GW FAQs are published now

[Ketharim]

Hey people, as expected GW just updated the FAQ section with the recent changes for the different armies.

Take a look yourself, just some minor changes mostly: GW FAQ (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=1000018&pIndex=1&aId=3000006&multiPageMode=true&start=2)

[Wolfshade]

Thanks for the heads up

[SotonShades]

Including Dark Angels... nice. why will my computer not let me read them! grr

[DrLove42]

Heldrakes Weapon is turret mounted. Means it can be fired backwards?

Final Nail in teh coffin for Eldar player. Farseers cannot use power while in transports

Tau seeker missiles -If you hit a flier with a amrkerlight, the mssile then needs another 6 to hit...

If only half a enemy unit is in range, you can only wound that half. So if only 1 enemy is in range, and you do 20 owunds, you only kill him

FNP and Force Weapons sorted out - Force weapons first, then FNP

[Wolfshade]

Well it cleared up the Force Weapon v. Feel No Pain issue

[eldargal]

Final Nail in teh coffin for Eldar player. Farseers cannot use power while in transports
Here I was hoping the FAQ qould include something to make fielding eldar actually worthwhile. I suppose I'll stick with Dark Eldar and WFB 'til the next codex.

[SotonShades]

Old Zogwort, despite being a warphead, cannot choose to re-roll the psychic shooting attacks from the weirdboy table. Why not? every other warphead can?

[Kirsten]

haha, units embarked on a night scythe don't take wounds if it is destroyed. glad that is cleared up :P

[Iyandagar]

Finally I will be able to roast silly Space Wolves with glee from my Heldrake. Furthermore I can get my Vector Strikes on and not have an argument every single time about cover saves...

[Learn2Eel]

Mycetic Spores now follow the rules for other Drop Pods regarding unit placement - placing the Doom within 6" of a Mycetic Spore = :D

Deathmark + Veiltek squad has been nerfed, Deathmarks can now only mark a single unit for the entire game.

You can't Look Out Sir against Vindicare Assassins :eek: Though of course that makes sense.

The Heldrake weapon being turret mounted :eek: Kharn actually does benefit from Hatred.

NO COVER SAVES FROM VECTOR STRIKES! And random allocation for vector strike wounds.......

[Eberk]

You gotta love GW for providing these FAQ's. I know I do.

This means they acknowledge they CAN be wrong and will update the Rulebook and/or Codexes.


I still remember a time when a Codex was released and then you had to wait for 5 years before you got an update (as in a new codex or WD article/update).

[Learn2Eel]

From the changes to vector strikes and how its main gun is now a turret weapon, the Heldrake has somehow managed to become even more powerful......

That is ridiculous. It's weapon is turret-mounted!? You measure from the base for it!? Great, so positioning no longer matters against a Heldrake. Oh, and no cover saves from Vector Strikes - combine that with a Hades Autocannon that can shoot out of its butt.....

Unless I've got the rules all wrong?

[eldargal]

The only change to the DE FAQ Ican see is the removal of this:

Q: A void mine is used in the Movement phase. How does this effect
what weapons can be fired by the Voidraven Bomber in the Shooting
phase? (p47)
A: The void mine does not count towards the number of
weapons a Voidraven Bomber can fire that turn.
I hope simply because GW realised it was damned obvious that an equipment option used in the movement phase wouldn't impact on the shooting phase without it being mentioned explicitly rather than them implying this is no longer the case.

[rpricew]

From the changes to vector strikes and how its main gun is now a turret weapon, the Heldrake has somehow managed to become even more powerful......

That is ridiculous. It's weapon is turret-mounted!? You measure from the base for it!? Great, so positioning no longer matters against a Heldrake. Oh, and no cover saves from Vector Strikes - combine that with a Hades Autocannon that can shoot out of its butt.....

Unless I've got the rules all wrong?

I thought you always measured turret mounted weapons from the weapon itself? Definitely some boosts to Tyranids and Psykers in general.

[DrLove42]

FAQ specifically states measure from base of model.

