If you read the Horus Heresy books it kind of explains it. When Horus has his trippy vision of the past he ends up in the Emperors gene lab, Constantin Valdor who is on guard at the time takes a few potshots at the \"intruder\" hitting two of the amniotic tanks containing the primarch embryos. Whether this caused the deaths of the two missing guys or whether it was all a product of Horus\'s fevered imagination is up to debate. As the other Primarchs aren\'t mentioned at all in the Heresy books they must have been destroyed before the crusade or they never existed in the first place.
40k 5th Edition.
- Thread starter Roger Bunting
- Start date
Roger Bunting
New member
Here\'re the links to the latest rumours for 5th ed.
http://belloflostsouls.blogspot.com/2008/01/rumors-40k-5th-edition-round-3.html
http://belloflostsouls.blogspot.com/2008/01/rumors-40k-5th-edition-round-4.html
http://belloflostsouls.blogspot.com/2008/01/rumors-40k-5th-edition-round-3.html
http://belloflostsouls.blogspot.com/2008/01/rumors-40k-5th-edition-round-4.html
Some of that makes good sense but other bits seem really stupid. Scatter on all blast weapons? Missile launchers just aren\'t that inaccurate, it would make hitting tanks and especially small vehicles very hard indeed. Also what\'s up with the reduction in strength for the defensive weapon category, that would make heavy bolters on vehicles rather pointless. My BS sensors are kicking in here...
Roger Bunting
New member
Got to agree on the blast weapons thing. Also, what would that mean for plasma cannons? Would the \"get hot\" be done with a seperate roll?
As mentioned in the comments on that site the rules would also mean your Praetorians gun line would be much diminished as you\'d have to move them more.
I do like the part that troops with scout rules confer that rule to the transport they\'re in. It didn\'t make sense to me about Tau Pathfinders, if it was an Omega level mission. Either footslog them to use scout and wait for the DF to turn up later or have the PFs wait, thereby making the whole idea of them rather pointless.
As mentioned in the comments on that site the rules would also mean your Praetorians gun line would be much diminished as you\'d have to move them more.
I do like the part that troops with scout rules confer that rule to the transport they\'re in. It didn\'t make sense to me about Tau Pathfinders, if it was an Omega level mission. Either footslog them to use scout and wait for the DF to turn up later or have the PFs wait, thereby making the whole idea of them rather pointless.
Not sure about grenades being brought back being a good thing. Most armies would probably devolve into grenade squads given the short range nature of the game.
I would like to see Marines get a little more elite. For champions of humanity they sort of suck apart from their armour save.
I would like to see Marines get a little more elite. For champions of humanity they sort of suck apart from their armour save.
Bengoodall
New member
But then grenade squads are an actual unit used, maybe not today, but they have been.
And what makes that so bad?
If you are able to get a decent sized squad to within a short range of something without getting shot to pieces or charged and wiped out, well done.
And what makes that so bad?
If you are able to get a decent sized squad to within a short range of something without getting shot to pieces or charged and wiped out, well done.
The thing you have to bear in mind that, if the new ed is coming in the near future, any changes have to be compatible with the latest run of codices. Starting with the Dark Angel Codex (and possibly bypassing the Chaos one) are in the new style as decreed by Jervis so all subsequent ones will be drawn out in that format. If certain things are changed, like what strength constitutes a defensive weapon for instance, would have to fit with these army lists. Putting heavy bolters into a main weapon category makes landspeeder tornadoes pointless as they will never be going slow enough to fire both weapons as they can now. The bolter will be redundant unless the assault cannon is destroyed.
The same applies to grenades to a lesser extent. Most grenade squads have been removed and replaced with the option to equip normal squads with them instead. Grenades would need to be given stats which are substantially better than the units standard weapon which in the case of Marines or Orcs would mean upping the strength to 5 or adding better AP. This would make them too good and unbalance the game rather.
40k, like all wargames rules is an abstract system. Grenades make enemies keep their heads down as you assault and the extra casualties inflicted from this effect can be said to include any damage sustained from the exploding grenades themselves. The same can be said in CC, all the damage comes from actual HTH rolls whereas in reality guns would be fired as you charge in, grenades might kill a few then more wounds would result from the actual HTH combat. Assigning phases to each of these actions would draw combats out unnecessarily and slow the whole game down.
Of course it wouldn\'t be the first time that the rules have been changed to the detriment of certain armies so I suppose time will tell...
The same applies to grenades to a lesser extent. Most grenade squads have been removed and replaced with the option to equip normal squads with them instead. Grenades would need to be given stats which are substantially better than the units standard weapon which in the case of Marines or Orcs would mean upping the strength to 5 or adding better AP. This would make them too good and unbalance the game rather.
40k, like all wargames rules is an abstract system. Grenades make enemies keep their heads down as you assault and the extra casualties inflicted from this effect can be said to include any damage sustained from the exploding grenades themselves. The same can be said in CC, all the damage comes from actual HTH rolls whereas in reality guns would be fired as you charge in, grenades might kill a few then more wounds would result from the actual HTH combat. Assigning phases to each of these actions would draw combats out unnecessarily and slow the whole game down.
