Topic: FW IG (BG, D-99, DKoK, EDT, R&H) & FW IG Gear

[Vespasian Swiper]

I didn't expect it to change much as well, but was miffed that the twin-heavy stubbers rule (bar it obviously being a twin) were not included.

I also feel that the more crew a heavy weapon has the higher its RoF should be (like in FoW.)

[Chosen Man]

I didn't expect it to change much as well, but was miffed that the twin-heavy stubbers rule (bar it obviously being a twin) were not included.

Why do we need another statline for a weapons that's only Twin Linked? What Twin Heavy Subber rule are you referring too?

I also feel that the more crew a heavy weapon has the higher its RoF should be (like in FoW.)

Why would that make any difference? Space Marine Heavy Bolters and IG Heavy Bolters have the same RoF weather maned by 1 Marine or 2 Guardsmen. Again this makes no sense, and while FW is in the business of making wild armylist, they don't mess with the basic mechanics of the game rules.

On a side note....did anyone notice that the Conscripts(AKA Workers Rabble) DO NOT have the standard Cons restriction rule of requiring a regular Platoon before you can purchase the ConsSquad....Hmmmmm mm Interesting!

[Vespasian Swiper]

Heavy bolters all fire around the same rate of fire.

Already we have 'slick loader' in the Battlegroup list - so its not unlikely that the more/higher trained/experienced  crew artillery have would easily increase their rate of fire.

[[dixon]]

On a side note....did anyone notice that the Conscripts(AKA Workers Rabble) DO NOT have the standard Cons restriction rule of requiring a regular Platoon before you can purchase the ConsSquad....Hmmmmm mm Interesting!

The same goes for Armoured Fists as well, allowing a sort of Mechanized Renegades list.

Heavy bolters all fire around the same rate of fire.

So why shouldn't Heavy Stubbers all fire around the same rate?

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Indeed.  And the only real life machine gun weapon that depends on its crew for its crew for its rate of fire is the 19th century gatling gun, which depended on the crew turning a crank.  Sure, better crew might allow a weapon to reload faster or to swap out barrels faster, but those events are both neglible in 40K game turns in that they provide a mere seconds break in firing over the term of a game which depicts several hours of fierce battle.

Inquisitor Psychologis Ruminahui

[Chosen Man]

Well the Malcador is out, and I have to say its SSSSWWWEEEETTTTT!!! That tank screams Praetorian Super Heavy Support! I might have to get one for my Praetorians. Of course my CRM will get some too!

[Col.Gravis]

Completely agreed, I'm gonna stick one on my next Forgeworld Order

[Andro Ist Keine Schwedischen]

Might be a future scratchbuild project...

~Andromidius

[Armored Kangaroo]

Wow, that would look great with my Death Korps, advancing with them as they pour out of the trenches, I'll have to make one from a Leman Russ if I get the opportunity, or even buy the forgeworld one if I happen to get the cash.

[Markay]

The malcador is looking amazing. Must admit though when I first saw it for real at conflict it seemed rather small, looking back on it though its the perfect size for a single structure point superheavy. It would also look perfect alongside some standard pattern Russes.

Looks fantastic both for imperial and renegade armies alike, not to mention the amazing paint job on the site with the red chaos iconography.

[Parak]

I believe it has two structure points. Its a beautiful tank. Actually thats a lie...It's a really ugly tank, but in the same way that a bull dog is ugly, but realy cool and mean looking.

[Andro Ist Keine Schwedischen]

I'm so very tempted to get one...

Might be interesting to do a low-tech Imperial Guard regiment to go with it as well, with background explaining that an ancient armoury was discovered relatively recently on the world.  Or some such rubbish.

Just roll out the tanks, please.

~Andromidius

[Markay]

Doesn't seem big enough for 2 structure points to me, I thought it would be one because its actually the same width as a standard Russ, obviously its longer so a heavier tank but its not close to the macharius. The chap at the forgeworld stand also mentioned it being one structure point, just so it could move and fire everything. One seems perfect to me!

Have there been any announcements about this?

[[dixon]]

The rules are out, you know.

[Markay]

splendid. Looks like fun.

never listen to forgeworld stand guys 

[Lord Commissar Spiteful]

just out of curiousity, how would 1 structure point work? I alsways thought that due to the damage tables and all it basically made the rule redundant. The only real advantage would be to target multiple units.

[PaxImperator]

Exactly. I daresay that that was the point. And it also has some effects on the vehicle's maximum speed, number of weapons it can fire (in addition to the Ordnance), how it tank shocks and so on and so forth. Basically, it turns the Malcador from useless into useful. Who would pay for heavy bolters and lascannons with such poor lines of sight on a normal vehicle that can't split its fire?

[Andro Ist Keine Schwedischen]

Track Guards would be somewhat useful as well, considering Super Heavy Damage Tables are slightly different.  Thus you can avoid engine damage and only lose the use of one weapon for a turn.

I imagine a pair of Malcadors could really tear it up, especially with plenty of infantry support.

~Andromidius

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Doesn't seem big enough for 2 structure points to me, I thought it would be one because its actually the same width as a standard Russ, obviously its longer so a heavier tank but its not close to the macharius. The chap at the forgeworld stand also mentioned it being one structure point, just so it could move and fire everything. One seems perfect to me!

I have to agree - it doesn't seem to be big enough for structure points - but the rules are the rules.  IMHO, only things larger than a lanraider should have structure points (as the landraider is the largest non-FW vehicle, and the largest without structure points), and this thing is certainly smaller than a landraider.

As for only one structure point, isn't that what pretty much what all normal 40K vehicles have?

Personally, I think they would been better off just making it without structure points, but allowing it to split fire in exchange for lumbering.

Inquisitor Psychologis Ruminahui

[Chosen Man]

I have to agree - it doesn't seem to be big enough for structure points - but the rules are the rules.  IMHO, only things larger than a lanraider should have structure points (as the landraider is the largest non-FW vehicle, and the largest without structure points), and this thing is certainly smaller than a landraider.

As for only one structure point, isn't that what pretty much what all normal 40K vehicles have?

Personally, I think they would been better off just making it without structure points, but allowing it to split fire in exchange for lumbering.

I think your idea has merit. Since the tank is so old, it could have a more advanced Machine Spirit that would allow for multi-targeting, since technology of the past was far more advanced then it is in the current 40K time frame. As a special rule perhaps. But as things go, we are not graced with such foresight at FW. So we are here dealing with 2 structure points. I guess one reason the landraider could be excused for being larger, is that due to its cargo capacity, a lot of the tank is open, and not thicken enough to take additional structure points. Before anyone mentions the Gorgon, it is larger then a Landraider, I know I have seen them. Either way folks it here so lets rejoice!