Wh40k 10th Edition Terminator Datasheet, Rapid Fire and "Anti" Rules

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Oddity said:

 

I think it's a distinct possibility that we see a strength increase. My guess would be that at the high end we'll get stuff like railguns and the superheavy AT weapons with strength 12 or 14 (wherever theycap the new toughness stats), with las going to 10, melta 9, autocannon and plasma 8, and heavy bolters/assault cannins at 6. That gives a bit more granularity among special and AT weapons while keeping each one as a threat to its preferred target profile.

 

Heavy bolt rifle variants and Tau pulse weapons will probably top standard-issue infantry guns at S5 to reflect their main role of combating other infantry, since realistically line infantry shouldn't be doing major damage to heavy infantry or vehicles without specialist weapons.

The strongest AT will probably be 1 above the T cap to allow the best weapons to W on a 3+
either that or they’ll get anti-vehicle3+

[Rhavien]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Oddity said:

 

I think it's a distinct possibility that we see a strength increase. My guess would be that at the high end we'll get stuff like railguns and the superheavy AT weapons with strength 12 or 14 (wherever theycap the new toughness stats), with las going to 10, melta 9, autocannon and plasma 8, and heavy bolters/assault cannins at 6. That gives a bit more granularity among special and AT weapons while keeping each one as a threat to its preferred target profile.

I really hope they don't increase the weapon strength on all fronts. The mentioned goal was to decrease lethality and not to add granularity. Tanks and monsters need to feel like tanks and monsters again and not made out of paper like they do now. If you increase toughness and also increase strength we are exactly where we are now, but you are now wounding anything else on 2+. 

[Focslain]

4 minutes ago, Rhavien said:

I really hope they don't increase the weapon strength on all fronts. The mentioned goal was to decrease lethality and not to add granularity. Tanks and monsters need to feel like tanks and monsters again and not made out of paper like they do now. If you increase toughness and also increase strength we are exactly where we are now, but you are now wounding anything else on 2+. 

I don't think they'll increase the strength, they be the same with the Anti- rule, things like the Tau railgun and Vanquisher cannon should at least have anti-vehicle 3+ minimum. But still keep the high strength to deal with monsters as those weapons should be able to punch a wraithlord/carnifex off their feet.

[Lemondish]

52 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

I mean... compare your typical bolter with a heavy bolter.. aint nobody thinking they're firing the same bolts.

Honestly, I thought that was just a tradition of senseless jank best epitomized by Azrael's old bullpup bolter. It's not that it doesn't make sense, it does, it's more I just naturally expected a heavy bolter to just be the SAW to the boltguns 'rifle' role, y'know?

[Marshal Reinhard]

3 minutes ago, Lemondish said:

Honestly, I thought that was just a tradition of senseless jank best epitomized by Azrael's old bullpup bolter. It's not that it doesn't make sense, it does, it's more I just naturally expected a heavy bolter to just be the SAW to the boltguns 'rifle' role, y'know?

I'm saying its a SAW to the heavy bolt rifle

[Mr. Oddity]

Fair points, I forgot about the new Anti rule. That would definitely be a cleaner solution.

[Lemondish]

4 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

I'm saying its a SAW to the heavy bolt rifle

Makes sense to see it that way.

 

Apologies, though - I didn't mean to derail the thread. Back to Terminators! I'm grumpy we didn't get our originally promised look at the new faction rules lol

 

I actually suspect plasma won't change much, but the high end of toughness will.

Edited April 5, 2023 by Lemondish

[MARK0SIAN]

29 minutes ago, Lemondish said:

Apologies, though - I didn't mean to derail the thread. Back to Terminators! I'm grumpy we didn't get our originally promised look at the new faction rules lol

 

Yeah me too, they some how had time to do 2 articles on Bonereapers and plug the Kansas City open but couldn’t click ‘publish’ on what must surely be an already written article. 
 

Hopefully we will get a proper look at a faction tomorrow!

