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.

 warboss wrote:

 Grey Knight Luke wrote:
Well it looks as if the sky is not falling after all and we may have a fun edition on our hands. I am all for people playing unbound armies, a Leman Russ tank contingent comes to mind right away as a fluffy fun way to spend an afternoon. Campaigns are going to be great fun because of this I think.

It also looks as if competitive play will not be broken either. Unbound armies will be required to table pretty much every army they come up against, something that may happen to me, but will not happen to most players out there.

Just when I think I'm going to get out of this silly game, GW sucks me right back in...

Campaigns have never been restricted by the FOC and didn't need a "take anything" army construction rule as a standard option. As for competitive play, I suspect we'll see a blanket ban on unbound armies in most tournies except for the (apparently unpopular judging from Adepticon) formats that specifically advertised in the past taking everything. This just enables TFGs to try and screw over pickup game opponents as part of the standard rules via "but the rules say I can take all riptides!" argument. Your ability to get a fearless warlord and have super scoring troops doesn't matter if your opponent kills every troop by turn 2 and tables you by turn 4 because they've cherry picked the most broken units from 15 different sources.

Even Unbound armies are limited by the (new) Allies chart. So you're still won't face someone who "cherry picked the most broken units from 15 different sources".

I was going to add "you're supposed to discuss restrictions with your opponents before games", but from the way PUG players keep posting, it sounds like actually talking to your opponent beyong "1500 points?" doesn't actually happen.

I'm pretty sure that the "everything and their grandmother is scoring" thingy is a dubious rumour rather than something from the WD article or the video. Time will tell, obviously.

Realy unbound force organisation not the issue, it's weather the game itself can support it as a option.
Can GW make players want to take and use all there options with the rules, missions and objectives.
And can they create a game that both and all players can enjoy with there rules without huge amount of work.

A lot of other games can do this with limited restrictions so there isn't realy any reason GW cannot other than willful failure.

 streamdragon wrote:

 warboss wrote:

 Grey Knight Luke wrote:
Well it looks as if the sky is not falling after all and we may have a fun edition on our hands. I am all for people playing unbound armies, a Leman Russ tank contingent comes to mind right away as a fluffy fun way to spend an afternoon. Campaigns are going to be great fun because of this I think.

It also looks as if competitive play will not be broken either. Unbound armies will be required to table pretty much every army they come up against, something that may happen to me, but will not happen to most players out there.

Just when I think I'm going to get out of this silly game, GW sucks me right back in...

Campaigns have never been restricted by the FOC and didn't need a "take anything" army construction rule as a standard option. As for competitive play, I suspect we'll see a blanket ban on unbound armies in most tournies except for the (apparently unpopular judging from Adepticon) formats that specifically advertised in the past taking everything. This just enables TFGs to try and screw over pickup game opponents as part of the standard rules via "but the rules say I can take all riptides!" argument. Your ability to get a fearless warlord and have super scoring troops doesn't matter if your opponent kills every troop by turn 2 and tables you by turn 4 because they've cherry picked the most broken units from 15 different sources.

Even Unbound armies are limited by the (new) Allies chart. So you're still won't face someone who "cherry picked the most broken units from 15 different sources".

I was going to add "you're supposed to discuss restrictions with your opponents before games", but from the way PUG players keep posting, it sounds like actually talking to your opponent beyong "1500 points?" doesn't actually happen.

Seriously, when you take a list that you have played with more than 5 times and actually put thought into, how often have you gotten tabled? For me it hasn't happened since 5th when I went up against leafblower for the first time. I almost never hear of people getting tabled on turn 2. Knowing that the guy across the table from you cannot score is a HUGE advantage and lets you play very defensively if you need to.

Stop being scared, this is really good news!

via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
These are in Australian prices
Standard edition 140
Collectors Edition 360
Physhic Cards 16
Objective Tokens 12

Anyone care to translate that to prices for the rest of the work?

Screencaps from http://xvilegion.com/2014/05/12/reglas-de-la-nueva-edicion-new-40k-edition-rules/#more-464

It seems that GW wants to publicise their new 40k edition, so they have uploaded a promotional video with Jervis Johnson, part of GW’s Rule Development Team. I have taken some screenshots of all the rules for a better reading, click to enlarge.






