DA 8th Edition Info

[shabbadoo]

"unless the ability in question says otherwise, a model with a rule like this is always within range of the effect"

 

Under Aura Abilities, side note on one of the shooting pages.

Dang side notes! Some folks cropped the side notes off of the posted Core Rules pics before posting them, but now I at least know I haven't seen everything about the Core Rules just yet.  At least this is covered in a universal manner. Now, if they would have just called the rule "Icon of Old Caliban (Aura):" it would be perfectly obvious that there is a particualr "Aura" rule that governs this particular universal thing. Also using *keywords* for rules would...um...be a good idea GW, because just how many things in the game would an "Aura" keyword apply to? Only a dozen or two in ***EACH*** army list (i.e. "Rites of Battle (Aura):" etc.). C'mon GW! This one's a no-brainer, and I don't think I am nit-picking here!. If you wan the game to be easy for n00bs to learn then make it n00b-proof!

Edited June 4, 2017 by shabbadoo

[Pbenner]

1: take a land raider crusader

2: put azreal near it

3: enjoy having nearly 40 shots rerolling to hit with a 4+ invuln land raider. Take multiple for maximum dakka.

4: stick techmarines inside if you don't want friends.

 

This made me smile very very much.  I will do this.  Excuse to get 2 more LRC...

[FlamingDeth]

Reading the main rules I don't think the techmarine can fix it from inside, but he can jog along behind.

[Elios Harg]

Reading the main rules I don't think the techmarine can fix it from inside, but he can jog along behind.

I got the same impression. On the bright side, the techmarine no longer wastes his movement, turn, etc. doing the fixing. It's an instant thing at the end of the movement phase and has no impact on the rest of the turn for either the techmarine or the vehicle. I like the idea of having a group of dreadnoughts or venerable dreadnoughts with Azrael and a Techmarine in the middle. Azrael provides a re-roll and invulnerable save bubble and the techmarine repairs any damage the dreads take. If you put the techmarine on a bike, he can conceivably repair any dreadnought in any given turn even if he had to repair one the turn before.

[Ezzeran]

So am I reading this right to calculate the points?

 

Take the model cost and add in their equipment? So Deathwing terminator is base cost of the model plus the storm bolter plus the powerfist?

 

Just want to make sure I am not missing anything since point costs don't seem to be on the data cards.

 

Ezz

[Elios Harg]

So am I reading this right to calculate the points?

 

Take the model cost and add in their equipment? So Deathwing terminator is base cost of the model plus the storm bolter plus the powerfist?

 

Just want to make sure I am not missing anything since point costs don't seem to be on the data cards.

 

Ezz

Yes, unless otherwise noted, you add up all the models' wargear (unique characters typically indicate that it is included in the cost). That is why some stuff is priced 0.

[Knight Master Eladric]

1: take a land raider crusader

2: put azreal near it

3: enjoy having nearly 40 shots rerolling to hit with a 4+ invuln land raider. Take multiple for maximum dakka.

4: stick techmarines inside if you don't want friends.

5: line 2-3 darkshrouds up behind the group

[Crazy Jay]

 

1: take a land raider crusader

2: put azreal near it

3: enjoy having nearly 40 shots rerolling to hit with a 4+ invuln land raider. Take multiple for maximum dakka.

4: stick techmarines inside if you don't want friends.

5: line 2-3 darkshrouds up behind the group

Did Dark Angels just become the "whole army as a Death Star" army? Seriously though, I'm really interested in running 2 jump pack Chaplains with an assault squad just to crush the enemy in the morale phase. I really like our options and the viability of our whole army.

[Solrac]

So on Saturday me and a couple of my friends were invited to go to our local Warhammer store to help get the new box set ready for intro games for the day. The starter set is fantastic and Primaris Marines so easy to put together, totally glad I pre-ordered a box.

 

Also as I was putting together Primaris Marines, in the assembly book for the Dark Angels it gives you the colour scheme and shows you a picture of the DA transfers that you get in the box. I think this has offered a clue on how Primaris Marines will fit in the companies. All the normal Squad Markings were there (Tactical, Assault, Devastator) however the clue was in the squad numbers. You get squad 1, 2, 10 and 16 for markings. A little weird since there are no transfers for 11 - 15 but it's a clue nonetheless. I think thats why they may have stopped making the Chapter specific transfer sheets as there will need to be more numbers available.

