New shooting phase

>>52982563
The fact that units with pistols can shoot in the shooting phase while locked in combat is huge, that meens that after you get assaulted by assault marines, your also gonna get fucking shot by them

Also stooked for the fact that cover now adds to your armour save rather than giving you a cover save, actually gives sm players a reason to use cover at all.

Does this meen jink will go away though? Because jinking was a cover save

>>52982563

Big change to anti-cover weapons. Though they still exist things like flamers do not ignore cover so will be made pretty bad at dealing with models in cover.

>>52982616
It's possibly they haven't fully released the weapon rules. Flamers could still ignore the armor modifier.

>>52982759
this

also im glad that heavy weapons only have a -1 to hit now if they move and shoot

was annoying as fuck that if a marine squad moved the heavy would snap, made taking anything besides a plasma cannon or grav cannon pointless since 90% of the time your marines are mobile.

File: dark souls bonfire.jpg (319KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 1280x720px

>>52982759
>Flamers could still ignore
>implying

The age of fire is over, and the age of infantry is about to begin.

>>52982856
this

one of the main problems in 40k rn is that even though infantry are supposed to make up the back bone of any army, they suck dick in 40k

why take a squad a tactical squad whne you can bring veterans?
why take at tactical squad when you can bring bikes
why take a tactical squad when you can load the field with devestators and centurians?

why bring eldar infantry when you can load the field with jetbikes and scatter lasers?


8th edition is going to see a massive boost to general infantry, especially units such as tactical marines.

>>52982759

It would be pretty annoying if the special rules for guns are not listed on their profile.

>>52982896
it could be stated in the main rules that flamers ignore cover.

thats kinda how it is in 7th anyways

>>52982610
Slugga Boyz are going to be terrifying in combat now

>>52982930
Yeah. This was first thought. As assault infantry, they might be one of the best basic troopers now. Really buffs the orks a lot and allows one to play to their strengths.

>>52982563
So if you move within 1 inch of a squad before charging them, they cannot fire overwatch at you?

File: image.jpg (55KB, 300x234px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 300x234px

>>52982930
Plasma pistols seem to be back on the menu, if they are like 10 points.

>>52982930
>>52982944

ya it looks like gw is trying to make close combat viable again

never made sense to me that a unit in melee combat could not use a pistol against their enemy, I thought that was the whole point of bring a CQC weapon anyways

something im not very excited for however is the fact that bolters will no longer be able to instant go through light armour like guardsman and eldar guardians

>>52982958
assuming overwatch works the same way as before, yes. In fact I hope they make it so if you are within 6 inches you cannot overwatch, i never understood how a unit could bring their weapons to bear if they suddenly get bonzai rushed by a bunch of dudes.


Something that is also very interesting is that it seems the rules that you cannot be within an inch of another enemy unit are gone.
from the community page on shooting:
"You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you."

it sounds like it implies there will be situations were you can move within an inch of the enemy.

So I can move and fire my heavy bolters and hit on 4s? The fuck?

>>52982984
why did they make bolters worse :(

>>52982984
I guess that's why overwatch was always hitting on 6's to represent a unit not having time to accurately level their firearm at the oncoming rush.

I kinda like the new rule and I say that as a Ork player who has had a lot of success with Flashgitz in my games. Overwatch with assault 3, random ap was so so good, often no one wanted to rush them

>>52983016
>Why didn't they give my marines 4+ saves against basic guns?

Maybe they wanted you to actually get some use out of that armor?

>>52983015
No they mean if you move in the shooting phase you can't fire.

>>52983015
ya its great.

unless you planned on having your tactical squad be stationary the entire game, it did not make sense to bring anything besides blast weapons since you would always be on the move and always be snapping

and if heavy bolters still only fire 3 shots that meens on average your only gonna hit with 1 or two bullets.

>>52983041
what? no.

>>52983039
again what do you meen by this?

>>52983024
exactly my point, overwatch is just fucking insane at times

If i bring 6 black knights, thats 12 re-rollable strength 7 ap 2 shots your gonna have to take from overwatch. I have just straight blown away entire units in overwatch before, which is fucking stupid.

>>52982958
Unless you can't be within 1" of enemy models and the phrasing basically tells you to now attempt to claim overwatch on someone who has already assaulted you.

>>52983090
but you cannot shoot people within an inch of you, so you would not be able to overwatch anways if someone is assaulting you

>>52982894
Bro just think about it: if you put your tactical marines in a forest/crater/literally any type of cover they'll +1 to their armor save. They'll have the same armor save as terminators.

>>52983102
most likely the overwatch rule overrides the shooting rule, since it is more specific

>>52983049
>again what do you meen by this?

That if they gave Bolters enough AP to ignore guard armor, the changes to AP would make it so bolters blasted through power armor, along with all those other S 4 AP 5 infantry guns.

Is that what you really want? To deny guard their armor by ruining your own?

>>52982917

That would be even more horrible.

Having a vague rule where you have to agree what weapons should and should not ignore cover at the beginning of every game would be really bad.

Deciding what was plasma and what wasn't was bad enough. "flamer" weapons would be even worst.

File: try not to cry.png (214KB, 416x440px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 416x440px

>>52982563
I doubt many people will get to use their pistols in the shooting phase coming after their charge if units can, and you can bet your ass they will, disengage at the beginning of their turn

>>52983102
Yeah, but that's exactly my point.

IF, and I say if, you still can't move within 1" of an enemy model without assaulting then the rule only kicks in DURING the assault. Any enemy outside that 1" hasn't charged yet and can be overwatched.

>>52983160
are you retarded ?

>>52983160
It's not vague. Jesus, lots of weapons in 7e have special rules that aren't shown in their basic numerical profile. There's no reason to think flamers wont still ignore cover.

>>52983128
ya they will, but at the same time the weapon profiles are set up to have AP which makes it so that it can modify armour saves. And im glad anyways because space marines are lack luster and even though they have good armour if you shoot at them 1 million times they are still going to die, they are not survivable enough and this is a good change to prevent people from fielding armies of basically just elites and specials.

>>52983132
source? also overwatch is a type of shooting attack.

>>52983136
really? what if bolters were ap 1 and guard armour was a 6+ save? bolters would not blast through power armour, you could take a 4+, but would automatically go through guardian armour.

>>52983173
I get what your saying now, but the wording of the new shooting rules makes me believe that maybe they are getting rid of the 1 inch rule.

>>52983165
exactly, it would make the player make tactical decisions because as of right now, from the rules they have released, if you fall back (disengage from combat) you cannot shoot or charge. You would have to decide to either weather the attack or retreat your units, you know, like a wargame should be.

>>52983191
this
>i dont know man, is that weapon a flame weapon?
>its called an inferno pistol and is a small flame thrower.

>>52982563
Super curious about grav weapons.

>>52983198
>source? also overwatch is a type of shooting attack.
There is no source, I'm just guessing. I know it's a shooting attack, but it's not a shooting attack youre making in your shooting phase. And when it comes to GW, specific rules override general ones.

>>52983198
inferno pistols are meltas though

>>52983181
>>52983191

The issue is if the rulebook says "flamers ignore cover". What weapons does that include?

There are so many flame based weapons in 40k. Like a sword which fluff wise shoots fire, would that be a flamer?

