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.
No, his point is not valid, because he's just as wrong as you are about what a Tactical Squad can do. You cannot pick 2 Heavy or 2 Special Weapons in a Tactical Squad. At 5, you get one or the other. at 10, you get one of each. That's it. Re-read the tactical squad datasheet if you won't believe me. I don't like it much either, but at least i'm comparing apples to apples.
Aight, so first let's be clear, what a tactical squad can or cannot do has nothing to do with what this Kin squad can do, and what it can do is forcing you to take two DIFFERENT weapons instead of just letting you take the same weapon twice in the 10 sized squad, or 4 time in the max sized squad.
Good job on removing context. The point of this was that the comparison of Kin Squad vs Devastator squad was made, and I just pointed out that that's not a fair comparison, as you should instead compare them to Tacticals which have similar restrictions. Still sucks for both TacSquads and Kin Squads, but it's not something new or uniquely Kin Squad.
Spoiler:
nekooni wrote: And yes, I'm aware combi-weapons on the sarge are a thing, but that's clearly, obviously not what both of you are talking about, so don't even start with me on that one
(HN) wrote: I legit have no idea why anyone would make such argument but hey, you sure did address that strawman alright.
1) Combi-weapons are basically the same profile as special weapons. That's why they get lumped in as "equivalent" quite often - I'm shooting 2 meltagun shots quite frequently instead of "one combi-melta in melta mode only and one melta"
2) Yes, pre-emptively addressing a possible counterargument - and putting it in spoilers and pointing out that it IS pre-emptively and not in response to an argument already made is clearly the textbook definition of a strawman. Sorry!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/09/02 17:54:54
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Ugh, I don't like that. So you need to field exactly 20 models to field 4 special weapons? What sense does that make?
It feels really unnatural to me, how it just suddenly jumps from 2 to 4 after a single model.
nekooni wrote: Good job on removing context. The point of this was that the comparison of Kin Squad vs Devastator squad was made, and I just pointed out that that's not a fair comparison, as you should instead compare them to Tacticals which have similar restrictions. Still sucks for both TacSquads and Kin Squads, but it's not something new or uniquely Kin Squad.
Pretty funny that you try to pull a "good job removing context" while doing it yourself.
The criticism started simply as "GW didn't learned anything, thos loadout restriction are cancerous" to which someone brough up the devastator squad as an argument.
Who care about other squads? The problem here is that this datasheet is yet another example of needless contrived restrictions on a squad loadout that not only restricts your builds to force you into mixed loadout that just slow the game with more weapon profiles than necessary for the sole reason that GW is STILL hung up on their moronic "must be in the box" idea despite them being to cheap to put a decent amount of stuff in said boxes.
It's particularly annoying seeing that this is literally the only troop choice of the codex and it's gimped by not just thos stupid forced mixed loadout, but also a weird cut out at 20 for more special weapons when the unit is going to be forced into weird random numbers under that to fit into the transports. Having at least a +1 if you reach 15 would have given a lot more flexibility to that unit and the whole army they are supposed to be the backbone of.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/09/02 18:06:07
It's just weird how GW is so inconsistent with applying this weapon restriction. A 20 strong Kabalite warrior squad can run around with 2 dark lances and 4 blasters if they want, despite that loadout requiring buying 40 models' worth of boxes to get all the guns.
Or a better example, the Neophyte genestealer cultists that can have 2 heavy and 2 special weapons per 10, with no restriction on doubling up despite having 1 of each per box.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/02 18:14:55
tneva82 wrote: But yeah not surprised people want votan to be special snowflakes who have everything better than others.
Nice strawman here.
We don't want them to be snowflake, we want GW to stop making trash datasheet for the sake of fitting in boxes they can't be arsed to put more than the bare minimum, and that goes for EVERYONE, not just them.
