They said high damage was better against vehicles, so I wonder if that's just dreads or if all vehicles are moving towards having regular profiles.
Also from WarCom, regarding challenges:
"When two of these figures meet in combat, it should be an epic battle for the ages, so there are now a suite of options for high-level characters involved in challenges to outfight, outthink, and outmanoeuvre their opponent. These hard-fought duels capture the feel of the dramatic showdowns from the Horus Heresy novel series, as well as increase the usefulness of these epic heroes to your battleplan. And they’re great fun."
Wonder if this will also take into account more of the mental stats, if that's where the variety is (in characters over basic troopers by and large)?
In their 'questions' answered bit they also have this:
"There are several cool new things for players to get their teeth into, including Challenge Gambits, Tactical Status, and Army Selection, all of which we’ll go into more detail on in upcoming articles."
Cool toys are cool!
Breachers - awesome, but mk2 assault marines - gorgeous.
Happy to see more plastic coming to HH, a good sign it won’t be forgotten anytime soon after a rules dump.
The box we already knew about but its still disappointing that it's just a load of marines again. Especially when they have Custodes in the trailer. They would have looked far better opposite the Saturnines.
No mention if they're going to have Zone Mortalis in the core book this time, nor any mention of a skirmish mode. The model count for this game isn't doing it any favours when Legions Imperialis does a far better job of large scale warfare.
The 3-year cycle is a huge turn off, especially when the initial impression is "might as well just play Rogue Trader, which we still print once in a while".
Not sure how I feel about the Questoris army book, although it might work out cheaper if only going for Knights'n'Titans.
Not Online!!! wrote: Vehicle rules will make or break it, well and if they reign in Dreads.
Damage Stat might reign in dreads as it is.
Damage stat was already in with brutal-.
If the vehicles are going to a T model then i will just not.
To a degree on Brutal. Some weapons had it, most didn’t. Now? Further details needed, natch. But if even Heavy Bolters go to D2? Dreads might be in for a much rougher time of it.
The breacher shield is a weird mix of Mk3 and Mk5, they probably leaned too hard into "make one design to go with all armour marks"
Luckily Mk2 get the correct jump packs!
The volkite pistol teaser was plastic Mk4
Still no whiff of Fast Attack in any shape or form but we get the Baneblade with all the detail sanded off that everybody wanted
The rules I am extremely negative about, to the surprise of no one
A decently competent ruleset that just needed a balance patch and better layout gets thrown out baby with the bathwater style, as GW always does nowadays, and rewritten from scratch with an all new set of beginner blunders, because 3 years of playtesting is rendered obsolete by the scope of changes.
4 mental stats in a mass battle game is insane. I can already see Intelligence being used in exactly one situation, techmarine repairs. Maaaybe avoiding Gets Hot? But we're burdened with keeping track of the stat for no reason on every single model that will never use it.
The tactical statuses might be good if they don't amount to just 4 barely distinct types of pinning that are just pointless mental load.
Changing the stat acronyms sounds like just pure malice to bully veteran players who are in HH specifically to avoid change. But clearly the game is no longer for them, we're on the 3 year e-sport treadmill now.
And of course we're replacing the entire library of 50€ books that lasted 3 years or less, with the promise of adding Arcane Journals on top down the line.
And I am 100% certain Legends are gone, ain't nobody at GW rewriting 300 pages of statlines for free when the changes are so massive.
- if they brought back extraneous mental characteristics but not rt/2nd ed style vehicle hit/damage charts imma be mad.
- "more flexible army building" has become a trigger for me, hoping they havent done away with FOC charts
- mk2 assault marine, but not mk3? What about mk2/3 scimitar bikers?
- was hoping for the glaive in plastic alongside the fellblade, hopefully a follow-on variant kit for the fellblade is in the works
- splitting knights off into a separate book is a choice, im surprised that it looks like their liber is as large as the mechanicum and auxilia books. They really dont have that many units, hopefully theres some mechanicum crossover in there if they are pushing them in the direction of standalone factions.
- happy about the journal format, should give us more steady updates and a better microscope into the lore
- anyone else catch references to "asset points" in the journal preview text? Do we think that was something specific to scenario/campaign play, or was it hints at the new points system? The numbers were low, along the lines of power level, this might get uhh... controversial....
- also no mention of shattered legion, blackshield, daemon, militia/army/warp cult rules, etc. *sigh*
Jack Flask wrote: Nobody is excited for what is almost certainly Dark Mech?
Spoiler:
Looks more like a skitarii named character or officer, than dark mech.
There aren't any Skitarii in 30k right now (other than Titan Guard) though. Also this is specifically in the same colors as the LI Dark Mech robots and has more "evil" looking bayonet on the front than any of the current Mechanicum units.
SamusDrake wrote:The box we already knew about but its still disappointing that it's just a load of marines again. Especially when they have Custodes in the trailer. They would have looked far better opposite the Saturnines.
That's never going to happen because GW want people to be able to buy the starter box and use all of the models as the core of a single 30k army.
At least for Talons they basically confirmed they'll be getting a significant release in the near future, likely a massive expansion to the Sisters of Silence.
There's no other reason they'd be launching as a PDF rather than a full Liber, and the presenters directly said their Liber will be coming in the future with some new releases.
The breacher shield is a weird mix of Mk3 and Mk5, they probably leaned too hard into "make one design to go with all armour marks"
Luckily Mk2 get the correct jump packs!
The volkite pistol teaser was plastic Mk4
Still no whiff of Fast Attack in any shape or form but we get the Baneblade with all the detail sanded off that everybody wanted
The rules I am extremely negative about, to the surprise of no one
A decently competent ruleset that just needed a balance patch and better layout gets thrown out baby with the bathwater style, as GW always does nowadays, and rewritten from scratch with an all new set of beginner blunders, because 3 years of playtesting is rendered obsolete by the scope of changes.
4 mental stats in a mass battle game is insane. I can already see Intelligence being used in exactly one situation, techmarine repairs. Maaaybe avoiding Gets Hot? But we're burdened with keeping track of the stat for no reason on every single model that will never use it.
The tactical statuses might be good if they don't amount to just 4 barely distinct types of pinning that are just pointless mental load.
Changing the stat acronyms sounds like just pure malice to bully veteran players who are in HH specifically to avoid change. But clearly the game is no longer for them, we're on the 3 year e-sport treadmill now.
And of course we're replacing the entire library of 50€ books that lasted 3 years or less, with the promise of adding Arcane Journals on top down the line.
And I am 100% certain Legends are gone, ain't nobody at GW rewriting 300 pages of statlines for free when the changes are so massive.
I'm on board with everything you said regarding the rules.
I guess I'll hold onto my books and keep the Legends files handy to use any new models.
Jack Flask wrote: Nobody is excited for what is almost certainly Dark Mech?
Spoiler:
Could be a loyal resistance fighter from the Skitarii legions as well. Doesn't look especially Dark Mechanicum to me.
I'm open to being wrong, but there aren't any (non-Titan Guard) Skitarii in 30k currently and the bayonet doesn't looks more brutal than the ones on the Tech Thralls.
Plus this models is painted in the same colors as the LI Dark Mech walkers.
A Book for Knights? Hopefully they won't feel like they were tacked on and will be better integrated into the game.
(Now, if they would let me use my 40k Knights in 30k without the 2 for 1 Armiger tax.)
Not because I love Armigers, but I was behind the 2-for-1 of HH'22, as it was sensible for 28mm wargaming. But they could ease it up with 1-for-1, at least for larger games.
I might get some breachers, just to build. I never got an army up and running for the current edition, and the odds of it happening in the next 3 years are not great either. I like the concept, but think it’s going to be a slow burn background project. And I’m not buying new rulebooks for that.
Like the superheavy, and as my goal is a mechanized list, might eventually happen.
Friendly reminder for those planning to stick with the old edition to download everything from the website before it gets replaced with the new edition.
Nice catch (assuming its not resin upgrade), but also i think this may confirm hh keeps the legacy drop pod? Also a sabre in front left
Both the Fellblade and the Fellglaive in this picture are the old resin versions. The plastic version has a different front and also round doors on the side skirts. But with a plastic Fellblade around the corner, the Glaive can't be far away. It would just require a different turret sprue.
cautiously optimistic about all of this. the choice towards more complexity, not less, has me thinking that their heart is in the right place. also they've already confirmed that legends will still be around, not just for models but for factions (ie, militia and demons), which says to me they're committed to maintaining the existing units. if anything in heresy could be cut, it would be the demons PDF
I'm not sure a game of this size requires skirmish level stats and the like. All wind is out of my sails despite the amazing minis, I dont fancy game getting bogged down in 4 hours turn 2/3 showdowns (ymmv).
What’s more, there will be a range of Legacy PDFs coming out over the next few months, allowing players to deploy classic miniatures and factions from their collections.
So I am not well-versed in HH tech, but with all these new disintegrator weapons, I'm a bit confused... I thought volkite already was some of disintegration ray, no?
Not all that enthusiastic seeing I spent close to 200€ on 10 resin jump packs.. just for them to re-release em in plastic for MKII Assault Squad!
Plenty of surprises with this one though. The new rules changes could turn out interesting, with supression, more nuanced psychology rules and that. I do like HH rules are veering off from the main 40K rules even more than before, makes the games feel more distinct from one another. I never played HH 1 nor 2, the new rules might tempt me to start.. if they dont end up a mess.
The fact that 5 libers are coming out on launch day feels good to me. Less chance of a power creep messing with the edition methinks.
Seeing the models better made me readjust my opinions on them. I do like the base MKII models, I think they look even better than the new MKIII. I also really like the Saturnine Praetor, a surprisingly brilliant kit considering I dont fancy the regular Saturnine models nor the dread..
That Whilrwind sneak peek made me chuckle a lil. It looks exactly like my LItbashed Whirlwinds I made from Predator, Rhino and Tarantula bitz
I also liked how they showed the sprues and gave us scale comparison right there in the reveal show. They should do that stuff for all their reveal shows going forward.
I'm still left wondering when we'll see plastic Fast Attack vehicles and plastic MKV. But at least there will be an unlimited supply of old style Jump Packs going forward (which will presumably also fit all the existing marks? Assuming the contact point on the back will be the standard one..)
Dudeface wrote: I'm not sure a game of this size requires skirmish level stats and the like. All wind is out of my sails despite the amazing minis, I dont fancy game getting bogged down in 4 hours turn 2/3 showdowns (ymmv).
Gert, Dudeface and I agree on something, best call the president to open the bomb shelters.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crimson wrote: So I am not well-versed in HH tech, but with all these new disintegrator weapons, I'm a bit confused... I thought volkite already was some of disintegration ray, no?
Lorewise yes but rules wise volkite is just a glorified stubber, high rate of fire gak AP. Disintegrators in HH 2.0 are basically what Plasma used to be, and actual Plasma was heavily nerfed.
Automatically Appended Next Post: We're also clearly headed down the 40k road of every new model coming with bigger guns than the last and units being erased instantly... after one edition of respite, all-AP2 squads are back with Disintegrator spam, Saturnines have 2 heavy weapons each, and there's plastic superheavies.
I think the reintroduction of Personal Characteristics from 1st edition 40K could in fact reduce the amount of special snowflake rules required for certain interactions.. assuming they have been designed properly. But we shall see soon enough
Absolutely love all the new models, interested to see how the rules shake out. Very hyped for the box and following releases. The leaked photos were very unflattering for the saturnine, they look great.
Dudeface wrote: I'm not sure a game of this size requires skirmish level stats and the like. All wind is out of my sails despite the amazing minis, I dont fancy game getting bogged down in 4 hours turn 2/3 showdowns (ymmv).