>>52983211
assuming overwatch even functions like it does in 7th, or even exists at all, im sure they will specify you can not ovewatch if you are in close combat

>>52983217
ya i know, the second i hit submitt i realized that. also said guardian armour instead of guard armour.

>>52983227
Okay? So they just make a flamer keyword rule and tag it on to all weapons that utilize it. It's really not that hard.
>>52983230
>specify you can not ovewatch if you are in close combat
We're not talking about units that are already in combat, we're talking about units that get charged from 1 inch away.

>>52983227
They're doing a keyword system like AoS has for warscrolls. If you have the flamer keyword, you're a flamer. If you don't, you're not.

File: 8E Weapons.jpg (35KB, 1600x205px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 1600x205px

>>52982917

The thing is, the Flamer (and other flamer-type weapons) should have a note or a keyword that indicates they are flamers (besides being called flamers because: is a burna a flamer despite not having "flamer" in the name?)

>>52983227
>>52983261

im guessing that they are introducing key words the will probably just give them the flamer key word, this may just be a short hand version of the weapon profile.

>>52983246
ok, but if you get charged from one inch away, and exactly one inch away, you are still within one inch, and cannot be shot.

>>52983280
That's not the case if the overwatch rule says "you may fire overwatch at any unit that charges you" because that rule is more specific than the general rule

>>52983198
>exactly, it would make the player make tactical decisions because as of right now, from the rules they have released, if you fall back (disengage from combat) you cannot shoot or charge. You would have to decide to either weather the attack or retreat your units, you know, like a wargame should be.

if you disengage you lose less models and leave the enemy in the open to be shot at

it can barely be considered a tactical choice

>>52982610
>Jink
Since they said smoke launchers will become a hit modifier, I'm assuming (like another anon said in another thread) that rules/abilities that gave you cover by way of obscuring you from the enemy somehow (stealth, shrouded, jink, smoke etc) will be a hit modifier.

Actual physical cover like terrain will give you a save modifier.

>>52983280

We can only hope. Good rules-writing requires a rigorously defined and limited words list, and this has always been a problem with GW's rules writing.

>>52983261
>>52983280

Or they may just make it part of cover. Weapons that auto-hit ignore cover.

>>52982563
>I for one am stoked that cover save is now an active modifier, not something you only get if your armour isnt good enough.

It should impose a penalty on the shooting unit's chance to hit, not increase the target's armour save. GW imposed the right change in a retarded way.

File: smug loli painful.png (151KB, 474x426px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 474x426px

>>52983261
>Flamer literally stating that it only automatically hits
>Flamer fanboys still claim that flamer ignores cover too

Age of fire is over guys.

>>52983334

It looks like they are separating hard cover (barriers, armour bonus) and concealment (Smoke launchers, attack penalty)

>>52983326

Assuming that the pic we got is the actual weapons listing (i.e. that there isn't a keyword like "torrent" for flamer-type weapons) that would be the easiest/most-elegant way I can think of doing it.

>>52983291
again, im sure they will specify weather or not you can overwatch in such a case, or atleast release and FAQ on the matter if people abuse it.

>>52983296
what if you are on top of an objective? what if you disengage the assaulting player gets to make some sort of consolidation move? what if you disengage you can be sweeped? there are a lot of things you are considering.

>>52983299
i like the idea of this, it looks like bikes are getting a serious nerf, which they need.

>>52983305
I honestly think more of the problem is the fact that people purposely twist the words around to get an edge. 99% of the time if you are unsure of the wording of a rule, you really only need to think about the implications and "spirit" of the game to understand what they meant.

>>52983334
I can understand why they do it though. Think about it, if you are hiding behind a wooden pallet, your enemy would just shoot right through it to kill you, they wouldnt try to aim at the bits barely not covered by it.

File: flamer.png (1KB, 340x26px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 340x26px

>>52983345
This is a flamer profile as it currently exists in 7e. Please tell me where it says "ignores cover", such that a lack of that text on the 8e profile makes you think they won't ignore cover.

>>52982930
I was wondering if hand flamers are going to count for the pistol rules. I certainly hope so.

>>52983403
that would be fucking narly

>>52983403
Salamanders with flamer pistols and thunder hammers.

>>52983402

Ignore covers comes with it being a template weapon. So that rule is shown in the profile.

>>52983198
>really? what if bolters were ap 1 and guard armour was a 6+ save? bolters would not blast through power armour, you could take a 4+

Then you've done exactly what I said would happen. Making marine armor Whittier against basic guns just so you can ignore Guardsmen armor entirely.

How about instead, we just let everyone have their basic armor, and you live with killing 2 or 3 less guardsmen every shooting phase?

>>52983448
maybe they will state that weapons that automatically hit also ignore covers, makes sense enough to me, since if its automatically hitting you it probably does not care about cover.

>>52983448
Okay, but templates aren't in 8e. Meaning they would have to make a keyword to tag weapons that previously used templates.

>>52983402
>>52983448

Ouch.

>>52983345
But if cover is now a to hit modifier, wouldn't automatically hitting ignore cover?

File: DSC03612.jpg (21KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 640x480px

So what's everyone else doing with their plasma pistols?

I'm sure chaos players have collected a sizable hull by now.

>>52983473
Cover is an armor modifier

>>52983461
your assuming that a bolter is a basic weapon, it may be that most armies weapons will be in the strength 3 region. in fact las guns may be strength three and no rapid fire or rank orders.

>>52983448

And so far we don't know if there is any extra parts to 'Automatically hits' as it's the replacement to the template.

>>52983479
Those just look awful. >>52983481

I wonder if Tau breachers will get pistols.

>>52983479
I used all of mine as counts-as Plasmaguns on a squad of Chosen.

Might change that to being actual pistols this edition though, depending

File: 793614b93782cf271286dc09c98d4365abd6107aa588bfcec63dfb985c93971e.jpg (27KB, 506x501px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 506x501px

>mfw noise weapons ignore cover

>>52983479
I still have all of them in their own section of my bits-box, I play Thousand Sons so I doubt I'll ever do anything with them.

>>52983547
They're not mine, I put the combi-plasma alongside the bolter barrel like a god damned civilized man. Also I chopped off the oversized bayonet. I didnt hate the bayonet, it simply got in the way.

>>52982930
>anon stop fucking footslogging slugga boys theyre OP!
mfw the boyz are back.

>>52983586
But they already do that?

>>52983482
>Marines use Bolters
>Sisters use Bolters
>Chaos marines use bolters
>Necrons have Gauss, on par with bolters
>Eldar have Shuriken guns, same deal
>Tau have Pulse weapons, same deal

Even Tyranids have guns on warriors that get to S 4 AP 5. It's a very basic infantry profile.

Lasguns are the exception, not the rule

GUYS, LISTEN UP!

Ignores Cover is still in, in the shape of automatically hitting. Cover has been split into two modifiers. Shits that obscures you affects hit, physical cover affects your save.

Ignores cover is in the game by ignoring the hit modifiers any ObscureCover gives you, aka: hitting automatically. Cover as a save modifier is unaffected.

>>52983618
Wonder what they'll do with guass

>>52983622
>Ignores Cover is still in, in the shape of automatically hitting. Cover has been split into two modifiers. Shits that obscures you affects hit, physical cover affects your save.
Literally not the case

>>52983601
I replaced the bayonets on mine with multi-melta barrels (from the old loyalist devastator kit) to make combi meltas.

