New Warhammer 40,000: Large Models

File: New40kLargeModelsMorkanautProfile-1[1].jpg (56KB, 1000x175px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1000x175px

>>53109782

Basically nothing we didn't know before, but it's nice to see that the Morkanaut now has an impressive statline.

>>53109800
So guess everybody will get worse at what they are good when they loose wounds. So a Riptide should get BS 5+ on his last wounds.

But how will this effect versatile models like dreadnoughts? Will the you get worse everywhere?

I support everything being Toughness based so I can truly start fielding my 30 deathmarks

>>53109782
>>53109800
But they didn't answer the real question: Will Nobz in a Naut actually be good?

>>53109828
The big ones will, I don't think dreadnoughts count. They're only eight wounds.

>>53109828
From what we have seen Dreadnought don't degrade as they don't have * on their profile. It's just for things that were Superheavy, Gargantuans or just shy of it.

Also the Morkanaut is the supposed shooty one, so it degrades what he's worse at. I expect the Gorkanaut to instead become worse at shooting.

>>53109863
Well yes, but expect a total rewrite of Sniper and Hunter from hyperspace.

>>53109782
>The biggest Tyranid monsters now have over a dozen wounds, where Imperial Knights have over 20!
what monsters are they talking about you think? Trygons and Mawlocs? How many wound do you think Carnifexes will have?

>means that high-power weapons that can take chunks of wounds off at a time (lascannons, powerfists, battle cannons, etc)
Battlecannons and powerfists confirmed D6 wounds

Overall I like what I read here.

>>53109936
Powerfist/chainfist makes D3/D6 for sure, but I guess the battlecannon will be effective because of its 2D6 hits instead.

File: IMG_0010.jpg (287KB, 1600x1071px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1600x1071px

>>53109782
>The biggest Tyranid monsters now have over a dozen wounds, where Imperial Knights have over 20!
>the biggest tyranid monster is the goddamn Hierophant
>xbox huge Hierophant will have a little more than 12 wounds
>tiny Imperial Knight will have 20 wounds

Tyranids still sucking confirmed. I can now resume building my little bugs in peace, knowing that only darkness awaits.

>>53109936
I'm expecting at biggest for tyranids we're looking at 14-15 wounds with really high toughness.

And unrelated, despite the wraiths being my favorite part of eldar, I'm excited at the idea that without the gargantuan buff wraithknights should finally be scaled down to something reasonable.

>>53109936
Carnifexes would probably have around the same wounds as a SM Dreadnought so about 8.

>>53109977
They might get better saves as they get more wounded to show how Tyranid adaptation would work on the tabletop.

>>53109936
>How many wound do you think Carnifexes will have?
Around 10 or 12. Hive Tyrant 12-14 and Mawlocs 16 would be my guess.

>>53109977
They never said a little. They just didn't say over 20. For all we know it could be on par with a morkonaut.

Stomp was so fun though. Look what you did you whining cockfaggots.

>>53110024
it is possible to add a rule that gives stomp or even something similar without having the word gargantuan stamped onto them, regardless of how hard that is for some people to comprehend

>>53109936
I can see Tyranids wounds going like this:


Venomthrope/Zoanthrope: T4 W3
Warriors/Raveners: T5 W5
Hive/Tyrant Guards: T6 W6
Carnifexes/Tyrants: T7 W8
Tervigon/Trigons: T8 W12

>>53109996
Well now there are weapons that aren't S:D tailor made to kill all big stuff, not just vehicles. So your Rhino full of grumpy meltachosen can do their instant delete trick on everything.

>>53110003
>They might get better saves as they get more wounded to show how Tyranid adaptation would work on the tabletop.
Damn, I like this idea.

>>53109977
I think they mean monsters as in monstrous creatures. Not sure if they mean hierophant in this case.

>>53110024
we don't know what weapons the Morkanaut has. He may still have a stomp attack, on top of a klaw attack and multiple dakka attacks.

>>53110003
>They might get better saves as they get more wounded to show how Tyranid adaptation would work on the tabletop.

This is genius. You could also increase thoughness the same way.

>>53110045
Idk, I don't think melta is going to be doing quite as many wounds, but having insane armor modifiers. They still have to hit someone and get past the toughness and get decent rolls on their wounds done. I'm not that worried and I roll Iron Hands repair spam. Then again for me any helps when fire prisms aren't oneshotting my tanks across the map.

>>53109977
Hierophants, like all other forgeworld models, don't exist according to games workshop. When FW covers the rules for their models you can be sure they'll have far more than 20 wounds. Don't let that fact get in the way of your preemptive whining though.

>>53110047
Anon, you know they're all going to be monstrous creatures because they're taking away the gargantuan title, right? They said the biggest tyranids.

File: FAQ about your dudes.png (26KB, 591x314px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 591x314px

>>53110089
Forgeworld sure as hell does exist to GW. They've already confirmed rules for everything at launch including currently-made FW models.

File: 1292440278134.png (3KB, 210x230px)

3KB, 210x230px

>>53110097

>>53110097
But we don't know if they were including forgeworld stuff in all this (in fact we don't know whether forgeworld stuff will be included in the 8th edition books at all, or if there will be a separate release later). They may have meant "biggest tyranid monsters made by GW".

File: e05.jpg (39KB, 498x441px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 498x441px

>>53110089
Of course I won't stop. I love whining.

More seriously, those news looks great for bugs as well.

>>53110123
see
>>53110113

Same date

>>53110113
Forgeworld models are never taken into consideration in regular GW publications outwith a short-lived period at the start of 6th ed where nids and IG had some in their codices.

>>53110140
This is the FAQ about 8th specifically saying they will.

>>53110152
They've specifically said that forgeworld will continue dealing with forgeworld models and games workshop will continue dealing with citadel models. Everything remains as normal.

>>53110152
yeah, and?

since when was a bio-titan in the same ball park as an imperial knight?

I hope the C'tan will get a nice 3+ invulnerable in the new edition and sometihng like an 8" move, it really needs a way to increase it's tankiness

>>53110188
Invuls are supposed to be very limited. Getting a 3+ is very unlikly.

Hopefully they're serious about infantry having ways to take down the super-sized enemies. This game needs to be more than my $150 model versus your $150 model.

