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.

 Ravajaxe wrote:
From Mordian Glory's live on Youtube.
These are semi-verified rumors, indiscretion from playtesters, info that he got from at least two sources. So probably reliable unless last minute changes had been made from the playtest documents.

Leman Russ new stats :

* Chassis : still moves 10" and T8, save 2+, but now has wounds count of 13, and 5 attacks in combat (still 6+ to hit).
They are all BS4+, but turret weapons get +1 to hit.

* Demolisher cannon : same as now, heavy D6, but damage upgraded D3+3.
* Nova Cannon : heavy D6+3, damage 2, ignores light cover, rest unchanged.
* executioner : STR 8, AP-4, damage 3, and always on overcharge.
* exterminator : heavy 6, STR 8, AP-2, damage 2.
* battlecannon : heavy D6+3, STR 8, AP-2, damage 3.
* punisher : heavy 20, STR 6, AP-1.
* Vanquisher : heavy 1, STR 14, AP-4, damage D3+6, ignores invulnerables, D3 additional mortal wounds.


There is more bits from the live, but I have to go to sleep.

Looks like I'll actually have a good reason to actually field my collection of forge world Vanquisher turrets! well I bet the battle cannon still maths out better against most targets its but at least not the brain dead easy choice it was on the current book

If those end up true, I think it's a good guess to make that the Shadowsword's Volcano Canon will also ignore Invulns?

Those Attilians are a hard pass for me. They look more at home in AoS than in 40K. On the bright side I can use my GSC bikers as Roughriders with a handy headswap.

M.

I'm just glad the Vanquisher cannon isn't "LOL, sucks" anymore. That actually looks like it could be an effective anti-tank weapon. I hope they update the Destroyer Tank hunter with similar stats too. That always seemed a bit anemic.


Also, with these rumors coming hard and heavy, I'm going to hazard a guess that the codex will drop the last weekend in November.

 Bobthehero wrote:
If those end up true, I think it's a good guess to make that the Shadowsword's Volcano Canon will also ignore Invulns?

Yay! More invulnerable ignoring guns! And just like the LoV railgun, the Vanquisher is AP-4! So it blows right through invulnerable saves, but can bounce off anything with a 2+ save and AoC!

Am I the only one that finds that kinda goofy?

Riders look great to me, the melta profile is probably the only reason to take the models on the table though. The frag profile against the perfect target gets, assuming base 2 attacks, 1 save at AP -ignore. I don't see what role these can fill in a guard army beyond suicide melta zerglings. They move 10+" - die... what am I missing?

Tank profiles.
Demolisher - If you want AP, otherwise the damage is too close to that of a Battlcannon to care also, less shots.

Nova Cannon - Needed to ignore all cover benefits and also get a re-roll to wound against targets in cover. As it is, not worth it.

Executioner - Probably still the default choice plus with guaranteed mortals, probably necessitates the reroll 1s tank order.

Exterminator - Still bad, but not quite as bad as before.

BattleCannon - If you don't need AP, this is your choice. The other advantage is range, but who plays on a table with more then 24"LoS anyways?

Punisher - 20 shots instead of 40 is a real nerf, the AP -ignore is a cock tease at best.

Vanquisher - If you like being greasy this is your profile, will remove a transport a turn, save your CP reroll for this. Personally the ignore invuls thing + mortals irks me too much to feel okay using this model now

I don't like it that the various railgun weapons ignore invulnerable saves; but if any gun should it should be the Volcano Cannon.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
If those end up true, I think it's a good guess to make that the Shadowsword's Volcano Canon will also ignore Invulns?

Yay! More invulnerable ignoring guns! And just like the LoV railgun, the Vanquisher is AP-4! So it blows right through invulnerable saves, but can bounce off anything with a 2+ save and AoC!

Am I the only one that finds that kinda goofy?

I have not played in years, tell me why AP-4 bounces off 2+ saves?