>>52983622

Well, we don't know yet. People are declaring both as true but we don't know for sure.

File: PogChamp.jpg (27KB, 459x465px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 459x465px

>TFW Leafeblower Gard is back

>TFW Fish'O'fury is back

>TFW Rino Rush is back

>>52983631
Bonus damage (so multiple wounds) on rolls of six is my guess. Might be mortal wounds if their feeling like kicking things up a notch but somehow I doubt it.

>>52982563

> You can't shoot models closer than 1 inch to you, except with pistols.

Okay that sounds reasonable enou-

> You can't shoot units engaged in close combat at all.

So... a pistol is only useful for the very rare scenario where a model is less than 1 inch closer to you but not engaged in combat... doesn't make much sense to me.

>>52983631
I expect 2 wounds on a 6, to maintain the anti-vehicle function

>>52983643
Consider it informed guesswork. We know certain shit that gives you a cover save is a hit modifier, we know actual physical cover boosts your save and we know a previously IC weapon automatically hits. 1+1

>>52983687
You can use pistols in close combat dummy

>>52983687
right from the community page

"You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you. The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat!"

pistols are an exception.

>>52983692
>We know certain shit that gives you a cover save is a hit modifier,
It's literally the exact opposite and they've said it on two different occasions. Cover is an armor modifier. That's it.

>>52983687
Units with pistols can now shoot in the shooting phase while in combat, so long as they have pistols.

Previously, anyone locked in combat skips the shooting phase entirely. Now, those expensive plasma pistols can shot, giving you an extra edge before the enemy can even swing.

It basically fluctuates between gun-fu and melee.

>>52983635
It's literally been said in today preview.

>>52983692

Yes but we don't know the actual cover rules, just a small overview. I mean, we don't even know enough of the wording that (If this was 7e) we'd know 'Templates ignore cover'.

>>52983720
Yet they also stated that popping smoke launchers will obscure your vision and provide you with a hit modifier. And also moving, shit that previously made you snap shot, is also a hit modifier. consider Invisibility and the Culexus ability makes him wispy and also makes you snap shoot him, I'm inclined to believe ObscureCover is a hit penalty.

>>52983422
>>52983437
I really hope so. Dual hand flamer sisters doing 2d6 hits before combat world be great. Maybe even worth the 70pt price tag. Lol

>>52983647
That what I was thinking too. The -1 to hit on heavy weapons on vehicles sucks, but it's amazing for the heavy weapons in the back.

Heavy weapons getting more mobile is going to be a big game changer.

>>52983702
>>52983718
>>52983721

Alright that's good to hear. I looked the article but it explicitly said you can't shoot into engaged units.

File: cover.png (35KB, 580x340px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 580x340px

>>52983725
You need to learn how to read. Cover is cover. Shit like smoke launchers are obscuring effects. They aren't the same thing. Cover is armor. Whatever else that might give a -to hit is just shit like stealth, smoke, etc

>>52982563
>Cover has been divided into actual physical cover and obscuring things that grant penalities to hit

>You need to learn how to read. Cover is cover. Shit like smoke launchers are obscuring effects.

How does it feel to actually be retarded?

>>52983803
Meant for >>52983761

>>52983761
You're not understanding me, maybe it's my fault.

Currently, any sort of obscuring effect or physical terrain gives a blanket save called Cover. In 8th, they are separating some of these effects (as they should) from this blanket save, turning them to hit modifiers and making the rest give you a flat save modifier.

So I can surmise that flamers not longer "ignore cover" as that was a blanket statement. Now they might "ignore obscuring effects", hence the auto-hits.

Which is a nerf and a buff in a way. Templates always hit but with hit modifiers becoming a thing, they're also more useful.

>>52983617
Yes, that anon is retarded.

Who else think that pistols won't grant their extra attack anymore?

>>52983907
Maybe, though I could see some units needing extra attacks to compensate. Assault marines, for example, already get 4 'attacks' by shooting their pistol before charging in.

File: 244729_md-Dark%20Angels,%20Plasma%20Pistol,%20Power%20Weapon,%20Space%20Marines,%20Work%20In%20Progress[1].jpg (71KB, 800x786px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 800x786px

>you can fire pistols even in close combat
Finally, I was asking for this for years now. Finally those plasma pistols will get some more mileage.

>-1 to hit with heavy weapons after moving
Wondering if they let us fire heavy blast weapons after moving.

>>52983947
Blast weapons don't exist anymore so that's a yes. Plasma cannons probably do 1d3 or 1d6 wound roll on every hit

>>52982610
Did I miss something or are we just assuming you can shoot and attack in the assault phase? Wouldnt it be one or the other?

>>52983402
>>52983448

Son, you done been flamed.

>>52984017
Why would it be one or the other? It's not like this currently and nothing was said that point to that.

I'm still stunned by the option to withdraw from combat. It's going to make shoot and armies strong. Doubly so if they can afford cheap bubble wrap units.

File: 1o64kv.jpg (99KB, 500x506px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 500x506px

>No longer I2
>Can shoot in combat

>>52983947
The way I think blasts will work is that you will first make a normal to hit roll, if that hits then you do a random number of auto hits.
In that case to hit modifiers would affect the first roll.

>>52984017
I mean currently you cant shoot at all if you're locked in CC you just get a extra cc attack if you have a pistol, so its already a bonus that your units that may be weaker in cc can still use their pistols. Theres nothing really indicating that they are going to let you cc attack and shoot at the same time either. Just that you can do a shooting attack in cc now.

If they did allow it horde armies would become even more bogged down in assault, 30 Slugga attacks followed by 60 choppa attacks.

>M stat
>Shooting in CC for pistols
>rend
>etc
All of this 2nd edition stuff was awesome and now its back.
Looks like this will be an awesome edition

>>52984048
>>52984159
Ment to reply to you, not myself.

>>52983974
if i had to guess probably 1d3 strength 7 rend -3

>>52984017
what? you shoot your pistols in the shooting phase and then attack with melee weapons in the assault phase, the big change is if your pistol units are locked in combat during your shooting phase, they can still fire their pistols at the people they are locked in combat with

>>52984118
the thing about withdrawing from combat is that they havent said wether or not you can sweeping advance fleeing units, and if the charging unit will consolidate after their enemy disengages.

>>52984147
probably

>>52984164
yes, all the anti change aspies will scream about it because they can no longer bring 100 eldar jet bikes with scatter lasers that will assrape anything they look at, this is the best thing to happen to 40k in a long time

>>52984118

I am wondering how durable tanks will be against shooting in cover. If the rules for the dreadnought are anything to go by a leman russ, predator, battlewagon and other durable tanks would be insanely durable with a 2+/3+ armour save and the ability to modifying hit rolls on them via smoke.

Spamming melee units may be bad due to the ability to just leave combat but using melee units to kill key entrenched units? Maybe that is where they will exile.

>>52982610

>Sisters all have pistols
>Seraphim all have two pistols

Holy fuck.

>>52984208

But they're faggots and asspies, who gives even a single fuck about their assmadery?

Revel in their lamentations, senpai, sweet are their tears.

>>52984208
Sooo... What you're saying is what I said? If you're locked in CC currently you cant fire pistols. The change is you can now fire into CC, but no where does it say you still get your CC attacks in 8th.

