So we are getting close, and there are numerous reports of hardcover rulebook sightings at various spots over the globe. Here is what the birds are singing into our ears:
Firstly, the rule-set has hundreds of minor changes all over the place. It is a different game so we will all need to really take the time to re-read every sentence carefully as many, many subtle changes have been made all over the place. It isn't a case of the same game with just a handful of major changes.
Secondly, the leaked PDF must have been quite early as there are many, many changes from it.
Here is a set of some of the larger individual items we've been hearing:
- BS of 6 and higher made it in.
- Wound allocation by model is in (meaning special models may be lost early)
- Torrent of Fire is gone
- Intervening models (friend or foe) grant a 4+ cover save to the target unit
- There is no longer any consolidating into new squads in assault (only charging can do this)
- Only engaged models may fight (like now), but casualties can be pulled from anywhere
- Powerfists only get the +1 attack if you have a pair (like lightingclaws)
- Monstrous creatures do fire 2 weapons per turn
- Vehicle LoS for sponsons and various weapons are now defined through a ton of charts
- Obscured and skimmers moving fast now grants a cover save vs damage (and it is a cover save so chew on that for the full implications)
- Assault Attacks versus vehicles with no WS are resolved against rear armor
- Vehicle Squadron rules are very different
- Vehicle Ramming is in (and skimmers get a dodge save to avoid it against non-skimmers)
~Thats just scratching the surface here folks. As I've said earlier, many, many, many things have been revised throughout the entire ruleset, so expect to adjust you tactics. Its a new game. Caveat Emptor's apply until we get a look at the actual book in person.
105 comments:
This sounds better and better all the time. Really 3e and 4e were such huge steps away from the fun of 2e that it seems like 5e is taking us back to the Golden Years.
There is no longer any consolidating into new squads in assault (only charging can do this)
What they should have done is if one unit wipes another unit out, then roll a D3 and the scatter dice and that's how far the victorious unit gets moved, and if it so happens that they get moved into another enemy unit then they enter combat with the new enemy unit.
I have always thought the consolidate should be random, but maybe that's just me.
Also, as for assaults hitting rear armor automatically for non WS vehicles is BS.
So that means any vehicle formation is now useless as any rank and file troop can just walk up to the front armor of the vehicle and blow it up easy.
I would not have had an issue with this if it were a special ability, but now every retard troop type has a change to blow up most things in the game relatively easy.
Oh, except the Land Raider and the Monolith, both of which are going to be neigh-unstoppable.
I strongly suspect that the first test-drive of the new rules I play in will be aerial jousting/ramming. Dethkoptas, jetbikes, landspeeders - which will prevail?
I wonder if those rules will work effectively with the rules for aircraft in Apocalypse? Time to build some dozer blades for my two fighta-bommerz...
What is 'Torrent of Fire?'
I'm betting that some dedicated/crazy melee units will be able to consolidate into enemies. I mean, do Death Company members even know what "consolidate" means? Probably not.
I also really hope that S4 isn't the defensives weapon limit, or my heavy bolters will weep instead of shoot.
@purpletrex: "So that means any vehicle formation is now useless as any rank and file troop can just walk up to the front armor of the vehicle and blow it up easy."
What? do you even read what you type? Show me "rank and file troops" that are Str 5. Str 4 + d6 = glance at best and from what we've heard, a glance will immobilize at best. If those Str 4 guys have meltabombs or whatever, then yes they should be able to blow up a vehicle. Way to over react.
It means that properly arranging your vehicles against shooting units doesn't confer the same result against assaulting units.
How do you explain a tank that did not move, with its rear armour to the table edge or any impassable terrain, being hit on its rear armour?
Plus tank formations are never supposed to move without their infantry support, precisely to stop these kinds of charges from happening in the first place (or to punish those who try afterwards).
Ok, I saw the early PDF and I still can't work out how this new system of being wounded from shooting works.
Do I really need to spend several minutes extra every time my squad is shot just to roll every save separately?
Does anyone know?
(And what, Sister Jane can't pick up Sister Glen's Meltagun?
Brother Michael can't pick up Brother Gabriel’s Flamer?
Guardsman Red-shirt... etc)
Um....Skimmer Moving Fast grants COVER save with all the "implications" ? I don't know about you, but I can think of quite a few weapons that ignore cover save and GW better not try telling me, that (for example) the Land Speeder can't escape a heavyflamer burst ... :-/
Or am I getting it wrong ?
It is a considerable change going from 4th to 5th, from 3rd to 4th was hardly any change at all.
Assaulting Tanks
Ok, first I'm a guard player (before I get any personal comments) but I can see this makes sense. Infantry attacking a tank would swarm all over it, attack the hatches, jam things in the tracks... they wouldn't just sit there hammering at the front armour. So it makes sense, especially given the weakest point on ANY tank is the hatch. Difficult to shoot, but an assault veteran with a krak grenade might fancy his chances. If a normal assault has the swirling melee of combat, then it makes sense there would be some motion in assaulting a vehicle. You merely leave the troops at the front for convenience.
And parking with the rear armour to the table edge is a trick I have frequently used, but let's be honest if this is a representation of a battlefield how many infantry assaulting a tank would be like "woah corporal, I know the rear armour is weaker, but you see that line there... we can't cross that. Have to try against the side armour instead. I suppose you could try leaning over... someone hold him steady!" Yeah, right!
Skimmer Cover Saves
A speeder not getting a save against a flamer... that makes sense to me. It's one thing to have a skimmer pilot dodge a line of heavy bolter fire (which would probably have tracers) or a single missile that's incoming from far away, but if he's in range of a heavy flamer, it means he's flying pretty close to the firer, and a massive wide gout of flame opening up at close range with little or no warning is going to be a much harder thing to dodge. So to me it makes sense that flamer attacks wouldn't allow a cover save.
Purpletrex
And finally, I love the idea of a Land Raider or Monolith being NEIGH-unstoppable. I had this image appear in my head of a Space Marine Commander poking his head out the hatch shouting "Hi-Ho Silver, awaaaaaay!" and the land raider rearing up before speeding off whinnying... Made me chuckle :o)
What Ian said :)
Tanks have always been vulnerable to infantry. Slight change of tactics is all that is needed. Just don't let them get to you!
Perhaps sponson weapons will see more use now. I welcome these changes and I'm a Guard player too.
-Maza
Not to stir to the poostorm again but models grant the 4+ cover save?
Was it models in other units or in the same unit? Or will we just have to wait?
@ maza
your aware sponsons are useless in this edition correct? S4 and under means basically no current sponson weps for sm and some other races can fire if they moved.
