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.

Odd that the Stormraven twin plasma cannon shows both profiles.

Also unlike the devastator sheet, plasma cannon starts at D2 (and overcharges to D3).

It fits the HPC going to 20 points though, and is at least semi-consistent with its different Gets Hot rule from 8th.

Just checking: last battlescribe update was titled 'eradicators to 85ppm'

I'm pretty positive this is glaringly obvious sarcasm, but I just want to check because if this is true this is the most gigantic nerf bat GW have ever employed

^Did it mention their new "Quad Damage" ability?

 McMagnus Mindbullets wrote:
Just checking: last battlescribe update was titled 'eradicators to 85ppm'

I'm pretty positive this is glaringly obvious sarcasm, but I just want to check because if this is true this is the most gigantic nerf bat GW have ever employed

While there was an update to the Munitorum Field Manual on the 24th, the Eradicators weren't changed in it.

And I imagine we're still far too early for advance copies of the new SM 'dex to be floating around - and even if they were, they normally seem to be under a NDA until the week (or two?) before release.

The Newman wrote:
I do wonder why the Tac kit only comes with the Power Fist, Power Sword, and Chain Sword when they expect to be in melee eventually, and the Devastator box comes with all the melee options when they want to stay out of melee.

Because the Dev Kit was made when:

A) you no longer had to keep the Veteran Sergeant in the 4 heavy weapon combat squad to prevent the opponents assasin from autokilling your bolter marine when he reveals himself and wipes your Devs in one round of close combat
B) (I thnk?) before you wanted to keep the Sergeant in the Heavy Weapon combat squad for the signum/auspex/etc and they still had targetters on all four Heavy Weapons.

There was a period where had to keep the Sarge in the squad,
then there was a period where you gave him a CCW, 4 bolter meatshields, and a Razorback,
and now you keep him in the squad again, probably without the extra marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:
Odd that the Stormraven twin plasma cannon shows both profiles.

Also unlike the devastator sheet, plasma cannon starts at D2 (and overcharges to D3).

That makes sense a bit for Plasma Cannon in general. A Rapid fire Plasma Gun had the potential to out damage the cannon, and mathematically probably averaged something too similar to justify extra points for a heavy weapon version.

 McMagnus Mindbullets wrote:
Just checking: last battlescribe update was titled 'eradicators to 85ppm'

I'm pretty positive this is glaringly obvious sarcasm, but I just want to check because if this is true this is the most gigantic nerf bat GW have ever employed

Battlescribe, or more specifically the group maintaining the 40k rules repository, has been doing community meta-commentary in their update titles for as long as I can remember. There have been no rules, or points, updates on Eradicators.

More on point, they also have a hard rule that any updates, even if theyre known in advance, arent incorporated into live rulesets until after street release date for their appropriate publication. We're not gonna see 2 wound marines or anything else in those files till October.

The Newman wrote:
I do wonder why the Tac kit only comes with the Power Fist, Power Sword, and Chain Sword when they expect to be in melee eventually, and the Devastator box comes with all the melee options when they want to stay out of melee.

Both the Tactical Squad and Devastator Squad have three sprues, but the Tactical Squad has 10 models while the Devastator Squad has 5. This means there was much more space to dedicate to weapon option in the Devastator box, space that the Tactical box dedicated to more models. Given that you can't even build a proper Devastator squad form one box (there are only 2 copies of each heavy weapon in the kit), it ensures you have lots of bits for kit-bashing other models in your army.

 alextroy wrote:

The Newman wrote:
I do wonder why the Tac kit only comes with the Power Fist, Power Sword, and Chain Sword when they expect to be in melee eventually, and the Devastator box comes with all the melee options when they want to stay out of melee.

Both the Tactical Squad and Devastator Squad have three sprues, but the Tactical Squad has 10 models while the Devastator Squad has 5. This means there was much more space to dedicate to weapon option in the Devastator box, space that the Tactical box dedicated to more models. Given that you can't even build a proper Devastator squad form one box (there are only 2 copies of each heavy weapon in the kit), it ensures you have lots of bits for kit-bashing other models in your army.

Define a "proper" Devastator squad, especially in an edition where split fire is a thing.