It's just very noticeable here since it's a brand new unit for a brand new army that will act as their only troop choice.
nekooni wrote: Good job on removing context. The point of this was that the comparison of Kin Squad vs Devastator squad was made, and I just pointed out that that's not a fair comparison, as you should instead compare them to Tacticals which have similar restrictions. Still sucks for both TacSquads and Kin Squads, but it's not something new or uniquely Kin Squad.
Pretty funny that you try to pull a "good job removing context" while doing it yourself.
I've not removed anything when I quoted you there.
The criticism started simply as "GW didn't learned anything, thos loadout restriction are cancerous" to which someone brough up the devastator squad as an argument.
Yes, that was the argument. And after you went on quite in-detail on how unfair the Kin Squad is treated when compared to the Tac Squad, which I just pointed out (again) isn't based on actual rules. Instead of taking the L you're now moving goal posts, and accuse me of arguing in bad faith.
Who care about other squads? (...)
You apparently did, until proven wrong.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/02 18:25:04
The criticism started simply as "GW didn't learned anything, thos loadout restriction are cancerous" to which someone brough up the devastator squad as an argument.
Yes, that was the argument. And after you went on quite in-detail on how unfair the Kin Squad is treated when compared to the Tac Squad, which I just pointed out (again) isn't based on actual rules. Instead of taking the L you're now moving goal posts, and accuse me of arguing in bad faith.
Again, that's not what happen and you know it. We didn't "went on quite in-detail on how unfair the Kin Squad is treated when compared to the Tac", and I don't know why you keep trying to paint us as some kind of weird LoV white knights when honestly, I'm personally not a fan, AT ALL, of what GW did to the squats.
What H.B.M.C. originally pointed out is how yet again we got a gimped datasheet, something I even missed because I overlooked the word *different* in the weapon selection, and how it was so just to fit "da box".
The comparison to tac or other came later and is honestly very out of topic.
YOU are the one that is moving the goal post because you can't follow a conversation.
Shakalooloo wrote: It's just weird how GW is so inconsistent with applying this weapon restriction. A 20 strong Kabalite warrior squad can run around with 2 dark lances and 4 blasters if they want, despite that loadout requiring buying 40 models' worth of boxes to get all the guns.
Or a better example, the Neophyte genestealer cultists that can have 2 heavy and 2 special weapons per 10, with no restriction on doubling up despite having 1 of each per box.
They legit just throw darts at a board to see what to write
tneva82 wrote: Why votann should have it better than others?
That's a backwards way of looking at it. No one should have to put up with these whacko weapon restrictions.
tneva82 wrote: But yeah not surprised people want votan to be special snowflakes who have everything better than others.
That's not what people are saying at all. Please pay attention.
nekooni wrote: Yes, that was the argument. And after you went on quite in-detail on how unfair the Kin Squad is treated when compared to the Tac Squad, which I just pointed out (again) isn't based on actual rules. Instead of taking the L you're now moving goal posts, and accuse me of arguing in bad faith.
There's no L to take. Why anyone would even bring up the Tac Squad is beyond me.
My example was the Devastator Squad, but you could just as easily replace that example with Wyches, or Death Guard, or Skitarii Rangers. They're all units that can take multiple specialist weapons, but are restricted on individual types of special weapons based on nothing but the bits in the kit, rather than any balance, in-game or fluff reasons. So my Dev Squad example was there to show what it would be like if you could take 4 Heavy Weapons, but were limited to how many of any one kind of HW you could take, rather than the current situation where you can take 4 of any type in any combination.
How could you not understand what I was getting at right from the start? Why did you bring up the Tactical Squad, a squad doesn't even mirror the structure of any of the units we're talking about. It only gets 1 special and 1 heavy slot. It doesn't get 2 special or 2 heavy, or 2 at 10 and 4 at 20 like the Votann squad. It's an irrelevant comparison. A relevant comparison would have been the Chaos Marine Squad, which can take 2 heavies or 2 specials at 10 men... but can't take two of the same for the same asinine reasons as so many other squads are suffering from in this edition.