Why would you not move a tank? I know I would so it woudn't be auto hit, and now with the new rear armor hit rules, your asking to die giving an opponent an auto hit.
good thing about the rear armor thou, is sure fists lose one attack, but hitting on rear armor with a s8 fist minimum means chances are you will kill tanks easily with one (chain fists only needed vs av14)
I like the assaulting lowest armour value. If I am assaulting, I can shoot in windows are better yet, under the tank.
I wish sponson weapons could fire like the machine spirit, need 5 or 6's to hit or something, but at least you could hit.
sounds good to me, but i'm still praying for some ultra-secret new rule for sponson weapons or the like, or my tanks will devolve to immobile weapon mounts with a covering infantry squad against chargers. :/
The reasoning for the rear armor is that apparently as others have mentioned, at assault ranges, infantry have every opportunity to go for the vulnerable vision-slits, engine intakes, tracks, and other such soft spots which is represented by using the rear armor value.
While the heavy flamer will be dangerous to speeders at very close range, the particular examples I'm been slobbering over are Crack-shot Fire Dragon and Dark Reaper exarchs... ouch...
I personally like where the rules are going, it fits into how I imagine 40K to really be like.
The simpler codex form is great. Warhammer fantasy used to have the same problems. Armies were made of several Uber-characters and one or two unbeatable mega-units of troops. They nurfed wizards in combat, gave characters less magic items, etc. and it made everything better.
The same thing is happening with 40K, and I say bring it on.
With the issue of tanks and their reduced shooting; I've always seen 40K tanks much like WWII tanks. Large and crude, they move forward but would need to come to a full stop to fire. Even tau tanks, floating, but needing to slow down and aim, otherwise they could flip themselves. Only eldar tanks do I think of as operating like a modern battle tanks, moving pretty quickly, pulling off graceful turns and firing weapons all at the same time (but nothing too ultra-futuristic).
"Forget the glories of the future. There is no advancements. The wonderous technologies of the past are forgotten, never to be remembered. For there is only war."
heh now all those space marine vet sgt with power swords can come back out,
Honestly the combat system is gonna be so shooty dominated its silly to thing about it
Well, you don't HAVE to take sponsons for e.g. Predators according to the wording of the codex, right? It would be pretty sweet if vehicles can shoot the models assaulting it with pintle-mount/sponson weapons, kind of like stand and shoot in Fantasy, but for vehicles, I suppose.
It'll be mostly shooting? Unlike war since the invention of gunpowder, which has mostly been mostly melee. Sorry, I'm really just kidding around with you.
I think they're doing a good job at encouraging both shooting at melee. A lot of units have assault weapons or pistols (so most units can shoot and charge) a lot of units have to have multi attack leaders. The new rules about attacking vehicles will get a lot more people to fight them up close.
The only thing is that the no consolidating into a new combat will force people to fight smart, or they'll get butchered.
On another note, looks like eldar skimmers will still rock out with their socks out! Farseers can allow them to get a re-roll failed cover saves. Although they'll have to shoot less. Good bye tri-falcon, hello 6 serpents and 3 fireprisms.
The no consolidating into a new unit sounds a bit rough for the new Daemons. 3/4 of their army seems to be close combat. Half shows up on the first round to get shot at by the opponents (potentially) whole army, without being able to assault in. What's left can assault on round 2 (if they're close enough), while some more things pop in, which wont be able to do anything till round 3. Oh, and since those models that came in on round one are so good in hand to hand and wiped out those 10 guardsmen, they get to stand there and get shot at by more of them, and their tanks.
Oh well, it makes my necrons more resilient.
Alright i hate to stir up bad feelings but my local GW staffers confirmed that defensive weapons ARE STR 4 and below. However i could see them allowing heavy bolters and other such sponson weapons to fire, but at a reduced BS. IE you move 6" it's -1 to BS.... however that's just my opinion....
I have heard you can run after deepstriking, so move so others have to fire through their own guys to hit you and problem solved. Assault, but make sure the entire force cannot hit you. More tactics. Imagine hitting the flank of the gun line, keep wiping out groups, while the rest can only fire at you and give you a 4+ cover. Sounds fair to me.
With the combat system becoming shooty and troop dominant why wont i just stop playing my marines and go with my guard until they figure out that Guard will now be cheese ....tasty cheddar i will lub :)
Well, there's a lot of strange and new things coming with 5th, and for the most part, I like them. I've been hearing a lot of screaming from a good portion of players, say 'oh no, my army is broked!', and stuff like that... admittedly, until this past week I was doing the same thing, cause I LOVE to whine about all things.
But after talking to some of the BoLS guys, and doing some reading of my own, I'm pretty excited about 5th edition over all. Here's what I would consider some big things that will change, for a positive:
1. Run. Run will totally add another aspect to the game - movement tactics. Sure, you can get closer to the enemy faster, but is that always good? Will I actually be able to roll high enough to make it into that cover?
2. Cover rules. The new cover rules are going to be sweet, albeit a little confusing at first. The new BGB does have a pretty good section in it though, about determining majority armor save, including the ability to negate certain models from firing. I also think that these new terrain rules will encourage the building of larger, more dynamic, better looking tables and terrain features.
3. Vehicle equalization. Vehicles aren't uber-gay anymore if you spam them. Falcons and other eldar stuff, as well as armored company aren't going to be as stupidly good as they are in 4th. The new damage table really helps as well. And it also creates more longevity for more well-armored tanks and stuff.
4. Assault revamp. The Combat Resolution is going to mean some cool things. It means that the 180 ork horde won't always win. It means that conscripts are shitty like they should be. It'll be fun, and it'll be bloody.
5. Template weapons. I'm pretty glad about the tons of scattering, I think, that while it may make some things less competitive, it'll make the game more fun on the whole.
6. New Missions. The new missions are the only thing in 5th I'm not sure about.. some of them are really unbalanced. Guard, for example, should always loose killpoint missions, while necrons and bigbugs should always win.
As far as things I'm worried about in 5th, there are really only a couple things:
1. Eldar vehicle cruise missiles. Aka ramming for a strength 15 attack. Gay.
2. Grenades. Will everybody get them? What affects will they have against charging various unit types?
3. Cover rules. Are they too complicated?
Just thought I'd throw these thigns out there, see what ya'll had to say.
I truly despair of the direction GW is going in, I really do... very few of these changes make sense to me. They just seem... pointless. Some are pointless and bad. How is this a return to 2nd ed golden age. Bears no resemblance to those rules as far as I can tell.
Think I'll be sticking with my house rules gaming club, thank you.
Rear armor is also the armor value of a tanks underside. Thats where some grenades could be rolled with ease.
If you run at a tank with a grenade or even just some shots, all you have to do (especially if it isn't moving) is duck down and aim the bolter under the hood. That will really mess up the ol' cogs.
