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.

@ GiToRaZor: sorry, my blind eyes read d3+3 shots for the battlecannon instead of d6+3. My bad, you are indeed correct

 RustyNumber wrote:

 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.

I honestly like how you phrase it overkill granularity. That's pretty much what the ever escalating rules writing of the current designers is. A narrow core ruleset that does not allow for nuance and variety among armies that is then modified on a per army and unit level to reflect fluff on the tabletop is going to see layer stacked upon layer until the whole thing breaks down and has to be reset. If you brought back different kinds of invulnerable saves (we had those back in 2nd ed), you'd only add one more block to the wide top of GW's Jenga tower. I think it's fair to call that overkill, since the demise of the current core rules has been built into them and the exact way it's bloated to death doesn't really matter. It's going to happen one way or another.

More transcripted from B&Ch (who took from Mordian Glory):

Heavy Lascannon:
Range: 48''
Shots: 1
S14,
Ap-3? (unconfirmed ap),
Damage d6+6 (Ignores invuns)

Ogryns: Toughness +1 (to 6),
all Ogryns +2wounds (to 5),

Ability: Reduce damage by 1

Leman Russ:

Leman Russ Tank (AoC unknown) M10'' WS6+ BS4+ S7 T8 W13 LD7 A5 2+ save

Turret Weapons have Turret keyword (+1 to hit when firing)

Demolisher D6 shots S9 Ap-3 Damage D3+3

Nova Cannon: Shots d6+3 SameS Same ap damage 3 (Ignores cover)

Executioner: Shots: Unknown S8 AP-4 Damage 3 (Always considered overcharged)

Exterminator Autocannon: Shots: Heavy 6 S8 AP-2 Damage: 2

Battlecannon: Shots: Heavy d6+3 S8 AP-2 Damage: 3

Gatekeeper: Shots: Same as BC S9 AP-4 Damage: 3

Punisher: Shots: Heavy 20 S6 Ap-1 Damage: 1

Vanquisher: Shots: Heavy 1 S14 Ap-4 Damage D3+6 (Ignores invuns and D3 mortals on top)

Command squad -

Platoon (Elite) or Company commander (HQ) command squad units

2 Guardsmen make veteran heavy weapons Medic gives just the command squad a 5FnP Regimental standard - Reroll 1s to wound Any number of veterans can swap weapons in the same as before and well as (new):

Master Vox (Unknown what this does)

Standard Vox (as before)

You cannot select the same special or heavy weapon more than once in each unit.

Refractor stilll have 5+ invun

Veteran guardsmen have BS4+ but 2 more attacks

Kaskin:
Hotshot back to 24''
Hotshot sniper 36'', Heavy 1 S4, Ap-2, Damage (MW on roll of 6+)

Misc:
Shocktroop Squads cost same as Cadian (65points [p])
Cadian squads only get 2 special weapons (no heavy weapons) in squads - 6s explode to hit (ranged)
Catachan squads (70p) - 6s explode to hit in melee
DCoK squads (80p) - Minitrans human
Astropath - No longer lets you ignore cover. :( :( :( (Psyker divination staying as a psychic action WC7). This gets you a CP if you complete the action


-New Solar is a totally new character

-Catachans could add 3 flamers on a squad (says it could totally be false)

-Confirms you cant take command baneblades now

-You can add armour tracks to any tank

 GiToRaZor wrote:
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.

While overall agree mind you the blast here does nothing vs 6-10 models. 3+1=4 which is more than minimum 3 so no good.

It's # of SHOTS that gets put on minimum. Not roll.

But yeah that exterminator sucks.

If blast weapons had cap per model it might be different...but still would be weird as exterminator isn't exactly known as being tank killer in fluff

"If a Blast weapon targets a unit that has between 6 and 10 models, it always makes a minimum of 3 attacks. "

d6+3=4-9 attacks.

(with the weapon stat creep gw might want to reconsider blast rules. 6-10 part is pretty much irrelevant these days and thanks to death of hordes generally blast is "don't shoot in melee" debuff)

You can still just use dudes-on-motorbikes conversions if you want for RRs....

DKoK get a mini transhuman (only would one 3+).

And 80pts per squad. The true kicker will be if they are locked into regimental doctrines with that. However, stick them in cover, and they will be harder to kill, so I wonder if the Cult of Sacrfice doctrine could in fact work for them?

Is 20pts per squad extra going to be worth mini trans.

