Tsagualsa wrote: "Tactically Pinning" tanks or even stuff like Helicopters and such happens in real life, mostly when crews on the ground (without the almost-perfect knowledge you have on the tabletop) decide they're not advancing against e.g. dense terrain occupied by infantry with unknown amounts of anti-tank capabilities. That's one of the reason you do combined-arms tactics, and have formations like mobile infantry, Panzergrenadiere and such to back up the heavies.
On top of that, in 30/40k, a tank is not the relative top of the food chain it is in real battlefields: there are a lot more of various nasty, man-portable anti-tank options, and things like knights, superheavies or titans exist and could dominate tanks in open-terrain slugouts like tanks dominate infantry under the same circumstances.
Yes, I see it the same way. ‘Pinning’ tanks goes right back to WW1 when they first appeared. In WW2 it was common to shut a tank crew down with concentrated fire if you couldn’t actually kill the tank; inexperienced crews would sometimes bail out under sustained machine gun / mortar fire. And we’re seeing Russian tanks in Ukraine pinned by, for instance, fire from 25mm Bushmaster autocannon.
Separately, I found this a bit reassuring: “ Neil (Lead writer): There won’t be much here that changes how your current army works; you might need another Centurion for the new Force Organisation, but that’s about it..” So hopefully models in the current libers aren’t going to be invalidated.
Yeah you could have a bailed out status (although that wouldn't make sense for Astartes who won't be getting out of their tank unless it's inoperable) but "pinned" is really not intuitive and I don't think anyone really says they "pin down" an armored vehicle. None of the stuff you're discussing, the threat of man portable AT or ambush guns, heavy small arms fire, etc "pins" a tank, I don't think that's a thing people say. And even if that were the implied ludonarrative here why would a techmarine running over and "repairing" those battlefield conditions from the tank make sense?
Assault Squad are fething awesome now. Base 2 attacks, has gained access to (free) chainaxes with separate options for new heavy chainaxes (which stats are still unkown).
Veteran Assault Squad is Assault Squad on steroids. 3 attacks with WS 5 and access to all weapons Sergeant would get normally. All Thunder Hammer or Lightning Claws is possible.
Veteran Tactical Squad is BS 5, has access to all combi-weapons, Volkite Chargers and new Disintegrator Rifles besides being able swap weapons for special or heavy weapon for every 5 models. This includes new Disintegrator variants.
By the way, Outriders have gained second wound (finally) and slot wise doesn't compete with Scimitars. And can be put on transports.
The kit has one handed bolters that are meant to rest in the shield slot. So unless the kit also comes with one handed Volkite chargers, meltaguns, lascutters, plasma guns, and flamers those options are highly likely not going to be on the unit entry. The plastic versions of them have two hands on each weapon.
Theres already evidence to support this. Theres already previous evidence from other game systems to support this. If it doesn't happen it will be more of a surprise to me.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Theres already evidence to support this. Theres already previous evidence from other game systems to support this. If it doesn't happen it will be more of a surprise to me.
Snord wrote: So hopefully models in the current libers aren’t going to be invalidated.
Contents page of the Liber Astartes has leaked, Scouts and both Destroyer Squads are gone.
So have Sicaran Variants, assuming they didn't roll them into the basic tank entry.
Yeah these could go either way, either they're legends or just options for a sicaran since they're just turret swaps. Im shocked they haven't made the other variants in plastic yet.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Theres already evidence to support this. Theres already previous evidence from other game systems to support this. If it doesn't happen it will be more of a surprise to me.
So….you’ve no evidence for Heresy? Yeah?
I just highlighted it in the form of Mor Deythan loosing all their other options besides shotguns.
Especially when, models wise, the More Deffing are all snipers.
What are you even on about? You really think this is single case example? GW do this deliberately. Its a method of combating 3rd party bits from printing and bits companies. There is 100% going to be more examples of this and if you think otherwise you're delusional. It might not be every unit, but its going to be many.
Doc that's the point people are making, units that had rules before are losing those rules because models don't exist.
That is the textbook definition of NMNR.
I used to be able to run my Iron Hands with one book, if I moved to HH3 I'd have to use the Legacy PDF to use Destroyers and Scouts, units that have been in HH since the game first came out in 2012, in fact I think Destroyers were one of the first HH units to be made by FW.
Gert wrote: Doc that's the point people are making, units that had rules before are losing those rules because models don't exist.
That is the textbook definition of NMNR.
I used to be able to run my Iron Hands with one book, if I moved to HH3 I'd have to use the Legacy PDF to use Destroyers and Scouts, units that have been in HH since the game first came out in 2012, in fact I think Destroyers were one of the first HH units to be made by FW.
Exactly, and that is extremely gakky for people who spent time and money converting these options and running them for over 10 years in some cases. I have a personal friend that have 3 mor deythan upgraded in a now illegal way.
I used to be able to run my Iron Hands with one book, if I moved to HH3 I'd have to use the Legacy PDF to use Destroyers and Scouts, units that have been in HH since the game first came out in 2012, in fact I think Destroyers were one of the first HH units to be made by FW.
The loss of Destroyers is so incomprehensibly jarring that even I kinda expect they must be hidden somewhere, maybe a Prime upgrade to Veterans or something? ugh
Gert wrote: Doc that's the point people are making, units that had rules before are losing those rules because models don't exist.
That is the textbook definition of NMNR.
I used to be able to run my Iron Hands with one book, if I moved to HH3 I'd have to use the Legacy PDF to use Destroyers and Scouts, units that have been in HH since the game first came out in 2012, in fact I think Destroyers were one of the first HH units to be made by FW.
Except for Mor Dethyn. Which can have shotguns, but have no existing models for shotguns.
But hey, I can prove anything with, Y’know, facts.
HH grogs, welcome to modern GW! Make sure you buy all your books as soon as you can, because the new edition will be here in <checks wrist-mounted chronometer> 3 years and you'll have to buy them all again. But hey, at least you're not playing 40k, amirite?
Can we get a GW version of the Sonic Cycle? Can all the steps on the cycle be "wait and see"?
Hmm, reading through the leaks my opinions are mixed.
Lots of wargear options being lost both makes some units i've built require re-structuring. Annoying but I'll survive, also reduces list diversity which I really dislike. I enjoy seeing 5 players/armies use and kit out the same unit in different ways, it was the vibe I enjoyed in 30k 2.0 list building.
No artificer on sargents means ap3 will be way more powerful on the average, unit survivability may drop a bit but things will speed up as you don't have to/can't slow roll 20 hits on the sarge till you get that failed 1. Centurions can take that role now I suppose and we'll probably see more of them due to how the list building functions? (as I understand)
Extra attacks from 2 weapons has been moved to the attack characteristic? And the extra shots thrown out by volley fire I suppose. Does mean weapons that feel chunky like hammers feel, well less chunky because you're not weighing up that lost attack you'd get from a power weapon or what have you, just asking if you want to get the extra shot on the charge or not. (assuming rapid fire weapons still cant charge after shooting)
Tanks being single units may feel annoying, like... how many single predators or sabres can you cram in a list? Will this cripple heavy weapons squads as they simply can't kill that many units? More of a meta question I suppose, how the average list will handle the average problem. But it may make tanks more functional, maybe, you certainly won't have whole squadrons vanish to a 10 man lascannon squad. Cause they can only kill 1 per turn. To my understanding tanks have split fire natively and infantry/dreads don't.
We know dreads got a kick to the teeth in their stats but does anything else look overtuned to anyone at this point? Like, the game could be fun but it does feel like an offshoot of 2.0 rather than a development, if that makes sense.
cody.d. wrote: Hmm, reading through the leaks my opinions are mixed.
Lots of wargear options being lost both makes some units i've built require re-structuring. Annoying but I'll survive, also reduces list diversity which I really dislike. I enjoy seeing 5 players/armies use and kit out the same unit in different ways, it was the vibe I enjoyed in 30k 2.0 list building.
No artificer on sargents means ap3 will be way more powerful on the average, unit survivability may drop a bit but things will speed up as you don't have to/can't slow roll 20 hits on the sarge till you get that failed 1. Centurions can take that role now I suppose and we'll probably see more of them due to how the list building functions? (as I understand)
Extra attacks from 2 weapons has been moved to the attack characteristic? And the extra shots thrown out by volley fire I suppose. Does mean weapons that feel chunky like hammers feel, well less chunky because you're not weighing up that lost attack you'd get from a power weapon or what have you, just asking if you want to get the extra shot on the charge or not. (assuming rapid fire weapons still cant charge after shooting)
Tanks being single units may feel annoying, like... how many single predators or sabres can you cram in a list? Will this cripple heavy weapons squads as they simply can't kill that many units? More of a meta question I suppose, how the average list will handle the average problem. But it may make tanks more functional, maybe, you certainly won't have whole squadrons vanish to a 10 man lascannon squad. Cause they can only kill 1 per turn. To my understanding tanks have split fire natively and infantry/dreads don't.
We know dreads got a kick to the teeth in their stats but does anything else look overtuned to anyone at this point? Like, the game could be fun but it does feel like an offshoot of 2.0 rather than a development, if that makes sense.
Is there another leak album other than what was posted earlier? If so link pls?
I think at this point most of the rules have been leaked, most of the special rules, how challenges function, vehicles function etc etc. Though it was in a chatroom so I don't know where they came from.
cody.d. wrote: I think at this point most of the rules have been leaked, most of the special rules, how challenges function, vehicles function etc etc. Though it was in a chatroom so I don't know where they came from.
Ah im aware of that stuff, just was wondering if more of the libers leaked than what we saw earlier.
The full pages for tac, vet tac, assault, vet assault, outriders and jetbikes are floating around.
More options than in 40k but less options than in 30k 2.0. Way less access to power weapons meaning the power weapon kit really is weird now. Just for kitting out sergants and characters essentially.
Yeah probably true honestly. I heard they removed artificer armor for squad sergeants. Which is such a GW way of fixing wound tanking. They could easily just go back to "closest to closest" for wound allocation. Or make it so you can only tank an amount of wounds equal to your initiative like SN do.
cody.d. wrote: Ah but don't forget they seem to want us to have a lot of centurions for list building. So they'll probably take the job of wound tanking.
Everyone is Stormwing now. It almost brings a tear of joy to my eyes to see how the lesser legions have learned from their betters.
So, contrary to my earlier hopeful statement, 2 of my current SW units have indeed been invalidated; Grey Stalkers are gone, as is the Speaker of the Dead. Just as well I paused my SW army when the first rumours of a new edition appeared. Back to the drawing board with that army. I guess it was inevitable that there would be some thinning-out of legion-specific units, as they will eventually want to do all of them in plastic - a shame my favourite SW unit got hit though.
My just-completed SoH Veteran squad also seems to have been invalidated, as it contains models with a mixture of combi-weapons and melee weapons. That stings. I should have seen that one coming though, as they weren't a popular unit.
Where are the leaked entries for Assault squads and Veteran units?
This is some of what I have, could post the whole lot of it when I get home if wanted? I dunno the posting rules to the letter mind you and don't want to spam and it's on my phone atm.
Chain axes are on the menu for everyone though so that's fun.
Snord wrote: My just-completed SoH Veteran squad also seems to have been invalidated, as it contains models with a mixture of combi-weapons and melee weapons. That stings. I should have seen that one coming though, as they weren't a popular unit.
Where are the leaked entries for Assault squads and Veteran units?
I can imagine combi-weapon wargear will fall under Seekers, which are a standard Recon unit. Combi-weapons are missing from the datasheets we've seen so far, including on sergeants across the board. You'll probably be still be able to use the squad with their current loadout (depending on how many melee weapons you have).
Check out BlackBriar gaming on youtube, the data sheets are available there.
Thanks, both. I think my Veterans are history - they are equipped with a mixture of volkite combi-weapons and melee weapons, and I can't see any way of fitting that in. At least I hadn't painted them.
Agreed, my assault marines and despoilers have their power axes now illegal. Perhaps the models will see some life as part of a retinue? I've yet to see that datasheet and hope THAT at least will be a toybox to have fun with.
But, tac vets are kidna fun, actually having bs5 now.
cody.d. wrote: Agreed, my assault marines and despoilers have their power axes now illegal. Perhaps the models will see some life as part of a retinue? I've yet to see that datasheet and hope THAT at least will be a toybox to have fun with.
But, tac vets are kidna fun, actually having bs5 now.
Why are the power axes illegal? Assault marines at least still get 1 per 5 for 10 points.
Oh, you're right I stand corrected. Well I'm certainly glad of that. Though part of me is wondering if it's worth kitting some out with some fancy pistols since they're likely to be used more often nowdays.
Been going through the Questoris chaps and, I have to say, it is going right up my flagpole to be saluted.
Caveat: I was not playing them in the last edition. Also, have not made a careful study of the new rules, so please take that into account.
What I am liking is the addition of the Yeomanry detachment, Solar Auxilia or Militia to represent the 'house troops'. Basically boils down to Veletaris, a couple of Lasrifle sections, a couple of Dracosans and some Hermes Sentinels. Make one of your Knights a Lord Scion and you unlock this detachment. However, if you are an Imperialis house, you get the detachment for free and can have unlimited Lord Scions. So, knock yourself out and have half your army as footsloggers.
You can also do this with Automata, but it is flipped, so Imperialis houses get potential access to one if you have the right knight on board while Mechanicum can have a whole bunch.
Were the big(ger) Dominus Knights in the last edition? They are missing in this one.
Anyway, was going to mostly ignore this edition but the idea of the complete knight household has got me looking seriously at doing a new army
Needless to say, I hate everything. Some of the rules reek of active malice towards players.
Even White Scars can't make bikes scoring, nor can any character take a bike, ever. Khan's special power is spamming empty Land Raiders for some reason.