[Montford]

With the weapons being presented individually on these datacards I am going to guess that GW might limit weapon loadouts for Sergeants, or at least for Tactical Sergeants if they will still exist in 10th, as they usually have the greatest variety of weapon options in the various Squad types. Or Sergeants might get their own datacards separate from their Squads so that they will have the room for all the options (assuming they will still have all those options we are used to seeing them have).

Edited April 5, 2023 by Montford
Additional thought

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

3 hours ago, Rhavien said:

I really hope they don't increase the weapon strength on all fronts. The mentioned goal was to decrease lethality and not to add granularity. Tanks and monsters need to feel like tanks and monsters again and not made out of paper like they do now. If you increase toughness and also increase strength we are exactly where we are now, but you are now wounding anything else on 2+. 

I mean not necessarily. 
raising HBs from S5 to 6 really isn’t going to keep lethality down when superheavies are going up to T12 at least.

 

i agree, in general weapons should be going up in S too much, but if you’re raising T up to 12 things like lascannons and multimelta would be completely unable to do their jobs if they don’t get their S boosted.

maybe the anti rule can keep S from needing to go up a bit though.

[DesuVult]

Anti-vehicle on lascannons but keeping their S would mean pretty reliable damage to vehicles.  If anti-vehicle proliferates a lot though it could mean you need different weapons to deal with monsters or battlesuits.

[jaxom]

My greatest hope is that the Heavy Intercessor weapons are re-themed to be reinforced barrels so they can handle the short range specialist breaching and room clearing munitions they should have as the ones wearing gravis (aka Desolators don't get gravis because they're meant to sit on the back field so why the hell does a gravis unit have range 30"+ guns?).

[spessmarine]

anti-X doesn't really need to be on stuff like railguns with really high strength as it'd basically never be relevant, unless strength got capped to 10

things like poison and haywire it'd fit best, low strength but real effective against their intended target

 

ideally, not that many weapons even have anti-X

Edited April 6, 2023 by spessmarine

[Lemondish]

3 hours ago, Montford said:

With the weapons being presented individually on these datacards I am going to guess that GW might limit weapon loadouts for Sergeants, or at least for Tactical Sergeants if they will still exist in 10th, as they usually have the greatest variety of weapon options in the various Squad types. Or Sergeants might get their own datacards separate from their Squads so that they will have the room for all the options (assuming they will still have all those options we are used to seeing them have).

 

I kinda doubt they'll split off data cards for individual models. We see the terminator card has 5 ranged and 3 melee profiles listed with plenty of room to spare for more.

 

I think it's much more likely some Firstborn units lose access to certain weapons that aren't included in the box. That seems to be the trend and I don't suspect it'll slow. Take Tactical Marines as an example - of the seven melee weapons available to that sergeant only 3 are in the kit. Out of all the heavy weapons the unit can take in the rules, only one shows up in the kit. I would not be surprised if these options enter Legend status.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Lemondish

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

28 minutes ago, spessmarine said:

anti-X doesn't really need to be on stuff like railguns with really high strength as it'd basically never be relevant, unless strength got capped to 10

things like poison and haywire it'd fit best, low strength but real effective against their intended target

 

ideally, not that many weapons even have anti-X

yeah i was just thinking that if too many weapons have the anti rule it could just be a poo-show that undoes all their attempts to reduce the lethality, so hopefully that rule is applied sparingly to weapons. maybe two weapons of each anti type for shooting, and two of each type for melee weapons in the whole codex seems reasonable?

[MegaVolt87]

Good to see the anti rule, I actually submitted an example rule of that in the last two surveys which worked pretty much the same way. 

[brother_b]

I can see something like the shuriken catapult getting anti infantry.

 

We know the chainfist has anti vehicle.

 

Just speculation but what other weapons for lore reasons may get anti-x?

Im going to guess that GSC acolyte weapons will each have a specific anti-x. Maybe drill anti-vehicle, etc.

[Nephaston]

1 hour ago, brother_b said:

Just speculation but what other weapons for lore reasons may get anti-x?

