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.

 Hulksmash wrote:
People do understand that rough riders can be move blocked right? I'd argue Cavalry has to be over tuned because otherwise they never get there. Also honestly they're 5pts cheaper than Ork Squig Cav which are tougher, more wounds, same save, 2" slower, can advance and charge, can do mortals, and have similar if not more attacks.

And they aren't lighting up the boards and haven't been since they came out. That cavalry key word is a bastard.

This is a good observation.
The inability to move through walls can especially be limiting - despite a seemingly higher M stat.

I think the issue though is partly about army composition. I guess we'll see where the special rules end up - but Guard are probably going to be a mainly shooty army. So you can arguably just take 300-500 points of rough riders (i.e. 3*5, or potentially larger squads) as your counter-assault force. If your opponent wants to assault into the rest of your army, they are getting these guys in the face, and that should be produce an efficient trade.

I'm not really sure Orks can play this way. Partly that's the problem of Waaagh synergy. You tend to want to go all in with an Ork list, rather than run a toolbox. (Although I have not really looked at what "Ork meta" looks like these days, so I could be wrong.)

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Most weapons are getting inflated, with older units getting left behind. A shadowsword tank now mounts a better volcano cannon than a reaver titan. At least we are starting to see a move towards toughness starting to increase to improve survivability without needing a ton of special saves or rules, with scout sentinels now at 6 and heavy tanks at 9.

Reaver pays for being resin.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Nice to have splodey-sticks that don't only work once. And I like that you don't have to choose between Frag or Melta, but get both.

Yeah. And fixed damage on the Melta helps them stop being too swingy. If it was Damage D3, I think they’d be cack, as you still need to get them into combat, on the charge, with enough numbers to count.

I think they might do quite well as a roving force for finishing off already damaged tanks or squads that have taken a mauling. Sure a full strength unit can do a lot of potential damage, they don’t seem especially survivable. So picking off the wounded, freeing up your firepower seems a natural role.

Not sure why everyone is getting upset about lasguns on the rough riders now. They were explicitly mentioned in the reveal article and you can see the holsters in the reveal video. I pointed this out at the time.

I am happy to see them there, historically cavalry have often festooned themselves with as many weapons as possible, Steppe cavalry especially. It is only a bit weird with the current mechanics of shooting rapid-fire weapons and assaulting in the same turn- previously you could only do either-or, giving a swap period between weapons. This is a game abstraction though, not a lore reason.

Advanced Eldar anti-tank weapon:
36" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D1d3+3

Primitive human anti-tank weapon:
48" Heavy 2 S10 AP-4 D1d3+3


Did Eldar skip the Industrial Revolution or something?

 vipoid wrote:
Advanced Eldar anti-tank weapon:
36" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D1d3+3

Primitive human anti-tank weapon:
48" Heavy 2 S10 AP-4 D1d3+3

Easy explanation:

One Codex was written by the day-shift rules team, and the other by the night-shift rules team. They don't talk except when passing each other in the hallway between shifts.

 vipoid wrote:
Advanced Eldar anti-tank weapon:
36" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D1d3+3

Primitive human anti-tank weapon:
48" Heavy 2 S10 AP-4 D1d3+3

Did Eldar skip the Industrial Revolution or something?

This would be more hilarious if the Heavy LC had the no-invu profile .

 Haighus wrote:
Not sure why everyone is getting upset about lasguns on the rough riders now. They were explicitly mentioned in the reveal article and you can see the holsters in the reveal video. I pointed this out at the time.

I am happy to see them there, historically cavalry have often festooned themselves with as many weapons as possible, Steppe cavalry especially. It is only a bit weird with the current mechanics of shooting rapid-fire weapons and assaulting in the same turn- previously you could only do either-or, giving a swap period between weapons. This is a game abstraction though, not a lore reason.

Because unless your game abstraction is, as previously mentioned is the horse swinging the lance in it's mouth while the rider is firing a las rifle the entire unit is impractical from a basic anatomy perspective. The might as well have just made the lance +1S extra and made them base S3 for consistency and written "has guns to participate in all phases and must be S8 to kill T4 efficiently" in the unit blurb.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Advanced Eldar anti-tank weapon:
36" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D1d3+3

Primitive human anti-tank weapon:
48" Heavy 2 S10 AP-4 D1d3+3

Did Eldar skip the Industrial Revolution or something?

This would be more hilarious if the Heavy LC had the no-invu profile .