More or less this confirms the rumours we have beer hearing these days, I am still afraid of the impact of including Lords of War in regular 40k, let’s see how this goes.

I think some of the stuff looks interesting, but I'm still waiting to see the full picture because it feels like we're only looking at a handful of pieces.

If anyone at GW is reading this thread, I hope the MAIN thing they take away from it is:

More communication with your fanbase is a good thing.

That video with Jervis explaining some of the reasoning and rules, along with screen caps from the actual rulebook, goes a long way towards making me feel better about dropping $100 or so on a new book in a couple weeks. While watching it I found myself thinking that perhaps they've actually gone through the rules so that they make more sense.

The rules layout looks pretty clear. The reasoning appears sound and given what we just saw I'm pretty sure that the Force Chart is a long long ways from actually being dead.

Can't wait until the next video.

 streamdragon wrote:
Even Unbound armies are limited by the (new) Allies chart. So you're still won't face someone who "cherry picked the most broken units from 15 different sources".

I was going to add "you're supposed to discuss restrictions with your opponents before games", but from the way PUG players keep posting, it sounds like actually talking to your opponent beyong "1500 points?" doesn't actually happen.

Well, that's reality. When you go to a store, you usually have two scenarios:

1) Everyone who is looking for a game is already playing. You wait until another person looking for a game comes in. You have the choice of their playing that person, or risking not playing at all because either there is no other person coming in, or the next person coming in is going to play him rather than you.

2) One or more people are waiting for a game, and aren't playing each other for some reason. Either you play one of those people or you are joining the crowd of people who jump everyone who comes in with an figure case.

Most of the time, you either play whoever wants to play and don't be picky about it, or you'll end up spectating games all afternoon.

Re Prices

Apocalypse is Aus$124 and £45, so I guess we're looking at ~£50 for the Rulebook, perhaps as high as £60.

Between US$75-90

 ClockworkZion wrote:

via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
These are in Australian prices
Standard edition 140
Collectors Edition 360
Physhic Cards 16
Objective Tokens 12

Anyone care to translate that to prices for the rest of the work?

Okay, so US direct translation:

Standard Edition: $131
Collectors Edition: $337
Psychic Cards: $15
Objectice Tokens: $11

EDIT: As Azreal said, I don't think these will be the prices for the US since Australia experiences such a mark-up, I just wanted to provide the exact translation

 ClockworkZion wrote:

via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
These are in Australian prices
Standard edition 140
Collectors Edition 360
Physhic Cards 16
Objective Tokens 12

Anyone care to translate that to prices for the rest of the work?

Though from what I understand Aussie prices tend to be inflated somewhat

For her majesty's empire

Standard £67
Collectors £200
psychic cards £9
tokens £7
(all rounded up a bit)

for you yanks

standard $131
Collectors $337
psychic cards $15
tokens $11.20

Edit: bah beaten to it

Hmm... mention of Citadel miniatures. Does this mean the Forge World debate is still going to be going on?

To bad they can't just say GW miniatures but still keep saying Citadel miniatures.

Great. Still don't have the full rules, but with 7th, you are absolutely required to communicate with your opponent before the game whether he wants to play the game (no Unbound) or just shove plastic on the table (allowing Unbound).

I really laughed out loud when I read that the "advantage" you get for using the FOC is re-rolling the Warlord Table. Great fething job GW. Whoop-di-whoop. And I am glad that only your Bound force may score while hordes of Waveserpents and Riptides tear everything apart.

GW isn't even trying anymore.

Still: waiting for the entire rules. Right now, it looks utterly terrible now.

Plus: really? ~100€ for a rulebook? Not going to happen. Ever.

You're missing the part where FoC bound armies get advantages to capturing objectives. Which is a pretty nice tactical advantage over unbound armies.

 Jidmah wrote:

Well, that's reality. When you go to a store, you usually have two scenarios:

1) Everyone who is looking for a game is already playing. You wait until another person looking for a game comes in. You have the choice of their playing that person, or risking not playing at all because either there is no other person coming in, or the next person coming in is going to play him rather than you.