>>53110024
>>Stomp was so fun though
The damage table for stomp was shit as was being able to hit units ridiculously far from the walker.

Why yes I will kill that land raider twelve inches away in one hit by charging this tack squad.

As long as stomps get less fucking stupid, they should be an answer to tar pits no every gods damn model in the game.

>>53110152
Forge World said that they will deal with it asap. So maybe 3-4 months knowing them. The tyranid profiles you speak about shouldn't ever exist yet. In conclusion it should be impossible for GW to refere to them in this days article.

If you have proof for the opposite, please contact the Ordo Chronos for supervision

I'm guessing Land Raiders will have 14 wounds, representing their former 14 Armor. Here's hoping they'll have at least toughness 10 to really not have to give a fuck about most things.

Hell, they SHOULD have toughness 14 as well to be better suited against Meltas and similar things, since those only damaged it on a 6 before.

File: 1493492840418.jpg (64KB, 194x300px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 194x300px

This is literally the beginning of a new golden age

>>53110182
where and when?

>>53110257
can anyone run numbers? How long would it take for a 4 lascannons Devastator team to reduces the strength of/destroy a Morkanaut with the new profiles? I would do it but I'm on a trip, and phoneposting

>>53110283
you know you can paint your custodes any colour under the sun?

I really hope these new rules make Armoured Ceramite less effective. Melta is practically useless in 30k because anything you'd need melta to deal with effectively has AC, making them almost immune to it.

>>53110305
14ish shots to kill it completely, provided there is no cover.

>>53110305
Will be difficult to do the exact calculation since we don't know how exactly the To Wound chart is going to work.

>>53110279
>Hell, they SHOULD have toughness 14 as well to be better suited against Meltas and similar things, since those only damaged it on a 6 before

You wot? They rolled 2d6 you idiot, 6 on 2d6 is easy to roll, with 1d6 roll to wound Land Raider would be T8, T9 max to have similar chances of being wounded...

>>53110279
A melta needs a 6+ for T10 anyway.

And i guess the Dreadnought had AV 8 since he has 8 wounds now?

>>53110316
so you want them to make something which has the designed purpose of reducing the effectiveness of melta, to be weak to melta?

big nearly indestructible things need to be nearly indestructible. or there is no point them existing in the first place.

mastodons get put down.

File: 1380921865682.jpg (26KB, 247x200px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 247x200px

>>53110040
>Carnifex
>Less Toughness than a Tervigon

>>53110341
They only rolled 2d6 when standing right next to the thing. A regular Melta only had 1d6 when shooting above half range.

>>53110353
>has over a dozen wounds
>Morkanaut has 18
14 wounds for a Land Raider is reasonable.

>>53110431
>shooting melta at max range
how much of a shitter can you be

>>53110382
Dude, a Carnifex is a lot smaller than a Tervigon. It's the Dreadnought equivalent while the Tervigon should be the Land Raider Equivalent.

File: Maleceptor.jpg (57KB, 600x620px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x620px

>>53110507
>>53110382
Carnifex could have more thougness and less life, while Trygon could be the reverse. Also, the Trygon will probably have a better move stat than the carnifex (except if there is biomorph option shenanigans involved)

Also, I wonder what will happen with pic related. If psykers are gonna be a real thing again, then maybe this monstrosity will not suck anymore ?

>>53110581
Man, I hope so. I'd love to get a psychic doggo nid, but its rules are just awful currently.

File: HOTGARBAGE.pdf (913KB, 1x1px)

913KB, 1x1px

>>53110507
Tervigon's not a tough unit, friend. Carnifexes were made to be tough bastards that didn't die. They belong with the Trygons/Mawlocs in terms of durability.

>>53110581
>>53110605
We can only hope that we'll be able to use what should have been a very nice buff to our army in 8th. Maybe it'll have a better Invuln save this time, instead of being this shitty thing.

>>53110373
No, I want them to not be immune to melta. How do you deal with AC spartans and typhons?

>>53110654
I'd give him an AOE attack instead of a psychic shot. It would help to distinguish him from FIRIHNMAHLAZOR zoanthropes.

>>53110373
No, anon wants them to be less of a hard-counter. Melta is one of the only reliable ways to kill biggest and toughest of vehicles, and ignoring it makes a vehicle so much tougher than it should be.

File: 99120105053_Bullgryns02.jpg (41KB, 600x620px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x620px

So, with what we know about 8th ed. so far, what nigh unseen models are you guys hoping to see more of? Personally, I'm hoping to see a lot more ogyn and bullgyn.

>>53111062
I hope for powerweapons and fists. Multilators and posessed should be back on the menu.

>>53111062
Nobz.
Flash gitz.
90% of the ork codex desu

8 edition will be what 40K needs fun game to play with friends without rulesbloat and NOT for tournament play - if you want tournament play wh40K will be TOTAL SHIT

File: so tired so very tired.jpg (40KB, 654x643px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 654x643px

>>53109977
My thoughts exactly. Being a nidfag is eternal suffering.

>>53110654
>Tervigon's not a tough unit, friend. Carnifexes were made to be tough bastards that didn't die. They belong with the Trygons/Mawlocs in terms of durability.

Except that's wrong. Carnifexes are T6 W4. Tervigons are T6 W6 and a lot bigger, like Trygons.

File: Renegade Arty sm.jpg (658KB, 1601x861px) Image search: [Google]

658KB, 1601x861px

>>53111062
Every vehicle that was too easy to kill with AV 11 or 12 or open topped. Mostly the various walkers.

I'm just hopping that artillery don't get shafted, I got my heavy artillery battery in just in time for the switch to 8th and I'm hopping this isn't 5th ed canifexes all over again. Hot shit to lukewarm diarrhea in one rules shift.

I got a box of Gaunts as a present, I don't collect Tyranids, but I would like to paint them. Does anyone have any ideas as to a cool scheme?

File: 1480647770356.png (162KB, 494x788px)

162KB, 494x788px

>>53111193

Karma, my friend. For all the times you nidfriends had to tell us how 40k was about how nids were going to eat the galaxy and everything else was of no matter.