More than any other sections, this one looks like it was written by RoboRosewater.
I see the Grey Slayers are now something of a hybrid between the original Slayers and the now-defunct Stalkers. Meanwhile Deathsworn have lost their (meagre) weapon options, but are still rubbish in melee. Varagyr had all of their options removed too, which seems pretty perverse - of all the SW units, they would be the most likely to have a mixture of weapon types. As this lack of options tracks the available resin models, I guess that means the SW aren't getting plastic replacements any time soon.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: I haven't seen anyone comment about how they split Knights and titans into their own Liber off from the Mechanicum. So not only do you have to buy all new books, they generated a new one lmao.
I'm glad that Questoris Knights aand Titans are their own book and not part of the Mechanicum.
Now I only need 1 Liber to play. If I want to add allies later, I don't mind looking at other books then. But I prefer a simple approach in the beginning.
I'm glad that Questoris Knights aand Titans are their own book and not part of the Mechanicum.
Now I only need 1 Liber to play. If I want to add allies later, I don't mind looking at other books then. But I prefer a simple approach in the beginning.
I'm on the fence if the new book contains enough new content to warrant the split and still charge roughly the same price as the old edition Liber Mechanicum book.
That said, it would still be better value than the codices for 40K.
Bolter & Chainsword folks feeling pretty salty right now. The idea that options were removed from Libers just so they can re-sell em to you a year later in the form of a journal isn't getting a lot of love from the community.
Feels bad seeing HH fans getting what 10th ed 40K gave me
GrimmT wrote: This rhetoric is so tiring. If you want to doompost, go on reddit.
Come back when you've actually played the version of the game you're preemptively criticizing.
And then come back after the FAQ! And after the next journal! And after the next edition! In fact you're not allowed to have an opinion that upsets me!
tauist wrote: Bolter & Chainsword folks feeling pretty salty right now. The idea that options were removed from Libers just so they can re-sell em to you a year later in the form of a journal isn't getting a lot of love from the community.
Feels bad seeing HH fans getting what 10th ed 40K gave me
Clearly they are not salty enough. I hope GW looses enough customers, and money, that people at the top get fired. I've not even seen a single thing for the new edition that excites me.
GrimmT wrote: This rhetoric is so tiring. If you want to doompost, go on reddit.
Come back when you've actually played the version of the game you're preemptively criticizing.
And then come back after the FAQ! And after the next journal! And after the next edition! In fact you're not allowed to have an opinion that upsets me!
No, we get it, you hate everything and everything sucks. Better pack it in and sell your stuff then.
there will be eough people who are happy with to make it a success
and not buying it because it is a bad product isn't even an option, poor GW must be given a chance
also don't forget, not matter how bad it is, in 3 years there will be a new game anyway so just keep buying and stop playing until than
this is still a GW game, not matter how salty people are this won't turn into an X-Wing like scenario but still selling out
Feels bad seeing HH fans getting what 10th ed 40K gave me
This rhetoric is so tiring. If you want to doompost, go on reddit.
Come back when you've actually played the version of the game you're preemptively criticizing.
Which I agree the "Oh noes 40k!" Tagline for things that aren't realistically to do with the system is tiring, there are plenty of things you don't need to play it to dislike.
Dial it down please everyone, you are all entitled to your opinions but there is no need to be rude. If you find someone elses opinions tiresome then skip their posts or put them on ignore, if they break the rules then hit the yellow triangle.
Feels bad seeing HH fans getting what 10th ed 40K gave me
This rhetoric is so tiring. If you want to doompost, go on reddit.
Come back when you've actually played the version of the game you're preemptively criticizing.
Which I agree the "Oh noes 40k!" Tagline for things that aren't realistically to do with the system is tiring, there are plenty of things you don't need to play it to dislike.
Well the good news is you guys can all play 2nd edition still for the rest of your life. Nothing is stopping you.
GrimmT wrote: No, we get it, you hate everything and everything sucks. Better pack it in and sell your stuff then.
Weird you're in here backseat moderating when you only post in the Swap Shop
Weird behavior to check my history from years ago. Noone is backseat moderating, seems like you like to gatekeep though? Where should I post before I can post my opinion here master? "Oh my god this guy paints entire armies and sells them, he's not a T R U E gamer like me!!"
Feels bad seeing HH fans getting what 10th ed 40K gave me
This rhetoric is so tiring. If you want to doompost, go on reddit.
Come back when you've actually played the version of the game you're preemptively criticizing.
Which I agree the "Oh noes 40k!" Tagline for things that aren't realistically to do with the system is tiring, there are plenty of things you don't need to play it to dislike.
Well the good news is you guys can all play 2nd edition still for the rest of your life. Nothing is stopping you.
Well, several people have said in here they'll do exactly that. Mostly it's the fear of not getting games in as easily as before, because not everyone will stick to second edition and others might quit the game entirely when GW invalidates their models. The have backpedalled on that brainless stance in lotr recently, so I hope for HH fans that everything lost will find its way into legends PDFs at least.
Feels bad seeing HH fans getting what 10th ed 40K gave me
This rhetoric is so tiring. If you want to doompost, go on reddit.
Come back when you've actually played the version of the game you're preemptively criticizing.
Which I agree the "Oh noes 40k!" Tagline for things that aren't realistically to do with the system is tiring, there are plenty of things you don't need to play it to dislike.
Well the good news is you guys can all play 2nd edition still for the rest of your life. Nothing is stopping you.
Well, several people have said in here they'll do exactly that. Mostly it's the fear of not getting games in as easily as before, because not everyone will stick to second edition and others might quit the game entirely when GW invalidates their models. The have backpedalled on that brainless stance in lotr recently, so I hope for HH fans that everything lost will find its way into legends PDFs at least.
Yeah, I expected stuff to go to legacy but I honestly don't understand why they got rid of destroyers.
To sell them back to you in a Journal
That's my completely serious answer, albeit personal conjecture
They stated outright in the round table that they're going to sell you back kitbashing options through Journals after cutting them from the Libers, why not Destroyers too.
kodos wrote: not matter how bad it is, in 3 years there will be a new game anyway so just keep buying and stop playing until than
Spend money on models I wont use, wait three years, repeat .
Hope is not a plan .
guess this is how GW imagines their customers
And they're often right. There's also been some theories that they're intentionally corralling people from system to system in a loop, tho I'm not sure if GW are competent enough to intentionally make a ruleset good or bad. If they are, I suppose we are expected to jump to TOW now for 18 months and then they feth that up in time to push us towards 40k 11th.
Regarding HH, we'll see if 2.0 has enough appeal for players to keep playing it (rather than just waiting 3 years not playing HH), in that case the player base splits properly and it's all down from there.
Wow. Someone's a bit grouchy at Pardo. Gotta admire the commitment to putting his message on every single image though.
Well I was hoping the Dark Angels might get some of our funky wargear from 1st Edition back, but no joy. Was really hoping for a return of Molecular Acid Shells and other such fun things. But clearly not to be.
I was fully prepared to not play this edition purely out of spite. But the more I look at what's been leaked, the less I like what I see any way, so I'll be sticking with 2nd ed.
I hope those who move into 3rd get some enjoyment out of it.
Wow. Someone's a bit grouchy at Pardo. Gotta admire the commitment to putting his message on every single image though.
The story is he's been passing on details of anyone on the discord sharing rules info ahead of the nda lift to GW. Hence the beef with the heavy handed moderation. The random dig at Reddit I saw somewhere is the 30k sub won't allow any leaked images on it and seem to force group the threads into pinned megathreads to go die slowly.
That said, Pardo obviously might have a financial stake in not having the rules on their discord, because why else might you subscribe and donate to their massive wave of new HH content set to drop day 1, but to see the rules and army info.
Incredibly funny how we are now past "Just wait for the libers" and onto the "Just wait for the Legacies PDF" cope. Once the Legacies PDF comes out and doesn't satisfy that, we'll move onto "Wait for the expansion books". Then when they come out, we'll move onto "the changes are good, actually."
kodos wrote:there will be eough people who are happy with to make it a success
and not buying it because it is a bad product isn't even an option, poor GW must be given a chance
also don't forget, not matter how bad it is, in 3 years there will be a new game anyway so just keep buying and stop playing until than
this is still a GW game, not matter how salty people are this won't turn into an X-Wing like scenario but still selling out
blood reaper wrote:Incredibly funny how we are now past "Just wait for the libers" and onto the "Just wait for the Legacies PDF" cope. Once the Legacies PDF comes out and doesn't satisfy that, we'll move onto "Wait for the expansion books". Then when they come out, we'll move onto "the changes are good, actually."
Lord Damocles wrote: No! No! Wait And See what the FAQs, erratas DLC, and supplements do to fix the problem which doesn't really exist because LALALA I can't hear you!
It's getting tiresome. Do you guys play or played the game? I suppose not. And if the only contribution is 'huhu, those dumb GW fanboys, they're still playing that games, they didn't ascended like us, look at them and laugh!' it's not a great contribution to the thread, more an annoyance. But if it makes you feel better...
Looking at HH 3.0 I'm curious. I wasn't exactly fond with 2.0 and as a Mechanicum player double so. I just wait, see and finally play. Then it's time for a conclusion and maybe a rant.
Legacy might be things that are no longer in production or that haven't seen any releases. Like the Fulmentarus, Gorgon, Minotaur, Salamanders hq dread, etc.
Looking at the v3, if I will eventually cope with it, I'm not looking forward to buying Asterius. 500 euros, damn.
kodos wrote:there will be eough people who are happy with to make it a success
and not buying it because it is a bad product isn't even an option, poor GW must be given a chance
also don't forget, not matter how bad it is, in 3 years there will be a new game anyway so just keep buying and stop playing until than
this is still a GW game, not matter how salty people are this won't turn into an X-Wing like scenario but still selling out
blood reaper wrote:Incredibly funny how we are now past "Just wait for the libers" and onto the "Just wait for the Legacies PDF" cope. Once the Legacies PDF comes out and doesn't satisfy that, we'll move onto "Wait for the expansion books". Then when they come out, we'll move onto "the changes are good, actually."
Lord Damocles wrote: No! No! Wait And See what the FAQs, erratas DLC, and supplements do to fix the problem which doesn't really exist because LALALA I can't hear you!
It's getting tiresome. Do you guys play or played the game? I suppose not. And if the only contribution is 'huhu, those dumb GW fanboys, they're still playing that games, they didn't ascended like us, look at them and laugh!' it's not a great contribution to the thread, more an annoyance. But if it makes you feel better...
Looking at HH 3.0 I'm curious. I wasn't exactly fond with 2.0 and as a Mechanicum player double so. I just wait, see and finally play. Then it's time for a conclusion and maybe a rant.
Yes I regularly play the game - every week actually - and that's why I'm not particularly pleased with what has been shown, and seeing the consistent plethora of excuses which have at this point clearly been exposed as plainly wrong.
Yes I regularly play the game - every week actually - and that's why I'm not particularly pleased with what has been shown, and seeing the consistent plethora of excuses which have at this point clearly been exposed as plainly wrong.
Well, I guess we will wait and see if its a good fun and balanced game to play for anyone that go with the new rules and try to find a meta based on the rules, units and options available.
At the same time we already clearly see that many established armies and players will get the short end of it, and the transition to a new edition will be rough to say the least.
The Titan rules actually sound fun. Personally I'd say stuff like that belongs into a free legacy pdf while usual units like Destroyers and whatever should be in the common books, but what do I know about the HH community, apparently Titans are common enough they need their own subset of rules in the main rulebook .
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Theres already evidence to support this. Theres already previous evidence from other game systems to support this. If it doesn't happen it will be more of a surprise to me.
Read in the designers commentary on the website that some customisation is in but everybody is saying its been taken out. They also made reference to a Saturnine command squad being shown in a previous article but I couldn't find it.
Andy: You can expect a lot of calls to kitbash in the Journals. There’s so much cross-compatibility and modularity in The Horus Heresy range, which makes sense from both gaming and narrative points of view – many Legions had to scavenge and cobble together. We want to open up options for dedicated fans without forcing converted units into the Libers.
Neil: You can see this with the Saturnine Command Squad that was shown in a recent article, which is a kitbash brought together to make something unique, but not something we’d want people to feel required to make. Rules are coming in the second Journal Tactica.
Fayric wrote:New books is the best part of new edition. Always good quality and a great thing to have around.
Oh man do I have loads of outdated GW books. I get about 6 armybooks for AoS each edition despite not even playing the game. And old 40k books I had to move about two shelves to our gaming cellar a few years ago.
I've got loads of outdated GW books from the 90's and 00's. That's why these days I buy the vast majority of my books as ebooks. I don't have any of the 40K 10ed books because there's no ebooks, and it looks like I won't have any of the HH3 books either. They entirely removed the HH section from the Warhammer Digital site. Also, the latest Arcane Journals for TOW haven't gone up there yet.
Gael Knight wrote: Read in the designers commentary on the website that some customisation is in but everybody is saying its been taken out.
Customisation, but only if you pay £16.50 for a book, and it might include units that previously you didn't need anything but a Liber or army book for. So, in a technical sense, sure, customisation is there. In a practical sense, it's being locked behind a paywall.
Yes I regularly play the game - every week actually - and that's why I'm not particularly pleased with what has been shown, and seeing the consistent plethora of excuses which have at this point clearly been exposed as plainly wrong.
My apologies to you then.
I am not sneering at "GW fanboys" or whatever; I am upset that people can so brazenly go "wait for X" (we wait for X, guess what happens) then say, without blinking "wait for Y", etc. It's very clear they know exactly what's going to happen but they just dance around it.
Also the designers commentary is an absolute joke and exists purely to justify decisions made.
