New Warhammer 40,000: Large Models

>The biggest Tyranid monsters now have over a dozen wounds, where Imperial Knights have over 20!
>the biggest tyranid monster is the goddamn Hierophant
>xbox huge Hierophant will have a little more than 12 wounds
>tiny Imperial Knight will have 20 wounds

Tyranids still sucking confirmed. I can now resume building my little bugs in peace, knowing that only darkness awaits.

I'm expecting at biggest for tyranids we're looking at 14-15 wounds with really high toughness.

And unrelated, despite the wraiths being my favorite part of eldar, I'm excited at the idea that without the gargantuan buff wraithknights should finally be scaled down to something reasonable.

Carnifexes would probably have around the same wounds as a SM Dreadnought so about 8.

They might get better saves as they get more wounded to show how Tyranid adaptation would work on the tabletop.

>How many wound do you think Carnifexes will have?
Around 10 or 12. Hive Tyrant 12-14 and Mawlocs 16 would be my guess.

They never said a little. They just didn't say over 20. For all we know it could be on par with a morkonaut.

Stomp was so fun though. Look what you did you whining cockfaggots.

it is possible to add a rule that gives stomp or even something similar without having the word gargantuan stamped onto them, regardless of how hard that is for some people to comprehend

I can see Tyranids wounds going like this:

Venomthrope/Zoanthrope: T4 W3
Warriors/Raveners: T5 W5
Hive/Tyrant Guards: T6 W6
Carnifexes/Tyrants: T7 W8
Tervigon/Trigons: T8 W12

Well now there are weapons that aren't S:D tailor made to kill all big stuff, not just vehicles. So your Rhino full of grumpy meltachosen can do their instant delete trick on everything.

>They might get better saves as they get more wounded to show how Tyranid adaptation would work on the tabletop.
Damn, I like this idea.

I think they mean monsters as in monstrous creatures. Not sure if they mean hierophant in this case.

we don't know what weapons the Morkanaut has. He may still have a stomp attack, on top of a klaw attack and multiple dakka attacks.

>They might get better saves as they get more wounded to show how Tyranid adaptation would work on the tabletop.

This is genius. You could also increase thoughness the same way.

Idk, I don't think melta is going to be doing quite as many wounds, but having insane armor modifiers. They still have to hit someone and get past the toughness and get decent rolls on their wounds done. I'm not that worried and I roll Iron Hands repair spam. Then again for me any helps when fire prisms aren't oneshotting my tanks across the map.

Hierophants, like all other forgeworld models, don't exist according to games workshop. When FW covers the rules for their models you can be sure they'll have far more than 20 wounds. Don't let that fact get in the way of your preemptive whining though.

user, you know they're all going to be monstrous creatures because they're taking away the gargantuan title, right? They said the biggest tyranids.

Forgeworld sure as hell does exist to GW. They've already confirmed rules for everything at launch including currently-made FW models.

...

But we don't know if they were including forgeworld stuff in all this (in fact we don't know whether forgeworld stuff will be included in the 8th edition books at all, or if there will be a separate release later). They may have meant "biggest tyranid monsters made by GW".

Of course I won't stop. I love whining.

More seriously, those news looks great for bugs as well.

see
Same date

Forgeworld models are never taken into consideration in regular GW publications outwith a short-lived period at the start of 6th ed where nids and IG had some in their codices.

This is the FAQ about 8th specifically saying they will.

They've specifically said that forgeworld will continue dealing with forgeworld models and games workshop will continue dealing with citadel models. Everything remains as normal.

yeah, and?

since when was a bio-titan in the same ball park as an imperial knight?

I hope the C'tan will get a nice 3+ invulnerable in the new edition and sometihng like an 8" move, it really needs a way to increase it's tankiness

Invuls are supposed to be very limited. Getting a 3+ is very unlikly.

Hopefully they're serious about infantry having ways to take down the super-sized enemies. This game needs to be more than my $150 model versus your $150 model.

>>Stomp was so fun though
The damage table for stomp was shit as was being able to hit units ridiculously far from the walker.

Why yes I will kill that land raider twelve inches away in one hit by charging this tack squad.

As long as stomps get less fucking stupid, they should be an answer to tar pits no every gods damn model in the game.

Forge World said that they will deal with it asap. So maybe 3-4 months knowing them. The tyranid profiles you speak about shouldn't ever exist yet. In conclusion it should be impossible for GW to refere to them in this days article.