>>53111194
Being big != being durable. Think about it this way: Say there's a cinderblock and a stack of cans. The cans are far bigger than the cinderblock, that much is clear, but the cinderblock is far harder to destroy. The stack of cans, while big, is easier to ruin the formation of. It's something you could do with a swipe your hands. Try and break up a cinderblock with your hands and your results will be far less effective. That's the difference here. Tervigons are broodmothers that are massive and lumbering, but far less armored and tough than their siege-weapon counterparts who are living bulwarks that plow through enemy defenses.

>>53111257
The Behemoth scheme is pretty decent.

>>53111194
Not him but that's what it should be

Make Carnifexes slow but very tough for their points with options to be ranged support or a line breaker melee unit (Rules to take advantage of battle shock to thin out hoards?).

Make Tervigons faster with more wounds but less armor/ toughness, their job is to target high value enemy units and cripple them so they don't fuck up your other stuff. Like devastators and such.

>>53110089
This.

Makes ya wonder how many wounds a Warlord Titan is going to have? (my bet is 100 or more)

File: IMG_3643.jpg (91KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 800x600px

>>53111062
The humble landspeeder, love these models. With autohitting&rending heavy flamers, it'll be glorious

>>53111300
>Being big != being durable.

The point is that Tervigons are both bigger and more durable than Carnifexes. And it has always been like that since Tervigons where introduced. Do you have some source about the opposite?

>>53110431
in 15 years playing i never saw someone not dealing 2d6.
just l2play at this point

>>53111401
>The point is that Tervigons are both bigger and more durable than Carnifexes

[Citation Needed]

File: LemanRussTank12.png (1MB, 867x577px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 867x577px

>>53111062
I want to hear about the Best tonk

>>53110263
also it was basically useless against 3+ saves 5 out of 6 times while shitting on everything else
same thing with hammer of wrath destroying vehicles easily while being useless against infantry because ap-

>>53111401
You're the one making the assertion, friend.

>>53110876
>>53110373
>he doesn't know about basilisks and medusas
it's like you don't want to completely remove the flare shield/ armored ceramite meta single handedly in your local 30k scene

>>53111436
For the bigger part you just have to look at the models or at any fluff depiction.

For the durable part Tervigons always had 150% of the wounds of a Carnifex while having the same carapace and the same thoughness. You would have a point if Tervigons were T5 or 4+. They weren't.

Fluff also don't paint them as being frailer than Carnifexes.

What are your sources about the fact that they are less durable except your headcanon?

>>53111507
Its not the fluff painting them as being frailer, but Carnifexes being the threat just below the burrowing terrors and bio titans.

File: pixel_maleceptor_by_steeljoe-daqlaia.gif (1MB, 794x514px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 794x514px

>>53111062
maleceptor

monsters should be good
psykers should be good

>Gone are the days of a lucky first-turn meltagun blowing up your Land Raider. (A squad of them will still ruin its day though…)

REEEEEE

>>53111454
>what nigh unseen models
>leman russ
that said i'm anxiously awaiting the battle cannon and demolisher rules as well as seeing if they'll lose effectiveness with wounds lost or if they fall just below that
>>53111062
i'm hoping we'll see some of the more uncommon baneblade variants
I've always been a fan of artilllery so i'dd love it if the banesword wasn't a hot pile of trash anymore

>>53111507
Just because a model has more wounds doesn't make it more durable, I don't see why you don't understand this. Just because there's more of something doesn't mean it's harder to destroy. And looking at model rules for justification on how something should scale is pretty quickly tossed when you look at shit like Pyrovores and Maleceptors, which are far understatted for what their fluff should present them as.

File: Triarch_Praetorians.png (3MB, 887x1190px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 887x1190px

>>53111062
Praetorians.

>>53110140
IG had forgeworld artilery from the middle of 5th to when their 6th ed codex dropped a week before the end of 6th.

>>53111173
>if you want tournament play wh40K will be TOTAL SHIT

So no changes at all really.

Carnifexes are retard strong, not tough.
They have S9 while bigass Trygons are only s6.

>>53111546
That can mean more dangerous, but it doesn't mean tougher.

File: 1289694299103.jpg (1MB, 1031x1466px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1031x1466px

>>53111556
Fire Dragons on suicide watch. Their entire Aspect, gone.

>>53111111
What a waste of sext

A chaosfag.

>>53111649
FIre Dragons are fine, they all shit out meltas, it's the one lowly guardsmen being in the right place at the right time and rolling well being able to bring down the mighty warmachines aspect of the game, not an eldar aspcet that will probably do 6d6 wounds to it, that's gone.

>>53111649
>"A squad of them will still ruin its day though"
I'm not so sure about that

>knights have over 20 wounds
That's ah, a bit high. I was expecting around 15-18, roughly 3x old Hull points.

>>53110123
They said it would in the 8e FAQ

ANOTHER 8th ed article is up, about CSM. There's literally nothing concrete in it beyond suggesting that some players will actually field CSM in their CSM armies now.

>>53111752
They announced in their first statblock reveal that huge stuff like Knights and Land Raiders will have "dozens" of wounds, so it was to be expected.

>>53111752
They're super-heavies that are competently built, it makes sense that they'd have wounds above a Morkanaut. Still likely don't have enough to compare to a Titan, though.

>>53111752
They're rebalancing a lot of stuff, knights will probably take a serious hit to their invuln.

>>53111779
I hope they'll do these small "sneak-peaks at what's being buffed" for more factions and units.

Wait, so if there's no more directional armor, is there any point to trying to outmaneuver vehicles? Why not just sit in cover in gunlines and pound them with artillery and ordinance all game?

New article out, focuses on chaos space marines

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/07/faction-focus-chaos-space-marines/

>>53111833
Unlikely. They released an article about HUEG UNITS and then proceeded to give us only one, while tossing out a throwaway sentence for imperial and nid units.

>>53111779
>Chaos had a hypeman now
That article is a bunch hot air with no substance

File: Rak'Gol_Render.jpg (187KB, 696x752px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 696x752px

>>53109782
Soon

>>53111838
>>53111779
Meh. This is like the old GW "It's fucking nothing" hype articles.