 Dysartes wrote:

Define a "proper" Devastator squad, especially in an edition where split fire is a thing.

Kind of a hard to build a proper squad, when one box gives you half(thank you auto correct) the weapons you need. Still much better then CSM players needing to buy 4 boxs to get 4 reaper canons for one unit of havocks.

 Dysartes wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

The Newman wrote:
I do wonder why the Tac kit only comes with the Power Fist, Power Sword, and Chain Sword when they expect to be in melee eventually, and the Devastator box comes with all the melee options when they want to stay out of melee.

Both the Tactical Squad and Devastator Squad have three sprues, but the Tactical Squad has 10 models while the Devastator Squad has 5. This means there was much more space to dedicate to weapon option in the Devastator box, space that the Tactical box dedicated to more models. Given that you can't even build a proper Devastator squad form one box (there are only 2 copies of each heavy weapon in the kit), it ensures you have lots of bits for kit-bashing other models in your army.

Define a "proper" Devastator squad, especially in an edition where split fire is a thing.

Splitfire might be a thing but only reason to mix weapons is flak missiles and the hbolter mw thing. 40k is specialization rather than generalism.

 Dysartes wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

The Newman wrote:
I do wonder why the Tac kit only comes with the Power Fist, Power Sword, and Chain Sword when they expect to be in melee eventually, and the Devastator box comes with all the melee options when they want to stay out of melee.

Both the Tactical Squad and Devastator Squad have three sprues, but the Tactical Squad has 10 models while the Devastator Squad has 5. This means there was much more space to dedicate to weapon option in the Devastator box, space that the Tactical box dedicated to more models. Given that you can't even build a proper Devastator squad form one box (there are only 2 copies of each heavy weapon in the kit), it ensures you have lots of bits for kit-bashing other models in your army.

Define a "proper" Devastator squad, especially in an edition where split fire is a thing.

I will leave this as a exercise for the reader. Two hints: there are 2 copies of each heavy weapon in the box; a Devastator squad can have up to 4 heavy weapons.

 alextroy wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

The Newman wrote:
I do wonder why the Tac kit only comes with the Power Fist, Power Sword, and Chain Sword when they expect to be in melee eventually, and the Devastator box comes with all the melee options when they want to stay out of melee.

Both the Tactical Squad and Devastator Squad have three sprues, but the Tactical Squad has 10 models while the Devastator Squad has 5. This means there was much more space to dedicate to weapon option in the Devastator box, space that the Tactical box dedicated to more models. Given that you can't even build a proper Devastator squad form one box (there are only 2 copies of each heavy weapon in the kit), it ensures you have lots of bits for kit-bashing other models in your army.

Define a "proper" Devastator squad, especially in an edition where split fire is a thing.

I will leave this as a exercise for the reader. Two hints: there are 2 copies of each heavy weapon in the box; a Devastator squad can have up to 4 heavy weapons.

Therefore a proper devastator squad is a 2/2 split, possibly split into two combat squad squads for flexibility?

Alternately, 1 heavy weapon, 3 bolter marines and a sigum + Cherub is fine too.

I just want to point out, again, death guard, without these changes, are dominating tournaments with regularity whenever they happen.

stratigo wrote:
I just want to point out, again, death guard, without these changes, are dominating tournaments with regularity whenever they happen.

Please provide a source for all the tournaments they are dominating.

Because frankly, every single person I asked for a source so far went silent afterwards, and the analysis of data actually available says the opposite.

So either back up that claim with facts, or stop spreading it.

 Jidmah wrote:

stratigo wrote:
I just want to point out, again, death guard, without these changes, are dominating tournaments with regularity whenever they happen.

Please provide a source for all the tournaments they are dominating.

Because frankly, every single person I asked for a source so far went silent afterwards, and the analysis of data actually available says the opposite.

So either back up that claim with facts, or stop spreading it.

i too would like to see that.

stratigo wrote:
I just want to point out, again, death guard, without these changes, are dominating tournaments with regularity whenever they happen.

Yeah uh, nope. Death Guard are currently chilling at about a 40% winrate I believe? "General Chaos Soup" is doing slightly better but not cracking 50%.

