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.

 p5freak wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
I am just happy that daemonengines can now actually be played as the hybrids they were intended.
Imagine a working defiler.

Really ? You are hitting on 5s with your daemonengine, if enemy units are in engagement range of it, and you can only target those units.

I mean not that but the no more -1 penalty for moving and heavy weapons.

 p5freak wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Domandi wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Really GW ? A basilisk can now target an enemy unit in engagement range with its earthshaker cannon ? A shadowsword can target grots in engagement range with its volcano cannon ? How about a plagueburst crawler with its plagueburst mortar, which has 12-48" range ? It can also target enemy units in engagement range ?

Those big guns are most likely going to be blast weapons, which they state will not be able to fire. (Unless I read it wrong) Also, I am sure anything with a minimum range won't be able to be fired... under the minimum range...

Ok, then a leman russ can fire its battle cannon against a unit of grots in engagement range ?

They -specifically- mentioned the Battle Cannon being blast.

Sounds like a lot of vehicles arent gonna be able to fire their guns when enemy units are in engagement range. I wonder if any main guns wont be blast weapons. Sounds like you need sponsons on vehicles.

I mean that's why sponsons were invented: to serve as point defense against infantry.

the_scotsman wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Really GW ? A basilisk can now target an enemy unit in engagement range with its earthshaker cannon ? A shadowsword can target grots in engagement range with its volcano cannon ? How about a plagueburst crawler with its plagueburst mortar, which has 12-48" range ? It can also target enemy units in engagement range ?

...No? presumably all those are blast weapons?

I also wonder why this rule doesnt mention blast weapons not being able to target enemy units within engagement range.

 p5freak wrote:

Domandi wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Really GW ? A basilisk can now target an enemy unit in engagement range with its earthshaker cannon ? A shadowsword can target grots in engagement range with its volcano cannon ? How about a plagueburst crawler with its plagueburst mortar, which has 12-48" range ? It can also target enemy units in engagement range ?

Those big guns are most likely going to be blast weapons, which they state will not be able to fire. (Unless I read it wrong) Also, I am sure anything with a minimum range won't be able to be fired... under the minimum range...

Ok, then a leman russ can fire its battle cannon against a unit of grots in engagement range ?

The battle cannon is also a multi-hit weapon that would most likely end up being a Blast weapon. You are being intentionally obtuse.

 p5freak wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Really GW ? A basilisk can now target an enemy unit in engagement range with its earthshaker cannon ? A shadowsword can target grots in engagement range with its volcano cannon ? How about a plagueburst crawler with its plagueburst mortar, which has 12-48" range ? It can also target enemy units in engagement range ?

...No? presumably all those are blast weapons?

I also wonder why this rule doesnt mention blast weapons not being able to target enemy units within engagement range.

It's probably in the blast rule instead.

Well I wanted flamers to have the blast rules, but now I'm not so sure ^^'.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Well I wanted flamers to have the blast rules, but now I'm not so sure ^^'.

They mentioned flamers being able to shoot into melee, so they won't have blast.

 p5freak wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Really GW ? A basilisk can now target an enemy unit in engagement range with its earthshaker cannon ? A shadowsword can target grots in engagement range with its volcano cannon ? How about a plagueburst crawler with its plagueburst mortar, which has 12-48" range ? It can also target enemy units in engagement range ?

...No? presumably all those are blast weapons?

I also wonder why this rule doesnt mention blast weapons not being able to target enemy units within engagement range.

Because I would assume that big guns never tire is an exception to the usual rules preventing weapons from being fired at units within engagement range of other units?

Like that has to exist or none of this makes any sense, lol.

Hellhounds like this big guns never tire rule a lot.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Well I wanted flamers to have the blast rules, but now I'm not so sure ^^'.

They mentioned flamers being able to shoot into melee, so they won't have blast.

Yes, Stu' mentioned the Leman Russ wielding heavy flamer being good at defence against melee. So if they are able to target engaged units, flamers will likely not get "blast" rule.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
-1 To Hit for firing Heavy Weapons only applies to infantry now... hmm...

Maybe Forgefiends will be viable?

Where did you hear/see this HBMC?

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Vehicles and CM now ignore Heavy Penalty...about time!

And it will be revoked again in 10th. Love me some GW rules writing. Buhaha!

 puma713 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
-1 To Hit for firing Heavy Weapons only applies to infantry now... hmm...

Maybe Forgefiends will be viable?

Where did you hear/see this HBMC?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/09/tanks-are-back-on-trackgw-homepage-post-1/

Bottom of the page.

So all vehicles basically get steel behemoth now. Nice. Wonder if super heavys get something to make up for everything else having what used to make them special.

Wait. If the hellforged units keep their ability to heal wounds when they kill something in cc they will be nasty. Get them stuck in and they'll be pretty hard to drop.

My chainclaw contemptor approves of this.

Ignore.

 Strg Alt wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Vehicles and CM now ignore Heavy Penalty...about time!

And it will be revoked again in 10th. Love me some GW rules writing. Buhaha!

Works in my favour though. I don't like 8/9th but 10th will probably be a brand new thing again so I just have to wait.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
So all vehicles basically get steel behemoth now. Nice. Wonder if super heavys get something to make up for everything else having what used to make them special.

Wait. If the hellforged units keep their ability to heal wounds when they kill something in cc they will be nasty. Get them stuck in and they'll be pretty hard to drop.

My chainclaw contemptor approves of this.