Scoring Units Clarification:
There's been much ado about what will be a "scoring unit" in 5th edition 40K. I've had a GW manager who looked at the 5th edition rule book confirm that scoring units are any units that come from the TROOPS selection in a Codex. This means that ANY selection made as a TROOPS choice is a scoring unit. Specifically and contrary to some recent rumors, scoring units are not "infantry only", it's just that they are only units that are chosen to fill TROOPS selections in the Force Organization chart of an army list.
For example, if you take the Master of the Ravenwing in a Dark Angels Army, any Ravenwing Bike squads that are taken as TROOPS selections in the Force Org. chart will count as scoring units, while those taken as FAST ATTACK choices will not.
I just put my Imperial Guard army up for sale about 15 minutes ago.
S4 defensive weapons and auto-hitting rear armor sealed the deal. I already lose most of my tanks to CC attacks from MC's, powerfists, or grenades. Having them hit rear armor no matter what the facing just made it that much worse.
I will be eagerly awaiting 6th Edition.
While assaulting units auto-hit rear armor makes sense from a pure realism standpoint if one were inclined to do so (if troops are equipped with actual grenades and whatnot, not just punching or hacking it with a Choppa for instance) It further makes non-skimmer vehicles simply a non-option for 5th Ed.
Yes the new damage table helps, yes cover saves are great, however they lose most of their value as mobile platforms (their primary purpose for existing over Infantry alternatives) and tracked vehicles already hideous vulnerability to CC attacks just became a hell of a lot worse for no good reason.
Is GW trying to not sell another predator or Chimera kit ever again? It really does seem like they are going out of their way to make such vehicles pointless.
@anon 12:38
Okay, now you've moved into the realm of stupid.
We can bitch and moan about rumors and tidbits, but to just give up before you know everything that's going on? Well at least someone else might have more fun with your stuff
@ Anon 1:17
Why? My Imperial Guard army is made primarily of Chimera's with a couple leman russ tanks. My chimera's went from mobile firebases to static pillboxes. Sure its harder for a lascannon or something to kill it, but I lost most to powerfists or hive tyrants or something anyway. I've played two games with the stores preview copy, and found it to be absolutely horrendous for the army. It went from being a semi-mobile guard army to a static gunline IG army. much more of my firepower was negated due to the ubiquitous 4+ cover, and movement was harshly penalized if I wanted to try and do any shooting.
Run was nice, but IG units not utilizing their HW's doesn't help much either. Even with the new damage table and vehicle cover saves, it wasn't hard for a Chaos and an Ork army to table me by turn 5.
You really should think a bit more before you just blow up on someone with an uninformed rant.
For people who are primarily 40K players rather than model collectors or hobbyists, rules changes over the years can have a profound impact on the Games Workshop hobby.
I am primarily a hobbyist who's in it mostly for the fun of the models themselves, yet I have to admit that I do care and am affected by rules changes. Having been in the hobby since Rogue Trader, I've seen some changes that were really fun for some of my armies and other changes that were not fun or enjoyable.
However, the great models and the joy of converting, painting and collecting them remains a constant. Is the fun of certain models when it comes to gaming with them affected by rules changes for better or worse with each revision of the rule book or related Codex? Absolutely, but it's a constant part of the hobby that can't be controlled. Here's how I've come to deal with it.
For those who are looking forward to 5th edition rules changes and for those who are dreading them, all I can say is that these changes have always been part of the hobby. If they make you distraught then you likely do need a new hobby. If you are immersed in your model collection and have a diverse collection, then this will mitigate the impact of negative changes and allow you to continue to enjoy the hobby till the pendulum swings back more the direction you'd like.
I believe I have the experience to go on here. I have several armies done and more in boxes waiting (don't most of us!), but my first and best loved army is Chaos Marines. When I started out in Rogue Trader they were tons of fun to play with in games and the models really got my imagination going. The first Chaos Marine Codex under 2nd Edition was terrific. Then there was the colorless, flavorless Chaos Codex of 3rd Edition, but I still managed to enjoy my favorite army in games in spite of it. They still played well and the models were still great in spite of the lack of colorful rules. Then their next Codex was full of color and limitless options making them more exciting than ever, only to be followed by the 2007 Chaos Codex which is largely stripped of color and character. It's a rollercoaster ride no matter what army one plays as one's favorite Codex is revised multiple times over the years. Yet, regardless of these "good" and "bad" Codex changes, Chaos Marines will always be my favorite army. The models and modeling possibilities remain exciting and I can instill them with character even when a particular Codex version may not.
So for those who can't bear the rules revisions every few years, this game may not be for you. Perhaps board game strategy games (e.g., Advanced Squad Leader) would be better for you, because rules changes in Warhammer have always been part of the hobby and you can't avoid them. If you love the hobby you learn to live with them, even when some changes are annoying to you. Unfortunately, GW can't write a custom version of the rule book to suit every gamer every time.
Do I have criticisms of some revisions each time the rules change? Sure I do. I love the hobby and having played strategy games for years before coming to GW games I have opinions about what works well and what doesn't. GW isn't a charity and they shouldn't expect people to buy products they don't like. If the new rules truly displease you, it's your right not to buy it. As consumer, we all "vote" with our money and how we spend it. But even if some things are disliked by customers that doesn't mean GW isn't trying to produce a good product. All companies make mistakes and miscalculations even when trying hard to please. Remember the disaster called "New Coke"?
Sometimes GW succeeds better than others when revising the rules, but I love my GW models and the hobby too much to dump the hobby every time the rules are changed in a way that doesn't exactly suit me. Would I bail out if I thought the company wasn't trying to please or made a really inferior product? Sure I would. In spite of the fact that some rules revisions and Codex revisions have been inferior to others, I don't believe that on the whole GW is producing a bad product. As a whole package, 40K as a game and the models for it and the hobby support from GW are the best they've ever been. So adapt or die, or in this case, adapt or play Warhammer Fantasy till the 40K rules swing back in a direction you like.
That's blowing up in a rant?
Well I can see you're set, but what about not firing all your weapons? Sure it sucks that the hull mount on a Chimera can't shoot on the move, but you still have your turret and your passenger's lasguns.
Geez, just how small is the defensive weapon category? Lasgun, Hurricane bolter, Twin-linked shuriken catapult. Storm bolters and heavy stubbers go in that new category. um... is that it?
@ Brassscorpion
My concern is actually as a hobbiest who enjoys the game. I spend a lot of time and effort and money on my Imperial Guard army. I spent almost 18 months assembling and painting 3000pts of IG. Now the army really doesn't function anymore. It was never a hugely competitive army, but it was fun and it would work on occaision. Now it simply doesn't. I don't have enough to really jig it up enough to make a workable army that I would *want* to play, and I do not have the time to go into another army right now due to work.