I assume this is DKoK Vet guardsmen also... I wonder if they'll be able to get other upgrades that make them a little tankier (medic etc).

I'll actually praise them for (mostly) not just cranking lethality up to 11 in an attempt to get another codex banned. I know people here are poo-pooing the russ, but would the world be a better place if it was ap-4 with 6+d3 shots or something dumb?

Garrac wrote:
Heavy Lascannon:
... (Ignores invuns)

They're really lowering the bar to entry in the "ignores invuls" club.

Garrac wrote:
You cannot select the same special or heavy weapon more than once in each unit.

Yeah... feth this book.

Refractor stilll have 5+ invun

Garrac wrote:
Veteran guardsmen have BS4+ but 2 more attacks

Praise the Emperor! Our Veterans get a few extra weak-ass attacks in HTH combat. We're saved!

I'm not being a white knight etc here, but can we really stop having a 'sky is falling' meltdown every time codex rumours pop up?

Yep, the rules don't look amazing in some regard, and have absurdity in others (I also dislike ignore inv rules), but it has been shown time and again that when certain people get their hands on the rules, they can actually make things work - 2A guardsmen might actually be competent, let's wait and see.

We don't need another negative spiral of a thread just for the sake of it... It's overplayed in all the spheres of discourse when it comes to 40k in particular, leave it for the goons on prominent social media platforms to have the meltdowns and leave this thread for just actually what it is, rumours.

Man, i like this.
Fans of the "old", anachronistic and absolutely weird IG get Rough Riders ( just remember how bad the old models were but they were still loved!)
and friends of a new, modern "Army" IG get Kasrkin, who are absolutely stunning btw.

I predict the new tank will aim to close the gap between WW1 Leman Russ and the new Primaris tanks.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

We don't need another negative spiral of a thread just for the sake of it... It's overplayed in all the spheres of discourse when it comes to 40k in particular, leave it for the goons on prominent social media platforms to have the meltdowns and leave this thread for just actually what it is, rumours.

People aren't complaining 'for the sake of it'. They're specifically complaining about the reveals/rumours - which are the topic of this thread.

There really are lots of leaks. Is there any place where they have actually been compiled?

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

We don't need another negative spiral of a thread just for the sake of it... It's overplayed in all the spheres of discourse when it comes to 40k in particular, leave it for the goons on prominent social media platforms to have the meltdowns and leave this thread for just actually what it is, rumours.

People aren't complaining 'for the sake of it'. They're specifically complaining about the reveals/rumours - which are the topic of this thread.

And the complaining is without all the relevant context, it's prudent not to call any of the new rules amazing without all the knowledge, such as pt cost, any potential restrictions etc, at the same time it is not the time to call anything awful without the full context.

Discussing it is fine, as long as it is an objective and thought out discussion, lots of what typical happens is not that.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
2A guardsmen might actually be competent, let's wait and see.

They could be amazing. But, did you get into Guard collecting for their incredible close combat ability? Lots of things make an army good, but they aren't always in character.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
2A guardsmen might actually be competent, let's wait and see.

They could be amazing. But, did you get into Guard collecting for their incredible close combat ability? Lots of things make an army good, but they aren't always in character.

Again, I don't dispute this, but for certain guard it is fairly lore friendly... There are melee based regiments, and Catachan (especially Devils) and Krieg have always been fairly competent melee fighters for humans.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
2A guardsmen might actually be competent, let's wait and see.

They could be amazing. But, did you get into Guard collecting for their incredible close combat ability? Lots of things make an army good, but they aren't always in character.

I am working on some concepts for Kanak skull takers, so melee would be pretty tasty.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Loving the Rough riders. Could make good Vostroyan cavalry with a headswap too.

The poses seem fine to me- sitting to a canter is reasonable and lancers do typically have an upright pose (look at jousting).

The sergeant with sword forward should be leaning more if they want to reach though.

One detail I am particularly happy with is they are all carrying lasguns (as they should be), and can receive FRFSRF if it is still an order. So the unit still has some ranged bite if needed.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
2A guardsmen might actually be competent, let's wait and see.

They could be amazing. But, did you get into Guard collecting for their incredible close combat ability? Lots of things make an army good, but they aren't always in character.

Well, I play with Traitor Guard, so... yes?

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
I'm not being a white knight etc here, but can we really stop having a 'sky is falling' meltdown every time codex rumours pop up?

