5th Edition Rumours

[coredump]

Couple of observations/guesses.

based on the relic news link, it sounds like they are only toning down the shooting rending ability. Since there is never mention (that I know of) of an AP for a melee attack, the proposed change only makes sense for a ranged weapon.

If that change is for melee, it will make a pretty big difference for us. Right now, against MEq we get 2 kills via rending, for every 1 kill 'normally'. (stealers that is)
If we 'only' get AP1, that means we still need to get past their toughness, which means we would go to 1 and 1, or a drop of 33%. Killing only 4 marines instead of 6 is a pretty big change.

Hitting rear armor during melee attacks will be huge for us, (and yet makes little sense from a miniatures game.)
Hgaunts can now assault the front of transports, and kill it. Stealers can hit the front of a predator, and still easily get through. With any skimmer nerf, it means those AV10 rear hatches are just that much easier to reach.

Giving everyone 'fleet lite' may end up hurting us, but I am not sure. I am not happy about it, but it may not hurt us too much.


Oh, note that the rule will *not* let the stealers move 24". It will not change any of our units at all. It will let a marine either
Move-shoot-assault
or
move-fleet-(done)

[Psychichobo]

Really? I thought it mentioned under the march rule rumour that units with fleet will be allowed to make a d6 inch move in the assault phase too, and then are still allowed to make a 6 inch (12 for leapers) assault...

EDIT: Ok, just realised I misunderstood the second bit about the fleet of foot rule. This'll make things a bit awkward for advancing if the enemy just wants to move away from us... it's a bit daft, in my opinion. This now means that an ordinary guardsman can move as fast as cavalry. That seems just a leedle bit illogical there...

[coredump]

The way the rumor reads...

Everyone will get 'fleet', but then you are done, no shoot, no assault.

If you have the 'fleet of......' rule, you can fleet, and assault.


But latest word is that our understanding of Forced March is close, but not quite.... so who knows.

[lowlygaunt]

Just a reminder on giving sniper rifles rending, Eldar sniper rifles already have this, so whats the big deal? Under this proposed rules change a sniper rifle that rolls a 6 to wound ignores armor saves, simple, and in my opinion needed. Eldar pathfinders who roll a 5-6 to hit and then wound with those shots ignore armor saves already.
I agree that these are extremely early rumors, but look forward to these changes.

[Shas'o Tash'var Kais Pat]

mmm, that I do, and despite my earlier doubts about 5th ed the evidence is mounting that it will be released soon, so I can't wait

[Enigma]

I personally think that forced march blows, but i have an idea to improve fleet. Simply allow fleeters to move extra d6 and charge, or move d6x2 and no charge

[Enigma]

Another thing: cover. I think that the way cover is changed, is you simply improve armour save, and you change it to cover save. So, for the original 5+ and 6+ cover saves, you simply are allowed to make armour saves no matter what against anything other than flamers. For 4+ original cover saves, you will do the same as above, and will improve the save by 1. And increase it by 2 for original 3+ saves. Obiously, the max save is 2+, but it gives Space Marines a reason to go into cover, making it much more realistic. Flamer weapons remove all bonuses to saves.

Ex. A Termagant is in a bunker. It normally has a 6+ save, which means it can be penetrated by bolters. If it is in a bunker, it has a 4+ save and is immune to all AP other than flamer weapons. If attacked with a flamer weapon, it loses the 4+ save, and instead has a 6+ one.

[Roxas]

that makes surprising sense.....

also i would like to point out that snipers being rending mkaes little sense other thyan the armour save bypass methinks.

Tam.

[Overread]

belloflostsouls.blogspot.com/2008/01/rumors-40k-5th-edition-round-3.html

some new info rumours concerning 5th ed
In these, two things shine out:
1) friendly and enemy units now off LOS blocking - so we can screen with gaunts infront of stealers (not monstrus creatures are still targetable)

2) area terrain nolong blocks LOS - ok this worries me a bit - things like forests now no longer offering protection for enemy fire. Granted the rule above means that we get additional cover in one respect - but a cutting out woods and area terrain - this to me seems to be making terrain on the board a little bit superfules -- also I don't think I am wrong in thinking that this is a move to make 40K more urban in conflict over rural battles

[coredump]

You still get the cover save from area terrain, it just doesn't block LoS if you are behind it.

[lowlygaunt]

I think the real issue with rending is it has TWO benefits, instead of one. It auto wounds AND ignores armor saves. I think the idea of moving it to the wound roll brings it back down to having one benefit instead of two. That makes more sense for sniper rifles, as they work for the Eldar.



