Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
If thoughts on the new rules prove to be true for 5th edition, and vehicles defensive weapons are now strength 4, does this change how your tanks are constructed considering the most common right now is for a Russ to have the 3 heavy bolters?
 

·
Set Sail and Conquer!
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
If thoughts on the new rules prove to be true for 5th edition, and vehicles defensive weapons are now strength 4, does this change how your tanks are constructed considering the most common right now is for a Russ to have the 3 heavy bolters?
If the rumours do indeed hold true, you will probably see a lot more bare bones 'Russes, with no sponsons, and more heavy stubber upgrades.

I mean, when you fire the battle cannon you cant fire anything else anyway, but if you can only fire 1 heavy bolter on the move, meh. I'd drop the sponsons, personally.
 

·
Has a monkey!
Joined
·
1,630 Posts
My personal opinion is that vehicles are becoming pillboxes again. Especially Imperial ones. Move or shoot, and if you get a commanding position at the beginning of the game, damn it, that vehicle's not moving. Combined with the concept that Troops are the only scoring units, I expect to see a lot fewer battle tanks out there. Vehicles are going to go up in survivability but down in firepower and mobility- I see a big opening for transports now. Especially with Entanglement being removed.
 

·
Treadhead with a Chainaxe
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
I'll probably be forced to put my entire IG army on the shelf if this change happends. The whole concept of playing Mechanised Grenadiers falls when you can't move and fire - then you might just aswell play a normal gunline list, because tanks or not, that's what your army is going to turn into in 5th ed unless they decide to revert the defensive weapons change.

I'll probably leave my russes as they are with their tripple heavy bolters... on the shelf and start playing my Khornate Chaos Space Marines as my primary army instead. Possibly my fantasy Dwarfs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
326 Posts
There's a few reasons why I may stop taking russes:

1. If a russ cant move and fire all non-ord weapons, there's less reason to take the non ord weapons.
2. If I'm not taking non-ord weapons on a russ I'm essentially only after the ord weapon.
3. If I can take a vehicle with an ord weapon in the form of a basilisk for 25 points or so less, I'll take it.

A few other things to think about though:

1. No more area terrain means you cant really hide the basilisk anymore... you do get a 3+ or 4+ cover save in exchange though so it might still be the better option.
2. Seeing as vehicles wont score anymore, there's less reason to move them anyway, so I just might get some value out of all those sponson weapons on a russ anyway!
3. Again the no area terrain means I can basically use my tanks to hit anything within range with a simple pivot, which is a point in favour of sponsons again. (Pivot does not count as moving) I can see the value of the 'defensive' setup demolisher increasing greatly as I'll be able to fire those three heavy's every turn!

The vehicle that really gets nailed is the chimera.. I should expect a serious points reduction on this one should we ever get a new codex. Somewhere between 40-50 points as its essentially reduced to a poorly armoured and armed transport.

All this is of course if the rumoured str 4 weapons thing is true... we can always hope it isnt!
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,399 Posts
All this is of course if the rumoured str 4 weapons thing is true... we can always hope it isnt!
Looking at the DA codex - created with 5th in mind it may well be. (How cheap is a razorback? Oh - they'll be useless in 3 months)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,800 Posts
Well, we aren't getting the whole picture yet, remember. I don't have much use for heavy bolter sponsons as it is; a cannon and a mobile lascannon are all I really want from my Russes. Let the Hellhounds and flashlights do the anti-infantry!

The whole concept of playing Mechanised Grenadiers falls when you can't move and fire - then you might just as well play a normal gunline list,
There will still be the other reason to play Mechanized--resistance to high-speed, CC-oriented armies. Think of Chimerae as consolidation 'fire breaks' and I predict they'll still be around. We should still have the option of throwing grenadiers forward into melta-range of expensive stuff as well, and has anybody heard about how passengers shooting out of vehicles will be affected?

I don't think the new edition will completely cripple our vehicular mobility. One of the reasons for the revision is that GW wants to make vehicles (at least the battle tanks) more useful. Upping survivability and then making them stationary isn't going to be very productive in that regard. If we lose heavy-bolter firepower but things are otherwise to our advantage then we should be alright. One of the other rumors I've heard is that 'Skimmers Moving Fast' is going to take a significant nerf, so maybe the defensive weapon ruling's intent is to ensure the Guard aren't the total doom of light skimmers. Not that I would have a problem with being total doom....