As far as I can tell, these are not 'meltdowns' just the releases and the rumors being kinda... how to put it... run-of-the-mill and thus not generating the sweeping excitement that would only have some die-hard contrarians bitching about nothing. And when fans get bored they get pissed.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

We don't need another negative spiral of a thread just for the sake of it... It's overplayed in all the spheres of discourse when it comes to 40k in particular, leave it for the goons on prominent social media platforms to have the meltdowns and leave this thread for just actually what it is, rumours.

People aren't complaining 'for the sake of it'. They're specifically complaining about the reveals/rumours - which are the topic of this thread.

And the complaining is without all the relevant context

So mind telling me what context everyone was missing with the last few codices?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

We don't need another negative spiral of a thread just for the sake of it... It's overplayed in all the spheres of discourse when it comes to 40k in particular, leave it for the goons on prominent social media platforms to have the meltdowns and leave this thread for just actually what it is, rumours.

People aren't complaining 'for the sake of it'. They're specifically complaining about the reveals/rumours - which are the topic of this thread.

And the complaining is without all the relevant context

So mind telling me what context everyone was missing with the last few codices?

People gonna moan, simple as, the leman russ shows that. If it was notably more powerful people would complain its broken, if it strikes reasonable or under the curve people complain it's worse than other tanks. If they let you DIY your special weapons as you see fit in a squad people complain all the options aren't in, if they lock you out of options they complain about "muh dudes", if they do put them in and allow it the box inevitably costs more so people complain about that.

I know I'm replying to you EP but this isn't for or aimed at you, for once I'm saying just let people whine. Someone is going to be unhappy regardless and ultimately bemoaning bad man GW at every turn is more socially acceptable to fit in.

Here's some more context: This codex has 1 job, sell the new models for 6-7months before they bring them all in line with the indexes. Within that context disappointment becomes more pronounced and hype threads get derailed.

endlesswaltz wrote:
And the complaining is without all the relevant context, it's prudent not to call any of the new rules amazing without all the knowledge, such as pt cost, any potential restrictions etc, at the same time it is not the time to call anything awful without the full context.

Not sure what "relevant context" is gonna make losing specialization of weapon selection better, especially if it's extended to Weapon Teams of either variety.

You can't "wait and see" stupid decisions.

tneva82 wrote:


Well all it requires is modifying characteristic like jinx

Jimx doesn't affect Daemonic Saves.

Wait And See
New Codex
As You Come
To Take Our Optionssss

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
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.

Real horses were also used by all sides (including US special forces) in Afghanistan after USA invaded (to the point you can find multiple statues of mounted troops dedicated to that conflict) and by Ukrainians right now. Funny how armchair experts on "modern" armies often are so sure while being so wrong:

Aecus Decimus wrote:
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.

Yeah, because beyond idiotic, utterly comical idea of previous editions that a massive blast riddling everything around with shrapnel (or focusing flamer stream on a single target instead of swinging it in an arc) magically ceased to exist if you had no buddies around worked sooo much better

Remember how monstrous creatures laughed at blasts and template weapons, even stuff that was supposed to fire antimatter or teleport spherical chunks of reality into warp, because it only ever did one wound? Apparently not, because you'd also remember how stupid, unbalanced (making MCs vastly better than any vehicle for multiple editions even with same stats), and suspension breaking that gak was...

Kill Team's Kasrkins are apparently BS 4+

Two games, two rules and all that, but I wouldn't be surprised if they had that BS as well.

Hell, the Germans were using more horses than tracked or wheeled vehicles in the Blitzkrieg.

I think I get the idea of what they are doing with Guard now, making them a a rather multi diverse grouping of soldiers of the battlefield, coordinating to fight against their foes.

That vanquisher cannon rumour looks oddly apealing....

Not talking about the long stiff barrel, but about its stats!

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
2A guardsmen might actually be competent, let's wait and see.

They could be amazing. But, did you get into Guard collecting for their incredible close combat ability? Lots of things make an army good, but they aren't always in character.

Fluffwise ig isn't described as lousy in melee without exception. Plenty more h2h based regiments.

IIRC there was a bit of WWII propaganda that the foolish and backwards Polish charged German tanks with lances.

I always though the Rough Riders were a take on that idea, in the Imperium that idea actually works

The Japanese also experimented with explosive spears as part of their last ditch suicide weapons to repel an American invasion. I remember a diorama of a guy in a diving suit who was supposed to use them against passing landing craft. Not sure they were ever used.