 

Had a look at Imperium 1 at our DA entries and I really like it considering the books are just something to get us playing and not an actual codex. I read through the fluff to see if there was anything in there about how companies fit in the Primaris Marines and there was nothing however there was a line in there saying that Guilliman was going around to all the Chapters making sure they were Codex Compliant and the DA petitioned to keep the 1st and 2nd Companies as they are and Gulliman allowed it.

 

Played a few intro games and ran a few intro games as well. Played 21 power points a side with a friend on a 2 x 4 with an objective in the middle. I used Nurgle he used Primaris Marines. The game was brutal but really quick and fun to play and just as tactical as it was before and in some cases more tactics were required. Also reading all the leaks I always thought to myself I will never supercharge plasmas cause on 1 your guy just dies but my Plasma toting Plague Marine killed 3 Primaris Marines on his own. Definitely worth it in the right circumstance.

 

Also one other thing that has changed that I liked was how you hold objectives. You hold an objective if you have more models within 3" of the centre of the objective than your opponent. There is no more obsec. This forces you to think about taking large squads which I like and also gives a disadvantage to "Elite" low model count armies.

[Berzul]

So, anyone think about switch from regular Points, over to Power Points, to start making armies and playing games? I've been mulling over the advantages/disadvantages of this method of play.

 

Mainly, that you would no longer have issues with exact budgeting for a list. Gives room to focus more on what you want to bring, instead of what you can bring.

 

But, it adds a certain potential for imbalance, when it comes to upgrades and special/heavy weapons.

 

Still, it kind of feels like a good system. As far as I can tell, every 25 power points would be equivalent to 500 regular points.

[jbaeza94]

I am thinking of using power mostly, but it'll depend on what my new store prefers. My army is going the fluffy route, with not always the best loadouts, so it'll be fun to play against similar built armies

[Syphid]

Now maybe I'm missing something, but as far as I can tell you can fire Rapid Fire and Heavy weapons and still Charge so... What's the benefit of Assault Marines without Jump Packs over Tacticals?  I guess if you are going to be in combat for more than one turn you get the extra attack from the chainsword, but aside from that it seems the only benefit is Eviscerators and double Flamers.  If I understand the rules, each model gets to fire all of its weapons so each tactical marine can rapid fire his Boltgun, the fire his Bolt Pistol, then charge for 1 attack - making it four Str 4 attacks hitting on 3+ in a turn.  Assault can only fire the pistol and then make Chainsword attacks, so that's 3 Str 4 attacks.  And that's not including special or heavy weapons.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Syphid

[Elios Harg]

So, anyone think about switch from regular Points, over to Power Points, to start making armies and playing games? I've been mulling over the advantages/disadvantages of this method of play.

 

Mainly, that you would no longer have issues with exact budgeting for a list. Gives room to focus more on what you want to bring, instead of what you can bring.

 

But, it adds a certain potential for imbalance, when it comes to upgrades and special/heavy weapons.

 

Still, it kind of feels like a good system. As far as I can tell, every 25 power points would be equivalent to 500 regular points.

I feel that it would only really work if everyone maxes out their upgrades on every unit. For instance, a tactical sergeant can have a power sword or a power fist, but the power fist is decidedly more powerful as they have the same AP, but the fist has x2 S and D3 damage instead of 1. Without points the only benefit of the sword is no -1 to hit. Yet, these are both 'free' options under power level. Thus, if every tactical squad takes a powerfist and a combi-weapon on their sergeant, a plasma gun or meltagun, and a grav cannon, lascannon, or missile launcher, then it is "worth" its power level. If you take anything less than that, then you are essentially giving up too much. I think power level works fine when balance doesn't really matter for the battle, such as for narrative or just getting in a quick game to teach someone how to play. However, it does not work well when you are trying to have a balanced game between roughly equal power armies.

 

An example, you state that 25 power level is roughly equal to 500 points. Yet, I can field a 5-man tactical squad that costs me 5 power level, but would only cost 65 points. In 500 points, I could have 7 of these units and have 45 points to spare. In power level, I could only have 5. Using power level, I could also have 5 squads of 5 tactical marines with a power fist, combi-plasma, and a grav-cannon. The two kinds of squads, all boltguns and the one with upgrades, are the same power level, but one unit will assuredly wipe the floor with the other.