It was either try and stick to 4th Ed while everyone else transitions to 5th, or sell it and stick to fantasy.
@ Anon 12:38
What's the link? I need some more Chimeras for my Guard Horde. I'm looking forward to using combined arms tactics to make the Guard the army that wins in the "shooting is great, taking objectives with Troops is great" environment.
@brassscorpion
I also heard that it Troop units that weren't vehicles (ie. AV) or Swarms (so no Ripper scorers). Is that true too?
Or maybe you can wait for the new IG codex coming quite soon that will msot likely address it all and make the army playable in V ed.? Sigh, people.
Since I have a massive Imperial Guard army (you can see pictures of it at the link on my screen name) amongst others, I hope it's not as bad for the IG in 5th edition as stated by some above. I do have a friend who is a long-time hobbyist and former GW employee of 10 years who is also concerned about what 5th edition changes mean for the IG army he was building. In fact, he's now working on his Tau army partly because of that. However, till we've all had a chance to extensively test the new 5th edition rules and read them fully in depth and try different army combinations with them, I'm trying to reserve judgment.
GW is relatively responsive to their customers these days and I think that if the new rules are a "mistake" that negatively impacts the hobby and GW's sales, we'll see some changes fairly quickly, just like Coca Cola switching "New Coke" back to "Classic" before it was too late to keep their customers from switching permanently to another product.
In spite of my own reservations, I'm still looking forward to giving 5th edition a test drive with my Chaos Marines, my Imperial Guard and my other armies as well. Since most of my games the past two years have been Cities of Death or Apocalypse games, I'm hoping the new fun attitude for 40K as a whole will mitigate any cumbersome or troublesome 5th edition rules change and that most changes will be fun. We'll all know shortly. I'm planning to pick up my Gamer's Edition just after midnight in the first few seconds of July 12.
@ excitedveteran
>> "I also heard that it Troop units that weren't vehicles (ie. AV) or Swarms (so no Ripper scorers). Is that true too?"
Well, I haven't seen the rule book for myself yet so I'm going to be careful not to say I'm sure about all aspects of this. We still don't have a sample copy of the new rule book at my local Battle Bunker for customers to look at yet.
However, the always helpful manager there told me this weekend that after seeking clarification for himself that the stipulation is that scoring units occupy a TROOPS slot on the Force Org. chart for your army list. He did not mention any exclusions for units with AV value, so I don't know about that. The example I stated above about bike squads being scoring units if they occupy a TROOPS slot hopefully makes what little information I have that seems trustworthy at this point fairly clear, but since bikes don't have an AV value, it doesn't answer your specific question.
I'll be at my Battle Bunker again on Monday. If I get more info, I'll gladly share it here soon.
@Hal'jin
You mean that would be coming out in 12-15 months? Remember we have to get in smurfs, space puppies, and DE before IG. If I were in that position I'd rather just start something different than spend a year playing with something that wasn't fun.
@Brass Scorpion
There are some things you'd think GW would pick up on before they let a product out the door. removing tanks from mobile platforms to stationary ones and taking everything a step backwards (as well as removing much of the traditional role of the tank) should have been one of them. That said, I agree with most everything else you said.
I can't help but notice that there is a lot of negative feeling about - but it all (mostly) seems to be coming from this guy "anonymous" - who so far is selling his IG army, only playing with club house rules, never buying from GW again, waiting for 6th ed to come out,etc, and probably for a finale sucking on a boltgun.
For gods sake at least have the courage to stick your name to a post, if you want a good whine at least have the courage of your convictions and GROW A PAIR.
We have all had a good moan at every rule change and game revision GW have brought in since Rogue Trader was out but the real point is - we love the game, in all its forms, what we hate is change - don't fear it, embrace it, change is good, all hail Tzeentch...
Well, reading through all of this I come to conclude that hardly anything's certain at all and it was a wise call to put my Orkz on hold.
I have a 100 Boyz footslogging army and I am curious how they will perform with the new rules. While some things sound just great (run, rear armor on assault), others could deeply impact the way Orkz are to be played (think about wound allocation and Nobz with powerclaws).
Either way, I agree with BrassScorpion. No matter how the new rules are going to affect my Orkz, they will always be the most terrific looking (read: insane) gang in town. :-D
Yes, please keep selling armies. I've collected thousands of points of Blood Angels for pennies on the dollar.
I'm thinking of starting a Guard army... hopfully some Eldar players will also sell their collections off before they see the new book and reconsider.
@Docrailgun
You are assuming people will be selling them *really* cheap. I see people buy overpriced or marginally at best discounted stuff on Ebay all the time. Hell I see currently available boxed sets go for higher than GW retail. A sucker is born every minute.
That said, as someone who has 7 40k armies, I'm on the fence with 5th Ed. My Eldar won't care much either way, my Chaos and my currently transitioning orks will like 5th Ed very much, as will my Witch Hunters. Not quite sure about Necrons yet however.
My Guard and Tau armies aren't going to like 5th Ed much at all however, so I can definitely see where some of the other posters are coming from. 5th Ed is an absolute kick in the balls for most IG armies, especially vehicle heavy ones, and generally takes IG from "Mediocre/Ok" to just flat out bad. My Tau will also suffer as Crisis suits can't hide anymore and half my tanks firepower is now unusable on the move, not to mention more cover saves everywhere.
also, @wezaa-
Don't expect people to identify themselves. There is no need to if they don't wish to, especially if all you are going to do is ram it down their throats (which is exactly what it sounds like you want to do by demanding they identify themselves) and it also sounds extremely...naive given the nature of the internet.
Maybe I need to get around the net more, but I don't see people complain about going anonymous quite as much as here.
AS such, to be obstinate, never using a name again :P
bah, three minutes too late
@ anon who sold his guard.
LOL Guard is looking to be the best army of the new rules at this rate.
The heart of a guard army is its infantry, without the ability to consolodate into new units i can stack up assaulters and kill them with my firing lines...blast weapon hits are all hits ....if that applies to all templates my God my bassy and russ are gonna have a field day.
As I've said before I'm a guard player with years of experience. I play the game because I ENJOY the game. I have some friends who are, shall we say, a little more competitive, and they can't understand how I can play guard. Don't get me wrong, I don't always lose... the fact that I don't have one of these beardy armies that steam rollers everything makes victory all the sweeter. But I will admit I haven't quite stuck to the guard ethos, and the new edition will probably change this. Allow me to explain.