2) One or more people are waiting for a game, and aren't playing each other for some reason. Either you play one of those people or you are joining the crowd of people who jump everyone who comes in with an figure case.

Most of the time, you either play whoever wants to play and don't be picky about it, or you'll end up spectating games all afternoon.

'
I fail to see how either of those scenarios makes a 2 minute conversation about what you both want out of the game impossible. Surely you are capable of working something out with another human being, who is theoretically also there because they too want to get a game in?

 Sigvatr wrote:
Great. Still don't have the full rules, but with 7th, you are absolutely required to communicate with your opponent before the game whether he wants to play the game (no Unbound) or just shove plastic on the table (allowing Unbound).

I really laughed out loud when I read that the "advantage" you get for using the FOC is re-rolling the Warlord Table. Great fething job GW. Whoop-di-whoop. And I am glad that only your Bound force may score while hordes of Waveserpents and Riptides tear everything apart.

GW isn't even trying anymore.

Still: waiting for the entire rules. Right now, it looks utterly terrible now.

Plus: really? ~100€ for a rulebook? Not going to happen. Ever.

There are a number of bonuses listed, but here are the two we know in full:

The video gives you partial view of a few more as well.

I changed my mind. The deathstrike missile army is lame and unfriendly, and not in the spirit of the game.

I'm bringing an army of nothing but 3rd edition Daemonhunters Heavy Support Orbital Bombardments. It's a unit in my collection, and I can use whatever units are in my collection, or whatever, so why the feth not?

 daedalus wrote:
I changed my mind. The deathstrike missile army is lame and unfriendly, and not in the spirit of the game.

I'm bringing an army of nothing but 3rd edition Daemonhunters Heavy Support Orbital Bombardments. It's a unit in my collection, and I can use whatever units are in my collection, or whatever, so why the feth not?

My Narrative™ is ready.

Oh my god, with each passing day it gets worse! Don't have 10 marneus Calgar models? Oh well cool thing is now all your dopes will be really good-ish at holding objectives unless your opponent also doesn't have 10 Abbadons and he too is good0ish at holding objectives, then you both still suck at holding objectives!

Man! this all seems so hard! How do i write a decent list? Oh I know, I'll just forge a narrative :forgeforgeforgeforge: until GW just straight up writes a list for me!

ungh... all that forging! Excuse me I have to pawn my worthless crap models off on some unsuspecting dweeb.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
You're missing the part where FoC bound armies get advantages to capturing objectives. Which is a pretty nice tactical advantage over unbound armies.

By the reading of this, even Unfun armies are able to capture objectives unless Regular troops are at the very same objective?

 Sigvatr wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
You're missing the part where FoC bound armies get advantages to capturing objectives. Which is a pretty nice tactical advantage over unbound armies.

By the reading of this, even Unfun armies are able to capture objectives unless Regular troops are at the very same objective?

I see what you did there...

Yeah, that seems to be the scenario. I guess it is meant to encourage at least min-max troop choices in an Unbound list to hide in cover and attempt last-minute objective grabs.

Yes. So use FoC troops to steal objectives.

Sounds like a lot of fun. Hide for the entire game while getting bombared by superior troops. Points-denial games have always been the most fun games.

very exciting much fun so wow

Points denial is the new "forging the narrative". Holy cow, I just hope GW stays away from WHFB for the next at least 10 years. They seriously suck at making rules.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
You're missing the part where FoC bound armies get advantages to capturing objectives. Which is a pretty nice tactical advantage over unbound armies.

By the reading of this, even Unfun armies are able to capture objectives unless Regular troops are at the very same objective?

My understanding is basically 3 tiers of units, with regards to objectives:

1. Obective Secured units. Tyranid Skyblight Gargoyles, and Troop units from Battle Forged armies go here.
2. Scoring units. Whatever units that aren't scoring. Troop units from Unbound armies go here.
3. Denial units. Units that can't score themselves, but are still capable of contesting objectives.

OS units can't be contested by Scoring or Denial units. They can ONLY be contested by other OS units. So a Skyblight Gargoyle could contest a Battle Forged Tactical Space Marine squad sitting on an objective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sounds like a lot of fun. Hide for the entire game while getting bombared by superior troops. Points-denial games have always been the most fun games.

very exciting much fun so wow

Points denial is the new "forging the narrative". Holy cow, I just hope GW stays away from WHFB for the next at least 10 years. They seriously suck at making rules.