 

 

Now maybe I'm missing something, but as far as I can tell you can fire Rapid Fire and Heavy weapons and still Charge so... What's the benefit of Assault Marines without Jump Packs over Tacticals?  I guess if you are going to be in combat for more than one turn you get the extra attack from the chainsword, but aside from that it seems the only benefit is Eviscerators and double Flamers.  If I understand the rules, each model gets to fire all of its weapons so each tactical marine can rapid fire his Boltgun, the fire his Bolt Pistol, then charge for 1 attack - making it four Str 4 attacks hitting on 3+ in a turn.  Assault can only fire the pistol and then make Chainsword attacks, so that's 3 Str 4 attacks.  And that's not including special or heavy weapons.

 

 

You can fire all your pistols or all your non-pistols/non-grenade weapons or one model may throw a grenade instead of any other weapons. So, the advantage of the assault marine is that it gets his pistol in its own shooting phase (or overwatch), plus 2 attacks in every fight phase. Meanwhile, the tactical marine gets his bolter on the charge (either his own shooting phase then charging or overwatch), plus 1 attack in the first fight phase, then his pistol in his own shooting phase plus 1 attack in every fight phase.

 

This means that the Tactical marine is as good as an assault marine (3 total S4 attacks) on the charge. But he's worse in any prolonged close combat.

 

You were comparing foot assault marines. When you add in Jump Packs, of course, the assault marine now moves faster and is, therefore, more likely to get a charge. However, the assault marines fly, so they can shoot when they disengage, this gives some tactical flexibility to them as it may be more beneficial to fall back and shoot at the unit (or another unit) with pistols, flamers, etc. plus other nearby units than to continue fighting one more round.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Elios Harg

[twopounder]

The old 3+ on 2d6 TDA save worked...and would work...just fine, except for people who are so mentally slow as to not be able to quickly add a number no greater than 6 to 3, and then add two numbers - each no greater than six - to one another and see if the total is lower than the first number. I know people don't have six fingers on each hand to help them out in figuring things, but I also know it is possible to the most imbecilic of people to actually learn to do such simple mental math *in a second or two*; especially if there is some sort of personal impetus for them learning to do so. And people can do this simple math without being jacked up on Sapho juice. Besides, if somebody is having to make 20-30 TDA saves because they are playing so gigantic a game that that is even going to happen I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt that, if they could count high enough to add up their army list points in the first place, they will probably be just fine figuring out 20-30 saves in this manner. There would probably be an app for those who need their butts wiped for them anyways. If you want an example of something cumbersome, we could go back to throwing frag grenades, rolling for scatter for each one that misses, and rolling a 4+ for every model not completely covered any small blast template to see if it is hit. Now, imagine that being done for 30 models who all threw frag grenades. And then there are the rolls for wounding and saves - maybe some of them against TDA! Yeah, those 3+ on 2d6 TDA saves are sounding pretty simple now, aren't they. And it will happen, because we all just have to play stupidly large games all of the time just so we can complain about how the rules don't work quickly enough, and are therefore stupid!

 

Anyways, I don't recall any legitimate rumor of the 3+ TDA thing coming back. It is only conjecture based on the Shadow War: Armageddon rules. Doesn't mean the rule couldn't come back though...

 

Sorry, have to take this on. Been bugging me for a while.

 

Not going to give my credentials, but I guess you could say I'm not mentally slow.

 

Why don't you roll 2d6 for a 3+ save when the unit takes 40 wounds from 4 different weapon AP's. Over 5 turns. 

 

Now tell me, are you mentally slow or could this possibly just be sped up a bit?

[Solrac]

So, anyone think about switch from regular Points, over to Power Points, to start making armies and playing games? I've been mulling over the advantages/disadvantages of this method of play.

 

Mainly, that you would no longer have issues with exact budgeting for a list. Gives room to focus more on what you want to bring, instead of what you can bring.

 

But, it adds a certain potential for imbalance, when it comes to upgrades and special/heavy weapons.

 

Still, it kind of feels like a good system. As far as I can tell, every 25 power points would be equivalent to 500 regular points.

 

We used Power Points on Saturday because it's a lot quicker to get models onto the table. That and the games weren't supposed to be competitive in any way.

 

My gaming group will most likely stick to Matched Play Points unless we are playing some sort of Narrative game.