I've often despaired of guard troops choices. In a small game, by the time you get an infantry platoon or two in, you've spent about 400 points on compulsory units, more if you kit them up to any degree. In a 1000 point game, that leaves very little for other, more fun, items. So for a long while I've been minimising my troops expenditure by using doctrines. Specifically Grenadiers. I get to use storm troopers as troops. This gives me 2 troops choices, for 200 points. Hell, if I really wanted to scrimp I could make 2 units of 5 and just spend 100 points. This allowed plenty of points for other spending (including kitting up my heavy weapon squads with Carapace Armour - 4+ save guardsmen surprise most people, especially those with ap5 weapons - watch that smirk disappear) Sure, storm troopers can't take heavy weapons, but I never liked the restriction that put on my troops manoeuvrability anyway, and I'd always played with specific heavy weapon platoons/squads. It's quite effective, but small units of elite soldiery is not really what the Imperial Guard is all about, by the fluff. The new edition however, will change my way of playing completely.
Anything in a troops choice counts as scoring. So that means most people will have a maximum of 6 scoring units. Well a guard infantry platoon has a command squad and up to 5 squads. That's 6 choices for 1 troops choice straight away. Meaning that I could potentially outweigh an enemy 6:1 in scoring units, having a massive 36 scoring units running around the board. Sure, they die easy, but with that sheer amount of them... and I do believe that last sentence sums up the fluff about the Imperial Guard perfectly.
Bring on the objectives. This is gonna be a challenge (as always) but personally I'm looking forward to it.
Let me say NO to "Always attack Rear AV". OK, some people keep saying that infantry will swarm over tanks, yes, BUT I'm sure NOT everyone will made it to the rear side, NOT every attacks can bounce to the fat ass of a tank.
That's why I always propose a hit distribution that after each hits, roll the dice for each hits and on a certain roll it'll be made on Rear AV (probably +1 when assaulting from sides), it'll surely make things more fair. Come on, tanks are now static pillboxes and you want to kill them that easily at close range? Fine, so armour is pratically useless now.
Its not about the infantry raching the rear so much as rolling grenades underneath the tank's soft underbelly, shooting the crew through vision slits, fouling the tracks and dropping grenades through hatches.
Still, I don't think every hitting attack will reach those places so fine and well. Especially on Grenade's part, it can still stuck on the main hull after rolling that.
So a hit distributing will be needed IMO.
I'm stoked about the new rules.
What I like at this time is the fact that consolidation does not allow a unit to contact a new unit and casualties can be taken from anywhere in the unit that is fighting, not just the two inch kill zone. Fighters are still only the two inch kill zone but the dead guys can come from the back if you choose. Torrent of close assault is gone, so at least my one, lone power fisted veteran sergeant can attack back unless you kill everyone in the squad outright.
How many of us have been on the recieving end of a close combat where a unit and/or model with a higher initiative kills everything in the kill zone and you don't get any attack back? That is over...I may still lose the unit but at least I'll get to attack back in many cases.
How many of us have lost a combat and our units stay put while the winner consolidates into one or two new units? That's over... now units can gang up on attackers and support other units without fear of being wiped off the board because of higher initiative combined with good weapons. (Think winged Hive tyrant vs multiple marine squads supporting each other)
I am not sure about the vehicle rules.
Ramming seems... fun. It's a last ditch effort instead of being just a moble wall. Orks will use "ramshackle" and it will be hilarious.
The terrain rules seem fair. I like well built terrain that someone has put some effort into. Terrain and tables are part of the hobby too. I have often wondered why in the open catagory of tournements that well built terrain, not diorama, could be built. Imagine a lava flow table that glowed from lighting underneath.
I am not sure about line of site. I like the idea of higher models have a better view and the new laser pointer (obviously just a gimmick) will help. Flat tables will be boring IMHO.
oops... gotta go... kid and wife...
later,
Tim Weston
>>"You are assuming people will be selling them *really* cheap. I see people buy overpriced or marginally at best discounted stuff on Ebay all the time. Hell I see currently available boxed sets go for higher than GW retail. A sucker is born every minute."
Wow, is that true. While most "used" items do go for less than retail, I constantly see things on eBay go for near retail and occasionally for more than list retail price. It's very odd because if something goes up to within 20% of the list price, I never bid on it because at that point I'd just as soon buy it at my local GW store and know what I'm getting or buy it from a reputable mail order vendor, many of whom have a 20% discount off the list price. I don't understand why anyone bids on current range items from "some guy" on eBay at near or more than list price. I guess some Warhammer players are clueless as to what the prices are. A simple glance at the GW website would save them a lot of money. LOL.
Funny, I also have concerns about the new rules, but after spending several months in 2006 painting my massive IG army and getting tons of nice comments on how it looks (see pictures at link on my screen name if you like), I don't think I'll be selling it any time soon. In fact, I'm adding a tank company to it soon and I've already added a couple Baneblades as soon as that model was released. I just bought a couple more models for my Daemon army along with a few things for my son from GW Direct so I could get the limited edition Space Marine model currently being offered and I sold and traded a bunch of stuff at this past weekend's GW Battle Bunker customer flea market (Bizarre Bazaar) and am putting everything I got back into 40K. The rules may change, but I'm more into the hobby than ever!
Just to be clear, I'd like to point out my reservations over 5th have nothing to do with the effects it might have on my armies. too late for that. I collect Chaos, Eldar, Blood Angels and Necrons. Thanks to Jervis bleeping Johnson Chaos have lost all their variety, Eldar have been MEQ'd, Blood Angels have been castrated and Necrons have gotten the best deal by just being ignored. I was planning to game in my local GW soon to meet some other players and expand my gaming club. But add the missed opportunity of 5th edition to the list of disappointments and I'm extremely reluctant to pay out £30 for the priviledge of playing in store with boring rules
Why is there a hang up about using the rear armour value of a vehicle involved in a an assault? It is an abstract representation of what has been said already. Fouling tracks, rolling grenades, shooting in view ports ect...
You are looking at Power fists and a few other goodies penetrating unless it is a transport.It is a decent rule that didn't need anything special created to make it work.
I am not sure I beleive the thing about not being able to consolidate into other units at all. What I had heard was that you would not be able to consolidate into existing assaults. So we'll have to see about that. That would actually be a really far reaching change.
SIEG HEIL
I wonder how this will affect tank with the 'siege armour' rule, from cityfight. Maybe they could use that rule for close combat too. That could make some people happy.
Tim: yeah, I understand that if you were the one being charged and in desperate desire to strike some blows back, you welcome it, but! Have you stopped to realize, that the tactics of clearing the small killzone, preferably including the hidden fist was THE TACTIC most assault armies relied on (in fact, HAD to rely on) ?
