5th Edition Rumours

[Psychichobo]

koyori said:

Is it just me who did note that rending when moved to "wound" as it is said in the leaked dex, is totally useless against tanks? It says rending only takes place on the "to wound" roll, tanks how ever don't have wounds, which means stealers, raveners and lictors will have very little chance of taking out tanks. With this the only reliable anti tank weapon we have is Warp Blast.

I thought that with the current rending, against vehicles you roll to hit normally, and if you get a six then it doesn't matter, but on the penetration rolls if you roll a six then you get to roll another dice to add to armour penetration...

[Sledgehammer]

Psychichobo: exactly

[Koyori]

psychichobo said:

I thought that with the current rending, against vehicles you roll to hit normally, and if you get a six then it doesn't matter, but on the penetration rolls if you roll a six then you get to roll another dice to add to armour penetration...

Your correct about how rending works in current edit, what I had missed in 5th edit was the thing about rending vs tanks. As it said that you only counted rending hits on "to wound" rolls, now since tanks don't have wounds it would have meant you could not rend at all against tanks.

[coredump]

Plus, apparently, all CC hits will go on the rear armor.

So we used to get +d6, but now D3
But even attacking the front of a pred, we only need an 11, and not 13. So it kind of balances...

It also means that +S HGs will be able to take out the front of some transports and such.

[Overread]

thing is to me the attacking the rear of the armour takes some (ok a lot) of tactics out. Parking a tank in an alley now loses all meaning. Its cutting at the realism of the game a little too much

[coredump]

Depends on how you think of it.

Don't think of it as hitting the rear armor, think of it as being able to take advantage of the weakspots. Tossing a grenade into the view slot, taking out the treads, jamming the turret, etc. These should make it easier to take out a tank, hence getting credit for hitting the lower armor value.

[Enigma]

And for stuff like Land Raiders and Monoliths with AV14 all round, they are fully sealed, or close to it

[graveaccomplice]

sewerstalker said:

Well, for now im not gonna buy anything until 5th is released.

And hopefully *crosses fingers* the pdf and the rumours are fake.

This would be part of my reasoning as to why its not fake. Too many folks would think along these lines. GW would have to say something to prevent this. Instead, JJ refuses to say anything when asked about 5th ed (per a warseer rumor thread).

[Aldair]

If rending vs tanks is reduced to an addition d3 instead of a d6 it will be impossible for a stealer w/o toxin sacs to kill an AV14 vehicle. Even with toxin sacs you will need a 6 + 3 to land a glancing hit. Assuming the tanks moved 6", the odds of landing a glancing hit is... 1:36. For killing it, it's 1:218. And that's per dice. If the tank moved it's full 12" then the odds go up to 1:108 (killing is 1:648). If the tank was stationary the odds are a comfortable 1:18 (killing is 1:108).

Right now the odds for glancing or better (w/o toxin sacs) are at (for stationary) 1:12 (kill with glancing 1:216 [because you need a 4 to glance] with penetrating 1:18 [5 or 6 to penetrate], (moved 6") 1:24 (glance kill 1:432; penetrating kill 1:72), (moved 12"), 1:72 (glance kill 1:1296[explained below] penetrating kill 1:216).
With toxin sacs the odds improve a good bit.

Just an after thought... The way I set up the figures it's (for 1:108) 1 roll out of every 108 rolls will statistically do a glancing hit or better.

Whoops, totally forgot the damage chart.

Ok, how to calculate odds 101:

There is a 1 in 6 chance of calling the number of a die that has been rolled. If you can do it twice in a row it becomes 1 in 36. 1 in 6 the first time multiplied by the 1 in 6 the second time (so 6x6 = 36).

How the 1:1296 is calculated:

You need a 6 to hit (1 in 6). You need a 6 to rend and do damage (another 1 in 6). You need a 4 to glance (another 1 in 6; there's only 1 four). Then you need another 6 to get a Vehicle Destroyed! result (1 in 6). So the formula is 6x6x6x6 = 1296.

The penetrating hit kill on the same situation.

Need a 6 to hit (1 in 6). Need another 6 to rend (1 in 6). Need a 5 or 6 to penetrate (1 in 3. 6 divided by 2 = 3). Then you need a 4, 5, or 6 to kill (1 in 2. 6 divided by 3 = 2). So the formula is 6x6x3x2 = 216.