It means you can vector strike and shoot at the same unit. It also means the direction he was pointing in is largely irrelevant.

Yes he is incredibly powerful now, more so.

[eldargal]

Thankfully you can ignore FAQs if you choose too, FAQs being GW houserules not binding changes to the rules. Ill be making a case to my group to ignore the Farseer ruling but honestly there isn't much point anyway, I'll just wait until November.

[bfmusashi]

Yay, Vindicare are back and normal inquisitors are worth taking again!

[Learn2Eel]

FAQ specifically states measure from base of model.

It means you can vector strike and shoot at the same unit. It also means the direction he was pointing in is largely irrelevant.

Yes he is incredibly powerful now, more so.

Jeez.....this thing is even more devastating.....dear oh dear.

[Iyandagar]

Once more with gusto... Burn Space Wolves burn.... Ok so I love my Heldrake and dislike my friends Space Wolves... A lot. Gotta' say, I am happy with this FAQ update.

[Defenestratus]

Here I was hoping the FAQ qould include something to make fielding eldar actually worthwhile. I suppose I'll stick with Dark Eldar and WFB 'til the next codex.

Seriously - I think you need to re-evaluate the Eldar. I've had much more success with them in 6th edition than I have with my blood angels.

[DrLove42]

I haven't won a game out of 10 with my Eldar. in 5 of them i've been tabled.

[uglytater]

The BA FAQ includes a Strength 4 Hi (obviously missing the T in hit, but it makes me laugh). Would a strength 4 Hi be someone shaking your hand while a strength 10 hi includes a hug from your aunt with that perfectly placed back slap?

[Soul Drinker]

Heldrakes Weapon is turret mounted. Means it can be fired backwards?



If only half a enemy unit is in range, you can only wound that half. So if only 1 enemy is in range, and you do 20 owunds, you only kill him



Hi guys, i'm here to ask you a clarification about this FAQ:

In italian forums we are literally killing each other on this argument. For the RAW of this FAQ a (example) marine unit with bolters and 1 Las Cannon -then 24 for bolter and 48 range for Las Cannon- that is in range with all his members with bolter to Half of an enemy unit can allocate the bolter's wounds even to enemy models farther then 24 beacause 1 of the marine weapon (Las Cannon) has in range the entire enemy unit? So the Las Cannon actually extend the bolter's range.
Is it correct or bolter's wound can be allocated only to enemy within 24 of range? (As i really hope, for a more realistic rule)

Thank you and sorry for my bad English :D

[Wildcard]

@Soul Drinker:

This is from the original english FAQ:


Q: When making a Shooting attack against a unit, can Wounds
from the Wound Pool be allocated to models that were not within
range any of the shooting models when To Hit rolls were made (i.e.
half the targeted model are in the shooting models’ range, and half
are not)? (p15)
A: No.

This means that as long as one weapon has range to the model when rolls were hit, each wound can be allocated to that point. And if i am not mistaken, this same goes for line of sight..

Other than that, my personal points:


Q: If Typhus is engaged in a Challenge and chooses to use the
Destroyer Hive, do you centre the template over him and resolve hits
as normal against all units with models under the template, or
does the Destroyer Hive only hit the model against which Typhus is
fighting his Challenge? (p61)
A: It hits all units with models touched as normal.

This would imply that GK: Sterns Zone of Banishment as well as (i hope its not too much stretching) cleansing flame will cause wounds as normal to whole unit.


Vindicare Assassin’s Deadshot special rule supersedes the Look out Sir!

This was good news, even tho i haven't used vindicare in ages..

However, lots of issues specific for GK that i've been hoping (and needing for) were left unanswered. I would hope some designers notes to clarify the following things:

- Master Swordsman and the MC / Character / Independent Character issue?
- Crowes rending cleansing flame?
- Can brotherhood champion, on the turn in which he charges, re-roll the heroic sacrifice to-hit roll as well?

I believe there were one or two others (or then they could have been main rulebook issues as well), but i cant remember them since its been over one and half months since i last time got the time to play a game..