It's getting tiresome. Do you guys play or played the game? I suppose not.
If I don't play the game, does that mean that a new edition isn't coming?
If I don't play the game, does that mean that the rules are just a tidy up of 2nd edition?
If I don't play the game, does that mean that the rules aren't a word salad?
If I don't play the game, does that mean that loads of options aren't being removed?
If I don't play the game, does that make you feel better?
Gael Knight wrote: Read in the designers commentary on the website that some customisation is in but everybody is saying its been taken out.
Customisation, but only if you pay £16.50 for a book, and it might include units that previously you didn't need anything but a Liber or army book for. So, in a technical sense, sure, customisation is there. In a practical sense, it's being locked behind a paywall.
That's certainly quite a choice by GW. That's a real shame. Are the formats going to be like mini codexes or what? I'm still a bit confused honestly.
Gael Knight wrote: Read in the designers commentary on the website that some customisation is in but everybody is saying its been taken out.
Customisation, but only if you pay £16.50 for a book, and it might include units that previously you didn't need anything but a Liber or army book for. So, in a technical sense, sure, customisation is there. In a practical sense, it's being locked behind a paywall.
That's certainly quite a choice by GW. That's a real shame. Are the formats going to be like mini codexes or what? I'm still a bit confused honestly.
Journals will basically have some fluff, a scenario or two, and some alt units made using kitbashes or existing boxes.
Man reading this and reddit has been really enjoyable, had a bad day so i needed a nice distraction.
Don't like the box set don't like the sound of the rules also the leaks almost looks like they are sunsetting the legion specifics with how barren they are. Building an army seems a little confusing (as opposed to just looking at a 20+ year old idiot proof chart i guess) and weirdly punishing for a very typical 2.0 list.
That said i guess building from scratch seems fun and if nothing else the 2.0 things it punishes, apothecaries and the obligatory recon squad were pretty boring auto-takes. Hate the symbols by the way, there had to be a better way to do it than a blurry picture of a spartan(?) etc.
I like the vanguard veterans but it seems strange they are adding such a ridiculously powerful unit just outta nowhere. I like that nemesis bolters are 48 like they always should have been (vets can't have them tho). I like the prime slot idea (would have been awesome in the old system hint hint homebrew writers). I like the sound of terrain and i like them getting rid of the squadron rule but a previous commenter nailed it when they pointed out it's pretty easy to take a ton of predators in 3000pts.
The arcane journal format is good but imo the problem is Arcane Journals are actually, y'know, good (ymmv haha) in terms of offering, new army lists, new units, new spells, new magic items. That journal tactica looks bum tbh (based on leaks of lame duck sounding units and the full contents being shown), it would be like getting an arcane journal that just had that 1 lame narrative scenario they all have in it.
Not happy about my Huscarls not being in the Imperial Fists table of contents in that leak. I guess they'll be in some supplement I have to buy? Maybe?
It's getting tiresome. Do you guys play or played the game? I suppose not.
If I don't play the game, does that mean that a new edition isn't coming?
If I don't play the game, does that mean that the rules are just a tidy up of 2nd edition?
If I don't play the game, does that mean that the rules aren't a word salad?
If I don't play the game, does that mean that loads of options aren't being removed?
If I don't play the game, does that make you feel better?
To add to all of this, if someone is put off playing the game, surely that's indication of potential players being missed by GW.
A current player should always want to grow the game.
It looks like they ported titan damage and void rules from AT and did some touches. It also looks like scalable points and threat levels with the different princess to make games more interesting.
MajorWesJanson wrote: It looks like they ported titan damage and void rules from AT and did some touches. It also looks like scalable points and threat levels with the different princess to make games more interesting.
I wonder if the Titans got a price drop so they could actually see play (beyond the stray Warhound).
lord_blackfang wrote: Consuls are exactly only the resin models they sell. Mostly no options.
Lmao, I'm sorry, what? The 'historical' game based around heavy customization is moving to total NMNR, even losing the character customization? What an incredible mis-step.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Can't wait to see all the content creators absolutely glazing the new edition and offering no criticism simply because daddy GW sent them free stuff.
It seems like a few of the bigger creators that didn't have HH content are considering leaning into it. These guys will probably love the new edition, since they're starting from scratch and have nothing to compare it to. I think some of them didn't play 40K pre-8th edition, so there's a chance they've never even played an actual wargame, and HH will blow their minds. I can envision a lot of newer era 40K players dipping their toes into HH and having a version of that experience, and the edition seeming very popular in the end (regardless of however its grognards end up feeling).
Just seen a post elsewhere saying that Consuls are now all locked into whatever the resin model has.
I.E. Siege Breakers all have Thunder Hammers and Moritats all have Jump Packs.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Can't wait to see all the content creators absolutely glazing the new edition and offering no criticism simply because daddy GW sent them free stuff.
That is how one keeps themselves employed yes.
But as free agents we're allowed to be more honest. And honestly the loss of flavour in unit entries freaken HUUUUURTs. It is a big part of why I got into 2nd edition out of 40k to begin with. Even if the turn to turn gameplay feels okay I'm going to be missing when I could build a character project around some weird loadout. The idea of a guy and his retinue of weirdo hangerons is half the fun of wargames to my mind.
If i had to guess GW saw how quickly the 3d printing market exploded with 2nd edition and thought, nope, gonna try to curb that.
Gert wrote: Just seen a post elsewhere saying that Consuls are now all locked into whatever the resin model has.
I.E. Siege Breakers all have Thunder Hammers and Moritats all have Jump Packs.
God help us.
The Warsmith also went from a Praetor upgrade with all those options to only exactly what the resin model has.
It’s a bit unfair to lump all Heresy content creators together like that. Not all of them are in GW’s pocket. Pardo of SN (i.e. the one who has evidently pissed off a rather juvenile leaker) has expressed concerns about what 3rd Edition might contain since the (accurate) rumours first surfaced. Many of these people are genuinely passionate about Heresy, and more inclined to see the upside. And if carping and sneering is the kind of content you want, there is always that guy at Outer Circle…
That said, while the rules changes can be absorbed and may even prove to be positive, it will be hard for anyone who is being honest to justify the removal of so many options from units. GW seem to be presenting it as not ‘forcing’ players to convert in order to field units, but that’s BS. This decision was clearly financially motivated, and will alienate a significant proportion of the existing Heresy player base. I think of all those players with beautifully converted and painted armies who will now have to pull weapons off their models or shelve them entirely. A lot of them are so prolific that they’ll just crank out a new army, but not everyone has the time and energy for that.
Gert wrote: Just seen a post elsewhere saying that Consuls are now all locked into whatever the resin model has.
I.E. Siege Breakers all have Thunder Hammers and Moritats all have Jump Packs.
God help us.
Eww. Truly the deathblow for the game. What an absolutely fethed situation to find oneself in.
Oh for fething hell, customizing and freedom on your consuls was one the better parts of the game and now you can now only get them how they sell them?
And even weirder is that Tartaros terminators for some bizarre reason don't have access to power fists despite kit coming with them.
Snord wrote: It’s a bit unfair to lump all Heresy content creators together like that. Not all of them are in GW’s pocket. Pardo of SN (i.e. the one who has evidently pissed off a rather juvenile leaker) has expressed concerns about what 3rd Edition might contain since the (accurate) rumours first surfaced. Many of these people are genuinely passionate about Heresy, and more inclined to see the upside. And if carping and sneering is the kind of content you want, there is always that guy at Outer Circle…
That said, while the rules changes can be absorbed and may even prove to be positive, it will be hard for anyone who is being honest to justify the removal of so many options from units. GW seem to be presenting it as not ‘forcing’ players to convert in order to field units, but that’s BS. This decision was clearly financially motivated, and will alienate a significant proportion of the existing Heresy player base. I think of all those players with beautifully converted and painted armies who will now have to pull weapons off their models or shelve them entirely. A lot of them are so prolific that they’ll just crank out a new army, but not everyone has the time and energy for that.
That's crazy because I consider the Outer Circle to be extremely passionate about Heresy. I feel he is dead on in most of his discussions when calling out the terrible decisions GW makes regarding Heresy and has been for the past few years. He also calls out the constant positivity hype train that surrounds these games and the mental gymnastics people do in order to convince themselves they have it good when the company is clearly taking a dump on them repeatedly. Essentially each video breaks down to "you should hold this company to a higher standard as a consumer."
At the same time I think it would be completely false to assume SN is not passionate about Heresy as well. They have fully dedicated themselves to the system. There are many that simply act as hype men after they receive their goodies and never talk about the system again.
lord_blackfang wrote: Consuls are exactly only the resin models they sell. Mostly no options.
Lmao, I'm sorry, what? The 'historical' game based around heavy customization is moving to total NMNR, even losing the character customization? What an incredible mis-step.
Praevians don't even have melee weapons now. Just a pistol.
Chaplains have no special rules at all, they're just Centurions with an extra couple of points in their "mental" stats. And no options.
Gorgon Terminators have no combi-bolters. Tartaros Terminator squads can't take powerfists or chainfists anymore, just default power weapons or swap it for one lighting claw. A third of the Consuls are just gone, and whether your Legion gets a unique unit for your special Consul-esque HQ or just a Prime Benefit that tacks a couple of small benefits onto a generic one is a complete tossup. Multiple Legion specialist units lost all their options, but they added options that aren't in the kits to Lerneans and Justaerin.
It's not even NMNR, it just seems like a ruleset written by a schizophrenic. It's impossible to tell what the mentality behind any given decision is, or if it even was a decision and these are just the worst proof-read GW books ever published and loads of this stuff is mistakes. Even putting aside any issues or bugbears one might have with the core rules(limiting missions to four turns to give you extra time for their godawful action figure slapfight challenge system, for example) and just looking at the Libers 3.0 is legitimately baffling, bonkers, ferret-riding-a-tricycle-tier mental.
Rihgu wrote: The only good news so far is new Tartaros model kit incoming. The monkey’s paw bit of it is no power fists, though.
Where's that coming from? Only place I saw mention of nuTartaros was pure speculation/copium based on someone's disbelief that GW could have so royally hooped it without any reason so they must be doing a new kit right? Right? Right.....
Oof. Hearing that HH is losing all of their wargear options hurts badly. I already hated that in 40K, but assumed HH and TOW were safe from it. This sets a horrifying precedent.
Snord wrote: It’s a bit unfair to lump all Heresy content creators together like that. Not all of them are in GW’s pocket. Pardo of SN (i.e. the one who has evidently pissed off a rather juvenile leaker) has expressed concerns about what 3rd Edition might contain since the (accurate) rumours first surfaced.
If he did what the guy is ostensibly mad at him for, and tried to narc him out to GW, the anger is not juvenile. It's deeply pathetic to bodyblock for a corporation and try to get another human targeted for reprisal, even if you disagree with them.
If he did what the guy is ostensibly mad at him for, and tried to narc him out to GW, the anger is not juvenile. It's deeply pathetic to bodyblock for a corporation and try to get another human targeted for reprisal, even if you disagree with them.
Considering that as far as I've seen it was only the leaker making those claims about Pardo with no evidence to back them up and the leaker has just been writing racist, transphobic, and antisemitic comments on the latest leaks he released, I wouldn't be too quick to be defending him in any way.
Consuls have been completely gutted, yea. It's the beginning of 40k datasheetfication. Each of the surviving Consuls is its own unit entry with exactly the gear on the model (possibly two options if they sell a loyalist and a traitor sculpt) and the rest were squatted. Obviously none of them can be given any form of Terminator armour, bike or jump pack.
Besides invalidating loads of lovingly crafted Your Dudes conversions, it is also beyond schizophrenic to make a herohammer edition and force additional characters through list building rules, only to at the same time squat the majority of possible character builds.
lord_blackfang wrote: Consuls have been completely gutted, yea. It's the beginning of 40k datasheetfication. Each of the surviving Consuls is its own unit entry with exactly the gear on the model (possibly two options if they sell a loyalist and a traitor sculpt) and the rest were squatted. Obviously none of them can be given any form of Terminator armour, bike or jump pack.
Besides invalidating loads of lovingly crafted Your Dudes conversions, it is also beyond schizophrenic to make a herohammer edition and force additional characters through list building rules, only to at the same time squat the majority of possible character builds.
It also has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that consuls make for Leutnant equivalent (cheap to make /design with probably the biggest margin) and the force org now forces you into more of them so that you may buy more...
Pardo was also critical, before GW offered them free stuff Now they openly claim how great and tactical this game is, and how overall excited they are about the new edition.
Man, I just can't wait for them to publish l2p series. Should be hilarious, given that even after so many games, they would still get quite a few rules wrong or just keep checking them.
Well, if they joined in "recently", being positive is part of the NDA to get review materials in the first place
Only those who joined in before that can get stuff early and be honest.
So most of those who release reviews on release, be it models or rules, cannot point out any downside or say something bad about the product or they break contract.
yet this doesn't justify to go after leakers or expose those who don't need to follow a contract, specially not if the only reason being exposed as being paid for positive reviews
I don't know the whole story about exposing stuff, my comment was about creators/influencers/whatever glazing the new edition. Because at first Pardo and SN were more negative and had almost instan 180 degree turn
Feels bad seeing HH fans getting what 10th ed 40K gave me
This rhetoric is so tiring. If you want to doompost, go on reddit.
Come back when you've actually played the version of the game you're preemptively criticizing.
So sorry you had to read something on the internet that upset you. /s
I'm not even critisizing the game yet, I am just lamenting the loss of options invalidating HH armies people lovingly built up and converted over the years. Are you some sort of sociopath who gets upset seeing other people sympathising with others' misfortunes?
