PDA

View Full Version : Did the Assualt Cannon get toned down in the Dark Angels Codex?



Murphey
10-02-2007, 09:27
Hoyo,

Someone mentioned something, which has me wondering if they reduced the number of shots on the assualt cannon in the DA codex.

I know they did the heavy weapon limit on termies, and increased the cost of em, but I didnt think they actually changed the weapons statline.

Can anyone confirm/deny this?

Thanks!

Aurellis
10-02-2007, 09:30
I've heard that rumour too.
Although, if you think about it reducing the number of assault cannons available is kind of toning them down, afterall they're effective because of the number of shots they can put out (and rending:mad: )

The Emperor
10-02-2007, 09:46
I haven't heard a peep about altering the stat line. From what I've heard, they've altered the points cost and availability.

Dreadnoughts, for instance, are now more expensive. So are Assault Cannons on Terminator Squads (While the price of both the Cyclone Missile Launcher and Heavy Flamer have dropped a notch). Land Speeder Tornadoes are also more expensive.

As for availability, Terminator Squads now only carry one heavy weapon, so only one Assault Cannon. You can only get one Land Speeder Tornado per Ravenwing Support Squadron, as opposed to three in a Land Speeder Squadron. And Ravenwing Attack Squadrons have to take 6 Bikes before they can take a Land Speeder Tornado.

Aurellis
10-02-2007, 10:05
While we're on the topic of altering weapons' isn't the shotgun in for a deserved change?

The Emperor
10-02-2007, 10:10
Dark Angels are getting Manstopper Rounds, which make their Shotguns Str 4.

Murphey
10-02-2007, 10:27
I was kinda hoping that they did town down the Assualt cannons.

I think a large portion of the Space Marines high power curve status is because that weapon is, quite literally, the best weapon in the game, and works well against just about everything.

If they did not weaken the assualt cannon, that prolly means that when/if the redux comes out, Space Marines are gonna get hit harder than they would otherwise.

Oh well, one of the players at my store is a HUGE Dark Angels fan, so Ill get a chance to look at his codex when he gets it in a few days (pre-ordered the huge army set aparently.)

As a side note, from what you guys have seen: Does it seem like the DA codex has leveled the option playing field a bit? So that having the generic assualt cannon/5 man termie squads are not the most optimum choice by far?

Catferret
10-02-2007, 10:35
The only thing that changed about Assault Cannons was the cost.

Murphey
10-02-2007, 10:46
Cool, thanks for the straight up answer Catferret :)

Angelus Mortis
10-02-2007, 10:46
You know, we already debated how the Assault Cannon is not the uber weapon you all think it is. There are a lot of weapons far worse in the game. Its getting quite tiresome to see these threads keep popping up. Why don't you add the the threads already started instead of starting another Assault Cannon bashing thread? :rolleyes:

Murphey
10-02-2007, 10:53
I was explaining why I asked, and what my prefered answer would be, and why.

It has not gone off on a "Assualt Kannons are Cheezzorr!!11!" tangent.

Mathmatically, the assualt cannon is really, really good. The dark angel codex has shown signs of trying to limit that and give more viable alternatives.

I havent seen anyone here screaming to the hills that the assualt cannon has ruined the game for them, or that its the child of satan or anything.

I honestly think your over-reacting to a question and a stated opinion.

Master Jeridian
10-02-2007, 12:28
You know, we already debated how the Assault Cannon is not the uber weapon you all think it is. There are a lot of weapons far worse in the game. Its getting quite tiresome to see these threads keep popping up. Why don't you add the the threads already started instead of starting another Assault Cannon bashing thread?

Because if numerous people complain about it, and many agree...they must all be wrong. I bet someone's gonna be crying when they take away his 9 Tornados.


Anyway, Tornados are 100pts and 1 per squadron.

Captain Micha
10-02-2007, 12:36
Indeed. especially when all the weapons that are supposedly are as good have been proven inneffective in comparison

Gutlord Grom
10-02-2007, 14:55
I still say Gauss weapons are far better and more powerful than Assault cannons, since they can wound anything, and can destroy vehicles much faster.

The Emperor
10-02-2007, 14:57
Because if numerous people complain about it, and many agree...they must all be wrong.

Just because a bunch of people bitch and moan about something, it doesn't mean they're right. I bet plenty of people disagree with your view. So I take it that they're all wrong?

Angelus Mortis
10-02-2007, 15:05
I still say Gauss weapons are far better and more powerful than Assault cannons, since they can wound anything, and can destroy vehicles much faster.Exactly. And even with the new Eldar Codex, a 3 Warwalker squadron with 2x Starcannons a piece hand out 1 + + DO NOT POST CODEX LISTED STATS IN OPEN FORUM IT INFRINGES FORUM RULES PhilB+ +. All this for the exact same point cost as a 5 man Terminator Squad w/2x Assault Cannons. But the Assault Cannon is sooooo unbalanced. Please.

The Emperor
10-02-2007, 15:07
*groan* How did Nazi Germany enter into this thread? :p

But yeah, just because a number of people complain, it doesn't mean they're automatically right. Nor is there any evidence that the people complaining are even in the majority.

DesolationAngel
10-02-2007, 16:05
They're more expensive and people can take less of them, presumably as GW got the impression they were too good and changed that. They won't get weaker stats wise as well, as they were about the right level before, but people choose to complain about assualt cannons and speeders, rather than adapt to face them.

Gutlord Grom
10-02-2007, 16:08
I think there's a saying about that. and some commen logic. A lot of people will complain about something, but few will do anything.

machine_recovered_meat
10-02-2007, 17:00
Indeed. especially when all the weapons that are supposedly are as good have been proven inneffective in comparison

:wtf:
When?
Don't recall you or anyone else putting forward an argument for the case which was any stronger than soggy tissue.