[robrodgers46]

OK, for Space Wolves, they made Scouts even more useless because a WGPL and/or IC can't benefit from Behind Enemy Lines. Meanwhile, did they address the Lone Wolf - First Blood issue? Nope. Give SW any anti-air? Nope.

For Orks, all they did was make an IC completely useless! Nice work, there.

For IG, the forgotten army, nothing. Same with Sisters. So my four armies got screwed, screwed, nothing, and nothing.

And then, the Helldrake. Must not be selling, since it's so butt ugly. So to make sure it does, let's make it even more ridiculously overpowered than it already was.

I love 40k, I really do. But sometimes I wonder what the people at GW are smoking when they write this stuff.

[Angelofblades]

OK, for Space Wolves, they made Scouts even more useless because a WGPL and/or IC can't benefit from Behind Enemy Lines. Meanwhile, did they address the Lone Wolf - First Blood issue? Nope. Give SW any anti-air? Nope.

For Orks, all they did was make an IC completely useless! Nice work, there.

For IG, the forgotten army, nothing. Same with Sisters. So my four armies got screwed, screwed, nothing, and nothing.

And then, the Helldrake. Must not be selling, since it's so butt ugly. So to make sure it does, let's make it even more ridiculously overpowered than it already was.

I love 40k, I really do. But sometimes I wonder what the people at GW are smoking when they write this stuff.


The point of the FAQ is to address issues within each codex. The VS - cover save issue has been out there for a while - nothing in the IG or SoB codex can do either of these things.

The Heldrake arc of fire has been another debated and asked over by many

I don't know about Zogwort, it just looks like they were keeping consistent with the man rulebook FAQ in regards to shooting and 0 level characteristics.

The allies rules should more than make up for the lack of fliers in a SW army, plus it's not like their the only ones w/out fliers.

[celestialatc]

Very happy that Noise Marines can take 1 blastmaster in 5 or 2 in 10. Although I have been finding out that one blastmaster is a lot of overkill.

[Angelofblades]

Very happy that Noise Marines can take 1 blastmaster in 5 or 2 in 10. Although I have been finding out that one blastmaster is a lot of overkill.

I'm actually super ecstatic over this, you can never have enough blast masters

[Wildeybeast]

GW apparently has snakes writing FAQ's now.


Q: Can Broadside Battlesuits fire submunition shots? (reference ssection, Warhammer 40,000 rulebook)
A: No.

[robrodgers46]

The point of the FAQ is to address issues within each codex. The VS - cover save issue has been out there for a while - nothing in the IG or SoB codex can do either of these things.

The Heldrake arc of fire has been another debated and asked over by many

I don't know about Zogwort, it just looks like they were keeping consistent with the man rulebook FAQ in regards to shooting and 0 level characteristics.

The allies rules should more than make up for the lack of fliers in a SW army, plus it's not like their the only ones w/out fliers.

I'm just cranky about my IG and Sisters. The Lone Wolf problem is a real one, as a very cool and fluffy unit pretty much can't be run due to just about automatically giving up a VP.

For Zog, one of the reasons they FAQ is to fix issues from previous edition codices. I think that qualifies.

And, I didn't ask for fliers. I actually don't want fliers. I want my Long Fangs, who are the most skilled heavy weapon troops in the game, to be able to shoot at fliers. I mean, Havocs can do it, and they are droolers.

[Wildcard]

I can't remember when was the last time the FAQs were so lackluster in general..

[Slacker]

Old Zogwort, despite being a warphead, cannot choose to re-roll the psychic shooting attacks from the weirdboy table. Why not? every other warphead can?

I believe the FAQ is only addressing the reason for re-rolling, regardless of him being a warphead. If he ends up with a psychic shooting attack (that he cannot use on account of his BS0) he can't re-roll just because he can't use the power. I would think you still get the warphead re-roll.

That's the way I'm going to be interpreting it anyways.