I'm more worried about the 'march moves' rumors. If most armies become capable of turn 2 charges regardless of list design then Guard and Tau will have a very hard time--but the Russ will still be the Russ!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
579 Posts
Just some brief thoughts:

I'll be keeping the three H/B configuration because I happen to think it looks pretty cool from a modelling POV - all "boxy" and multiple guns - very WW1.

We won't be playing 5th Edition anyway - all the armies are built and based around 4th - no way are we all ripping everything up, re-pointing and re-jigging lists and spending wodges of cash making our armies "legal" with the latest GW money-making effort.

I'm not saying if there aren't some good ideas or models we won't use them - but a switch to 5th - nah - been there, done that, got the second mortgage to prove it ;)
 

·
Hellhounds are good tanks
Joined
·
733 Posts
................................what about the hellhound now it has to stand still????!!!!!!

and my friends let me use flyers and i know there is no str 4 wpn on a flyer

......................
 

·
space pope
Joined
·
175 Posts
Everything being discussed is hearsay and conjecture. Don't start shelving your armies just yet - the truth is still to be revealed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
If anything, I've heard rumours to GW starting the rumors for 5th Edition so they can monitor what player do and don't like and change it accordinly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
326 Posts
................................what about the hellhound now it has to stand still????!!!!!!
Not really... you still move and fire the inferno cannon, you just lose the ability to fire the heavy bolter as well. In my experience, all you really ever want to fire on that tank is the inferno cannon.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,399 Posts
these updates seem to be making the game worse for the Imperial Guard.
Ah come on, cheer up - only troop choice infantry score - you should have 5 times the amount of scoring troops in comparison to every other head on legs at the table. Is no one else looking on the bright side of just how exellent the infantry will become?
 

·
A 51st Century Man
Joined
·
1,806 Posts
Ah come on, cheer up - only troop choice infantry score - you should have 5 times the amount of scoring troops in comparison to every other head on legs at the table. Is no one else looking on the bright side of just how exellent the infantry will become?
but why change sooo many of the rules
 

·
Treadhead with a Chainaxe
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
................................what about the hellhound now it has to stand still????!!!!!!
DEFENSIVE weapons are rumoured to be strenght 4. Main weapons are unaffected. Basically it means that if you move your tank, you may fire one of your weapons that is s5 and up, and all that are s4 and down.

Still. I see no reason to panic. Sofar it's only rumours. I am however saying that if the change is done, I will have to shelf my mechanised grenadier army and play regular gunline guard... and in that chase I'd rather play my Khornate Chaos Marines I think.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
596 Posts
This sounds pretty bad for my tank column, but I will wait until the rules are official before I start flaming.
I really dont want to have to shelf my chimeras.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,399 Posts
If anything, I've heard rumours to GW starting the rumors for 5th Edition so they can monitor what player do and don't like and change it accordinly.
Possibly True.
If you considered their playtesters/developers to give a rats ass what you think. Case in point: Falcon Grav Tank.
It's also possibly true that they're going to thoroughly proofread all future codexes/rules, reduce the prices on the miniatures (white metal? why! - I went into a store in 1996-7 and saw a staff member putting new price labels - at £1-2 more on existing packs. admittedly a franchised retailer, but that was disgusting, and led to my first quit. I have now had CCG rehab, and have quit that (WOTC have less morals than F/W price goons))
I'd rather hold my breath for plastic warlord titans, that's rumored too.

P.s. that's not your opponent across the table - It's Jervis Johnson in a Disguise! Quick, get him for what happened to specialist games with a blood bowl Blitz attack! ram him with your knee like you would BFG ork kroozers! GET HIM!!!
 

·
A 51st Century Man
Joined
·
1,806 Posts
If anything, I've heard rumours to GW starting the rumors for 5th Edition so they can monitor what player do and don't like and change it accordinly.
I doubt it. Not to affend you in anyway. I just doubt GW would do something like this.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top