In 7th you can use a grenade in CC, but thats all you get for that model, one grenade you dont get to tack on a bunch of CC attacks with it. So its not like we havent seen them make you do a trade before.

>>52983907
I'd say that is very likely. The extra attack was supposed to represent using your gun in close combat, no?

>>52983819
Where are you getting these supposed rules from?

File: image.jpg (76KB, 533x400px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 533x400px

>>52984208
If feel a disturbance in the meta, as if millions of jetbikes suddenly cried out in battleshock and were suddenly mortally wounded.

I wonder, what happens in the assault phase when you destroy a unit you're tied in combat with in the shooting phase. Do you consolidate as if you won the combat ? Or act as if you weren't tied at all and charge a different unit ?

>>52983750

INCOMING 60 MULTI MELTAS

File: impressive.png (102KB, 391x350px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 391x350px

>40k is literally being saved

>>52984288
no

right now in 7th, you cannot fire weapons period if you are locked in combat, you also cannot fire weapons into units that are locked in combat

the change in 8th is that if a model has a pistol, that model can fire its pistol during the shooting phase at the closest enemy model regardless if its locked in close combat or not

the big difference is that models like assault marines will be able to use their pistols against the models they are charging before the charge, and then after the charge during their next shooting phase, even if they are still locked in close combat

the closest model clause ensure they will be shooting the people they are locked in combat with.

>>52984289
thats my guess, now that you can use pistols even if locked in cc, the extra attack will probably go away.

>>52984322
probably consolidate would be my guess

>>52984308

Not him but Warhammer site mentions something like that.

"There are a few other factors that affect hit rolls too – smoke launchers on a vehicle, for example, have the same effect of -1 to hit."

>>52984334
its great isnt it anon? new GW is actually making changes to the game that arent meant to sell more models, but are meant to make the game more ballanced and fun for everyone, which will in the end make them more money

>>52984359

This.

>Come on! This is New Games Workshop

This, only unironically.

Great days, brothers, great days.

>>52983479

I'm bringing my unit of dual plasma pistol chosen out of the box again! We Pistoleros now!

300 conscripts with CCW and laspistol confirmed winning 8th edition

>>52984414
>Implying it wasn't already

Prole.

>>52983753

Explicitly followed by the next sentence saying pistols could.

>>52984441
Okay lets think about something. 300 pistol dual-wielding conscripts, with 2 bayonets each.

>>52984414

I wish all guard units could swap their lasguns for shotguns and laspistols.

It seems odd only veterans have the option.

>>52984414
>>52984441
Commender Chenkov pls

>>52984337
Not sure if you ment, Pistols can even fire into other CC's if so I'd re read.

In any case it never says that youll be able to shoot and get CC, we're all getting amped for it assuming things based on 7th. It dosen't say anything about cc except that you can use pistols while locked, not if theres a drawback or not. I just dont want to see a huge hope surge for it and then that not even be the case that you'll get to be a blender of choppa and dakka

>>52984475
lasgun is the standard issue weapon for basic guardsman. they have no choice of the gear they are issued.

veterans have been around long enough to loot the remains of battlefields and pick the equipment that suits their style of warfighting.

>>52984518
pistols, in 8th, and in a most technical sense, can fire into cc, but only if the unit fireing the pistol is in said cc

you still cannot shoot into cc if you are not involved in it, and only if you have pistols.

its obvious by what the community page says is that charging units can shoot the people they are in combat with during their next shooting phase if they are still in combat.

>>52984308
Just guesswork from what we've seen, like >>52984352 states. Just guessing based on trends and current info. It makes sense to me at least

>>52984567
Do they still get the extra attack from the pistol trough ?

>>52984567
Correct, but no where after does it say after shooting your units will get full on CC attacks. This is where our community is assuming.

>>52984276
Do seraphim have a cqc weapon though?

>>52984602
maybe not, i think the idea of the extra attack from pistols in 7th was that you used it as a cc weapon aswell, the tradeoff for shooting pistols while locked in cc may be sacrificing that extra attack, which is more than worth it.

>>52984611
I do not see why you would not. i think its a same assumption you could still attack with melee afterwards. Especially when you take into account that GW is obviously trying to make CC viable again.

tl;dr
it's a mix of 2nd edition and aos

>>52984567
>lasgun is the standard issue weapon for basic guardsman. they have no choice of the gear they are issued.

That is not true, some regiments are stated to use laspistols instead of lasguns.

File: seraphim-sister-superior-ikf60.jpg (16KB, 300x569px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 300x569px

you didn't cut them all off, did you, you powergaming faggot?

>>52984652
Maybe I've just been hurt too much by GW's meaty fists and assume that GeeDubs will strike me again. He just gets so mad when he drinks. He pushes my little green men into the ground and then uses my money for more booze and makes me say " I love it, I want more of it." I know he says he's changed, but my black eye is still fresh Anon

>>52984602
Probably not. Good. The extra attack made sense sometimes but other times was retarded.

>this gun make me swing my power sword faster!


>>52984611
Not really. It's the deafult, it's you that are assuming the opposite. When they told us about retreat they also said it's limitations, which make sense, as the previews are made in the style of telling us what's different in 8th from 7th.

If you go with "everything that was not explicitly stated is an assumption" then there is absolutely no way to discuss anything, as we are also assuming that the combat phase is after the shooting phase instead of between the shooting and the movement, or a thousand of other retarded things.

>>52984684
>Cutting
>On our Emperor's own holy pewter

Fucking heretic.

>>52984651

They have 2 bolt pistols. The superior can have a sword.

will gw change upgrades for sergeants so that double fists or lightning claws are cheap enough to take

File: 1477817921275.gif (352KB, 550x192px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 550x192px

>mfw when I can't tell this edition favors melee or shooting

>>52984651
No, just two pistols

To me pistol shooting in cc is a throw back to 2nd ed. Before 3rd cc S was based on weapon S. 3rd on it was model profile S (with some exceptions) no matter what you had. So to me it's like the old days but with probably a BS to hit roll. Did nuGW give a peek to some cc weapons? Was wondering if cc weapons have their on S again?

>>52984716
Well dont be so fucking retarded and talk about things that are actually fucking confirmed you faggot.

>>52984746
They are rewriting costs from the grounds up, and even if they weren't cheap they revealed that will exist "narrative points" and "competitive points". The latter would be like today, with every option accounted for, but the former would be just an average for fast narrative battles, so you can literally equip your sergeants as you wish without being punished for it. I think it's the best thing ever.

>>52984756
All units and weapons costs and stats are being reworked, and we have no idea of how combat works, so it's literally impossible to say fro now.

>>52984666
some is the keyword, overall however the majority will issue some form of a lasgun over a pistol.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/21/regimental-standard-an-obituary-for-jenkins/

this follows the story of a guardsman, its kinda funny, but main point is he is issued a helmet that is way to big for him, and it obscures his vission.

point is most guard units do not have a choice of taking anything besides the generic loadout of a lasgun and flak armour.

>>52984756
I think its trying to destroy the idea of meta. i think gw wants people to make their own armies, how they want, with the play style they like, and still stand a chance

I love melee, but i can't win any fucking games with it unless i played khorne deamons and spam fucked blood thirsters onto the field.


>>52984782
be assmad, these are safe assumptions we are making
kys

>>52983586
I need sauce.