Why would those bog down the game? I wouldn't call them specifically "skirmish level stats" either. What is the difference between a one model unit and a 10-model unit besides number of dice rolled for weapons and armor? Not that much. And we already do that part.
Granularity is a good thing for a larger scale game like HH. I look forward to the impact the Legions/factions have on those new stats and how that develops in the course of each battle. Hopefully the design studio uses this fresh space to add interest and not just many flavors of old leadership.
Now, might we hope for a Spartan upgrade sprue for the same?
Would be lovely if they added the option for Spartan chassis to take the quad heavy bolters too. They gave pretty much every vehicle that can the Predator sponsons all the options, let's do it for the "superheavy" sponson too.
I like the Fellblade. But the thing that I'll most likely to get at some point is the tarantulas. Generic Weapon platforms are useful for any game system and faction and if GW prices them properly I can see me getting a couple.
Everything else is nice but I've no use for it. Saturnine armour and MKII don’t interest me as much as existing sets.
Dudeface wrote: I'm not sure a game of this size requires skirmish level stats and the like. All wind is out of my sails despite the amazing minis, I dont fancy game getting bogged down in 4 hours turn 2/3 showdowns (ymmv).
Why would those bog down the game? I wouldn't call them specifically "skirmish level stats" either. What is the difference between a one model unit and a 10-model unit besides number of dice rolled for weapons and armor? Not that much. And we already do that part.
Granularity is a good thing for a larger scale game like HH. I look forward to the impact the Legions/factions have on those new stats and how that develops in the course of each battle. Hopefully the design studio uses this fresh space to add interest and not just many flavors of old leadership.
Why does a game with hundreds of minis a side need 4 variations of leadership? The point of large scale mass battle games, which HH is due to game size, is to streamline combat experiences to some degree for accessibility.
Having layered checks and tests against varying mental stats at various stages of the turn can only add downtime to the process.
The weapons, less bothered about, it could potentially reduce overhead. But the sounds of the extra challenge mechanics and tests scattered about the game with inevitable modifiers and suchforth seems a bit much.
I won't lie, I'm a few beers in and literate eloquence is beyond me, others may explain why 4 stats is more work than 1 for "extra" tests.
Now, might we hope for a Spartan upgrade sprue for the same?
Would be lovely if they added the option for Spartan chassis to take the quad heavy bolters too. They gave pretty much every vehicle that can the Predator sponsons all the options, let's do it for the "superheavy" sponson too.
That would also quite nicely flesh out an upgrade box too now you mention it.
Dudeface wrote: I won't lie, I'm a few beers in and literate eloquence is beyond me, others may explain why 4 stats is more work than 1 for "extra" tests.
Gotta remember or check which weapon tests on which stat and causes which of the 4 versions of pinning. Gotta remember or check 4 stats per model instead of 1 and they already hinted there will be minute nuances when now it was pretty much Mooks 7, Veterans 8, Elites 9 and Heroes 10.
Also I welcome 4 different versions of Stubborn and 4 different versions of Fearless, for each of the mental stats, with names that will give no hint what fits with what.
Honestly, maybe a better implementation of mental stats would have been to do it army wide with bonuses from leaders and characters?? Marines are 7s across the board, a sergeant gives +1 LD and CL, a techmarine +1 IN, etc? A lot less to remember that way.
lord_blackfang wrote: Also I welcome 4 different versions of Stubborn and 4 different versions of Fearless, for each of the mental stats, with names that will give no hint what fits with what.
I know they won't, but the buff for intelligence surely should be wrinkly brain and the debuff smooth braining.
I thank you for your word smithing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
chaos0xomega wrote: Honestly, maybe a better implementation of mental stats would have been to do it army wide with bonuses from leaders and characters?? Marines are 7s across the board, a sergeant gives +1 LD and CL, a techmarine +1 IN, etc? A lot less to remember that way.
All the plastic redo's of FW resin kits look good. Breachers, Mk2 assault marines, raipers and fellblade all onto my to buy list.
All the new stuff looks bad. The saturine stuff is all dollar store starcraft knockoff bad.
The rules changes all look terrible. HH is meant to be a mass battle game, adding complexity and gimmick rules will just slow down the game and cause more rules issues. Not to mention I have zero interest in the constant rules churn. I won't be buying any rules books from GW.
Excited for the new models, but the rules in 2nd ed were borderline too complex as it was. And this doesn't look any better. Hopefully the mechanicum rules aren't as messy this time around.
Why does a game with hundreds of minis a side need 4 variations of leadership? The point of large scale mass battle games, which HH is due to game size, is to streamline combat experiences to some degree for accessibility.
Having layered checks and tests against varying mental stats at various stages of the turn can only add downtime to the process.
The weapons, less bothered about, it could potentially reduce overhead. But the sounds of the extra challenge mechanics and tests scattered about the game with inevitable modifiers and suchforth seems a bit much.
I won't lie, I'm a few beers in and literate eloquence is beyond me, others may explain why 4 stats is more work than 1 for "extra" tests.
It isn't usually "hundreds of minis a side". At most I usually have about 40, maybe 60 tops. This isn't a "large scale mass battle game" - that is Legion Imperialis.
Also, these four stat checks may not be so relevant as to slow the game any more than leadership did in previous editions. It just change who is impacted, how and under what conditions.
Ultimately, I am excited but going to obviously, like everyone else, reserve final judgement for when the rules are in my hands and maybe even a few battles in, realistically.
Why does a game with hundreds of minis a side need 4 variations of leadership? The point of large scale mass battle games, which HH is due to game size, is to streamline combat experiences to some degree for accessibility.
Having layered checks and tests against varying mental stats at various stages of the turn can only add downtime to the process.
The weapons, less bothered about, it could potentially reduce overhead. But the sounds of the extra challenge mechanics and tests scattered about the game with inevitable modifiers and suchforth seems a bit much.
I won't lie, I'm a few beers in and literate eloquence is beyond me, others may explain why 4 stats is more work than 1 for "extra" tests.
It isn't usually "hundreds of minis a side". At most I usually have about 40, maybe 60 tops. This isn't a "large scale mass battle game" - that is Legion Imperialis.
Also, these four stat checks may not be so relevant as to slow the game any more than leadership did in previous editions. It just change who is impacted, how and under what conditions.
Ultimately, I am excited but going to obviously, like everyone else, reserve final judgement for when the rules are in my hands and maybe even a few battles in, realistically.
What does your army list look like to have 40 guys at 3k points? It promotes big blob units, that's the point of the setting and game.
But if we assume you're right for a minute, why bother with 4 stats, sets of tests and sets of modifiers if they "may not be so relevant"?
It's almost like they listened to the worst areas of the HH online communities and went "hey these guys love pointless stats and 'crunch', let's inject ore for the sakes of it".
I will go now, approach this with a clearer head tomorrow.
Yay, teased custodes, I remember they had forgeworld spears for custodes, so either they are making new spears, which will be nice to have some variety in my army, or they’re going to make some forgeworld models like the spears and hopefully the vehicles plastic which would be amazing.
And finally, staying in the Solar System, here is the glinting blade of an auramite spear…
The thing with those stats is what it tells us about the design brief.
GW didn't go "oh you know what the game needs to be better, a separate stat specifically for fixing vehicle damage"
They went "what can we cram in to justify invalidating hundreds of pounds worth of practically new books"
Maaaybe they implement them well but this motivation inevitably leads to bad choices because it's not about improving the game, it's about just adding stuff for the sake of adding it and some of the stuff is bound to be bad.
And of course we're spinning the wheel of random power levels for each faction again, because there is no playtest data for this version of the rules, and our prospects in case of sucky rules are to get a new random spin again in 2028 for another 100€, rather than any fine tuning based on gameplay experience.
What does your army list look like to have 40 guys at 3k points? It promotes big blob units, that's the point of the setting and game.
But if we assume you're right for a minute, why bother with 4 stats, sets of tests and sets of modifiers if they "may not be so relevant"?
It's almost like they listened to the worst areas of the HH online communities and went "hey these guys love pointless stats and 'crunch', let's inject ore for the sakes of it".
I will go now, approach this with a clearer head tomorrow.
That would be my more elite, PotL list. Usually its about 50ish, for my Night Lords. Are a lot of people just spamming fat units of Tacticals or something? I feel like even my IF Stone Gauntlet list comes in around 60ish.
The point of the setting and game is to take place during the Horus Heresy. If they wanted big units, this would be Legion Imperialis.
Not a question for me, man. Ask the designers. Ask the folks who play Necromunda maybe? The stats clearly have a purpose. Certainly feels like it will be more interesting than just leadership was, potentially.
I feel like I hear two camps arguing right now - the game sounds too simply like it is becoming 40k or AoS and the game is getting new bloat rules and turning into a worse 7th or 9th ed.
At this point I am just gonna wait and see. Not much left to do really.
Just in case anyone fancies using it against me in the future?
I was wrong, this isn’t the “spit and polish” 2.5 type edition.
But remember, I’d only argued it might be.
Yet wrong I stand, and happily so.
The overwhelming rumor narrative from Valrak and most of the copycat posts on 4chan, etc also said it'd be closer to a 2.5 edition, and given that Valrak was 100% correct about the model contents it wasn't really a controversial statement at the time.
skrulnik wrote: So did they explain why the Saturnine have Chest Eagles with only one head?
That is a clear design change that seems noteworthy to me.
All Eagle insignias to now have had 2 heads that I am aware of.
The existing Emperor's Children stuff has 2 heads, the old FWHH resin as well
Last I saw was something along the lines of the double head referred to the alliance of Terra and Mars so that these were made before, or without the influence, of the Mechanicus. Or something like that.
I appreciate the Saturnine but have no interest in them so I'll probably be looking for someone who wants them but not the Mk II to split a box with.
Is there any more info on Saturnine besides the novels?
Was it covered in the Old HH Black Books?
The only sculpted aquilla I recall seeing with eyes was a FW large marine sculpt and it had two, but you can find a lot of drawn examples with one seeing eye.
The_Pilot wrote: Yay, teased custodes, I remember they had forgeworld spears for custodes, so either they are making new spears, which will be nice to have some variety in my army, or they’re going to make some forgeworld models like the spears and hopefully the vehicles plastic which would be amazing.
And finally, staying in the Solar System, here is the glinting blade of an auramite spear…
very excited at the hint of plastic custodes. the fact that the Talons book is coming later was quite disappointing, but this tells me it very well might be worth it
who knows. we might even finally get a second SoS kit!
Just in case anyone fancies using it against me in the future?
I was wrong, this isn’t the “spit and polish” 2.5 type edition.
But remember, I’d only argued it might be.
Yet wrong I stand, and happily so.
The overwhelming rumor narrative from Valrak and most of the copycat posts on 4chan, etc also said it'd be closer to a 2.5 edition, and given that Valrak was 100% correct about the model contents it wasn't really a controversial statement at the time.
Reading warcom posts and listening to the preview, GW is *also* framing it as a minor tweak/2.5 type thing:
"The Warhammer Design Studio have been pretty happy with where the game has been for the last few years, and they’ve seen this new edition as the opportunity to reinvestigate the core systems and make improvements – rather than making wholesale changes.
This is very much the same Horus Heresy game you know and love, and the team have made targeted refinements to a system that already works really well, making changes only where necessary and adding flavour wherever they can. "
Snrub wrote: There is absolutely no way that Sats are going to be anything faster then 5 inch movement. Not happening no way no how way. They're too hugelarge to be faster then hobbling speed. I predict though that they'll have some inbuilt deepstrike rule or the option to purchase a teleporter or something so they're not totally bereft of movement options. Probably a 2+/4++ like Cats. From the look of the picture weapon choices seem to be either Disintegrators/power Fists or double plasma weapons. Hopefully there's something else in the box as well.