One hidden fist or PW sergeant now essentially has 9 ablative wound around him and there is nothing the assaulter can do about that now
@ wezaa
"For gods sake at least have the courage to stick your name to a post, if you want a good whine at least have the courage of your convictions and GROW A PAIR."
Yeah, because "WEZAA" tells me exactly who you are. I know so many people named WEZAA. Heck I even clicked your profile. Nothing. Sounds like someone needs to follow his own advice and grow a pair of something or other.
A.N. Mous
@anon 1:52
As the rule goes now I get no attacks if you kill all the models in the kill zone. This is ______ ?(insert word)
New rule... as long as the attacker does not kill the entire squad I get something instead of nothing. Seems _____. (insert word)
And so... heavy close assualt armies get toned down and I get a chance to damage a unit instead of the unit wiping me out and they go unscathed... and this is... fair, realistic, balanced, rational, proportional, designed correctly, within the fluff, right on the money, right on time, a great rule, well within standards...
It is coming, it is what it is, and there is not a thing that can be done about it except, perhaps, kling to the PAST with different versions or house rules.
In the grim darkness of the FUTURE there is only war!
such is life,
Tim Weston
@ disappointedvet (I am sure you mean small animal doctor!)
"Thanks to Jervis bleeping Johnson Chaos have..."
Nothing to do with Jervis, who is a God Among Men. It was Gav that killed Chaos.
Now, I am sure the cockapoo in exam room 2 needs his temperature taken, disappointedvet.
"In the grim darkness of the FUTURE there is only war!"
Well stated brother!
So how exactly does removing wounds work? Can you loose a guy with a heavy weapon on the first wound a squad takes? It seems like that would hurt gaurd armies too since a squad of guardsmen without a heavy weapon can't take down much of anything.
Actually, I think this rule makes guard better then other armies; guard heavy weapons are in teams! kill one guy and the other can take over. At least, that's how the rules sound to me.
My god people - wait until you see the rule book. And none of these rules make any army unplayable - they just change the tactics you use.
I will be using my weapon destroyed vypers as eldar torpedoes- move fast and ram!
Not being able to consolidate into another assault is going to be wack, good-bye assault armies!
Okay, I've seen it one to many times. If you want to justify the attacks on the rear of a tank please do not go with "vision slits" or "shooting under it" or my favorite "a grenade down the hatch". It might be just a pet peeve of mine but I'm sick of people that have no knowledge of tanks making these statements. vision slits have not exited on tanks since people said "hey I'll just shoot in the vision slit" they use periscopes. let me show you
/|
||
||
|/
this is so people can NOT shot you while looking out and is represented on 40k tanks. Also if you try and roll something under a tank from in front of it, the tank is gonna run you over for being that dumb or shoot you with a co ax gun.As for grenades down the hatch, oddly has also been though of, hence tank hatches having a way to lock them from the inside, you know cause you lock doors you want to stay closed. /end rant.
But as for the rule it self, I see no point other then when people park it to the rear of the table, tracks are shown by weaker side armor. I think it was a poor choice when they seem to be tossing abstract rules like area terrain and choosing casualties to add another abstract rule.
Diet_evil
As long as I can tie up mobs of gaunts and orks and necrons with my Sentinel squadrons, we're good.
@fritz
I don't think the days of assault armies are gone... I think what you will see is heavy hitting units that wipe out other units in two turns and take some damage instead of wiping out a unitin one turn and having the domino effect into other units with no casualties.
later,
Tim Weston
Um, before you attack people about their explanations, you might want to look at a 40K tank... they have vision slits! Eldar use a glass bubble dome. I think only Tau use enclosed tanks.
If you read the fluff, marines, 'stealers, etc. commonly rip off tank hatches. So anything with str. 4 could do it... hmmm... str. 4, Av 10?!?
Or, how did they spike WWII artillery? A 2-3 inch grenade goes down an 88mm (or 120mm) barrel pretty easy.
Locked hatches, periscopes and tank movement. Melta or plasma gun will burn thru a hatch, periscopes same as above. Jam a lasgun into a tread to throw a track. These troopers aren't just beating a tank with their fists. It is all an abstract representation.
Have you fixed a thrown track? Not fun and it can even happen with a thick tree limb catching a drive wheel. So as for IG, Eldar, SM or other army finding a way to assault a tank they would know the tricks before attempting. We have applied some real world but fact is this is a game and those are the rules. Play it out and see both sides to alter tactics.
No, it'll just be the defenders who need to change his tactics thanks to the less mobile and "fire on the move" tanks. Asault armies are now kinds "point, click and destroy" against the tanks now since little armour has Rear AV more than 10.
And even though they're abstract representations, it won't always hit on the spot they want to, SO that's why I raised the hit allocation rolls but no one responded to that.
Oh yeah, it's BrianGeneral here.
A shame they don't introduced a rule to use grenades vs Monstrous Creatures as they made the rule for hitting rear armour of vehicles.
If you could put a grenade to a dreadnought it could also damage a carnifex (that it's even less agile).
first of all, let me begin by saying that I am an IG player and I have no problems with the new assault on rear armor rule. I always thought it was unrealistic how tanks could roll up unsupported and still survive in a combat. 40k is heavily influenced by WWII imo, and regular infantry could easily take out a tank in an assault. tanks are no longer effective when mobile, so put a squad or two beside it to protect it. if the squads are two inches apart, the tank can still shoot without giving the enemy a caver save, and it cannot be attacked.
(btw- does anyone know how the 4+ cs for shooting through units works with respect to tanks, walkers, monstrous creatures and elevated terrain)
also, since all blasts hit with no partials, alot of plastic is fallin' to battlecannons.
-eddtheman
If Games Workshop doesn't change the rules from time to time, people would lose interest in the hobby...
Over the years, I've watched a whole series of games come and go... they all had "perfect" rulesets (and many claimed to be better then warhammer)...
but they didn't change (for good or bad), and people lost interest in them. Their rulebooks are collecting dust in secondhand stores.
No set of rules is going to make every player happy. It's impossible. Every time Games Workshop does change the rules (and the codex books as well), they make one set of players happy, and piss off some others.
Brasscorpion hit it on the head with the whole cycle of chaos marines.... good codex, crappy codex, good codex, crappy codex. Gee, I'd almost think Games Workshop planned it out that way...
I agree the new chaos codex is boring and colorless, but that's not going to make me stop playing chaos. They taketh and giveth. I have more invulnerable saves then ever, and tons of free equipment (krak & frag as standard equipment, etc)
LOL. And anyways, in a couple years, there'll be a new codex.
And that's they way I look at the main rulebook as well. If it sucks, there will be a new one out in a few more years.
Tank shocking has become more and more dangerous on the other hand non? While the death or glory attack hits the front of the tank the next turn the infantry that survived can easily swamp the tank and take it out with krak grenades or the like.
