8th Ed version all day. I like to fire all my guns.

@Talamare - we need to start a club.

Ballasar wrote:

 Talamare wrote:
The Battle Cannon is basically Good at shooting EVERYTHING

It's not the best anti infantry with mediocre number of shots, but d6 dudes a turn is pretty good.

It's not the best anti elite infantry with mediocre AP, but -2 AP and potential for d3 damage is pretty good.

It's not the best anti tank with mediocre d3 damage, but being able to deal d6 shots makes it pretty good.

ITS AN ALL PURPOSE TANK



It shouldn't outshine specialized options, but it should be alright at all targets.

It does it's job perfectly.

Also known as not worth it's points.

We don't know what it's points are

We know based off available data that the battlecannon is averaging about two dead GEQ a turn, or 1 dead MEQ or one dead TEQ a turn.

So exactly how many points do you think 2 dead guardsmen or 1 dead termie or marine with average rolls is worth? Do you seriously think that it's going to cost like 50 points for the stock Russ+BC?

We don't know everything yet, but it's not difficult to infer or eliminate completely unlikely scenarios, like the tank costing 50 points. lol

The same gun also averages slightly over a full wound on T5/6 and 2+ sv, multiwound creatures which is way higher than previously. It seems obvious at least to me that MEQ infantry aren't the core target for the BC (and fluff-wise never should have been).

What unit type do you think is the intended target for the battle-cannon?

 BlaxicanX wrote:
What unit type do you think is the intended target for the battle-cannon?

Not who you asked the question but I'd say probably units that have a low number of models and more than 1 wound. The battle cannon could kill 1 or 2 termies a turn. Maybe single light vehicles or MC's like dreads

Light and medium vehicles MCs, and most multi-wound infantry, off the top of my head anyway. Somewhat dependent on other armament too, since you can fire everything now.

Mostly that's based on the logic of not wasting the D3 damage on single wound targets. The difference between the BC and the HB is way more pronounced when the D3 damage can actually be factored in.

 TheLumberJack wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
What unit type do you think is the intended target for the battle-cannon?

Not who you asked the question but I'd say probably units that have a low number of models and more than 1 wound. The battle cannon could kill 1 or 2 termies a turn. Maybe single light vehicles or MC's like dreads

Basically that's it..

With the change in rules the battlecannons role has changed.. save the anti troop work for your 100 flashlights =D

 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.

Well prior to 3rd edition, the 10+ years of twin linked weapons meant ONE roll to hit or miss for both weapons. Thus a twin linked lascanon was not worth twice one lascannon. (actually it was absurdably too cheap)

Not 100% sure from the article but do we know for sure that twin linked gets more than one chance to hit???

even still the likelihood is that it must fire at the same target for both guns.....as others have surmised.

This 8th is turning into more of 2.5 edition every single day. Now give us wargear cards !! lol

GodDamUser wrote:

 TheLumberJack wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
What unit type do you think is the intended target for the battle-cannon?

Not who you asked the question but I'd say probably units that have a low number of models and more than 1 wound. The battle cannon could kill 1 or 2 termies a turn. Maybe single light vehicles or MC's like dreads

Basically that's it..

With the change in rules the battlecannons role has changed.. save the anti troop work for your 100 flashlights =D

Yeah it's just a new weapon now. With the changes to twin linked, use that to kill infantry. But the BC will shred walkers like dreads or units of termies and stuff

Yeah- it sounds like we might be moving back to 2nd ed rules for twin linked (one roll to hit, two hits.

Twin is double shots, not double hits. I'm pretty sure both the edited version of the article and the replies on FB confirmed that.

 Fenris-77 wrote:

Ballasar wrote:


Also known as not worth it's points.

Hey, if you have at the 8th edition points values tucked away somewhere let us all know.

Also, it's tough to gauge the value of now being able to fire all weapons, not just the BC, even if the points remain the same. Personally, if I had an option, in 7th, of the 7th Ed BC and the statline for the new one as Hd6 for the same points, I take the 8th Ed version all day. I like to fire all my guns.

@Talamare - we need to start a club.

Do you believe it will cost less for a LRBT than a single marine? Or a single terminator? You don't need the points breakdown to see a bad weapon.

How many marines does a Godhammer Lascannon kill per turn? Uh huh, max one. That doesn't make it a bad weapon, it only means that line infantry aren't the most efficient targets for that weapon. The same thing is true of the BC.

edit -obviously I've forgotten the new twinlinked rule. Mea culpa, but my point remains - fire guns at what their best suited to kill. Complaining that a gun is bad at killing things it wasn't primarily designed to kill doesn't really advance the discussion.

Against an opponent who spaced properly a 7th edition battle cannon will hit 2-3 guys on a direct hit. Then only 1-2 will die due to the cover save. Versus a single model it can only do 1 wound ever. If your 7th edition battle cannon was smashing huge gobs of marines with every shot it was not because your battle cannon was good, it was because your opponent was bad. This new battle cannon is superior in every way to the old one (except if you were fighting players with a poor grasp of 7th edition spacing). 7th edition battle cannons are absolutely awful, I don't see how anyone could argue that this new iteration is worse. Just because you killed little Timmy's bunched up, cover less tactical squad with your battle cannon once doesn't make the new version inferior to the old. Though I do sympathize with you because I too have killed Timmy's squad with my battle cannon and it felt great, but it was due to Timmy's mistake and not my battle cannon.

As expected, low value on the Battlecanon AP, only 1d6 hits. Was there a mention of instant death somewhere?