Just a very well known example of the majority being wrong. True, not a very pleasant thought, but true none the less.
Whilst I agree the assault cannon is not the uber weapon of doom
[which it isn't, neither for those who see things only in black and white, is there a 'best weapon' in the game]
I really have to call Godwin's Law on you ;)


They're more expensive and people can take less of them, presumably as GW got the impression they were too good and changed that. They won't get weaker stats wise as well, as they were about the right level before, but people choose to complain about assualt cannons and speeders, rather than adapt to face them.
The truth.


A lot of people will complain about something, but few will do anything.
Word. Because it's easier to moan than to do something effective.

Groksnag
10-02-2007, 17:24
EVERY race has an uber weapon of some sort. like the Zzap guns for Orks, Gauss class weapons for Necs, the Ass.cannon for SM, the Lance weapons for Eldar(i dont know about starcannons, as ive never played against them), etc.
get back on topic.

Orbital
10-02-2007, 17:31
You know, we already debated how the Assault Cannon is not the uber weapon you all think it is. There are a lot of weapons far worse in the game. Its getting quite tiresome to see these threads keep popping up. Why don't you add the the threads already started instead of starting another Assault Cannon bashing thread? :rolleyes:

This thread wasn't about Assault Cannon bashing. If you re-read the first post, you'll see that it's a question about whether or not the Assault Cannon has a statline change in the Dark Angels codex.


Just because a bunch of people bitch and moan about something, it doesn't mean they're right.

No, it doesn't... but it doesn't mean they're wrong, either. When a lot of people are complaining about something, it's an indicator of perception. Sometimes it's a skewed perception, but you'd be mistaken to think that's always the case.


EVERY race has an uber weapon of some sort. like the Zzap guns for Orks, Gauss class weapons for Necs, the Ass.cannon for SM, the Lance weapons for Eldar(i dont know about starcannons, as ive never played against them), etc.
get back on topic.

Lance weapons, especially for their cost, are hardly an "Uber Weapon". You won't see a lot of them fielded in this codex. Starcannons were the premiere example of an Uber Weapon in the previous codex, though.

The Emperor
10-02-2007, 17:33
No, it doesn't... but it doesn't mean they're wrong, either. When a lot of people are complaining about something, it's an indicator of perception. Sometimes it's a skewed perception, but you'd be mistaken to think that's always the case.

I never said they were wrong. But assuming people are right because they bitch is just as stupid as assuming they're wrong. That's not any kind of an argument, either way, and doesn't prove squat.

Bookwrak
10-02-2007, 17:39
I still say Gauss weapons are far better and more powerful than Assault cannons, since they can wound anything, and can destroy vehicles much faster.

That statement is flat out wrong. A gauss weapon can inflict a wound on anything no matter the toughness on a Wound roll of 6. This is only relevant when shooting at really tough things like beefed up Carnifexes or Wraithlords, and they still get an armor save against it. Whereas with Rending, a 6 on the To Hit is an auto-wound, no armor saves. Rending is obviously better.

With vehicles, a 6 with a Gauss weapon on the armor penetration roll gives you a glancing hit. Not bad, but a 6 on the Armor Penetration roll for rending gives you another d6. Since we're talking about Assault cannons, that means that you're automatically getting at least a 13 on the penetration roll. Against AV 14 with Gauss, that's a 1/6 chance of of glancing. With Rending, if you get your six, you have a 1/6 of doing nothing, a 1/6 chance of glancing, and a 2/3 chance of penetrating. Once more, Rending is obviously better.

Especially when you factor in in the case of assault cannons, while across the whole army, you get an average of two shots with a given Gauss weapon, if you're firing the Assault Cannon, you're always firing four.

So Meat, you want to give us some words of wisdom on how to do something 'effective' when facing an opponent who's maxed out the number of Donkey Cannons in his army?

swindy
10-02-2007, 18:47
Starcannons were the premiere example of an Uber Weapon in the previous codex, though.

But they couldn't blow up land raiders :rolleyes:

Azuremen
10-02-2007, 20:08
And they generally missed half the time... go BS of 3.


Exactly. And even with the new Eldar Codex, a 3 Warwalker squadron with 2x Starcannons a piece hand out 12x S6 AP2 Plasma Death at 36". All this for the exact same point cost as a 5 man Terminator Squad w/2x Assault Cannons. But the Assault Cannon is sooooo unbalanced. Please.

Yes, but lets think about this. Those starcannons can't pop AV 14 vehicles. And miss half the time. And can get taken down by random bolter rounds and such. Or at least stunned most of the time. And I generally find it easier to take out WarWalkers than Termies.

Just a horrible comparison... honestly.

Mojaco
10-02-2007, 20:10
Assault cannons got a lot of slack since they are brainless. Facing horde armies? 4 shots at ap 4 should come in handy. Vehicles? Assault cannon can deal with them better then lascannons. MEQ? Go 6s!

I understand and agree with the complaining. Now that you're actually paying a suitable amount of points for this immense flexibility, I'd say they're balanced.

Sekhmet
10-02-2007, 20:10
Exactly. And even with the new Eldar Codex, a 3 Warwalker squadron with 2x Starcannons a piece hand out 12x S6 AP2 Plasma Death at 36". All this for the exact same point cost as a 5 man Terminator Squad w/2x Assault Cannons. But the Assault Cannon is sooooo unbalanced. Please.