Of course it wouldn\'t be the first time that the rules have been changed to the detriment of certain armies so I suppose time will tell...
I would like them to increase the ammount of space between two armies at the beginning of the game. 24\" means that really long range weapons are of no appreciable benefit, armies like the Tau generally will get whalloped by turn 2. Apocalpyse came out and i thought, this should be a good format for long range battles, mowing down enemies before they crash into your force, but no. Super heavy tanks 24\" apart from each other from the first turn.
Bolters need to be upgraded. They are meant to be the \"finest weapons\" but the rank just a little above lasguns, same as shooters and below Pulse rifles and gauss flayers.
Missile Launchers should have the option of a being Heavy for Krak missiles and Assault for Frag missiles (like an RPG).
WS needs a going over as it is next to useless, just as Marines probably need a bump to keep in line with the background. It is funny that a preacher has the same WS as a marine who trains 18 hours a day.
I am not Marine biased, but as i play with them mostly, they are the army i can comment on best. All armies need tweaking at some point or another.
Bolters need to be upgraded. They are meant to be the \"finest weapons\" but the rank just a little above lasguns, same as shooters and below Pulse rifles and gauss flayers.
Missile Launchers should have the option of a being Heavy for Krak missiles and Assault for Frag missiles (like an RPG).
WS needs a going over as it is next to useless, just as Marines probably need a bump to keep in line with the background. It is funny that a preacher has the same WS as a marine who trains 18 hours a day.
I am not Marine biased, but as i play with them mostly, they are the army i can comment on best. All armies need tweaking at some point or another.
Bengoodall
New member
Dont say that, I dont like being a long way away from eldar and tau things, without having a chance to get into stompy in two turns.
Mind, I wouldnt mind more room with gribblies and orks sometimes.
Mind, I wouldnt mind more room with gribblies and orks sometimes.
If you increase the table length, then tyranids and orks should come down a bit in price to make the horde army more viable as a rushing in.
Tau, increase in BS would probably make a bit of sense as they are a shooting army first and foremost.
I have also been thinking about this a little bit, but i think they need to go back to the days of having a separate strength for attacking vehicles. This would go part way to making gauss flayers less of an odd rule amongst other fixes. Glancing hit on a 6, i feel is ok for lighter vehicles, but i don\'t buy it against heavy tanks. Multi lasers/scatter lasers are also another odd one. High strength, wounds infantry easily and can damage lighter vehicles, but cant penetrate infantry armour? If it is good enough to go through the side of an APC, then it should be good enough to go through carapace (at least).
By having a separate strangth, it means that you could make it more in line with current weapons. For example, missile launchers should be great against vehicles (high vehicle strength), but lowsy against infantry (highlighting the difficulty of hitting someone with a weapon designed to destroy tanks). Lascannons would be good against both sorts of targets (it is a precision weapon) but is hampered by it\'s slow rate of fire. Plasma cannons should go back to 2 modes of fire, with the focussed beam being good against vehicles and slightly worse against infantry and the wider blast marker great against infantry but lousy against vehicles.
Small arms could be better, with sniper rifles having an appropriate strength of 7 against infantry instead of \"wounds on a 4+\" This makes it excellent against lower toughness imperial guard, eldar, tau, but will not take out a space marine commander or ork warboss in one shot. Hive tyrants, Carnifexs and Wraithlords will also be possibly better off, not sure. Bolters can get a higher strength against troops but lower against vehicles, las guns could get a bump against vehicles to represent it is a precision weapon. shuriken catapaults. excellent against troops, no chance against tanks.
But these are just some thoughts.
Tau, increase in BS would probably make a bit of sense as they are a shooting army first and foremost.
I have also been thinking about this a little bit, but i think they need to go back to the days of having a separate strength for attacking vehicles. This would go part way to making gauss flayers less of an odd rule amongst other fixes. Glancing hit on a 6, i feel is ok for lighter vehicles, but i don\'t buy it against heavy tanks. Multi lasers/scatter lasers are also another odd one. High strength, wounds infantry easily and can damage lighter vehicles, but cant penetrate infantry armour? If it is good enough to go through the side of an APC, then it should be good enough to go through carapace (at least).
By having a separate strangth, it means that you could make it more in line with current weapons. For example, missile launchers should be great against vehicles (high vehicle strength), but lowsy against infantry (highlighting the difficulty of hitting someone with a weapon designed to destroy tanks). Lascannons would be good against both sorts of targets (it is a precision weapon) but is hampered by it\'s slow rate of fire. Plasma cannons should go back to 2 modes of fire, with the focussed beam being good against vehicles and slightly worse against infantry and the wider blast marker great against infantry but lousy against vehicles.
Small arms could be better, with sniper rifles having an appropriate strength of 7 against infantry instead of \"wounds on a 4+\" This makes it excellent against lower toughness imperial guard, eldar, tau, but will not take out a space marine commander or ork warboss in one shot. Hive tyrants, Carnifexs and Wraithlords will also be possibly better off, not sure. Bolters can get a higher strength against troops but lower against vehicles, las guns could get a bump against vehicles to represent it is a precision weapon. shuriken catapaults. excellent against troops, no chance against tanks.