AP-4 gets reduced 1 for AOC (BS) another 1 for light cover or similar ability which leaves the model with 4+ save. Can definitely bounce.

Ogryn gaining 2wounds, one toughness, and -1 damage. Interesting

General Hobbs wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
If those end up true, I think it's a good guess to make that the Shadowsword's Volcano Canon will also ignore Invulns?

Yay! More invulnerable ignoring guns! And just like the LoV railgun, the Vanquisher is AP-4! So it blows right through invulnerable saves, but can bounce off anything with a 2+ save and AoC!

Am I the only one that finds that kinda goofy?

I have not played in years, tell me why AP-4 bounces off 2+ saves?

AoC, or "Armour of Contempt" is a rule that some factions/units get that reduce the AP of a successful wounding attack by "1". Which means that if a weapon that ignores invulnerable saves, but only has AP-4, hits something with a 2+ save and a 5++ invulnerable save, for example, it ignores the 5++, but then gets its AP reduced down from -4 to -3 by AoC, so that the 2+ armour save now has the same chance to save the wound as the ignored 5++ invulnerable save. So, the armour save is more "invulnerable" than the actual invulnerable save.

Welcome to 9th edition!

Unless there's a caveat for the Punisher Cannon firing more shots somehow, I can't see people taking that. It's effectively AP0 in the vast majority of match ups and is basically in an anti-horde role during a time when that unit type is borderline non-existent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cuda1179 wrote:
Ogryn gaining 2wounds, one toughness, and -1 damage. Interesting

Seems like GW are just throwing around stat changes since they don't know what to do with them. Unfortunately, unless Ogryn are like a semi-glass cannon that is absurdly underpriced or puts out a butt ton of mortal wounds somehow, Bullgryn will almost always be the better option. I don't think regular Ogryn have been competitive...ever?

These are all net nerfs for every single turret option, with the removal of grinding advance. So the unit that is useless in holding objectives, but was specialised (even if underwhelming in comparison) into max damage output and staying power, can now be more mobile, so quicker in a spot where it is useless, and in exchange kill even less than the already underwhelming amount it had previously.

The vanquisher is still crap btw. 1 shot? Even if they made it 2+ to hit and return the coaxial heavy stubber, it would still take almost 3 to rounds to get its points back against the best possible targets. Demolishers have less damage output than battle cannons. Are executioners overheating now? Turret weapons used to be excluded, cooling systems and all that. The punisher feels especially gutted, it is now "better" against T5 and 6, woho, slowclap. The exterminator is still worse than a battle cannon, even against a single target. Nova cannon still a gimmick weapon. And that's it folks.

Battlecannon is still the braindead choice, but GW completely forgot what the purpose of the tank is. They probably think it should be an outflanking linebreaker? Or maybe it's just that they fexed it, so that their new Churchill tank finds buyers. If the tank doesn't see a 15% price cut or some magical special rules, it's dead on the shelf.

As a small saving grace for the Exterminator: it didn't get down in number of hits (6x hitting on 3+ equals 8x hitting on 4+) and it beats the Battlecannon against 1, 2 and 4 wound models and together with the Punisher can shoot in melee. From a quick glance it might be handy against T4 stuff that wants to melee like Genestealers at least

I think it is trying to be a light tank of sorts. Whereas the Churchill is medium and the Baneblade is med/heavy, as per the fluff. I'm not sure on the Battlecannon, the AP -2 is so measly that it's next to ignore able. Unless the Executioner does a real amount of mortals to itself I think it's still the best. The more I look at it, a Demolisher is only preferable if you need that 5 dmg v 3. If the Executioner had stayed at Str7 it wouldn't be so ideal against vehicles. In my experience in this point in 9th the sweet spot for profiles across my armies is currently Str8 Ap-3 dmg3 and fits the bill. Hell, it even keeps in line with the AP ballooning.