[Mrchilidog]

Are we seriously complaining out lackluster faq's? As a Necron and Dark Angel player, I was quite happy with what came out today. My buddy who plays chaos was ecstatic about the helldrake turret decision. Lackluster faq's...wow..I have almost officially heard every possible complaint that could be made about a GW product. When someone posts a complaint about Jervis Johnson not using Official Mat Ward toilet paper, then we will be complete.

[Tynskel]

Did you hear?

Jervis Johnson does not use the Official Games-Workshop Original Mat Ward toilet paper™. #Whatsupwiththat

[Emerald Rose Widow]

I must profess that I am pleased with the change to tyranid FAQ, that is pretty awesome.

[Wildcard]

Are we seriously complaining out lackluster faq's? As a Necron and Dark Angel player, I was quite happy with what came out today. My buddy who plays chaos was ecstatic about the helldrake turret decision. Lackluster faq's...wow..I have almost officially heard every possible complaint that could be made about a GW product.

Mr chilldog: we have no necron, nor dark angel players in our small gaming group. We have blood angel, grey knight, chaos space marine, imperial guard, ork and eldar armies present on the table.
I am yet to look at BA FAQ (but its a dex we have not have any issues with anyway), but the rest didn't bring any clarification to our problems. Save for perhaps the helldrake, but we had ruled it to be 180deg frontal arc anyway, so now it just got a major boost. Already eating power armor at terrible pace, now it can do it anywhere it goes and not care about not having a vector dancer usr..

My point is, as i pointed out in my last post: There are issues that require (for us atleast) some sort of insight into devs mind, how stuff were actually meant to be used.

I am pleased that Games Workshop continues to support the products they release, but having literally hundreds of pages of post across the major 40k forums about issues not being handled is indeed in my opinion half-hearted attempt in here.

Unlike Eldergal and her group, we take FAQs in all aspects as seriously as rulebook itself. Sometimes FAQs are needed to solve issues about unclear wording, or outright non-understandable contexts, and other times its just to quell the RAW vs RAI war that makes the game unenjoyable atleast, and sometimes even unplayable.

This batch of FAQs didn't serve us in our needs for the rule clarifications (and i know we are not alone). We know better than to take precedents from FAQs of other races than our owns. Why wasn't GK zone of banishment or cleansing flame catered to as was lord typhus destroyer hive in C: CSM?

When was the last round of FAQs? when 6th shipped, like 6months or so ago? So, with a little effort we wouln't have to wait until summer to get next change to get our answers..

[eldargal]

Seriously - I think you need to re-evaluate the Eldar. I've had much more success with them in 6th edition than I have with my blood angels.
I can't play the army I want to play is my main trouble with it, certainly there are some builds that are very good and I grant my initial prejudice against Nightwings was unfounded. One of my friends who favours an infantry force is having great success with it.

[Learn2Eel]

I can't play the army I want to play is my main trouble with it, certainly there are some builds that are very good and I grant my initial prejudice against Nightwings was unfounded. One of my friends who favours an infantry force is having great success with it.

I'm having that problem with my Tyranids. I do love the units I am using, but winning all the time isn't what I want to do. I want to have a balanced, fun army that incorporates lots of awesome elements - such as Lictors, Genestealers, Raveners and the like. Unfortunately, one of those units is terrible, one has been nerfed majorly by 6th edition and the third is sadly over-costed for what they do. I like Hormagaunts but I can make Termagants do the same thing just as well for less. Unfortunately, unlike your codex, this is more a result of bad codex writing more than anything else. I hope both armies are updated soon, that is for sure.

[Kirsten]

just out of curiousity, people complaining that their issues haven't been answered, have you actually asked them? Bear in mind that FAQ stands for frequently asked questions don't blame Games Workshop if the questions are not frequently asked, or asked at all.

[Lost Vyper]

Sigh...well, i´ve had more wins with Eldar in the 6th edition (and i rather win with superior tactics, than, let´s say Cron Air), but this really grinds my gears...new codex better be worth all this nerfing...Vindicare getting the rule, which i think should be with any decent snipers anyway (a.k.a Pathfinders). If a sniper shoots his target with high power rifle, who the hell (jedi?) can dodge that bullet or even yell : "NOOOOOOO!!!", in a cinematic way while pushing the charismatic leader outta harms way?