>>53109977
Cmon nid players stop being retards, obviously they are referring to carnifexes and mawlocs, not biotitans

>>53111838
>entire article focusing on how the army's going to play
>not a single explanation of a special rule, or statline change
constructive post

>>53111588
First of all the whole thing started about rules. So of course I am taking rules into consideration when talking about rules. More than that as it doesn't exist any fluff that portray the Carnifex as being more durable than Tervigons or Tervigons as being less durable than Carnifexes. At best the Carnifexes are presented as "one of the toughest and deadliest of all a hive fleet’s warrior creatures," which is a moot point, for the "one of the", the fact that Tervigons aren't warrior creatures and the fact that the codex entry proceeds to point out that it's the strenght the focal point of the Carnifex.

Second, while it's true that more wounds don't necessarly means more durable it doesn't necessarly means the opposite. Tervigons are comparable to Carnifexes in absolutely every other defensive stat, so at best you'd have an argument that they are as thought as Carnifexes. Still this is only if we ignore the fact that more wounds are often used as a meter for a particolar durable individual even with the same mass of others. Or ar you arguing that Chapter Masters aren't more durable than normal marines, just bigger?

>>53110003
>They might get better saves as they get more wounded to show how Tyranid adaptation would work on the tabletop.
That's nice gamewise, but that's not how tyranids work. Mtg slivers maybe, but not tyranids. You need a new generation to adapt.

>>53111959
Rak'Gols might make a nice addition to 40k, especially as some sort of mercenary faction for chaos.

In fact, having units with the "mercenary" keyword, might be a good idea to use and develop minor xeno factions like Kroots, Jokaeros, Hrud, K'nib, Demiurg, Vespids, etc.

>>53109936
>what monsters are they talking about you think? Trygons and Mawlocs? How many wound do you think Carnifexes will have?

I imagine, tyrannofex, trygons etc... will have around 15-20 wounds

Carnifex will probably be around 8-10

>>53109977
Heirophant doesn't exactly count...

>>53112048
I think you need to look up what Adaptive Biology is.

>>53112005
I feel that the point I'm trying to make is getting lost here. Look, what I'm trying to say is that the Carnifex is a hard to kill unit in spite of it's lesser size in relation to the Tervigon. It's only thing holding it back is the lack of biomass. If the Carnifex were bigger in size, it'd have the relative wounds of a Tervigon, if not the defensive capacity of the Tyrannofex as well.

>>53112168
Then why the fuck you are arguing in favor of the side that said that a Tervigon having more thoughness than the Carnifex in the new system is bullshit and that Tervigons aren't a though unit?

>>53111062
The big bad space marine characters like Azrael, Dante, hopefully Grimnar will have a reason to not be on his sled.

Scions when. Need to see dem statlines. Same with Tauroxes.

>>53112230
What did I say that contradicted that? My statements are still the same. And I don't necessarily agree with the people saying a Tervigon should have less toughness than the Carnifex, just that a Carnifex's Toughness shouldn't be below the likes of a Tervigon or Trygon, but instead on par or above if we're specifically talking about OOE. That was my beef. I'm all for the Carnifex having less wounds than the things that are bigger than it, simply due to it not having the biomass to justify it like the bigger nids.

>>53112254
they are Space Marines, so 1W. Iron Halo? 2W

Kinda wished we saw the stats for leman russ or a landraider.

Are tanks gonna have WS?

>>53112604
>Are tanks gonna have WS?
you know the tank commanders sticking out the top waving their swords? they will actually have a purpose now

>>53111959
It's a nice thought, but what makes you think it's likely? I don't mean to be rude or anything, I'm just asking if I've missed out on a rumor. Rak'Gol would be amazing for Shadow War

File: Ssylth.jpg (135KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 800x800px

>>53112067
There's also the Sslyth, and I think in general there's a fair number of deldar/corsairs that do mercenary work.

Now I'm wondering what sort of "xenos mercenaries" army you could field if you tried hard enough - reckon Kroot would work with Freebooterz, even though they hate each other if the pay was enough?

File: 1472030852909.gif (415KB, 480x238px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 480x238px

>>53112521

>>53112604
>>53112634
it'll probably be there to represent ramming attacks

>>53111833
I would prefer "what was balanced to make the game fun".

>>53112604
>>53112634
Please no. I'm realy not sure how to feel about the possibility of normal tanks getting stuck in melee. I feel they should still not count as engaged for movement and shooting in the new rules but we'll see.

File: 1452450321577.jpg (386KB, 1280x919px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 1280x919px

>>53111779
I don't know it tells us that a bunch of Chaos units are getting buffed:Daemon Engines, Bezerkers, Abaddon, Havocs, etc

Also I like how it poked fun of the one CSM in a CSM list tourney list from a while ago

>>53112763
the post on assault mentions melee is more fluid now. Units can't get "stuck in" any more

>>53109976
>large blasts replaced by 2d6 hits
Has this been confirmed anywhere?

>>53112786
They can still be forced to loose their shooting in order to disengage. Even as a guard/renegade player I'm not looking forward to tanks like the Russ or Land raider loosing their shooting because a 50 pt squad of 10 mooks charged them.

>>53111836
Do vehicles also get cover save modifiers?

>>53112889
Pretty plausible rumours says that Vehicles and units engaged with vehicles can retreat without losing any actions.

File: Kharn-Approves.jpg (216KB, 651x747px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 651x747px

>>53112940
Nice

>>53109800
Hate hate hate this reduced statline nonsense.

They had two new game systems to take inspiration from, AOS and Horus Heresy, and they took the shitty AOS rules.

>>53112763
Imagine how I feel when my skypirate dwarves ships can get stuck in melee or fly away and not get to shoot.

>>53111779
Where the fuck has he not been seeing Havocs? Since Traitor Legions, they're basically an auto-include for Death Guard.

>>53110876

That and some armies (Like SOB) have no anti-tank options BUT Melta.

Though the Exorcist at least is looking happy in this edition.

>>53112823
No but templates have gone now, so it pretty much has to work this way, that on top of flamers being D6 hits kinda hints at it

Will Heretics & Renegades have rules, much less not require an accounting degree to play?

>>53112928
Seems that way. Although only certain types of cover. Probably big buildings and such.

>In the new Warhammer 40,000, cover is a bonus to your armour save. Critically, this ability often only applies to certain types of unit. For example, only Infantry gain the bonus of cover from a crater.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/30/new-40k-shooting-phase-apr30gw-homepage-post-4/

>>53113463
The doubt is basically just about how much hits.