If you had followed along this thread like I have, you'd already know I am not thinking about buying into this game. Every day, I get more and more convinced that 1st editions of any GW game ever made is the one to stick with, just use the new models, best of both worlds - fantastic, anatomically correct looking models, and rules which while never perfect, at least were a labout of love.
I am still intrigued to see how HH 3.0 rolls out. There are a lot of new changes to this game which might end up interesting.
There are still grownups in this world who see both the good and the bad in all things. Its not "best ever!!!!111" nor "worst flocking gak ever made", its something between these two, and most of all, entirely subjective
Lastly, doomposting? On Reddit? Clearly not the same Reddit I'm lurking at.. all I see on there is this toxic positivity where all deep insights of anything get ignored and people endlessly upvote the laziest, most treaded rhetorics. Why bother to post anything on there? You cannot have a normal discussion on such a platform..
I’ll see what becomes of Horus Heresy, when the dust settles a bit, but options limitation quickly threw cold water on me.
Just fething why would GW do that? Add 4 LD stats, but reduce the number of builds? Bleh!
Old World is customisation galore, so it’s not like the “no mini- no rules” policy is a group punishment for all the games GW produces. Old World is the only thing that I’m dishing out any money for to GW.
So why taint an already niche game with this hideous new40k list building style? We saw some units discontinued with the release of 2.0, but it was mostly special characters, which is not as horrible as whole unit layouts in my opinion.
Maybe I should’ve kept my 2.0 rule book.
Whatever, I’ll just do the modelling bit, not like I get to play HH anyway. And a 3 year book rotation can feth off, if I wanted subscription type games, I’d play some of that juicy AAA online video game slop
How important is it that aesthetic choices have specific rules representation at this point?
HH is often touted as being "for the hobbyists to customise their guys", so does the visual item they're holding necessitate bespoke rules?
If so then where does that leave being a hobbyist by that definition. Because it feels game design is cramping people's creativity a little as they need positive affirmation from GW that they stuck the relevant bit to the mini.
Dudeface wrote: How important is it that aesthetic choices have specific rules representation at this point?
HH is often touted as being "for the hobbyists to customise their guys", so does the visual item they're holding necessitate bespoke rules?
If so then where does that leave being a hobbyist by that definition. Because it feels game design is cramping people's creativity a little as they need positive affirmation from GW that they stuck the relevant bit to the mini.
I think there is a balance between and the line is drawn when something can be way too easily mistaken for something else and/or just becomes a proxy. Mordheim for example has different stats for different hand weapons, unlike WFB, but it known to have been one of the most customisable games out there, hence it’s still alive through the love of enthusiasts for this game.
As far as we know there are individual teams working without any interaction between them to avoid leaks (and better track the leaker) during work or after the initial phase
The problem in this case would be the supervisor not knowing or caring enough to spot the difference before things went to print
In regard that not all is doom and gloom, 2 faction books that are on such a different level is even worse than all of them having no options
Dudeface wrote: How important is it that aesthetic choices have specific rules representation at this point?
HH is often touted as being "for the hobbyists to customise their guys", so does the visual item they're holding necessitate bespoke rules?
If so then where does that leave being a hobbyist by that definition. Because it feels game design is cramping people's creativity a little as they need positive affirmation from GW that they stuck the relevant bit to the mini.
It's an interesting question, certainly.
When CSM and DA 4.0 came out and people were going nuts lamenting the loss of options, I defended it, saying we can now put cool looking gear on everyone without having to pay the points for what were often gakky abilities. But that was stuff like purity seals, bionics, etc.
But HH mostly didn't even have these do-nothing cosmetic items with points costs in the first place. We're talking about the loss of weapon loadouts (in a game where massive emphasis is put on stat differences between them and a lot of melee is about rock-paper-scissors of weapon matchups) with the accompanying WYSIWYG issues, loss of mobility upgrades, and loss of .entire classes of model with distinct tactical roles (Armistos, Mortificator, Primus Medicae...)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kodos wrote: 2 faction books that are on such a different level is even worse than all of them having no options
We've seen similarly distinct tiers of product quality based on, probably, the enthusiasm or competence level of particular designers on particular assignments in other places, AoS-to-Warcry and Warcry-to-AoS faction conversions especially come to mind.
Siloing the different faction books to avoid/punish leaks and ending up with massive imbalances in value and versatility between them is so modern GW it hurts. What the feth happened to trying to make the best game you can?
Billicus wrote: What the feth happened to trying to make the best game you can?
that was replaced by "making the best fantasy display models" some 15 years ago
GW doesn't care about the games (outside as advertising to sell more models) for a long time now, just that some of the niche games did better simply because they were not touched by GW after the original designer tried to make a good game
usually for any other game the rule is to wait for a 2nd Edition so that the initial bugs are removed and you get a better and refined game
while for GW games if you like it one hopes it never gets another edition
SnotlingPimpWagon wrote: I’ll see what becomes of Horus Heresy, when the dust settles a bit, but options limitation quickly threw cold water on me.
Just fething why would GW do that? Add 4 LD stats, but reduce the number of builds? Bleh!
Old World is customisation galore, so it’s not like the “no mini- no rules” policy is a group punishment for all the games GW produces. Old World is the only thing that I’m dishing out any money for to GW.
So why taint an already niche game with this hideous new40k list building style? We saw some units discontinued with the release of 2.0, but it was mostly special characters, which is not as horrible as whole unit layouts in my opinion.
Maybe I should’ve kept my 2.0 rule book.
Whatever, I’ll just do the modelling bit, not like I get to play HH anyway. And a 3 year book rotation can feth off, if I wanted subscription type games, I’d play some of that juicy AAA online video game slop
It's unlikely that Horus Heresy was meant to remain a niche game even by the time 2nd edition was announced. It's the other Space Marine game, it got a massive amount of plastic releases and, as hopefully no one will deny any longer, it's riding the three year edition train now. If there is anything niche left about it, it's unrealistic to expect it'll stay that way much longer. GW will want do its level best to further align Horus Heresy with the approach that made 40k so profitable in the last decade. Even if it entails leaving the current players disgruntled as a stepping stone to a wider audience.
Nevelon wrote: Sometimes you have to wonder if there are multiple teams, but not getting the same memos.
Dudeface wrote: How important is it that aesthetic choices have specific rules representation at this point?
HH is often touted as being "for the hobbyists to customise their guys", so does the visual item they're holding necessitate bespoke rules?
If so then where does that leave being a hobbyist by that definition. Because it feels game design is cramping people's creativity a little as they need positive affirmation from GW that they stuck the relevant bit to the mini.
There's a difference between Power Swords/Axes/Lances getting merged into Power Weapons, and load outs being totally removed.
People play WYSIWYG to make life easier for everyone involved. Nobody is going to kick up a huge fuss that a Praetor with Paragon Blade actually has a Paragon Flail but throw in a Siege Breaker with a Chainsword that's actually a Thunderhammer, a Chaplain with a Jump Pack that doesn't have a Jump Pack, and a Librarian on a Jetbike that also doesn't have a Jetbike and it's getting to stupid levels.
Genuinely quite upsetting reading comments about people who now have armies with 2/3rds are unusable. Absolute despair in some cases of people not knowing what to do.
And the saddest thing (and in some ways this will be a repeat of the death of WHFB those years ago) will be the sundering of communities. Some will use the new rules some will not, some will change games or stop altogether. HH really had such an enviable community of close-knit players and hobbyists - I think that long lifespan of v1 helped a lot with that. And I wonder if GW ever stops to think there is a human cost to social groups when they do these things - WHFB dying actually made a grown man I knew cry, because he knew the days of travel to tournaments with close groups of friends were over - rather than just trying to get everyone to buy an unnecessary set of new rules and their bottom line.
Pacific wrote: Genuinely quite upsetting reading comments about people who now have armies with 2/3rds are unusable. Absolute despair in some cases of people not knowing what to do.
And the saddest thing (and in some ways this will be a repeat of the death of WHFB those years ago) will be the sundering of communities. Some will use the new rules some will not, some will change games or stop altogether. HH really had such an enviable community of close-knit players and hobbyists - I think that long lifespan of v1 helped a lot with that. And I wonder if GW ever stops to think there is a human cost to social groups when they do these things - WHFB dying actually made a grown man I knew cry, because he knew the days of travel to tournaments with close groups of friends were over - rather than just trying to get everyone to buy an unnecessary set of new rules and their bottom line.
I don't like the rules, but a lot of the "my army is 2/3 unusable" is often largely over dramaticisied.
Pacific wrote: Genuinely quite upsetting reading comments about people who now have armies with 2/3rds are unusable. Absolute despair in some cases of people not knowing what to do.
And the saddest thing (and in some ways this will be a repeat of the death of WHFB those years ago) will be the sundering of communities. Some will use the new rules some will not, some will change games or stop altogether. HH really had such an enviable community of close-knit players and hobbyists - I think that long lifespan of v1 helped a lot with that. And I wonder if GW ever stops to think there is a human cost to social groups when they do these things - WHFB dying actually made a grown man I knew cry, because he knew the days of travel to tournaments with close groups of friends were over - rather than just trying to get everyone to buy an unnecessary set of new rules and their bottom line.
I don't like the rules, but a lot of the "my army is 2/3 unusable" is often largely over dramaticisied.
It literally, objectively isn't. People built theme lists around options that are now just gone. Volkite-armed breacher company? Oopsie-poopsie, gone. A guy I know lovingly converted over a dozen characters for his Fists and now all but one have wildly illegal loadouts. Again, Tartaros Terminator units can't take powerfists, the default melee option provided in the plastic kit since its inception. Even the places that normally *enforce* positivity with moderation like FB groups and the 30k discord are overwhelmingly negative and filled with people upset about how much of their army has been invalidated.
This isn't the usual suspects having a moan and blowing things out of proportion.
Min. unit size is 6 with option for 3 more, not Line or Vanguard unit and is counted as Support unit but they can now freely change stock lightning guns to photon, plasma-fusil or multi-melta (so you can now have all multi-melta). And 3+ save.
Min. unit size is 6 with option for 3 more, not Line or Vanguard unit and is counted as Support unit but they can now freely change stock lightning guns to photon, plasma-fusil or multi-melta (so you can now have all multi-melta). And 3+ save.
Also down to 2W in an edition with a lot of D2 guns, so a real glass cannon now.
Min. unit size is 6 with option for 3 more, not Line or Vanguard unit and is counted as Support unit but they can now freely change stock lightning guns to photon, plasma-fusil or multi-melta (so you can now have all multi-melta). And 3+ save.
Also down to 2W in an edition with a lot of D2 guns, so a real glass cannon now.
And guns with D2 are not exactly that common.
Only 20 points for Thallax is actually quite good.
Pacific wrote: Genuinely quite upsetting reading comments about people who now have armies with 2/3rds are unusable. Absolute despair in some cases of people not knowing what to do.
And the saddest thing (and in some ways this will be a repeat of the death of WHFB those years ago) will be the sundering of communities. Some will use the new rules some will not, some will change games or stop altogether. HH really had such an enviable community of close-knit players and hobbyists - I think that long lifespan of v1 helped a lot with that. And I wonder if GW ever stops to think there is a human cost to social groups when they do these things - WHFB dying actually made a grown man I knew cry, because he knew the days of travel to tournaments with close groups of friends were over - rather than just trying to get everyone to buy an unnecessary set of new rules and their bottom line.
I don't like the rules, but a lot of the "my army is 2/3 unusable" is often largely over dramaticisied.
It literally, objectively isn't. People built theme lists around options that are now just gone. Volkite-armed breacher company? Oopsie-poopsie, gone. A guy I know lovingly converted over a dozen characters for his Fists and now all but one have wildly illegal loadouts. Again, Tartaros Terminator units can't take powerfists, the default melee option provided in the plastic kit since its inception. Even the places that normally *enforce* positivity with moderation like FB groups and the 30k discord are overwhelmingly negative and filled with people upset about how much of their army has been invalidated.
This isn't the usual suspects having a moan and blowing things out of proportion.
Is it so hard to use the first models as power weapons? What was it about volkite breachers you loved? They'd still be lovingly painted and assembled as breachers with those guns.
People claim they come to HH because theyre old school 40k players. Changing some loadout for edition changes isn't exactly unusual in old 40k.
Pacific wrote: Genuinely quite upsetting reading comments about people who now have armies with 2/3rds are unusable. Absolute despair in some cases of people not knowing what to do.
And the saddest thing (and in some ways this will be a repeat of the death of WHFB those years ago) will be the sundering of communities. Some will use the new rules some will not, some will change games or stop altogether. HH really had such an enviable community of close-knit players and hobbyists - I think that long lifespan of v1 helped a lot with that. And I wonder if GW ever stops to think there is a human cost to social groups when they do these things - WHFB dying actually made a grown man I knew cry, because he knew the days of travel to tournaments with close groups of friends were over - rather than just trying to get everyone to buy an unnecessary set of new rules and their bottom line.
I don't like the rules, but a lot of the "my army is 2/3 unusable" is often largely over dramaticisied.
It literally, objectively isn't. People built theme lists around options that are now just gone. Volkite-armed breacher company? Oopsie-poopsie, gone. A guy I know lovingly converted over a dozen characters for his Fists and now all but one have wildly illegal loadouts. Again, Tartaros Terminator units can't take powerfists, the default melee option provided in the plastic kit since its inception. Even the places that normally *enforce* positivity with moderation like FB groups and the 30k discord are overwhelmingly negative and filled with people upset about how much of their army has been invalidated.
This isn't the usual suspects having a moan and blowing things out of proportion.
Is it so hard to use the first models as power weapons? What was it about volkite breachers you loved? They'd still be lovingly painted and assembled as breachers with those guns.