As far as those interesting new plasma weapons go, they bear some similarities to the plasma bombard mortar thing that Thanatar wields. So I wonder if they're going to be some manner of plasma artillery? Because a wall of Sats marching forward lobbing plasma bombs around sounds like my idea of a good time.
All the disintegrator weapons have two barrels. So they could either be rejigging the profile for them for more shots, or the Sat units have a twin-linked version of the weapon. Would would help with the not insta-gibbing yourself on a gets hot.
And oh look. I was completely fething right. About everything. I hate being right.
-I really dislike the changes they've made to the MkII (and by extension MkIII) armour re. the overlapping plates and the knees. Still, there's plenty of old Forgeworld kits kicking about for me to get and a few good STLs floating about. So I've got options.
-I was a bit on the fence about the Saturnine terminators, but getting clearer and varied shots of them, I find I quite like them.
-The alternate pose for the Sat Praetor is much nicer then the one on the box. He's so bloody big though. It's ridiculous.
-Sat Dreadnought's not really doing much for me. It's fine, I don't dislike it. But I wouldn't despair if they unannounced it.
-I think my favourite thing from the new box is the MkII centurion. Really digging the helmeted head, although I think i'd be cutting the broom crest off.
-Nice to see them filling gaps with the other kits. Roll on the plastic Glaive! The breachers aren't doing it for me. They've mucked around with the shields a bit too much for my tastes. Not a fan of the rapier loadouts being split between one anti-troop/armour loadout per box. That gak ain't logical. Put both anti armour and anti troop in one box, not one and one. They SHOULD have been all four to a box, but hohum. -Keen to see the full MkII assault marines box though. That did look good.
-Pretty much agree with Blackfang regarding the rules changes. Not at all impressed or enthusiastic about any of it as shown so far. 2.0 wasn't perfect by any means, but it was good and it did work. It would have been so easy for them to just tweak a few things, a little change here and there and they would have had pretty much everyone happy. But no. Here we are on the treadmill.
Impressive reveals! The previewed plastic upcoming releases look awesome too. I haven't played HH in a while but my initial gut reaction on hearing they've added to the rules and made it more involved was not great. I get it though, I always thought the HH game was targeted more at veteran players instead of the young pups but not sure if that's still the case. The effort GW is going to with the plastic redux and future previews, custodes, ad mech/dark mech look like they might want the newbies climbing aboard too. We'll see how the rules play out.
What I'm interested in though is the price. What does one expect a big box like this with 50 new miniatures Plus whopping 352 page hardback book & extras to retail for?
Then what do you expect the plastic super heavy tanks to go for? Considering every week the cost of living goes up too!
There's a part of me that's very tempted to think this box all painted as the same faction plus a tank or two and tarantulas or rapiers etc might be enough for an army. Is that wishful thinking?
Dig the plastic sculpts of classic units. Still not liking the "Saturnine" stuff.
Not thrilled that they've decided to do a big rules revamp instead of a 2.5 edition. I guess I'll "wait and see", but not digging the preliminaries.
Final thought: I don't know why they decided to switch to round doors for rectangular doors for the plastic Fellblade, but it will serve one purpose: separating the "boys with plastic toys" from the "men who don't fear resin". (Just a joke. I fully understand those that didn't want to deal with the old kit. I can tell you from experience, it was a beast. )
Snrub wrote: Well that was a hell of a thing to wake up to.
I’ll say!
I can’t really comment on the rules changes. This was my biggest concern, but I can’t get a handle on how what they’ve announced will actually affect the game. I am hopeful that, if these are (as they say) the biggest rules changes, they haven’t moved vehicles to T stats (one of the worst things they did to WH40k), but it’s too soon to be sure. It looks as though the increased flexibility in list building involves allies rather than trashing the FoC, but let’s see…
As for the new models:
- I’ve never really understood the attachment to Mk III armour. The plastic version looks fine to me, but no better than the Mk III. The assault version looks great though - much better than the beakies. Really liking their jetpacks in particular.
- I’m all in for the Breachers too. We’ve waited too long for them, so they were always going to be a bit of an anticlimax, but I think they’ll be more exciting once we see the full kit with its options.
- The Saturnine stuff is okay. I think I quite like the Termies, but the Dread just looks too big and flat.
- The new Fellblade looks fab. I’m not sure why anyone could say it’s not an improvement on the resin kit.
- I also like the plastic Rapiers (released just when I’d finished converting my own - typical). We knew they’d be the same as the LI version, and the upsized design looks good, although maybe a bit too WH40k. The crew look a bit…awkward? Not sure what’s going on there.
So I guess it’s a mixture of anticipation for the new models and trepidation for what else they’ve done with the rules.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Final thought: I don't know why they decided to switch to round doors for rectangular doors for the plastic Fellblade, but it will serve one purpose: separating the "boys with plastic toys" from the "men who don't fear resin". (Just a joke. I fully understand those that didn't want to deal with the old kit. I can tell you from experience, it was a beast. )
Rather like the grognards who still insist that the only real war gaming figures are metal.
The Saturnine terminators are glorious. Everything terminators should have always been... right down to having their neck situated above their armpits!
Not keen on the massive plasma mortar thing, but the rest of it is perfection.
Snrub wrote: split between one anti-troop/armour loadout per box. That gak ain't logical. Put both anti armour and anti troop in one box, not one and one. They SHOULD have been all four to a box, but hohum.
There are 4 crew models, and both art pics are of a pair of similar rapiers, so I am thinking that each box will be 2 rapier carriages that can build 2 of the same or one of each of the two options listed. Cant be positive, but going by these:
- I’m all in for the Breachers too. We’ve waited too long for them, so they were always going to be a bit of an anticlimax, but I think they’ll be more exciting once we see the full kit with its options.
I kinda think that the Breachers will be an upgrade set, not a full unique set with new poses or anything. Maybe a sprue with 5 pairs of arms and guns, one set of shield and melee, and 5-8 heads on a frame, doubled.
Didn't you recently share that you haven't played any GW games since, like, 2012 or 2016 or something?
It's easy to be optimistic when you have no skin in the game, other than a distant sense of aesthetic appreciation for rulesets and/or an aspirational approach to playing that will never come to fruition.
Btw this is not a condemnation of you not playing while remaining engaged with the hobby. I am also in that situation, and only consider myself a semi-active player of Kill Team and Necromunda. But I am not all over every page of every discussion about new rules.
lost_lilliputian wrote: What I'm interested in though is the price. What does one expect a big box like this with 50 new miniatures Plus whopping 352 page hardback book & extras to retail for?
Then what do you expect the plastic super heavy tanks to go for? Considering every week the cost of living goes up too!
There's a part of me that's very tempted to think this box all painted as the same faction plus a tank or two and tarantulas or rapiers etc might be enough for an army. Is that wishful thinking?
It'll cost at least as much as the Age of Darkness box, and has roughly the same amount of plastic in it (so probably minimum $523 AUD, though we have plenty of retailers where you can get 20-25% off).
Hard to estimate points costs when the game is being rebalanced, but the existing starter box is not far under 2000 points, when HH games normally range in size from 2000 to 3500 points. Add a few things to the Saturnine box and you'll definitely have the core of an army. It's great value, but still a hefty buy-in
MajorWesJanson wrote: There are 4 crew models, and both art pics are of a pair of similar rapiers, so I am thinking that each box will be 2 rapier carriages that can build 2 of the same or one of each of the two options listed. Cant be positive, but going by these:
Unfortunately I think this puts paid to that hope.
WarCom wrote:The Rapier is similar, providing Legion forces with a mobile heavy weapon or light artillery support. There are two new plastic kits on the way – one with a graviton or quad-bolter option, and one with a quad-launcher or laser-destroyer. Whatever you’re shooting, there is a Rapier for the job!
Marshal Loss wrote: It'll cost at least as much as the Age of Darkness box, and has roughly the same amount of plastic in it (so probably minimum $523 AUD, though we have plenty of retailers where you can get 20-25% off).
If it comes in anywhere remotely what the AoD box costs, I'll be shocked.
I'll not be shocked however if this one caps $600. I'm expecting the Liber's to jump to the $110/120 mark as well.
Marshal Loss wrote: It'll cost at least as much as the Age of Darkness box, and has roughly the same amount of plastic in it (so probably minimum $523 AUD, though we have plenty of retailers where you can get 20-25% off).
If it comes in anywhere remotely what the AoD box costs, I'll be shocked.
I'll not be shocked however if this one caps $600. I'm expecting the Liber's to jump to the $110/120 mark as well.
I'm confident it will be reasonably consistent with what Age of Darkness costs actually, given it's the entry point to the system, but I guess we'll see soon enough.
MajorWesJanson wrote: There are 4 crew models, and both art pics are of a pair of similar rapiers, so I am thinking that each box will be 2 rapier carriages that can build 2 of the same or one of each of the two options listed. Cant be positive, but going by these:
Unfortunately I think this puts paid to that hope.
WarCom wrote:The Rapier is similar, providing Legion forces with a mobile heavy weapon or light artillery support. There are two new plastic kits on the way – one with a graviton or quad-bolter option, and one with a quad-launcher or laser-destroyer. Whatever you’re shooting, there is a Rapier for the job!
Marshal Loss wrote: It'll cost at least as much as the Age of Darkness box, and has roughly the same amount of plastic in it (so probably minimum $523 AUD, though we have plenty of retailers where you can get 20-25% off).
If it comes in anywhere remotely what the AoD box costs, I'll be shocked.
I'll not be shocked however if this one caps $600. I'm expecting the Liber's to jump to the $110/120 mark as well.
Surely that means there is the option for two of each.
If there were just one of each it wouldn't use the word option.
Didn't you recently share that you haven't played any GW games since, like, 2012 or 2016 or something?
It's easy to be optimistic when you have no skin in the game, other than a distant sense of aesthetic appreciation for rulesets and/or an aspirational approach to playing that will never come to fruition.
Btw this is not a condemnation of you not playing while remaining engaged with the hobby. I am also in that situation, and only consider myself a semi-active player of Kill Team and Necromunda. But I am not all over every page of every discussion about new rules.
I did mention somewhere that my lack of current rules experience kinda insulates me, and encourages me to get going with this one. Essentially, with the sort of changes we’re seeing, the playing field is more level for those getting started or restarted.
Ah hang on a sec. Looking back I definitely misread what MWJ said here.
MajorWesJanson wrote: There are 4 crew models, and both art pics are of a pair of similar rapiers, so I am thinking that each box will be 2 rapier carriages that can build 2 of the same or one of each of the two options listed. Cant be positive, but going by these:
and I also wasn't super clear what I was trying to convey in my initial post.
My gripe was that they've split the kits into Heavy Bolter/Graviton and Quad Mortar/Laser Destroyer, rather then the more logical (to me at least) Bolter/Mortar and Graviton/Laser. And that realistically a kit should come with all the options as would be most sensible.
I didn't mean to imply that a kit would only come with 2 carriages and only 1 heavy bolter and 1 graviton, etc. which I think may have been the take away from my post.
Sorry everyone, that bout of literary confusion is on me!
My gripe was that they've split the kits into Heavy Bolter/Graviton and Quad Mortar/Laser Destroyer, rather then the more logical (to me at least) Bolter/Mortar and Graviton/Laser. And that realistically a kit should come with all the options as would be most sensible.
It could simply be that these weapon pairs filled the sprues more evenly.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I did mention somewhere that my lack of current rules experience kinda insulates me, and encourages me to get going with this one. Essentially, with the sort of changes we’re seeing, the playing field is more level for those getting started or restarted.
Re: Rules? The more time passes, the fonder I am of the Battletech approach to those things, with changes so minimal that someone who hasn't played since the 80s can peruse any new book and get going right away.