Here´s waiting for the next "kick Eldar while they are truly down" update...

[bfmusashi]

I like to remember posts like this when people complain about the Twilight fandom.

[Tynskel]

just out of curiousity, people complaining that their issues haven't been answered, have you actually asked them? Bear in mind that FAQ stands for frequently asked questions don't blame Games Workshop if the questions are not frequently asked, or asked at all.

I love you! This is awesome!

[eldargal]

Well to be fair a few people on Warseer have said they emailed in with questions which were not answered. But then as you say it is Frequently Asked Questions so if only a couple of people write in about something that the internet thinks is important but lots of people write in about other things, guess which get answered.

[Caitsidhe]

What Eldargal said. I know lots of questions which have been regularly emailed by myself and others in my META that have not been answered. For all we know Games Workshop has a magic number of times they have to get a question before they address it; something arbitrary like ten thousand times. :) It could also be, since they don't really design a tight rule set or test it, that they answer the questions only after having had time to figure it out. In short, they can't answer the question definitively because it never occurred to them in the first place for them to know how to do it. Because Games Workshop is a big company we attribute to them all sorts of standards and practices. We make assumptions about how professional they are in their design. My personal belief is that they slap a lot of this together, are not organized at all, and their creative teams work pretty much rudderless. The number of typos and errors in their books literally SCREAMS the fact that they do not employ a professional copy editor (which they should). We should be grateful for any corrections or clarifications that show up at all.

[Kirsten]

I think that is nonsense to be perfectly frank, the designer(s) will know exactly how things work, they wont have to work out answers. Certainly things wont occur to them, that happens with any producer of anything, nothing is watertight. But they very obviously do play test a lot, and the rules are very tight. To say otherwise is just internet nonsense that people bandy about making ridiculous complaints. Certainly they should take time to proof read, that is a major failing on their part, and something they need to solve pdq. If they just 'slap it all together' in a rudderless environment the game would be totally different.

[eldargal]

What Kirsten said. I actually think it would be very amusing and somewhat ironic if the questions that people on internet rules forums really want to know don't get answered because they are too busy discussing them on forums rather than contacting GW.

[Kirsten]

clearly they can't think of every issue before a book is released. should they catch more than what they do? yes. But they can't have much in the way of independent play testing with their secrecy policy being what it is. That policy has increased their sales, so that isn't going to change any time soon. If it was thrown together in a slap dash fashion without any overarching plan the company would not have lasted this long, they would have gone bust years ago. I have been playing for 15 years and I have only had to phone up with a rules query twice in that time, and I play every week on average. That suggests a pretty damn good rules set. The majority of the rules arguments that fly about are ridiculous and perfectly obvious, the genuine ones that come up are not major issues, you make a decision with your opponent/club and go with it until GW answer it. If you are having arguments and can't decide, then you are taking it way too seriously.

[The Madman]

I must profess that I am pleased with the change to tyranid FAQ, that is pretty awesome.

my two cents on it is that they should count MCs as 10 one wound models like they do for apocalypse transports, allowing a brood of two Carnifexs to deploy from a spore.

[Daemonette666]

When someone posts a complaint about Jervis Johnson not using Official Mat Ward toilet paper, then we will be complete.

Edit - I was going to add something in about Jervis Johnson and Matt ward toilet paper, but Tynskel beat me to it.

I have heard from a mate who used to work for GW in Australia and went to the UK GW a few times and even helped play tested their stuff back in 4th/ 5th edition, that they do play test in house. Write up a set of rules, which sounds OK to them, and then send it off to the Printers.

If what they wrote sounds confusing to others or the printers, or can be interpreted in a few ways, they do not care as it is now not their problem. If the rule works, it is adhered to even if it sounds silly. They only seem to errata rules when they realise they have to fixing the problem as everyone has been complaining about the rule, or they decide to the rule needs a FAQ as it is confusing and can be interpreted in many ways and too many people are asking for it to be fixed.