People claim they come to HH because theyre old school 40k players. Changing some loadout for edition changes isn't exactly unusual in old 40k.
Come on man, even if you don't personally care either way failing to grasp why many if not most people are, on this level, is so unlikely it seems feigned.
This isn't just about local squads of mates though, with the changes to units it means no events outside your specific game group if you're just house ruling the things you want to keep.
House ruling is great, until you're not in the house anymore. I'm not picking up HH3, that means no WHW events, and likely no wider community events for me.
It's already brutal in my part of the country to get a Heresy event, with one of the largest teams shutting down after their first HH2 event due to family life taking over.
There were other groups but it's damn near impossible to get space when there are maybe 2 locations that are within a reasonable distance.
So with this edition I'm saying goodbye to all that and that's truly upsetting.
Pacific wrote: Genuinely quite upsetting reading comments about people who now have armies with 2/3rds are unusable. Absolute despair in some cases of people not knowing what to do.
And the saddest thing (and in some ways this will be a repeat of the death of WHFB those years ago) will be the sundering of communities. Some will use the new rules some will not, some will change games or stop altogether. HH really had such an enviable community of close-knit players and hobbyists - I think that long lifespan of v1 helped a lot with that. And I wonder if GW ever stops to think there is a human cost to social groups when they do these things - WHFB dying actually made a grown man I knew cry, because he knew the days of travel to tournaments with close groups of friends were over - rather than just trying to get everyone to buy an unnecessary set of new rules and their bottom line.
I don't like the rules, but a lot of the "my army is 2/3 unusable" is often largely over dramaticisied.
It literally, objectively isn't. People built theme lists around options that are now just gone. Volkite-armed breacher company? Oopsie-poopsie, gone. A guy I know lovingly converted over a dozen characters for his Fists and now all but one have wildly illegal loadouts. Again, Tartaros Terminator units can't take powerfists, the default melee option provided in the plastic kit since its inception. Even the places that normally *enforce* positivity with moderation like FB groups and the 30k discord are overwhelmingly negative and filled with people upset about how much of their army has been invalidated.
This isn't the usual suspects having a moan and blowing things out of proportion.
Is it so hard to use the first models as power weapons? What was it about volkite breachers you loved? They'd still be lovingly painted and assembled as breachers with those guns.
People claim they come to HH because theyre old school 40k players. Changing some loadout for edition changes isn't exactly unusual in old 40k.
Come on man, even if you don't personally care either way failing to grasp why many if not most people are, on this level, is so unlikely it seems feigned.
Not really, it isn't like we've been through this several times in their other games. I can understand why theyre upset, but largely I think they fail to portray the reason fluently.
Consuls have fixed loaoduts, is that less cool? Maybe? Does it invalidate your loadout? No, because the model has the rules as printed and there are no options so it can look however you want it to look and mean whatever it means to you.
What was so important about the hammer being a hammer or whatever that it's no longer usable?
Maybe im more pragmatic with my minis and like the way they look, will use them as I see fit etc.
I get more annoyed at the word salad rules and complicated not complex attitude they've applied to core rules.
That's an extremely reductive take on this Dudeface and I'm surprised at that.
This isn't just about Siege Breakers only having Hammers.
This is about no more mounted characters (sorry White Scars), or no more jump pack characters except Moritats (sorry Raven Guard, World Eaters, and Blood Angels).
This is the nail in the coffin for what was the one hope of Heresy not going the way of 40k and AoS with set character loadouts and no options for units beyond the kit limits.
Gert wrote: That's an extremely reductive take on this Dudeface and I'm surprised at that.
This isn't just about Siege Breakers only having Hammers.
This is about no more mounted characters (sorry White Scars), or no more jump pack characters except Moritats (sorry Raven Guard, World Eaters, and Blood Angels).
This is the nail in the coffin for what was the one hope of Heresy not going the way of 40k and AoS with set character loadouts and no options for units beyond the kit limits.
I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
Gert wrote: That's an extremely reductive take on this Dudeface and I'm surprised at that.
This isn't just about Siege Breakers only having Hammers.
This is about no more mounted characters (sorry White Scars), or no more jump pack characters except Moritats (sorry Raven Guard, World Eaters, and Blood Angels).
This is the nail in the coffin for what was the one hope of Heresy not going the way of 40k and AoS with set character loadouts and no options for units beyond the kit limits.
I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
Yes? Rite of war armies? The fact that HH armies are literaly built that way?
They changed the loadouts for basic units like veterans. Like it or not, a lot of players will have built up their squads using the options they were previously allowed to have, that will now not be usable (I don't think the "since x isn't an option anymore nobody will be confused if you use a model with x and you won't have to explain why it isn't wysiwyg" argument is a reasonable one). It's the equivalent of saying in the next edition of main 40k, intercessor sergeants can't have melee weapons anymore, or something like that - it'd feth a lot of people.
Gert wrote: That's an extremely reductive take on this Dudeface and I'm surprised at that.
This isn't just about Siege Breakers only having Hammers.
This is about no more mounted characters (sorry White Scars), or no more jump pack characters except Moritats (sorry Raven Guard, World Eaters, and Blood Angels).
This is the nail in the coffin for what was the one hope of Heresy not going the way of 40k and AoS with set character loadouts and no options for units beyond the kit limits.
I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
Yes? Rite of war armies? The fact that HH armies are literaly built that way?
There is no requirement for a jump pack character to build a jump pack army any more, same for bikes.
Gert wrote: That's an extremely reductive take on this Dudeface and I'm surprised at that.
This isn't just about Siege Breakers only having Hammers.
This is about no more mounted characters (sorry White Scars), or no more jump pack characters except Moritats (sorry Raven Guard, World Eaters, and Blood Angels).
This is the nail in the coffin for what was the one hope of Heresy not going the way of 40k and AoS with set character loadouts and no options for units beyond the kit limits.
I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
Yes? Rite of war armies? The fact that HH armies are literaly built that way?
There is no requirement for a jump pack character to build a jump pack army any more, same for bikes.
That is not the point. point beeing that thematic forces are built that way, and therefore the options are used, were used and now are ilegal. And the HH- community is far more inclined for such thematic forces.
Gert wrote: That's an extremely reductive take on this Dudeface and I'm surprised at that.
This isn't just about Siege Breakers only having Hammers.
This is about no more mounted characters (sorry White Scars), or no more jump pack characters except Moritats (sorry Raven Guard, World Eaters, and Blood Angels).
This is the nail in the coffin for what was the one hope of Heresy not going the way of 40k and AoS with set character loadouts and no options for units beyond the kit limits.
I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
Yes? Rite of war armies? The fact that HH armies are literaly built that way?
There is no requirement for a jump pack character to build a jump pack army any more, same for bikes.
That is not the point. point beeing that thematic forces are built that way, and therefore the options are used, were used and now are ilegal. And the HH- community is far more inclined for such thematic forces.
But that would undermine GW's goal - little Timmy has to be able to build an army with just the models in each box, they can't possibly be expected to convert or think, just buy buy buy
Gert wrote: That's an extremely reductive take on this Dudeface and I'm surprised at that.
This isn't just about Siege Breakers only having Hammers.
This is about no more mounted characters (sorry White Scars), or no more jump pack characters except Moritats (sorry Raven Guard, World Eaters, and Blood Angels).
This is the nail in the coffin for what was the one hope of Heresy not going the way of 40k and AoS with set character loadouts and no options for units beyond the kit limits.
I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
Yes? Rite of war armies? The fact that HH armies are literaly built that way?
There is no requirement for a jump pack character to build a jump pack army any more, same for bikes.
That is not the point. point beeing that thematic forces are built that way, and therefore the options are used, were used and now are ilegal. And the HH- community is far more inclined for such thematic forces.
So literally the only thing stopping them now is the absence of 2 wargear entries that I noted was a problem. That is still not the majority of their force invalidated in any way, just the characters which I suspect will be restored before long.
You seem to lean on rites of war, which is a rules based play style, it is irrelevant to the models being invalidated.
Gert wrote: That's an extremely reductive take on this Dudeface and I'm surprised at that.
This isn't just about Siege Breakers only having Hammers.
This is about no more mounted characters (sorry White Scars), or no more jump pack characters except Moritats (sorry Raven Guard, World Eaters, and Blood Angels).
This is the nail in the coffin for what was the one hope of Heresy not going the way of 40k and AoS with set character loadouts and no options for units beyond the kit limits.
I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
Yes? Rite of war armies? The fact that HH armies are literaly built that way?
There is no requirement for a jump pack character to build a jump pack army any more, same for bikes.
That is not the point. point beeing that thematic forces are built that way, and therefore the options are used, were used and now are ilegal. And the HH- community is far more inclined for such thematic forces.
But that would undermine GW's goal - little Timmy has to be able to build an army with just the models in each box, they can't possibly be expected to convert or think, just buy buy buy
Except that contradicts their own Company statement of the Journals requiring conversions to build units from their pages.
It's always the same with you dude, same when R&H were invalidated. What this is, is precedence, we saw it already with 40k.
Stop excusing the multibillion Dollar company.
ScarletRose wrote: But that would undermine GW's goal - little Timmy has to be able to build an army with just the models in each box, they can't possibly be expected to convert or think, just buy buy buy
See, I thought that Heresy was geared at an older crowd, not Little Timmy. Since, y'know, there are a lot of 'expert kits' that Little Timmy shouldn't be getting into.
Not Online!!! wrote: It's always the same with you dude, same when R&H were invalidated. What this is, is precedence, we saw it already with 40k.
Stop excusing the multibillion Dollar company.
At what point have I? I've suggested people are being dramatic and exaggerating, which is nothing to do with excusing anything.
I've been nothing but negative towards the 3.0 rules so far, but I can't have a mood about minis being a waste just because it has the wrong pokey item on it etc. they tend to mean enough to me I'll just find a way to use them.
ScarletRose wrote: But that would undermine GW's goal - little Timmy has to be able to build an army with just the models in each box, they can't possibly be expected to convert or think, just buy buy buy
See, I thought that Heresy was geared at an older crowd, not Little Timmy. Since, y'know, there are a lot of 'expert kits' that Little Timmy shouldn't be getting into.
Dudeface wrote: I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
I mean it depends on the individual army doesn't it? As it stands, without the Legacies rules, my armies have so far lost the following:
Iron Hands - 2x Destroyers, 1x Scouts, 1x Gorgon Terminators (loadout changes mean my converted Gorgons are now illegal), 1x Praevian (has something that isn't in the loadout so now it has to be something else so no robot buddies for him), 1x Moritat (doesn't have a Jump Pack so is no longer a legal loadout).
Salamanders - 1x Firedrake Terminators (same as the Gorgons). I've also lost Dragonsbreath Flamers and Drakescale Shields. Thank you GW very cool.
Raven Guard - 3x Scouts (i.e. all my core line units and the RoW that allowed them to be line).
Iron Warriors - 1x Warsmith (not in Terminator armour so he's been reduced to generic consul, so I would no longer have a Warmsith as I don't have any other models with the right loadout), 1x Terminator Librarian (as far as I am aware, these are gone). Potentially other consuls from this army though I am not 100% sure just yet. Ironically, my Siege Breaker is fine because the model has a Thunderhammer.
Is it 2/3rds of my army? No. Are they important parts of my armies? You bet.
Frankly, all it looks live you've done in the last few posts is tell people they aren't allowed to be annoyed or upset that they've lost chunks of their army. So, way to go defending the faceless corporate entity.
Dudeface wrote: I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
I mean it depends on the individual army doesn't it? As it stands, without the Legacies rules, my armies have so far lost the following:
Iron Hands - 2x Destroyers, 1x Scouts, 1x Gorgon Terminators (loadout changes mean my converted Gorgons are now illegal), 1x Praevian (has something that isn't in the loadout so now it has to be something else so no robot buddies for him), 1x Moritat (doesn't have a Jump Pack so is no longer a legal loadout).
Salamanders - 1x Firedrake Terminators (same as the Gorgons). I've also lost Dragonsbreath Flamers and Drakescale Shields. Thank you GW very cool.
Raven Guard - 3x Scouts (i.e. all my core line units and the RoW that allowed them to be line).
Iron Warriors - 1x Warsmith (not in Terminator armour so he's been reduced to generic consul, so I would no longer have a Warmsith as I don't have any other models with the right loadout), 1x Terminator Librarian (as far as I am aware, these are gone). Potentially other consuls from this army though I am not 100% sure just yet. Ironically, my Siege Breaker is fine because the model has a Thunderhammer.
Is it 2/3rds of my army? No. Are they important parts of my armies? You bet.
Frankly, all it looks live you've done in the last few posts is tell people they aren't allowed to be annoyed or upset that they've lost chunks of their army. So, way to go defending the faceless corporate entity.
You weren't going to play 3rd ed HH anyway so why are you mad?
nels1031 wrote: Just ordered a small Solar Auxilia force, and wanted to order up a Charonite Ogryn Section or two, and its nowhere to be found on the US site.
It was just featured in the "Faction Focus" article for Solar Auxilia, so its strange to see it missing. Rebrand/Rebox is most likely, right?
Most likely - any change to the product triggers a new product code and the website interprets this as the old product code going "sold out online" and vanishing. Sometimes GW are swift and they swap over and no one notices; other times it pings and can stay like that for a while before the new one gets cycled in. It's one of the big frustrations at times because you're never quite sure if the sold-out-online thing is going away for good or not.
You weren't going to play 3rd ed HH anyway so why are you mad?
It's called providing examples to back up a point.
But yeah sure, I'm banned from commenting or supporting others points in a discussion because I'm not playing HH3.