That, for me, is a much, MUCH better approach both "for those getting started or restarted", and also for anyone actively playing now.
But that's just me.
...and I guess that doesn't drive book sales quite so much, of course.
Swings and roundabouts. A lot of it depends on an opponent not just NooB Stomping.
My first experience of Warmachine? NooB Stomped, never went back.
My first experience of X-Wing? Dice utterly betrayed me, but opponent took me through it and did what they could to show the game off to its best.
My recent 2nd Ed Heresy Game? Made it clear I’m still learning the ropes. Opponent brought a beardy army, and I didn’t enjoy the experience, but no Rules Gotchas, so that’s good.
3rd Ed Heresy? Figure if I get in at the ground floor, most will be learning the new ropes, giving opportunity for a better bonding and that.
Part of my frustration there is I used to be a pretty decent player. Doubt I’d place well in a tournament like, but I knew the rules and some tricks. To find oneself at square one is a very odd experience, as I’m constantly telling myself I know the game better than I actually do.
In 40k this also came bundled with the loss of damage tables (which would be pretty schizophrenic for an edition that introduces 4 variants of pinning infantry) and loss of fire arcs (leading to the loss of meaningful positioning).
Automatically Appended Next Post: Another thing I didn't catch yesterday is the first Campaign Journal is dropping together with the box, so we have day 1 DLC.
Heresy might be getting on the most brutal tier of rules treadmills of all specialist games.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Actual rules snippet
We can infer that reactions exist that cost more then 1 reaction point.
lost_lilliputian wrote: What I'm interested in though is the price. What does one expect a big box like this with 50 new miniatures Plus whopping 352 page hardback book & extras to retail for?
Then what do you expect the plastic super heavy tanks to go for? Considering every week the cost of living goes up too!
There's a part of me that's very tempted to think this box all painted as the same faction plus a tank or two and tarantulas or rapiers etc might be enough for an army. Is that wishful thinking?
It'll cost at least as much as the Age of Darkness box, and has roughly the same amount of plastic in it (so probably minimum $523 AUD, though we have plenty of retailers where you can get 20-25% off).
Hard to estimate points costs when the game is being rebalanced, but the existing starter box is not far under 2000 points, when HH games normally range in size from 2000 to 3500 points. Add a few things to the Saturnine box and you'll definitely have the core of an army. It's great value, but still a hefty buy-in
Thank you for the info, especially in Aus
Certainly is a hefty buy in. I have fears the box will be between $600 - $700 Aus and by the time 2 to 3 other kit releases are bought will be about $1k but if a super heavy tank is purchased will definitely crack $1k. All quality? Not entirely sure, I mean it looks great but how it plays is another thing. Oh well fingers crossed it's not too expensive lol.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I did mention somewhere that my lack of current rules experience kinda insulates me, and encourages me to get going with this one. Essentially, with the sort of changes we’re seeing, the playing field is more level for those getting started or restarted.
Re: Rules? The more time passes, the fonder I am of the Battletech approach to those things, with changes so minimal that someone who hasn't played since the 80s can peruse any new book and get going right away.
That, for me, is a much, MUCH better approach both "for those getting started or restarted", and also for anyone actively playing now.
But that's just me.
...and I guess that doesn't drive book sales quite so much, of course.
Agreed. And you hit the proverbial nail on the head as to why gw insist on reinventing the perfectly fine wheel time after time: invalidate current books-sell more books. It's offensive, and why so many people have checked out.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Agreed. And you hit the proverbial nail on the head as to why gw insist on reinventing the perfectly fine wheel time after time: invalidate current books-sell more books. It's offensive, and why so many people have checked out.
There's another reason. With the cycle being so fast, they don't have to work very hard on balance. Your faction is weak? It's only 3 years until you spin the wheel again. You probably won't even finish painting this box before the edition is done. Maybe you won't even get a game in.
With them refreshing all factions at once this time, you can be sure most units didn't see even a single playtest game. I don't think any company could balance this much stuff internally. When Warmachine tried it it was also a complete gakshow.
It also helps selling the next Edition, because there is no one who than really happy with the by than current version and looks forward to anything new, happily buying into it because it just can get better.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I did mention somewhere that my lack of current rules experience kinda insulates me, and encourages me to get going with this one. Essentially, with the sort of changes we’re seeing, the playing field is more level for those getting started or restarted.
Re: Rules? The more time passes, the fonder I am of the Battletech approach to those things, with changes so minimal that someone who hasn't played since the 80s can peruse any new book and get going right away.
That, for me, is a much, MUCH better approach both "for those getting started or restarted", and also for anyone actively playing now.
But that's just me.
...and I guess that doesn't drive book sales quite so much, of course.
Agreed. And you hit the proverbial nail on the head as to why gw insist on reinventing the perfectly fine wheel time after time: invalidate current books-sell more books. It's offensive, and why so many people have checked out.
Sadly, their model remains obscenely profitable to the point that even IGN is reporting on their financial success:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Agreed. And you hit the proverbial nail on the head as to why gw insist on reinventing the perfectly fine wheel time after time: invalidate current books-sell more books. It's offensive, and why so many people have checked out.
There's another reason. With the cycle being so fast, they don't have to work very hard on balance. Your faction is weak? It's only 3 years until you spin the wheel again. You probably won't even finish painting this box before the edition is done. Maybe you won't even get a game in.
With them refreshing all factions at once this time, you can be sure most units didn't see even a single playtest game. I don't think any company could balance this much stuff internally. When Warmachine tried it it was also a complete gakshow.
Point. Just release a new edition instead of balancing the current one. Sell more books. Again: offensive.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I did mention somewhere that my lack of current rules experience kinda insulates me, and encourages me to get going with this one. Essentially, with the sort of changes we’re seeing, the playing field is more level for those getting started or restarted.
Re: Rules? The more time passes, the fonder I am of the Battletech approach to those things, with changes so minimal that someone who hasn't played since the 80s can peruse any new book and get going right away.
That, for me, is a much, MUCH better approach both "for those getting started or restarted", and also for anyone actively playing now.
But that's just me.
...and I guess that doesn't drive book sales quite so much, of course.
Agreed. And you hit the proverbial nail on the head as to why gw insist on reinventing the perfectly fine wheel time after time: invalidate current books-sell more books. It's offensive, and why so many people have checked out.
Sadly, their model remains obscenely profitable to the point that even IGN is reporting on their financial success:
So, maybe it's time to make that model less profitable? No more books. No more new editions. Stick to the ones we have. Balance them with our communities.
won't work
everyone who doesn't want to buy but still play will just pirate the rules and models
therefore any other but the current version of the game doesn't have a chance
and if it really happens that everyone would stopp playing, GW would just kill it off completely and replace it with a fancy new game everyone will pick up because this time it will be better
Incidentally? I might gripe about GW's prices, practices and other stuff, but that is excellent and something I'd love to see more companies doing.
Off the back of those huge profits, and “in recognition of our staff’s contribution to these results,” Games Workshop is giving employees £20 million, up from the £18 million it handed out last year. The money will be paid on an equal basis to each member of staff. Games Workshop is estimated to have around 1,500 staff. If that’s accurate, it means each employee is set for a £13,333 (approx $18,000) bonus.
As an outlier in 40k/30k land (as I don't really play the major factions, and my favorite game to play is AT),
I honestly don't understand a lot of the mental pain that is being caused to players by the release of this new edition, which in my mind should be a joyous event with all sorts of birthday present anticipation, not trepidation.
Is it because the release of this new edition is so close to the old one and invalidates the money spent on expensive rulebooks?
Or is it, because a complete rules overhaul feels unnecessary, when a Necromunda-esque rules cleanup would've sufficed?
Or is there something else, that I'm just not seeing?
It's the first two things you mentioned - a 3 year lifespan on expensive hard back rulebooks you bought does not feel good. Rule changes that add bloat to an already complex game will always be controversial.
And I think the fanbase for Heresy skews older, perhaps with less frequent games. So people might have only played the new edition a dozen or so times before the reset.
Lathe Biosas wrote: Is it because the release of this new edition is so close to the old one and invalidates the money spent on expensive rulebooks?
Or is it, because a complete rules overhaul feels unnecessary, when a Necromunda-esque rules cleanup would've sufficed?
Yes. The ONLY good news is that most armies will have their rules right out of the gate, and so will be valid for the whole edition. Compare that to, say, 40k, where it takes 2.5 years* to get through the slow-drip of codex releases, which leaves certain armies playing with an actual book for a depressingly short period of time (think Guard and World Eaters at the end of 9th).
*I get that there's a HUGE difference in quantity, but it still feels bad.
kodos wrote: won't work
everyone who doesn't want to buy but still play will just pirate the rules and models
therefore any other but the current version of the game doesn't have a chance
and if it really happens that everyone would stopp playing, GW would just kill it off completely and replace it with a fancy new game everyone will pick up because this time it will be better
No illegal pirating required. Just play with your old books rules. House rule whatever you want as befits your group. How hard is that?
Lathe Biosas wrote: Is it because the release of this new edition is so close to the old one and invalidates the money spent on expensive rulebooks?
Or is it, because a complete rules overhaul feels unnecessary, when a Necromunda-esque rules cleanup would've sufficed?
Equal parts these two for most Heresy players, I'd be quite prepared to say. 3 years is not a long time when all said and done and not everyone has the opportunity or the means to game regularly. I'm fortunate in that I have access to a group who meets once a month a place not inconvenient to me. So I can often squeeze two games in the day, sometimes a third if I'm lucky. Not everyone has that chance and if you can only meet 3 or 4 times a year for a year then having a 3 year rotation is not really conducive to value for money.
The rules for 2nd edition aren't perfect by any means, but they did work with minimal problems. A complete over-haul is only necessitated if the game is unplayable, which 2.0 was far from. In this instance a complete rework of the rules is nothing but a cash grab. There wasn't anything wrong with the rules that couldn't have been fixed with a few careful tweaks. I don't think there was any single aspect of the rules that needs a total overhaul. And it's not even a matter of the rules being old and stale and in need of a revamp. This basic rule set had been serving 40k well enough for 18 years(?) from 3rd thru to 7th. If people didn't want to play them, Heresy never would have taken off in the first place.
Da Boss wrote: It's the first two things you mentioned - a 3 year lifespan on expensive hard back rulebooks you bought does not feel good. Rule changes that add bloat to an already complex game will always be controversial.
And I think the fanbase for Heresy skews older, perhaps with less frequent games. So people might have only played the new edition a dozen or so times before the reset.
This, I’ve had a whole 5 games of heresy 2.0, have barely gotten used to reactions and haven’t finished the army I started with its release. The couple of hundred quid I’ve spent on rulebooks for it that are now invalid hurts.
This rules churn is why I stopped playing 40k, it will now be why I give up on heresy.
Da Boss wrote: It's the first two things you mentioned - a 3 year lifespan on expensive hard back rulebooks you bought does not feel good. Rule changes that add bloat to an already complex game will always be controversial.
And I think the fanbase for Heresy skews older, perhaps with less frequent games. So people might have only played the new edition a dozen or so times before the reset.
I also suspect that there's something else.
The knowledge that what this really means is that 30k players are going to get churned.
Perhaps some really did believe that they would escape the fate of every other GW game which isn't just canned. Most though - I believe - always knew, deep down, but tried to deny the knowledge. There's no running from the truth now though.
New rules every three years; your rules library frequently invalidated; units getting abandoned to Legends; New Thing™ is best thing; entirely mutable background. It's all coming.
Get ready, Old World players!
The best thing with the 3 year cycle is that if one of of your armies get nerfed, you can just put it in a box for 3 years and try again next edition.