He also said that when BOLS were making up tournament rules to fix GWs problems, GW got peeved off and stopped them from doing that, but then were too lax to remedy the problem until they had enough questions/ problems in order to make it worth their while assigning someone to correct them.

Perhaps what the others here were saying about a magical number of complaints and inquiries about a rule being required before GW will look at resolving it is how it works.

Whether my mate is also correct, who knows. He quit because he did not like how GW were running their company in Australia - higher prices, lack of Errata / FAQs, poor customer service (at that time), and many more problems he said they were having with policy on where they were opening their stores and how they ran them.

My mate does not seem to hold a grudge or hate GW, in fact he stills plays 40K and other GW games, and has a lot of friends he plays against, some are currently employed with GW and some are ex GW employees. He even stands up for them when others are bad mouthing them, but does admit they could run their company better, but the games is a solid game, and should be played to be enjoyed not played to win at all costs.

Either way GW does not do things like fix Errata and FAQ problems very quickly, and then usually seem to dump them on us all in one go. They do not even announce they have been updated on their websites main page.

On a side note, I used the new rules for the HellDrake today. OMG, that thing is a nightmare. I forgot to use the torrent rule, but it did not matter. It was a huge 4000 double FOC game between my Chaos Space Marine army (no allies) and his Black Templars Army (no allies).

The flier did not get onto the board until round 3, and in 3 rounds of flying - vector strikes and shooting, it destroyed one unit of 8 models in cover, finished off a mauled unit that had deployed from a landraider and delivered the coupe de gras to a unit of termies with attached HQ models that I had been concentrating fire on. It lost one hull point from a plasma gun from a unit on a skyfire nexus objective, and had between 3 and 4 units firing at it each turn.

It was a fun game, and in the first 3 rounds I could not roll to hit or wound very well, but made a decent ammount of saves, while in the last 2 rounds, the tide turned, and my opponent got the bad luck with his dice rolls. It is amazing how quickly a unit of 30 cultists (130 points - no upgrades) can be wiped out from a combination of shooting and close combat from 2 enemy units. I lost 2 of those cultist units over 3 game turns (took enemy that long to get close enough to assault both units). Abaddon and the Dark Apostle earned their points though. Without the LD 10 from the Dark apostle, and Abaddon's Preferred Enemy, the cultists and other units would not have either stayed in combat for as long as they did, or were able to re-roll the amount of dice they did.

[Daemonette666]

With the new FAQ/Eratta, some vehicles have really been hit with the NERF stick.

Psykers and models in transports that do not have firing points, such as the Eldar Falcon and Tau Devil Fish can no longer use any abilities or psychic powers that do not need line of sight.

Also The Landraider has now been classified as a Heavy Vehicle Tank. It covers all Landraiders - CSM and all the Space Marine type codex Landraiders. Why do I say they are Nerfed, well it depends on how you want to use the Landraider. Mobile weapons platform, well you are OK.

If you need it as a Mobile Transport to get forces to an objective quickly and safetly, good luck with that. You can now only move at combat speed (up to 6"). You can not move at cruising speed or go flat out. It will take forever to get that squad of Terminators or Command squad on to the objective. Landraider Crusader and Redeemers are now less of a treat, but the old school Landraider still has the range to keep the enemy worried about its guns.

[Kyban]

The only change to the DE FAQ Ican see is the removal of this:

I hope simply because GW realised it was damned obvious that an equipment option used in the movement phase wouldn't impact on the shooting phase without it being mentioned explicitly rather than them implying this is no longer the case.

Didn't they upgrade klaives to AP2?

[bfmusashi]

Where's the bit on Land Raiders turning into Heavy vehicles?

[Wildcard]

Where's the bit on Land Raiders turning into Heavy vehicles?

I would definately like to know this as well..

[Kyban]

I would definately like to know this as well..

Same, that would make them completely useless.

[Caitsidhe]

More useless than they are right now? ;) Agreed... I would like to know what part of the Faq updates I missed because that would certainly be the nail in the Land Raider coffin if true. In fairness, I don't use them a lot now because I don't think they are that good anymore (they were already pretty much obsolete in 5th Edition).