I can see small blasts doing 1d3, large blast doing 1d6 and the apocalypse templates doing 2d6 or more.

>>53113371

Horus Heresy' rules are shit.

>>53113371
what are you missing? new charge system makes initiative obsolote and makes counter charges actually viable, so that one's justified, and the WS table never worked anyway and having it be flat doesn't take much away when S-T interaction is still there.

>>53113371
You mean just weaker D and Grav? Did HH do much else different from the 7th ed. rules?

>>53113614
HH is nice. It's a much better implementation of 7th, but it's still 7th. I'm hopeful it will stick around for its fans.

>>53113463
Just a flat amount of hits doesn't feel like a blast at all though. It's more likely to be similar to AoS catapults and similar, where it's only one shot which if it hits causes multiple separate wounds, and the to hit roll and amount of wounds scale with how big the target unit is.

File: 1494045739201.png (11KB, 550x375px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 550x375px

>>53111111

HAIL CHAOS!!!

>>53113657
Much stricter army compositions, more detailed missions, more intricate special rules.

>>53113682
I'd much rather have 8th for 30k as well. 7th is enough of a rules swamp to slog through without FW's sloppy writing on top of it, and the meta needs a serious shakeup.

>>53113810
>without FW's sloppy writing on top of it,

With 8th looming we'll never discover what the fuck is the Misericordia

>>53113810
>Much stricter army compositions, more detailed missions, more intricate special rules.
Ok. So you're not really talking about vehicle rules.

>>53113875
Good observation, champ

>>53113885
Then why bitch about stats?

File: loxatl.jpg (278KB, 1076x960px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 1076x960px

>>53112667
Loxatl mercenaries.

>>53113885
Just wanted to clarify this was an AoS-whine not constructive criticism.

>>53109977
>>53111193
you guys are tards

>>53113900
I'm a different anon, genius. Also, the original anon was bitching about 8th's direction in general.

>>53110003

But this would make Nids good.

We all know GW can't allow that.

I still miss 5th when the bugs were still feared, and the Carnifex was in its prime.

>>53113992
No he said "reduced stats nonsense" he's bitching about stats which has nothing to different in 30k beyond D and grav

>>53114043
Look at the other two replies to him, m8. You're the only one interpreting it as specifics here

>>53114043
I think he was referring to how bigger models get reduced stats as they get wounded.

>>53113924
If the Tau Loxatl models I'd turn to communism faster than you could say "Hell yeah, the greater good".

>>53114072

>>53113657 here

I actually meant specifically with regard to vehicle rules. Perhaps I should have been clearer, that's my mistake. That said, I maintain that HH doesn't really do much to improve vehicle rules specifically so the argument in >>53113371 doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Any "improvement" in how the rules operate is the changes to D/Grav and just not having to deal with the differences in Xenos armies.

>>53114072
All 3 replies so far are HH rules are shit, stat reduction doesn't matter charge negates need for initiative etc, what's different besides D and Grav.

It's not a generic sperging on 8th, but we can treat the guy as a retard sperging on everything if you are so insistent on not writing what's written.

Do you think there will be a start collecting box for the new DG or will they only come bundled in the new Ed starter set?

>>53113623
The charging strikes first thing is good. So is movement being back.

Removing templates, the 3 ways to play shit, "command points", the changes to morale with losing models instead of fleeing, the absolute mess of the assault phase ("fight phase" sounds faggy) with this "dragging in" mechanic and the falling back shit, the shit about models "attacking out of turn" etc. etc. All looks shit.

>>53111062
Avatars of Khaine. I just want to field it without it being wiped before it does anything.

>>53109977
>>Tyranids still sucking confirmed. I can now resume building my little bugs in peace, knowing that only darkness awaits.
Sound and nice. That would actually make Nids good...as long as Cruddance doesn't write the new Codex.

>>53114340
>Removing templates
Eh, this is an understandable change. From a nostalgic standpoint I liked templates, though.
>the 3 ways to play shit
Narrative point values make life easier when you want to run a campaign,and old point values will still be there, so what's your problem with this you retard? You literally lose nothing and get more stuff.
>"command points"
Unifying the resource mechanics will prevent bullshit like Celestine preventing SoBs from using Faith and makes learning new armies easier. Resource mechanics make the game more tactical and it's a super easy way to balance faction rules against each other. This is good.
>the changes to morale with losing models instead of fleeing
Saves a lot of time. Somewhat of an abstraction, but I can live with it.
> this "dragging in" mechanic and the falling back shit
Are you mentally deficient? Old assault phase was boring as fuck because once you got in, you'd grate each other down, or one side runs away and commits sudoku because the enemy reacts faster no matter how many models are on each side. Literally the opposite of how assault works conceptually in 40k. Being able to fall back and let the second line fire or charge, breaking down a gunline, that's all stuff that happens in the lore that was impossible till now.
>the absolute mess of the assault phase
it's much more structured now than before you weapon
>("fight phase" sounds faggy)
amazing criticism, anon. kys
> the shit about models "attacking out of turn"
Oh no, having to run through a fucking flowchart with tons of special rules per model was so simpler better than just activating units alternately with unit wide special rules that trigger at the beginning
Honestly mate your opinions are shite.

>>53114340
Do you have anything substantial to elaborate that with or is it just plate full of salt?

I can't comment on command points because I'm not sure what that is.

>>53114548
>Narrative point values make life easier when you want to run a campaign

Lets talk about this. Because if there's no balance to this, then what's stopping someone from "forging the narrative" with an army that's wiping the floor with everyone else? If it's balanced, why have a separate point system?

>>53111062
Chaos Terminators, Possessed Chaos Marines, Chaos Dreadnoughts

>>53110431
>>53110373
>>53110698
Just give Melta weapons a rule that says they roll extra wounds or re-roll to wound or something to that effect when fired at half range against units with the "vehicle" keyword.

>>53111257
Look up real world insects and find a cool one on which to base a scheme.

>>53112823
I think people aren't being creative enough. Some weapons could do D6 hits. Some might be 2D6. Some could be D6+3 and other such things. Not all weapons that used a large blast template will necessarily be locked into the same number of hits.