D'ya get it yet???
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2022/09/02 19:29:07
So we've seen a Hearthkyn model holding what is very clearly a Bolt Revolver (The Medic with the Knife). All the other Hearthkyn have a holstered weapon that matches the bolt revolver, which you can tell by it's handle - the Autoch Bolt Pistol has a noticeably different grip shape as seen on the Hearthkyn Theyn.
Except it seems that Hearthkyn can't actually have bolt revolvers, they can only use Autoch Bolt Pistols.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/09/02 19:28:33
KillerAngel wrote: I hate to say "wait and see," but LoV doesn't have a LoW choice yet. That could very well be where the Land Train might end up.
The Codex has leaked. There's no LoW. There's not much of anything really. It's half a list, ready to be supplanted in 10th Ed by a new Votann Codex that gives them the other half of the miniature line. Maybe then they'll get a LoW.
That's what I said. There is plenty of room for growth here.
Mentlegen324 wrote: So we've seen a Hearthkyn model holding what is very clearly a Bolt Revolver (The Medic with the Knife). All the other Hearthkyn have a holstered weapon that matches the bolt revolver, which you can tell by it's handle - the Autoch Bolt Pistol has a noticeably different grip shape as seen on the Hearthkyn Theyn.
Except it seems that Hearthkyn can't actually have bolt revolvers, they can only use Autoch Bolt Pistols.
Look, with a couple obvious exceptions (like the missile pod) the weapons the squat models are holding are going to be irrelevant for a decade or more as people adjust to them being in the game.
(or if they become the most popular army, chances of which I think are close to nil). People are just going to call them squat bolters or better bolters or whatever name catches on.
The fact that they chose bad names for them (Hy_las_ _auto_ rifle when las and auto are different weapon classes in 40k) isn't going to help matters. If there's a real game difference between a revolver and a pistol, I honestly think they crapped the bed again and don't understand the scale of the game they're writing for.
The long and short of it is, when people rattle off what weapons their squats have, their opponents are just going to nod and/or shrug. Maybe ask to check the book if the number of (obvious) special weapons seems odd to them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/02 19:39:36
Mentlegen324 wrote: So we've seen a Hearthkyn model holding what is very clearly a Bolt Revolver (The Medic with the Knife). All the other Hearthkyn have a holstered weapon that matches the bolt revolver, which you can tell by it's handle - the Autoch Bolt Pistol has a noticeably different grip shape as seen on the Hearthkyn Theyn.
Except it seems that Hearthkyn can't actually have bolt revolvers, they can only use Autoch Bolt Pistols.
Look, with a couple obvious exceptions (like the missile pod) the weapons the squat models are holding are going to be irrelevant for a decade or more as people adjust to them being in the game.
(or if they become the most popular army, chances of which I think are close to nil). People are just going to call them squat bolters or better bolters or whatever name catches on.
The fact that they chose bad names for them (Hy_las_ _auto_ rifle when las and auto are different weapon classes in 40k) isn't going to help matters. If there's a real game difference between a revolver and a pistol, I honestly think they crapped the bed again and don't understand the scale of the game they're writing for.
The long and short of it is, when people rattle off what weapons their squats have, their opponents are just going to nod and/or shrug. Maybe ask to check the book if the number of (obvious) special weapons seems odd to them.
I'm not on about the names at all. The Autoch bolt revolver has its own model and rules and the Bolt revolver has its own model and rules - they're two seperate things. Hearthkyn have the bolt revolver model, but seemingly can't use bolt revolvers.
Obviously people will just count them as bolt pistols as that's what they have (or maybe the rules will end up different after all), but it's still not a good thing if they are modeled with something they don't even have and are missing the model for what they should have instead.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2022/09/02 19:50:49
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Ugh, I don't like that. So you need to field exactly 20 models to field 4 special weapons? What sense does that make? It feels really unnatural to me, how it just suddenly jumps from 2 to 4 after a single model.