[Wolfshade]

I recall reading that Leman Russ Battle tanks were...

[Tynskel]

Oi! Land Raider coffin? You guys are so full of it. Armor 14 with 4 hull points. It still takes considerable effort to bust that thing open.

[ElectricPaladin]

Oi! Land Raider coffin? You guys are so full of it. Armor 14 with 4 hull points. It still takes considerable effort to bust that thing open.

I've never lost a land raider, except for situations where I screwed up and failed to protect it.

[Kyban]

Oi! Land Raider coffin? You guys are so full of it. Armor 14 with 4 hull points. It still takes considerable effort to bust that thing open.

But you're still paying a lot of points for something that can either be avoided or easily popped with a meltagun.

[Caitsidhe]

In my META (by contrast) a Land Raider is lucky to make it to Turn-3. Between Dark Lances, various Melta, Vindicators, Turbo Penetration, etc. it isn't that difficult to disable or destroy.

[Daemonette666]

I heard the thing about Landraiders yesterday after I had just fought a Black Templars player.

One of the Local Rule Lawyers gamers I know, who normally is on the ball and knows his stuff (and before anyone says it, no he is not GW or ex GW) made a comment after the game. Not word for word, but the gist of what he said was that now the Landraider is a Heavy vehicle, my opponent could have moved up and fired all his weapons on his Landraider at one of my squads in turn 3 and not needed to snap shot some of them.

I thought nothing of it, and did not have the time to look it up, because I nearly missed Star Trek NG on the television, and then was too tired to bother after that. Now that I have tried to look for it, it is not in the FAQs or Erratas for the main rules or any of the codexes you would expect to see it in.

O.K. error on my part. Must obey rule regarding checking up facts for what I say before stating them in my replies to posts.

Black Templars really need a new Codex. Eldar and Tau do as well, but the next GW Imperial Codex should be Black Templars.

[Wolfshade]

I've never had a LR not make it through a game, though I suppose I use it as a delievery mechanism rather than for its tankosity

[Chris Copeland]

As far as I can tell there are only two HEAVY vehicles in the game: Leman Russ tanks and Monoliths... I can't find anything about Land Raiders being HEAVY... cheers... kjc

[bfmusashi]

Thanks for clearing that up Daemonette.

[DarkLink]

If you can't make a Land Raider last long enough to do its job, and you're not facing DE or Tau Broadsides, you don't know what you're doing with it. It doesn't even need to live to the end of the game.

[eldargal]

Oi! Land Raider coffin? You guys are so full of it. Armor 14 with 4 hull points. It still takes considerable effort to bust that thing open.
Well not for my Wyches, but I do agree with you. The highest AV in the Dark Eldar list is AV11, all of two choices and one is open topped. Complaining about having AV14 4HP vehicles just seems like the self entitled whining of Space Marine players.

[DWest]

I think the problem stems from the fact you can park 4 or 5 Ravagers in the big lump's footprint. About the only thing that can block LOS on a Land Raider . . . is the corpse of another Land Raider. That and they're a "trophy kill"- "you might have more VP, but I smoked your Land Raider turn 1, I claim moral victory!" Not always true, but it's there.

The other problem which makes a Land Raider so inconsistent across the board is you do need Melta or similar to make it explode, and so you're relying on the luck of 2d6 now. Two examples from me from the previous year:
-Example 1: DA player (old dex) rams a LR Crusader down the throat of my Chaos (new dex). I have the Hellbrute w/ Multi-melta on the table, take my 1 shot. Hit (4/6 chance), Penetrate (7/12 chance), Explodes! result (3/6 chance). 2 Termies go down with the ship.
-Example 2: (5th Edition rules) I, playing Nids, have my Hive Tyrant w/ Adrenals jump on a GK Land Raider. LR didn't move, so that's 4 auto-hits. Str 7 + 2d6 for MC = 5/12 chance to Penetrate per swing. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Not even a glance.
All anecdotal evidence, I admit, but Land Raiders don't seem to regularly conform to any sort of statistical average, so it all comes down to how they "feel" when played, whether they live up to the reputation of being a mobile fortress, or look like a flaming deathtrap.