Hmmm, krak grenades have become more useful for my Guard army, maybe I'll swap out my tanks for more walkers and heavy weapon platoons instead, less mechanized and more rifle.
"And even though they're abstract representations, it won't always hit on the spot they want to"
That's why we throw the dice.
Using rear armor value can just increase the odds. There's still room for failure. More allocation tables just make the game more cumbersome.
@ Ian .....LOLZ!!! Good humor. Rearing, whinnying Land Raiders for the win.
@ excitedveteran
They are changing the swarms rule to make it clear that swarms are never scoring units... which I think makes sense.
I will be annoyed too if STR 5 and 6 weapons can't fire while moving along with the one primary weapon, but that hardly makes tanks pointless. Chimeras lose a heavy bolter and Russes usually just fire their battle cannon... predators will be a lot weaker though. Let's not overreact until we see the finished version.
I really like the idea of removing close combat casualties from anywhere in the squad... it will make it way less fiddly to remove a few specific models surrounded on all sides with weapons sticking out... less knocking models over is a good thing. Elite close combat squads will probably lose a few more guys than they used to, and it also makes a slow initiative but large squad (like orks) way more viable in close combat.
The no consolidating into a close combat makes me concerend, but again we can wait and see.
Hopefully grenades will work against monstrous creatures in a limited fasshoin, but I have to think that Carnifexes are more agile than a Dread.
Cheers.
I started playing back in 2nd and loved all the crazy rules involved. Warp spiders used the heavy flamer template and everyone under it had to make an initiative roll or else die pretty much. There were crazy charts to roll on for everything.
When 3rd came out Eldar became really bland. They made warp spiders (my favorite unit) have rapid fire guns which meant they had to hold still for maximum effect. I hated that change so much I effectively quit the game for a few years. I kept my models because I knew that the next edition would change things again.
I got back in a while ago and love the 4th ed book. Eldar got a good book and I have effectively switched to a jetbike army.
The game kind of flows like that. It cracks me up when people sell their armies based on secondhand rumors. Until the 5th ed rulebook is in my hands I'm not going to believe anything.
Of course I still love reading the rumors. Keep it up BoLS!
@bigbob
"My Tau will also suffer as Crisis suits can't hide anymore"
I don't follow; please explain.
Jon
@jon23516
There will no longer be area terrain, so as long as you can see the crisis suits, even behind terrain, they can be shot at. Granted they get a cover save, but it still means they can be killed when behind terrain.
>> "There will no longer be area terrain..."
Not for ANY kind of terrain?
GW has recognized for years that wooded and jungle type terrain are best represented by an area "template" with few or removeable trees on it so that it's practical to actually move and place models through and within what is supposed to be woods, forest or jungle within the game. Have you ever tried to play a game where you have to have an actual model tree for everywhere in the woods there is supposed to be a tree? Trust me, you won't like that at all. It's not practical for placing models or determining LOS in a clean, practical manner.
If someone who has actually read and clearly understands how wooded terrain is handled in 5th edition 40K would like to explain it here, I'm sure it would be appreciated by more than a few people.
@JungleGoddess
Everything is true LoS in 5th ed. If you can see it, you can shoot it. Abstract templates (that area terrain used) no longer function to block LoS, they will merely provide a cover save unless you can physically block LoS completely.
>> "Everything is true LoS in 5th ed. If you can see it, you can shoot it. Abstract templates (that area terrain used) no longer function to block LoS, they will merely provide a cover save unless you can physically block LoS completely."
That would mean that for woods to provide cover, there would have to be a tree for every model to stand behind, the size of the tree trunks will make a big difference, and the angle the firer is at relative to each tree and the models behind it will make a huge difference as well. That would be ridiculous, impractical and a huge waste of time. I know because in my earliest days in 40K we tried that and it didn't work. In response to the problem, friends and I worked out years ago that woods needed to be represented by a template because worrying about exact placement of individual trees was not practical at all and we figured this out before GW did so with the "area terrain" rules.
I can't wait to watch others trying to come up with a way to represent woods and jungle other than with an area template because they feel they must obey the letter of the rule book. It should be very amusing (unless you're playing in those games).
@JungleGoddess
You can still use abstract terrain, however it will only provide a cover save, it will *not* block LoS.
A simple green cloth representing woods can still do so, it just won't block LoS. Units inside or on the other side still get a cover save, but they can be shot at through any terrain now unless it the model is physically hidden.
>> "You can still use abstract terrain, however it will only provide a cover save, it will *not* block LoS."
That's the rational approach I was expecting after years of games development experience from GW, but I don't think the others responding to my question really understood what I was after, so thanks for posting because you answered my question with exactly the information I was after.
Hopefully my local game shop will have a sample copy soon so I can check out some of this stuff myself. Thanks again.
new rule about consolidate will make assault more planned. You just need to attack at the same time several shooty targets if you don't want to get shoot after winig combat. I think there will be more CSM demon bombs 5 summoned lesser deamons cost 65pts, they can assault after deep striking so they will tie up shooter while elite assaulters will be en route from one combat to another
@ Diet_evil "I've seen it one to many times. If you want to justify the attacks on the rear of a tank please do not go with "vision slits" or "shooting under it" or my favorite "a grenade down the hatch". It might be just a pet peeve of mine but I'm sick of people that have no knowledge of tanks making these statements."
Rhino (and all Rhino based tanks) have 2 windows with wipers on front armour. Granade can't be thrown down the hach but your's power fist pal can open it even if it is locked from inside. You can't imagine how many damage can cause something which explode between turret and hull, or inside demolisher cannon barell. You can imagine tousands of posibilities if you actually watch models carefuly.
My favorite new rule is raming sadly I don't like tanks at all so I wouldn't be able to use it with my CSMs. Nevertheless I think it will bring lots and lots of laugh to the battlefield
nah i just like the way these new rules sound like... just give em 40 days or so and then all of us will give em a try, buy new GW stuff win, lose, buy some more new GW stuff and all of us in the end will be happy...
I started playing as they released third ed. From all of the friends that I play with that actually played second ed, the response to third ed. is that its faster and better in most aspects.
When GW developed third ed, they moved from what was more like a role-playing game about heroes ans their armies to a game of armies facing off in minor battles.
In fourth ed, they fixed some of the last glitches. Easier wound allocation and less problems with whom and how models fight in close combat.
The thing is that the same thing that is happening now have happened when 4ed. was released. People where afraid of the changes being made and what would become of their armies.
As I see it they made many good and game enhancing choices, a game became faster and less complicated. The down side was the game now lacked some of the fine finesses and in some aspects felt like being "dumbed-down".