>>52984782
You literally can't. They have confirmed so little that there is literally no way to talk about the game if you only stick to what has been confirmed.

>>52984756
Thus far, it looks like shooting is weaker, but its easier to take more shots. It also looks like it'll be easier to get into melee, but harder to stay in prolonged fights.

I could see battles ending up with melee units rushing in quickly under a hail of gunfire while not too many of them die, before carving out shooting squads as a ranged army tried to fall back and finish them.

If they balance it right, it might be really exciting

>Veterans can use their HWTs at BS3 from inside a moving Chimera
Time to slap Lascannons on all my Vets and tanks.

>>52984836
one could only imagine

>guard sets up their firing lines, heavy weapons and auto cannons
>they can feel the floor tremble, black smoke rises in the near distance
>they can hear the bellowing WAHHHHHH of orks as the crest of the horizon and enter their firing lines
>the guardsman are vigilant and remembering their training fire at the orks is successive ranks.
>while many fall, its not nearly enough, as the orks reach the first line of soldiers and brutally rip them limb from limb
>the tanks are furiously firing their payloads, desperately trying to destroy the ork transports
>the next minutes will decide the battle, will the guard be able to blast them all away? or will they fall to the bloodied makeshift weapons of the greenskins

>>52984872

>Battle sisters can fire multi-meltas at BS3 from the back of a moving multi-melta immolator

I might finally getting use some of my heavy weapon models.

>>52984872

I'd literally do this, but only if HWTs got unfucked.

With 2 plasma guns, an autocannon, and an H.Flamer feels good, mang.

>>52984973
>>52984872
dont assume that unit structure will remain the same, GW basically re worked everything from the ground up

>>52982616
>>52982759
Why do flamers ignore cover in previous editions, anyway? It's literally a stream of flammable liquid being shot out of a hose; a wall will stop it.

>>52985075

Because it's a stream of flammable liquid rather than a solid projectile. It's very good at dealing with people hiding in trenches and buildings.

>>52985075
A solid wall will, but a trench, forest, or shirty ruins won't. It'll flow through the gaps and just torch everything there.

File: Commissar.jpg (139KB, 566x762px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 566x762px

>>52984138

You're Orks, you'll never be good. This is something you're going to have to accept going forward my ugly green friend.

>>52985075
when you shoot flames into a enclosed space it fills the space anon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4tEef4m6rg

average life expectancy of a flame thrower during WWII in the pacific was 15 minutes on the field because the Japanese were that fucking terrified of them, and if they shot into any of their caves they entire place would get burned out

File: M4 croc iwo.jpg (107KB, 1024x546px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1024x546px

>>52985075
Because the liquid is not fired in a straight line, but rather a parabolic arc. One could fire over the wall and hit a target behind it if they weren't directly behind it.

Also, liquid, being liquid, could splash over a barricade and stick to something directly behind it, even if it's not a direct hit.

Flamethrowers were used as bunker-clearing weapons in the second world war. Pic related is a Sherman mounted with a flamethrower firing into a Japanese cave complex in Okinawa.

>>52985075

Even with a solid wall the splash of burning liquid would be extremely painful...

4 U

>>52985205
god damn thats fucking terrifying

>>52984795
>some is the keyword, overall however the majority will issue some form of a lasgun over a pistol.
>mfw I still longingly flip through my 4E IG codex and long for the days of taking a Regimental Doctrine that allowed me to take Warrior Weapons Special Equipment + Hardened Fighters Skills and Drills and run a Feral World Regiment with platoons of Close Combat monsters.

>>52984836
Does.... does that mean Tau Auxiliaries (Kroot mainly) might start being viable again???

>>52984836

> If they balance it right...

I don't even know where to begin with this.

>>52985205
>the people filming it talking about feeling the heat
Jesus Christ that's horrifying

>>52985380

Yeah, flame weapons are pretty damn terrifying. It's basically impossible to avoid them.

>>52985335
>we might go back to old-school tau fluff lists
Oh God, please.

>>52985357
i have to say im really optimistic, sure old GW made units great to sell them but it seems like they are really trying to turn away from that

ill give them another chance, but if they fuck up again and go back to their old ways ill never trust them again.


>>52985380
>>52985405

honestly flamers should cause a morale check

during ww2 these guys would shoot the flame into the cave, and if you someone avoiding getting burned alive, which only about 10% of people achieved, the flame would quickly eat all the oxygen in the cave and you would sufficate.

also nothing shakes your morale like watching your friend die in one of the worst ways possible.

Are they actually simplifying the rules, which drastically needs to happen, or are they just moving things around?

>>52985440
simplifying is not the right word, they are streamlining

there are a lot of mechanisms and rules in current 40k that are complex for the sake of being complex, which is boring and slows down gameplay. it seems like they are remaking 40k from the ground up and throwing away all the unecessary horseshit.

>>52985440
>>52985495

You know about the dozen of rules that impact how much a unit can move, from its unit tipe, the army it's from (because eldar jetbikes are different from other jetbikes) if it's a vehicle, what kind of vehicle, if you can run, turbo boost move at combat speed etc etc

Now every model has a movement value. You can advance for an extra 1d6 but you can shoot if you do.

Holy shit it was needed.

So a squad of 5 serafins charging in to something with two dual flamers each will unload 6d6 str 4 auto hiting shots, plus the 4 shots from normal pistols serafins, before any attacks are done? oh jeezzus. As my father once said when drunk on the floor "a woman is beating me up".

>>52984795
Concept of meta cannot disappear. Long as asymmetry exists, there will be meta game.

>>52985435
>honestly flamers should cause a morale check
I mean in real life you basically have the choice between leave where you are and die horribly. I suppose you could give the defending player the choice of taking the hits or losing all cover bonuses.

>>52985582
>choice
ok i'll tank those 3 flamer hits rather than lose all of my squad to the bolters rapid firing after this flamer

>>52985562
They do that before charging (which they could do even before), the big difference is that now, once you have charged and are stuck into combat, the enemy has to choose between retreating (and so moving away from cover, from an objective, and being at the mercy of your shooting units) or take those again the next round. Hand flamer are now awesome for forcing an anemy unit to flee or devastate it.

>>52985559
this

there are just too many things and 40k is way too bloated.

7th edition:
>well im not sure if those guys are calvary or beasts

8th edition:
>it says on their profile they move 8 inches.

>>52985440
I would call it moving things around in such a way as to make it significantly faster to play. So rather than consulting all of the rules that define what can do what they'll just put the end result of all those rules onto the dataslate so you don't have to constantly consult the rulebook.

>>52985559 is a good example where the end result is that units have a similar amount of diversity in how they can move, but now with 100% less big rulebook checking.

>>52985612
Would also, obviously, require an increase in the deadliness of flamethrowers.

they already simplified the game a lot when wound allocation became as it is now

it used to be a pain in the dick

>vehicles -1 to hit if you move
please no, I want to actually use my Guard tanks.

>>52985695
maybe you get to shoot all weapons

so chimeras actually benefit from this

File: 1448746958156.png (148KB, 240x266px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 240x266px

>>52984740
I picked up a pewter skulltaker through a friend.
It was falling to bits and glue just doesn't work in the long run.

Really makes me appreciate plastic even if it doesn't have the same weight.
God dammit I wish it'd stay together so I could paint it.

