Wh40k 10th Edition Weapons in 10th

[WrathOfTheLion]

Heavy will normally be paired to a lower ballistic skill to recreate units needing to stand still to hit at what their normal BS is in 9E.

 

For units that ignored the penalties for moving and shooting heavy weapons (vehicles, Terminators, Havocs, etc.) it'll just not be on their profile, as it's unnecessary.

 

Shuriken cannon didn't have it because Dark Reapers currently have an ability to move and shoot heavy weapons with no penalty, so they don't need that pairing to recreate that effect.

Edited April 19, 2023 by WrathOfTheLion

[bigtrouble]

11 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

assault cannon doesn’t have the heavy rule.

 

the shuriken cannon doesn’t have the heavy rule

 

bolt rifles do have the heavy rule.

 

clearly the weapons are being reclasified

 

To add on, there aren't even classes anymore. a weapon is not required to be "heavy" to everyone. It depends on the datasheet. Heavy isn't even a penalty, it's just a thing you can do with your weapon. I like this much more.

 

I'm actually blown away that assault weapons don't have a penalty to hit, and this all makes me think they're trying to eliminate -1 to hit modifiers, maybe those are reserved for cover or truly defensive abilities. Much more logical, if that's the way it works out, less to remember. I get +1 for my stuff, enemy gives -1 for their stuff.

 

I'm really curious to see where hit penalties live, if at all.

[Lemondish]

46 minutes ago, jaxom said:

I think the rub's in the wording. Like, will Terminators now choose weapons from the Terminator Fire Support Weapon List instead of the Terminator Heavy Weapon List? 

I'm thinking there won't be a list. I'm thinking they're going to specifically outline what weapons they have available to them in the index entry sheet rather than you having to cross-reference to a completely separate page. Not to say that cross referencing is bad, especially not when all of these things happen well before you actually make it to the table. But it still feels like something they would do.

 

42 minutes ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

For units that ignored the penalties for moving and shooting heavy weapons (vehicles, Terminators, Havocs, etc.) it'll just not be on their profile, as it's unnecessary.

 

Totally agree, however Terminators today do not ignore the penalties for moving and shooting heavy weapons. I think that's a carry over from a previous edition.

 

They do have a way to eliminate the penalty via a stratagem I suppose...

 

32 minutes ago, bigtrouble said:

I'm actually blown away that assault weapons don't have a penalty to hit, and this all makes me think they're trying to eliminate -1 to hit modifiers, maybe those are reserved for cover or truly defensive abilities. Much more logical, if that's the way it works out, less to remember. I get +1 for my stuff, enemy gives -1 for their stuff.

 

I think it's so that they can remove some of that weird interaction we had in 9th edition with modifiers when there was a limit to them. If you were targeting something that already had a -1 to hit modifier, it didn't matter if you then moved and fired your heavy weapon, or advanced and fired your assault weapon - they wouldn't stack or affect you in any way unless you also were stacking +1 to hit modifiers as a counter.

Edited April 19, 2023 by Lemondish

[WrathOfTheLion]

50 minutes ago, Lemondish said:

Totally agree, however Terminators today do not ignore the penalties for moving and shooting heavy weapons. I think that's a carry over from a previous edition.

 

They do have a way to eliminate the penalty via a stratagem I suppose...

Do they not? Might be in Chaos Marines and/or 30k they do, I haven't played out of Codex: Space Marines in a hot minute yet.

 

Either way, they're a unit that should, so that's why the weapon didn't have heavy at BS 4 :)

Edited April 20, 2023 by WrathOfTheLion

[WrathOfTheLion]

51 minutes ago, Lemondish said:

I think it's so that they can remove some of that weird interaction we had in 9th edition with modifiers when there was a limit to them. If you were targeting something that already had a -1 to hit modifier, it didn't matter if you then moved and fired your heavy weapon, or advanced and fired your assault weapon - they wouldn't stack or affect you in any way unless you also were stacking +1 to hit modifiers as a counter.

Good point on those interactions. I'm looking forward to what they do to iron out fights first/last in a similar way when we get to the fight phase.

[Lemondish]

3 hours ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

Good point on those interactions. I'm looking forward to what they do to iron out fights first/last in a similar way when we get to the fight phase.

I think that last part is one of the reasons why folks were drooling over the idea that initiative would return. A number that represents who fights in what order, and can be modified with, well, modifiers, seems on the surface to be so much cleaner than this fights first/last interaction quagmire.

 

But since it isn't returning, the question becomes - how will they streamline this? I wonder if we'll see articles for each phase now that they've sort of released the overview article, y'know?

[WrathOfTheLion]

8 hours ago, Lemondish said:

I think that last part is one of the reasons why folks were drooling over the idea that initiative would return. A number that represents who fights in what order, and can be modified with, well, modifiers, seems on the surface to be so much cleaner than this fights first/last interaction quagmire.

 

But since it isn't returning, the question becomes - how will they streamline this? I wonder if we'll see articles for each phase now that they've sort of released the overview article, y'know?