OK, let's go through it:
Iron Hands - 2x Destroyers, 1x Scouts, 1x Gorgon Terminators (loadout changes mean my converted Gorgons are now illegal), 1x Praevian (has something that isn't in the loadout so now it has to be something else so no robot buddies for him), 1x Moritat (doesn't have a Jump Pack so is no longer a legal loadout).
You've not said much but a stock destroyer is pistols and chainsword, close to an assault or despiiler squad based on jump pack or not.
You've not commented on the gorgons, you could still field gorgons and use them with the legal stock loadout.
The praevian has limited gear so simply has the stock gear and is still a praevian.
Field the moritat model as is, using the profile provided. The jump pack is aesthetic only.
Salamanders - 1x Firedrake Terminators (same as the Gorgons). I've also lost Dragonsbreath Flamers and Drakescale Shields. Thank you GW very cool.
Again, not giving much context, again you could use them as stock loadout.
Raven Guard - 3x Scouts (i.e. all my core line units and the RoW that allowed them to be line).
Line no longer matters in this context, there are no Scouts, whilst I agree that's a problem here, I'm actually OK with scouts going away on a fluff level, use them as recon squads?
Iron Warriors - 1x Warsmith (not in Terminator armour so he's been reduced to generic consul, so I would no longer have a Warmsith as I don't have any other models with the right loadout), 1x Terminator Librarian (as far as I am aware, these are gone). Potentially other consuls from this army though I am not 100% sure just yet. Ironically, my Siege Breaker is fine because the model has a Thunderhammer.
You acknowledge you can still use the warsmith, the same will apply to the librarian.
Is any of that really that hard if you wanted to continue using your minis?
Is it worth tearing them apart or simply not playing rather than make that small leap of logic?
Frankly it doesn't matter, people can be upset about what they're upset about. It doesn't mean everyone will be as empathic as others and that's why people are interesting, we're all different.
ScarletRose wrote: But that would undermine GW's goal - little Timmy has to be able to build an army with just the models in each box, they can't possibly be expected to convert or think, just buy buy buy
See, I thought that Heresy was geared at an older crowd, not Little Timmy. Since, y'know, there are a lot of 'expert kits' that Little Timmy shouldn't be getting into.
Timmy churns better.
Not if he can't afford the bloody game, or if everyone gak-talks it like this.
ScarletRose wrote: But that would undermine GW's goal - little Timmy has to be able to build an army with just the models in each box, they can't possibly be expected to convert or think, just buy buy buy
See, I thought that Heresy was geared at an older crowd, not Little Timmy. Since, y'know, there are a lot of 'expert kits' that Little Timmy shouldn't be getting into.
Timmy churns better.
Not if he can't afford the bloody game, or if everyone gak-talks it like this.
Resin only models is quite the gatekeeper to Little Timmy.
Of course you can theoretically still play all your models with minor changes
Same as you could officially play Bretonnia in 2nd Edition AoS, even at events
The problem is, if a game is advertised as narrative focused for casual play, the personal narrative and immersion matters the most
And people build their models in a way the narrative told them
And now GW just changed the lore and what was once a lore accurate unit is now a proxy
So of course everyone can just play with proxies, but people choose this game because they didn't want that
You could also suggest that people should just take their models and proxy 40k, a Sicaran isn't that different from the primaris tanks anyway
And if people don't want that, they are not flexible enough or whatever you want to call that
If people would be that relaxed towards such changes in general, X-Wing or Warmachine would be still big games with a growing community but both died with an Edition change, and the changes and upgrade costs there were minor compared to HH3.
Somehow people are not allowed to be angry at GW or demand good games, just torwards others
It's the question of are people unhappy and looking to vent, or unhappy and looking for solutions?
People are entitled to feel how they want, but at the same time if other people don't feel the same way or are looking for options, that doesn't automatically make them corporate shills like some people claim. It's not a case of "If you aren't with me, you are the enemy"
Gert wrote: That's an extremely reductive take on this Dudeface and I'm surprised at that.
This isn't just about Siege Breakers only having Hammers.
This is about no more mounted characters (sorry White Scars), or no more jump pack characters except Moritats (sorry Raven Guard, World Eaters, and Blood Angels).
This is the nail in the coffin for what was the one hope of Heresy not going the way of 40k and AoS with set character loadouts and no options for units beyond the kit limits.
I accept the loss of jump packs and bikes as a problem. Are they 2/3 of an army though?
Yes? Rite of war armies? The fact that HH armies are literaly built that way?
There is no requirement for a jump pack character to build a jump pack army any more, same for bikes.
That is not the point. point beeing that thematic forces are built that way, and therefore the options are used, were used and now are ilegal. And the HH- community is far more inclined for such thematic forces.
So literally the only thing stopping them now is the absence of 2 wargear entries that I noted was a problem. That is still not the majority of their force invalidated in any way, just the characters which I suspect will be restored before long.
You seem to lean on rites of war, which is a rules based play style, it is irrelevant to the models being invalidated.
This is genuinely farcical sophistry. It's a game, the game has rules, of course the models people use to play the game no longer having the options available is relevant. I mean seriously, just skip to the end and start arguing nothing GW do with the rules ever matters because if it bothers us we can just write "Pravian" and "Tactical Squad" on little bits of cereal packet and play with those
MajorWesJanson wrote: It's the question of are people unhappy and looking to vent, or unhappy and looking for solutions?
People are entitled to feel how they want, but at the same time if other people don't feel the same way or are looking for options, that doesn't automatically make them corporate shills like some people claim. It's not a case of "If you aren't with me, you are the enemy"
People reacting negatively to being told "who cares, you could just counts-as your whole army as something different that kinda-sorta-vaguely looks a bit similar if you take your specs off and squint real hard" is hardly Anakin Skywalker speech tier.
Curious to see more Mechanicum stuff. Thanatar and the two bad boys look okay, weapons too. Thallax could be nasty, but their battle role changed.
Doesn't look like I lost anything this time, but well, the Liber Mechanicum wasn't exactly rich in variety. I hope the Macrocarid and Thrall weapon variants are still in the Legacies (and the Ordinatus Sagittar who has missed a whole edition...). Speaking of Legacies, looks like the Marine one is going to be pretty large - I wonder how the manage it and how the players react (I for one always used Legacy units, but I can't speak for the whole community). I mean the announcement was bold:
The Liber books deal with units which are part of the current Horus Heresy miniatures range, but there have been many units with rules in past editions which never had miniatures, or which have left the range.
You may absolutely still use these rules and miniatures in your games, using the Legacies of the Age of Darkness PDF. Units will clearly be marked as “core” or “legacy”, but there are no restrictions on using them, either in casual play or at tournaments. Tournament organisers may choose to exclude certain units from their events, but because this game system leans more towards the narrative side of things, the current plan is that all official Warhammer-run events will allow legacy units.
You've not said much but a stock destroyer is pistols and chainsword, close to an assault or despiiler squad based on jump pack or not.
You've not commented on the gorgons, you could still field gorgons and use them with the legal stock loadout.
The praevian has limited gear so simply has the stock gear and is still a praevian.
Field the moritat model as is, using the profile provided. The jump pack is aesthetic only.
And yet I already have 20 Despoilers and don't need another 10. The Toxiferran Flamers, Graviton Shredder and Rad-Missile Launcher are also all non-useable in any combination.
The Gorgons have Power Fists, so that means using them as Tartaros or Cataprhactii, which means I lose my unique Legion unit.
The Praevian has a Thunderhammer, hardly what I would call "WYSIWYG compliant", a standard for literally every single event in existence.
The Jump Pack is a very obviously lacking piece of wargear on the unit, and as discussed, without his Destroyer friends, he's rather lonely.
Feels like that's one for me there big dog.
Again, not giving much context, again you could use them as stock loadout.
None of them have Thunderhammers and Drakeshields, so again, losing my unique Legion unit.
Line no longer matters in this context, there are no Scouts, whilst I agree that's a problem here, I'm actually OK with scouts going away on a fluff level, use them as recon squads?
I'm so happy that my loss makes you happy even though Scouts are something that has been in Heresy rules since day 1 and has been present in Heresy artwork for a lot longer. But hey, I'm being unreasonable here aren't I? I should be happy that my smaller, less armoured models on smaller bases should be used as something else that doesn't actually look like the thing I'm using right?
You acknowledge you can still use the warsmith, the same will apply to the librarian.
But not as the unit it has been used as for close to 10 years. The Librarian also literally can't be a standard Power Armour Librarian if it's in Terminator Armour. Once again, the major issue with "Just proxy lol =))))" is that it doesn't work when WYSIWYG is the standard for any event.
Is any of that really that hard if you wanted to continue using your minis?
Is it worth tearing them apart or simply not playing rather than make that small leap of logic?
Again, WYSIWYG. I can't go to a HH3 event with these models because they are not legal. I can whatever I want in my own home with my own house rules. That is not the point I and others are making.
Frankly it doesn't matter, people can be upset about what they're upset about.
Then why are you insisting on policing people's emotions? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.
With unit entries missing wargear and options that are included in the kits, I do want to see what the FAQ/errata and Legacies PDF say. I also expect some people to reject that idea as "wait and see"
Again, WYSIWYG. I can't go to a HH3 event with these models because they are not legal. I can whatever I want in my own home with my own house rules. That is not the point I and others are making.
Frankly it doesn't matter, people can be upset about what they're upset about.
Then why are you insisting on policing people's emotions? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.
You moved the goal posts to WYSIWYG at an event, which are typically narrative and allow you to submit proxies before attending.
I'm not policing emotions. I'm pointing out that just because your praevian has a thunder hammer it doesn't mean you can't use it as a praevian, your army isn't ruined, you don't need to buy new stuff. If the thunderhammer is the sole single thing that gave your praevian it's character, that's really quite a shallow level of depth in the first place.
A unit not having the specific loadout doesn't render the model totally obsolete. Likewise, don't like it don't play it, nobody is going to force anyone to use something they don't want to.
Warhammer fans have a tendency to be disproportionately emotive in responses with a flair for the hyperbole, they also seem to constantly need GW's approval for everything and only be able to do what GW say. Likewise "trying to make the most of it" is like a sin level with mugging your nan apparently.
MajorWesJanson wrote: With unit entries missing wargear and options that are included in the kits, I do want to see what the FAQ/errata and Legacies PDF say. I also expect some people to reject that idea as "wait and see"
I'd be surprised to see multiple profiles for units just to add weapons back in.
Full units like Destroyers and Scouts, sure. But Legacy Medusan Immortals or Legacy Consuls would just be an admission of failure on the part of the rules writers.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote: Warhammer fans have a tendency to be disproportionately emotive in responses with a flair for the hyperbole, they also seem to constantly need GW's approval for everything and only be able to do what GW say. Likewise "trying to make the most of it" is like a sin level with mugging your nan apparently.
"Trying to make the most of it" falls flat when the rules have had significant changes and read like a scientific paper, customisation has been nuked then locked behind a paywall of extra books, and chunks of units aren't valid outside of house rules or mass counts-as/proxies.
As the saying goes, you can put glitter on it but it will always be what it is.
"Trying to make the most of it" falls flat when the rules have had significant changes and read like a scientific paper, customisation has been nuked then locked behind a paywall of extra books, and chunks of units aren't valid outside of house rules or mass counts-as/proxies.
As the saying goes, you can put glitter on it but it will always be what it is.
It also falls flat when you have to spend 10 minutes explaining what every unit counts as to your opponent and hope that they remember which is which throughout the game because you "tried to make the most of it" with units that no longer exist.
Dudeface wrote: Warhammer fans have a tendency to be disproportionately emotive in responses with a flair for the hyperbole, they also seem to constantly need GW's approval for everything and only be able to do what GW say. Likewise "trying to make the most of it" is like a sin level with mugging your nan apparently.
"Trying to make the most of it" falls flat when the rules have had significant changes and read like a scientific paper, customisation has been nuked then locked behind a paywall of extra books, and chunks of units aren't valid outside of house rules or mass counts-as/proxies.
As the saying goes, you can put glitter on it but it will always be what it is.
I've repeatedly stated I agree and dislike the core rules. The point stands, there's room to find use for people's collection, they can try and work with or around it if they want to play 3.0. Or they can be emotive and never play again/sell their army/whatever. Which isn't invalid if they wish to feel that way, just seems a shame to be so volatile as a response.
You make the most of a rainy camping weekend, you don't make the most of a massive company screwing around with a product you invest hundreds of hours and potentially thousands of pounds in to trying to enjoy. It's right to expect that your enjoyment is somewhere high on their list of priorities, which this release once again demonstrates it isn't.
You weren't going to play 3rd ed HH anyway so why are you mad?
It's called providing examples to back up a point.
But yeah sure, I'm banned from commenting or supporting others points in a discussion because I'm not playing HH3.
OK, let's go through it:
Spoiler:
Iron Hands - 2x Destroyers, 1x Scouts, 1x Gorgon Terminators (loadout changes mean my converted Gorgons are now illegal), 1x Praevian (has something that isn't in the loadout so now it has to be something else so no robot buddies for him), 1x Moritat (doesn't have a Jump Pack so is no longer a legal loadout).
You've not said much but a stock destroyer is pistols and chainsword, close to an assault or despiiler squad based on jump pack or not.
You've not commented on the gorgons, you could still field gorgons and use them with the legal stock loadout.
The praevian has limited gear so simply has the stock gear and is still a praevian.
Field the moritat model as is, using the profile provided. The jump pack is aesthetic only.
Salamanders - 1x Firedrake Terminators (same as the Gorgons). I've also lost Dragonsbreath Flamers and Drakescale Shields. Thank you GW very cool.
Again, not giving much context, again you could use them as stock loadout.
Raven Guard - 3x Scouts (i.e. all my core line units and the RoW that allowed them to be line).