Why votann should have it better than others?
That just means that they're following a dumb convention. I'm pretty sure it's a new one too. I don't remember that nonsense being around in earlier editions. Usually it followed a gradual progression rather than "oh, you don't have a whole squad? You only get exactly half of your options then, sorry"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/02 19:53:12
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
The special weapon limit in this context is at least somewhat mitigated by there being options that are complementary vs being forced to have a weird mixed of anti tank and anti personnel or mix of short/long range options. Doesn’t make the limitation less dumb, but functionally it’s not as bad as say for Skitarii.
I am surprised they didn’t make alternate squads with the standard dudes-support unit with more HW, ?recon unit of smaller squad size perhaps with a sagitar. Maybe even a mole mortar/grenade launcher support unit in addition to single weapons mixed in the assault squads. That would increase options by about 50% without requiring more models.
Mentlegen324 wrote: So we've seen a Hearthkyn model holding what is very clearly a Bolt Revolver (The Medic with the Knife). All the other Hearthkyn have a holstered weapon that matches the bolt revolver, which you can tell by it's handle - the Autoch Bolt Pistol has a noticeably different grip shape as seen on the Hearthkyn Theyn.
Except it seems that Hearthkyn can't actually have bolt revolvers, they can only use Autoch Bolt Pistols.
Look, with a couple obvious exceptions (like the missile pod) the weapons the squat models are holding are going to be irrelevant for a decade or more as people adjust to them being in the game.
(or if they become the most popular army, chances of which I think are close to nil). People are just going to call them squat bolters or better bolters or whatever name catches on.
The fact that they chose bad names for them (Hy_las_ _auto_ rifle when las and auto are different weapon classes in 40k) isn't going to help matters. If there's a real game difference between a revolver and a pistol, I honestly think they crapped the bed again and don't understand the scale of the game they're writing for.
The long and short of it is, when people rattle off what weapons their squats have, their opponents are just going to nod and/or shrug. Maybe ask to check the book if the number of (obvious) special weapons seems odd to them.
I'm not on about the names at all. The Autoch bolt revolver has its own model and rules and the Bolt revolver has its own model and rules - they're two seperate things. Hearthkyn have the bolt revolver model, but seemingly can't use bolt revolvers.
Obviously people will just count them as bolt pistols as that's what they have (or maybe the rules will end up different after all), but it's still not a good thing if they are modeled with something they don't even have and are missing the model for what they should have instead.
I'm apparently missing a piece. Given GW's incompetence with weapons, if the models have pistols and can't have revolvers, then... it doesn't matter? They have pistols and that's what squat bolt pistols look like. Even if they have revolver bits.
Whatever 'autoch' is, they don't have that. So, like I said, GW chose bad names for things, and people will just call name them colloquially based on the normal 40k equivalents.
So in a way, this simplifies the process.
Mentlegen324 wrote: So we've seen a Hearthkyn model holding what is very clearly a Bolt Revolver (The Medic with the Knife). All the other Hearthkyn have a holstered weapon that matches the bolt revolver, which you can tell by it's handle - the Autoch Bolt Pistol has a noticeably different grip shape as seen on the Hearthkyn Theyn.
Except it seems that Hearthkyn can't actually have bolt revolvers, they can only use Autoch Bolt Pistols.
Look, with a couple obvious exceptions (like the missile pod) the weapons the squat models are holding are going to be irrelevant for a decade or more as people adjust to them being in the game.
(or if they become the most popular army, chances of which I think are close to nil). People are just going to call them squat bolters or better bolters or whatever name catches on.
The fact that they chose bad names for them (Hy_las_ _auto_ rifle when las and auto are different weapon classes in 40k) isn't going to help matters. If there's a real game difference between a revolver and a pistol, I honestly think they crapped the bed again and don't understand the scale of the game they're writing for.