It does according to the rumours...

Dudeface wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Advanced Eldar anti-tank weapon:
36" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D1d3+3

Primitive human anti-tank weapon:
48" Heavy 2 S10 AP-4 D1d3+3

Did Eldar skip the Industrial Revolution or something?

This would be more hilarious if the Heavy LC had the no-invu profile .

It does according to the rumours...

They previewed the full weapon stats yesterday and it doesn't. The Heavy 2 was the alternate of the no-invu in the leaks too.

 AtoMaki wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Advanced Eldar anti-tank weapon:
36" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D1d3+3

Primitive human anti-tank weapon:
48" Heavy 2 S10 AP-4 D1d3+3

Did Eldar skip the Industrial Revolution or something?

This would be more hilarious if the Heavy LC had the no-invu profile .

It does according to the rumours...

They previewed the full weapon stats yesterday and it doesn't. The Heavy 2 was the alternate of the no-invu in the leaks too.

Fair point, I missed that yesterday

 vipoid wrote:
Advanced Eldar anti-tank weapon:
36" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D1d3+3

Primitive human anti-tank weapon:
48" Heavy 2 S10 AP-4 D1d3+3


Did Eldar skip the Industrial Revolution or something?

GW has a long history of doing this, giving the "primitive" and "regressing" Imperium better weapons than the supposedly "advanced" Eldar or other older races. Take for example, the 3rd edition S6 fusion guns vs S8 melta guns.

Dudeface wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Not sure why everyone is getting upset about lasguns on the rough riders now. They were explicitly mentioned in the reveal article and you can see the holsters in the reveal video. I pointed this out at the time.

I am happy to see them there, historically cavalry have often festooned themselves with as many weapons as possible, Steppe cavalry especially. It is only a bit weird with the current mechanics of shooting rapid-fire weapons and assaulting in the same turn- previously you could only do either-or, giving a swap period between weapons. This is a game abstraction though, not a lore reason.

Because unless your game abstraction is, as previously mentioned is the horse swinging the lance in it's mouth while the rider is firing a las rifle the entire unit is impractical from a basic anatomy perspective. The might as well have just made the lance +1S extra and made them base S3 for consistency and written "has guns to participate in all phases and must be S8 to kill T4 efficiently" in the unit blurb.

I am not sure what your point is? That it is silly that cavalry can shoot a lasgun and charge with a lance in the same phase, or that cavalry can carry and use both lasguns and lances?

The latter is obviously something cavalry can do, the rough rider models even show a model with its lance slung on its back.

The former is a game extraction of current rules allowing charging after firing rapid fire weapons. It wouldn't have been an issue in 5th edition, for example. It isn't a particularly egregious abstraction in the scheme of 40k, but different things break immersion for different people I guess. More a problem with rules interaction than loadout though. If it annoys you, pretend/model that they are firing a brace of laspistols for two las shots on the charge, like Polish winged hussars or something.

Aecus Decimus wrote:
I don't think it would have been a big deal. You had to give up the lance to take a special weapon

You had to, but now that they have lasgun and lance, consistency would dictate it would be the lasgun that gets replaced (and frankly, common sense too, come on, two rifles?). And it would be a big deal because then they could melta two targets in one round, one with guns, one with spears. For 5 power points, that would be bigger damage output than any comparable SM unit can dream of...

Aecus Decimus wrote:
Not from a balance point of view, it's just a stupid concept that these guys are carrying 3-4 different weapons and somehow managing to swap between a two-handed rifle and a lance in the middle of a charge.

Yeeeah, cavalry carrying rifles, lances, and pistols is such a stupid concept that is impossible to--



Oh wait

Dudeface wrote:
Where does the 12ft melta lance go while they fire an assault rifle 2 handed whilst riding horses at full pelt?

Held under your thigh, like real cavalry did for pretty much ever. Or put in stirrup holder like above. Or any of dozen other things real cavalrymen did to swap weapons in real life.

Fun fact, Polish Hussars, you know, that thing that annoyingly a lot of clueless people who only saw it on parades fetishise, had sabre, sometimes horseman's pick or mace, plus either carbine or set of two to six pistols and a 5-6 meter lance (so long in fact it needed a huge counterbalance weight next to grip so the users could just level it). And they managed to reliable fire their guns before charge then swap to another melee weapon once lance broke but before contact with enemy line hundreds of times. So yeah, it can be done with far smaller weapons, easily.