The situation is even worse for me. I've not played death guard at all this edition, so they're currently on a 0% winrate!


[The source of the statistics matter people. Cite your sources!]

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
The situation is even worse for me. I've not played death guard at all this edition, so they're currently on a 0% winrate!


[The source of the statistics matter people. Cite your sources!]

Exalted

This is the only reliable data I'm aware of can be found here, which also seems to be scotsman's source:
https://www.goonhammer.com/go-first-and-prosper-looking-at-the-9th-edition-meta/

 Jidmah wrote:

This is the only reliable data I'm aware of can be found here, which also seems to be scotsman's source:
https://www.goonhammer.com/go-first-and-prosper-looking-at-the-9th-edition-meta/

There's a related but separate rountable from Goonhammer talking about impressions of 9th so far, and one of the things they discuss is how DG arent doing as well (by the numbers) as most folks expected to, and dig into a few of the reasons why.

Good to know, haven't gotten around to reading it, thanks

Sterling191 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

This is the only reliable data I'm aware of can be found here, which also seems to be scotsman's source:
https://www.goonhammer.com/go-first-and-prosper-looking-at-the-9th-edition-meta/

There's a related but separate rountable from Goonhammer talking about impressions of 9th so far, and one of the things they discuss is how DG arent doing as well (by the numbers) as most folks expected to, and dig into a few of the reasons why.

So when you said "I just want to point out, again, death guard, without these changes, are dominating tournaments with regularity whenever they happen."

you meant "I just want to point out, again, death gaurd, without these changes, aren't dominating tournaments with any regularity but I believe extenuating circumstances are at play that explain those losses."

the_scotsman wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

This is the only reliable data I'm aware of can be found here, which also seems to be scotsman's source:
https://www.goonhammer.com/go-first-and-prosper-looking-at-the-9th-edition-meta/

There's a related but separate rountable from Goonhammer talking about impressions of 9th so far, and one of the things they discuss is how DG arent doing as well (by the numbers) as most folks expected to, and dig into a few of the reasons why.

So when you said "I just want to point out, again, death guard, without these changes, are dominating tournaments with regularity whenever they happen."

you meant "I just want to point out, again, death gaurd, without these changes, aren't dominating tournaments with any regularity but I believe extenuating circumstances are at play that explain those losses."

Check your quotes, you're replying to the wrong person.

Sterling191 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

This is the only reliable data I'm aware of can be found here, which also seems to be scotsman's source:
https://www.goonhammer.com/go-first-and-prosper-looking-at-the-9th-edition-meta/

There's a related but separate rountable from Goonhammer talking about impressions of 9th so far, and one of the things they discuss is how DG arent doing as well (by the numbers) as most folks expected to, and dig into a few of the reasons why.

So when you said "I just want to point out, again, death guard, without these changes, are dominating tournaments with regularity whenever they happen."

you meant "I just want to point out, again, death gaurd, without these changes, aren't dominating tournaments with any regularity but I believe extenuating circumstances are at play that explain those losses."

Check your quotes, you're replying to the wrong person.

Ah, mb. Sorry.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Has the Stormraven weapon sheet been posted yet?



1. I guess that's the rockets?
2. Twin Heavy Bolters.
3. Twin Multi-Meltas.
4. Twin Missile Launchers (both profiles this time).
5. Hurricane Bolters.
6. Twin Lascannons.
7. Twin Assault Cannons.
8. Twin Plasma Cannons (both profiles this time).

I don't notice any glaring errors here.

Any look at the unit stats for the SR?

That's all I got, sorry.

I don't get the inconsistency of giving the Overcharged profile on the Plasma Cannons for the Stormraven but not elsewhere.

Have you had a look at any of the datasheets in 8th edition boxes? Some of the DG charcters have nothing but their statline printed on them, what the hell is the point of that?

These are pretty much of the same quality.

 Jidmah wrote:
Have you had a look at any of the datasheets in 8th edition boxes? Some of the DG charcters have nothing but their statline printed on them, what the hell is the point of that?

These are pretty much of the same quality.

What if there isn't one anywhere else, it might shift the game again.

All these datasheets tell you to look at the codex for proper rules.