The long and short of it is, when people rattle off what weapons their squats have, their opponents are just going to nod and/or shrug. Maybe ask to check the book if the number of (obvious) special weapons seems odd to them.
I'm not on about the names at all. The Autoch bolt revolver has its own model and rules and the Bolt revolver has its own model and rules - they're two seperate things. Hearthkyn have the bolt revolver model, but seemingly can't use bolt revolvers.
Obviously people will just count them as bolt pistols as that's what they have (or maybe the rules will end up different after all), but it's still not a good thing if they are modeled with something they don't even have and are missing the model for what they should have instead.
I'm apparently missing a piece. Given GW's incompetence with weapons, if the models have pistols and can't have revolvers, then... it doesn't matter? They have pistols and that's what squat bolt pistols look like. Even if they have revolver bits.
Whatever 'autoch' is, they don't have that. So, like I said, GW chose bad names for things, and people will just call name them colloquially based on the normal 40k equivalents.
So in a way, this simplifies the process.
That's a bit like saying that it wouldn't matter if Seraphim all had Plasma Pistols modelled, because they can only have Bolt Pistols in the rules.
Mentlegen324 wrote: So we've seen a Hearthkyn model holding what is very clearly a Bolt Revolver (The Medic with the Knife). All the other Hearthkyn have a holstered weapon that matches the bolt revolver, which you can tell by it's handle - the Autoch Bolt Pistol has a noticeably different grip shape as seen on the Hearthkyn Theyn.
Except it seems that Hearthkyn can't actually have bolt revolvers, they can only use Autoch Bolt Pistols.
Look, with a couple obvious exceptions (like the missile pod) the weapons the squat models are holding are going to be irrelevant for a decade or more as people adjust to them being in the game.
(or if they become the most popular army, chances of which I think are close to nil). People are just going to call them squat bolters or better bolters or whatever name catches on.
The fact that they chose bad names for them (Hy_las_ _auto_ rifle when las and auto are different weapon classes in 40k) isn't going to help matters. If there's a real game difference between a revolver and a pistol, I honestly think they crapped the bed again and don't understand the scale of the game they're writing for.
The long and short of it is, when people rattle off what weapons their squats have, their opponents are just going to nod and/or shrug. Maybe ask to check the book if the number of (obvious) special weapons seems odd to them.
I'm not on about the names at all. The Autoch bolt revolver has its own model and rules and the Bolt revolver has its own model and rules - they're two seperate things. Hearthkyn have the bolt revolver model, but seemingly can't use bolt revolvers.
Obviously people will just count them as bolt pistols as that's what they have (or maybe the rules will end up different after all), but it's still not a good thing if they are modeled with something they don't even have and are missing the model for what they should have instead.
I'm apparently missing a piece. Given GW's incompetence with weapons, if the models have pistols and can't have revolvers, then... it doesn't matter? They have pistols and that's what squat bolt pistols look like. Even if they have revolver bits.
Whatever 'autoch' is, they don't have that. So, like I said, GW chose bad names for things, and people will just call name them colloquially based on the normal 40k equivalents.
So in a way, this simplifies the process.
I don't get how this is so hard to understand.
This is the weapon that's called an "Autoch Bolt Pistol", as seen on the Hearthkyn's Thayn. It has its own rules and its own model.
This is the weapon that's a "Bolt Revolver", shown here on a standard Hearthkyn. It has its own model and rules (which feature else in the range on the Hernkyn Pioneers too).
The Hearthkyn are modeled with the model for Bolt Revolvers, but are listed as having Autoch Bolt pistols and can't have Bolt Revolvers. The Autoch bolt pistols do not look like the Bolt Revolvers, because they are two separate things rule and model wise.
The naming is utterly irrelevant. They are a kit that by default you have to proxy as having a different weapon than they actually have.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/09/02 21:19:23
A Town Called Malus wrote: Differentiating between handguns to that level of granularity is idiotic in a game as big as 40k.