The better question is how are they switching from frag to melta Lance's on the fly?

Besides, in the far future it's not a stretch to imagine them developing telescopic or collapsible spears for easier concealment.

Personally I would have preferred it if they made Rough Riders into dragoons rather than lance cavalry, but I guess that's what the lasgun is for.
Come to think of it, the lances should probably have been replaced with miniature rocket launchers too. Orks get them, so why not imperials?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
The better question is how are they switching from frag to melta Lance's on the fly?

They learned quick swapping from Doom guy.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
The better question is how are they switching from frag to melta Lance's on the fly?

I assumed they had exchangeable tips, and the body of the lance is designed to survive the impact with a new head attached depending on the next target.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
The better question is how are they switching from frag to melta Lance's on the fly?

They throw the lasgun on their back, holster their pistol, put the lance in the holder I just learned about, ask their slightly charred opponent to wait a few moments please, climb down, lower the lance to the floor, get a charge out their packs, unscrew the old charge, put the new one on, put it back in the holder, remount the horse, take the lance and politely ask their opponent to back up a couple meters so they can boop them on the snoot with the new charge.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 GiToRaZor wrote:
b) screen your valuable units with cheap chaff

How do you profitably screen something that can kill your chaff for 100 points? At 20ppm rough riders are going to trade at least neutrally and probably somewhat favorably even if they're "only" wiping all your chaff off the table. And not all armies even have chaff that can stand in front of your real army and die without taking up an excessive amount of points.

Yes Leroy Arcadia is a powerful multiplier, but he is also a massive points sink and in top 1 per army.

180 points is hardly a "massive point sink", especially when you're getting three standard officers worth of orders plus the ability to give orders to things that can't normally receive them plus a change of objectives or +1 CP. Even ignoring the combat stats he compares pretty favorably to his points in normal officers and he does it from a single FOC slot. And there's still the possibility that he unlocks storm troopers as troops like the leaks suggested, adding even more value. He's going to be an auto-include in almost every army at 180 points.

And also, complaining that they have las pistols and lasrifles? Did I miss something?

Not from a balance point of view, it's just a stupid concept that these guys are carrying 3-4 different weapons and somehow managing to swap between a two-handed rifle and a lance in the middle of a charge.

1. Your Army might have access to sceening unit or not, alternatively most armies that need to get close have transports. You can just charge a transport into them or use it for blocking. Also Screening is just one option. Are you claiming not to be able to wipe 5 models off the board, even though they are so huge, they will almost always be visible? Just shoot them with 3-6 heavy bolters or one of the far more potent weapons that are by now out there. Anything from Bolters to Heavy Stubbers will take a serious toll on them. They are easier to kill than 5 Intercessors. And yes, RRs can delete smaller things, that is their job. They are crap at holding objectives and die to a wet wind gust. If you have such problems with RR, how do you even handle Eradicators or Aggressors? Their damage output per point is a lot higher and they don't even need to charge you, they just walk over shoot you from 12''.

2. 180 points is massive points sink if you play IG. I know for other factions that sounds ridicoulous, but with IG I look at the alternatives. I can probably get 3 Senior Officiers for the same price, that cover the same if not more Order potential, are easy to hide and have more area control. Everything above 100 points needs to seriously articulate it's existance in a Guard force, because everything besides tanks dies on first contact. So the only benefit is getting Stormtroopers as standard, having a bit more mobility and flexibility in Orders and his special skill. Yes he is a choice, but far from auto include. It's not like every IG force will have Tempestus and then they might prefer the separate detachment option, that makes them standard as well. He is certainly an option, but then you need to build the list around him, not have him in there as a too good to be true Succubus that just always works. I mean how do you want to include him into a 500pts force for example? Doesn't work, you might pull a Leman Russ in there, because that is hard to counter. But not a 180pts guy on a horse with some order potential and hardly any staying power/damage output. At 1500pts, he makes up more than 10% of the entire army still. that is basically an entire objective that I give up, because I would also be able to throw a unit in a Chimera at it and have another slogging along for the same price. At 2000 pts we might talk about a very likely inclusion, because that is the territory that you might as well say what gives, he will have something to do.