Just to boast, I landed the 1:1296 shot just last weekend. I had a squad of 2 stealers assault an Orc Battlewagon. The first one didn't hit but the other landed two rends and a hit. The hit didn't do anything and the 1st rend was a glancing hit and the 2nd was a penetrating. I rolled the glancing first and rolled a six. *boom*. The battlewagon in question had moved 13" the turn before (Red Wunz Go Faster!).

[WestRider]

The Rear Armour in Assaults thing isn't in the PDF I have, and I've not heard it from anyone who has the PDF, or is referring to any source more recent than the original round of rumours. The only thing even close to it is that if a Walker attempts a Death or Glory attack against a Ramming Tank and fails, it takes the Ramming hit on Rear Armour.

Apparently there have been substantial changes since that PDF got out, as well, since some of the more recent rumours, and even a couple of public statements from Jervis, IIRC, flat out contradict a few of the things that are in there. Take it all with a grain of salt, and wait for the actual release before you do anything about it.

[coredump]

At this point I can't even say where I heard about the 'rear armor' thing. I haven't looked at my .pdf yet, so I must have heard it from some other board or blog. Who know how reliable it is.

But yeah, I was all jazzed about getting a copy of the leaked rules... then realized that it was going to get changed so much it didn't matter....

[Hive Fleet Green Locust]

I don't know why everyone thinks the suppossed change to rending is so bad. Not only does it streamline the game, it makes more sense fluff-wise. You have to hit something before you can rip it apart. We don't even lose that many attacks.

Ex. 6 vanilla stealers vs. 10 marines (current ed.)
Stealers go first (18 atx on charge), w/ WS 6 we get 12 hits, statistically only 3 rends and of the other 9 hits, 4-5 wound and marines wound save all but 1 or 2. About 4-5 dead marines

Same ex., 5th ed.
Stealers go first (18 atx on charge), w/ WS 6 we get 12 hits, 6 wounds of which 2 will be rends, and the marines might fail 1-2 saves. About 3-4 dead marines.

Some we only lose 1 rend and that's in a perfectly statistically example. I personally always roll higher then statistically when I get more dice to roll (and usually all 1's & 2's when I have very few dice to roll), so rolling more on the to wound is much better for me anyway.

As far as vehicles are concerned, rending currently isn't that great at tank-hunting anyway and since we might get to roll on rear armour, 'stealers, warriors and raveners have an even better chance against vehicle.

In all I haven't heard any rumor that has made 'nids any less effective (other than no longer being able to hide behind cover). However, my eldar might get the shaft. I particularly do not like the skimmer nerf and str 4 weapons becoming defensive weapons. This will mean that my grav-tanks won't always recieve glancing hits and will only be able to fire 1 weapon a turn.

I started Eldar specifically to have jetbikes and skimmers only. It is bad enough that in the current ed. I rarely get to shoot my skimmer anyway because they are always shaken, but if the 5+ cover save thing is true, more than half of my army list will go down first and second turn. I know everyone hates how "cheesy" falcons and other Eldar vehicles are, but we pay a lot for them and they don't get much fire power (BS 3). You pay a lot for them to have survivable scoring units and fire magnets. Since they may not even be scoring anymore and may be penetrated, I don't know what I am going to do with my army that I just spent so much money, time & effort on.

[Aldair]

Your math is wrong.

18 attacks vs. marines would mean 12 hits. There should be 2 rends and 4 regular wounds. (4 strength vs 4 tough = 50% wounds) Marines should save 3 leaving only 3 marines dead. That's pathetic for genestealer squad.

Current rules version:

18 attacks would mean 12 hits. Of those 2 would be rending leaving 10 normal hits. Then there should be 5 wounds followed by 3 saves. That would mean 4 dead marines. I find that acceptable for a squad of 6 stealers seeing as how my 10 man squads kill 6 or 7 marines on the charge usually.

[Hive Fleet Green Locust]

My math is not wrong. Out of 18 dice, 3 (not 2) will be 6's, leaving 9 hits to wound remaining.

You are thinking of how many 6's you get out of 12 'to hit' rolls, but you get 18 (which means statistically 3 of every # on a D6)

[Aldair]

Ahh, there's my mistake. And a stupid one.

I was counting hits as rolls of 1,2,3,4,5,6 instead of 3,4,5,6,3,4,5,6.

It was dumb seeing as 1s and 2s never hit (well, 2s hit for Kharn).