(looking at you ad-mech -your time will come)
What's ad-mech? All I know is Mechanicum. Which were pretty damn playable. At least in one composition.
But, yeah, I shouldn't have sold my Reaver and second Warhound. Seems like the old Reaver+2 Warhounds list might be back on the menu
Vorian wrote: If you've played 5 games in 3 years, that's more your issue isn't it?
You can't expect a company to calibrate their release schedules for players that play fewer than a game per 6 months.
How many games did you play, that you're happy replacing your 3 year old hardcovers?
Mod edit - removed
I have plenty of hardcovers from editions for things that I have never played - but that's my fault, right?
Should they delay a year so you can get another 2 games in?
If youre not playing it enough to get value then it's perfectly rational for you not to buy the edition. It's not particularly rational for a games company to base their release schedules on players that are barely playing the game.
Dudeface wrote: Better yet - buy the books once you're in a position to play.
Problem: You need the rules in order to know how to build the army you want. It isn't that easy.
Only as a point of precision. If you know you want a mechanised force or a dread based force etc. You can make a start then getthe rules, you night not have an exact 3k army or whatever but it should be enough to start with or build off.
It's the same with 40k, buy some models you like, paint them, buy rules, finish the force off.
it is always the consumers fault, never the fault of the company
if people are too stupid and give companies money, there is nothing GW did wrong /s
of course it is on the people who buy the stuff, but GW not advertising "a new game every 3 years" contributes
there is no need for GW to do this outside making money by tricking people into thinking that the changes won't be that big and things being valid for a while
Instead of "Editions" GW could be more honest and give it a new name each time they release a new game so that people know that they only have 3 years until it is replaced by something different instead of adding to the confusion and call it again Horus Heresy
I've played loads of HH2 and yet I don't want to be learning a new edition every three years, especially when the previous one only needed a polish.
4 years from now? Sure give it a whack at new rules with new concepts.
Dudeface wrote: Better yet - buy the books once you're in a position to play.
Problem: You need the rules in order to know how to build the army you want. It isn't that easy.
Only as a point of precision. If you know you want a mechanised force or a dread based force etc. You can make a start then getthe rules, you night not have an exact 3k army or whatever but it should be enough to start with or build off.
It's the same with 40k, buy some models you like, paint them, buy rules, finish the force off.
Cool. You make that "dread based force" that you mentioned, then discover that it's totally OP and toxic, and no one wants to play with you. Too bad you didn't consult the rules first, right? Keep trying.
Gert wrote:I've played loads of HH2 and yet I don't want to be learning a new edition every three years, especially when the previous one only needed a polish.
4 years from now? Sure give it a whack at new rules with new concepts.
Dudeface wrote: Better yet - buy the books once you're in a position to play.
Problem: You need the rules in order to know how to build the army you want. It isn't that easy.
Only as a point of precision. If you know you want a mechanised force or a dread based force etc. You can make a start then getthe rules, you night not have an exact 3k army or whatever but it should be enough to start with or build off.
It's the same with 40k, buy some models you like, paint them, buy rules, finish the force off.
Cool. You make that "dread based force" that you mentioned, then discover that it's totally OP and toxic, and no one wants to play with you. Too bad you didn't consult the rules first, right? Keep trying.
I don't think that the evil Dread Army (that curbstomped my Knights into oblivion) can be laid on the feet of a new player not being familiar with the rules.
When I first bought my Knights I didn't know that people didn't like to play against them, I just thought they were cool and there was a codex for them with a bunch of really inspiring art. It wasn't until much later that I learned that people didn't want to play against Knights.
Lathe that's literally the point being made about buying models before rules.
The first event I went to had someone with an Iron Hands Dread army who loved the lore and loved the idea. They didn't know how good Fury of the Ancients was and spent the whole event apologising to everyone he played.
Nobody blamed him and he still felt rubbish about it all.
Gert wrote: Lathe that's literally the point being made about buying models before rules.
The first event I went to had someone with an Iron Hands Dread army who loved the lore and loved the idea. They didn't know how good Fury of the Ancients was and spent the whole event apologising to everyone he played.
Nobody blamed him and he still felt rubbish about it all.
I know how he feels, but that's how GW hooks new players into the game.
My roommate visited a Warhammer shop (unsupervised), and came back Trajann Valoris. No codex, no Combat Patrol (Out of Stock)... but he liked the model and the shop sold him on the rule of cool.
He's been building haphazardly, and realizing that he can't use the model he likes in Combat Patrol games. So Valoris just sits in a tray, partially assembled.
The employees themselves as so ingrained in pushing the models and the "cool army" concepts, that I think that the playability aspect becomes secondary.
I am all in favor of a little bit of honesty in the Warhammer community, where players, especially new ones can find out if the army they want to invest in is a "fun" army or a force that will gather dust because you can't find an opponent due to your list being a giant block of .
Albertorius wrote: I.... I'm simply an old curmudgeon that doesn't want to have to learn a new ruleset again every 3 years to play the same game, you know?
You sound like the perfect recruit for Adeptus Titanicus. It's the best game released by GW in the past 15 years, the rules are cheap, the models look amazing, and the game has been totally forgotten about by the new edition churn.
Gert wrote: Lathe that's literally the point being made about buying models before rules.
The first event I went to had someone with an Iron Hands Dread army who loved the lore and loved the idea. They didn't know how good Fury of the Ancients was and spent the whole event apologising to everyone he played.
Nobody blamed him and he still felt rubbish about it all.
I know how he feels, but that's how GW hooks new players into the game.
My roommate visited a Warhammer shop (unsupervised), and came back Trajann Valoris. No codex, no Combat Patrol (Out of Stock)... but he liked the model and the shop sold him on the rule of cool.
He's been building haphazardly, and realizing that he can't use the model he likes in Combat Patrol games. So Valoris just sits in a tray, partially assembled.
The employees themselves as so ingrained in pushing the models and the "cool army" concepts, that I think that the playability aspect becomes secondary.
I am all in favor of a little bit of honesty in the Warhammer community, where players, especially new ones can find out if the army they want to invest in is a "fun" army or a force that will gather dust because you can't find an opponent due to your list being a giant block of .
So, maybe, the method that gw employees use to "hook" people into Warhammer is flawed? Maybe, just maybe, they should know and understand the rules before pushing models on people interested in playing the games (instead of just building and painting the models)?
Sounds like another argument that you should know the rules before building an army.
In short, yes. There are loads. What’s more, this edition will accelerate the move from resin to plastic – making the jump is a mix of classic units (such as the MKII Crusade armour) alongside never-before-seen units. And it’s not just the little stuff. Did you see that new tank? It’s not the only one…
Welp, time for me to get on the hopium and assume and even expect plastic custodes kits, as they mentioned moving from resin to plastic, and saying it’s not just the little stuff but big vehicles too.
Vorian wrote: If you've played 5 games in 3 years, that's more your issue isn't it?
You can't expect a company to calibrate their release schedules for players that play fewer than a game per 6 months.
'
It is the company's problem when they don't know their audience. HH, while having some overlap, is not the same audience as 40k or AoS. HH enthusiasts are more akin to historical wargamers and that crowd isn't constantly playing games or publishing revised rule sets. It isn't a tournament game dominated by the meta and trying to make it that kind of game, if only appearing to do so, will burn good will and lose customers.
Dysartes wrote: Just to check I've got my armour marks right, the Breacher teaser image looks to be on Mk III?
Yes
They said it's an upgrade kit that will work with any mark, but I dunno, the kit obviously comes with bespoke Mk3 arm poses and Mk3 drum fed bolters, maybe even bespoke Mk3 heads? Would be weird it it came with arms and guns for all marks. The shield itself is some unholy amalgam of both previous shield designs.
Gert wrote: Lathe that's literally the point being made about buying models before rules.
The first event I went to had someone with an Iron Hands Dread army who loved the lore and loved the idea. They didn't know how good Fury of the Ancients was and spent the whole event apologising to everyone he played.
Nobody blamed him and he still felt rubbish about it all.
I know how he feels, but that's how GW hooks new players into the game.
My roommate visited a Warhammer shop (unsupervised), and came back Trajann Valoris. No codex, no Combat Patrol (Out of Stock)... but he liked the model and the shop sold him on the rule of cool.
He's been building haphazardly, and realizing that he can't use the model he likes in Combat Patrol games. So Valoris just sits in a tray, partially assembled.
The employees themselves as so ingrained in pushing the models and the "cool army" concepts, that I think that the playability aspect becomes secondary.
I am all in favor of a little bit of honesty in the Warhammer community, where players, especially new ones can find out if the army they want to invest in is a "fun" army or a force that will gather dust because you can't find an opponent due to your list being a giant block of .
So, maybe, the method that gw employees use to "hook" people into Warhammer is flawed? Maybe, just maybe, they should know and understand the rules before pushing models on people interested in playing the games (instead of just building and painting the models)?
Sounds like another argument that you should know the rules before building an army.
I agree, you should know the rules first. But Its hard to prioritize spending sometimes when you have an enthusiastic new player who has to make the call between a rulebook and some cool toys.
Albertorius wrote: I.... I'm simply an old curmudgeon that doesn't want to have to learn a new ruleset again every 3 years to play the same game, you know?
You sound like the perfect recruit for Adeptus Titanicus. It's the best game released by GW in the past 15 years, the rules are cheap, the models look amazing, and the game has been totally forgotten about by the new edition churn.
I mean, yeah, but I have Battletech for that itch ^^. For the 40k smol I use Epic 3rd
Dudeface wrote: Better yet - buy the books once you're in a position to play.
Problem: You need the rules in order to know how to build the army you want. It isn't that easy.
Only as a point of precision. If you know you want a mechanised force or a dread based force etc. You can make a start then getthe rules, you night not have an exact 3k army or whatever but it should be enough to start with or build off.
It's the same with 40k, buy some models you like, paint them, buy rules, finish the force off.
Cool. You make that "dread based force" that you mentioned, then discover that it's totally OP and toxic, and no one wants to play with you. Too bad you didn't consult the rules first, right? Keep trying.
Wait, are you saying its the players fault for building a force they thought looked cool without seeking peer approval? I thought GW was the big evil here and that 2nd edition was so good people wanted said dread forced for 6+ years.
Sort the hypocrisy out. People should be able to rock up with whatever they think looks cool and the game able to handle it - that's on GW and not the player for not "consulting the rules first".
Conversely it's not taken nostradamus to work out a new edition was a possibility for at least a year now. You might not want it or like it, but it was hardly dropped by surprise. The churn, whilst hardly fantastic, is a symptom of success in GWs eyes. I'd swear some of you want the game to do badly so they stop releasing for it.
Vorian wrote: If you've played 5 games in 3 years, that's more your issue isn't it?
You can't expect a company to calibrate their release schedules for players that play fewer than a game per 6 months.
'
It is the company's problem when they don't know their audience. HH, while having some overlap, is not the same audience as 40k or AoS. HH enthusiasts are more akin to historical wargamers and that crowd isn't constantly playing games or publishing revised rule sets. It isn't a tournament game dominated by the meta and trying to make it that kind of game, if only appearing to do so, will burn good will and lose customers.
It needs to make money to justify releases, this cycle is both a cause and result of that happening. They know their target audience well enough I'd wager.
Dudeface wrote: It needs to make money to justify releases, this cycle is both a cause and result of that happening. They know their target audience well enough I'd wager.
Perhaps you think "company wants to make money" was a secret only you figured out but pretty sure everyone here knows that and as such is taken into account when having this conversation. The discussion isn't "is this specific release ok" but "is it indicative a change in the approach toward HH and are they trying to make it more like 40k". If they are indeed trying to make it a game with shorter edition cycle and with consistently buying new army books they will probably lose some people. There are other business models that can make money without a new edition every three years.