I’d predict Super Heavies will be able to target outside of combat with some impunity. Like their main weapons etc?

pm713 wrote:

 puma713 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
-1 To Hit for firing Heavy Weapons only applies to infantry now... hmm...

Maybe Forgefiends will be viable?

Where did you hear/see this HBMC?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/09/tanks-are-back-on-trackgw-homepage-post-1/

Bottom of the page.

Ah! Thanks! They updated it since the first time I looked.

Called it! A week or so ago people on here said I was wishfully thinking or being daft for saying that vehicles would be allowed to fire INTO units that are in melee with that vehicle. That you could only fire OUT of melee at other units.

It seemed weird to me that when the rumor said "vehicles won't be bogged down in melee" that that meant it wouldn't be able to fire into models beating on it but could fire into models beating on something else.

Either way glad to see the change. Immolators might be worth a look for a transport. At least in 9th people might be less "inclined" to engage one in melee (at least with cheap, less durable units).

 Strg Alt wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Vehicles and CM now ignore Heavy Penalty...about time!

And it will be revoked again in 10th. Love me some GW rules writing. Buhaha!

Well at least we will have some proper rules for vehicles. Damn it, there was eight pages of rules detailing behaviour of vehicles in 7th edition, including their shooting peculiarities.
We went from that, to a complete erase, <vehicle> being a mere keyword, an empty shell.
I'm quite optimistic about the announced rules, even if it will not bring back all the richness that we had in previous editions.

Man alive there better be something real real good to incentivize taking units as a horde.

"Hordes, they're great! None of your dudes can fight, vehicles will score max hits on you automatically - enjoy those Heavy 12 Thunderfire cannons - and now you can't tie things up in melee anymore!

Hormagants, ork boyz, cultists, GSC - you just paint those things so the people you're playing against can feel cool while they make you shovel them off the board, right?"

I like all of these changes a lot.

the day 1 FAQ is going to be huge though for sure.

Gives Ghaz an extra 12 5+ str 5 -1ap attacks as well

No wolves on Fenris wrote:
Gives Ghaz an extra 12 5+ str 5 -1ap attacks as well

Hitting on 5s, so not particularly good.

Did they elaborate on Engagement Range at all? Is that the maximum distance you can melee with?

Man, I can’t wait until X Edition.

As long as Hitting on 2’s, rerolling 1’s - wounding on 2’s rerolling 1’s with a 3++/4+++ is gone, this should be better.

the_scotsman wrote:
Man alive there better be something real real good to incentivize taking units as a horde.

"Hordes, they're great! None of your dudes can fight, vehicles will score max hits on you automatically - enjoy those Heavy 12 Thunderfire cannons - and now you can't tie things up in melee anymore!

Hormagants, ork boyz, cultists, GSC - you just paint those things so the people you're playing against can feel cool while they make you shovel them off the board, right?"

Pretty much.
They might ensure that the opponent of horde units will have a blast destroying them. They will be there to show how great the poster boys are (SM primaris).

 JNAProductions wrote:

No wolves on Fenris wrote:
Gives Ghaz an extra 12 5+ str 5 -1ap attacks as well

Hitting on 5s, so not particularly good.

Did they elaborate on Engagement Range at all? Is that the maximum distance you can melee with?

Pretty sure extra Dakka where there was none before, and counting Dakka Dakka Dakka in is only a boost?

 p5freak wrote:
Really GW ? A basilisk can now target an enemy unit in engagement range with its earthshaker cannon ? A shadowsword can target grots in engagement range with its volcano cannon ? How about a plagueburst crawler with its plagueburst mortar, which has 12-48" range ? It can also target enemy units in engagement range ?

GW says you should not nerdrage so fast, which would have helped you think that blast weapons can't. Ans these will turn into blast weapons. It looks better now doesn't it ?

the_scotsman wrote:
Man alive there better be something real real good to incentivize taking units as a horde.

"Hordes, they're great! None of your dudes can fight, vehicles will score max hits on you automatically - enjoy those Heavy 12 Thunderfire cannons - and now you can't tie things up in melee anymore!

Hormagants, ork boyz, cultists, GSC - you just paint those things so the people you're playing against can feel cool while they make you shovel them off the board, right?"

Honestly, I will be glad to see this be the "elite" edition rather than "hordes/weight of fire" edition.

Ironically, removing the -1 to hit from moving and shooting heavy weapons does more to improve non-infantry with FLY than the ability to shoot into the unit tagging you, at -1 with heavy weapons, improves vehicle without FLY.

Aside from making flamers actually a good choice, the effect this is going to have on the overall game is quite minor. You're still going to want to tag any vehicle you can with infantry, because it limits their targeting to the unit tagging them.

It will cure some of the gimmickiest applications of that rule - no longer will a single grot be able to shut down a leman russ - but that unit of 10 grots will still shut down that tank just fine.

Meanwhile, FLY models just got even better, since they can now now only fall back and shoot at any target, but also do it without a penalty. And not just vehicles - anything that isn't infantry.

The non-FLY models that are most improved by this are stuff with large volume of shots, especially flamers or non-heavy weapons with large shot volumes.

Frankly, the much more impactful thing they seem to have "revealed" today is that "Engagement Range" means 1", not 1" + any models in the unit within 1" of that unit. It could just be clumsily worded, and who gets to attack is still the same. But if they've restricted models eligible to attack in combat only to those within 1", it breaks the entire game fundamentally, to a level no amount of rules changes are going to help melee in 9th as long as they still have 8th edition stat profiles. I would like to think therefore that this is just clumsy wording...but it's GW, you never know.

Did they elaborate on this at all on the stream?