I'm a bit sad for the Nova Cannon as I like the look and find the fluff explanation for its existance makes a lot of sense. But with those stats... unless the next edition includes T3 models with serious light cover bonuses.

removed - language please

Hey, Rough Riders are back. Yay.

And they look really static. Not-so-yay.

I do hope there are a good amount of alternate heads in there. Never liked the Attilan aesthetic. Would rather they be Cadian.

 Ravajaxe wrote:
* Vanquisher : heavy 1, STR 14, AP-4, damage D3+6, ignores invulnerables, D3 additional mortal wounds.

Oh for crying out loud...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
* Vanquisher : heavy 1, STR 14, AP-4, damage D3+6, ignores invulnerables, D3 additional mortal wounds.

Oh for crying out loud...

I mean, didn't we see it coming? It's the designers latest fixation and it'll be done to death until they find a new one a year down the line, just in time to leave behind the first codices of 10th ed.

Plus, stealing Tau guns goes well with stealing Tau cheek warmers.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
* Vanquisher : heavy 1, STR 14, AP-4, damage D3+6, ignores invulnerables, D3 additional mortal wounds.

Oh for crying out loud...

What did you expect? It's either ignore invulnerable saves or continue to be a useless weapon that might as well not exist. The concept of the vanquisher cannon doesn't work when a 1 CP re-roll can drop its damage output to such a pathetic level that you're better off taking a normal battle cannon and killing the target by sheer volume of fire. That's just how it is now that GW screwed up the concept of blast weapons and let them hit single-model targets multiple times.

 Geifer wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
* Vanquisher : heavy 1, STR 14, AP-4, damage D3+6, ignores invulnerables, D3 additional mortal wounds.

Oh for crying out loud...

I mean, didn't we see it coming? It's the designers latest fixation and it'll be done to death until they find a new one a year down the line, just in time to leave behind the first codices of 10th ed.

Plus, stealing Tau guns goes well with stealing Tau cheek warmers.

We already have models that can save against mortal wounds, so next we will have super mortal wounds, that can not be ignored by things that ignore mortal wounds.

And we will see an escalation of Daemon's unmodifiable saves and guess what, weapons that will be able to modify unmodifiable saves.

In 11th we will see mana charges for Stratagems. For 2 blue mana, whenever an opponent places a model from reserves, the model is placed back into reserves instead and can only enter the battlefield next round. Might as well play Magic to begin with.

Aecus Decimus wrote:
What did you expect?

Better rules?

I hope the Shadowsword's gun ignores even Daemonic saves, just to show how fethed the rules are.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Aecus Decimus wrote:
What did you expect?

Better rules?

I hope the Shadowsword's gun ignores even Daemonic saves, just to show how fethed the rules are.

You should make a note for this, as a prediction for next grey knights update.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Aecus Decimus wrote:
What did you expect?

Better rules?

I hope the Shadowsword's gun ignores even Daemonic saves, just to show how fethed the rules are.

How would you make a viable single-shot anti-tank weapon (which the vanquisher cannon must be to match the lore) without ignoring invulnerable saves? If you have a 50-75% chance to fail to get through the invulnerable save on top of the chance to fail to wound and the chance to fail to hit the weapon becomes so unreliable that nobody will ever take it.

 Geifer wrote:

I mean, didn't we see it coming? It's the designers latest fixation and it'll be done to death until they find a new one a year down the line, just in time to leave behind the first codices of 10th ed.

Plus, stealing Tau guns goes well with stealing Tau cheek warmers.

Would it be overkill granuality if they further broke down types of invulns? With railguns and things merely ignoring "forcefield" invulns, things like "evasion" or "demonic" invulns still acting as normal? (are demonic saves already a thing? you can tell I'm a huge 9e player)

Why not simply buff something like the vanquisher when targeting vehicles, and nerf when infantry? Using it as a lelzy character/h.inft/whatever sniper is obviously not the intended roll of a normal humie tank destroyer gun.