Dudeface wrote: It needs to make money to justify releases, this cycle is both a cause and result of that happening. They know their target audience well enough I'd wager.
Perhaps you think "company wants to make money" was a secret only you figured out but pretty sure everyone here knows that and as such is taken into account when having this conversation. The discussion isn't "is this specific release ok" but "is it indicative a change in the approach toward HH and are they trying to make it more like 40k". If they are indeed trying to make it a game with shorter edition cycle and with consistently buying new army books they will probably lose some people. There are other business models that can make money without a new edition every three years.
Well, I sort of assumed everyone here was smart enough to have worked out that evidently they've changed behaviour and yes its to bring the release model closer to their breadwinners. But please, continue to discuss that.
I'm sure you'll also eventually realise that as the big fish in the small pond they sent the standard to a large degree. This method, despite upsetting a minority, keeps making the numbers go up. It does this more than the other business models do for their competitors.
I'm done. Too many hypocritical people out to be angry at something in here.
Albertorius wrote: I.... I'm simply an old curmudgeon that doesn't want to have to learn a new ruleset again every 3 years to play the same game, you know?
My take is similar. HH is more of a “historical” game that has events rather than tournaments. I personally don’t need the same level of turnover for HH as we get for 40K. I would be perfectly happy with an annual mission book or deck, but I feel a 5 year cycle makes much more sense than a 3 year cycle for HH. Just my opinion, obviously.
As I love playing with the HH community at Adepticon, I’ll be buying the new rules to learn. But I’m not happy about it as the only time I really play is Adepticon.
All of that said, these models are bitchin and I will get that Fellblade for my 3k Sons of Horus list.
Vorian wrote: If you've played 5 games in 3 years, that's more your issue isn't it?
You can't expect a company to calibrate their release schedules for players that play fewer than a game per 6 months.
'
It is the company's problem when they don't know their audience. HH, while having some overlap, is not the same audience as 40k or AoS. HH enthusiasts are more akin to historical wargamers and that crowd isn't constantly playing games or publishing revised rule sets. It isn't a tournament game dominated by the meta and trying to make it that kind of game, if only appearing to do so, will burn good will and lose customers.
This is exactly the point. The people playing 30k are not the same type of people playing 40k. Most are older, and want / need stability in a hobby they only get to do part time because they are adults with busy lives. But GW doesn't know their customer base and thinks everyone is little Timmy getting their mum to buy everything for them.
How long was heresy the same game under forgeworld and the black books. I seem to remember playing the same game for about a decade.
And this isn't about making more money for the company, those new plastic kits will sell by the bucket load regardless of the rules changing or not. After all GW is a miniatures company, not a game design company, that was drilled into you while working there.
It is about making more money. The logic is that a rules change forces players to change their armies and buy more models, that's the core reason, that GW believes it can get more money out of HH players just like it does from 40k ones.
Dudeface wrote: Better yet - buy the books once you're in a position to play.
Problem: You need the rules in order to know how to build the army you want. It isn't that easy.
Only as a point of precision. If you know you want a mechanised force or a dread based force etc. You can make a start then getthe rules, you night not have an exact 3k army or whatever but it should be enough to start with or build off.
It's the same with 40k, buy some models you like, paint them, buy rules, finish the force off.
Cool. You make that "dread based force" that you mentioned, then discover that it's totally OP and toxic, and no one wants to play with you. Too bad you didn't consult the rules first, right? Keep trying.
Wait, are you saying its the players fault for building a force they thought looked cool without seeking peer approval? I thought GW was the big evil here and that 2nd edition was so good people wanted said dread forced for 6+ years.
Sort the hypocrisy out. People should be able to rock up with whatever they think looks cool and the game able to handle it - that's on GW and not the player for not "consulting the rules first".
Conversely it's not taken nostradamus to work out a new edition was a possibility for at least a year now. You might not want it or like it, but it was hardly dropped by surprise. The churn, whilst hardly fantastic, is a symptom of success in GWs eyes. I'd swear some of you want the game to do badly so they stop releasing for it.
A little bit of column A, a little bit of column B. Gw should write the rules in a way that any force is equally strong. But they don't. So it’s on the player to figure things out. Edition changes with mass changes to stats and other rules make that more difficult. Thus, why many of us would prefer a 2.5 edition over the rules rehash, with the expense of new books, we seem to be getting.
TLDR: We didn't want a new edition. We wanted an iteration of the current one.
Dudeface wrote: It needs to make money to justify releases, this cycle is both a cause and result of that happening. They know their target audience well enough I'd wager.
Perhaps you think "company wants to make money" was a secret only you figured out but pretty sure everyone here knows that and as such is taken into account when having this conversation. The discussion isn't "is this specific release ok" but "is it indicative a change in the approach toward HH and are they trying to make it more like 40k". If they are indeed trying to make it a game with shorter edition cycle and with consistently buying new army books they will probably lose some people. There are other business models that can make money without a new edition every three years.
Well, I sort of assumed everyone here was smart enough to have worked out that evidently they've changed behaviour and yes its to bring the release model closer to their breadwinners. But please, continue to discuss that.
I'm sure you'll also eventually realise that as the big fish in the small pond they sent the standard to a large degree. This method, despite upsetting a minority, keeps making the numbers go up. It does this more than the other business models do for their competitors.
I'm done. Too many hypocritical people out to be angry at something in here.
"No you're the stupid ones!" and taking your ball and going home is certainly one way to get your point across. You can pretend that HH isn't a slightly different crowd than 40k but as you can see by this thread, and others just like it around the internet with similar concerns, it isn't some isolated point of friction. Even Arbiter Ian made a video about this launch and brought up this problem. I don't think this current change is going to drive to many away but if they come out with a 4th edition in three years requiring new army books you'll see a much larger exodus of people just sticking to the edition they like and buying models. You see it a bit in 40k, but with the HH being a somewhat different crowd it will happen on a much bigger scale. I don't think the model side is in any danger but the rule books could see a significant decline, not to mention morale.
I also suspect that there's something else.
The knowledge that what this really means is that 30k players are going to get churned.
Perhaps some really did believe that they would escape the fate of every other GW game which isn't just canned. Most though - I believe - always knew, deep down, but tried to deny the knowledge. There's no running from the truth now though.
New rules every three years; your rules library frequently invalidated; units getting abandoned to Legends; New Thing™ is best thing; entirely mutable background. It's all coming.
Get ready, Old World players!
I know this post appeared a couple of pages back, but I think this nails my reaction. And not just mine - when I posted the earlier rumours about the new edition and new models (most of which were correct), there was a lot of pushback from people who simply refused to accept it was happening.
The prospect of buying multiple new hardback books, and shoving the old ones into my pile of discarded 40k codexes, does not fill me with any joy. There’s something wrong when getting new rulebooks etc is nothing but an expensive chore. It’s very wasteful too. It’s a business model that only really works because GW has worked out that a large number of players only stay with the hobby for a limited period, and it’s more profitable to generate excitement and sales for newer players by constantly re-launching their games, rather than it is to keep established players happy. It’s basically the iPhone business model applied to wargaming.
I also suspect that there's something else.
The knowledge that what this really means is that 30k players are going to get churned.
Perhaps some really did believe that they would escape the fate of every other GW game which isn't just canned. Most though - I believe - always knew, deep down, but tried to deny the knowledge. There's no running from the truth now though.
New rules every three years; your rules library frequently invalidated; units getting abandoned to Legends; New Thing™ is best thing; entirely mutable background. It's all coming.
Get ready, Old World players!
I know this post appeared a couple of pages back, but I think this nails my reaction. And not just mine - when I posted the earlier rumours about the new edition and new models (most of which were correct), there was a lot of pushback from people who simply refused to accept it was happening.
The prospect of buying multiple new hardback books, and shoving the old ones into my pile of discarded 40k codexes, does not fill me with any joy. There’s something wrong when getting new rulebooks etc is nothing but an expensive chore. It’s very wasteful too. It’s a business model that only really works because GW has worked out that a large number of players only stay with the hobby for a limited period, and it’s more profitable to generate excitement and sales for newer players by constantly re-launching their games, rather than it is to keep established players happy. It’s basically the iPhone business model applied to wargaming.
It's also the same model used by the Comics industry. For years, both Marvel and DC have hit the cosmic reset button on their storyline and character arcs every few years to reset the setting so new readers can have a smooth introduction to the universe.
Lathe Biosas wrote: It's also the same model used by the Comics industry. For years, both Marvel and DC have hit the cosmic reset button on their storyline and character arcs every few years to reset the setting so new readers can have a smooth introduction to the universe.
Stories are forever, though. You can still read your back issues, and don't need to coordinate agreeing on a baseline with another person to enjoy them. Playing a wargame requires consensus,.
I'm curious whether this works out for GW. I feel the new HH Edition has a similar approach like the new Middle earth Edition, though the latter had an outside force with the new movie apparently calling for a new edition. But the changes made and the wording from GW about it are similar.
Additional leadership profiles, all old books not really useable anymore, but still they say: This will still be the game you know and love.
A difference being that the ME releases appeared extremely slowly, but we'll see the pace of everything they teased for HH in the coming months.
It might. The cheat code here is that the new rulebook is included for free with those sweet new models you probably want, so you're only spending money for real on your (one?) faction Liber.
The equation is considerably more sour for non Marine players.
Staying with 2.0 is... possible? Saturnines have profiles in the fan edition, but obviously their loadout won't match as GW invented all brand new guns for them, and the fan edition is a bit bad overall.
I’ll be getting two sets of Saturnine, and will probably give the second rulebook to someone. And I’m sure there’ll be cheap copies doing to rounds for much the same reason.
I’ll be getting two sets of Saturnine, and will probably give the second rulebook to someone. And I’m sure there’ll be cheap copies doing to rounds for much the same reason.
As a person who will not be buying the starter box, I will be hunting down people who did to make a donation to their cause (for their extra copy.)
Cant say I like the Saturnine terminators. Perhaps they will look nice in real life.
Funny they share the basic design with primaris agressors. Feels like they tried to make Agressors the equivalent of terminators for primaris, and now they tie the design to the heresy era (in a weird topsy turvy re-design prequel way)
It isn't all doom and gloom. I think there are a lot of things to be looking forward to with this release. The models, obliviously, but I am optimistic the rules are an improvement and having the majority of the lists available to go at launch is good. Well, if you are a Dark Mechanicum or militia player it is a little less rosy, but still overall a positive.
I wasn't all that keen on the Saturnine initially but seeing just how massive they are somewhat softened me on them. They chonky.
lord_blackfang wrote: It might. The cheat code here is that the new rulebook is included for free with those sweet new models you probably want, so you're only spending money for real on your (one?) faction Liber.
The equation is considerably more sour for non Marine players.
Staying with 2.0 is... possible? Saturnines have profiles in the fan edition, but obviously their loadout won't match as GW invented all brand new guns for them, and the fan edition is a bit bad overall.
It isn't "free". It's included in the price of the boxset. If you don't want the boxset? You pay.
There was always the discusion how a marine would fit in terminator armour because the placing of the head. What do they do with the spacemarine wearing saturnine armour stretching there legs and arms or better the whole marine. there is to little marine for that suits of armour.
Vorian wrote: If you've played 5 games in 3 years, that's more your issue isn't it?
You can't expect a company to calibrate their release schedules for players that play fewer than a game per 6 months.