Depends in how cooky crazy we want to get;

-anti-xenos for certain deathwatch weapons, maybe even specific to the species like an anti-necron weapon that dissolves living metal

-anti-chaos or anti-daemon weapons for grey knights or the emperors sword

-anti-tzeentch for the occasional khornate or anti-nurgle for the cleaning lady

-anti-bloodthirster for shalaxi helbanes spear, because why not

-anti-fun for whatever is next to be overpowered

-anti-everything for necron weapons to chase those upstarts away, lmao

 

[spessmarine]

1 hour ago, brother_b said:

I can see something like the shuriken catapult getting anti infantry.

 

We know the chainfist has anti vehicle.

 

Just speculation but what other weapons for lore reasons may get anti-x?

Im going to guess that GSC acolyte weapons will each have a specific anti-x. Maybe drill anti-vehicle, etc.

Anti-daemon definitely
Anti-everything for when 10th gets long in the tooth and GW needs to make things messy again per the usual

 

Daemon, infantry, and vehicles makes sense to me. !holy-magic from the !paladins, poison and fire for the squishies, and mucking up vehicle electric circuits respectively.

Not sure how anti-monster plays out, feels like that should either overlap with anti-infantry or anti-vehicle

[Shinespider]

I think when you factor in how few artifact-type things and such there are going to be in the new edition, it's very unlikely that weapons are going to get too specific with their "Anti-" words. If you only have a handful of them then you wouldn't want one to only be useful against a single possible opponent. Everything has to be pretty generalist.

Grey Knights will still have some Anti-daemon stuff, sure, but anti-necron and anti-nurgle are probably off the table. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I foresee 3-4 anti categories.

infantry

vehicle

monster

demon

 

with the possibility of big demons getting the monster keyword and there being no dedicated demon rule.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Interrogator Stobz]

26 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

I foresee 3-4 anti categories.

infantry

vehicle

monster

demon

 

with the possibility of big demons getting the monster keyword and there being no dedicated demon rule.

Anti Daemons runs the risk of costing issues. GK may end up struggling against non daemons or too good against them.

Anti Monster sounds fairer.

 

3 hours ago, Lemondish said:

 

I kinda doubt they'll split off data cards for individual models. We see the terminator card has 5 ranged and 3 melee profiles listed with plenty of room to spare for more.

 

I think it's much more likely some Firstborn units lose access to certain weapons that aren't included in the box. That seems to be the trend and I don't suspect it'll slow. Take Tactical Marines as an example - of the seven melee weapons available to that sergeant only 3 are in the kit. Out of all the heavy weapons the unit can take in the rules, only one shows up in the kit. I would not be surprised if these options enter Legend status.

I agree some of the Sgt weapon options will likely disappear, especially the power CC options now they are combined, but dropping the Heavy options down to ML only will really hurt Tacticals. 

One can only hope they continue to  include the Heavy weapons available in the Devastator box for Tacticals. 

The KT datasheets fit tonnes of weapon options on them, I can't see them skimping here but I'm used to disappointment by now lolz.

[MARK0SIAN]

2 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

I foresee 3-4 anti categories.

infantry

vehicle

monster

demon

 

with the possibility of big demons getting the monster keyword and there being no dedicated demon rule.

I suspect there’ll be an anti-building/fortification one as well. It’s traditional for GW to have at least one useless building/fortification rule in every edition.

[Karhedron]

10 hours ago, Lemondish said:

I actually suspect plasma won't change much, but the high end of toughness will.

 

Makes sense. With pretty high strength and moderate ROF, Plasma will be a decent jack-of-all-trades heavy/special weapon. It will be able to take a decent shot at most targets but will be outperformed by dedicated weaponry.

[Karhedron]

4 hours ago, brother_b said:

Just speculation but what other weapons for lore reasons may get anti-x?

 

Maybe we will get Hellfire Shells back for Heavy Bolters with anti-Monster 3+ since lore-wise they were designed to take down by Nids.

 

We probably won't see a huge amount of Anti-Infantry because generally wounding infantry isn't that hard anyway and it would skew against armies like Death Guard and Custodes who's signature capability is tough infantry. I can see Dark Eldar Splinter weapons getting anti-Infantry though as that is kinda their signature too. Sniper weapons would also make sense for anti-infantry.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Karhedron