Warwalkers, in general, are too powerful for their price. Even giving them scatter lasers tends to kill huge amounts of infantry, whether they have a 3+ save or not. But then again, a squad of destroyers firing at them will probably wipe out the Warwalker squad, while doing almost nothing to Terminators. Besides the fact that terminators are much more survivable, they can deepstrike, and they can beat the living sh..snot.. out of pretty much anything in close combat. Oh, except stuff with rending. :rolleyes:

But I believe the Assault Cannon is by FAR better than any gauss weapon. OOo.. the "wounding" part of the Gauss effect allows Gauss Flayers (bolters) to wound t8 models now, of which there are... 3. 2 of them are Necrons units. That's so effective! While the gauss rule allows flayers to wound wraithlords, assault cannons automatically wound on the hit roll, not the wound roll, and ignore saves. That's magnitudes better than the gauss rule that only matters on one weapon out of the five with the gauss effect.

And glancing a vehicle on a 6? Assault Cannons get an extra penetration die on a 6. So while statistically, a gauss weapon will always do something when rolling a 6 to pen, the Assault Cannon can quite easily do far more damage by penetrating instead of glancing. Against skimmers that moved more than 6", you could say gauss weapons are better since a glance is all you'll ever get. Against anything else, the Assault Cannon wins every single time. And even against fast skimmers, if you stunned them or immobilized them, the next turn an Assault Cannon will rip it to shreds.

edit: beaten by bookwrak.

Orbital
10-02-2007, 21:18
Warwalkers, in general, are too powerful for their price.

Nope. Sorry. No vehicle with AV10 that isn't a skimmer, is a mere S5 in CC, can't take holo-fields and can only move 6" per turn is overpowered, even if it does have two heavy weapons.

Sekhmet
10-02-2007, 21:33
Nope. Sorry. No vehicle with AV10 that isn't a skimmer, is a mere S5 in CC, can't take holo-fields and can only move 6" per turn is overpowered, even if it does have two heavy weapons.

Notice the second part of my statement was, "for their price."

Compare a 60 pt Warwalker with 2 scatter lasers to a 60 pt Sentinel with closed top and a mutli-laser.
The Warwalker has better initiative, more attacks, and 5 more shots (at the same strength, ap, and range). They otherwise have the exact same rules and points values (except heavy vs fast attack).

Warwalkers can be guided to hit far more often than a sentinel. They can also take spirit stones.

You can make a 45 pt Warwalker with 2 shuricannons.

Again, for their price, warwalkers need to be toned down. They should've been twin-linked instead of 2 weapons.

Orbital
10-02-2007, 21:39
Notice the second part of my statement was, "for their price."
For their price, they're fine. There are several units that are harder to kill by a long shot, have better movement options, and are deadlier in HtH. Your point about the Sentinel is well-taken, but your argument supposes that the Sentinel is just right for the points. I think it should be better for the points if you look at all the armies on the whole and compare.


Warwalkers can be guided to hit far more often than a sentinel.

Guide isn't free. Calculate in the cost of a Farseer with Guide, and you're doing a fair comparison.


They can also take spirit stones.

Can Sentinels not take extra armor? Or any other upgrades?


Again, for their price, warwalkers need to be toned down. They should've been twin-linked instead of 2 weapons.

I don't agree.

Sekhmet
10-02-2007, 21:46
For their price, they're fine. There are several units that are harder to kill by a long shot, have better movement options, and are deadlier in HtH. Your point about the Sentinel is well-taken, but your argument supposes that the Sentinel is just right for the points. I think it should be better for the points if you look at all the armies on the whole and compare.

True, the sentinel does need to be cheaper, but in the category of light walker fire support, the warwalker comes out vastly ahead.



Guide isn't free. Calculate in the cost of a Farseer with Guide, and you're doing a fair comparison.

I didn't calculate guide in because you're right, it does cost extra points. That's why it was a separate paragraph. The fact is that Warwalkers have the ability to be guided, while Sentinels do not.



I don't agree.
That's because you play Eldar and I don't. :p

Back on topic...
higher cost of ACs = less numbers = good for everyone.

Orbital
10-02-2007, 21:53
True, the sentinel does need to be cheaper, but in the category of light walker fire support, the warwalker comes out vastly ahead.

"Vastly", I dunno. It's got one more heavy weapon, which it pays for. I'm not contesting that the War Walker performs better than a Sentinel, but your attempt to show some "vast" advantage doesn't sway me.


I didn't calculate guide in because you're right, it does cost extra points. That's why it was a separate paragraph. The fact is that Warwalkers have the ability to be guided, while Sentinels do not.

Your point stands if you recalculate the cost of the War Walkers to include the Farseer with Guide. I think, at that point, the difference in cost will justify the benefits of Guide.


That's because you play Eldar and I don't. :p

I hope that was a joke.

Angelus Mortis
10-02-2007, 22:03
That statement is flat out wrong. A gauss weapon can inflict a wound on anything no matter the toughness on a Wound roll of 6. This is only relevant when shooting at really tough things like beefed up Carnifexes or Wraithlords, and they still get an armor save against it. Whereas with Rending, a 6 on the To Hit is an auto-wound, no armor saves. Rending is obviously better. And I completely disagree with you and I will tell you why. A Gauss Weapon is way better than an Assault Cannon just for the mere fact that its a basic trooper weapon and every single freaking model in your army can have one. So no, your 8 possible rending shot squad does not beat my 40 possible shot Gauss Squad.


With vehicles, a 6 with a Gauss weapon on the armor penetration roll gives you a glancing hit. Not bad, but a 6 on the Armor Penetration roll for rending gives you another d6. Since we're talking about Assault cannons, that means that you're automatically getting at least a 13 on the penetration roll. Against AV 14 with Gauss, that's a 1/6 chance of of glancing. With Rending, if you get your six, you have a 1/6 of doing nothing, a 1/6 chance of glancing, and a 2/3 chance of penetrating. Once more, Rending is obviously better.