>>53114634
Because people that play a campaign probably don't want to wipe the floor with everyone else, they want the battles to be cool.
They also don't want to get bogged down in the minutiae of paying exact points costs for all of their models, they just want to be able to grab what they feel is appropriate. The points are there as a rough metric to make sure the battles don't accidentally become one-sided and boring.

>>53114634
I think narrative ones are like historical scenarios where each side gets some required shit.

>>53114634
>Lets talk about this. Because if there's no balance to this
But there is.
>then what's stopping someone from "forging the narrative" with an army that's wiping the floor with everyone else?
Why play campaigns with people who don't want to play a campaign but a tournament?
>If it's balanced, why have a separate point system?
Because it's easier to get three narrative points reinforcements, so you throw together 3 Tactical Squads with what your models have on them, than to get 500 points reinforcements so you get like 27 Marines in 3 squads with a clusterfuck of equipment.

If you want perfect balanced, use oldPoints.

File: 1446056939580.jpg (186KB, 700x639px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 700x639px

>>53109977
> Everyone's taking this post seriously
Cmon /tg/, you're better than this!

>>53114634
I imagine narrative is for things like Necromunda or Shadow War, where you fight multiple battles, with models dying or getting wounded, and you getting points in between to replenish and upgrade your dudes.

>>53114634
Because Narrative points will be averages that don't take count of all the little things so you can finally give your sergeant a power fist and a plasma pistol without spending as much points as a rhino or having to take away things because you are 5 points over the limit.

File: template weapons.jpg (399KB, 1112x1347px) Image search: [Google]

399KB, 1112x1347px

>>53112823
>>53113463
>No but templates have gone now, so it pretty much has to work this way
Reminder that templates =/= blasts. In 40k rules "template" weapons specifically mean flamer templates.

>>53114773
Reminder that blast template are a thing. Please don't be dumb

>>53114748
>I imagine narrative is for things like Necromunda or Shadow War, where you fight multiple battles, with models dying or getting wounded, and you getting points in between to replenish and upgrade your dudes.
Nah. They're rougher points values. Like, for example a Tactical Marine Squad will just be 10 points for the squad, 10 more if you upgrade to 10 marines. Equipment is free. It's for narrative and campaign games where in the overall of things it doesn't really matter if timmy the guardsman paid 15 points for a meltagun or not because that's not the focus.

>>53114340
You sure used a lot of word to say absolutely nothing of substance.

Templates were a time sink and more often resulted in debates over which way a stupid arrow was pointing. Multiple ways to play have always existed. The change to moral is more fluid and is less "all or nothing" with less record-keeping...

It just sounds like you like to bitch for the sake of bitching and that you just don't like change.

>>53114634
>If it's balanced, why have a separate point system?
Narrative points should be faster, and the idea is a sort of general hand-wavy balance that works as long as you aren't trying to find the efficiencies in the system and exploit them. Something suitable for a nice friendly pickup game or to indicate a size of game to your friends. Not suitable for tournaments or a really competitive pickup game where people are going to design lists on the basis of optimal choices.

File: apoc-002.jpg (59KB, 640x426px)

59KB, 640x426px

>>53114710
Yeah, just like early AoS and Apocalypse. It's just fun, bro. Bring what you got and lets duke it out, bro. You like fun, don't ya?

File: blast.jpg (443KB, 1078x1342px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 1078x1342px

>>53114785
>blast template are a thing
Reminder that they aren't. They're "Blast Markers" smart-ass.

>>53114881
Which are templates.

Seriously though, they are all going away.

>>53114863
At least now you can just say, "No thanks I'm looking for a Matched Play game", And that's that.

File: wdytwa.jpg (10KB, 184x273px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 184x273px

>>53114817
> It just sounds like you like to bitch for the sake of bitching and that you just don't like change.

>>53114965
>Seriously though, they are all going away.
I know flamer templates are going away, but I haven't seen anything indicating Blast Markers are going anywhere (especially when they're pretty much essential to artillery units like Basilisks/Lobbas/whathaveyou, and were used to check which models got caught when a vehicle went KABOOM! in a bunch of infantry models...

>>53111553
Man, i wish we could get some more gifs like that. Make like a short movie or something for each faction.

>>53114863
There's a market for such games, even if you're not part of it

>>53114965
Maybe. But we have seen no solid info or even rumors about blasts.

Even this: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/04/40k-rumors-8th-edition-big-shakeups.html

Is just BoLS making the same assumption from the rumor of "templates are going away".

>>53114724
>But there is.

So you've seen the rules? Cool, do share.

>Why play campaigns with people who don't want to play a campaign but a tournament?

Anon, you do realize that if you got no balance, you can make a more powerful army than your opponent without even trying. A bunch of ork boyz can be as narrative as a riptide wing, and both players can think they're equally cool, but I don't think a bunch of boyz square fairly against a bunch of riptides.

>>53115105
I'm sure there is, and like >>53114990 said, at least it's not the only option we got. Remains to be seen just how long it'll last. It didn't take long for AoS players to start coming up with ways of balancing out the game, and I remember some modifiers for Apoc games.

>>53115405
>So you've seen the rules? Cool, do share.
Well, neither have you, so we can end the discussion here, you braindead fucktard.

>>53115021
>were used to check which models got caught when a vehicle went Kaboom! in a bunch of infantry models...

No? You checked the distance from the hull.

>>53115489
Wrong thread, this is the one about whining about the new edition. Look for the General or the WiP.

Good ork, still.

>>53115445
Did you just willfully ignore the "if" in my comment, clearly marking it as speculation, not an outright statement of fact?

So all you've managed to do is start shit over nothing.

>>53115448
>You checked the distance from the hull.
Hmm... probably. I must be thinking of something else in terms of 'unit goes boom other units affected'. It's been a long time.

>>53115526
Sorry, i'll take it over there. Appreciate it

>>53115527
No shit, of course not having balance is bad, it's a moot point. Having them actually playtest shit for once and the NarrativePoints being less granular anyway points to them probably not being complete bullshit though. The only one doing retarded shitflinging here is you.

>>53115598
Dude, don't project your butthurt on me. I was just asking questions, not bashing the idea.

>>53112667
Kroot will work for anyone that gives them good gene material to work with.