Line no longer matters in this context, there are no Scouts, whilst I agree that's a problem here, I'm actually OK with scouts going away on a fluff level, use them as recon squads?
Iron Warriors - 1x Warsmith (not in Terminator armour so he's been reduced to generic consul, so I would no longer have a Warmsith as I don't have any other models with the right loadout), 1x Terminator Librarian (as far as I am aware, these are gone). Potentially other consuls from this army though I am not 100% sure just yet. Ironically, my Siege Breaker is fine because the model has a Thunderhammer.
You acknowledge you can still use the warsmith, the same will apply to the librarian.
Is any of that really that hard if you wanted to continue using your minis?
Is it worth tearing them apart or simply not playing rather than make that small leap of logic?
Frankly it doesn't matter, people can be upset about what they're upset about. It doesn't mean everyone will be as empathic as others and that's why people are interesting, we're all different.
I understand your approach and it's actually what I sometimes do when playing OPR with my 40K models that don’t always fit 1:1.
However, whenever you say: "use this with the stock profile" it implies every opponent will know every profile and therefore be aware that the thunderhammer on unit 1 is a thunderhammer while on unit 2 it's a sword because now that profile can suddenly only come with a sword. But what if your opponent doesn't play loyalist Marines? He won't know the guy without jump Pack actually has a jump Pack, etc. It's the usual problem whenever using proxies that don’t use the exact equipment of the thing they proxy.
Billicus wrote: You make the most of a rainy camping weekend, you don't make the most of a massive company screwing around with a product you invest hundreds of hours and potentially thousands of pounds in to trying to enjoy. It's right to expect that your enjoyment is somewhere high on their list of priorities, which this release once again demonstrates it isn't.
So if you don't make the most of it and get the enjoyment you can out of the product, what do you do?
Yeah we could have just gotten new models and an updated 2.0 rulebook to fix some of the issues like literally everyone wanted.
Instead they choose to make the absolute worst possible design choices and a whole new edition because "we have to every 3 years"
The fact that a massive W was so easily attainable and required far less work and money that the massive L we got is what is so fething frustrating. They deserve all the gak they're getting, people are rightfully pissed and honestly I'm here for it.
Billicus wrote: You make the most of a rainy camping weekend, you don't make the most of a massive company screwing around with a product you invest hundreds of hours and potentially thousands of pounds in to trying to enjoy. It's right to expect that your enjoyment is somewhere high on their list of priorities, which this release once again demonstrates it isn't.
So if you don't make the most of it and get the enjoyment you can out of the product, what do you do?
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Yeah we could have just gotten new models and an updated 2.0 rulebook to fix some of the issues like literally everyone wanted.
Instead they choose to make the absolute worst possible design choices and a whole new edition because "we have to every 3 years"
The fact that a massive W was so easily attainable and required far less work and money that the massive L we got is what is so fething frustrating. They deserve all the gak they're getting, people are rightfully pissed and honestly I'm here for it.
I think this just about sums it up?
Well, for me at least, from what we've seen so far...
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Yeah we could have just gotten new models and an updated 2.0 rulebook to fix some of the issues like literally everyone wanted.
Instead they choose to make the absolute worst possible design choices and a whole new edition because "we have to every 3 years"
The fact that a massive W was so easily attainable and required far less work and money that the massive L we got is what is so fething frustrating. They deserve all the gak they're getting, people are rightfully pissed and honestly I'm here for it.
I think this just about sums it up?
Well, for me at least, from what we've seen so far...
I would say so, yeah. This edition seems to be something nobody asked for, but got regardless.
But apparently you can't get pissy about it, because reasons.
The same reasons you can't have a positive take without being a corporate white knight stomping over people's opinions. It's the internet. Personal attacks and hyperbole are easier than discussing ideas, on any side.
I'm excited for a lot of the core changes, disappointed by the loss of options in the libers, but am hopeful for errata and legacies, plus supplements as more kits get plasticized.
In a few hours all the information should be out fully to look at. I want to see about mechanicum and titans, more than the few teases and mentions of thallax changes
Gert wrote: Iron Warriors - 1x Warsmith (not in Terminator armour so he's been reduced to generic consul, so I would no longer have a Warmsith as I don't have any other models with the right loadout), 1x Terminator Librarian (as far as I am aware, these are gone). Potentially other consuls from this army though I am not 100% sure just yet. Ironically, my Siege Breaker is fine because the model has a Thunderhammer.
Oh dear, I didn’t notice that Terminator Librarians are gone.
I don’t know what Dudeface is trying to say - or if he even genuinely believes it. Models with weapon options that are no longer available to them can’t be fielded in a WYSIWYG environment. Heresy players tend to be fairly strict about this, in my experience. Equally important is the massive reduction in the scope for customising models - a big part of Heresy’s appeal.
It seems very self-limiting to only permit Consuls to take the equipment depicted on the resin models. What if they want to produce different ones?
It seems very self-limiting to only permit Consuls to take the equipment depicted on the resin models. What if they want to produce different ones?
Agreed. Limits on consuls are bad. I could see some trims, but only the model is awful.
If they do want to produce new ones, there is nothing stopping them from adding the rules via pdf or journal. Overseers, optae, and a few others were added by expansion books in 2.0 after all.
The joke is on everyone else - can't really take away World Eaters models because they pretty much never made any for us in the first place. Hooray for 20 years of neglect.
I was tempted to get the starter, but I'll just wait until the Hydra AA platform is released separately (and maybe the dreadnought if it gets close combat weapons later)
Got the starter because I love the models and I'm happy enough just painting things up for my EC in my own time, but thoroughly displeased with the way the liber rules have turned out. Very disappointing
Marshal Loss wrote: Got the starter because I love the models and I'm happy enough just painting things up for my EC in my own time, but thoroughly displeased with the way the liber rules have turned out. Very disappointing
If i hadn't picked up the 40kEC(which I was gonna use for my burgeoning SOT era IIIrd) only to have most of the army I've already built(100% rules legal & legit FW/GW product) basically pissed all over. I could easily have had 3x the points & units if I'd have used recasts...now I'm just gonna sail the seas of cheese.
Facepalm GW. I've never even remotely thought of buying a not"gw" thing.
James is stepping over DOLLARS/POUNDS/EURO/YEN to get to dimes(i don't know offhand the breakdown for other currency
To have both 30&40kEC invalidated within 6mo of each other really makes me a sad panda....
Gert wrote: Iron Warriors - 1x Warsmith (not in Terminator armour so he's been reduced to generic consul, so I would no longer have a Warmsith as I don't have any other models with the right loadout), 1x Terminator Librarian (as far as I am aware, these are gone). Potentially other consuls from this army though I am not 100% sure just yet. Ironically, my Siege Breaker is fine because the model has a Thunderhammer.
Oh dear, I didn’t notice that Terminator Librarians are gone.
I don’t know what Dudeface is trying to say - or if he even genuinely believes it. Models with weapon options that are no longer available to them can’t be fielded in a WYSIWYG environment. Heresy players tend to be fairly strict about this, in my experience. Equally important is the massive reduction in the scope for customising models - a big part of Heresy’s appeal.
It seems very self-limiting to only permit Consuls to take the equipment depicted on the resin models. What if they want to produce different ones?
If they can only have the equipment on the resin models, plus customising minis is a core tent pole of the game, what's to stop you customising the mini as long as its readily identifiable.
I 100% believe what I say, it's so frustrating seeing people bang on about how creative and modeller friendly HH is, but then need an official GW stamp of approval for the mini they make. It's an oxymoron.
Gert wrote: Iron Warriors - 1x Warsmith (not in Terminator armour so he's been reduced to generic consul, so I would no longer have a Warmsith as I don't have any other models with the right loadout), 1x Terminator Librarian (as far as I am aware, these are gone). Potentially other consuls from this army though I am not 100% sure just yet. Ironically, my Siege Breaker is fine because the model has a Thunderhammer.
Oh dear, I didn’t notice that Terminator Librarians are gone.
I don’t know what Dudeface is trying to say - or if he even genuinely believes it. Models with weapon options that are no longer available to them can’t be fielded in a WYSIWYG environment. Heresy players tend to be fairly strict about this, in my experience. Equally important is the massive reduction in the scope for customising models - a big part of Heresy’s appeal.
It seems very self-limiting to only permit Consuls to take the equipment depicted on the resin models. What if they want to produce different ones?
If they can only have the equipment on the resin models, plus customising minis is a core tent pole of the game, what's to stop you customising the mini as long as its readily identifiable.
I 100% believe what I say, it's so frustrating seeing people bang on about how creative and modeller friendly HH is, but then need an official GW stamp of approval for the mini they make. It's an oxymoron.
It's not about a "stamp of approval", it's about having the ability to run "your dudes" as "your dudes".
Examples:
My Praetor rocks a jump pack and an Eschaton Power Claw + Lightning Claw, and leads jump pack units.
My Librarian rocks Tartaros armour and leads Tartaros terminators.
Etc, etc.
It's about the customization. Yes, you can still model the minis however you want, but they will no longer function how you want. That bothers many people. If it doesn't bother you, cool. But, understand that everyone isn't after the same experience.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Yeah we could have just gotten new models and an updated 2.0 rulebook to fix some of the issues like literally everyone wanted.
Instead they choose to make the absolute worst possible design choices and a whole new edition because "we have to every 3 years"
The fact that a massive W was so easily attainable and required far less work and money that the massive L we got is what is so fething frustrating. They deserve all the gak they're getting, people are rightfully pissed and honestly I'm here for it.
Sums up excatly how I feel about the situation. How much time, effort and money have they put into producing this product that the player base just doesn't want? They simply do not understand their customers.
MajorWesJanson wrote: The same reasons you can't have a positive take without being a corporate white knight stomping over people's opinions. It's the internet. Personal attacks and hyperbole are easier than discussing ideas, on any side.
I'm excited for a lot of the core changes, disappointed by the loss of options in the libers, but am hopeful for errata and legacies, plus supplements as more kits get plasticized.
In a few hours all the information should be out fully to look at. I want to see about mechanicum and titans, more than the few teases and mentions of thallax changes
Pretty much a perfect summary.
I’m going to get one Saturnine box because I want those MkII dudes and the dread, but I’m not getting any libers until I’ve had a chance to go over the core rules properly.
Just got the journal so far myself, as I can see that being something that will go out of stock. Going to see how things play out. Will likely get the core box as at some point as I’m slowly painting things up. I’m trying to avoid a build up of grey plastic gathering dust in storage.
Goonhammer reviews are up as well on their website for all the books.
Read the article on generic Legion units and main rules.
They don't pull punches on talking about how the wargear removals will have an impact on people's armies and the fact the core rules are written like a corporate legal document.
Even in the sections where the articles are positive (Challenges being one) they are still clear the way its written is going to put people off.
The most hilarious takeaway is that there is apparently a big note in the book that every single rule should be read through because this edition is nothing like any previous edition and assuming the rules are similar will mean you'll get them wrong.
So much for "The Horus Heresy you all know and love".
It's as wordy a f***. It could be rewritten with half the word count. There's an ok, maybe even good game, hidden under all that verbiage. It's not the first time it was 'good game, s*** rulebook' and I'm sure it won't be the last.
The reduction of customization is a blow. I felt certain they'd release a 'commander' set - like the old 40 commander with a bunch of the options they could take. Oh well.
I've been going back and forth over whether or not I should buy the Saturnine set. Alchemist Workshop have 300 in stock at the time of writing, so I guess that there's no rush
Whether you're gonna play the game or not, it's still really quite a good deal vs buying the contents individually. I use one page rules for heresy, so there's enough in there to keep me going for ages, and with any luck I can flip the book for a tenner or so
The removal of so many options is just plain ridiculous IMO. Otherwise this might have been a good edition.
The box sets will be a deal $$$ wise compared to if you buy it all separately but IMO the old V2 Army books will just stay on my shelf for now.
I decided to go with 2 boxes mainly for all the new kit which im sure will cost a ton when its in individual boxes, rules are whatever will just sell off at least 1 book maybe both if they continuing making it worse than V2.
Did pick up the journal hoping its worthwhile with story/scenarios and anything else they add.
Didnt and not buying any of the new army books--all the removals make them a waste IMO. As well the Legion trait/unit changes seem all over the place...instead of using this as a chance to fix mistakes they just repeated mistakes or made things actively worse in some of the various legion rules....
I guess outside some specific resin units they still need to sell which they made much better. This is pure crappy marketing and its done very badly.
Also ordered two set of the Melee Weapons. With 80 MkII, I’m gonna be doing a lot of more Veteran units, something which various hitting sticks are welcome.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Also ordered two set of the Melee Weapons. With 80 MkII, I’m gonna be doing a lot of more Veteran units, something which various hitting sticks are welcome.
Melee veterans are jump only sorry to say if you want to be wysiwyg
I want to make sure I didn't miss something but there really isn't any need for FOMO on the box, right? This will be like AoD in that it should be available for awhile yes?
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Also ordered two set of the Melee Weapons. With 80 MkII, I’m gonna be doing a lot of more Veteran units, something which various hitting sticks are welcome.
Melee veterans are jump only sorry to say if you want to be wysiwyg
Can still equip Veteran Sarge differently and that. The rest, I’ll await Book In Hand plans.
I'd already talked myself into waiting on the new box and just grabbing the books instead, but them putting a box in the BRB about how they basically lied straight to our faces has me feeling like taking the money I was gonna use for the books to another company.
The most hilarious takeaway is that there is apparently a big note in the book that every single rule should be read through because this edition is nothing like any previous edition and assuming the rules are similar will mean you'll get them wrong. So much for "The Horus Heresy you all know and love".