'
It is the company's problem when they don't know their audience. HH, while having some overlap, is not the same audience as 40k or AoS. HH enthusiasts are more akin to historical wargamers and that crowd isn't constantly playing games or publishing revised rule sets. It isn't a tournament game dominated by the meta and trying to make it that kind of game, if only appearing to do so, will burn good will and lose customers.
except they are 100% trying to shake that historical tag and trying to turn it into another tentpole game
This isnt necromunda, this game is now going to be the big 3, Aos, 40k, 30k
They want to shake the proffesional casual audience and ring in more tournament players to drive up engagement and sells
HH walks a fine line because on the one hand legion specific can work; on the other hand it can also end up with loads of parts for basically the same model in the same army choking up the production run and leaving other armies out with nothing.
It also relies heavily on tapping that "marine mine" of popularity.
I feel like if they wanted to do it in plastic and have legio-specifc parts the smart thing would have been to make a generic core model and then have a bunch of parts in the box like shields/emblems to stick on for legions or to be designed around as part of legio specific kits- ergo one core sprue and then a legio specific spru with both parts creating the final model.
lord_blackfang wrote: Well, there were no new legion bitz released for any of the 3 plastic dreadnoughts during the 3 years of 2nd edition.
Technically they released a legion specific resin torso for the contemptor for each legion (they were modofied versions of the legion specific resin contemptors).
Also theres a few legion leviathans - blood angeks, dark angels, white scars, and night lords
SamusDrake wrote: Once again GW are selling 30K as "40K but only with Marines."
Wasn't that always the whole point of HH?
Keyword "only".
i say this as a talons player but if someone is wanting to get into HH for factions other than marines it's because they're either specifically playing with a marines player (in this case, my girlfriend), or because they also play marines. HH is the space marines game, fully. it's "the space marine civil war, and some other factions". GW has never presented it as anything else
I can understand the frustration that they completely left out mechanicum or auxilia from the discussion. Not everyone likes marines, some people are drawn to poor bloody infantry and ww1 tanks or robotic techno-undead with land biremes and triremes, etc. Omitting them from marketing plays into the whole "HH is just all marines all the time, very boring" narrative of its detractors and serves to limit the audience and reach of the game.
One article is hardly all of the marketing, is it?
If we get to the point where the new edition comes out and there is nothing for anything but the Legions, then one could say "all the marketing is aimed at Astartes".
One cound interpret it as non Legion players not having to prepare for Saturnine because they're not getting anything in Saturnine. Its existence doesn't affect their army building.
As beast demonstrated, their article about how to prepare for the new edition *only* features marines and basically advises players in a way that basically ignores the existence of any faction which isnt marines.
So yes, all the marketing, functionally speaking. They probably wont be publishing an article titled "Saturnine Part Two: How to prepare for the new edition of the Horus Heresy if you dont play marines"
um..guys... the big new boxed set ONLY HAS MARINES IN IT. It was also the big focus of the reveal event the other day where other factions only got a few partial images of new models - not even full models on show.
So yeah of course the marketing from now until launch is going to focus heavily on the Marines because they are in the new boxed set that's the primary focus of the marketing from now until it launches.
That's just marketing, that's how it works. It doesn't want to market the thing that's coming in 6 months when its got something coming in 1-2 months. It wants you spending on the 1-2 month stuff
Other factions will only get a mention when the books for launch are getting a mention; otherwise as they don't have new models there's no reason for marketing to focus on them right now.
I am curious why nowt was teased for the Solar Auxilia during the Saturnine preview, alongside the teases for the Talons & Mechanicum - surely there's something coming for them in the year of Tanks, right?
Other factions will only get a mention when the books for launch are getting a mention; otherwise as they don't have new models there's no reason for marketing to focus on them right now.
Did you forget that they literally previewed the mechanicum, auxilia, and knights libers and announced them as day 1 releases at the preview? By your own logic, todays article shouldve included a section about starting one of those factions.
Other factions will only get a mention when the books for launch are getting a mention; otherwise as they don't have new models there's no reason for marketing to focus on them right now.
Did you forget that they literally previewed the mechanicum, auxilia, and knights libers and announced them as day 1 releases at the preview? By your own logic, todays article shouldve included a section about starting one of those factions.
Yes but the article wasn't talking about the books was it. It was talking about models so hence the big marine focus. That's the main big draw - GW 100% knows that models out-pace books in terms of customer interest.
When GW wants to market the books they'll give an article or two on the factions; if you're lucky each book gets its own marketing announcement and focus with a brief overview of their faction.
Anyone who finds 1 marine article after basically a marine model preview; is enough to turn them away - eh - they were looking for an excuse to leave in the first place
Some of those new colour plates are fantastic. Wish they'd release all of the Mark II & Saturnine plates for all of the Legions as a matter of course though
chaos0xomega wrote: I can understand the frustration that they completely left out mechanicum or auxilia from the discussion. Not everyone likes marines, some people are drawn to poor bloody infantry and ww1 tanks or robotic techno-undead with land biremes and triremes, etc. Omitting them from marketing plays into the whole "HH is just all marines all the time, very boring" narrative of its detractors and serves to limit the audience and reach of the game.
Or something.
This is pretty much what's wrong with the article. I'm not knocking the game but just wish GW would stop self-sabotaging their efforts to sell it, as the Heresy family of products has come a very long way in only 3 years.
For the record, the marines are very cool in the Heresy era and the Saturnine half of the new box game looks amazing. Shame about the other half...
Yes but the article wasn't talking about the books was it. It was talking about models so hence the big marine focus. That's the main big draw - GW 100% knows that models out-pace books in terms of customer interest.
One of the first sections of the article is literally "Get reading! (or listening)" and encouraging folks to pick up the novels/audiobooks. Its clearly more than just hawking models. Did you even look at the article before trying to formulate these arguments? Or are you just debating for the sake of debating?
Yes but the article wasn't talking about the books was it. It was talking about models so hence the big marine focus. That's the main big draw - GW 100% knows that models out-pace books in terms of customer interest.
One of the first sections of the article is literally "Get reading! (or listening)" and encouraging folks to pick up the novels/audiobooks. Its clearly more than just hawking models. Did you even look at the article before trying to formulate these arguments? Or are you just debating for the sake of debating?
By books I mean the new books for the various non-marine factions in the rules.
Which don't feature once in the article which is hyper focused on Marines because its a Marine focused article. Again because only 3 days ago they just announced a huge new run of only Marine models in the new starter for the upcoming launch.
Again I fully expect that other factions present will get a mention in their own article at some point because GW will start marketing the new faction books as well. They are just not AS major a point as the Marines who get to use all those shiny new models that will be going on sale first.
beast_gts wrote: Yep, I'm putting my Milita (& Blackshields) on hold for a while - Mechanicum should be a safe(r) bet...
I guess but a good chunk of their line hasn't been released in plastic. So you're stuck with old FW models for Myrmidons and a Magos on abeyant. As far as marines go, unless all units get line or the ability hold objectives the fear evergone has with building an army is minimal. If you're that scared about assembling an army, just build vehicles. As a marine player, when I get the new box, I will have 40 more power armored bodies to assemble. The only thing I plan on putting on hold is building my Kakiphony and Sun Killers with Mk6 or Mk3 marines. Instead, I'm going to make them with Mk2 so I can represent them as Vets. Also, I still plan on using Cataphractii and Tartarus terminators as I enjoyed playing Pride of the Legion. I feel like the Community will continue to push for some kind of balance. My local game shop balanced out the dreadnought issue and I feel like the greater community will do the same if there are initial lists that are rough out of the gate.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Overread wrote: um..guys... the big new boxed set ONLY HAS MARINES IN IT. It was also the big focus of the reveal event the other day where other factions only got a few partial images of new models - not even full models on show.
So yeah of course the marketing from now until launch is going to focus heavily on the Marines because they are in the new boxed set that's the primary focus of the marketing from now until it launches.
That's just marketing, that's how it works. It doesn't want to market the thing that's coming in 6 months when its got something coming in 1-2 months. It wants you spending on the 1-2 month stuff
Other factions will only get a mention when the books for launch are getting a mention; otherwise as they don't have new models there's no reason for marketing to focus on them right now.
It's almost as if 18 of the primary factions are Legions... That the Horus Heresy revolves primarily around the Legions. If you were to look at the Black Library Books, how many of the 50+ books revolve around a Space Marine Legion? Demons, Militia, Auxiliaries, and Mechanicus are all other players and are numerous in the galaxy, but not necessarily the main characters until the Siege of Terra where they want the story told from the eyes of mortals and show how things have been distorted over 10,000 years.
The legion colors in that article really show the difference between the older art and new. The Salamanders got brightened up a bit, doesn't really match the vulkan green paint that they've been selling....and they didn't even put flames on the armor.
OH the image here is bigger. It's not mk4, it's new Cataphractii
I hold hope that it's Destroyers and not Cataphractii, but I'm good with either.
So much to comment on.
MK2 look nice. They used to be the TEMU version of MK3 but now they have their own flair. Good job!
I (right now) like the 4 mental stats! I remember when they went to 1 stat and everyone was moaning that they were dumbing down the game. I'm hoping that these stats come into play during list building, on who can take what (in whatever way)- either tech, squads etc. I also think they'll add some depth to each legion.
As for multi wounds? Ehhhh... I have mixed feelings. Veterans with 2 wounds would make them harder to kill. I loved HH vet squads but they died way too fast and therefore weren't worth the cost, so I stopped taking them. I don't know how this will affect the game big picture.
I'm nervous about taking some restrictions out of list building. But again, we fear what we don't know, so I will remain cautiously optimistic and wait to hold the book.
I’m on board for multi-damage weapons, as it can open up design space.
As you mentioned, Veterans moving to W2. More resistant to small arms fire, but don’t necessarily gain protection against the shootier guns.
It also tones down Dreadnoughts (depending on exact stats!) as they become easier to plink away at with Heavy Weapons. And for vehicles, one presumes AP2/AP1 is no longer quite the deciding factor.
On the four mental stats? I like the concept, but judgement is withheld you gil we know more about the execution. For instance, if CL just isn’t used much compared to LD, we might find ourselves asking what the point was. But, like multi-damage weapons if does open up design space.
Moopy wrote: I hold hope that it's Destroyers and not Cataphractii, but I'm good with either.
That must be new Cataphractii. I guess they've redone them with all the options, and they'll probably be bigger too. A bit annoying, as I'd bought enough volkite chargers on eBay to arm my next Cataphractii unit - that turned out to be a waste of money.
On the four mental stats? I like the concept, but judgement is withheld you gil we know more about the execution. For instance, if CL just isn’t used much compared to LD, we might find ourselves asking what the point was. But, like multi-damage weapons if does open up design space.
Since I just started Night Lords I’m very interested in this.
New edition release with the flagship models for the game in a setting that revolves around the 18 Legions. Like... what else would you expect?
I expect you to read the posts we've made since.
Not being nasty and so don't take this personally, but I am not wasting mine, your's or anyone else's time repeating what's already been said and probably annoying the mods in the process.
That was absolutely the best part, though I also liked how they 'confirmed' that every Legion was getting rules (except, you know, the two missing ones).
New edition release with the flagship models for the game in a setting that revolves around the 18 Legions. Like... what else would you expect?
I expect you to read the posts we've made since.
Not being nasty and so don't take this personally, but I am not wasting mine, your's or anyone else's time repeating what's already been said and probably annoying the mods in the process.
The time you spent typing this reply could have easily quoted a previous message had you addressed what I said or otherwise addressed it in a civil, concise manner. I looked back and didn't see anything, though I could have missed it.
The time you spent typing this reply could have easily quoted a previous message had you addressed what I said or otherwise addressed it in a civil, concise manner. I looked back and didn't see anything, though I could have missed it.
The box? Yes. 3rd edition, not really. I'm hopeful that all flavors of dreadnoughts are toned down a bit and having 1 flier isn't a freaking waste that gets shot down immediately with auspex scanners and that I keep +1 to hit with my Imperial Fists bolters.