I could see them doing an implicit initiative, i.e., every unit is I 0 or whatever your flatline is. Then putting +/- either way to determine final ordering.

 

It would certainly be easier to understand, but I'm not sure that's all that streamlined. I haven't put too much effort into deciding what a good way is, just that the current way sucks pretty bad.

[RolandTHTG]

12 hours ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

Good point on those interactions. I'm looking forward to what they do to iron out fights first/last in a similar way when we get to the fight phase.

 

I think those will just be reduced to two USRs, with a note that a unit affected by both effects fights as normal. That's the easy way to solve the current "almost all cancel sometimes" resolution. 

 

Like the Heavy BS reduction now allowing better granulation between situational and weapon based BS modifiers, i think they have actually thought about all these interactions. 

[chapter master 454]

Not hard to sort the melee order thing. Magic the Gathering has a system for it regarding their Double Strike and First Strike creatures.

 

For 40k, you would just divide units into 3 tiers:

Fights First

Fights Now

Fights Last

Units charging and units with the USR "Fights First" (not sure if they will make that one a USR just spitballing) are eligible to fight in the Fights First phase of throwing hands. This phase is unique in it has attacker (Active Turn Player) go first for choosing units to fight with.

Fights Now is your default Fight Phase. Units that have nothing that affects which phase they can be picked in are defaulted here. Defender (Inactive Turn Player) gets to pick where fights happen first here.

Fights Last is where units that have "Fights Last" USR (and this could be a USR that is also commonly an affliction instead of a standard thing on datasheets by default). These are units that fight last after units in the Fights First and Fights Now phase. Defender chooses where fights happen first here too.

 

Not difficult to understand. Unlike prior editions where we had to compare initiatives then find we had the same one and then had to roll-off for tiebreakers if I remember right. Only time I got to tell an Eldar Player "Higher than yours" was when I had an Eversor assassin in 7th go after their character. Was quite funny and they found it humour to be on the receiving end of that comment (it was his thing when playing eldar if you asked what his initiative was).

[bigtrouble]

16 hours ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

Good point on those interactions. I'm looking forward to what they do to iron out fights first/last in a similar way when we get to the fight phase.

I don't have trouble with the current mechanic, though it did take them almost the whole edition to clearly define it. If they keep the current system, which I'm fine with, at least I hope they write the rules a little more clearly. 

[mel_danes]

So we can put Primaris in Landraiders.

I got excited.

 

Then I remembered Twin Link is stupid now.

 

Two Twin Linked Lascannons, or 4 lascannons total. Under new rules you roll 2 dice to hit, rerolling failed wound rolls.

Heavy bolter same. 

Assault Cannon same.

I hope these vehicles get a points reduction, as their damage output has been nerfed.

 

 

[MagicHat]

1 hour ago, mel_danes said:

So we can put Primaris in Landraiders.

I got excited.

 

Then I remembered Twin Link is stupid now.

 

Two Twin Linked Lascannons, or 4 lascannons total. Under new rules you roll 2 dice to hit, rerolling failed wound rolls.

Heavy bolter same. 

Assault Cannon same.

I hope these vehicles get a points reduction, as their damage output has been nerfed.

 

 

 

What if the lascannons are Godhammer lascannons, with better S, BS and damage then infantry carried lascannons? 

 

Everything is changing, so best not to assume too much. Twinlinked assault cannons are more likely to get devastating wounds as well.

[Vassakov]

1 hour ago, mel_danes said:

So we can put Primaris in Landraiders.

I got excited.

 

Then I remembered Twin Link is stupid now.

 

Two Twin Linked Lascannons, or 4 lascannons total. Under new rules you roll 2 dice to hit, rerolling failed wound rolls.

Heavy bolter same. 

Assault Cannon same.

I hope these vehicles get a points reduction, as their damage output has been nerfed.

 

 

 

Yes, Land Raiders damage output might be reduced (we don't actually know yet) but 1) a lot of things are likely going down in lethality and 2) the Land Raider is likely going to be a lot tougher as well, meaning that it will be able to do it's job and deploy Marines straight into the thick of things - especially as Assault Ramp will enable charges out of it like the good old days.

 

That having been said, the Lascannon/Heavy Bolter setup has always been a bit at odds with the idea of "close quarters assault tank" and I for one will be dusting off my trusty Land Raider Crusader and all my many, many Terminators. Might even finally get round to those Bladeguard as long as Wizard Lizards don't distract me...

[Mogger351]

3 minutes ago, Vassakov said:

 

Yes, Land Raiders damage output might be reduced (we don't actually know yet) but 1) a lot of things are likely going down in lethality and 2) the Land Raider is likely going to be a lot tougher as well, meaning that it will be able to do it's job and deploy Marines straight into the thick of things - especially as Assault Ramp will enable charges out of it like the good old days.

 

That having been said, the Lascannon/Heavy Bolter setup has always been a bit at odds with the idea of "close quarters assault tank" and I for one will be dusting off my trusty Land Raider Crusader and all my many, many Terminators. Might even finally get round to those Bladeguard as long as Wizard Lizards don't distract me...