Oh right so now WYSIWYG is not meant to be a thing to such a level that it's perfectly fine for GW themselves to misrepresent what their models have on them meaning you have to proxy that unit as having something else by default.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2022/09/02 21:38:59
This is the weapon that's called an "Autoch Bolt Pistol", as seen on the Hearthkyn's Thayn. It has its own rules and its own model.
This is the weapon that's a "Bolt Revolver", shown here on a standard Hearthkyn. It has its own model and rules (which feature else in the range on the Hernkyn Pioneers too).
The Hearthkyn are modeled with the model for Bolt Revolvers, but are listed as having Autoch Bolt pistols and can't have Bolt Revolvers. The Autoch bolt pistols do not look like the Bolt Revolvers, because they are two separate things rule and model wise.
The naming is utterly irrelevant. They are a kit that by default you have to proxy as having a different weapon than they actually have.
I don't normally side with the gun enthusiasts, but I think you're exactly right here. The two weapons are clearly different. Once again, the RAW don't allow you to build the models that GW themselves are selling you.
It doesn't really matter if it might be easy to proxy a bolt revolver as a bolt pistol. The point is that GW keep harping on about how they sell such a "premium" product, and they charge such increasingly outrageous prices, yet their rules are a clusterf**k of badly-balanced armies, endless special rules bloat, prolixity, and now they seem to be increasingly fine with selling you models that come with instructions for *illegal loadouts* ... which they then patch on their website. Good. Because that's why I paid premium cash for a hardback armybook - for day 1 edits that I can cut-and-paste into this "super premium" product. Give me a break, GW...
A Town Called Malus wrote: Differentiating between handguns to that level of granularity is idiotic in a game as big as 40k.
Sure. But GW gave them different profiles and then messed up which unit has access to which. If there was just one "squat bolt pistol" profile that then could be represented by either model there wouldn't be an issue.
A Town Called Malus wrote: Differentiating between handguns to that level of granularity is idiotic in a game as big as 40k.
Sure. But GW gave them different profiles and then messed up which unit has access to which. If there was just one "squat bolt pistol" profile that then could be represented by either model there wouldn't be an issue.
Next Dex in 1 year or so dont worry they will fix it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/02 22:15:29
A Town Called Malus wrote: Differentiating between handguns to that level of granularity is idiotic in a game as big as 40k.
Oh right so now WYSIWYG is not meant to be a thing to such a level that it's perfectly fine for GW themselves to misrepresent what their models have on them meaning you have to proxy that unit as having something else by default.
GW has just been painfully sloppy as of late when it comes to matching the minies. The fact that they "kinda forgot" the gun of the Daemon Prince or that kerfuffle with the Autarch are pretty telling on how extremely disconnected the scultor/sprue maker side of GW is from the rule writting side of it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/09/02 22:27:32
Kind of glad that the Ironhead Prospectors, along with the Exodriller, were not allied into the codex. Their weapon options would have been a doozy.
I never get "the no model, no rule" and specific sprue options nonsense regarding special/heavy/etc weapons. There are people out there who will want to run 40 troops that require them to buy 80 to actually do it and they would. GW actually do themselves out of profit by limiting the options.
Ngl, after learning about the 3 new weapon type of the LoV, I feel like I just got cucked as a Necron Player.
Let's hope they'll wake up in 10th and remember than the whole thing about necron gauss weapons and blades was that it's supposed to go trough everything...
(HN) wrote: Ngl, after learning about the 3 new weapon type of the LoV, I feel like I just got cucked as a Necron Player.
Let's hope they'll wake up in 10th and remember than the whole thing about necron gauss weapons and blades was that it's supposed to go trough everything...
Remember when people with Marine hateboners were raging at the Intercessor Bolt Rifle because it was compared to the Gauss Flayer? Good times!
Kinda weird, there are significantly fewer hammers in this army than I thought that there would be. No hammers for the Hearthkyn or the Kahl. Heck, the Kahl can't even have a sword?
~4100
~1660