>>52985761
pinning

>>52985761
if you desperate just us jbweld

File: 1302635632899.png (154KB, 632x500px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 632x500px

So with all of this talk about hand flamers what are the odds they will do d3 hits instead of d6?

Also note that hand-flamers are currently S3 last I checked.

>>52985562
>serafins
They're called Seraphim retard.

>dual flamers
They have flamer pistols, not flamers. They'll have a different profile. Probably Str 3, D3 hits, 6" range.

>>52985817
2d3 hits would be just a bit more than with an unupgraded seraphim

that's baaaaad

>>52985335
I could see it. There might not be the same restrictions on Kroot charging, and they may even be able to assault after infiltrating. The lack of grenades in terrain doesn't hurt since they always strike first either.

Vespid will also be nice, since they'll likely end up with really high movement due to their previous fleet and 6 initiative, while also having the AP on their guns affect things with 2+ armor more significantly.

>>52985781
Alright I'm doing this today, hadn't considered it before.

>>52985695
It's a big improvement from "you only hit on a 6+ if you move a sensible distance".

Also it's only on heavy weapons. I can see vehicle weapons having weapons type changed now that it's actually relevant.

More shit changes and more shit lore progression to go with it.

>>52985817
Before they had a template like normal flamers, just with a S3. I can see them still having a d6.

>>52985817
I think they might just have their range cut to 6" instead

>>52985695
There might be special rules on the Russ to let if fire heavy weapons with no penalty but it moves slowly. Also remember the -1 is only for heavy weapons (and presumably ordinance if that is still a thing)

>>52985817
Even a d3 it's on average like 3 bolt pistol shots.

>>52985960
ordnance weapons are often if not always heavy weapons

>>52985940
There's no way they're going to give a single infantry model 2d6 shots that can shoot while locked in CC and hits automatically.

At best you'll get D3 shots each, for 2D3, average 4 automatic hits. That's if they don't make "twin hand-flamers" a single weapon profile representing both with just a flat D6 shots, giving a lower average number of hits than 2D3.

>>52985931
>butthurt aspie who is mad that he wont be able to use deathstars anymore and abuse codex's

all changes so far have been good, fuck off

>seraphim hand flamers 10 points
>seraphim inferno pistols 30 points
explain

>>52985985
when was the last time anyone on /tg/ saw a seraphim squad get into melee and do more there than just shooting the templates?

>>52985837
>, D3 hits
I'm hoping for d6. I mean they were only str3, but they used the same template.
>>52985840
Maybe if they get a point drop.

Wont know till the codex comes out.

>>52984414
PLEASE GOD BRING BACK COMMANDER CHENKOV

>>52986016
>when was the last time anyone on /tg/ saw a seraphim squad get into melee and do more there than just shooting the templates?
When was the last time anyone on /tg/ was playing 8th edition? Your argument is irrelevant.

>>52985985
2d6 S3 shots.

The strenght is important. It means on average 0,7 marines dead. It's devastating against units with low toughness and/or armor (2,3 guards dead), but not really against thought targets

>>52985753
>>52985909
true, if the Ordnance rule is gone I will be perfectly content
seriously fuck that stupid rule

>>52985695
We'll have to see how it works out. It might encourage really mobile play since moving 1 inch or 18 gets you the same penalty.

If I had to guess, Russes will have a rule where they don't count as moving, but keep the lumbering speed penalty.

>>52986064
i'm saying an edition change won't make seraphim hilariously OP

they'll be shit regardless of pistol shooting in close combat

>>52986046
>I mean they were only str3, but they used the same template.
Everything used the same template, that's part of the reason they're getting rid of templates, so they can differentiate hand-flamers, flamers and heavy flamers more like they were in 2e where they all had different templates.

2D3 automatic hits, that can be shot into melee even while you're locked, as the standard equipment for a whole squad not a single special weapon guy, is already really good.

>>52986102
>lumbering behemoth returning
one can dream

you can basically only shoot the pistols in close combat if you're defending against an enemy's charge

File: Untitled.jpg (60KB, 661x313px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 661x313px

>>52985975
Ordnance weapons are ordnance weapons. But it seems likely that they will be done away with or have a huge overhaul in 8th ed.

>>52984567
>veterans have been around long enough to loot the remains of battlefields and pick the equipment that suits their style of warfighting.
Aren't any looting guardsmen supposed to be executed by a Commissar? Vets are exempt because they've proven their value.

>>52986162
You can shoot them the turn after you charged if you're still locked in combat.

So now that Heavy Weapons are just -1BS on the move I can totally see the return of Heavy Bolters to just add more bolter fire to a squad.

I will certainly be running 5 man crusader squads with a heavy bolter+flamer in a razorback.

>>52986184
protip: you won't be

>>52986194
You're assuming all enemy units will want to fall back.

Pro tip: There are a ton of units in the game with only melee weapons who want to be in CC.

>>52986179
Depends on the regiment. Soviet style regiments might actively encourage looting to ease their supply lines.

>>52986194
>What is Chaos/Nids Versus Orkz

Not everyone plays pussyfaggot shooting armies son

HOLY SHIT ARE THEY MAKING EVEN BIGGER BADDER SPACE MARINES????????

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/30/warhammer-40000-watch-the-new-teaser-nowgw-homepage-post-1/

>>52986222
Maybe. I'm thinking even cc dedicated units will be falling back a lot, if the opposition is better at cc, to open them up for shooting.

>>52986228
>Depends on the regiment.
This needs to be hammered into the heads of every retard on this board who makes generalized sweeping assumptions about the Imperial Guard.

The operating protocols, traditions, tactics, culture, and languages of IG regiments alone is more than every possible expression of a social group or subculture that has ever existed in human history on earth.

>>52986177
I would expect Ordnance to be removed or for it to just make you count as being moved for your other weapons, so any other heavy shots are at a -1

>>52986240
by the time your shooting face rolls again there will have been 2 close combat phases if you were the one charging

a unit of slugga boys would slaughter a unit of nids in that time

>>52986272
i would say vast majority of ig regiments don't allow looting because they fight against heretics and xenos most of the time

that's heresy and dangerous

>>52986251
>wasting your dedicated CC units entire turn to stop it from doing the only thing it's meant to do so that other units can shoot the thing they could have been killing instead of targets that are too far away for your melee units to kill
8th is going to be awesome because there are going to be so many stupid fucking scrubs who try terrible anti-tactics like this and get fucking rolled.

>>52986248

>Guilliman calls for a new crusade
>gonna crusade against traitors, mutants and demons

Tau plot armor wins again.

>>52986190
Even a 5 man Tac squad with a Heavy Bolter seems quite viable now, which is awesome

>>52986300
You know you can loot your own guys right?
I think that's the general assumption. Vets get access to more IG gear, not xeno tech.

>>52986190

Heavy bolters might actually be a viable choice in they get -1 AP

>>52986282
>a unit of slugga boys would slaughter a unit of nids in that time
>he thinks slugga boys are gonna beat hormagaunts and genestealers in new edition
Think again lol

>>52986194
>>52986222
>>52986240
Remember that you'll need to actually have room to fall back. If you deploy a gunline on your table end you can't fall back because you can't place models off the table.

>>52986354
They might also finally give them more shots, or a suppression rule or something. Though I'm probably being too optimistic here.

