Next codex announcements?

Cavash wrote:

I would love a Kabalite slave barge with a mechanic for gifting CP upon a number of slaves being 'taken', similar to the old PFP mechanic where each unit killed equalled one PFP token. It would require more balance, obviously. Pure wishlisting though

This is along my line of thinking as well. The idea I had in the past was a large kabal aircraft that harpoon victims and pull them into a hold (which would translate into removing the model from play) and that you would get some kind of bonus for every so many units harvested.

FuelDrop wrote:

Honestly, what we need isn't a Superheavy, it's a Superheavy hunter. We have no practical answer to titans and their ilk. Even our go to massed darklight spam is pretty useless against anything T 9+ with a voidshield.

Which is why haywire should be brought back in enough numbers to do something.

Honestly, there's a part of me that would just like to see 40k rules for the Dark Elf Kharibdyss. The model's right there and it would fit really well into our army.

|Meavar wrote:

FuelDrop wrote:

Honestly, what we need isn't a Superheavy, it's a Superheavy hunter. We have no practical answer to titans and their ilk. Even our go to massed darklight spam is pretty useless against anything T 9+ with a voidshield.

Which is why haywire should be brought back in enough numbers to do something.

Yeah. Rapid fire haywire would be nice. Hell, assault 3 haywire wouldn't exactly be a gamebreaker.

I'd rather have utility haywire, tbh.

Raw damage haywire has a problem : it cannot be balanced. A weapon that does "auto damage" like that will either be underwhelming, or the best AT around.

So i think giving it sub-optimal damage, but debuffing utility, is the way to go to make both HWB and HL interesting options.

I would not mind at all if haywire became utility.

Although I disagree that it cannot be balanced, yes it will be slightly harder, it just means finding the right spot where it shines, which arguably should not be against regular tanks.
I think it means finding the price spot where dark lances are better against t7, roughly equal vs t8 and haywire good against invul and t9+.

Why not giving it:
Wounds vehicles on 4+
On a to wound roll of 5 D3 mortal wounds instead
On a to wound roll of 6 D6 mortal wounds

I.mean, a dark Lance is always doing D6 damage. So make haywire a bit cheaper than dark lances

CptMetal wrote:

Why not giving it:
Wounds vehicles on 4+
On a to wound roll of 5 D3 mortal wounds instead
On a to wound roll of 6 D6 mortal wounds

I.mean, a dark Lance is always doing D6 damage. So make haywire a bit cheaper than dark lances

Darklances often wound on 3+, as well.

I like your idea, but if I may spitball an alternative option for consideration.
Alternative option: Haywire weapons wound vehicles on 2+. On a 4 they deal a mortal wound. on a 5, d3 mortal wounds. on a 6, d3+1 mortal wounds.

This way they don't compete to Darklight for raw damage, but can still scratch off plenty of wounds through concentrated fire and raw reliability.

Give them to wyches again and make it so each model can have them, would make wyches pricey but very effective. Would be no worse than a squad of harlies with fusion pistols.

Another idea for Haywire weapons would be that they have the reverse effect as the Valhallan doctrine, if they hit, the VEHICLE they hit is treated as having half wounds (min 1) on its damage table for the purpose of its characteristics. Makes them really good at disruption without making them overpowered for damage.

Crazy_Ivan wrote:

Give them to wyches again and make it so each model can have them, would make wyches pricey but very effective. Would be no worse than a squad of harlies with fusion pistols.

Could be a nice difference between wyches and bloodbrides

On the topic of Bloodbrides, all they would need is every Bloodbride having her own Wych Cult weapon. With that rule, they would be quite formidable even now. S3 isn't so bad anymore when you can re-roll all your to-wound rolls (Hydra Gauntlets).

Couple that with 4 attacks total (considering the +1A drug) and you can put on a lot of hurt all of a sudden. Apart from that, just apply other buffs that you'd also give the Wyches themselves and they would be a great asset to have an complement the Incubi in CC.

Mppqlmd wrote:

I'd rather have utility haywire, tbh.

Raw damage haywire has a problem : it cannot be balanced. A weapon that does "auto damage" like that will either be underwhelming, or the best AT around.

So i think giving it sub-optimal damage, but debuffing utility, is the way to go to make both HWB and HL interesting options.

You can balance it with range limitations and unit choice. Just imagine Heat Lances being an amazing wargear that performs far better than DL. It still wouldn't be an auto-take because of the limited range and because it turns Scourges into an all or nothing spot that you can hardly form a strategy around.

And with Haywire too, you could make them work best against targets that Darklight fails against: T9 and invul saves. Not to mention that the lower range means that with Haywire too, Scourges need to put themselves into a more immediate threat area (compared to a Lance).

Shride wrote:

Another idea for Haywire weapons would be that they have the reverse effect as the Valhallan doctrine, if they hit, the VEHICLE they hit is treated as having half wounds (min 1) on its damage table for the purpose of its characteristics.  Makes them really good at disruption without making them overpowered for damage.

Or, just have it, in addition to damage, count the vehicle as being one tier lower on its damage table for 1 turn. If the vehicle is already at its bottom tier, then it cannot move, shoot, charge, or fight.

Shride wrote:

Another idea for Haywire weapons would be that they have the reverse effect as the Valhallan doctrine, if they hit, the VEHICLE they hit is treated as having half wounds (min 1) on its damage table for the purpose of its characteristics.  Makes them really good at disruption without making them overpowered for damage.

This^^

I like that idea!