 GiToRaZor wrote:
And we will see an escalation of Daemon's unmodifiable saves and guess what, weapons that will be able to modify unmodifiable saves.

Well all it requires is modifying characteristic like jinx


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 RustyNumber wrote:
Would it be overkill granuality if they further broke down types of invulns? With railguns and things merely ignoring "forcefield" invulns, things like "evasion" or "demonic" invulns still acting as normal? (are demonic saves already a thing? you can tell I'm a huge 9e player).

Yeah daemons have their save to for which you can't put modifiers to roll(except for 1 exception in the book). So it's not invulnerable save so ignore invulnerable save doesn't affect but as you can't modify roll the AP is irrelevant.

Only thing that can change it is if you modify characteristic. (why the 1 exception couldn't be modify characteristic instead of +1 to save rolls despite daemonic saves being unable to modify roll...)

Rough riders: pointless and stupid, and really out of place in a modern guard army.
At least you get rules to support your Catachan raptor riders now.

 Fayric wrote:
Rough riders: pointless and stupid, and really out of place in a modern guard army.
At least you get rules to support your Catachan raptor riders now.

I don't see how you can have a "modern" guard army when the point of the Imperial guard is to pay homage to armies across human history. Yes, Cadians are supposed to represent the "modern" aspect, but they're just one part of the guard and reflect only a part of the overall concept.
Cavalry (and I mean real horses, not the modern usage of the word which refers to mechanized infantry) were used even in WW2.

Rough riders are fine in that respect, and go well with the anachronistic nature of the Imperium.

Now, as for the models themselves...I think GW released better horses. The Bretonnian mounts looked better, for example.
I hope there's more helmet options too, because the "attilan" style helmet would look out of place in say, a Cadian army or a DKOK army.

 Pyroalchi wrote:
As a small saving grace for the Exterminator: it didn't get down in number of hits (6x hitting on 3+ equals 8x hitting on 4+) and it beats the Battlecannon against 1, 2 and 4 wound models and together with the Punisher can shoot in melee. From a quick glance it might be handy against T4 stuff that wants to melee like Genestealers at least

* exterminator : heavy 6, STR 8, AP-2, damage 2.
* battlecannon : heavy D6+3, STR 8, AP-2, damage 3

That means against 1 target the battlecannon has 6.5 shots on average, against a squad of 6 it's 7 shots, against a squad of 11 it's 9 shots. Yes, against a single target it can be a bit swingy, but the additional damage make up for that, since we have a load of models that have 2+Wounds and reduce the incoming damage by 1 to a minimum of 1.

Example: assume you roll a 1 for shots, so 4 shots with the battle cannon against, say a Plague Marine: 2.6 hits - 1.7 wounds equals reliable 0.5-1 dead models
Exterminator shoots 6 times, hits 4, wounds 2.2 times, results in only 0.5 - 1 dead models. Yes, it is a bit better against regular 1 or 2 wound models. On the worst possible scenario for the battle cannon. The battleconnon is just flat out better if you don't roll a 1 for shots in any other scenario and on top of that, better at killing other, higher characteristic targets.

IMHO the Exterminator would need 10-12 shots in order to be considered a sort of an alternative, with a focus on a different target group.

BTW: Rumor for turret weapon is +1 to hit and can shot out of combat, similar to the Baneblade. So you can at least shoot at something else that is not in C&C with you. You should be taking 3 Heavy Flamers anyway these days, to discourage anyone from charging, and roast them if they don't wreck you in the first turnof combat.

BTW.: Above calculation should be considered as a reminder as to how utterly bad the Leman Russ is, it has a hard time killing more than 2 marines with it's main weapon per turn.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
the point of the Imperial guard is to pay homage to armies across human history

I wouldn't necessarily say that. Well, other than "the point of Imperial Guard aesthetics is original aesthetic design being hard while historical aesthetic references being easy".