But these are just some thoughts.
Bengoodall
New member
And now that youve stated some common sense, youll be hunted down by the GW police.
It all sounds good, and making sense.
I still think there needs to be a shake up on the armour values, and armour piercing front.
Like with having a dozer blade.
Surely strapping another huge lump of metal on the front of a tank would up its armour value?
Instead of giving you a bonus against rough terrain?
It all sounds good, and making sense.
I still think there needs to be a shake up on the armour values, and armour piercing front.
Like with having a dozer blade.
Surely strapping another huge lump of metal on the front of a tank would up its armour value?
Instead of giving you a bonus against rough terrain?
So, i usually avoid these \'what-if\' type rumor discussions, but...
I don\'t see anything coming of \'thrown/ranged gernades\' and, to be blunt, i fail to see the obsession. I know of at least 4 people in my small gaming arena who stopped playing 40k because of gernades getting tweeked from 2nd to 3rd ed. ???
I like most of what i\'m seeing on the vehicle rules. 1 damage chart. Thank god, it\'s about time! I like the rules for glancing hits and how open topped works. As a player with A LOT of open topped vehicles and skimmers i\'ve felt that it\'s a hard knock life with the current set up.
Cover saves for vehicles. Again... about time.
Defensive weapons being S4 seems a little lean, but we shall see. (I don\'t see this changing honestly)
The changes to IC, template weapons, and wound allocation all make sense and sound great!
For those who feel the need for marines to feel more \'manly\' or whatever... all i can guess is that you play marines or you play in a marine heavy group. The current group i play in has 1 marine player out of about 20 players. They are a tough nut and no two ways about it. I think we will see them get pistols like the CM. All things being equal, SM\'s are the only army (save maybe necrons) that takes the table and should assume to win every time. IMHO that\'s how it should be.
Anyway, that\'s my rant on that... One thing to keep in mind, GW seems to really push for simplicity of play and subtle adjustments... anything that seems grand or sweeping just isn\'t likely to happen at this point.
... and squats are dead, deal with it.
I don\'t see anything coming of \'thrown/ranged gernades\' and, to be blunt, i fail to see the obsession. I know of at least 4 people in my small gaming arena who stopped playing 40k because of gernades getting tweeked from 2nd to 3rd ed. ???
I like most of what i\'m seeing on the vehicle rules. 1 damage chart. Thank god, it\'s about time! I like the rules for glancing hits and how open topped works. As a player with A LOT of open topped vehicles and skimmers i\'ve felt that it\'s a hard knock life with the current set up.
Cover saves for vehicles. Again... about time.
Defensive weapons being S4 seems a little lean, but we shall see. (I don\'t see this changing honestly)
The changes to IC, template weapons, and wound allocation all make sense and sound great!
For those who feel the need for marines to feel more \'manly\' or whatever... all i can guess is that you play marines or you play in a marine heavy group. The current group i play in has 1 marine player out of about 20 players. They are a tough nut and no two ways about it. I think we will see them get pistols like the CM. All things being equal, SM\'s are the only army (save maybe necrons) that takes the table and should assume to win every time. IMHO that\'s how it should be.
Anyway, that\'s my rant on that... One thing to keep in mind, GW seems to really push for simplicity of play and subtle adjustments... anything that seems grand or sweeping just isn\'t likely to happen at this point.
... and squats are dead, deal with it.
JesterzUSMC
Recovering Megalomaniac
Originally posted by pez5767... and squats are dead, deal with it.
lol lol lol lol lol lol
Bengoodall
New member
Awwwwww but wook at the cute wittle guys, dont you just wanna snuggle up with them!
I do play marines, but that is not the reason i want to see them stronger. Think of Delta Force/SAS/Jack Bauer in space. By their own, they can bring down any enemy unit. Imagine what an army of them could do. In 40k terms, those guys would belong in a Imperial guard stormtrooper/harderned veteran squad. WTF?!? I am trying to see the game more along the lines of the fluff they put out.
And BTW, i never take beardy armies to games. At most tournaments i have ben to i generally rank in the top 5 for army selection.
And BTW, i never take beardy armies to games. At most tournaments i have ben to i generally rank in the top 5 for army selection.
Bengoodall
New member
If one more person asks Im going to start dishing out clubbings.
:flame:
:flame:
For space marines that match the \'fluff\' look up the \'Movie Space Marine\' rules.
Otherwise, it\'s important to remember that all 40k fluff is really just one form of propaganda or another to support the game. The original IG codex paints Solar Macharius as a tyrannt bent on conquest, hardly the hero he was later envisioned to be.
Regarding Squats:
Tyrannid hive fleet Beheamoth ate the majority of their homeworlds. The scoop!
Otherwise, it\'s important to remember that all 40k fluff is really just one form of propaganda or another to support the game. The original IG codex paints Solar Macharius as a tyrannt bent on conquest, hardly the hero he was later envisioned to be.
Regarding Squats:
Tyrannid hive fleet Beheamoth ate the majority of their homeworlds. The scoop!