Otherwise, I'm in camp "HH is a Historical Game catering to old farts like me and a 3 year cycle is dumb as hell."
If you think otherwise, I hope neither side of your pillow is ever cool.
I come from a different camp than most people on this forum.
I am recently getting back into the hobby, and have been interested in all the new stuff coming out.
Before picking up some Custodes, I had zero models from any range for the past 14 years or so.
I tried to learn more about HH locally, but no one plays. I'm hoping this edition change brings in some players, because as it stands now, it's kinda like Aeronautica Imperialis.
The time you spent typing this reply could have easily quoted a previous message had you addressed what I said or otherwise addressed it in a civil, concise manner. I looked back and didn't see anything, though I could have missed it.
Page 348.
Are you looking forward to the new edition?
I guess you did a roundabout way of speaking to it, but it didn't feel like it addressed it, hence my post. C'est la vie. Not that important really.
Am I looking forward to the new edition? I play Knights. So yes, very much so. Spending all of HH2 with a dysfunctional army wasn't fun. But also it is a good chance to do big time cleanup. It has been a lot of years since 7th ed and they have a lot of games they can learn from, so hopefully they make this a solid edition. We shall see!
The time you spent typing this reply could have easily quoted a previous message had you addressed what I said or otherwise addressed it in a civil, concise manner. I looked back and didn't see anything, though I could have missed it.
Page 348.
Are you looking forward to the new edition?
I guess you did a roundabout way of speaking to it, but it didn't feel like it addressed it, hence my post. C'est la vie. Not that important really.
Am I looking forward to the new edition? I play Knights. So yes, very much so. Spending all of HH2 with a dysfunctional army wasn't fun. But also it is a good chance to do big time cleanup. It has been a lot of years since 7th ed and they have a lot of games they can learn from, so hopefully they make this a solid edition. We shall see!
I agree whole heartedly. Knights felt like they were poorly implemented in HH... where you had odd build restrictions.
I want to see how they fixed the issues (if they did).
Quixote wrote: because as it stands now, it's kinda like Aeronautica Imperialis.
Cool models and no players.
Naw, GW was smart enough to include some Xenos in Aeronautica Imperialis. HH is dull by comparison.
This is coming from someone who appreciates both games: Aeronautica died a quick death and HH is going pretty strong, so maybe xenos didn’t matter much in terms of “smart” decisions.
The time you spent typing this reply could have easily quoted a previous message had you addressed what I said or otherwise addressed it in a civil, concise manner. I looked back and didn't see anything, though I could have missed it.
Page 348.
Are you looking forward to the new edition?
I guess you did a roundabout way of speaking to it, but it didn't feel like it addressed it, hence my post. C'est la vie. Not that important really.
Am I looking forward to the new edition? I play Knights. So yes, very much so. Spending all of HH2 with a dysfunctional army wasn't fun. But also it is a good chance to do big time cleanup. It has been a lot of years since 7th ed and they have a lot of games they can learn from, so hopefully they make this a solid edition. We shall see!
I agree whole heartedly. Knights felt like they were poorly implemented in HH... where you had odd build restrictions.
I want to see how they fixed the issues (if they did).
I have to disagree on Knights. I played them a lot in 2.0 with a 90% win rate and the restrictions help with the army not being an absolutely broken mess that's unfun to play against in my experience.
The time you spent typing this reply could have easily quoted a previous message had you addressed what I said or otherwise addressed it in a civil, concise manner. I looked back and didn't see anything, though I could have missed it.
Page 348.
Are you looking forward to the new edition?
I guess you did a roundabout way of speaking to it, but it didn't feel like it addressed it, hence my post. C'est la vie. Not that important really.
Am I looking forward to the new edition? I play Knights. So yes, very much so. Spending all of HH2 with a dysfunctional army wasn't fun. But also it is a good chance to do big time cleanup. It has been a lot of years since 7th ed and they have a lot of games they can learn from, so hopefully they make this a solid edition. We shall see!
I agree whole heartedly. Knights felt like they were poorly implemented in HH... where you had odd build restrictions.
I want to see how they fixed the issues (if they did).
I have to disagree on Knights. I played them a lot in 2.0 with a 90% win rate and the restrictions help with the army not being an absolutely broken mess that's unfun to play against in my experience.
I'm more upset about not being able to use the Moriax Armigers.
Am I looking forward to the new edition? I play Knights. So yes, very much so. Spending all of HH2 with a dysfunctional army wasn't fun. But also it is a good chance to do big time cleanup. It has been a lot of years since 7th ed and they have a lot of games they can learn from, so hopefully they make this a solid edition. We shall see!
A fellow Seneschal...
Also interested in what lies ahead. While I'm only running Heresy through AT and a little bit of LI, I'm somewhat curious about 30K. In it's current state its scored some own-goals which have kept me away, but this new edition might bare fruit...
Naw, GW was smart enough to include some Xenos in Aeronautica Imperialis. HH is dull by comparison.
I hated how they handled the switch to the Heresy era, by only selling the rule book but not even a poster map to friggin play on. There's no point in continuing to sell the game in this state.
The time you spent typing this reply could have easily quoted a previous message had you addressed what I said or otherwise addressed it in a civil, concise manner. I looked back and didn't see anything, though I could have missed it.
Page 348.
Are you looking forward to the new edition?
I guess you did a roundabout way of speaking to it, but it didn't feel like it addressed it, hence my post. C'est la vie. Not that important really.
Am I looking forward to the new edition? I play Knights. So yes, very much so. Spending all of HH2 with a dysfunctional army wasn't fun. But also it is a good chance to do big time cleanup. It has been a lot of years since 7th ed and they have a lot of games they can learn from, so hopefully they make this a solid edition. We shall see!
I agree whole heartedly. Knights felt like they were poorly implemented in HH... where you had odd build restrictions.
I want to see how they fixed the issues (if they did).
I have to disagree on Knights. I played them a lot in 2.0 with a 90% win rate and the restrictions help with the army not being an absolutely broken mess that's unfun to play against in my experience.
A good player can overcome anything? Maybe your meta is just friendlier to Knights? The broader Knight community tends to agree they are vastly underpowered and need some help.
They were definitely unfun and broken in HH1. Maybe they can figure them out for HH3. Knowing we are getting across-the-board damage stats for weapons really, really opens them up. That a Contemptor had Brutal on their first but a Knight didn't was ridiculous, just as a single example.
Anecdotally, my knight army (with ~500 points of pure flavor SoH allied detachment Dark Emissary + tactical squads dead weight) has gone undefeated against las havoc + siege tyrant IW so far and only lost to IH (with grav moritat) once.
If this makes me a good player, this will be the first army and first game system in almost 20 years where I can claim that.
Yeah, EC with Sunkillers was pretty much the bane of the army for me. I also found that not trying to lean into the really expensive big Knights was better and I know a lot of Knight players want to do that. I tend to run 8-9 Armigers and bring 2-3 relatively cheap Questoris rather than anything bigger or more expensive.
Man, they're not producing the best articles at the moment. To be honest, i was hoping for a Heresy Thursday and some Legion MkII Shoulder Pads or Heads
Platuan4th wrote: Yeah, EC with Sunkillers was pretty much the bane of the army for me. I also found that not trying to lean into the really expensive big Knights was better and I know a lot of Knight players want to do that. I tend to run 8-9 Armigers and bring 2-3 relatively cheap Questoris rather than anything bigger or more expensive.
I didn't buy an Acastus for it to never see the table, you know? That big hunk of beautiful resin shouldn't be a liability.
Interesting that all of the HH 2.0 rule books have gone “Sold Out Online” on the GWUK webstore.
I admit I took delivery of the Liber Mechanicum, Liber Imperium and Martian Civil War books today, to complete my collection - not that I have any of those models right now, but maybe one day…
Well considering there's a new edition for all those books/factions around the corner - yeah makes sense to pull them rather than have GW getting "I bought this last week and now its out of date I want a refund" messages
zedmeister wrote: Man, they're not producing the best articles at the moment. To be honest, i was hoping for a Heresy Thursday and some Legion MkII Shoulder Pads or Heads
Hopefully this week was just getting the daily "so did you hear about our new trailer" posts out of the system and we'll see some more substantive (rules please!) content next week onwards.
I am very curious about whether we'll get the Mark II Legion-specific wave like we did with Mark VI after Age of Darkness. I'm leaning towards not, but we'll see
Journal Tactica: The Isstvan V Dropsite Massacre – Part 1
This gaming supplement is the perfect place to get up to speed on the current Age of Darkness timeline. It explores the infamous events of the Dropsite Massacre, where a Retribution Fleet sought to bring Horus to account for the atrocities he had already committed against the Imperium. Unbeknownst to fleet, however, the roots of corruption ran deeper than any had yet dared to imagine.
The book includes a wealth of background on the warriors that fought on Isstvan V, detailed timelines of the massacre, and a stunning miniatures showcase that brings the conflict to life. Also included are rules for three new Legiones Astartes units and expandable Interdiction Cadres.
So the new army books don't include all units? You need to buy the day-0 expansion book as well?
Wonder if 'expandable Interdiction Cadres' will be some kind of starter force format with a Crusade/escalation system to build out your new army as you go?
Something came to mind today as I was driving home and trying not to crash the car. I did not crash the car.
I've been nervous about the, "less restrictions" reveal for list building. Of course that's new and new is scary, especially without context. First comes to mind is 40k style list building which is not a good thing in IMO.
BUT
It could also mean, "Troops may a rhino, drop pod or dread claw as a unit transport." as an example. That is less restrictions.
In all my games of 1st/2nd ed I've never seen some options taken, such as drop pods. Yes people have them, but everyone in my groups never did for over 12 years. POSSIBLY these "fewer restrictions" let you get around some things that were relegated to say Rights of War. Just a guess.
Have there been any rumours about the release date for the Saturnine box? In as much as release dates seem to be a bit fluid with current 2 week preorders and apparent production issues.
Age Of Darkness was released on June 18th 2022 so is June a decent shout?
June to July for the pre-order would be my guess. I'm leaning more toward late june or early july as it doesn't feel like the marketing has kicked up a gear toward release.
It also gives a bit more lag time for this big recent wave of items GW threw onto the market
ListenToMeWarriors wrote: Have there been any rumours about the release date for the Saturnine box? In as much as release dates seem to be a bit fluid with current 2 week preorders and apparent production issues.
Age Of Darkness was released on June 18th 2022 so is June a decent shout?
GW said "launching alongside the new edition of Warhammer: The Horus Heresy in a few weeks’ time" here, and they've mentioned previews of the 'next few weeks' in quite a few other Saturnine articles, so it could be as soon as mid-June.
But I've seen AOS rumourmongers purportedly in the know say there are 3-4 weeks of preorders launching ahead of Heresy (including the new Kill Team & Cathay for Old World), so preorders on 28 June or 5 July seem plausible. I'm hoping it 's a little sooner
Marshal Loss wrote:
But I've seen AOS rumourmongers purportedly in the know say there are 3-4 weeks of preorders launching ahead of Heresy (including the new Kill Team & Cathay for Old World), so preorders on 28 June or 5 July seem plausible. I'm hoping it 's a little sooner
Ooh, a Cathay Kill Team that would be pretty cool.
Here at Warhammer Community, we get to answer the burning question “How Cool is 7 Cool?” in an exciting first look at new rules from Warhammer: The Horus Heresy, including the new characteristics for units and weapons, and the mysterious Tactical Statuses.
Here at Warhammer Community, we get to answer the burning question “How Cool is 7 Cool?” in an exciting first look at new rules from Warhammer: The Horus Heresy, including the new characteristics for units and weapons, and the mysterious Tactical Statuses.
Rules previews to look forward to this week.
Sounds like a comprehensive list of things we've already seen!
.