If you have proof for the opposite, please contact the Ordo Chronos for supervision

I'm guessing Land Raiders will have 14 wounds, representing their former 14 Armor. Here's hoping they'll have at least toughness 10 to really not have to give a fuck about most things.

Hell, they SHOULD have toughness 14 as well to be better suited against Meltas and similar things, since those only damaged it on a 6 before.

This is literally the beginning of a new golden age

where and when?

can anyone run numbers? How long would it take for a 4 lascannons Devastator team to reduces the strength of/destroy a Morkanaut with the new profiles? I would do it but I'm on a trip, and phoneposting

you know you can paint your custodes any colour under the sun?

I really hope these new rules make Armoured Ceramite less effective. Melta is practically useless in 30k because anything you'd need melta to deal with effectively has AC, making them almost immune to it.

14ish shots to kill it completely, provided there is no cover.

Will be difficult to do the exact calculation since we don't know how exactly the To Wound chart is going to work.

>Hell, they SHOULD have toughness 14 as well to be better suited against Meltas and similar things, since those only damaged it on a 6 before

You wot? They rolled 2d6 you idiot, 6 on 2d6 is easy to roll, with 1d6 roll to wound Land Raider would be T8, T9 max to have similar chances of being wounded...

A melta needs a 6+ for T10 anyway.

And i guess the Dreadnought had AV 8 since he has 8 wounds now?

so you want them to make something which has the designed purpose of reducing the effectiveness of melta, to be weak to melta?

big nearly indestructible things need to be nearly indestructible. or there is no point them existing in the first place.

mastodons get put down.

>Carnifex
>Less Toughness than a Tervigon

They only rolled 2d6 when standing right next to the thing. A regular Melta only had 1d6 when shooting above half range.

>has over a dozen wounds
>Morkanaut has 18
14 wounds for a Land Raider is reasonable.

>shooting melta at max range
how much of a shitter can you be

Dude, a Carnifex is a lot smaller than a Tervigon. It's the Dreadnought equivalent while the Tervigon should be the Land Raider Equivalent.

Carnifex could have more thougness and less life, while Trygon could be the reverse. Also, the Trygon will probably have a better move stat than the carnifex (except if there is biomorph option shenanigans involved)

Also, I wonder what will happen with pic related. If psykers are gonna be a real thing again, then maybe this monstrosity will not suck anymore ?

Man, I hope so. I'd love to get a psychic doggo nid, but its rules are just awful currently.

Tervigon's not a tough unit, friend. Carnifexes were made to be tough bastards that didn't die. They belong with the Trygons/Mawlocs in terms of durability.

We can only hope that we'll be able to use what should have been a very nice buff to our army in 8th. Maybe it'll have a better Invuln save this time, instead of being this shitty thing.

No, I want them to not be immune to melta. How do you deal with AC spartans and typhons?

I'd give him an AOE attack instead of a psychic shot. It would help to distinguish him from FIRIHNMAHLAZOR zoanthropes.

No, user wants them to be less of a hard-counter. Melta is one of the only reliable ways to kill biggest and toughest of vehicles, and ignoring it makes a vehicle so much tougher than it should be.

So, with what we know about 8th ed. so far, what nigh unseen models are you guys hoping to see more of? Personally, I'm hoping to see a lot more ogyn and bullgyn.

I hope for powerweapons and fists. Multilators and posessed should be back on the menu.

Nobz.
Flash gitz.
90% of the ork codex desu

8 edition will be what 40K needs fun game to play with friends without rulesbloat and NOT for tournament play - if you want tournament play wh40K will be TOTAL SHIT

My thoughts exactly. Being a nidfag is eternal suffering.

>Tervigon's not a tough unit, friend. Carnifexes were made to be tough bastards that didn't die. They belong with the Trygons/Mawlocs in terms of durability.

Except that's wrong. Carnifexes are T6 W4. Tervigons are T6 W6 and a lot bigger, like Trygons.

Every vehicle that was too easy to kill with AV 11 or 12 or open topped. Mostly the various walkers.

I'm just hopping that artillery don't get shafted, I got my heavy artillery battery in just in time for the switch to 8th and I'm hopping this isn't 5th ed canifexes all over again. Hot shit to lukewarm diarrhea in one rules shift.

I got a box of Gaunts as a present, I don't collect Tyranids, but I would like to paint them. Does anyone have any ideas as to a cool scheme?