Especially when you factor in in the case of assault cannons, while across the whole army, you get an average of two shots with a given Gauss weapon, if you're firing the Assault Cannon, you're always firing four.
Again, not when every single model in your army has a Gauss Weapon its not. Refigure your odds when you have a 20 Warrior squad in rapid fire range and see which one is more likely to pop AV14.


But I believe the Assault Cannon is by FAR better than any gauss weapon. OOo.. the "wounding" part of the Gauss effect allows Gauss Flayers (bolters) to wound t8 models now, of which there are... 3. 2 of them are Necrons units. That's so effective! While the gauss rule allows flayers to wound wraithlords, assault cannons automatically wound on the hit roll, not the wound roll, and ignore saves. That's magnitudes better than the gauss rule that only matters on one weapon out of the five with the gauss effect.

And glancing a vehicle on a 6? Assault Cannons get an extra penetration die on a 6. So while statistically, a gauss weapon will always do something when rolling a 6 to pen, the Assault Cannon can quite easily do far more damage by penetrating instead of glancing. Against skimmers that moved more than 6", you could say gauss weapons are better since a glance is all you'll ever get. Against anything else, the Assault Cannon wins every single time. And even against fast skimmers, if you stunned them or immobilized them, the next turn an Assault Cannon will rip it to shreds Again, not when taken into context of the fact that you can arm your entire list with Gauss Weapons. Kind of a different story when taken into perspective isnt it?


So Meat, you want to give us some words of wisdom on how to do something 'effective' when facing an opponent who's maxed out the number of Donkey Cannons in his army?That goes to the no-brainer Plasma Weapon list. If you take a handful of Plasma Weapons (or any AP2 weapon really) you can easily deal with Assault Cannons.


This thread wasn't about Assault Cannon bashing. If you re-read the first post, you'll see that it's a question about whether or not the Assault Cannon has a statline change in the Dark Angels codex. I know exactly what the thread was about. The title isnt, "what new stuff in the DA codex", it was specific to the Assault Cannon. Now why would that be? The implication is that you guys are so worried about Assault Cannons being uber that it required a specific mention. If you think thats not an implication of a "I hate Assault Cannons" thread, then your kidding yourself.


No, it doesn't... but it doesn't mean they're wrong, either. When a lot of people are complaining about something, it's an indicator of perception. Sometimes it's a skewed perception, but you'd be mistaken to think that's always the case.Re-read the posts. The first statement was to the effect "if the majority say its so, then they are right". Nobody said that they must be wrong. They said the majority is not always right, with the implication that in this specific case they were wrong. And quite honestly, I dont believe its a majority. I believe its a vocal minority that gives the false perception of a majority. Please quote where someone said "the majority is always wrong" other than your own statement.


Warwalkers, in general, are too powerful for their price. Even giving them scatter lasers tends to kill huge amounts of infantry, whether they have a 3+ save or not. But then again, a squad of destroyers firing at them will probably wipe out the Warwalker squad, while doing almost nothing to Terminators. Besides the fact that terminators are much more survivable, they can deepstrike, and they can beat the living sh..snot.. out of pretty much anything in close combat. Oh, except stuff with rending. :rolleyes: There are plenty of units that can deal with Terminators. Quite frankly, in any game I have played against Terminators they either a)get massacred without doing anything or b)are kept out of harms way and wind up not doing anything for fear of being massacred. The only thing that carries an Assault Cannon that can be difficult(but isnt really with any forthought) is a Land Raider Crusader. Everything else that carries an Assault Cannon can be easily dispatched with units from any list. GW did not design Terminators or anything else to be invincible.

In closing, I have fought Marine lists with several differnt lists, Assault Cannosn and all and I have never had an issue with Assault Cannons. More often than not, they dont get their rending ability and when they do so what. It has never been a game breaker for me and I have never thought I lost a game because of an Assault Cannon uberness issue.

Orbital
10-02-2007, 22:06
I know exactly what the thread was about. The title isnt, "what new stuff in the DA codex", it was specific to the Assault Cannon. Now why would that be? The implication is that you guys are so worried about Assault Cannons being uber that it required a specific mention. If you think thats not an implication of a "I hate Assault Cannons" thread, then your kidding yourself.

Re-read the posts. The first statement was to the effect "if the majority say its so, then they are right". Nobody said that they must be wrong. They said the majority is not always right, with the implication that in this specific case they were wrong. And quite honestly, I dont believe its a majority. I believe its a vocal minority that gives the false perception of a majority. Please quote where someone said "the majority is always wrong" other than your own statement.

Somebody needs a nap.

Angelus Mortis
10-02-2007, 22:09
Somebody needs a nap.And someone needs a reality check.

Orbital
10-02-2007, 22:10
And someone needs a reality check.

Wanna take this outside, tough guy? *putting up dukes

Angelus Mortis
10-02-2007, 22:16
Wanna take this outside, tough guy? *putting up dukes
No you wont fight me. I have an Assault Cannon. :p

Sekhmet
10-02-2007, 22:17
"Vastly", I dunno. It's got one more heavy weapon, which it pays for. I'm not contesting that the War Walker performs better than a Sentinel, but your attempt to show some "vast" advantage doesn't sway me.

Well, the fact that a single warwalker puts out nearly 3 times the firepower as a similarly equipped sentinel, didn't sway you? I mean, that one warwalker has almost as much firepower as a squadron of sentinels (1 shot less), at 1/3 the total price. :cries:



Your point stands if you recalculate the cost of the War Walkers to include the Farseer with Guide. I think, at that point, the difference in cost will justify the benefits of Guide.

True, guide is definitely worth the cost, but it doesn't work too well when I can just compare exact pt costs with similar weapons and nearly exact stats otherwise.



I hope that was a joke.
It was. :D


No you wont fight me. I have 9 Assault Cannons. :p
fixed.