Below is a rant on rending, ignore it if you could not care either way, simply my reasons why the change to rending is a good one for my friend(s) on the sight.
As it is, a genestealer and Howling banshee cost the same, but in fact against anything toughness 4 or above, rending is far more useful than the Banshees power sword currently.
I still wonder at people who think rending is balanced.
Compare two models that are the same cost, a genestealer and a howling Banshee against a spacemarine.
Let's say 2 of each charge some marines, say 3 attacks each (charging), they both swing first generaly, Genestealers hit on a 3|+ so hit 4 times, banshees on a 4+ (against marines for example) so hit 3 times. Banshees need a 5+ to wound so cause one wound no save, 1 casualty. Genestealers get 1 rend kill and 3 hits. 1.5 of those hits wound, marine player saves 2/3 or loses .5 marines. The genestealers with rending have been more effective then the banshees with their power swords. I know it is a simple example, but as Toughness goes up, not too mention that the banshees cannot even TOUCH a vehicle, means point for point the genestealers are worth far more because of rending.
Toobe fair lets look at a space marine with power weapons against the genestealers. First the marine costs 25, so wewill say 3 stealers vs 2 marines, each swinging at an identical opponent, a space marine. Stealersget9 attacks, hit 6, 1.5 are rending, the other 4.5hits wound 2.25 times, marine losesanother .74, so total 2.24 guys dead. Marines swing, hit 3 times, wound 1.5 times, less casualties. Rending should not be "better" than having a powersword, becauseof all the other benefits against high toughness and vehicals.
Same goes for the assaultcannon. 4 shots with rending vs a lascannonagainst an armor 12 vehicle gives these numbers (using WS4). Assault cannon, 3 hits, .5 penetrates (1 in 6 becomes a 12+1d6) so it penetrates every other turn, lascannon, 2/3 hits, 50% penetrate means .3 penetrating hits. . with a .16% chance for a glance, or .49 chance to hurt the vehicle, so a glance or penetrate every other turn. Identical! And against higher armor the lascannon goes DOWN, while the assaultcannon goes up! Asault cannon vs 13 armor glances or penetrates .5 (or once every other)each shooting phase, the lascannon is now down to 2/3 x 1/2 or 1/3= 33% of its shots. . once in 3 turns! Against armor 14, assault cannon glances or penetrates .41,or just under every other turn. Lascannon, can ONLY glance, 2/3 x 1/3 or 2/9 shots, once every 4 turns.
And the assault cannon is cheaper!! If you cannot see that this is unbalanced I cannot make it any clearer.
I know these are simplified examples too, and I know army composition goesinto points costs etc, but right now I wouldexcahnge my power weapon for rending on A|NY of my marine characters because it is cheaper than the power weapon and atthe least gives me simmiliar benefits PLUS advantages against high T and vehicles.

I believe GW's hope is to be able to balance rending better by moving it to the wound roll. I also know that almost without exception any player who plays with rending will defend it irregardles of balance, and those who are its victims hate it. I play both, and IMO rending as written is too powerfull. when whole armies are being built and winninghigh %of gamesbasedon ONE special rule, it needs tobe looked at.
I also feel anytime I see a response to some rulle being changed as "we will be ruined|!!!!!!!!" I smile and think to myself if you are relying on that ability to win. . it is too powerful in game balance.
I play Tyranids, cannot wait for rending to be changed. . my army will still be extremely good, but it might not win 90% of its games as it does, and since at least 8 other people on this sight claim the same win % with their genestealer and tyranid armies, it is not an abnomaly.
I know rendign is whatmade tyranids tyranids, we willjust have to learn to play with a new number system. Genestealers now rend 1in 9 attacks instead of 1 in 6.

[coredump]

As it is, a genestealer and Howling banshee cost the same, but in fact against anything toughness 4 or above, rending is far more useful than the Banshees power sword currently.

Rending is not more effective than a power sword. Take rending away from that stealer, and give him a powersword, he goes from killing 1.5 marines, to killing 2 marines. Not bad.

What you are comparing is a stealer to a banshee in a straight fight, which is also misleading. Yes, a stealer is better at a straight up CC fight. This is partly because of rending, and partly because of the low WS and S of the banshee.
You picked the banshee because of equal points.
But have those marines be in cover, and all of a sudden the banshee rocks.
And the banshee has access to a transport, I would love my stealers to not have to get shot for 2 turns getting into combat.
And the banshee goes first against everyone, even against stealers.
And the banshee gets to shoot before assaulting.

So yeah, the stealers better be better in a straight fight, since the banshee has so many other advantages.

(Marines)Rending should not be "better" than having a powersword,

Its not. A stealer with rending is better than a marine with a powersword, in a straight CC situation. Give the marine rending, and he will do even worse.
But the marine also gets to shoot for a turn or two, perhaps even rapid fire.

The strength of the stealer is not rending, it is rending coupled with I6, WS6, fleet, and 2 attacks.
But it is countered by low save, no transport, no range.

[Hyper Kinetic]

Though the Assault Cannon point is almost totally true (the only difference being that Lascannons have twice the range and are AP2, so their regular shots still penetrate all armour at a much longer distance, hence the higher points).
Shooting Rending should be toned down, in my opinion, and in particular the Assault Cannon. I thought the point of the Assault Cannon having 4 shots was that it was supposed to get something through eventually... adding Rending on top of that seems almost too much. But does changing them to AP1 on the to wound roll (assuming it works for Armour Penetration too) make it now a little too much against vehicles? This would mean that all glances now become penetrating... though with a possible change to penetration rules it might not be so bad.
Forced March would be pretty good for the CC Fex. Means they would get there in a reasonable time... the Nidzilla list suddenly just got a boost...
Auto hitting rear armour in CC seems a little silly too... It would be nice if we were able to hit Walkers on their rear armour if they were surrounded though.

Meh... rumours are rumours. It's all speculation until something more solid, like an official release date, comes out.

[Psychichobo]

Is the fex classed as Infantry? I'm not sure if it would get that march bonus... or do all things with feet get it?
Also, quick word on the rending, don't forget that it's hit and miss, as there are those worse case scenarios where you get no Rending sixes at all. I've had my fair share of those...
I think we can cope with that new rending rule, it just means we have less chance of landing a rending hit, rather than it being weaker.
I'm just more annoyed at the effect it'll have on our tank-busting capabilities. We don't have a particularly effective manner of killing vehicles other than MC's and a lot of shooting, and rending. It was always good to throw a lichtor at a whirlwind and hope for one good rending to pull it into pieces.

[Enigma]

I think that rending should just be toned down for ranged combat, because i can see the assault cannon's point, but the genestealers and the howling banshees don't make it look like a good idea. It's sort of like comparing devilgaunts to termagants without calculating the range, or spinegaunts to hormagaunts without adding in spinegaunt shooting. At range, rending should be toned down, but in CC, it should be the same. Rename ranged rending if it makes you feel better.