 Fenris-77 wrote:
How many marines does a Godhammer Lascannon kill per turn? Uh huh, max one. That doesn't make it a bad weapon, it only means that line infantry aren't the most efficient targets for that weapon. The same thing is true of the BC.

edit -obviously I've forgotten the new twinlinked rule. Mea culpa, but my point remains - fire guns at what their best suited to kill. Complaining that a gun is bad at killing things it wasn't primarily designed to kill doesn't really advance the discussion.

Your buddy talmare who I originally quoted claimed that the BC was good at everything. Now that's been proven wrong here you come with a different argument all together. So what targets dose a BC engage better than anything else?

Ok, my list building strategy in pretty much every edition of 40k is all about making sure to squeeze all of the utility I can our of each part of the army.

That usually means avoiding "versatility." GW game designers make you pay out the nose for backup weapons that shouldn't come up in a game unless something has gone wrong.


With all of that said- I find I don't like the idea of rolling a single d6 to find out how many times I hit a unit. I'm ok with it being random, but a single unmodified d6 is really swingy (there's a world of difference between a 1 and 6, but they're all just as likely).

I think I'd prefer something like D3+2 or something like that. or 2D3- that'd be a lot more consistent and predictable.

The battle cannon changes I remain unsure of.
It loses loads of effectiveness against light and medium infantry (Hitting more than 6 wasn't too difficult)
Loses effectiveness against MEQ (They'll be getting a 5+ save)
Loses effectiveness against T4 multi-wound models (Assuming, and hoping that ID is no longer a thing), but is better against T 5 Multi-wound models and anything with a 2+ save
Got WAAY better for monstrous creature/vehicle killing.

Ballasar wrote:
Now that's been proven wrong ...

Except, you know, it hasn't. People are posting various kinds of mathhammer, some are interpreting that as the BC being the worst thing ever, others are looking at it in context of what has been revealed thusfar and seeing how its role appears to be changed.

It is best against multi-wound models, but unlike, say, a lascannon it can actually deal with other targets as well.

The numbers bear this out. It is a better anti-infantry weapon than a single heavy bolter (in fact, it's about twice as good). It is a better anti-vehicle weapon than the lascannon (which is actually pretty good this edition for anti-vehicle work). It hits its niche versus small units of multi-wound units with good saves (units likely to become much more common in 8th).

So there, you have what it is best at, and why some are referring to it as a jack-of-all trades in other places.

Will this cause it to be overpriced because it can do the jobs of multiple weapons? Who knows at this point. We can only discuss its apparent role and rules in relation to what has been revealed so far.

In terms of the other weapons we've seen it performs well in a variety of conditions alongside having potentially the highest single-target damage of any weapon revealed so far. Unlike other revealed anti-vehicle/MC weapons it can deal with more than a single target. And unlike revealed anti-infantry weaponry so far, it can deal with tougher, hardier units with multiple wounds. Those are the only definitive things we can say. To know whether it is efficient or inefficient in these varied roles is down to information we can't know yet. Pretending otherwise is tilting at windmills.

 Ronin_eX wrote:
The numbers bear this out. It is a better anti-infantry weapon than a single heavy bolter (in fact, it's about twice as good). It is a better anti-vehicle weapon than the lascannon (which is actually pretty good this edition for anti-vehicle work). It hits its niche versus small units of multi-wound units with good saves (units likely to become much more common in 8th).

The numbers don't bear it out because you're failing to calculate points-per-wound. It may put out twice as many wounds as a heavy bolter but it isn't "twice as good" unless it's less than twice the cost, and the same is true for the lascannon comparison.

There is no way for you to spin the battlecannon as being "a jack of all trades" so long as it's averaging only one to two wounds on every unit type in the game. That isn't a jack-of-all-trades, that's being terrible at everything.

 TheLumberJack wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
What unit type do you think is the intended target for the battle-cannon?

Not who you asked the question but I'd say probably units that have a low number of models and more than 1 wound. The battle cannon could kill 1 or 2 termies a turn. Maybe single light vehicles or MC's like dreads

You want to kill termies take the exterminator(autocannon variant). Unless exterminator becomes more expensive you get more dead termies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:
The Battle Cannon is basically Good at shooting EVERYTHING

It's not the best anti infantry with mediocre number of shots, but d6 dudes a turn is pretty good.

It's not the best anti elite infantry with mediocre AP, but -2 AP and potential for d3 damage is pretty good.

It's not the best anti tank with mediocre d3 damage, but being able to deal d6 shots makes it pretty good.

ITS AN ALL PURPOSE TANK

It shouldn't outshine specialized options, but it should be alright at all targets.

It does it's job perfectly.

You want all purpose tank, take the exterminator. Kills more light infantry, kills more heavy infantry and is doing it's job well against monsters. About only thing it's worse is T8 multi wound models with good saves but for example vs T7 2+ save battle cannon is only bit better. T6 targets and they are basically equal at least for 2+ save guys.

Exterminator is the all purpose tank. Battle cannon is cheaper version of very specified niche tank.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Otto von Bludd wrote:
Against an opponent who spaced properly a 7th edition battle cannon will hit 2-3 guys on a direct hit. Then only 1-2 will die due to the cover save.

That's more hits than 8th ed with less chance of missing completely(spaced out=very hard to miss). As for cover...That applies to 8th ed too. Let's see. Battlecannon vs tacs in light cover=4+ save for tac marines. Light cover in 7th was 5+ so 4+ cover will more likely be +2 to saves so battle cannon will be having even harder time.

So 8th ed will kill even less marines than 7th ed one. Whooo!

Versus a single model it can only do 1 wound ever.

Of course wounds have gone up. Battlecannon didn't gain any ground vs say dreadnought in 8th ed compared to 7th ed. More like got swingier.

Maybe the Exterminator will go back to a standard twin-linked Autocannon.