>>53114548
Underrated post

>>53115686
thanks

File: 1487816726128.jpg (6KB, 202x250px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 202x250px

With the removal of the superheavy classification, what does this mean for all the other superheavy abilities, like being able to target all guns independently? I just bought a malcador defender and I'll be a sad boi if I'm forced to target all my weapons at a single target now...

>>53114548
>>53115686
Seconded

>>53114548
Glorious post. Thx, based Anon.

>>53115769
I wouldn't be surprised if former superheavies had that as a special rule.

File: 20160628_224946.jpg (104KB, 576x1024px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 576x1024px

Feels good man

>>53115920
Or if it's a general rule.

>>53113682
It's not though. HH is changing to 8th once everything else is updated.

>>53109782
>Brings a Titan formation to a "narrative" game
>T 20
>W 50
>SV 2+
>each
>Opponent sends fabious bile into combat with them
>he hits first due to assaulting
>hits
>wounds on 6+ (because everything can do that in 8th
>I fail my save
>His weapon is Instant Death
>Remove Titan from the field
>Remove other 2 Titans after failing battle shock

Oh boy just looking forward to 8th.

>>53115769
Some units may have some or all of them on their datasheet. But it will differ from unit to unit.

>>53115940
I doubt that. As they said, "Superheavy" is no longer a classification.

>>53116006
Really? got a source?

>>53111752
Considering the average damage output on lascannons and melta, it won't take too much to take them down.

>>53116056
The FW site, as well as the wording on the original 8th announcement saying that HH would remain in 7th 'For now', which indicates it as temporary.

File: Burger King Kidz Klub.png (94KB, 640x456px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 640x456px

>>53116013
>Of all the random shit with ID in 40k he chose Fabious Bile for his copypasta shitpost

Might wanna swap him for something like the Swarmlord there champ. a model people would actually recognize

No CSM player has fielded Bile in...well, ever.

>>53116013
Might want to get a fresh plate, anon. That pasta's looking a bit old.

>>53116013
That fucking pasta again. Still as full of shit as always.

>>53112067
That seems like a good forgeworld project - detailed, small releases

>>53116067
>3.5 average damage per wound
> 2/3 of your shots hit
> Assuming T8 like Morkanauts 2/3 of your shots wound
> Assuming 3+ armor 1/6 get saved (-3 rend)

If Knights have 20 wounds exactly it's going to take approximately 15-16 lascannon shots to down them. That's ignoring any potential invul they have.

Vehicles gonna be stronk as fuck this edition.

>>53116041
No, I mean if units can freely shoot at different trargets with different weapons.

>>53116013
Despite the fact that this is bait, I'm still going to illuminate all the things wrong with it for people who are just joining us and have no idea what the rules in 8th are:

>Brings a Titan formation to a "narrative" game
Formations no longer exist, and narrative games don't mean "unbalanced games where you can do whatever you want", that's Open games

>Opponent sends fabious bile into combat with them
>he hits first due to assaulting
>hits
>wounds on 6+ (because everything can do that in 8th
We don't know everything Wounds on a 6+, it could be like SWA where you need to roll a 6 and then the 6's need a second roll of 4+ or more to stick.

>His weapon is Instant Death
No longer a thing, weapons can deal multiple Wounds per hit or even Mortal Wounds which ignore saves and don't need to roll to Wound, but you'll never be removing a 10+ Wounds model in one hit with anything.

>Remove other 2 Titans after failing battle shock
Not even remotely how battleshock works. Titans aren't going to be squadroned together and even if they were they're not going to have a Leadership lower than 7.

>>53114340
> the 3 ways to play shit
Already in the game, the other two are "unbound casual game" and "campaign/altar of war", both of which 7ed already support
>command points
Would you prefer formations? Honestly?
>the changes to morale with losing models instead of fleeing
I prefer AoS morale myself, as is morale is far too swingy and random when it matters, and it barely matters most of the time. It just depends on how they balance it.
>"fight phase" sounds faggy
You do realise the fight subphase has been in the game for the last several editions?
>this "dragging in" mechanic and the falling back shit
Oh no, design space that could possibly lead to tactics instead of just smashing your armies together.
>the shit about models "attacking out of turn"
We have to see how it's balanced but as it stands eldar can already do this shit.

The only thing I agree with you on is removing templates, because pieplates were just fun, but they did slow the game down a lot and if gw wants faster games, I can't really blame them.

>>53114091
>Tau Loxat

The only problem is that the Loxatl are very much fans of Chaos, though. They'd not be willing to serve the Tau.

>>53113416
You can shoot while engaged in AoS.

>>53110089
>>53110113
Forge World is literally Games Workshop. Of course they will get rules.

>>53116892
I... Legit forgot that. No wonder my opponent seemed so smug when I went straight to melee fighting.

>>53116013
I know this is bait but when you think about it, it's realistic.

If one tiny marine guy could one-shot a titan, I'm getting my other titans the fuck out of there.

>Vehicles are getting buffed and will be more popular in the meta

What a time to finish painting my Pask Vanquisher.

>>53119058
inb4 pask removed.

I wonder how Greater daemons are going to get stat-ed now.

Rowboat preview had 9 wounds I think? So more then that you think or less?

File: 1451327457837.png (200KB, 500x376px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 500x376px

>>53111959

...

I'ma fuck it.

>>53114817
The game is worse off without templates because they're a mechanic that actually takes advantage of physical space rather than just even more dice rolling. Having arrows on the template that corresponds to a number rather than an arrow on a die also makes moving them dead simple.

>>53116691
>tfw I hate the Loxatl with a burning passion due to the Gaunts Ghosts books.

>>53119876
i'd like to say the majority of people i play with are shitters that argue templates and scatter dice for advantage, so the conversion to pure numbers helps me immensely

>>53111062
Deathwing Terminators. New terminators look good, but I want to know what they've done to make Deathwing unique, if the special rules have been cut down.

>>53112000
So, in character with everything said on this board for the last month?

>>53120508
Special rules haven't been cut down. In fact it's the opposite. Everything gets special snowflake rules now, just to make it that much more annoying to keep track of everything.

File: Untitled1.jpg (107KB, 1114x538px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1114x538px

>>53109782

File: Bait 8th.jpg (139KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 680x680px

>>53121079

>>53121079
That Chimera's just adorable

>>53113691
Except wound distribution is different in 8th to AoS.