IJW
10-02-2007, 22:38
I mean, that one warwalker has almost as much firepower as a squadron of sentinels (1 shot less), at 1/3 the total price. :cries:
At 1/3 the survivability. And don't get me started on Deepstriking Sentinels... :eek:

P.S. I've not actually used new War Walkers yet.

BrainFireBob
10-02-2007, 22:40
The thing egging me?

Because the assault cannon's been an issue, and there's talk about whether GW will change its profile, someone asked if it *had* been changed in the new DA codex.

Then someone has to pop on claiming the OP was trying to bash the assault cannon, when he was asking if it was changed- I presume because he's using DA as an indicator of whether it will be changed in the Redux of SM.

Whhhhaaaattttt, I say

Orbital
10-02-2007, 23:01
At 1/3 the survivability. And don't get me started on Deepstriking Sentinels... :eek:

P.S. I've not actually used new War Walkers yet.

The comparison of shots between War Walkers and Sentinels doesn't work, as each can take weapons with various rates of fire.

What has to be kept in mind, by the way, is that a War Walker has to pay for two guns. It doesn't get the second for free. Sekhmet makes it sound like you get two guns for the price of one, thereby making the disparity between the two vehicles appear broader than it is.

Again, I do agree the War Walker is better than the Sentinel, but it's not THAT much better.


No you wont fight me. I have an Assault Cannon. :p

Speaking of which, I hear they might have a statline change in the new Dark Angels codex!

BrainFireBob
10-02-2007, 23:05
Speaking of which, I hear they might have a statline change in the new Dark Angels codex!

:D at orbital. Made my day.

Asq_Dak
10-02-2007, 23:06
Land Speeder Tornadoes are also more expensive

No they aren't. I can take my multi melta and heavy flamer for the same cost as before... The one with the assault cannon tho...

For the record, I prefer tornadoes with flamers and meltas. Better at popping tanks, and in my opinion, better at killing troops - you can get lots of AUTO hits that ignore cover saves. Uber. "But what about range?" - I can charge supporting units in to combat etc. to stop anything going for the speeders...

The profile of the assault cannon fits the fluff of the weapon, but considerring the humble heavy bolter received a points rise (they were too good agains 4+ or worse saves), naturally the assault cannon with its higher strength and extra shot would too.

As for availability, you can still get 9 tornadoes with ass cannons, 3 from crusaders and 3 from elite choices. Termie squads should never have been allowed 2 heavy wepons for 5 models (that's min/maxing - and goes in the same boat as las/plas). Remember, it was 2 heavy wepons for 5-10 models - that is TWO per TEN - ie ONE per FIVE, as it was before 3rd Ed. changed termie organisation to non-codex. This is why we see only 1 per 5 in codex DA, they are predominantly a codex chapter after all.

Orbital
10-02-2007, 23:21
And don't get me started on Deepstriking Sentinels... :eek:

Sentinels can Deep Strike?

BrainFireBob
10-02-2007, 23:23
Taros Campaign. Elysian Drop Troops list. Elysian Drop Sentinels.

They look like a cross between a pancake and a sentinel- but can't they take a multimelta?

Master Jeridian
10-02-2007, 23:35
No they aren't. I can take my multi melta and heavy flamer for the same cost as before... The one with the assault cannon tho...

"99% of Tornados are more expensive" Happy now, :D

As for the Nazi reference (must resist off-topic)- how was Germany the majority of the world? I think Britain, America, Russia, China, Australia, etc all disagreeing with dictatorship and vastly outnumbering Germany (and Italy) kind of blows that argument out of the water.

A better argument would be that 'A million people once believed the world was flat- where they right?'

And yes, a majority complaining does not make them right...if they are ill-educated. But a 40k majority is pretty 'educated' about facing Assault Cannons.
They aren't going to win you the game on their own- but you sure as well won't have to think very hard. Unlike your opponent, who must get his anti-tank to your tanks unscathed, his anti-infantry against your infantry, etc. Rather than just having a no-brainer weapon for all occasions- and yes, I do play Space Marines, so it isn't MEq-envy.


Anyway, there is no stat change of the Assault Cannon in the DA Codex. GW would not be able to do that- just as they weren't able to increase the cost of SM Predators because then Chaos would have identical tanks for cheaper.
They are stuck because the weapon is used by more than one Codex. To change it in one requires changing it in all- either retro-actively or re-releasing them all.
And it would **** off their largest customer base- justified or not.

Instead GW have took the only other alternative- they have restricted access to it (Tornados- 1 per squadron, Termies- 1 per 5xman) and/or made it more expensive to buy in the DA Codex.

Why do this if the Assault Cannon is 'perfectly balanced and fair'?

Sekhmet
10-02-2007, 23:57
Sentinels can Deep Strike?

Either in FW rules or the drop troops alternate regimental organization doctrine.

IJW
11-02-2007, 00:05
Either in FW rules or the drop troops alternate regimental organization doctrine.
Yep. On Thursday my unbeaten Winter War Eldar force got trashed by a really well designed IG force. Having the Shadow Weaver battery taken out by a deepstriking Sentinel was a bit... irritating.

Meanwhile, back on topic, I think a price rise for the AC is just fine, with the statline left as-is.

Orbital
11-02-2007, 00:21
I think the question was if the AC is getting changes in the Dark Angels codex. Did we touch upon whether or not it will be?

Aurellis
11-02-2007, 00:33
I think the question was if the AC is getting changes in the Dark Angels codex. Did we touch upon whether or not it will be?

Yes, in the first couple of posts :D

Orbital
11-02-2007, 00:36
Yes, in the first couple of posts :D

Ah. Catferret. Post 7. I see it now.

Catferret
11-02-2007, 00:38
I'm occasionally useful like that...