[Elios Harg]

Hmmm... I am a bit annoyed at the nerf to terminators' heavy weapons. Yes, overall, shooty terminators have improved vastly due to superior storm bolters. Yet, assault cannons, plasma cannons and cyclone missile launchers are now a 4+ to hit when moving. This mitigates some of the gained firepower, especially for mix n' match Deathwing squads.  The assault cannon is still a net win (compared to keeping 4 shots in 8th). As we will get 3 hits on average versus 2 2/3 hits with 4 shot. Plasma cannons just don't seem worth taking. Getting 1-3 shots which have a 50% chance of hitting with only a +1 S and -2 AP over assault cannons is just not exciting. On average, you will get 1 hit per volley. That's a 56% chance of killing a single marine. The assault cannon will average killing 1 marine per turn. Amusingly, the cyclone missile launcher using krak missiles is about the same effectiveness as the plasma cannon at killing marines. The advantage there is that it has greater versatility with frags and packs the storm bolter as well. The combined storm bolter and CML is almost as efficient as the assault cannon at marine killing when within 12". It is, of course, better at killing vehicles and multiple wound infantry (like Primaris marines and terminators). Using the combination of teleport strike, CML and split fire will cause people to need to be very careful about placing their important characters on the board. I'm not sure that justifies being almost 2.5 times more expensive than the assault cannon, though.

 

Once again losing TH/SS/CML Deathwing due to poor wording is also quite annoying. Hopefully, that one gets fixed with an FAQ or, at least, when the Dark Angels codex comes out.

[Ezzeran]

Where the plasma cannon may be better is against vehicle/monstrous targets, tho I haven't done the math yet. What I did observe, after looking through all the available data is that T7 seems to be the vehicle "standard" toughness. Notable exceptions are Land Raiders, Monoliths and Leman Russ tanks. Actually, Leman Russ tanks may even warrant a separate thread...

 

Oh, and the 36" range on plasma. I never found the extra range of the cyclones to be worth much, given SB were 24, but since cyclones and plasma are now both 36", I really see very little case for cyclones in any capacity.

 

Ezz

[FlamingDeth]

On the topic of points vs power levels, I'm still

not convinced that the points are balanced enough that the exact gear costs etc are that important. Power levels are probably just as balanced as the points. Also, just spamming the higher cost gear with power levels might seem like you're getting free points but that doesn't mean you're making a well balanced army.

[shabbadoo]

 

The old 3+ on 2d6 TDA save worked...and would work...just fine, except for people who are so mentally slow as to not be able to quickly add a number no greater than 6 to 3, and then add two numbers - each no greater than six - to one another and see if the total is lower than the first number. I know people don't have six fingers on each hand to help them out in figuring things, but I also know it is possible to the most imbecilic of people to actually learn to do such simple mental math *in a second or two*; especially if there is some sort of personal impetus for them learning to do so. And people can do this simple math without being jacked up on Sapho juice. Besides, if somebody is having to make 20-30 TDA saves because they are playing so gigantic a game that that is even going to happen I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt that, if they could count high enough to add up their army list points in the first place, they will probably be just fine figuring out 20-30 saves in this manner. There would probably be an app for those who need their butts wiped for them anyways. If you want an example of something cumbersome, we could go back to throwing frag grenades, rolling for scatter for each one that misses, and rolling a 4+ for every model not completely covered any small blast template to see if it is hit. Now, imagine that being done for 30 models who all threw frag grenades. And then there are the rolls for wounding and saves - maybe some of them against TDA! Yeah, those 3+ on 2d6 TDA saves are sounding pretty simple now, aren't they. And it will happen, because we all just have to play stupidly large games all of the time just so we can complain about how the rules don't work quickly enough, and are therefore stupid!

 

Anyways, I don't recall any legitimate rumor of the 3+ TDA thing coming back. It is only conjecture based on the Shadow War: Armageddon rules. Doesn't mean the rule couldn't come back though...

 

Sorry, have to take this on. Been bugging me for a while.

 

Not going to give my credentials, but I guess you could say I'm not mentally slow.

 

Why don't you roll 2d6 for a 3+ save when the unit takes 40 wounds from 4 different weapon AP's. Over 5 turns. 

 

Now tell me, are you mentally slow or could this possibly just be sped up a bit?