Isn't this basically what has been done since objectives became a thing in 40k? I mean, freakin last round Wave Serpent Tank Shocks or Turbo Boosting to objectives isn't anything new.

 warboss wrote:

alphaecho wrote:
I'd be happy if Unbound will let you take armies based on BL novels where the protagonists do not necessarily fit the FOC.

For example Talos and a veteran Night Lords squad with 30+ Bleeding Eye Raptors.

Might be hoop on the table and achieve nothing but could be fun to play!

Isn't Talos, two veteran Night Lords squads, and 30+ Bleeding Eye Raptors already legal? Does that single 5 man chaos marine squad make all the difference in you forging that narrative?

I don't have the current Chaos Codex. Do Chosen/ veteran Chaos Marines count as Troops or are they Elites? Can you take 40 Raptors in an FOC based army?

What I was suggesting (apologies if it wasn't clear) was one Elite choice with four+ Fast Attack selections. No HQ, no Troops.

Can see a lot of people learning quick wether they like or dislike this unbound stuff. It's just annoying to see the same people going on about the small things we've seen like that's the ONLY thing that'll be the difference between Unbound and Battleforged armies.

GW just proved that we have no idea what's coming and have no idea how it's gonna balance out.

Yeah the benefits for "Battle Forged" armies might not seem awesome as yet, but we don't know what else we've not seen as of yet. Do we?

2 more of those videos to come, should shed some light on it.

If unbound armies are allowed in competitive play then the nids just jumped at the top of the food chain!

Want to play unbound? Meet my Endless swarm list of x-thousand non tablable objective securing MSU. Oh and a pair of Primes somewhere in there to secure synapse.

Yes you can put your models back in the case now.

I'm a little confused about why they felt the need to mention that all units in your primary detachment need to be within the same Faction (which I assume is some new allies matrix thing) but then also mention that all units in your Allied detached must be within the same Faction.

What does that mean? Aren't all units from the same codex within the same faction anyhow? Does that mean that if I'm playing an "imperial" primary detachment, I can take units from Imperial Guard, Vanilla Marines, and Blood Angels, all within the same detachment?

Could I then choose an allied detachment from another Faction (let's say Eldar), which would then presumably be able to take units from the Eldar faction (which I assume includes DE)? Because it does not indicate that Allied Detachments have to be from the same faction as your Primary detachment.

Spoletta wrote:
If unbound armies are allowed in competitive play then the nids just jumped at the top of the food chain!

Want to play unbound? Meet my Endless swarm list of x-thousand non tablable objective securing MSU. Oh and a pair of Primes somewhere in there to secure synapse.

Yes you can put your models back in the case now.

This is why we cant have nice things.

darkcloak wrote:
Oh my god, with each passing day it gets worse! Don't have 10 marneus Calgar models? Oh well cool thing is now all your dopes will be really good-ish at holding objectives unless your opponent also doesn't have 10 Abbadons and he too is good0ish at holding objectives, then you both still suck at holding objectives!

Man! this all seems so hard! How do i write a decent list? Oh I know, I'll just forge a narrative :forgeforgeforgeforge: until GW just straight up writes a list for me!

ungh... all that forging! Excuse me I have to pawn my worthless crap models off on some unsuspecting dweeb.

"No FoC" does not mean "can take 10 copies of Special Characters".

darkcloak wrote:
Oh my god, with each passing day it gets worse! Don't have 10 marneus Calgar models? Oh well cool thing is now all your dopes will be really good-ish at holding objectives unless your opponent also doesn't have 10 Abbadons and he too is good0ish at holding objectives, then you both still suck at holding objectives!

Man! this all seems so hard! How do i write a decent list? Oh I know, I'll just forge a narrative :forgeforgeforgeforge: until GW just straight up writes a list for me!

ungh... all that forging! Excuse me I have to pawn my worthless crap models off on some unsuspecting dweeb.

Marneus Calgar is a force multiplier. An army of 10 Calgars would get destroyed.

Play 10 Mephistons instead.

Nah for real neither of those will happen, chill out.