Angelus Mortis
11-02-2007, 00:42
As for the Nazi reference (must resist off-topic)- how was Germany the majority of the world? I think Britain, America, Russia, China, Australia, etc all disagreeing with dictatorship and vastly outnumbering Germany (and Italy) kind of blows that argument out of the water.
If you read the post you would see it says "majority of Germany" not "majority of the world". Seeing as the event occured in Germnay(and lands occupied and governed by Germany) and by the direction of its Government and executed by its citizens, the refernce to "majority of Germany" is quite right. What this means is the majority of German citizens either directly or indirectly through inaction/apathy to prevent it condoned it. As the rest of the world was unaware of it even occuring until the war was for the most part over, they are by default not guilty of allowing it to happen as they did not have a choice in the matter. So your reference to the rest of the world not agreeing to it has absolutely no relevance to my statement. Perhaps you should read a bit more thoroughly?


Why do this if the Assault Cannon is 'perfectly balanced and fair'?I dunno. How about when your kid throws a tantrum and screams "I want a cookie" at the top of his lungs for 20 minutes, you finally give an an toss him a cookie along with a "shut the hell up already, jeez"?

Aurellis
11-02-2007, 00:47
If you read the post you would see it says "majority of Germany" not "majority of the world". Seeing as the event occured in Germnay(and lands occupied and governed by Germany) and by the direction of its Government and executed by its citizens, the refernce to "majority of Germany" is quite right. What this means is the majority of German citizens either directly or indirectly through inaction/apathy to prevent it condoned it. As the rest of the world was unaware of it even occuring until the war was for the most part over, they are by default not guilty of allowing it to happen as they did not have a choice in the matter. So your reference to the rest of the world not agreeing to it has absolutely no relevance to my statement. Perhaps you should read a bit more thoroughly?

C'mon guy's lets play nice now :evilgrin: *whips out the Assault Cannon*

Still dont see what the 1st milenium has to do with the 41st...

GraveDancer
11-02-2007, 00:51
we live in it?

Orbital
11-02-2007, 00:53
If you read the post you would see it says "majority of Germany" not "majority of the world". Seeing as the event occured in Germnay(and lands occupied and governed by Germany) and by the direction of its Government and executed by its citizens, the refernce to "majority of Germany" is quite right. What this means is the majority of German citizens either directly or indirectly through inaction/apathy to prevent it condoned it. As the rest of the world was unaware of it even occuring until the war was for the most part over, they are by default not guilty of allowing it to happen as they did not have a choice in the matter. So your reference to the rest of the world not agreeing to it has absolutely no relevance to my statement. Perhaps you should read a bit more thoroughly?

I love that this little lecture about how we should read more about Nazi Germany in order to better understand the Assault Cannon is brought to you by the guy who told me I need a "reality check".

No. I seriously do love that. :)

Aurellis
11-02-2007, 00:57
we live in it?

We live in the 3rd millenium not the first millenium

1st Millenium - 0AD - 999AD
2nd Millenium - 1000AD - 1999AD
3rd Millenium - 2000AD - 2999AD

Actually i got it wrong. in my first post... World War 2 was in the 2nd millenium.. now we are in the 3rd millenium...

junglesnake
11-02-2007, 01:01
Indeed. especially when all the weapons that are supposedly are as good have been proven inneffective in comparison

I don't think that is entirely true. Now that there is only one per squad and the likelihood is that you will be facing two in an army on average rather than four I think its about right.

It may well be nasty but then every army has nasty parts which you should rightly be scared of.

Personaly I think the hatred of the assault cannon is actually a sort of deferred pain. I think the real problem lies with the terminator carrying it. I think half as many people would complain if it was a IG team carrying it and moving or firing!

The real problem is not the damage it does but the difficulty in taking it out.

And there lies the tactical problem. Terminators have one obvious failing now and that is their squad size. You don't want to get shot to ribbons by the assault cannon then do exactly what it suggests you should do - assault. Preferably with power weapons.

There may not be many guns out there as versatile but I can think of a few units that are. A Seer council for one! Then you have Burna Boyz. The answer is not in moaning untill GW submits and changes the rules but in finding the weakness of the wielder.

Master Jeridian
11-02-2007, 01:08
I ask again if the Assault Cannon is so balanced, why has GW decided to reduce the number of units/squad members you can take that carry it and/or increased it's cost?

And it is not because a few people whine! Space Marines are GW biggest and bitchiest customer base- GW would not do such a radical thing for DA (one of the big four SM Chapters, and herald of things to come) and risk a backlash without any reason.


If you read the post you would see it says "majority of Germany" not "majority of the world". Seeing as the event occured in Germnay(and lands occupied and governed by Germany) and by the direction of its Government and executed by its citizens, the refernce to "majority of Germany" is quite right. What this means is the majority of German citizens either directly or indirectly through inaction/apathy to prevent it condoned it. As the rest of the world was unaware of it even occuring until the war was for the most part over, they are by default not guilty of allowing it to happen as they did not have a choice in the matter. So your reference to the rest of the world not agreeing to it has absolutely no relevance to my statement. Perhaps you should read a bit more thoroughly?

So...the majority of 40k players either directly or indirectly through inaction/apathy to prevent it condoned the broken nature of the Assault Cannon?

Regardless, there are circumstances where the majority are not right. But there are far more circumstances where they are!


The Assault Cannon is statistically as good as a lascannon at taking down tanks, and blatantly better than a heavy bolter at taking down infantry. It is also a close second to plasma for taking down heavy infantry.
Where each of these weapons has a weakness (lascannon against horde infantry, heavy bolter against tanks of AV 12+, etc) the Assault Cannon has none.