[Caitsidhe]

<chuckles> When I hear about Land Raiders making a big comeback and lists with them dominating tournaments, I'll be happy to eat crow. For my own part, I rarely use them and I have no trouble whatsoever killing them. Copeland was the last person I played who used one and the moment it was in Melta-Range it was dead.

[spaceman91]

if i may throw my two pence in. I use landraiders, not often but i do like to use them when i can. i think it comes down to the player not the raider itself. I have played games where i have just ignored a raider because the person using it was a bit slow. That said i have had cases where my raider has been a beast. it dropped 2 russ in one phase ( before you say it i know that was luck but what other vehicle can do that? ) and went on to drop my termies off, who then smashed their way through most of my opponents troops.
I say much love to the raider and poo poo to you people dislike it.

[DarkLink]

I think the problem stems from the fact you can park 4 or 5 Ravagers in the big lump's footprint. About the only thing that can block LOS on a Land Raider . . . is the corpse of another Land Raider. That and they're a "trophy kill"- "you might have more VP, but I smoked your Land Raider turn 1, I claim moral victory!" Not always true, but it's there.

There's this thing called terrain. It's kind of nice when you actually use it. Your Land Raider should always have a cover save at the least.

[DWest]

Actually, I've found terrain hinders as much as helps the Land Raider, because it ends up forcing the big beast to go down one or two specific, pre-set paths. I can park a tank-buster (such as my Hellbrute in example #1 above) either in cover or out of LOS, shrug off the Land Raider's fire, then pop out and take a free shot right down the lane where it gets no cover. I'll gladly give up my 5+ (which I can make for free for 1 round anyway) in exchange for not being funneled right into the meltaguns.

Or since I'm working on my Blood Angels at the moment, I'll drop the thing on your head from orbit, because that's never not funny.

[spaceman91]

Or since I'm working on my Blood Angels at the moment, I'll drop the thing on your head from orbit, because that's never not funny.

i used to do that until the last time i did it i lost almost 500 point in one go

[Defenestratus]

i used to do that until the last time i did it i lost almost 500 point in one go

Locator beacons are your friend.

[LordGrise]

So now Seeker missiles, that cannot launch unless a markerlight is painting the target, (made my roll of 6) now itself requires a 6 to hit. Great. My Remoras that I requested and recieved for Christmas in the mistaken understanding that a long-barrel burst cannon was the same no matter what it was mounted on, (on a Hammerhead they are 6/4 A6, on a Remora they are 5/5 A3) are now TOTALLY worthless against flyers, despite being a flyer itself. Terrific.

[Wildcard]

About the FAQs:

Was it even a considered needing a FAQ whether or not blasts (not barrage) could cause wounds to models shooter had no line of sight (and due to the wording, if it did not scatter, some says its one point as well)?

[DarkLink]

Also, can you cast Maledictions on Flyers?

[Defenestratus]

Also, can you cast Maledictions on Flyers?

I'm trying to think why you couldn't?

[Nabterayl]

So now Seeker missiles, that cannot launch unless a markerlight is painting the target, (made my roll of 6) now itself requires a 6 to hit. Great. My Remoras that I requested and recieved for Christmas in the mistaken understanding that a long-barrel burst cannon was the same no matter what it was mounted on, (on a Hammerhead they are 6/4 A6, on a Remora they are 5/5 A3) are now TOTALLY worthless against flyers, despite being a flyer itself. Terrific.
Since GW FAQs never refer to Forgeworld units as such, I'm inclined to say that the FAQ applies to ground-based weapons only. I see no reason why a markerlight fired by a unit with Skyfire, used to fire a seeker missile from a unit with Skyfire, should need anything other than the normal rolls to hit. Or, if a ground-based markerlight is used to fire an air-based seeker missile, why the seeker missile should not hit on the normal 2+.