 

My apologies if the comment came off as being directed at you, but  it was not. Sorry that you have dwelt on it at all. It was just a general (overly exaggerated in a humorous manner I thought) comment regarding anyone who can't handle simple math using single digit numbers. People generally master such skills by the time they are 7 years old, which is half the recommended age for this game, so it shouldn't be an issue is all I meant. I have taught children math for more than a decade, and they do learn very well what they have a desire to learn. You want a kid to learn math? Give them a game they like that requires it, and they will learn that required math quicker than you could ever dream possible. Others people generally respond just as well to the same motivation, but not always (age/hubris/self defensiveness are issues that increase as the learner gets older). Now people will once again not only have to add single digit numbers to other single digit numbers and subtract single digit numbers from other single digit numbers sometimes, but also need to know how to multiply and divided by 2 and what "more than" and "less than" mean. If somebody can do all of that, they can play 40K 8E. If they can do it quickly, as most people can, most people will enjoy playing a game with them. If they can't do it quickly, well, it sucks to be their opponent. Hopefully the end result will be that people will be "more smarterer" so far as simple math is concerned (never a bad thing).

 

Edit: Anyways, the 2d6 thing won't be an issue, as GW simplified things pretty well, and in an interesting way, with a 2+ save and +1 Wound for TDA models.

 

Cheers.

 

Also, saw the starter set today.  Models look pretty nice, and I will likely get it, though I need more models like I need a hole in the head. The high point may actually be the giant book it comes with, which has good amount of new fluff in it I'd like to read.

Edited June 5, 2017 by shabbadoo

[Berzul]

I have seen some comments and reviews, where people state that this edition is tough on transports. Due to their cost, and the fact that through wounds they can become just as slow as normal infantry. How are your opinions on the subject?

 

Gotta say, at 72 points base per rhino, and 105 points base per drop pod (considering the storm bolters they must come with), it IS quite expensive, considering that tactical marines stayed at a similar cost than 7th ed. The razorback I feel got better, considering a lascannon razorback went up in cost just 40 points per model (instead of straing up doubling or almost tripling its old cost). Specially with the changes to how transports attack, move and resist damage.

 

Rhinos and Drop Pods still worry me. They got seriously harder to fit into an army. Sure, they give you that T7 shell over the tacticals, but that can still be wounded at a 3+ y S4 to S6 weapons (which, there are a lot of, and in masse), so taking off the first 5 wounds on the transport itself does not look that difficult. And after 5 hits, you pretty much wrecked it, since the tacticals can no longer fire from the hatch, which means there is no point in staying inside the transport in a stationary position, and you are going to have to get out of the transport like it or not, as soon as it becomes damaged.

 

I can see the use in their speed for the first couple of turns, but at THAT cost, a rhino seems like a bad idea, to be honest. Cost-to-effect-wise, I mean.

 

Drop pod are still awesome, specially since you can now bring them and drop them all turn 1, after movement... but at 105 points base, you'd be lucky to fit one or two in the army. Same thing goes for Landraiders, that got their own costs increased a lot.

 

I have the feeling that this edition will indeed be one without many transports driven around the board, and one where infantry will have to depend on numbers over armor plating to survive.

[jbaeza94]

Berzul, S4-S6 wounds T7 on a 5+.

S twice of T     2+

S more than T 3+

S same as T    4+

S less than T   5+

S half of T        6+

 

Its a big difference comparing 3+ to 5+. Check out my Heavy Weapons post, T7 Sv 3+ is on there at the very bottom.

Edited June 5, 2017 by jbaeza94

[SnakeChisler]

Points wise the Rhino's Razors and drop pods are done at certain points for varying reasons

 

Drop pods so you have a cost to say dropping a load of Devastators with heavy weapons down and nuking your opponents big stuff in his backfield.

Imagine 2 squads of dev's who can have different weapons drop down with Azreal and Ezekiel so all units get 4++ and twin linked so hitting on 4's but re-rolling now stick 2 grav & 2 melta in each squad to manipulate the split fire and give the Sg's combi plasma.

 

10  guys * 2 in Rhinos with chainswords plasma pistols power weapons and a Chaplain sounds good

 

And lastly Razorbacks with a choice of dual-HB dual-las las-back or assault cannon are a decent small tank and points wise they all have something to offer

[Berzul]

Berzul, S4-S6 wounds T7 on a 5+.