It is a no-brainer choice. A weapon that does it all, or 3 weapons that specialise- cost of 1, cost of 3...

junglesnake
11-02-2007, 01:13
So I suppose that since many people in Nazi Germany thought it was ok to exterminate Jews then the Nazis must of been right? Please, just because the majority agree does not make it right. It only makes it the popular consensus.

Exactly. And even with the new Eldar Codex, a 3 Warwalker squadron with 2x Starcannons a piece hand out 12x S6 AP2 Plasma Death at 36". All this for the exact same point cost as a 5 man Terminator Squad w/2x Assault Cannons. But the Assault Cannon is sooooo unbalanced. Please.

3 Walkers is better than a 5man squad of termies because they are much better in close combat. Howmany basic troops have a strength high enough to have an effect on a walker (remember that all hits go by front armour value)?

I hate it when people compare only one aspect of what they are talking about when there is more to the selection to make the points cost. Also remember the AP2 bit. Termies dead on what 3's? Bar their invulnerable save.

"So I suppose that since many people in Nazi Germany thought it was ok to exterminate Jews then the Nazis must of been right?"

There are so many things that are wrong with this that I don't know where to start. Useing it in this context is inapropriate to begin with, thats not to say that the holocaust should not be discussed and debated but it should never be used in this way.

Then you are comparing what someone elses opinion is to this when their opinion is reletively straightforward and the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party in 1920's and 1930's Germany is anything but straight forward.

Some of the "cleansing" went on without peoples knowledge and it is widely accepted that most people in Germany at the time were not fully aware of the extent that operation had been taken to, to add to this they had been brainwashed into "thinking" it was ok and that those that had protested had disappeared. I wouldn't say that its as easy to say Germans at the time though that it was ok. That would be speculation.

There are better examples in life than this for example the American election system allowed Bush to get into power twice - and you can not possibly argue that the rest of the world was wrong in suggesting that he was not up to the job! That and more than half of the USA too!

Ubik_Lives
11-02-2007, 01:37
We live in the 3rd millenium not the first millenium

1st Millenium - 0AD - 999AD
2nd Millenium - 1000AD - 1999AD
3rd Millenium - 2000AD - 2999AD

Actually i got it wrong. in my first post... World War 2 was in the 2nd millenium.. now we are in the 3rd millenium...

Actually I'm pretty sure there is no year 0AD. We just took the year 2000 as the millenium change because it's much cooler than 2001. More numbers change and all that.

Anyway, my thoughts on the Assault Cannon is that it needs to be toned down or costed up. My main reasoning comes from the fact it has an exceptionally high versitility as well as excelling in a number of areas. Being Heavy 4 it can wipe out large cheap squads. The S6 and rending gives it the ability to harm high toughness models and light vehicles. The rending allows it to kill low armour save models as well as heavily armoured vehicles. It can kill more infantry than a heavy bolter and a comparable amount of tanks to a lascannon, and while it can't be doing both at the same time, the fact it is able to for slightly more points than them makes it a no brainer choice when you don't know your opponent's list. It's only drawback is its range, but this is hardly a crippling feature, especially for Land Speeders or deep striking Terminators.

Also, I think War Walkers are better than Sentinels. They start cheaper, aren't open topped, are slightly better in close combat, and can put out an insane amount of firepower. Having two weapons means that you can save points by not getting a second War Walker, something the Sentinels can't do. However, Sentinels get the Scout rule, can deep strike if you cough up a doctrine point, costs a Fast Attack choice rather than the very valuable Heavy Support, and you can make cheap throw-away Sentinels which are just threatening enough to divert some fire away from your Russes. Still, if given the choice, both Eldar and IG players would take the War Walker over the Sentinel any day of the week. I think the fact that the War Walker must compete with the nigh on invincible Falcon and Fire Prism means that most Eldar players don't really consider it for their army.

Sekhmet
11-02-2007, 01:56
Actually Warwalkers have Scout too. And with the amount of firepower warwalkers can put out, they should be heavy support.

Orbital
11-02-2007, 02:02
And with the amount of firepower warwalkers can put out, they should be heavy support.

I agree with that. Heavy Support choices are characterized by major firepower (most of the time). War Walkers, fragile as they are, most certainly dish out major shooting.

Catferret
11-02-2007, 04:22
War Walkers ARE a Heavy Support choice...

Orbital
11-02-2007, 04:31
War Walkers ARE a Heavy Support choice...

I did know that. I was only stating that I support it. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Catferret
11-02-2007, 04:35
Sorry, that was mainly directed at Sekhmet who didn't seem to know. all cleared up now though! :D

Sekhmet
11-02-2007, 05:47
Sorry, that was mainly directed at Sekhmet who didn't seem to know. all cleared up now though! :D

I knew that too, I was saying I believe that having them as Heavy was a smart decision.

Sakura
11-02-2007, 06:05
The assault cannon is more expensive and you can only have 1 per unit.
They are now redundant to me.
They could have taken the rending away and left everything as it was.

AngryAngel
11-02-2007, 07:35
The assault cannon is the biggest hype weapon in the game. If it was only as good, as people all swear up and down it is. It would be amazing, but as it performs much less then that, I guess its just pretty good. Though yeah they fixed it, by increasing the cost out a whole lot. Decreasing its possible numbers as well.

Though I didn't think it was broken to begin with.

swindy
11-02-2007, 10:02
Its just for the simple reason, that it can obliterate everything in the game which makes them a game breaker. I know someone who did a 15 AC list in 1500 points. 60 shots that rend, troops die, tanks blow up, MC's die, Gods die, Daemons die, all from one gun. The only thing it cannot kill is a monolith, but what does that matter with a force that churns out 60 rending shots a turn? Woo for phase out.

It is an obviously broken weapon, the only other army with a gun like it is Maugan Ra from Eldar.
Yeah, Necrons have Gauss... its no good when they lose half their army without a save. Or you just throw termies into the squads, and the dreads too.