Karma, my friend. For all the times you nidfriends had to tell us how 40k was about how nids were going to eat the galaxy and everything else was of no matter.

Being big != being durable. Think about it this way: Say there's a cinderblock and a stack of cans. The cans are far bigger than the cinderblock, that much is clear, but the cinderblock is far harder to destroy. The stack of cans, while big, is easier to ruin the formation of. It's something you could do with a swipe your hands. Try and break up a cinderblock with your hands and your results will be far less effective. That's the difference here. Tervigons are broodmothers that are massive and lumbering, but far less armored and tough than their siege-weapon counterparts who are living bulwarks that plow through enemy defenses.

The Behemoth scheme is pretty decent.

Not him but that's what it should be

Make Carnifexes slow but very tough for their points with options to be ranged support or a line breaker melee unit (Rules to take advantage of battle shock to thin out hoards?).

Make Tervigons faster with more wounds but less armor/ toughness, their job is to target high value enemy units and cripple them so they don't fuck up your other stuff. Like devastators and such.

This.

Makes ya wonder how many wounds a Warlord Titan is going to have? (my bet is 100 or more)

The humble landspeeder, love these models. With autohitting&rending heavy flamers, it'll be glorious

>Being big != being durable.

The point is that Tervigons are both bigger and more durable than Carnifexes. And it has always been like that since Tervigons where introduced. Do you have some source about the opposite?

in 15 years playing i never saw someone not dealing 2d6.
just l2play at this point

>The point is that Tervigons are both bigger and more durable than Carnifexes

[Citation Needed]

I want to hear about the Best tonk

also it was basically useless against 3+ saves 5 out of 6 times while shitting on everything else
same thing with hammer of wrath destroying vehicles easily while being useless against infantry because ap-

You're the one making the assertion, friend.

>he doesn't know about basilisks and medusas
it's like you don't want to completely remove the flare shield/ armored ceramite meta single handedly in your local 30k scene

For the bigger part you just have to look at the models or at any fluff depiction.

For the durable part Tervigons always had 150% of the wounds of a Carnifex while having the same carapace and the same thoughness. You would have a point if Tervigons were T5 or 4+. They weren't.

Fluff also don't paint them as being frailer than Carnifexes.

What are your sources about the fact that they are less durable except your headcanon?

Its not the fluff painting them as being frailer, but Carnifexes being the threat just below the burrowing terrors and bio titans.

maleceptor

monsters should be good
psykers should be good

>Gone are the days of a lucky first-turn meltagun blowing up your Land Raider. (A squad of them will still ruin its day though…)

REEEEEE

>what nigh unseen models
>leman russ
that said i'm anxiously awaiting the battle cannon and demolisher rules as well as seeing if they'll lose effectiveness with wounds lost or if they fall just below that
i'm hoping we'll see some of the more uncommon baneblade variants
I've always been a fan of artilllery so i'dd love it if the banesword wasn't a hot pile of trash anymore

Just because a model has more wounds doesn't make it more durable, I don't see why you don't understand this. Just because there's more of something doesn't mean it's harder to destroy. And looking at model rules for justification on how something should scale is pretty quickly tossed when you look at shit like Pyrovores and Maleceptors, which are far understatted for what their fluff should present them as.

Praetorians.

IG had forgeworld artilery from the middle of 5th to when their 6th ed codex dropped a week before the end of 6th.

>if you want tournament play wh40K will be TOTAL SHIT

So no changes at all really.

Carnifexes are retard strong, not tough.
They have S9 while bigass Trygons are only s6.

That can mean more dangerous, but it doesn't mean tougher.

Fire Dragons on suicide watch. Their entire Aspect, gone.

What a waste of sext

A chaosfag.

FIre Dragons are fine, they all shit out meltas, it's the one lowly guardsmen being in the right place at the right time and rolling well being able to bring down the mighty warmachines aspect of the game, not an eldar aspcet that will probably do 6d6 wounds to it, that's gone.

>"A squad of them will still ruin its day though"
I'm not so sure about that

>knights have over 20 wounds
That's ah, a bit high. I was expecting around 15-18, roughly 3x old Hull points.

They said it would in the 8e FAQ

ANOTHER 8th ed article is up, about CSM. There's literally nothing concrete in it beyond suggesting that some players will actually field CSM in their CSM armies now.

They announced in their first statblock reveal that huge stuff like Knights and Land Raiders will have "dozens" of wounds, so it was to be expected.