S twice of T     2+

S more than T 3+

S same as T    4+

S less than T   5+

S half of T        6+

 

Its a big difference comparing 3+ to 5+. Check out my Heavy Weapons post, T7 Sv 3+ is on there at the very bottom.

I turned the curve on its head, hahahaha! sorry. I meant the other way around. What I meant is that wounding on 5+ is a difference, but not THAT big a difference, when you consider the cost.

[templarphoenix]

Vehicles are very durable now, no more single lascannon/melta at turn 1.

Besides, explode is really hurt...

[twopounder]

 

 

The old 3+ on 2d6 TDA save worked...and would work...just fine, except for people who are so mentally slow as to not be able to quickly add a number no greater than 6 to 3, and then add two numbers - each no greater than six - to one another and see if the total is lower than the first number. I know people don't have six fingers on each hand to help them out in figuring things, but I also know it is possible to the most imbecilic of people to actually learn to do such simple mental math *in a second or two*; especially if there is some sort of personal impetus for them learning to do so. And people can do this simple math without being jacked up on Sapho juice. Besides, if somebody is having to make 20-30 TDA saves because they are playing so gigantic a game that that is even going to happen I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt that, if they could count high enough to add up their army list points in the first place, they will probably be just fine figuring out 20-30 saves in this manner. There would probably be an app for those who need their butts wiped for them anyways. If you want an example of something cumbersome, we could go back to throwing frag grenades, rolling for scatter for each one that misses, and rolling a 4+ for every model not completely covered any small blast template to see if it is hit. Now, imagine that being done for 30 models who all threw frag grenades. And then there are the rolls for wounding and saves - maybe some of them against TDA! Yeah, those 3+ on 2d6 TDA saves are sounding pretty simple now, aren't they. And it will happen, because we all just have to play stupidly large games all of the time just so we can complain about how the rules don't work quickly enough, and are therefore stupid!

 

Anyways, I don't recall any legitimate rumor of the 3+ TDA thing coming back. It is only conjecture based on the Shadow War: Armageddon rules. Doesn't mean the rule couldn't come back though...

 

Sorry, have to take this on. Been bugging me for a while.

 

Not going to give my credentials, but I guess you could say I'm not mentally slow.

 

Why don't you roll 2d6 for a 3+ save when the unit takes 40 wounds from 4 different weapon AP's. Over 5 turns. 

 

Now tell me, are you mentally slow or could this possibly just be sped up a bit?

 

My apologies if the comment came off as being directed at you, but  it was not. Sorry that you have dwelt on it at all. It was just a general (overly exaggerated in a humorous manner I thought) comment regarding anyone who can't handle simple math using single digit numbers. People generally master such skills by the time they are 7 years old, which is half the recommended age for this game, so it shouldn't be an issue is all I meant. I have taught children math for more than a decade, and they do learn very well what they have a desire to learn. You want a kid to learn math? Give them a game they like that requires it, and they will learn that required math quicker than you could ever dream possible. Others people generally respond just as well to the same motivation, but not always (age/hubris/self defensiveness are issues that increase as the learner gets older). Now people will once again not only have to add single digit numbers to other single digit numbers and subtract single digit numbers from other single digit numbers sometimes, but also need to know how to multiply and divided by 2 and what "more than" and "less than" mean. If somebody can do all of that, they can play 40K 8E. If they can do it quickly, as most people can, most people will enjoy playing a game with them. If they can't do it quickly, well, it sucks to be their opponent. Hopefully the end result will be that people will be "more smarterer" so far as simple math is concerned (never a bad thing).

 

Edit: Anyways, the 2d6 thing won't be an issue, as GW simplified things pretty well, and in an interesting way, with a 2+ save and +1 Wound for TDA models.

 

Cheers.

 

Also, saw the starter set today.  Models look pretty nice, and I will likely get it, though I need more models like I need a hole in the head. The high point may actually be the giant book it comes with, which has good amount of new fluff in it I'd like to read.

 

 

Probably came off a little more harsh than I intended, but its the first thing I've read every time I enter the thread, so it was bugging the crap out of me. Its okay to disagree on rules, but that doesn't mean people are any less capable of using them.

 

Anyway, on the topic of transports, I think they're going to be used for the 50% of troops on the ground for the deep striking units and are expected to die fairly quickly afterwards. Since you can assault out of all transports now, they won't do much after turn 2 anyway unless they have substantial firepower.