>>52986248
pretty sure you don't pronounce the e in roboute

>>52986190
kek

>>52986279
My thoughts are reserving Ordinance for guns that can't/shouldn't move and fire, like the Earth Shaker cannon, and change things like the Battle Cannon to just being heavy.

>>52986394
you do, thats how all gw employees pronouce his name, unfortunatly

>>52986380
and not be fearless, maybe stubborn even

also table edge gunlines are so 5th edition

>>52986380
You also can't fall back if a significantly faster army wraps around you and cuts off your retreat.

Tyranid Hormagaunts are going to be fucking SICK at this considering they hinted they're going to be getting much faster, you won't be retreating from nids very often.

>>52986308
Depends on the situation m8.
I think there are going to be a lot of times that falling back is the right answer.

If it's already a losing combat, you're doubling the amount of time it will take for the opponent to win, at the cost of giving them initiative each turn.

If the combat is going to be a loss, why keep pushing meat into the grinder?

You might be able to fall back, and shoot them or charge with something else to even things up.

>>52986282
>I have never witnessed Nids v Orkz and certainly don't play either of them

What? Man warriors with just a couple rending claws maybe a Prime get to feel overpowered versus Orks in CC against all but Meganobz, who can still be torn apart with a few lucky 6's

Hell even Hormagaunts punch through the 6+ shirt save currently

>>52986411
lexicanum says and refers to an audiobook that it's /rɒb'uːt 'guːlJmæn/

>>52986452
well when they made the plastic model for him they stated that is ro-booty

i dont like it but thats just how it is.

>>52986443
I'm hoping to be able to field warriors again, with the changes to instant death. Although there's a good chance anything that instant deathed them before will still have a 3/4s chance of instana jibbing them now.

>my dominus can now use his poweraxe, his dataspike and sexy Uzi in close combat all at the same time thanks to the harness.
Feelsgood.

>>52986314
Kek'd

File: ironwithinbro.jpg (141KB, 894x894px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 894x894px

>>52986527
>Warpsmith's hitting some poor marine chumps with the double tap melta/flamer harness before swinging his axe and blasting away with his pistol
>Along Maulerfiends bounding into combat who will NEVER BE IMMOBILIZED EVER AGAIN

Walkers basically becoming monsters is the tightest shit ever

>tfw Helbrutes could be not shit

>>52986627

Are dreadnought great again? Cuz I'm sitting on like 20 useless boxnoughts from all the eBay winnings.

File: Still+makes+him+a+retarded+faggot+_38362147e55f20271229d40f8aca7d71.jpg (19KB, 297x200px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 297x200px

>>52986627
>dreadnoughts can be killed with lasguns now

>>52986673
Not sure if great, but objectively not shit compared to monstrous creatures now since stats are shared

>>52986673
Do it. Field and all boxnaught list.

>>52986693
Yeah if you have like 1000 points worth of lasguns per dreadnought.

>>52986673
>>52986693
Dreads are supposedly toughness 7, with 8 wounds so i hope you Guardsmen brought something more dangerous than a flash-light

>>52986693
>Lasguns

More like heavy bolters, if they have the expected -1 armor they will likely chew through light armor.

Though speaking of lasguns being able to hurt more stuff, I wonder if "first rank fire, second rank fire" will be more useful now.

Is it just me ,but attack/shot numbers are the most important stat this edition?

Things look super lethal so survival is a lost cause. Anything can kill anything so quality is no longer a necessity.

>>52986826
Some weapons deal multiple wounds from one "wound".

>>52986826
Except it is, because things will have more wounds to offset that.

A Lascannon squad will kill a dreadnought easily, while you'll be wasting twice as many points trying to get enough lasguns close enough to plink it to death

>>52986826
We need to see more weapon stats first.
Are plasma guns still rapid fire?
Will Missile launchers be useful?
How will large blast guns be stated?
What about indirect fire artillery?

I have so many questions.

Hell we don't even know how the charging mechanics work. Do you just walk up to the enemy in the movement phase? Overwatch?

File: Dante The Angel.jpg (12KB, 262x193px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 262x193px

>>52985817

>I've got a blood angel Sargent with a inferno pistol and a hand flamer

>>52986826
>>52987030
>Tfw the most dangerous thing for a vehicle is Mortal wounds

That shit ignores invulns so even Daemon engines are in trouble

>>52987030
>>52986826
>>52987114

what is really important is that fact that you can only loose as many models as wounds conferred in 8th.

If i shoot a lascannon at a squad of orks i can only kill 1 ork even if i deal 6 damage, because lascannos only confer up to 1 wound.

however if i shoot a lascannon at a walker, I can remove up to 6 wounds from it

this is a very powerful and sleek system, it gives the rules designers a lot of control over how many models a single weapon can take out, your gonna have to start being really tactical about which weapons you bring to bear against which groups.

>>52987152
im guessing not many things will cause mortal wounds, just like how not many things cause instant death.

>>52985761
>>52985781

breh easier way is to use tissue paper on the join to act as grip for the super glue.

Saves you having to drill until you go crazy from it.

>>52987114

Oh god, my vets getting Rocket Launchers*. Finally I can complete the 40k-Only War synergy.


*: Never ever ever use the m-word!

>>52987152
Yeah, but the only thing we've seen so far for that is Smite, which only going to do 2 on average. It'll take 4 turns for a pay per to burn down a dreadnought within 18", and more than likely the dreadnought can pulp them first in return

>>52985582
>>52985435
>honestly flamers should cause a morale check
In Bolt Action, flamethrowers deal d6 hits with a +2 pen value, same as that from a light howitzer. If the target survives this, they take 1+D6 pin markers, each of which reduces their leadership value by 1. AFTER this, they take a leadership check(which works the same as 40k) and if they fail, the entire unit is wiped.

This even works on tanks. Naturally, the flamethrower ignores cover and buildings

>>52987152
>>52987186
Agreed, your probably looking at Imperial Knight chain swords and special character bullshit to bring many mortal wounds into play. At that point a platoon of guard with ML, AC, LC or a 10 man devastator/havoc squad with the same will do the job cheaper or for the same points.

>>52987284
Technically, rockets are missiles.

Wait, who can Dual Wield Pistols?

File: 1489361679721.jpg (84KB, 500x541px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 500x541px

>>52987434

no its because they have the word 'Miss' in them and superstitious folk around here don't like to call them that because of it.

File: sherman_flamethrower.jpg (57KB, 640x392px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 640x392px

>>52987317
IIRC flamethrowers in BA have +3 pen. But yeah, they're devastating as shit if you can get them in range. They make decent anti-tank weapons in a pinch, since +3 pen and hitting the top armor as opposed to the front gives them a good shot at lighter armor.

BA is significantly more leadership-focused than most tabletop games out there. Most games have a cursory nod to it.

Paralleling this to 40k- I'm really curious as to how leadership will work. The trend here seems to be simplifying it. I'd be ok with an AoS type leadership system with battleshock, or even with how Warmachine/Hordes did it- removing it altogether since it wasn't super relevant. I doubt that GW will make the leadership system for 8th edition complex enough to account for weapon types affecting morale checks differently though.

>>52984809
Lana Rain. Do your own research with that, anon. Many treasures will come to light.

I for one can't wait to shoot someone to shreds with Flechette blasters from 1' away.

What do you think will happen to Canticles and Imperatives? Stay as they are? Somehow folded to psychic powers? And what about orders?

