Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm trying to understand why the weapon profiles of certain weapon systems, some on the exact same platforms, have different stat lines. Is this by design, or is this just related to a poor review process?

Which profile for the Accelerator Burst Cannon is correct?

Hammerhead: AP -1
Sky Ray Gunship: AP -1
Devilfish: Ap 0
Razor Shark: AP 0
Longstrike: AP 0


Which profile for the Twin Smart Missile System is correct?

Hammerhead: Attacks = 3
Sky Ray Gunship: Attacks = 3
Devilfish: Attacks = 2
Longstrike: Attacks = 4
Broadsides: Attacks = 3
Riptide: Attacks = 3
Stormsurge: Attacks = 2

They are all correct, though longstrikes ABC may be a typo.
One of the design philosophies of the edition is a more individual approach to profiles so the same weapon on different vechiles can gave different stats to represent different power the platform can achieve.
If you think one profile is too weak or too strong then you can email GW about it and they may change it in the next errata.

They're all correct. Nothing states anywhere that a weapon has to have the same stats. Not to hit, strength, ap etc.

They are technically correct because they are what the datasheet says. It may be intentional or it may be due to poor editorial control.

Everything is equally correct, even in situations - actually, especially in situations - where one might seem to contradict another.

"Simple, not consistent".

Its annoying but this allows for GW to tailor each models power initially and in the future.

There are no universal weapon stats or USR like in past editions. They have the freedom to tweak each data sheet as they see fit.

 Smirrors wrote:
Its annoying but this allows for GW to tailor each models power initially and in the future.

There are no universal weapon stats or USR like in past editions. They have the freedom to tweak each data sheet as they see fit.

Well... Rather than having Deep Strike (X"), they just have Deep Strike.

 Smirrors wrote:
There are no universal weapon stats

That was the worst part about past editions, actually. It just never made any sense to me a say handheld plasma cannon should have the same stats as gun twice as large mounted in dreadnought arm or tank turret (which also made these models comically weak and equal in offensive output to a single mook, which was just sad). It was then made even worse in 8th edition when everything with the same name had to have identical stats, which led to idiotic situations like demolisher cannon buff to make vindicators viable filtering to a dozen+ unrelated IG tanks because they had "demolisher" cannons too (even though they were visually very different guns) making vindicators trash again because they were better balanced and with buff made Vs straight out obsolete again...

jshugart wrote:
I'm trying to understand why the weapon profiles of certain weapon systems, some on the exact same platforms, have different stat lines. Is this by design, or is this just related to a poor review process?

Which profile for the Accelerator Burst Cannon is correct?

Hammerhead: AP -1
Sky Ray Gunship: AP -1
Devilfish: Ap 0
Razor Shark: AP 0
Longstrike: AP 0

With the latest errata release,We now know that the correct AP for the Accelerator Burst Cannon, on all platforms is AP -1. So it looks to me, like the methodology being used by the GW Devs, is to have Str, AP, and Damage characteristics being equal, and modifying the Attacks profile of the weapon based on the unit/platform to "balance" the "intended" profile of the unit/platform.

I have not examined all Index weapons to verify this conclusion, this is just from looking at the Tau index and the response so far to submitted FAQ/Errata questions.

Heck, you should see the Chaos Autocannons, they are all over the place. S7-9, D 1, 2, and 3.

MadEdric wrote:
Heck, you should see the Chaos Autocannons, they are all over the place. S7-9, D 1, 2, and 3.

You peaked my curiosity, so I dug through all the Chaos autocannon stat lines to see if my theory held.

Chaos has 6 different named autocannon types: Havoc, Reaper, Predator, Hades, Twin and Hellstalker.

Of those 6, Chaos has 4 that have a range characteristic of 48", and other than the Attacks and BS stats, are all the same.
Of the other two, they do have different stat lines, but they are both named different/ unique names. I liken this to two different weapons, using Tau as an example, the "Burst Cannon" and the "Accelerator Burst Cannon" are not being compared as they are two completely different weapon system/profile types, even if the name is similar.

I could not find an instance where the exact same name for the weapon, provided a different stat line for Str, AP or Damage.

So, I could not find anything for Chaos autocannon types to dissuade my thinking on the methodology being used by the GW Devs, as stated above.