Just sucks for the spikey Bois.

[Vassakov]

Crossposting from another thread, but my Word Bearers Possessed are in no way shape or form disappointed to be potentially be able to charge out of a Land Raider or Spartan!

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, mel_danes said:

I hope these vehicles get a points reduction, as their damage output has been nerfed.

 

Everything is changing. Weapon lethality is going down, vehicle toughness is going up and the Land Raider has got its assault ramp back. Points will have to be considered in an entirely new meta.

[ZeroWolf]

I was drooling over the Land Raider Crusader variant yesterday because of these rules, expecially if assault cannons get a little extra oomph with devasting. It's also got me wondering about how I'm kitting out my redemptor. 

[Lemondish]

I kind of hope they would just get rid of some of these limited variants and instead give you a list of options to mix and match with, if you so choose.

 

I know there's a relationship with transport capacity that could suffer, but I'm not so sure that's enough reason to keep three different datasheets for what otherwise amounts to three sponson weapon options and two hull options.

 

I feel the same way about the Gladiator and Stormspeeder. GW - free the weapon combos, you cowards!

Edited April 22, 2023 by Lemondish

[mel_danes]

Agreed Lemondish.

And even if we don't get free reign on combos, at least unify the datasheet.

We don't need three cards for one tank with three options.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

7 hours ago, Vassakov said:

 

Yes, Land Raiders damage output might be reduced (we don't actually know yet) but 1) a lot of things are likely going down in lethality and 2) the Land Raider is likely going to be a lot tougher as well, meaning that it will be able to do it's job and deploy Marines straight into the thick of things - especially as Assault Ramp will enable charges out of it like the good old days.

 

That having been said, the Lascannon/Heavy Bolter setup has always been a bit at odds with the idea of "close quarters assault tank" and I for one will be dusting off my trusty Land Raider Crusader and all my many, many Terminators. Might even finally get round to those Bladeguard as long as Wizard Lizards don't distract me...

Lascannons and HBs aren’t that at odds with an assault transport.

 

they need to be able to soften up targets before the infantry gets out so they can be dropped off directly where they need to be.

[bigtrouble]

9 hours ago, mel_danes said:

So we can put Primaris in Landraiders.

I got excited.

 

Then I remembered Twin Link is stupid now.

 

Two Twin Linked Lascannons, or 4 lascannons total. Under new rules you roll 2 dice to hit, rerolling failed wound rolls.

Heavy bolter same. 

Assault Cannon same.

I hope these vehicles get a points reduction, as their damage output has been nerfed.

 

 

With the changes to vehicle toughness, I think we’re going to want those wound rerolls.

[Vardus]

4 hours ago, Lemondish said:

I feel the same way about the Gladiator and Stormspeeder. GW - free the weapon combos, you cowards!

 

The interesting thing in the article is that the Storm Speeder is not called out as a variant but the Gladiator is.

 

Probably reading too much into it!

[Lemondish]

6 minutes ago, Vardus said:

 

The interesting thing in the article is that the Storm Speeder is not called out as a variant but the Gladiator is.

 

Probably reading too much into it!

I saw that too, but assumed I was jumping to conclusions, so I'm encouraged that someone else noticed lol

[jaxom]

More evidence that most current heavy weapons will be lower than their current value. Sororitas heavy bolter is BS4+ Heavy.

[burningsky25]

Good point Jaxom.  It was a reasonable assumption, but we hadn't seen much for examples of it yet.

 

I'm actually quite interested to see a fuller S/T ecosystem as it gets fleshed out.  It seems like there's a lot of weapons - melta, powerfists, thunderhammers, plasma - that have kept the exact same Strength values, even when a lot of their ideal targets have significantly increased in Toughness.  Now for some weapons it's understandable that things like plasma would become more specialized to infantry/heavy infantry killing than currently, but for the rest it leaves a couple questions:

 

1. What else will there be to fill that niche, if anything - or will long range weapons be the only common solution to anti-tank/anti-monster as it appears to be so far.  Especially as far as it goes for infantry heavy forces which suddenly lost some of the premier anti-vehicle weapons in both melta and TH.   As Blood Angels I'm slightly concerned, though at the same time I do like the idea of requiring a more truly mixed-force army.  Mostly I'm uncertain how melee infantry into Tyranid monster mash is going to look now, as I play that fairly often.

 

2. What else will there be in the now largely vacated Toughness values? Specifically, T7&8.  Basically every monster/vehicle had one of those two in 9th, but now we can safely assume basically anything in that range is T9+, as they should be given the new spectrum.  Will heavy infantry get significantly inflated Toughness? More 'light' monstrous creatures? Bikes? Because there's been very little indication as to what will exist in that range, and for game health and meaningful weapon selection I'm pretty sure you want a fairly reasonable distribution along the Toughness spectrum.  What units that we haven't seen so far could we safely assume to be placed here in 10th?