In AoS, wounds are allocated based on how much damage is done, which means one cannon shot can kill D6, say, Ironbreakers on a single failed 6+ save.
In 8th, it looks like damage is distributed based on the amount of targets hit. So if you fire a lascannon at a squad of Guardsmen, you'll only kill one no matter how high you rolled for damage.

Also, I imagine you'd still need to roll to hit with blasts, to represent the chance of scatter. Maybe make D6 hit rolls or something.

>>53114701
This anon gets it.

File: chimera.jpg (56KB, 650x391px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 650x391px

>>53121079

>>53120701
>just to make it that much more annoying to keep track of everything.
it'll actually be much less annoying.
All a units rules are right there on 1 page
no more flicking between 2 or 3 chapters of 2 or 3 books just to keep track of one unit.

>>53123998
Pfffft! Like you could fit 10 Guardsmen in there.
<Zing!>

>>53123998
Is this a modern take on the "Amphibious Chimera Variant" that they had before Chimeras became Amphibious? Think it was in the CJ.

>>53110039
Treemen have stomp that gives everyone -1 ws in sigmar.

>>53121763
"Large Blast: If you hit with a weapon with this special rule, it causes an additional D6 automatic hits. If the target unit consists of more than 10 models, it causes an additional 2D6 automatic hits instead."

Simple as that.

>>53115929

>Bland pose
>Head on backwards

Why?

>>53114863
>much fun wow
>advancing, fire, advancing, fire
>so tactical, very intresting
i can't understand that kind of event

>i have the biggetst army and the biggest canon lol
>stop ! me to ! i have huge armis and huge canons
>go fithing to show who as the biggest.
Their life is empty as fuck to do such think.

>>53125563

> Partially assembled tank components scattered on the base
> Model is crudely secured to the base
> No further paint will ever touch that model

My friend, there are a great many other problems at hand here.

>>53112067
>Rak'gol
>Mercenary
You don't know shit about them, do you?

>>53111163
>Flash Gitz
>Ever being anything bettering than an expensive paperweight

We're more likely to get 3 point boys and 1 point grots famlam

>>53126710
If they get 4+ (which they look like they're wearing) and shooting that isn't rock-paper-scissors (which is already fixed with the new AP system), they're probably going to be useful

>>53111301
>Carnifexes slow
>Living Battery Ram: shit runs so fast & hits so hard it gets extra free attacks
U wot m8?

Tervigons are slow & chunky, while Fexes have always been used as line-breakers and siege-crackers. They lack bulk because they have speed & strength instead.

>>53119150
What if Pask was on Cadia when it blew up?

So if DG is included in the starter set, will Mortarion get a model that's sold separately?

File: Capture.png (80KB, 1076x170px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1076x170px

>>53109782

>>53127406
His wish was invalidated by the wish that took everyone else's wish away.

>>53127456
But maybe GW did die... from a certain point of view.

>>53127383
Nah they will release the 70€ centrepiece in a €100 starter box with 40 other minis only

>>53116013
Well I would laugh my ass of if they actually gave Bob some kind of ID or at least D6 wounds for his walking stick

>>53125886
I know that they are chaotic xenos, travelling space in nuclear-powered vessels.
As such, they could be fielded as xeno auxiliaries for Chaos armies. Or mercenaries, admitting that they would be willing to work for uranium, chaotic toys, or crude weapons which could be integrated to their warriors.
The fact is that the Rogue Trader rpg never developed them beyond that, and as such, no one can say for sure if they would do such a thing. But extrapolating upon other exemples of chaos-aligned xenos (like the loxatl), it's not a big stretch to imagine that they could act as mercenaries for some other factions.

>>53111298
So when do Chaosfags get their karma for doing the exact same thing?

>>53114020
>5th when the bugs were still feared, and the Carnifex was in its prime.
You mean 4th?

Am I right in seeing Ultra Marines as the only "true scale" guys from the new box? Am I able to keep building Chaos marines in peace?

>>53137255
I think he means 5th with 4th's codex.

>>53115769
>like being able to target all guns independently?
Given that different models within a squad can aim independently I would assume that different guns on a crewed vehicle would be able to as well.

>>53140003
But tyranids were trash once 5e hit. When melee couldn't open metal boxes anymore and the meta went hard metal boxes. Everyone else packed weapons to open tanks and that hurt monster mash hard.

>>53141150
yeah but that took a good what... 9 months. (ymmv) so i can see what he means in that window

>>53111301
>Make Carnifexes slow but very tough for their points with options to be ranged support or a line breaker melee unit (Rules to take advantage of battle shock to thin out hoards?).
>Carnifexes
>Slow
Fuck off Cruddace.

Carnifexes were never supposed to be slow. If they properly translate their original stats from 2e over to the new edition they should have a 9" move.

>>53111301
I don't remember Old One Eye being slow. A carnifex is like a train made of rape flying at you.

>>53127621
fuck off Obi Wan

>>53139471
Logic dictates that they're going to have to update the basic CSM at some point and I imagine this is as good a time as any for them to do so. I mean, what else could they make, plastic sisters?

File: 40kpepe.jpg (10KB, 235x214px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 235x214px

>>53141518
>I mean, what else could they make, plastic sisters?

>>53139471
They've already updated Thousand Sons to be "true scale" (all they actually did was fix the pose and the numarines will probably be the same) and the Death Guard will be next, so hopefully normal CSM aren't far away.

If Guilliman's base is any indication they already have the CAD files ready to go.

>>53139471
>Guilliman wakes up the Guillimarines
>Half of them immediately go traitor

So they ruined large models. Good to know.

>>53141737
You mean vastly improved? Cuz that's a weird way to spell that.

>>53141575
>all they actually did was fix the pose and the numarines will probably be the same
for the hundredth fucking time, the numarines are taller than deathwatch marines, so no, it's not just the pose

>>53141737
>I'll just drop my opinion without any argument
nice

File: IMAG1700 copy.jpg (2MB, 2860x1876px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2860x1876px

>>53141751
And you seem to keep forgetting that the guardsman he's standing next to isn't a plastic Cadian.

>>53115929
looks cool

what is it?

File: supremcy.jpg (172KB, 600x850px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 600x850px

>>53145289