>>52984809
Lana rain - pink pirate cosplay. 76min10sec mark.

>>52987525
They've already confirmed they're basically using battleshock, but the important thing is how all the army-wide SRs change that. Marines will definitely have some form of ATSKNF, Guard have Commissars, Orks have Mob Rule, Nids have Synapse, so none of these armies are going to be doing battleshock the standard vanilla way.

>>52982563
It would be interesting if they made Tau Pulse Blasters count as pistols, and made Breachers actually useful as a pseudo-CC unit.

>>52987664
i hope the bs7 bullshit goes away

>>52984320
THE PIC IS SO WRONG DOES NOT COMPUTE WITH THE QUOTE GIGAFAG.
THIS IS THE "I DONT REMEMBER EVER OWNING A DROID" PIC


REEEEEEEE

>x will be viable because y
>a won't be viable because b
point costs

>>52987970
That would be pretty neat. It'd certainly make me happy that I modeled my Breacher team Shas'ui with double pulse pistols

>>52983721
Wait, so that means units locked in combat can for against other enemies in close combat? I read it as pistols being the only weapon that other units outside of combat can fire into locked units

>>52987972
Bs is a roll now. Probably not gonna be anything higher than 2+

File: gdfg.jpg (18KB, 550x49px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 550x49px

>>52982563

why do they write shit like this? its so fucking cringe *cough *chokes on dick *cough

>>52988099
>being this much of a faggot

>>52988099
typical hip reddit talk you see everywhere on the internet in articles

>>52988099
Oh my God they're just trying to be funny, give them a break, Jesus.

>>52988099
>ugh cringe
Looks like old IRC talk, really.

>>52985987
Wrong the deletion of initiative and and just picking who attacks next is worse. Templates I could take or leave. I have a few packs of them but it isn't a big lose. The rule about characters is better. Movement values are better. Vehicles and monstrous creatures being more similar is better mechanically but I am sure it will feel weird. Not everyone who dislikes some if the rule changes is a net listing waac fag. Really we won't know how much we like it till all the rules are out. I am hopeful but cautious because AoS was very shitty on release. Still don't care for it much. It seems like they learned with it though and are making a larger effort to make it better.

>>52988099
Sounds like 90's/early 00's internet, i don't see the problem

>>52988557
who said that we would just pick and choose who goes next?

who said that the assault rules in AOS would be in 40k?

ill tell you whats even bigger bullshit, planning out all my mooves carefully in a game of 40k so that i could assault some eldar, only to be cut down before I get a turn to attack because the rule makers were pants on head retarded when they made the eldar rules

Initiative is fucking stupid, if im charging you i should attack first because i made better tactical decisions and was able to move my units into place, And i should not be penalized for that.

>>52982610
I doubt they'll keep the +1 atk for pistol and CCW though. I think this change makes pistol-armed troops more useful b/c they'll be able to get off more shots off, but not just blatantly better since they'll still have about the same damage potential in melee

>>52988723
the will i think. because most imperial units have a pistol+rifle so they would get the benefit of shooting in close combat without losing attacks because they had none in the first place

>>52988648
Not true there are times when a charge isn't a sound option. And I wish people would stop bringing up Eldest, Tau, and Summoning spam. These are mistakes made with the codexes. There were somethings that needed to be tweaked in the core rules sure, but the biggest issues with the game were because of the power levels of different codexes. Releasing all the rules for the different factions at the same time will cut that down but you'd be silly to think every book after that will fit in along an even curve of power. Planning ahead with your unites is what makes the game fun so I don't see a problem with that. If you were playing miss, orks, chaos space marines before the legion rules, and some guard lists you were gonna have a bad time against those armies any ways. I can understand your frustration with eldar with them having so many great options and no real negatives. Honestly I like the fantasy armor additions to 40k that and movement vales is something I've wanted for a while.

>>52987970
Please let my kroots have a purpose

File: heavy breathing cat.jpg (74KB, 500x496px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 500x496px

>>52988003
>dual hand flamers are actually 2d6 S3 but cost 70 points
>people make a full 10 squad of those guys for 700 points
>my guardsmen shoot them to death in 2 turns with my superior firing range

>>52988099
>I don't like fun

>>52987457
sternguard
cypher

>>52987457
Atm, pretty much every space marine sergeant can swap his bolter for a plasma pistol and dual wield bolt+plasma

>>52989109
>Not swapping for 2 plasma pistols

Pleb

New cover and AP rules seem more like they give more to marines and remove more from the likes of orks.

>>52990043
but the new initiative and pistol rules make orks seem really really scary

>>52988898
The real reply is
>points
>2/3 of the game modes have no points
>game mode with points gets shit on

>>52990043
Consider that now, Orks in Heavy or Mega armor are more likely to keep their save and not die.

Heavy bolter into 'Ardboyz? Still got a 5+. Lascannon into Meganobz? 2+ down to 5+ , and still a chance at only taking 1 wound from the thing.

Ads in to that the fact they get to strike first if they charge and that they have a lot of assault transports, and Orks are looking great

>>52990204
Makes me wonder if nobs are going to get another wound.

>>52987284
>>52987434
>>52987498
What are you gaks gabbin about? They're called Tread Fethers ya moron.

File: Veteran Albreid.png (46KB, 201x281px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 201x281px

Time to make a squad of company vets all decked out with plasma pistols and grav pistols.

>>52990451
Might be. Meganobz especially might. I could see them bumping them up to 3 and 4 in order to account for heavier weapons

>>52987152
Bring on those GK nemesis smite force armies

>>52990707
>Grav
Now I'm curious about the fate of grave weapons and salvo. Wounding on armor is still easy enough but what AP and special rules?

>>52991029
I think Rapid fire is going to be more variable and replace Salvo. I imagine Grav might end up tones down in the number of shots, basically being more of a way to steadily peel off wounds than anything.

Not sure how they'll differentiate Plasmaguns and Gravguns though

>>52990945
>termies get two wounds.
>gits thinking they are gonna get anything better than space marines.

Laughing grots.exe

>>52991392
One gets hot and the other does other shit

>>52991392
I can see plasma doing more than 1 damage while grav do only 1 in excange for bigger rend and more shots.

>>52983974
Plasma DAngels are back boyos

>>52986248

I have a bad feeling about this. IIRC, every time the Imperium tries something like this without the Emperor doing it, it goes tits up in a catastrophic way.

>>52992735
well row boat is on the job this time, and after the horus heresy and his crusade to see his father on terra, i think he is well aware of the forces against him

>>52993080

I'm not necessarily thinking the forces against him in terms of Chaos or whatever, I'm thinking that the science just goes wrong. I remember reading a lore piece in an old White Dwarf where there was some clandestine experiment into... cloning Space Marines I think? Or doing some kind of experimentation on the Space Marine template anyway, and the whole thing went tits up in pretty much every conceivable way: mutations, complete genetic failures, some went completely feral or mad or both; and of course the entire research facility's staff didn't survive either.

>>52993703
well row boat is shaping up to basically be the emperor, and if cawl can bring back row boat from death, maybe they can make even better space marines.

>>52993758

Eh, I dunno, I'm not buying it. Even the Emperor lost 9 Legions to Chaos. Trust me on this, Rowboat's project will go tits up somehow.

>>52994103
i guess maybe if he makes even better super soldiers, maybe the space marines will get assmad they are no longer the best.