The best solution I have to the lack of detailed rules is to incorporate them the same way they did with the "extra" set of rules in the back of the third ed. rule book. I think this is the way to go, mandatory basic rules and a extra set of voluntary detailed rules that gives depth to the game if you have the time and want to tailor your game to certain types of missions or sceneries.
I for one welcome changes as the rules are far from perfect and I am certain that the new rules will bring more balance to the game. So will sixth ed.
And I am certain that IG and Tau will do OK. Tanks are going to rock in fifth ed. and Tau are a strong army if you play them right, with or without the jet pack rules.
The only thing I dislike is the move to wards "less complicated" codexes where you have less options and ability to tailor your HQ, as it tends to give more armies that look a like.
just to let you peeps know i have been able to read through the actual 40k rulebook. the changes are there that the leaked rules talk about.but what people dont understand is that in 5th edition book it describes how they work and gives you examples in form of a lot! of charts. also squads are harder to kill. extra wounds that a squad takes can be assigned to a guy that gets killed from say ap weapon. how cover saves are figured out are. if the majority of the squad firing can see the target squad they get no cover saves. if less then half the squad can see the squad there firing at. that squad get a cover save. i could go on and on. i will add the new space marine and ork starter set will be in there along with the new drop pods and a new speacial character for orks. you do get termis and dred and guys . they also have older armour helmets on some like grey knights and also older knee pads were there straighter. new captain looks awsome. all i can say is that people are misjudgeing how they are changing the rules. the pdf is way different then actual book.
That Tanks get hit in rear in close combat is realistic!!!!!!!!
During the war between Israel and the Libanon in 2006 44 Merkava ("Chariot") a well armed battel tank got dameged and/or destroyed.
And don't forget that the Merkava is the BEST armored battel tank on the field.
To to fight it the Hammas used on the one hand russian high tec anti tank weapons and on the other hand granades and molotow coktails!
I am not kidding a bottel with bruning gas can take out batteltanks if you get close enough to throw it!!!!
Because tanks overheat very easy in the desert climate they have to retreat and open their hatches or the crew will get cooked.
That worked in WW I and WW II and even today. American battel tanks like the Abrams are very voulnerabel to thoes tactics because their high pressuer gas turbine can explode and kill the crew in the inside when they overheat.
To summerise it: Soldiers always found ways and always will find to destroy even the best armoed vihicels when they got close enough
So even in the 41st millenium a tank is a weapon not to use in close combat!!!
Sorry for the bad english 08/15
one thing everybody seems to be overlooking is that with the new rules for scoring units, huge infantry-based armies will have an advantage and a lot of units will be moving twice (running in the shooting phase). won't this mean some extremely long games? how long does it take to move 180 orks twice?
...good God. People will complain about the pettiest things!
Confirmed changes:
"True LoS" No longer will Size Catagory's be used in determining if a unit can see another. This could possible essentially get rid of the Size catagorys (no more wasting time on debating whether the building your unit is in is a Size 1, 2, or 3 building or hill. Just pull out some sort of Laser pointer, such as the new LoS Marker light being introduced. and see if your models sight line can see the target unit at all.... or for fun, use the Markerlight to show targeting for airstrikes and orbital bombardments XD
I have had a chance to see the new morale rules... and if you play a horde army, you are screwed. The change is drastic if you expect to have the large volume low cost troops - orcs, nids, Dark Eldar the way I play them. The only modifier is based on number of wounds. Hence, if you cause 3 wounds and your opponent causes 5, you lost the assault and your roll is at minus 2. With low cost models you expect to take more casualties in an assault, that is why they are so low cost. It would have been more fair if they put in positive modifiers (i.e. you took more casualties, but outnumber your opponent etc). This change will definitely aid the high point cost models. Back to Nurgle for me.
woah.. with every word i read i am getting more amused about the new rules. I've been playing guards for years now and for me it's death proof that guards will be powered up twice.
Firstly new coverrules are awesome for my ceap tanks. Every tank's ass wil be covered by infantry and get 4+ save throw! Moreover I'll kill any sort of skimmer with hellhounds with ease.. GW, i love you guys.
Best of all, big blasts gonna rock much more cause they always hit.. no more 4+ needed.. :)
AND what's about close combat?
Did i get this right? No consolidation? WOW, damn it! That means you could beat up some cheap guardsman with your special forces just to get ripped away by my lascans? nice one!
Ah.. what's about increasing my coversave by choosing the right doctrine? That means a stupid guardsman that has been killed by every damn DS5 weapon in the past, will be tough as hell cuz it receives a 3+ coversave in the open battlefield as long as some guards ar standing in front?
come on that's awesome..
:D
Right -ho well currently i have what is technically known as a "green power armour horde of coolness"(Dark Angels) its a technical term you can look it up
and you know what i have NO tanks and in a 2'000 pt game i squeeze in roughly 50 - 60 models including my Ginger Azrael, now the lose to win ratio isnt great but wtf i couldnt care less i love seeing that many painted space marines on a table with banners etc etc
anyhew my rambling point that i now make is that maybe its a good thing if tanks change from the horribly unfair things they are now i mean have any of you read Hanz Geurdians panzer tactics and in it he mentions that an unsupported armour thrust is just so much scrap metal so there.
maybe its time to put more power in the hands of your humble (i use the term loosley cause what my lads have done sometime defy's explination (ie my assault chaplin with meltabombs and assault seargent with pfist pawning a tank company yes the IG player's face was hilarious) and well quite frankly ive played V ed and you know what i love it ohh so much.
I,m just starting a 40k army so good thing I didn't buy the old rule book !!!!!!!
I'm just starting a 40k army so good thing I didn't buy the old rule book !!!!!!!
"American battel tanks like the Abrams are very voulnerabel to thoes tactics because their high pressuer gas turbine can explode and kill the crew in the inside when they overheat."
You are sadly deluded, or at least misinformed.
Ramming rules for tanks? So now as soon as a main weapon is disabled everyone can tie on their heabdands and shout 1000 lives for the Emperor and way they go, ramming their way to victory. I wonder at the ram fests which could erupt between the Tau and the Eldar.
All grist for the rumor mill, I am not selling anything or getting any pre whines in until I have a codex in hand.
"American battel tanks like the Abrams are very voulnerabel to thoes tactics because their high pressuer gas turbine can explode and kill the crew in the inside when they overheat."
You are sadly deluded, or at least misinformed.
Ramming rules for tanks? So now as soon as a main weapon is disabled everyone can tie on their heabdands and shout 1000 lives for the Emperor and way they go, ramming their way to victory. I wonder at the ram fests which could erupt between the Tau and the Eldar.
All grist for the rumor mill, I am not selling anything or getting any pre whines in until I have a codex in hand.
Post a Comment