Question about Heavy Rock Cutter

[TheHiveKing]

So i thought it was interesting that it said that the model is removed from play. Does this mean that it basically in a way ignores Eternal warrior? Also does the model that is removed from play by this effect count as being removed as a casualty? In other words would celestine be able to come back?

[kazetanade]

Celestine's is when she dies - so by right she should not be coming back to life.

Removed from play should mean exactly that - removed from play. Not dying.

Yes it should still be counted as a casualty for special rules, VP, missions, objectives.

[TheHiveKing]

Apr 9, 2017 16:37:06 GMT kazetanade said:

Celestine's is when she dies - so by right she should not be coming back to life.

Removed from play should mean exactly that - removed from play. Not dying.

Yes it should still be counted as a casualty for special rules, VP, missions, objectives.

Thanks for clearing that up

[No One]

Hmmm...

TheHiveKing said:

Does this mean that it basically in a way ignores Eternal warrior?

Very definitely - all EW does is make you lose one wound instead of all when hit with Instant Death. No effect here at all. (However, note that the super-heavy/GMC version would still mean they only lose D3 wounds).

Also does the model that is removed from play by this effect count as being removed as a casualty? In other words would celestine be able to come back?

Now, this is a trickier one. Pseudo edit: Nope, actually completely clear. Pg 13:

Models that are 'removed from play'...are also considered to have been removed as casualties

[kazetanade]

No One that only answers half a question. Can celestine come back from being removed?

[No One]

kazetanade said:

No One that only answers half a question. Can celestine come back from being removed?

Yes - her ability triggers on removal as casualty.

[kazetanade]

Sadly I am misinformed then. Excuse me and carry on.

[Hive Bahamut]

I've pondered many a use for this, and along with the Drill I am entirely convinced they just gave them rules because they had the models made.

There is no reason why you should ever take either. Anything you want to remove from play is either passing their test because of T6+ or making its save with ++, or dying because of S8. There is literally no perfect target for the Snips.

The Drill on the other Hand is cheaper, and somehow even worse. Why anyone would want to sacrifice 2-3 S8 for a single S10 (that doesn't auto hit,) is crazy.

These 2 weapons are akin to dual talon Metamorphs. Or a Neophyte that paid for a Pick or Maul.

[No One]

Hive Bahamut said:

I've pondered many a use for this, and along with the Drill I am entirely convinced they just gave them rules because they had the models made.

Eh, I'd say it's more to try and diversify the melee weapons, the same they have for ranged (compare: flamers/melta, HB/auto/las, and sort of talon/claw/whip) - something for anti-vehicle, something for anti-toughness/MC, a middle ground that's worse than both (but cheaper). The idea is good - allows diversification of the army, tailor to meta (or army with summoning), take the right things for what you feel lacking in. The problem is, as with many things GW, the implementation. Only one of them really achieves effectiveness against its chosen target - which is also the thing that the army struggles with the most - and also works fine against the targets of the other weapons.

If drills where, say, 15 pts but just S8 AP2, they'd probably be worth considering if you wanted some cheap options. Or if clippers where actually reliable MC killers (say, ID, or a more reliable means of removal from play than a T test against high T enemies ) - slightly more niche than AV, but they can still fulfil that role to a reduced extent, and if, say, there's a lot of Tau (read: Riptide Wing) in the meta? It'd probably be an option that you didn't feel like you were shooting yourself in the foot by taking.

Unfortunately, GW is...usually not very good at balancing opportunity cost weapons (i.e. you can take X from a selection of Y) - metas are a good exception (talons, claws and whips all have a place. Only double talons that don't).

(As an aside, I do believe there is an almost perfect target for snips - namely, Eldar Phoenix Lords, who unless I'm mistaken, are T3 EW with no invul. Of course, that's a perfect target that's very rarely going to see the table, let alone be taking cutter wounds, and would probably be pretty effectively drowned in normal rending wounds anyway, so...)

[rroach]

A 6 on a Toughness test is a fail, so not completely useless.

[No One]

rroach said:

A 6 on a Toughness test is a fail, so not completely useless.

No, but when you only have a 1/6 chance of doing anything more than the alternative weapon, it basically is (it's not even multiple T tests...). It's far too unreliable at its supposed 'role' to actually be effective. Similar to drills - too binary. Either nothing happens, or enemy goes splat (which I consider too unreliable to be competitive, and honestly not really that good game design for either player). Unlike saw, which provides a consistant and reliable increase in damage over just S8 AP2 against chosen target.

[topknot87]

Apr 15, 2017 4:37:26 GMT Hive Bahamut said:

I've pondered many a use for this, and along with the Drill I am entirely convinced they just gave them rules because they had the models made.

There is no reason why you should ever take either. Anything you want to remove from play is either passing their test because of T6+ or making its save with ++, or dying because of S8. There is literally no perfect target for the Snips.

The Drill on the other Hand is cheaper, and somehow even worse. Why anyone would want to sacrifice 2-3 S8 for a single S10 (that doesn't auto hit,) is crazy.

These 2 weapons are akin to dual talon Metamorphs. Or a Neophyte that paid for a Pick or Maul.

As I'm non-competitive and love just modeling things for things I made all those models hahaha.... But for at least the drills and the cutters I can just call them saws and say (please do not swear) it. Even in a competitive setting, no one is going to bat an eye if you say it's one thing even though it was intended for something else, close enough.

Though it is sad they'd go through the trouble to make these rules...

[jesses]

The only time I have taken the Snips was when I was playing a silly crab themed game against a friend (who was also playing a silly themed list) so I took everything I could that had claws or could pinch. So the Cutter on all my Acolyte squads, a Haruspex, Tyrant Guard with Crushing Claws, etc.

The game was fun, but the Cutters did not shine. I don't think the actual Snip rule ever came up.

If they retain the Snip rule in 8th, since its rumoured that double Str will no longer cause Instant Death, I can see them becoming more useful against many armies. Warriors, 2W Termies, Wracks, etc.

[No One]

jesses said:

If they retain the Snip rule in 8th, since its rumoured that double Str will no longer cause Instant Death, I can see them becoming more useful against many armies. Warriors, 2W Termies, Wracks, etc.

Honestly, I can see them just rolling it into a 'heavy weapon', since armourbane, ID, snip et al are all likely just going to be represented as higher damage or similar, to maintain their role as anti-tank/MC when there doesn't appear to be any other analogous function to their current rule - and since there's no real differentiation between tanks and MCs for damage purposes, they'd just have the same profile anyway.

To put it another way - if they did (for some strange reason) keep both saws and snips as is, snips would be the 100% no brainer choice, since it'd be very useful against MCs (doesn't care about the increased wounds) and (probably) just insta-kill vehicles (they'd take wounds, and then just auto fail the S test - even if not, no worse than saws), while saws would be almost useless against basically everything - they'd usually <2 wounds on vehicles, when they're sitting at ~>6 wounds...

I mean, they could do something completely different, but that's my prediction.