3. I don't think were are in a territory anymore where a model can explain the use of the weapons. How do Valkyries fire their rocket every turn if there are only two mounted. Same with Manticors. Where are the Bolt Pistols on Marines? How come Marines can shoot more than 4 rounds if they have no ammo on them? The answer is pretty simple. Because otherwise the game mechanic makes the model useless. Remember how Rough Riders where in 3rd? You could only use the lance once, and if you got charged first, you wouldn't even get the additional strength boost (to S5 back in the day) AND lose the lance on top of that. You know what that meant? That they were garbage. No one took them, hence GW decided at one point not to bother replacing them. Now they have functioning rules, but at the disadvantage of everyone be a secret Genestealer Cultist with a pocket dimension full of lances. That last part was sarcasm. If we were to nitpick every single detail, 40K would enter a state of unplayability, hence we need abstraction at some point at least. But yes those naughty Rough Riders are surely the worst offenders in the entire game of this. That last part was again sarcasm.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
The better question is how are they switching from frag to melta Lance's on the fly?

The lance head has both, and the user chooses the appropriate trigger. This probably isn’t exactly how it’s modelled, but it’s how you could do it. The secondary explosion of the untriggered charge would just add to the fun.

Alternatively, in reality there is only one charge on the end of the lance, and the choice between frag and melta effects is just a rules convenience. Yes, the player could conceivably go for melta effect on a light infantry target, when the frag effect would better reflect the real life impact of a big explodey thing capable of smashing through heavy tank armour. But why would they want to?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Advanced Eldar anti-tank weapon:
36" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D1d3+3

Primitive human anti-tank weapon:
48" Heavy 2 S10 AP-4 D1d3+3

Easy explanation:

One Codex was written by the day-shift rules team, and the other by the night-shift rules team. They don't talk except when passing each other in the hallway between shifts.

I wonder if the weekend team wrote the Imperial Knight rules then.

M.

No matter which explanation you choose, the verdict is always the same: Games Workshop is a first-rate conglomerate of toy merchants with a slapdash, amateurishly-run rules writing department.

If Black Library novels were written with the same amount of talent the codexes are, Gregor Eisenhorn's name would change to Quentin for two books, then back to Greg, before being written on his tombstone as Ludvig. But no, because it turns out for the readers of those books, things like that matter.

GW could have written better rules decades ago if it actually mattered to them. But it doesn't, so they won't.

Question - I normally have little time for eceleb promo guff, but I'm hoping that someone will have proper in-hand size comparisons of the new Guard from the box before preorders end: does GW send their captive Youtubers review copies of stuff like debut army boxes, or is it just codexes and starter boxes? And if they do, when can we expect that content to go up?

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

If Black Library novels were written with the same amount of talent the codexes are

To be honest I wouldn't put codex writing that low. It is bad, but not Black Library level of bad.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Question - I normally have little time for eceleb promo guff, but I'm hoping that someone will have proper in-hand size comparisons of the new Guard from the box before preorders end: does GW send their captive Youtubers review copies of stuff like debut army boxes, or is it just codexes and starter boxes? And if they do, when can we expect that content to go up?

Stahly from Tale of Painters helpfully does a lot of size comparisons in his (written, imagine that) reviews. I imagine he'll have a review up on Saturday when pre-orders go up, like he did with Slaves to Darkness last weekend.

https://taleofpainters.com

Tyel wrote:
Famous "remarks made before in-codex synergies are revealed", but the field ordinance batteries look kind of sad if the rumoured 70 points price tag is correct.

Indirect howitzers hiding behind a hill all the way.

 Geifer wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Question - I normally have little time for eceleb promo guff, but I'm hoping that someone will have proper in-hand size comparisons of the new Guard from the box before preorders end: does GW send their captive Youtubers review copies of stuff like debut army boxes, or is it just codexes and starter boxes? And if they do, when can we expect that content to go up?

Stahly from Tale of Painters helpfully does a lot of size comparisons in his (written, imagine that) reviews. I imagine he'll have a review up on Saturday when pre-orders go up, like he did with Slaves to Darkness last weekend.

https://taleofpainters.com

Thanks that's perfect.

 vipoid wrote:
Advanced Eldar anti-tank weapon:
36" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D1d3+3

Primitive human anti-tank weapon:
48" Heavy 2 S10 AP-4 D1d3+3


Did Eldar skip the Industrial Revolution or something?

The Eldar weapon is more elegant. And subtle. Unlike the crude and destructive human gun.

New regiments previewed

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/11/08/mix-your-favourite-regiments-in-the-new-codex-astra-militarum/

Well, at least art for one.

I don't get it, where's the new regiment?
I see a Mordian, a Tallarn, a Solar and what seems to be a Tanith?