All of the marketing and developer comments were about how this was basically a revamp and would be like 2.0(which we all of course knew was false when the leaks happened), it's the fact that the developers knew about this callout and still tried to sell it that way that leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. Corpos be corpos and all that, but I feel like this is something that shouldn't get my dollars.
Automatically Appended Next Post: So I've gotten to see the book. There's 6 pages used to define what they mean when they use a term like Turn. The last definition is a definition of what a Rule is. There's then 3 pages of pictures, and the next page with game text, they put the definition of Rule word for word again. They felt the need to define what a Rule is twice within 4 pages.
In the realm of big stompy robots, they have actually figured out how to make Titanic objectives make sense.
Instead of standing on central objectives, you now attack off table targets.
Also, I love the idea taking a 3,500 point Warlord titan as your entire army... I just need to borrow a couple thousand dollars from someone to help me buy one.
Why are the Liber Astartes and Hereticus books $5 USD more than they were listed on the trade sheet? They were listed as $65 USD on the trade sheet and they are $70 on the website.
Also, I love the idea taking a 3,500 point Warlord titan as your entire army... I just need to borrow a couple thousand dollars from someone to help me buy one.
As much as I fancy an Armiger as my Kill Team, or a Questoris as a Combat Patrol...
I'd assume they're out of stock for repackaging for the new edition.
Its been impossible to get any of the resin stuff for years now. Unless you are actively checking your emails for restock alerts daily they might come back in stock with 3 or 4 and then they're gone again.
I'd assume they're out of stock for repackaging for the new edition.
Its been impossible to get any of the resin stuff for years now. Unless you are actively checking your emails for restock alerts daily they might come back in stock with 3 or 4 and then they're gone again.
I've been on the watch list for an Alpha Legion model: "Exodus," since January.
Gert wrote: Goonhammer reviews are up as well on their website for all the books.
Read the article on generic Legion units and main rules.
They don't pull punches on talking about how the wargear removals will have an impact on people's armies and the fact the core rules are written like a corporate legal document.
Even in the sections where the articles are positive (Challenges being one) they are still clear the way its written is going to put people off.
The most hilarious takeaway is that there is apparently a big note in the book that every single rule should be read through because this edition is nothing like any previous edition and assuming the rules are similar will mean you'll get them wrong.
So much for "The Horus Heresy you all know and love".
Yeah, but at least 2.0 wasn't sold to us as "basically" the same game while being fundamentally different in both unit stats, USR & USR(*), weapon profiles, etc.
2.0 was pretty much everything they said it was, on its face.
3.0 is basically a boat that's falling apart and in need of repairs and or being scuttled.
Racerguy180 wrote: Yeah, but at least 2.0 wasn't sold to us as "basically" the same game while being fundamentally different in both unit stats, USR & USR(*), weapon profiles, etc.
2.0 was pretty much everything they said it was, on its face.
3.0 is basically a boat that's falling apart and in need of repairs and or being scuttled.
I've seen it said there's apparently a blurb in the book explicitly telling the reader to take their time understanding the new rules because they're a significant change to previous versions which, if right, would make their "basically the same" WarCom marketing even more egregious. Honestly we owe the leaker/s a lot, especially given the way many of the hobby influencers are *still* trying to spin things in a positive/wait-and-see way despite the fact we can read in plain english(well, actually in english that looks like the product of a thousand monkeys at a thousand keyboards prompting chatGPT, but you know what I mean) all the BS - I have no doubt they would have happily sold it as a completely positive situation and thoroughly glossed over all the bad stuff if they'd had a chance and a lot of people would be preordering a nasty surprise.
Racerguy180 wrote: Yeah, but at least 2.0 wasn't sold to us as "basically" the same game while being fundamentally different in both unit stats, USR & USR(*), weapon profiles, etc.
2.0 was pretty much everything they said it was, on its face.
3.0 is basically a boat that's falling apart and in need of repairs and or being scuttled.
I've seen it said there's apparently a blurb in the book explicitly telling the reader to take their time understanding the new rules because they're a significant change to previous versions which, if right, would make their "basically the same" WarCom marketing even more egregious. Honestly we owe the leaker/s a lot, especially given the way many of the hobby influencers are *still* trying to spin things in a positive/wait-and-see way despite the fact we can read in plain english(well, actually in english that looks like the product of a thousand monkeys at a thousand keyboards prompting chatGPT, but you know what I mean) all the BS - I have no doubt they would have happily sold it as a completely positive situation and thoroughly glossed over all the bad stuff if they'd had a chance and a lot of people would be preordering a nasty surprise.
Would also explain the rather complete set of leaks of someone that is unhappy.
Leakage is generally a product of low morale of the process or completely hyped up (marketing strategy). In this case it's hard to not get the feeling that someone decided that nope, this needs warning stripes more than even Iron warriors.
Did it? News to me but that doesn't really matter because HH2 was still largely similar to previous editions in terms of general rules.
Army construction was the same, core rules largely unchanged, weapon stat lines being the same as previous editions, Rites Of War still existed, and unit statlines were the same style.
Not the case with HH3, which is the point I was making about all the marketing/messaging saying "It's the same game" when it clearly isn't.
YodhrinsForge wrote: (well, actually in english that looks like the product of a thousand monkeys at a thousand keyboards prompting chatGPT, but you know what I mean)
It looks like they decided to let their legal team do the final revision, which might actually be worse than the monkeys at typewriters...
Not Online!!! wrote: .Leakage is generally a product of low morale of the process or completely hyped up (marketing strategy). In this case it's hard to not get the feeling that someone decided that nope, this needs warning stripes more than even Iron warriors.
Oh come on - that’s just pure speculation. You know perfectly well that there are all sorts of motives for leaking stuff like this.
Not Online!!! wrote: .Leakage is generally a product of low morale of the process or completely hyped up (marketing strategy). In this case it's hard to not get the feeling that someone decided that nope, this needs warning stripes more than even Iron warriors.
Oh come on - that’s just pure speculation. You know perfectly well that there are all sorts of motives for leaking stuff like this.
Yeah, cause leaked information about movies is definitely a warning about a horrible film, if those multi-billion dollar earning Avengers films were any indication.
Things get leaked all the time. You can't say, leaks = future bad product. It just doesn't fit. There have been leaks for most GW products.
Who the hell is pardo and why does whoever posted those want to have relations with them so bad?
Also, are all the Primarchs like that? The Sire ability being "if you fill the four primary troop slots with {signature unit/upgrade} they're all Prime" plus "everyone with the right legion trait gets a thematic bonus ability" I mean?
Not Online!!! wrote: .Leakage is generally a product of low morale of the process or completely hyped up (marketing strategy). In this case it's hard to not get the feeling that someone decided that nope, this needs warning stripes more than even Iron warriors.
Oh come on - that’s just pure speculation. You know perfectly well that there are all sorts of motives for leaking stuff like this.
True. But the fact that this steaming pile of needs hazard stripes is quite correct.
Seems like quite an astute observation to me. The chances of someone leaking something surely go up if they think that thing is controversial and people will be interested.
Not Online!!! wrote: .Leakage is generally a product of low morale of the process or completely hyped up (marketing strategy). In this case it's hard to not get the feeling that someone decided that nope, this needs warning stripes more than even Iron warriors.
Oh come on - that’s just pure speculation. You know perfectly well that there are all sorts of motives for leaking stuff like this.
True. But the fact that this steaming pile of needs hazard stripes is quite correct.
Yeah. But going by all the people hating on it in this thread, then saying "I'm only buying 2 boxes of it" sends the success signals to GW, who will just double down on the 40k-isation and option removal for v4 in three years time.
Not Online!!! wrote: .Leakage is generally a product of low morale of the process or completely hyped up (marketing strategy). In this case it's hard to not get the feeling that someone decided that nope, this needs warning stripes more than even Iron warriors.
Oh come on - that’s just pure speculation. You know perfectly well that there are all sorts of motives for leaking stuff like this.
True. But the fact that this steaming pile of needs hazard stripes is quite correct.
Yeah. But going by all the people hating on it in this thread, then saying "I'm only buying 2 boxes of it" sends the success signals to GW, who will just double down on the 40k-isation and option removal for v4 in three years time.
It not selling well will send the message not to invest however.
Just had a thought about the monoloadout consuls- they may match the resin ones, but a single load out could make it easier for beancounters to justify plastic clampacks for them. Maybe?
No you're a step behind - a single loadout means in a few months they can unveil a shiny plastic version with TWO loadouts, all the rules for which can be found in this thrilling new supplement, "the war for whatever somesuch"
Undead_Love-Machine wrote: I've been going back and forth over whether or not I should buy the Saturnine set. Alchemist Workshop have 300 in stock at the time of writing, so I guess that there's no rush
A day and a half later they are down to 278. 12 sold in a day and a half. Some retailers are going to get burnt by this release.
Undead_Love-Machine wrote: I've been going back and forth over whether or not I should buy the Saturnine set. Alchemist Workshop have 300 in stock at the time of writing, so I guess that there's no rush
A day and a half later they are down to 278. 12 sold in a day and a half. Some retailers are going to get burnt by this release.
They have 3 years to sell them, it's not a splash release
A lot of places depend on stock selling fast so the money can be re-invested in the next round of releases. If it doesn't go within the month they have problems (and will end up trying to sell cheap to get rid of them... without coming up on GWs radar for offering loo big a discount)
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: A lot of places depend on stock selling fast so the money can be re-invested in the next round of releases. If it doesn't go within the month they have problems (and will end up trying to sell cheap to get rid of them... without coming up on GWs radar for offering loo big a discount)
Ok, but ordering 300 on a whim feels like it was a bad choice.
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: A lot of places depend on stock selling fast so the money can be re-invested in the next round of releases. If it doesn't go within the month they have problems (and will end up trying to sell cheap to get rid of them... without coming up on GWs radar for offering loo big a discount)
Ok, but ordering 300 on a whim feels like it was a bad choice.
I’m guessing it wasn’t a “whim”
How did the prior edition starter do? How about similar boxes for other GW games? The person placing the order did not pull a number out of a hat. You want to make sure you order enough stock to cover expected sales, with enough buffer to bridge reordering, but not so much that you’ve got capital locked up in stock warming the shelves. It’s an educated guess, and if those number are right, might have been a real bad one in this case.
The problem (and hence opportunity) with a lot of these launch boxes is that they sell out quickly. Even if they are being restocked, gamers are impatient and want the thing now, so a lot of retailers will overorder these products gambling on the idea that they will fly off the shelves and then they will be sitting on a stash of stuff they can flip for easy cash, potentially even above MSRP. Works great, until it doesn't.
Even at trade price 300 boxes will be £30,000 of stock. How many one shop wargaming retailers can afford to have that much tied up in a stock that isn't shifting.
They would have thought it was a safe bet, and with good reason. The rules leaks didn't happen until the last minute so their stock orders will have been in with GW before the backlash hit social media.
I've just spent 10 minutes on facebook, every third post was a flgs I either follow, or don't, pushing the pre-order. Not seen that before for any release. Could just be facebooks algorithm or another sign of trouble.
I mean, ive not seen too many indicators that this release is flying off the shelves so far so yeah I think theres a lot of energy being put behind trying to market to folks
If we're scouring pre-order pages for signs of sales deficiency, it looks like the new standalone rulebook is out of stock at GW, as is the Carta Galactica, but the Saturnine box and the various libers are all still available.
I'm pretty sure historically speaking $300+ boxes have been a harder sell. You really can't expect them to go flying off the shelves quickly. This is a big hype release and decent value by GW's standards, but it's still up against the limits of what you can move to most hobbyists in a single purchase.
I don't recall the first AoD 2nd Edition boxed set selling out on release. So it's hard to assess how the new edition is doing. I think GW must be anticipating a big surge in sales, since that's presumably the main reason for the 3 year edition cycle. And they have hyped it quite a bit. I wonder it they have factored in the potential risks involved in selling a new edition with both rules revisions that the players didn't ask for and new models which players seem to either love or hate and don't therefore have general appeal.
Fayric wrote: If someone think that forum outrage will result in people not buying their products, I think that that someone has not been in the hobby long enough.
If someone thinks this is normal levels, intensity, and reasoning of forum outrage they haven't been in the hobby long enough. When someone like *Valrak* is echoing the basic sentiments of the complainers, it's not just "usual suspects" rawr me hate change griping.
Undead_Love-Machine wrote: I've been going back and forth over whether or not I should buy the Saturnine set. Alchemist Workshop have 300 in stock at the time of writing, so I guess that there's no rush
A day and a half later they are down to 278. 12 sold in a day and a half. Some retailers are going to get burnt by this release.
They have 3 years to sell them, it's not a splash release
That's...not how this works man. It not being a splash release doesn't mean retailers were planning on having the initial wave sat on their shelves for three years, it means they were expecting to *sell out*(or close to it) of the initial wave rapidly - as GW products usually do - and then be able to order more.
They are doing always the same, difference is just that the HH community reacts differently than AoS or 40k or even Lord of the Rings community to unnecessary changes that reduce options. (there are a lot of people who switched from 40k in 6th/7th and again in 9th/10th because they didn't like the changes there, now that game going the same direction isn't something people looking forward too, no matter if it is good or bad)
Also day 1 DLC doesn't really help to create hype for a pre-order were you know you need another book already.
Last point would be that the current rules aren't bad enough that everyone wants to switch, something that drives new Editions with 40k when people already ask for a new one a year before.
For the numbers, on previous sets 300 was what the stores sold out on preorder, smaller ones usually got 10 copies and sold them to regulars before preorder goes live
That said I didn't got a notification from my store this time and no one is really talking about it.
.
It's not about a "stamp of approval", it's about having the ability to run "your dudes" as "your dudes".
needs hazard stripes is quite correct.