Its obvious, that the gun needs toning down, or make it less available and cost more.

Y'know, I use SM, with AC because they are stupidly good, with hardly any price to them.

IJW
11-02-2007, 10:45
3 Walkers is better than a 5man squad of termies because they are much better in close combat. Howmany basic troops have a strength high enough to have an effect on a walker (remember that all hits go by front armour value)?
War Walkers are better in CC than Terminators? :wtf:
Yes, if you are using IG,DE, Eldar or Boyz mobs (without a Nob) then your basic troops will struggle in CC. Pretty much everything else will wipe out the War Walkers in short order as they can be glanced by S4.
Especially those Terminators...

t-tauri
11-02-2007, 12:29
Let's keep this on topic please and not make any comments more suitable to Politics and Religion.
t-tauri

The Warseer Inquisition

philbrad2
11-02-2007, 12:29
Everyone keep this thread on its original track please. If I see any further posts debating Germany/Nazism I'll terminate the thread you have been warned.

PhilB
:chrome:
+ Warseer =I= +

Angelus Mortis
11-02-2007, 12:41
I love that this little lecture about how we should read more about Nazi Germany in order to better understand the Assault Cannon is brought to you by the guy who told me I need a "reality check".

No. I seriously do love that. :)

See and that denotes a comprehension problem on your part. Let be break it down for you.

Poster 1 said something about "if the majority agree then its right" or words to that effect.

I said "the majority agreeing on something doesnt always mean its right" and cited the reference to Nazi Germany as an example. Perfectly relevant and a perfect example.

So it appears you still need a reality check, and possibly some brush up courses on reading comprehension.


Everyone keep this thread on its original track please. If I see any further posts debating Germany/Nazism I'll terminate the thread you have been warned.

PhilB

+ Warseer =I= +If people could did more than breifly browsed the posts, they would see that at least my reference was within the context. However, that being said I would love for you to shut down this thread, as I am seriously sick of all the whiners crying about Assault Cannons.

philbrad2
11-02-2007, 13:00
If people could did more than briefly browsed the posts, they would see that at least my reference was within the context. However, that being said I would love for you to shut down this thread, as I am seriously sick of all the whiners crying about Assault Cannons.

There is a simple solution to that, simply do not answer the retorts, if you feel people are 'whining' leave well alone. However, references to nazism and Germany I don't see as being particularly relevant. If the question has spawned answers which move off along another line of discussion then open a new thread in P&R - a forum more disposed to your line of questioning. However since the title of this thread is " Did the Assualt Cannon get toned down in the Dark Angels Codex?" and the the original quest was :-

Hoyo,

Someone mentioned something, which has me wondering if they reduced the number of shots on the assualt cannon in the DA codex.

I know they did the heavy weapon limit on termies, and increased the cost of EM, but I didnt think they actually changed the weapons statline.

Can anyone confirm/deny this?

Thanks!

Then I suggest we keep it in the context of this.

PhilB
:chrome:
+ WarSeer =I= +

Aurellis
11-02-2007, 16:32
[QUOTE=Ubik_Lives]Actually I'm pretty sure there is no year 0AD. We just took the year 2000 as the millenium change because it's much cooler than 2001. More numbers change and all that.[/quote=Ubik_Lives]

A year zero does not exist in:

* the Gregorian calendar
* the Julian calendar (our calendar)

A year zero does exist in:

* ISO 8601:2004
* astronomical year numbering with a defined year zero equal to 1 BC
* Buddhist calendars
* Hindu calendars

Master Jeridian
11-02-2007, 16:50
I know I can't verify or substantiate- but there is absolutely no stat change to the Assault Cannon in DA compared to SM. Instead they have reduced it's availabilty and increased its cost.


However, that being said I would love for you to shut down this thread, as I am seriously sick of all the whiners crying about Assault Cannons.

I was waiting for this from someone.

"I've had my say, other's disagree- I've spat my dummy out, close this as my fragile mind will explode if I'm subjected to different opinions." The 'I'm walking away, since I can't win this argument' of the internet.

Next step is: "I'm just gonna ignore these posts [cue fingers in ears, la la la noise], I'm not bothered by them yet for some uncontrollable reason am still responding..." The 'I can't hear you', so how did you know to say that of the internet.

Internet forum psychology- it's so fun.

I ask again, the assault cannon is so fair and balanced that GW saw it necessary to restrict and increase it's cost?

the_raptor
11-02-2007, 17:21
"I've had my say, other's disagree- I've spat my dummy out, close this as my fragile mind will explode if I'm subjected to different opinions." The 'I'm walking away, since I can't win this argument' of the internet.

No, walking away from an argument is often sensible (as on the Internet there are pillocks who will argue against reality until the heat death of the universe). Trying to suppress others because you can't stand their argument isn't.

And the answer to the OP (as has already been stated) is that the AC got "toned down" through point adjustment and restriction on numbers.

Orbital
11-02-2007, 17:57
"I've had my say, other's disagree- I've spat my dummy out, close this as my fragile mind will explode if I'm subjected to different opinions." The 'I'm walking away, since I can't win this argument' of the internet.

Next step is: "I'm just gonna ignore these posts [cue fingers in ears, la la la noise], I'm not bothered by them yet for some uncontrollable reason am still responding..." The 'I can't hear you', so how did you know to say that of the internet.

Don't forget: I will now discuss Nazi Germany at great length.

philbrad2
11-02-2007, 20:04
Seeing as this thread seems to have run its course and there are no further relevant comments to add we'll let it lie.

If you wish to take some of the 'off shoot' discussions in this thread make sure they go to P&R

PhilB
WarSeer =I=
:chrome: