Unless there are special rules in the codex maybe.
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
Maelstrom808 wrote:I'd say unless it changes, Haywire has become the number one tank killing weapon in the game by leaps and bounds.
I'd say no one in their right mind will take anything but cheap, expandable transports for rush redeployment or as ablative armor for infantry. Razorbacks might turn out to be the most expensive tanks you'll ever see on the table.
At a certain point you've saturated the enemy's anti-tank, so you can still take laspreds or Russes.
I don't see why Land Raiders are stuffed though. I don't think I've ever glanced a Land Raider more than a couple of times in a game. It's nearly always penetrated.
Testify wrote:
At a certain point you've saturated the enemy's anti-tank, so you can still take laspreds or Russes.
I don't see why Land Raiders are stuffed though. I don't think I've ever glanced a Land Raider more than a couple of times in a game. It's nearly always penetrated.
I always manage to penetrate a Land Raider 4-5 times on the first turn, unfortunately my luck is always to roll a 1 right after that penetration.
d-usa: Thats true, I have a 1500 tournament in early August using 6th, I'm interested to know if the allies and buying terrain rules will be able to be used or not
d-usa wrote:Unless there are special rules in the codex maybe.
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I've been wondering about too. 1850 points has been the norm for the past year atleast, but whether it gets bumped to 2000 points is anyone's guess. There aren't really any changes to the force organisation that would force it though, so I guess it's up to the players as a whole to decide.
d-usa wrote:
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I asked a question a few pages back that I think wasn't answered. I wanted to know the point level of the 5th and 4th edition 'intro batreps' from White Dwarf. If they've gotten progressively larger in points size, then perhaps it's further evidence of GW's push towards larger games?
Lukus83 wrote:Think Necrons and gauss. They break down Hull Points ridiculously fast. Blobs of 15-20 with a relentless Overlord now challenge the CCB lord.
Why spend so many points. 5 warriors and 2 stormteks will, on average, wreck any vehicle in the game a turn.
d-usa wrote:Unless there are special rules in the codex maybe.
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I've been wondering about too. 1850 points has been the norm for the past year atleast, but whether it gets bumped to 2000 points is anyone's guess. There aren't really any changes to the force organisation that would force it though, so I guess it's up to the players as a whole to decide.
People seem to like taking all their toys instead of having to make decisions when building a list. So more potential toys (allies/terrain) could justify a jump in point limits. Certainly would make sense from a GW perspective, since they are selling us the toys.
I would not be impressed with the average game size being increased past 2000pts. But then again this would push more model purchases and support the extra space for allies. Games past this point just go so slow and the level of balance I feel gets worse the larger the game.
d-usa wrote:
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I asked a question a few pages back that I think wasn't answered. I wanted to know the point level of the 5th and 4th edition 'intro batreps' from White Dwarf. If they've gotten progressively larger in points size, then perhaps it's further evidence of GW's push towards larger games?
GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
d-usa wrote:
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I asked a question a few pages back that I think wasn't answered. I wanted to know the point level of the 5th and 4th edition 'intro batreps' from White Dwarf. If they've gotten progressively larger in points size, then perhaps it's further evidence of GW's push towards larger games?
d-usa wrote:
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I asked a question a few pages back that I think wasn't answered. I wanted to know the point level of the 5th and 4th edition 'intro batreps' from White Dwarf. If they've gotten progressively larger in points size, then perhaps it's further evidence of GW's push towards larger games?
GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
Of course they do,
In a perfect GW world, every game would require 2000+ points of models, more money for them.
d-usa wrote:
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I asked a question a few pages back that I think wasn't answered. I wanted to know the point level of the 5th and 4th edition 'intro batreps' from White Dwarf. If they've gotten progressively larger in points size, then perhaps it's further evidence of GW's push towards larger games?
d-usa wrote:
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I asked a question a few pages back that I think wasn't answered. I wanted to know the point level of the 5th and 4th edition 'intro batreps' from White Dwarf. If they've gotten progressively larger in points size, then perhaps it's further evidence of GW's push towards larger games?
GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
Of course they do,
In a perfect GW world, every game would require 2000+ points of models, more money for them.
2000+ points?
Please, playa. GW wishes every game was apocalypse sized with at least 2 models from Forge World per player.
d-usa wrote:
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I asked a question a few pages back that I think wasn't answered. I wanted to know the point level of the 5th and 4th edition 'intro batreps' from White Dwarf. If they've gotten progressively larger in points size, then perhaps it's further evidence of GW's push towards larger games?
GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
But GW does push towards larger armies. Look at the changes to WFB in 8th. Heroes and Lords are percentage based, so that means if you want the level 4s and big heroes you need to play a bigger point game.
Same with 40K, give players more toys and options that they "have to have in their list" and you push for higher point games.
d-usa wrote:
One thing I am wondering about is tournaments. With allies, buying terrain, and other changes I wonder if we will see the standard game jump to 2000 or 2500 points. Fantasy has seen a point creep in 8th it seems.
I asked a question a few pages back that I think wasn't answered. I wanted to know the point level of the 5th and 4th edition 'intro batreps' from White Dwarf. If they've gotten progressively larger in points size, then perhaps it's further evidence of GW's push towards larger games?
GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
Of course they do,
In a perfect GW world, every game would require 2000+ points of models, more money for them.
I don't even know what that means. "Well we only have 1500 points so we'd better rush down the shop and buy 500 points more models before we can play".
No. People buy models, then play with what they have. Most collectors have thousands of points of various armies.
Testify wrote:
GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
GW totally has been growing the size of the armies with every edition. This can be seen in tournament/open gaming events they have held of the last 10 years now, each consecutive one has been larger and larger. These "events" for some reason tend to become the new average point size since people tend to build their lists to match the events rules. I remember when the average game was about 1000pts.
Doesn't matter what GW wants their game points level to be at. Its what the community wants.
GW doesn't spend a dime anymore sponsoring tourneys, so its 100% up to the community as to the size AND method they want to play. I think it will take at least a year for Allies and Terrain to become an accepted way to play the game. I also doubt that TO's will increase the points level because they want the games to end in a timely fashion. Most people (slowplayerslol) cant finish a 2000 point game in 2 and a half hours... what would a 2500 point game do?
Testify wrote:
GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
GW totally has been growing the size of the armies with every edition. This can be seen in tournament/open gaming events they have held of the last 10 years now. I remember when the average game was about 1000pts.
So back in the day when people had 2,000 points worth of models, they couldn't fathom how to get them all onto the table and just played with 1,000 points instead?
I think you guys seem to think the average player with buy x amount of points, no more no less, GW have cottoned on to this and so want people to play bigger games.
It's not like people enjoy being larger and more theatrical, or anything.
Testify wrote:
So back in the day when people had 2,000 points worth of models, they couldn't fathom how to get them all onto the table and just played with 1,000 points instead?
I think you guys seem to think the average player with buy x amount of points, no more no less, GW have cottoned on to this and so want people to play bigger games.
It's not like people enjoy being larger and more theatrical, or anything.
GW sponsored events have been growing in point size over the years. People build lists for these "events" and slowly they become the new average for everyone to consider. That has been the pattern now for as long as I can remember.
Also If you were even in the hobby around 2nd and 3rd, you would realize 1000pts was a HUGE game.
Armies play differently when they hit the FOC wall on slots, so people have thier different comfort zone on points. Bigger isn't always better in 40k games. Now with the addition of purchasable terrain, allies, and possible FOC manipulation, I could definately see the overall ceiling being raised a bit.
Goresaw wrote:Doesn't matter what GW wants their game points level to be at. Its what the community wants.
GW doesn't spend a dime anymore sponsoring tourneys, so its 100% up to the community as to the size AND method they want to play. I think it will take at least a year for Allies and Terrain to become an accepted way to play the game. I also doubt that TO's will increase the points level because they want the games to end in a timely fashion. Most people (slowplayerslol) cant finish a 2000 point game in 2 and a half hours... what would a 2500 point game do?
Our time limits are 30 minutes for every 500 points or fraction thereof.
I think allies will be in from the get go or nearly so.
Allowing the foc terrain will be a rare circumstance in tourneys
Testify wrote:
GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
GW totally has been growing the size of the armies with every edition. This can be seen in tournament/open gaming events they have held of the last 10 years now. I remember when the average game was about 1000pts.
So back in the day when people had 2,000 points worth of models, they couldn't fathom how to get them all onto the table and just played with 1,000 points instead?
I think you guys seem to think the average player with buy x amount of points, no more no less, GW have cottoned on to this and so want people to play bigger games.
It's not like people enjoy being larger and more theatrical, or anything.
Rulesets usually work best at a certain point level. Tournaments usually cater to a specific list of people that want to play a specific type of game. That is how point creep happens, again just look at WFB to see it in action.
Nothing keeps anybody from playing whatever they want at home or the FLGS. I enjoy lower point games because list building is more important IMO. But change the tournament scene and many local metas will change as well since for some people local games are only practice games for tournaments.
Rulesets usually work best at a certain point level. Tournaments usually cater to a specific list of people that want to play a specific type of game. That is how point creep happens, again just look at WFB to see it in action.
Nothing keeps anybody from playing whatever they want at home or the FLGS. I enjoy lower point games because list building is more important IMO. But change the tournament scene and many local metas will change as well since for some people local games are only practice games for tournaments.
Testify wrote:GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
Don't be naive. GW have been increasing the size of the game with each edition. They just added rules for buying terrain in your games, and terrain went up in price during the last price rise. These things don't happen by accident, they are planned.
we usually play 1500-1750 in my area, the problem is with the FOC, the higher points you go, the better (or worse) some armies get, for example the higher points you use imperial guard at... the better they get, same with GK, while certain armies (space marines and nids) cant keep up with the ability to spam so much stuff or the ability to take much more punishment.
It looks like the allies rules may help this though, as i would happily take 100 marines in a 2k game (thats 60 in troops then 40 more in another org chart)
Formosa wrote:we usually play 1500-1750 in my area, the problem is with the FOC, the higher points you go, the better (or worse) some armies get, for example the higher points you use imperial guard at... the better they get, same with GK, while certain armies (space marines and nids) cant keep up with the ability to spam so much stuff or the ability to take much more punishment.
It looks like the allies rules may help this though, as i would happily take 100 marines in a 2k game (thats 60 in troops then 40 more in another org chart)
Clever GW, clever...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
Testify wrote:GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
Don't be naive. GW have been increasing the size of the game with each edition. They just added rules for buying terrain in your games, and terrain went up in price during the last price rise. These things don't happen by accident, they are planned.
Get that tower thing with guns a around to glance tanks, an AA gun on top, cover to troops inside and then change the rules to make it a game breaker? Those sneeky buggers!
Formosa wrote:we usually play 1500-1750 in my area, the problem is with the FOC, the higher points you go, the better (or worse) some armies get, for example the higher points you use imperial guard at... the better they get, same with GK, while certain armies (space marines and nids) cant keep up with the ability to spam so much stuff or the ability to take much more punishment.
It looks like the allies rules may help this though, as i would happily take 100 marines in a 2k game (thats 60 in troops then 40 more in another org chart)
Clever GW, clever...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
Testify wrote:GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
Don't be naive. GW have been increasing the size of the game with each edition. They just added rules for buying terrain in your games, and terrain went up in price during the last price rise. These things don't happen by accident, they are planned.
Get that tower thing with guns a around to glance tanks, an AA gun on top, cover to troops inside and then change the rules to make it a game breaker? Those sneeky buggers!
I am so f-ing happy about these changes. Seriously. I am dancing around like a madman!
A squad of 15 warriors means 15 shots at 24" even when moving thus with a little bit of luck, you blow up a transporter in a single turn and even a landraider has to fear glances now. 20 Warriors = 20 shots at 24'' = pretty much a dead transporter. Pop goes the Rhino!
Heavy Destroyers? Hahahaha! Reroll to hit, S9, +1 on damage chart.
So. Happy. I shed manly robot tears.
Seriously, I can't stop smiling.
Now I know how Grey Knight players felt when their codex was released.
It's the keyword for stand and shoot at BS 1. Looks like its a charge reaction for everyone including tanks. Blast weapons may not fire, flamers inflict d3 hits per.
It has just dawned on me everyone is complaining about the hull points thins and I honestly have to admit I am fairly disapointed about it too, BUT there may be a light at the end of the tunnel if GW in there infanite wisdom will just faq the techmarine slightly so that his blessing of the omnissiah rule could replenish maybe d3 hull points on a vehical I think that would be AWESOME!!! Would make Techmarines as cool as I have always wished they should be, would also make there repairing stuff usefull too. Who knows maybe they will faq the Rhino repair rule too to do the same thing but instead of d3 hull points it could just be one hull point, to me that would be cool. This is all just speculation mind you but what doese everyone else think?
Unless a techmarine can repair a lot of stuff at the same time, it is a waste even with d3 hull points. He costs 50 points + an elite slot and can only repair on a 5+. Making his repair more effective would cost ~110 points. By that time, I might as well buy 3 Rhinos.
It's the keyword for stand and shoot at BS 1. Looks like its a charge reaction for everyone including tanks. Blast weapons may not fire, flamers inflict d3 hits per.
Testify wrote:GW don't "push" towards larger armies. You can play with whatever point level you want.
Don't be naive. GW have been increasing the size of the game with each edition. They just added rules for buying terrain in your games, and terrain went up in price during the last price rise. These things don't happen by accident, they are planned.
The other thing to remember is that the points per model have been going down for frequently used units. Back in 3rd edition, the initial "standard" was a 1500pt game instead of the 2000-2500pt one now popular with tournies but also that those 1500pt games had 18pt marines with frag/krak and 54pt rhinos with smoke/searchlights instead of 2500pt games with identical 15pt marines and 50pt rhinos.
It's the keyword for stand and shoot at BS 1. Looks like its a charge reaction for everyone including tanks. Blast weapons may not fire, flamers inflict d3 hits per.
Is defensive fire different?
I just want to be able to play firewarriors
Over watch=defensive fire from what I see in white dwarf.
Also move and fire 30" pulse rifles, along with 15" double tapping and defensive fire will massively help fire warriors. My tau are happy.
The more I think about it, the more I like the flyer rules. It nicely simulates the effect of strafing runs. You can go on one nicely timed strafing run, but since the zoom rule (dumb name, yes) only allows you to turn 90 degrees in your movement phase, you can't just whip around and strafe the enemy lines again. You either a) zoom away from the enemy sacrificing shooting but maintaining survivability b). "evade" out so you can come back in deep strike next turn for a set up strafing; but sacrificing shooting as you'll be snap firing, or c) take a normal vehicle turn allowing for full shooting, but you don't get the survivability zoom would give you.
leohart wrote:Unless a techmarine can repair a lot of stuff at the same time, it is a waste even with d3 hull points. He costs 50 points + an elite slot and can only repair on a 5+. Making his repair more effective would cost ~110 points. By that time, I might as well buy 3 Rhinos.
I disagree if my theory pans out I could see running a techmarine in or behind a land raider to repair it thus keeping it alive longer. You wouldnt need a 5 if you have a servo harness or servitors with you so there you go on that, and on wasting an elet slot maybe but I think Techmarines are just cool and are fairly descent especially the GK ones who also bring that nifty orbital bombardment thing and they could also bolster your defences, and to be honest if allies are correct you really arent wasting an elite slot because you kind of gain one with the allies stuff if it works the way it has been said so far.
tetrisphreak wrote:$75 for a Rulesbook to play a game for 4-5 years
OR
$60 for a video game that gets played 20-50 hours.
Hmmm? I think it's very easy to justify.
You can also sell your rulebook on eBay if you get tired of the game in 2 years. Probably a better resell value than trading your game in at GameStop in 1 year.
Happygrunt wrote:While everyone complains about the rules, I am sitting her wondering how I am supposed to justify a $75 game book.
I suppose the same way we justify the cost of anything Warhammer related, such as $50 for 5 little plastic Terminators. If you think this is bad you may want to avoid a website called 'Forgeworld'. Your head will explode.
So there's supposed to be something going down at my GW store this weekend. Does anyone know what these events are? Don't want to drive all the way there for nothing.
Happygrunt wrote:While everyone complains about the rules, I am sitting her wondering how I am supposed to justify a $75 game book.
I suppose the same way we justify the cost of anything Warhammer related, such as $50 for 5 little plastic Terminators. If you think this is bad you may want to avoid a website called 'Forgeworld'. Your head will explode.
Happygrunt wrote:I mean, seriously.
Oh good, I thought may you were joking.
Oddly enough, I do own some FW stuff, and actually didn't mind the price, seeing as it is not required to play the game with. When the main rulebook is $75+ dollars (That is more expensive that all the IA books except for Taros and Badab 2, for those keeping score at home) and I need it to play the game, then I think I can complain at least a little bit about prices.
And what is with the hostility my friend? We are all friends here.
spacewolf407 wrote:So there's supposed to be something going down at my GW store this weekend. Does anyone know what these events are? Don't want to drive all the way there for nothing.
Im still going to rock my DW with 3 land raiders cos they look bloody awsome and if i can take more than 3 hell yeah!
My Ravenwing is also going to use the Stormraven (legally now) and a couple of Stormtalons (not legal probably, so will still have to ask) my RW army is gonna look a bit like this
2 Stormtalons
1 stormraven
1 stormeagle
6 land speeders
2 ravenwing attack sqauds with attack bikes (yay no more free KP)
Liby on Bike (to test out new powers)
Sammael
Will it be competative... who cares,will it look cool...god damn right it will and thats all that matters
Really even the people who've said "No more GW ever" can easily justify this book. It's one thing to swear off GW products due to the price. It's another entirely to be unable to play the game because you're not keeping up with the rules, even if you aren't buying any more models.
Happygrunt wrote:While everyone complains about the rules, I am sitting her wondering how I am supposed to justify a $75 game book. I mean, seriously.
I might say "Thanks, but not thanks" and stay with 5th.
You could just apply some common sense and simply buy the minibook that will invariably come with the starter in two months... As for the price of the hardback, it's 100 pages longer than the current one and in full color... which is never cheap. Could they have sold it as a loss leader like the Pathfinder RPG core book? Sure.. but as the leader in the market (instead of a new up and comer), they don't have to and they know it. I'm not happy about the price or with GW overall for the past year but I'm still willing to give it a try in some form. Personally, I'm still deciding if I should take up my FLGS offer for 15% off (would rather support them than a cheaper online store) the hardback or just wait for the minibook (which I'll get a copy of regardless of whether I get the hardcover).
Therion, you've been implying via the hull points discussion that you and your buds have access to the rulebook at the local GW. Is that accurate? If so, how come you're not giving us more intel!?
One specific thing I'd love to know is whether they've done anything to fix the Fearless/No Retreat quagmire.
Another great scoop would be information about the hypothetical reintroduction of a Fear rule, as implied by the issue of WD.
Also, how exactly psychic powers are used in regards to the "Warp Charge" attribute seen on the spell cards.
Altruizine wrote:Therion, you've been implying via the hull points discussion that you and your buds have access to the rulebook at the local GW. Is that accurate? If so, how come you're not giving us more intel!?
One specific thing I'd love to know is whether they've done anything to fix the Fearless/No Retreat quagmire.
Another great scoop would be information about the hypothetical reintroduction of a Fear rule, as implied by the issue of WD.
Also, how exactly psychic powers are used in regards to the "Warp Charge" attribute seen on the spell cards.
Well, it sounds like in general complex units will no longer work for wound schenanigans. That being said terminators are getting a big buff in that power weapons are now AP3 and you'll now get to use FNP (albeit 5+ FNP) on everything < S8.
With the new rules that I am seeing, looks like my Blood Angels will be just fine, and now I won't be laughed at for playing Death Company so that's nice. Dark Eldar are a bit more questionable, but I've been wanting to do a WWP list for a while and with reserves bumping to a 3+ for 2nd turn? That's a great boon for reserves lists. What I really want to know is if there is any way to mitigate the rage mandatory movement or if that will even be in the rules for 6th.
If vehicles are as awful as everyone is saying, I'll look forward to picking up cheap rhinos on eBay to fill out my BA company. And I am quite excited to be able to use all those Space Hulk shooty terminators more often as well.
TH/SS got better... I don't see anything thus far that made single wound terminators worse..
I'd say overall draigo wing probably got better. Now they aren't susceptible to regular power weapons, and now even if you shoot them with Plasma, they get their invul plus 5+ FNP now. Unless you're a heavy torrent of fire army that is. Then you can make him lose paladins a lot faster than previously.
Formosa wrote:Im still going to rock my DW with 3 land raiders cos they look bloody awsome and if i can take more than 3 hell yeah!
My Ravenwing is also going to use the Stormraven (legally now) and a couple of Stormtalons (not legal probably, so will still have to ask) my RW army is gonna look a bit like this
2 Stormtalons
1 stormraven
1 stormeagle
6 land speeders
2 ravenwing attack sqauds with attack bikes (yay no more free KP)
Liby on Bike (to test out new powers)
Sammael
Will it be competative... who cares,will it look cool...god damn right it will and thats all that matters
When did it become legal for DA to use Stormraven? I don't see that in our codex anywhere.
6th edition 1/2 hits pe 1/6 hits explode=12 hits needed to explode
6th edition 2/3 glance/pen/whatever it loses a hull point. 4 hits=2.66666 hull points lost, 5 hits=3.33333 hull points lost
Long Fangs and Psyflemen will now glance targets to death far more often than they explode it. AV11 targets to take a over all hit in durability, but they are no longer stun locked by glances.
6th edition 1/3 hits glance/pen=9 hits needed to strip 3 hull points, 12 hits needed to strip 4 hull points.
Overall it's a loss of durability for the target, but in increase in firepower as glances no longer shake a vehicle. Seeing as how the AV13 vehicle is only likely to take a single glance/pen a turn the changes of the AV13 vehicle remaining able to shoot after being hit by a krak missile barrage/psyfleman dread pretty much doubled.
Formosa wrote:Im still going to rock my DW with 3 land raiders cos they look bloody awsome and if i can take more than 3 hell yeah!
My Ravenwing is also going to use the Stormraven (legally now) and a couple of Stormtalons (not legal probably, so will still have to ask) my RW army is gonna look a bit like this
2 Stormtalons
1 stormraven
1 stormeagle
6 land speeders
2 ravenwing attack sqauds with attack bikes (yay no more free KP)
Liby on Bike (to test out new powers)
Sammael
Will it be competative... who cares,will it look cool...god damn right it will and thats all that matters
When did it become legal for DA to use Stormraven? I don't see that in our codex anywhere.
morgendonner wrote:TH/SS got better... I don't see anything thus far that made single wound terminators worse..
I'd say overall draigo wing probably got better. Now they aren't susceptible to regular power weapons, and now even if you shoot them with Plasma, they get their invul plus 5+ FNP now. Unless you're a heavy torrent of fire army that is. Then you can make him lose paladins a lot faster than previously.
Even if they did get worse, Id just have to pull out my DOABA
Formosa wrote:Im still going to rock my DW with 3 land raiders cos they look bloody awsome and if i can take more than 3 hell yeah!
My Ravenwing is also going to use the Stormraven (legally now) and a couple of Stormtalons (not legal probably, so will still have to ask) my RW army is gonna look a bit like this
2 Stormtalons
1 stormraven
1 stormeagle
6 land speeders
2 ravenwing attack sqauds with attack bikes (yay no more free KP)
Liby on Bike (to test out new powers)
Sammael
Will it be competative... who cares,will it look cool...god damn right it will and thats all that matters
When did it become legal for DA to use Stormraven? I don't see that in our codex anywhere.
Happygrunt wrote:While everyone complains about the rules, I am sitting her wondering how I am supposed to justify a $75 game book.
I suppose the same way we justify the cost of anything Warhammer related, such as $50 for 5 little plastic Terminators. If you think this is bad you may want to avoid a website called 'Forgeworld'. Your head will explode.
Happygrunt wrote:I mean, seriously.
Oh good, I thought may you were joking.
Except, Forgeworld stuff costs the same as most GW kits now. In some parts of the world, it is cheaper to purchase Forgeworld.
Something that just came to me is, in the 6th ed rule set, I wonder if the Living Metal rules that Necron vehicles have will be able to regenerate lost hull points or prevent their loss in the same way that it currently stops Shaken and Stunned results? If so, then Necron vehicles will be very tough to kill.
Overall it's a loss of durability for the target, but in increase in firepower
Not to discredit your math in any way but this is pretty much a given, considering vehicles can fire all their guns even if they're shaken or stunned, by using snap fire.
Overall we could interpret the situation as the following: You can destroy a parking lot much faster than before, but it's impossible for you to employ a strategy of just shaking or stunning them all to suppress their firepower for a turn. Not only will you get much fewer shaken and stunned results than before but even when you do the tanks can fire with BS1.
Zathras wrote:Something that just came to me is, in the 6th ed rule set, I wonder if the Living Metal rules that Necron vehicles have will be able to regenerate lost hull points or prevent their loss in the same way that it currently stops Shaken and Stunned results? If so, then Necron vehicles will be very tough to kill.
It sounds like it will help prevent hull points from being lost to begin with. Since you get to use Living Metal after every shake/stun that occurs, you have a chance to prevent each one.
Overall it's a loss of durability for the target, but in increase in firepower
Not to discredit your math in any way but this is pretty much a given, considering vehicles can fire all their guns even if they're shaken or stunned, by using snap fire.
Overall we could interpret the situation as the following: You can destroy a parking lot much faster than before, but it's impossible for you to employ a strategy of just shaking or stunning them all to suppress their firepower for a turn. Not only will you get much fewer shaken and stunned results than before but even when you do the tanks can fire with BS1.
It sounds like it will help prevent hull points from being lost to begin with. Since you get to use Living Metal after every shake/stun that occurs, you have a chance to prevent each one.
My understanding is that living metal won't affect glancing hits at all, and will from now on be a situational bonus save that happens when you suffer a penetrating hit that results in a shake or a stun. Then you get a saving throw against that result, and if you succeed you neither lose a hull point or get shaken or stunned. Why I say situational is that if you consider stuff like AP1 weapons who get +2 to the chart, the only way living metal does anything at all against a railgun is if the railgun penetrates but rolls a 1 for vehicle damage which is a stun after the modifier.
If so, how come you're not giving us more intel!?
I don't have any. We've been discussing the one piece of info (how vehicle damage works) we got today via Lukus and his friend.
We don't know yet what open-topped does. Maybe we get an answer to that and many other things tomorrow. Personally what I want to know next is who have access to skyfire (other than flyers and Hydras) and interceptor (other than some fortification) special rules.
I hope to get access to the rulebook on Monday myself and if I do I'll spill the beans about the whole thing.
It sounds like it will help prevent hull points from being lost to begin with. Since you get to use Living Metal after every shake/stun that occurs, you have a chance to prevent each one.
My understanding is that living metal won't affect glancing hits at all, and will from now on be a situational bonus save that happens when you suffer a penetrating hit that results in a shake or a stun. Then you get a saving throw against that result, and if you succeed you neither lose a hull point or get shaken or stunned. Why I say situational is that if you consider stuff like AP1 weapons who get +2 to the chart, the only way living metal does anything at all against a railgun is if the railgun penetrates but rolls a 1 for vehicle damage which is a stun after the modifier.
Happygrunt wrote:While everyone complains about the rules, I am sitting her wondering how I am supposed to justify a $75 game book.
I suppose the same way we justify the cost of anything Warhammer related, such as $50 for 5 little plastic Terminators. If you think this is bad you may want to avoid a website called 'Forgeworld'. Your head will explode.
Happygrunt wrote:I mean, seriously.
Oh good, I thought may you were joking.
Except, Forgeworld stuff costs the same as most GW kits now. In some parts of the world, it is cheaper to purchase Forgeworld.
True its cheaper (including shipping) to get a sweet ass forgeworld dread than it is to get a normal bog standard one. Here in Australia at least.
Games workshop here in australia has had the rulebook for a few days and yesterday everyone was reading it. hard to really get a grip on it when 20 people are reading it at once and keep turning pages.
one thing people kept saying was that close combat has been changed quite a bit and now which hugley disadvantages ork, tyranids, space wolves, daemon hunters.
The coolest thing people were talking about is that imperial guard are set to be the best looking army so far with nothing "nerfing" them and allot buffing them. (not that they needed it)
Tau and eldar are gaining allot
none of this is really that good of information but im going to the store again tomorow to get some more time alone with the book
sorry if any of this is not new or intresting tomorow i will try to get as many pictures as i can!
It sounds like it will help prevent hull points from being lost to begin with. Since you get to use Living Metal after every shake/stun that occurs, you have a chance to prevent each one.
My understanding is that living metal won't affect glancing hits at all, and will from now on be a situational bonus save that happens when you suffer a penetrating hit that results in a shake or a stun. Then you get a saving throw against that result, and if you succeed you neither lose a hull point or get shaken or stunned. Why I say situational is that if you consider stuff like AP1 weapons who get +2 to the chart, the only way living metal does anything at all against a railgun is if the railgun penetrates but rolls a 1 for vehicle damage which is a stun after the modifier.
But living metal nullifies shaken / stunned, not glancing / penetrating hits. Shaken / stunned has nothing to do with hull points. Of course it's kinda (super extremely to the max!) silly to discuss RAW now, but if LM won't change in FAQ it will be meh.
I think I need to take a break from Dakka for the next week. The more I read this topic the more I get over-hyped about new edition
EDIT: Oh, and still waiting for some Lance rumours..
Seeing that Flyer is a vehicle type on its own, I wonder how that would affect DE's Razorwing/Voidraven... I can't see them making 3/4 of our heavy skimmers the new flyer, but what would happen to the Supersonic rule? We can now zone our paper planes across the battlefield, from one edge to another, for comedic effect, I assume?
schadenfreude wrote:In the grim dark future there is only math hammer
(snip)
Overall it's a loss of durability for the target, but in increase in firepower as glances no longer shake a vehicle. Seeing as how the AV13 vehicle is only likely to take a single glance/pen a turn the changes of the AV13 vehicle remaining able to shoot after being hit by a krak missile barrage/psyfleman dread pretty much doubled.
Your mathfoo is flawed.
You forgot two very important rumors to your theory...
Agree with Living Metal going to be an extremely weak special rule unless it's FAQ'd to nullify losing hull points to some degree.
But then again...fielding Ghost Arks might be a good idea now that Warriors are about to get buffed a lot and they still have 4 HP and AV 13.
Could also decide to not field any vehicles at all...a Warrior blob with a Phaeron inside (+orb) will be extremely tough to beat and if the rumor about +1 shot with Phaeron turns out to be true, we're looking at 60 S4 shots at 12'...which means death to everything that comes close and ID to any vehicle.
Get charged by cheesebot and torn apart by infinite attacks? Not anymore. Blows up before getting close.
Man I have to admit Eldar are already unforgiving for me to pull wins off with. I am super excited for sixth but foresee some serious face beatings depending on how new psychic powers play out and my tanks are now nerfed(maybe, I can't decide how much hull-points will effect mid-strength armor). I am excited to see how everyone overhauls their list.
I think there is some elegance in the design of Hull Points, having the same abbreviation as Hit Points (HP) because they are essentially vehicle hit points. We all know what happens when you drop to 0 HP in any RPG, same for vehicles in 40K. now just to memorize which vehicles have how many.
I anticipate (read: hope) that dark eldar venoms and raiders only get 2 hull points each.
Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:Really. Curious as to whether Hull Points are renewed each turn or are permanently lost like wounds.
Vehicle Dice Set comes with hull point dice markers, which leads me to believe that vehicles have the equivalent of wounds, like infantry do. It's better for the game - we need to be able to bust open those parking lots.
I anticipate (read: hope) that dark eldar venoms and raiders only get 2 hull points each.
BLASPHEMER!!! How dare you hope for my Raiders to be easy to kill... wait they all ready are.
I was hoping for 2+ jink and 3+ flicker fields ... j/k of course.
On a serious note, I really hope that they did not over due the Psychic powers. Magic was the Giant stone on the back of 8th WHFB (while steadfast was the straw that broke the back)
I don't understand why they got rid of Allies in the first place?
Maybe it was so it could be revamped? Didn't notice the Nids having any playmates?
I'm just glad my IG will be able to get a Psychic hood again.
I'm optimistically excited about the chances to use my half completed Necron units as allies to Marines, but the fluff part of me hates the idea. Internal turmoil commences.
I'm guessing MANY of the ally combos will have the 'grudging ally' or something similar relationship. The units would treat each other as enemy units that cannot be shot or assaulted...they just happen to be fighting the same foe(s) at the same time.
So, according to that, my Necrons can ally with....
Chaos Space Marines
Orks
Tau
Black Templars
Blood Angels
Dark Angels
Imperial Guard
Vanilla Marines
Space Wolves
Sisters of Battle
Holy crap, how are they going to explain how Necrons would even do this???? Blood Angels and Orks I can see because it's mentioned in the codex that the Necrons have had dealings with them in the past but any encounters with all the others have resulted in nothing but combat. Space Wolves being one of my allies does make me happy since that's the other army I'm working on right now. WOOHOO!!! Rune Priest for psychic defense/firepower!!!!
Something else I thought of regarding Hull Points on vehicles is how Entropic Strike will work. Will it stay the same or will I have to chew through the armor and Hull Points before the vehicle is wrecked?
I think it's fairly clear that these aliances can be explained through even the most extreme circumstance. It's not saying that because they are fighting together against a common foe that they are therefore best pals.
I'm guessing MANY of the ally combos will have the 'grudging ally' or something similar relationship. The units would treat each other as enemy units that cannot be shot or assaulted...they just happen to be fighting the same foe(s) at the same time.
Something else I thought of regarding Hull Points on vehicles is how Entropic Strike will work. Will it stay the same or will I have to chew through the armor and Hull Points before the vehicle is wrecked?
I'd say it's just yet another way to deal with armor.
Entropic it to 0 - tank dies
Reduce the armor to low enough to glance - remove the hull points and the tank dies
manage to pen after all the entropic reduction - possible explosion.
We also don't know how damaging vehicles exploding will be. A flyer gives s10 hits with no armor saves to occupants if it's zooming and explodes. maybe a tank explosion does a s5 hit with no armor? Open topped could be different as well....
So has anybody found any good online deals?
The best I get is 25% off. I'm really only interested in the
BRB. The bag, dice box, special coloered dice are all really
nice, but I'm also realistic. I don't have to have them to play.
The book on the other hand.....
GiraffeX wrote:Any thoughts on how daemonic possession on vehicles will work with hull points?
From what we've seen - you'd lose the hull point for the glance/pen, then if penned the damage table is rolled. on a 1, 2, or 3 you'd ignore the damage but still have lost a hull point. 3 Hull points lost = dead Dread, regardless of DP.
Was trying to stay positive about the allies rule [lets me do a proper chaos force] but the team ups allowed are just stupid. In understand guard, daemons and DE [at a push, if they were Slaanesh CSM] but why would my CSM team up with Tau [or, more pertinently, why woul they team up with me] Orks and Necrons?
tyrannosaurus wrote:Was trying to stay positive about the allies rule [lets me do a proper chaos force] but the team ups allowed are just stupid. In understand guard, daemons and DE [at a push, if they were Slaanesh CSM] but why would my CSM team up with Tau [or, more pertinently, why woul they team up with me] Orks and Necrons?
...because they're fighting a more serious threat? It's not as if they're going to become best friends forever and throw flowers, ponies and rainbows at eachother once the battle's over. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's not stupid at all.
AlmightyWalrus wrote:Black Templars and Tau made me giggle. Suppose it could happen against something like 'Nids though.
Since Tau have no psykers, you'd figure they'd be good buddies
Surprised that we can ally with Eldar though, I'd imagine Black Templars would go into a crazed frenzy by being near so many Psykers.
Yeah, that one is definately a head-scratcher.
tyrannosaurus wrote:Was trying to stay positive about the allies rule [lets me do a proper chaos force] but the team ups allowed are just stupid. In understand guard, daemons and DE [at a push, if they were Slaanesh CSM] but why would my CSM team up with Tau [or, more pertinently, why woul they team up with me] Orks and Necrons?
Orcs and Crons wouldn't really be too much of an issue as long as it wasn't Imotekh or really any of the Sautekh dynasty.
CSM and Orks isn't that bad, there even used to be Chaos Orks. The allies combinations are far to broad though, I fail to see how Grey Knights would ever (ever) fight along side Dark Eldar or SoB would fight along side Necrons.
Not only are they stupid but they're also horribly imbalanced and most likely only rarely allowed at tournaments. I know a lot of people don't need to care about what tournaments allow or disallow, but most of those alliances aren't pleasing aesthetically or from background or other imaginable reasons so I'm not sure why anyone would get so excited about them.
The only alliances that I 'sort of' accept are IG with every other Imperial codex, and Daemons with Chaos. IG allying with Marines is too imbalanced to be allowed so that only leaves the Daemons. Why they make sense is because the books were separated only recently for reasons unknown. The explanation now that GW wanted various types of Chaos armies to be separate instead of a homogenous mass doesn't make sense if they all of a sudden don't want any 40K armies to be separate and want Necrons allying with Sisters and Tau allying with Daemons.
alarmingrick wrote:I don't understand why they got rid of Allies in the first place?
Because this is not the same Allies that was rather easily abused in the Daemonhunters/Witchhunters books.
tetrisphreak wrote:I'm guessing MANY of the ally combos will have the 'grudging ally' or something similar relationship. The units would treat each other as enemy units that cannot be shot or assaulted...they just happen to be fighting the same foe(s) at the same time.
I'm guessing you're correct.
All this "Allies Matrix" does is show us who can ally with who, not the particulars of the alliances.
Orks and Chaos have teamed previously, or at least Orks previously have fallen to the ruinous powers. So then teaming up with CSm doesn't seem to hard to imagine.
morgendonner wrote:TH/SS got better... I don't see anything thus far that made single wound terminators worse..
I'd say overall draigo wing probably got better. Now they aren't susceptible to regular power weapons, and now even if you shoot them with Plasma, they get their invul plus 5+ FNP now. Unless you're a heavy torrent of fire army that is. Then you can make him lose paladins a lot faster than previously.
Even if they did get worse, Id just have to pull out my DOABA
My shelved DoABA army will become better as far as I can see, especially on the charge. Some more advantages fielding this kind of army?
It does make me wonder why they bothered to make an allies matrix at all.
I think you're closing in on the answer: The alliance rules are designed for team games and friendly custom games where both players are trying to play out some cinematic battle or a narrative or whatever with multiple armies doing battle.
I think the guy in charge of the site just done goofed, cause necrons do not have access to any psi-powers at all.
I think there is a picture of the psychic powers table showing that on the first page.
Unfortunately limiting allies to those that only make real sense creates very nasty imbalance, so the other option is opening up almost every ally with every other ally. They made some fluff exceptions, but with as loose as they've interpreted it, they might as well have made none at all. Really, they should have just left it out altogether imo, but we'll see how it plays out.
tyrannosaurus wrote:Was trying to stay positive about the allies rule [lets me do a proper chaos force] but the team ups allowed are just stupid. In understand guard, daemons and DE [at a push, if they were Slaanesh CSM] but why would my CSM team up with Tau [or, more pertinently, why woul they team up with me] Orks and Necrons?
Because GW wants to sell more product and this is the bast way to do it.
So, according to that, my Necrons can ally with....
Chaos Space Marines Orks
Tau
Black Templars
Blood Angels
Dark Angels
Imperial Guard
Vanilla Marines
Space Wolves
Sisters of Battle
Holy crap, how are they going to explain how Necrons would even do this???? Blood Angels and Orks I can see because it's mentioned in the codex that the Necrons have had dealings with them in the past but any encounters with all the others have resulted in nothing but combat. Space Wolves being one of my allies does make me happy since that's the other army I'm working on right now. WOOHOO!!! Rune Priest for psychic defense/firepower!!!!
Something else I thought of regarding Hull Points on vehicles is how Entropic Strike will work. Will it stay the same or will I have to chew through the armor and Hull Points before the vehicle is wrecked?
WHAT?!
Why would they ally themselves with chaos! Necrons hate chaos. This makes no sense at all -_-
Therion wrote:
The only alliances that I 'sort of' accept are IG with every other Imperial codex, and Daemons with Chaos. IG allying with Marines is too imbalanced to be allowed so that only leaves the Daemons.
Actually IG could ally with just about anyone as a basic human force. They could represent Chaos Cultists, Frateris militia, Diggaz, Tau militia, even Imperial Guard. Balance is something that is unknowable at the moment as the core rules aren't known and all races are supposedly getting FAQed. its possible that allies will even work within the tournament environment. Of course as this is GW I fully expect the rules to be full of holes and idiocy.
Can't see why any competitive players are getting worked up at allies. They won't be allowed in the tourney scene. The allies rules are DOA as far as I'm concerned...
I think the guy in charge of the site just done goofed, cause necrons do not have access to any psi-powers at all.
I think there is a picture of the psychic powers table showing that on the first page.
Is it possible that Crypteks may have dispel ability? Maybe this is why they're posted as psykers?
JGrand wrote:Can't see why any competitive players are getting worked up at allies. They won't be allowed in the tourney scene. The allies rules are DOA as far as I'm concerned...
There's a metric crapton of competetive players that seem to like allies, just as there's a metric crapton of competetive players that seem to dislike them. I'd say you're a bit premature at judging the rules considering we haven't even read them yet...
I think the guy in charge of the site just done goofed, cause necrons do not have access to any psi-powers at all. I think there is a picture of the psychic powers table showing that on the first page.
Is it possible that Crypteks may have dispel ability? Maybe this is why they're posted as psykers?
Well, I guess that makes sense from a fluff stand point. The necrons do already have a device on their spyders that can cancel out psychic activity, so it makes sense that a cryptek would have something similar.
There's a metric crapton of competetive players that seem to like allies, just as there's a metric crapton of competetive players that seem to dislike them. I'd say you're a bit premature at judging the rules considering we haven't even read them yet...
I guarantee that at the very least there will not be allies at the major GTs.
I don't really see DA's using Allies that much as they are so secretive about their chapter and hunting of the fallen. Just seems kinda weird to me, as does most of the ally combos that might be there.
I do see some cool combos.
Eldar & Dark Eldar for some Corsairs.
CSM & Demons & IG Tau & IG (Human Auxiliers)
CSM & Marines/DA's (Fallen)
I see this more for fluffy based armies and maybe not very competitve at this point. With knowing very little about the Rules at this point.
Edit: Just saw that I added fallen so that actually would fit the DA codex a bit. lol But only for that fluff readon like I said before.
I think that what most people who are complaining about allies opening up a whole lot of OP combinations are forgetting is the way GW has envisioned the rules being used. They want players to play a FUN game, with narrative and such. For that reasons the possibility of having allies is a good thing (boosts sales as well).. If people use the possibility to write OP lists that's their fault for using that possibility in a way it wasn't intended to be used
Hmm, pretty sure when the Necrons got their new codex, the White Dwarf for that month mentioned something about Necron Crypteks using advanced technology that was easily mistaken as Psychic abilities.. or something like that?
I think the guy in charge of the site just done goofed, cause necrons do not have access to any psi-powers at all.
I think there is a picture of the psychic powers table showing that on the first page.
Is it possible that Crypteks may have dispel ability? Maybe this is why they're posted as psykers?
If you read the description of the Crytek it specifically says that it isn't a Psycker, but that they use arcane Necron artifacts to manipulate reality in a way that often seems like Psyker abilities.'
Everyone is excited, I understand, but let's take a step back and breathe. "Allies" is an in game mechanical term for allowing another army to be mixed in with the main one. The rule isn't called "Best Buds" for a reason. Just becuase an army can be mixxed with another doesn't mean those armies suddenly like each other. We also know that there are different levels of alliances. Just becuase two armies can be mixed to some degree doesn't mean you won't be penalized for doing so.
Ultramarines + Imperial Guard = Glorious Brofist ~ gain a bonus
Dark Angels + Space Wolves = No hate, but no brofist ~ no bonus, no penalty
Eldar + Dark Eldar = Hate eachother , but will work together ~ can ally, but with penalty
Altruizine wrote:Hmm, just realized that if allies of convenience are treated as enemy units, they may not be able to take objectives for you.
Actually, if they are treated as enemy units that you can't shoot at or attack, they would (unless the rules state otherwise) count as competing units for objectives.
We also know that there are different levels of alliances.
We already know many of the alliance rules from the White Dwarf. There were no special provisions for the Daemons allying with CSM or the IG with GK, except the force organisation rules (You get an extra detachment in addition to your normal FOC of 1 HQ, 1 Elites, 1 Troops, 1 FA, 1 HS). If you're expecting that all of a sudden there's an intricate rule set that balances the system so that Grey Knight Purifiers occupying the elite slots of a Necron army etc. etc. makes any sense whatsoever you have to be delusional.
Untill proven otherwise it's better to assume everyone allies with everyone with no real positive or negative modifiers of any kind. You can make as ridiculous army lists as you like. Many people will talk about them, fewer people will actually assemble them and almost none get to play them at tournaments because they simply won't be allowed. I agree with JGrand.
Therion wrote: If you're expecting that all of a sudden there's an intricate rule set that balances the system so that Grey Knight Purifiers occupying the elite slots of a Necron army makes any sense whatsoever you have to be delusional.
Or you realize that IG/GK and CSM/CD would be trusted allies and as such have no penalties. But hey, what do I know, I'm delusional, right?
Altruizine wrote:Hmm, just realized that if allies of convenience are treated as enemy units, they may not be able to take objectives for you.
Actually, if they are treated as enemy units that you can't shoot at or attack, they would (unless the rules state otherwise) count as competing units for objectives.
Thats entirely based on 5th edition objective rules, and anyway majority fo ally units you take wont be scoring anyway.
Altruizine wrote:Hmm, just realized that if allies of convenience are treated as enemy units, they may not be able to take objectives for you.
Actually, if they are treated as enemy units that you can't shoot at or attack, they would (unless the rules state otherwise) count as competing units for objectives.
Thats entirely based on 5th edition objective rules, and anyway majority fo ally units you take wont be scoring anyway.
That's entirely based on 5th edition objective rules...
Therion wrote: If you're expecting that all of a sudden there's an intricate rule set that balances the system so that Grey Knight Purifiers occupying the elite slots of a Necron army makes any sense whatsoever you have to be delusional.
Or you realize that IG/GK and CSM/CD would be trusted allies and as such have no penalties. But hey, what do I know, I'm delusional, right?
Either that or an absolutely hopeless optimist. You do realise you're essentially wishlisting and imagining rules right now? GW apologism at its finest. There has to be some brilliant reason why Necrons can ally with Grey Knights and a secret rule that in the end balances it it all, right?
Therion wrote: If you're expecting that all of a sudden there's an intricate rule set that balances the system so that Grey Knight Purifiers occupying the elite slots of a Necron army makes any sense whatsoever you have to be delusional.
Or you realize that IG/GK and CSM/CD would be trusted allies and as such have no penalties. But hey, what do I know, I'm delusional, right?
Either that or an absolutely hopeless optimist. You do realise you're essentially wishlisting and imagining rules right now? GW apologism at its finest. There has to be some brilliant reason why Necrons can ally with Grey Knights and a secret rule that in the end balances it it all, right?
Yes, expecting something similar to the allies chart in WHFB 8th edition is TOTALLY GW apologism at it's finest.
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Therion wrote: If you're expecting that all of a sudden there's an intricate rule set that balances the system so that Grey Knight Purifiers occupying the elite slots of a Necron army makes any sense whatsoever you have to be delusional.
Or you realize that IG/GK and CSM/CD would be trusted allies and as such have no penalties. But hey, what do I know, I'm delusional, right?
Either that or an absolutely hopeless optimist. You do realise you're essentially wishlisting and imagining rules right now? GW apologism at its finest. There has to be some brilliant reason why Necrons can ally with Grey Knights and a secret rule that in the end balances it it all, right?
We know from the latest teaser that there are different levels of alliances.
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Only when I'm feeling like doing them a favor. You need to wake up.
We know from the latest teaser that there are different levels of alliances.
Yes, we know that. We also know that has nothing to with balance either. The whole premise that all the 8 loyalist books are on 'best buddy' alliances with eachother is already so blatantly unfair to everyone else that it would in fact be better if everyone were best buddies with eachother. Atleast then you wouldn't be just trying to give the Imperials a buff. From a balance perspective Imperial Guard having access to Purifiers is just as imbalanced as Necrons having access to them. So why are the Purifiers best buddies with the Imperial Guard and not the Necrons? Because of a a background explanation? Of course. None of this has anything to do with game balance.
Like I said there's no secret rule that in the end makes it allright and balances the allies. They're imbalanced, no matter how you spin it. I'll repeat for the fifth time for those with a little thicker skulls than others (you know who you are): The sooner you accept that the majority of the tournaments will disallow them the better it'll be for you. Maybe you'll even save some money.
Therion wrote:We already know many of the alliance rules from the White Dwarf.
And yet we still have the tearing of cloth and the gnashing of teeth when it is discovered that some armies may not hate another to thepoint where they wouldn't work together to defeat a greater threat.
Therion wrote:If you're expecting that all of a sudden there's an intricate rule set that balances the system so that Grey Knight Purifiers occupying the elite slots of a Necron army makes any sense whatsoever you have to be delusional.
Or you'd have to be some sort of fool that creates straw men about balance and then call people delusional. No mention of balance was made, nor a belief in intricate rule systems. My post responded to the constant "I can't believe X would ever fight with Y", and why they misght take a second and relax before declaring that the sky was falling. Much like freaking out over the Necrons having a psyker when taking just a moment to read it would show that it is not a psyker at all.
Therion wrote:Until proven otherwise it's better to assume everyone allies with everyone with no positive or negative modifiers of any kind.
There was a scan posted somewhere that had the alliance listings which included the type of alliance that different armies had to each other and what it meant. You either got nothing, an extra tactic, or lost a tactic card. Or something along those lines.
Therion wrote: There has to be some brilliant reason why Necrons can ally with Grey Knights and a secret rule that in the end balances it it all, right?
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Only when I'm feeling like doing them a favor. You need to wake up.
Or he could maintain his views on the game, and you yours. There is never a need to insult people just because they disagree with you, at least not on an internet forum about a board game with action figures.
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Only when I'm feeling like doing them a favor. You need to wake up.
In the last vid that GW put out, there is a shot of part of the allies page that starts to describe the different levels of allies, just like they are handled in the fantasy allies tables.
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Only when I'm feeling like doing them a favor. You need to wake up.
As has been mentioned, the last teaser also had a blurb about different types of alliances, but I suppose I'm just wishlisting and white-knighting GW, as I'm delusional and need to wake up?
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Only when I'm feeling like doing them a favor. You need to wake up.
As has been mentioned, the last teaser also had a blurb about different types of alliances, but I suppose I'm just wishlisting and white-knighting GW, as I'm delusional and need to wake up?
You need to improve on your reading comprehension as well.
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Only when I'm feeling like doing them a favor. You need to wake up.
As has been mentioned, the last teaser also had a blurb about different types of alliances, but I suppose I'm just wishlisting and white-knighting GW, as I'm delusional and need to wake up?
You need to improve on your reading comprehension as well.
Pray tell, what part did I misunderstand? You DID say I need to wake up, you DID, albeit indirectly, call me delusional and you DID accuse me of being a GW apologist. I think you might need a break, I don't see why you need to be so darn hostile in the first place.
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Only when I'm feeling like doing them a favor. You need to wake up.
As has been mentioned, the last teaser also had a blurb about different types of alliances, but I suppose I'm just wishlisting and white-knighting GW, as I'm delusional and need to wake up?
You need to improve on your reading comprehension as well.
Pray tell, what part did I misunderstand? You DID say I need to wake up, you DID, albeit indirectly, call me delusional and you DID accuse me of being a GW apologist. I think you might need a break, I don't see why you need to be so darn hostile in the first place.
Just take a breath, relax, read the last couple pages again if you have to and maybe you'll just figure it out on your own instead of me having to reply once every five seconds to you.
What should be done is each codex is a seperate entity and receives a +2 allies (IG gets GK and CSM for instance, GK gets IG and Templars, CSM gets IG and Demons, Demons get CSM and Orks, etc.)
this way each faction/codex can work with only up to 2 other factions.
Tyranids by themselves, hope they have an awe inspiring codex that does not need any holes filled in........
Glorioski wrote:*The far bottom right box should be green
None of the armies list their own army as an ally, so unless it is specifically mentioned somewhere (which might very well be... or not) a codex can't be an ally to their own codex.
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Only when I'm feeling like doing them a favor. You need to wake up.
As has been mentioned, the last teaser also had a blurb about different types of alliances, but I suppose I'm just wishlisting and white-knighting GW, as I'm delusional and need to wake up?
You need to improve on your reading comprehension as well.
Pray tell, what part did I misunderstand? You DID say I need to wake up, you DID, albeit indirectly, call me delusional and you DID accuse me of being a GW apologist. I think you might need a break, I don't see why you need to be so darn hostile in the first place.
Just take a breath, relax, read the last couple pages again if you have to and maybe you'll just figure it out on your own instead of me having to reply once every five seconds to you.
Wait, you're the one insulting people and yet you want me to calm down? Furthermore, I'm not forcing you to do anything, so if you don't want to reply then don't, but please, tell me what I missed (and I'm not trying to taunt you on this one, I'm genuinely curious and don't think I'd change my mind reading it through again anyway).
Glorioski wrote:*The far bottom right box should be green
None of the armies list their own army as an ally, so unless it is specifically mentioned somewhere (which might very well be... or not) a codex can't be an ally to their own codex.
Thats a given though. Why would they need to be an ally with themselves? I don't see what that could do to help you in anyways.
On an unrelated note, do you always start insulting people when they don't agree with you?
Only when I'm feeling like doing them a favor. You need to wake up.
As has been mentioned, the last teaser also had a blurb about different types of alliances, but I suppose I'm just wishlisting and white-knighting GW, as I'm delusional and need to wake up?
You need to improve on your reading comprehension as well.
Pray tell, what part did I misunderstand? You DID say I need to wake up, you DID, albeit indirectly, call me delusional and you DID accuse me of being a GW apologist. I think you might need a break, I don't see why you need to be so darn hostile in the first place.
Just take a breath, relax, read the last couple pages again if you have to and maybe you'll just figure it out on your own instead of me having to reply once every five seconds to you.
Wait, you're the one insulting people and yet you want me to calm down? Furthermore, I'm not forcing you to do anything, so if you don't want to reply then don't, but please, tell me what I missed (and I'm not trying to taunt you on this one, I'm genuinely curious and don't think I'd change my mind reading it through again anyway).
You're trolling now since you have nothing further to add to the discussion yet you want to drag the thread into the mud. You can PM me about your request if you wish and I'll gladly explain your failures in reading comprehension. I'll even quote you the relevant parts. Consider it a favor.
About the insults, if you scroll up you'll find that I was speaking in general terms that one has to be delusional to expect anything else than the view I was proposing. It wasn't an attack towards the person I was quoting, which wasn't you by the way. It was Ahtman. You appeared out of nowhere asking if I thought you were delusional. I've no idea why you did that, but I suspect you were just trying to pick a fight.
Glorioski wrote:*The far bottom right box should be green
None of the armies list their own army as an ally, so unless it is specifically mentioned somewhere (which might very well be... or not) a codex can't be an ally to their own codex.
Thats a given though. Why would they need to be an ally with themselves? I don't see what that could do to help you in anyways.
If this is an add-on / extension of detachments, then adding a detachment of your own army expands your FOC. For some lists, there may be no reason to pull in units from another codex, but you may need the extra FOC slots.
Glorioski wrote:*The far bottom right box should be green
None of the armies list their own army as an ally, so unless it is specifically mentioned somewhere (which might very well be... or not) a codex can't be an ally to their own codex.
Thats a given though. Why would they need to be an ally with themselves? I don't see what that could do to help you in anyways.
If it is true that you get these 1 HQ, 1 TR, 1 EL 1 FA, 1 HSin addition to the regular FOC then it could actually matter quite a lot because you would be able to spam a 4th unit of something for each of your FOC slots.
I would assume that there are some limitations of having allies that make the extra force organisation slots balanced by some kind of drawback. I cant think of any reasonable way to implement these off the top of my head but I'm guessing allying with yourself wont be possible.
Glorioski wrote:*The far bottom right box should be green
None of the armies list their own army as an ally, so unless it is specifically mentioned somewhere (which might very well be... or not) a codex can't be an ally to their own codex.
Thats a given though. Why would they need to be an ally with themselves? I don't see what that could do to help you in anyways.
If this is an add-on / extension of detachments, then adding a detachment of your own army expands your FOC. For some lists, there may be no reason to pull in units from another codex, but you may need the extra FOC slots.
I think the guy in charge of the site just done goofed, cause necrons do not have access to any psi-powers at all.
I think there is a picture of the psychic powers table showing that on the first page.
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Hmm, pretty sure when the Necrons got their new codex, the White Dwarf for that month mentioned something about Necron Crypteks using advanced technology that was easily mistaken as Psychic abilities.. or something like that?
The GW website does as well:
Crypteks are members of pan-galactic conclaves of technologies whose purpose is to study and maintain the eldritch devices of their race. They are masters of dimensional dissonance, singularity manipulation, atomic transmutation, elemental transmogrification and countless other reason-defying technologies. In many ways, a Cryptek's powers mirror those employed by the psykers of other races, but with a crucial difference; instead of using a mutant mind to channel Warp energies, the Cryptek employs arcane science to harness the universe's fundamental forces.
Glorioski wrote:*The far bottom right box should be green
None of the armies list their own army as an ally, so unless it is specifically mentioned somewhere (which might very well be... or not) a codex can't be an ally to their own codex.
Thats a given though. Why would they need to be an ally with themselves? I don't see what that could do to help you in anyways.
If it is true that you get these 1 HQ, 1 TR, 1 EL 1 FA, 1 HSin addition to the regular FOC then it could actually matter quite a lot because you would be able to spam a 4th unit of something for each of your FOC slots.
EDIT: other people already beat me to it
See I wasn't thinking it was and extented FOC. I thought it was the same FOC just using units from other armies. That could make more sense then. Allies just got even more stupid. So you are saying that every army can have 4 Heavies, 4 fast, 4 elites. Not sure how I feel about that. Seems alitte over the top to me.
Glorioski wrote:*The far bottom right box should be green
None of the armies list their own army as an ally, so unless it is specifically mentioned somewhere (which might very well be... or not) a codex can't be an ally to their own codex.
Thats a given though. Why would they need to be an ally with themselves? I don't see what that could do to help you in anyways.
If it is true that you get these 1 HQ, 1 TR, 1 EL 1 FA, 1 HSin addition to the regular FOC then it could actually matter quite a lot because you would be able to spam a 4th unit of something for each of your FOC slots.
EDIT: other people already beat me to it
See I wasn't thinking it was and extented FOC. I thought it was the same FOC just using units from other armies. That could make more sense then. Allies just got even more stupid. So you are saying that every army can have 4 Heavies, 4 fast, 4 elites. Not sure how I feel about that. Seems alitte over the top to me.
There would be a downside of having to take 2 hq:s and 3 troops minimum.
Altruizine wrote:Hmm, just realized that if allies of convenience are treated as enemy units, they may not be able to take objectives for you.
Actually, if they are treated as enemy units that you can't shoot at or attack, they would (unless the rules state otherwise) count as competing units for objectives.
Thats entirely based on 5th edition objective rules, and anyway majority fo ally units you take wont be scoring anyway.
That's entirely based on 5th edition objective rules...
I'm fairly certain we already got confirmation that only troops score.
balsak_da_mighty wrote:So you are saying that every army can have 4 Heavies, 4 fast, 4 elites. Not sure how I feel about that. Seems alitte over the top to me.
Some people seem to think so, and the WD battle report armies are composed like that (at 2500 pts), but there is no confirmation either way.
I wouldn't like it either. They should just have everything happen within the current FOC boundaries.
Okay... so the Necrons can ally with the Black Templars... I understand that ally =/= BFF, but I'm pretty sure the Necron codex mentions that at some point, Imotekh cut off Helbrecht's arms. So one way or another, I just don't understand how those two races are gonna fist-bump.
However, now my Necrons can bring a Rune Priest, a Razorback full of Grey Hunters and a squad of Long Fangs!
Personally though, I suspect that the Eldar will be the most-used ally, just because of Runes of Warding and how useful that will be if Psykers are getting a buff.
Robbietobbie wrote:If people use the possibility to write OP lists that's their fault for using that possibility in a way it wasn't intended to be used
I really do think that you should get the award for having posting the most inane thing in the entire thread thus far.
Not sure where I read the rumour that objectives were changing so this might be complete nonsense but I'll continue anyway. I had read that objectives would now be worth between 1 and 6 points, based on this I would ASSUME that allied troops may be able to claim objectives but at a lower points worth (i.e. my tactical marines can claim it for 3 points, my allied immortals can only claim it for one). If this were the case it could well still keep allied troops as useful, but not as useful as your own scoring units.
So you are saying that every army can have 4 Heavies, 4 fast, 4 elites. Not sure how I feel about that. Seems alitte over the top to me.
There would be a downside of having to take 2 hq:s and 3 troops minimum.
I hope everyone have their sarcasm detectors at full power
This is an actual hinderance. To get the 3 extra slots (fast, heavy & elite. You'll probably won't use all of them),
you have to pay the price by spending points on 2 slots you may not want to.
Altruizine wrote:Hmm, just realized that if allies of convenience are treated as enemy units, they may not be able to take objectives for you.
Actually, if they are treated as enemy units that you can't shoot at or attack, they would (unless the rules state otherwise) count as competing units for objectives.
Thats entirely based on 5th edition objective rules, and anyway majority fo ally units you take wont be scoring anyway.
It doesn't matter if the allied units could score. Any unit can contest an objective. So having your allied Grey Knights next to the objective would negate the ability of your Necron Immortals to claim the objective. (To use the silly Necron army/GK allies example from other posters)
EDIT: Seems a bit silly to keep speculating before we know, but to follow the logic further, it would also mean that any units killed by your erstwhile allies would award no kill points to your army. Hmmm, I really can't wait to see for sure.
azazel the cat wrote:Okay... so the Necrons can ally with the Black Templars... I understand that ally =/= BFF, but I'm pretty sure the Necron codex mentions that at some point, Imotekh cut off Helbrecht's arms. So one way or another, I just don't understand how those two races are gonna fist-bump.
However, now my Necrons can bring a Rune Priest, a Razorback full of Grey Hunters and a squad of Long Fangs!
Personally though, I suspect that the Eldar will be the most-used ally, just because of Runes of Warding and how useful that will be if Psykers are getting a buff.
Robbietobbie wrote:If people use the possibility to write OP lists that's their fault for using that possibility in a way it wasn't intended to be used
I really do think that you should get the award for having posting the most inane thing in the entire thread thus far.
Lmao.
But yes, a lot of those ally combos are utter nonsense
We still don't know the complete ally rules though. Possible different forms/levels of alliances, etc. It could be, for example, that if you ally Orks with anyone, that they include rules where the Orks could turn upon your other army.
Therion wrote:Kroot I know you're fighting the good fight and all but damn you're late on this one.
1.) Well, I have to work sometimes and may have overlooked some detail on 20 pages per day.
2.) Pics weren't posted AFAIK, esp not the graphic including the different kinds of allies.
Altruizine wrote:Hmm, just realized that if allies of convenience are treated as enemy units, they may not be able to take objectives for you.
Actually, if they are treated as enemy units that you can't shoot at or attack, they would (unless the rules state otherwise) count as competing units for objectives.
Thats entirely based on 5th edition objective rules, and anyway majority fo ally units you take wont be scoring anyway.
That's entirely based on 5th edition objective rules...
Yeah, exactly. We already know there's at least one mission module where Heavy choices can score.
azazel the cat wrote:Okay... so the Necrons can ally with the Black Templars... I understand that ally =/= BFF, but I'm pretty sure the Necron codex mentions that at some point, Imotekh cut off Helbrecht's arms. So one way or another, I just don't understand how those two races are gonna fist-bump.
Calling them "Allies of Convenience" makes it really easy to justify even the most far-fetched scenarios, which is why I'm glad they called it that instead of "Tentative Allies" or "Uneasy Allies" or any other terms that imply some level of coordination.
To give a quick and dirty example, if some Black Templars and Daemons were locked in a titanic struggle on some planet, and then a bunch of Necrons teleported in and start lighting up the Daemons without any hostile overtones towards the BTs, I'm fairly certain the BT commanders would take a "deal with it later" stance rather than immediately engaging the Necrons and all but begging to be double-teamed. You just need to imagine a resultant 500 point game taking place immediately after your original 2000 point game ends.
Do all flyers need to start in reserves, or will there be an exception for hover style ones?
That could be quite a big deal if they can't. It'd give people until turn 3 in many case to avoid Storm Raven pwnage. Crash and Burn might avoid some excessiveness too...
Therion wrote:Kroot I know you're fighting the good fight and all but damn you're late on this one.
1.) Well, I have to work sometimes and may have overlooked some detail on 20 pages per day.
2.) Pics weren't posted AFAIK, esp not the graphic including the different kinds of allies.
At the least they were better quality than the other pictures posted so far...
The one that Kroot posted has nothing to do with 6th other than give a possible gauge of some of the ally levels. I would say the matrix that GW gave today is fairly accurate, although there are a couple errors.
TBD wrote:According to that latest matrix (Kroot posted) Space Marines and Tau are indeed brothers in arms
That picture is old, and either speculative or based on Forgeworld/Planetstrike/Apoc/whatever. It has been posted several times in several threads in the lead-up to 6th edition, including before any of the WD leaks or website information went up. It has nothing to do with the new rulebook, unless by chance.
Compel wrote:Do all flyers need to start in reserves, or will there be an exception for hover style ones?
That could be quite a big deal if they can't. It'd give people until turn 3 in many case to avoid Storm Raven pwnage. Crash and Burn might avoid some excessiveness too...
It'd also change Vendetta usage a lot.
The snapshots of the Flyer rules says that they start in Reserve. I agree that would limit their lethality a great deal. They would not show up until Turn 2 at the earliest and possibly not until Turn 3 or even 4. Even when they show up, if players keep them in Zoom move (for survivability) they will have a hard time finding good targets since they can only turn up to 90 degrees and still remain in Zoom move. The rule apparently requires them to take that 90 degree turn at the beginning of their move which further reduces flexibility in finding targets when then have to move at least 18 inches and do it in a straight line after the 90 degree turn.
I plan to use an Officer of the Fleet and 2-4 Hydras in my IG list so I'm not too worried about flyers. I may also include three Vendettas if they turn out to be good versus flyers.
Note that we do not have confirmation that Valkyries and Vendettas are flyers yet AFAIK though that seems likely to be the case. I wouldn't mind if Valks and Vens remained as skimmers without the flyers ability tacked on but my fellow IG players will probably disagree. It would be sweet to fly 18" and still fire all three TL lascannons, but as I stated above I think flyers will not get as much action as players think they will.
TBD wrote:According to that latest matrix (Kroot posted) Space Marines and Tau are indeed brothers in arms
That picture is old, and either speculative or based on Forgeworld/Planetstrike/Apoc/whatever. It has been posted several times in several threads in the lead-up to 6th edition, including before any of the WD leaks or website information went up. It has nothing to do with the new rulebook, unless by chance.
I know, but why were they ever "brothers in arms" in whatever in the first place?
A small detail and probably nothing but GW sales hyperbole, but in the tanks page linked previously the intro at the top of the page mentions that tanks are now more resilient than ever, which would run contrary to the current majority thinking it would appear.
Just to make it clear:
The ally matrix I posted is from a GW doubles tournament and was posted a while ago. But it may be an indication of the different levels of allies.
Kroothawk wrote:Just to make it clear:
The ally matrix I posted is from a GW doubles tournament and was posted a while ago. But it may be an indication of the different levels of allies.
What about the other screenies you posted? Where are they from, are there more?
So far I'm fairly happy for my Tau and will be even happier if the Skyray is an AA vehicle (again) and our disruption pods still work...I doubt there's any word on this.
Too soon to make a call about allies but on the surface it seems like the wrong direction to take in a game system that already suffers from cheesiness and balance problems. I was happy with allies being an Apoc thing, it may turn out that that's where it should have stayed...hope not.
Compel wrote:Do all flyers need to start in reserves, or will there be an exception for hover style ones?
That could be quite a big deal if they can't. It'd give people until turn 3 in many case to avoid Storm Raven pwnage. Crash and Burn might avoid some excessiveness too...
It'd also change Vendetta usage a lot.
The snapshots of the Flyer rules says that they start in Reserve. I agree that would limit their lethality a great deal. They would not show up until Turn 2 at the earliest and possibly not until Turn 3 or even 4. Even when they show up, if players keep them in Zoom move (for survivability) they will have a hard time finding good targets since they can only turn up to 90 degrees and still remain in Zoom move. The rule apparently requires them to take that 90 degree turn at the beginning of their move which further reduces flexibility in finding targets when then have to move at least 18 inches and do it in a straight line after the 90 degree turn.
I plan to use an Officer of the Fleet and 2-4 Hydras in my IG list so I'm not too worried about flyers. I may also include three Vendettas if they turn out to be good versus flyers.
Note that we do not have confirmation that Valkyries and Vendettas are flyers yet AFAIK though that seems likely to be the case. I wouldn't mind if Valks and Vens remained as skimmers without the flyers ability tacked on but my fellow IG players will probably disagree. It would be sweet to fly 18" and still fire all three TL lascannons, but as I stated above I think flyers will not get as much action as players think they will.
According to the WD (I know not the best source for rules) Both Valk/Vendettas and Stormravens are subject to the newer flyer rules. Meaning they start in reserves and such. As for the Allies rules, they make people who have large "Forces of Order/Disorder" Collections have the chance to take bits of their collections to become part of one fun or themed armies.
Surely Dark Eldar would ally with anyone if they were being payed. Then after the battle call in reinforcements to finish off the remainder of their allies and take the spoils.
TBD wrote:And why would Sisters of Battle & Black Templars be an "unholy alliance"
I can't think of a Marine chapter that would be more friendly to the Sisters than Black Templars. I'd love to know what committee of minds put that ally matrix together.
TBD wrote:And why would Sisters of Battle & Black Templars be an "unholy alliance"
I can't think of a Marine chapter that would be more friendly to the Sisters than Black Templars. I'd love to know what committee of minds put that ally matrix together.
I know, right? One loves burning xenos, mutants and psykers with righteous fire, the other likes burning xenos, mutants and psykers with righteous fire, guess that means they hate eachother!
I'm pretty sure most major North American tournaments will allow allies as some army books are unplayable without them. It's really not that bad in practice.
As for the Necron Phalanx being back, I thought losing an assault and getting the whole unit run down killed that unit? Are negative modifiers to morale in a losing assault gone? Otherwise I don't see 12 warriors and a Phaeron being around very long on the tabletop.
Kroothawk wrote:BTW here the ally matrix from the GW June/July doubles tournament:
Wait a sec there is something wrong with this, surely Blood Angels and Necrons are brothers in arms.
On a more serious note, my point remains Tyranids and Necron should be able to make a somewhat patching unholy alliance based on the simple fact that robots aren't a good food diet for a growing hive fleet.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grimnarsmate wrote:Surely Dark Eldar would ally with anyone if they were being payed. Then after the battle call in reinforcements to finish off the remainder of their allies and take the spoils.
That may help to explain why they don't have so many friends.
TBD wrote:And why would Sisters of Battle & Black Templars be an "unholy alliance"
I can't think of a Marine chapter that would be more friendly to the Sisters than Black Templars. I'd love to know what committee of minds put that ally matrix together.
I know, right? One loves burning xenos, mutants and psykers with righteous fire, the other likes burning xenos, mutants and psykers with righteous fire, guess that means they hate eachother!
They can't fight together due to the excessive requirement for supplies of Promethium. They get into a slap fight before a battle to claim the canisters and drums of fuel needed for their fiery temperer hosts.
azazel the cat wrote:Okay... so the Necrons can ally with the Black Templars... I understand that ally =/= BFF, but I'm pretty sure the Necron codex mentions that at some point, Imotekh cut off Helbrecht's arms. So one way or another, I just don't understand how those two races are gonna fist-bump.
However, now my Necrons can bring a Rune Priest, a Razorback full of Grey Hunters and a squad of Long Fangs!
Personally though, I suspect that the Eldar will be the most-used ally, just because of Runes of Warding and how useful that will be if Psykers are getting a buff.
Robbietobbie wrote:If people use the possibility to write OP lists that's their fault for using that possibility in a way it wasn't intended to be used
I really do think that you should get the award for having posting the most inane thing in the entire thread thus far.
Inane because? People are blaming gw for writing a rule WAAC players can exploit to create even stronger list while these players will find the cheese anyway.. If you use the rules as they were intended i see no problem with the oppertunity to create a fluffy alliance. Hate the player, not the game
Coming soon to a galaxy near you: Abaddon and his gretchin legions unleash their 14th black crusade. Space wolves and thousand sons unite, and Commissar Yarrick teams up with the orks....
I'm glad I turned my back on the mess that GW has become. Andy Chambers and Rick Priestly must be spinning in their graves!
I can buy CSM and Daemons. I can but IG and CSM as part of a planet rebelling, I could even buy Tau and Ultramarines against those walking soup tins, but everything else is getting silly.
A final note on terrain. Given how easy it is to make rock piles, rubble and small ruins, added to all the tutorials on the painting section of this site, then I will be very dissapointed if anybody forks out big bucks for GW terrain.
As a company that makes rules to be used within games, Games Workshop should really be aware of exploitation possibilities and aim to prevent it IMHO.
They may want everyone to use rules in a non-competitive manner, but things don't work like that and nor - I imagine - are they under any illusion that they do.
Bottom-line, I think as the company that designs the rules, Games Workshop should try to prevent any potential for abuse.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Coming soon to a galaxy near you: Abaddon and his gretchin legions unleash their 14th black crusade. Space wolves and thousand sons unite, and Commissar Yarrick teams up with the orks....
I'm glad I turned my back on the mess that GW has become. Andy Chambers and Rick Priestly must be spinning in their graves!
I can buy CSM and Daemons. I can but IG and CSM as part of a planet rebelling, I could even buy Tau and Ultramarines against those walking soup tins, but everything else is getting silly.
A final note on terrain. Given how easy it is to make rock piles, rubble and small ruins, added to all the tutorials on the painting section of this site, then I will be very dissapointed if anybody forks out big bucks for GW terrain.
I need to go and read my FOW rulebook
Andy Chambers and Rick Priestley in the same sentence? Wtf? If anything Andy Chambers is the man responsible for the direction GW has gone in the last decade. Him and Priestley are complete opposite ends of the spectrum mate.
And for what it's worth, Priestley recently gave an interview with BOW where he basically said the reason he was unhappy with where 40k has ended up was because it was restrictive on what players can do. If anything I think allies would be a step in the direction of what Priestley would have wanted.
No not Nids. They will do fine with things like Harpies, flying Tyrants and preferred enemy everywhere.
We will have to see about harpies and how awesome swoop attack is or if they make any changes to venom cannons or barbed stanglers...at W3 two attacks they are beyond horrible in CC and unlike flyers they only get a single blast shot....for nearly 160-200 points, making them poor at shooting for the point cost.
Something else I thought of regarding Hull Points on vehicles is how Entropic Strike will work. Will it stay the same or will I have to chew through the armor and Hull Points before the vehicle is wrecked?
It'll stay the same, I'm guessing, I mean, no matter how tough your hull is, once you have no armour you are stuffed
but I'm just guessing
To get rid of any possibility at all of exploitation the rules would have to be so strict it would no longer be any fun. You need the freedom to do something crazy from time to time to shake things up, if people use that freedom to write an unbeatable list they are to blame, not gw. Just my opinion though. Like in the battle report in this months's WD i really think the allies bit added to the game, but that's because they did what would be cool, not what would be the strongest combination possible
So with all the talk of allies being basically a mirror of the allies system in 8th edition fantasy. How does that work? How does it play out balance-wise, and is it allowed in tournaments? There are obvious holes in what we have come to know as the races in 40k and how they are supposed to fight together under almost any circumstances but if GW has already introduced this to fantasy I was wondering how well it works for that system.
I guess that means that all the fluff in the Templar dex is pretty much useless now then since there were multiple references to them fighting along side the Sisters of Battle against Chaos. I do remember a story about a Cannoness, an Emperors Champ and someone else standing against a Bloodthirster in a volcano. Guess GW needs to just omit that from any further publications of the Templar dex until they get there new one where it is revealed that was all a hoax and the Cannoness was possessed by a rival Chaos God....
I've been with the hobby a long time, 20+ years, and I've seen a lot of strange things in that time. One thing that was mentioned earlier, and I will agree with, is this points creep thing. Game sizes seem to be getting bigger (once it was 1000 points, now it's 2000) and the cost of models is going up money wise, whilst the gaming cost of a model is going down.
Now, it's true that nobody is forced to play 2500 point games, but given that there are so many rival gaming systems, so many rival model makers, video game options etc etc it is criminal to be charging £20 for 10 plastic IG troopers and only getting 60 game points for them. On top of £45 for a rulebook etc etc
I'm going to keep banging the FOW drum, but for £60 I get a hardback rulebook and a 1500 point late war German Panther force, and a gaming experience/set of rules that is as good as anything. The GW equivalent is around the £200 mark for a similar sized force. Do the math
I'm going to keep ranting, but I suspect that the allies rule is part of a GW campaign to destroy the dakka dakka site. They know there will be endless nerd rage, they know the number of threads that will be created over the next few months will probably buckle this site, and they know the self loathing they will induce in people i.e 'Yeah I hate GW but I've just spent $300 on dice and models, will produce an almighty backlash!!
This could be the spark for WW3
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I'm going to keep banging the FOW drum, but for £60 I get a hardback rulebook and a 1500 point late war German Panther force, and a gaming experience/set of rules that is as good as anything. The GW equivalent is around the £200 mark for a similar sized force. Do the math
Keep banging that drum, buddy! I'll go and get my horn, and we'll make a merry little band!
No not Nids. They will do fine with things like Harpies, flying Tyrants and preferred enemy everywhere.
We will have to see about harpies and how awesome swoop attack is or if they make any changes to venom cannons or barbed stanglers...at W3 two attacks they are beyond horrible in CC and unlike flyers they only get a single blast shot....for nearly 160-200 points, making them poor at shooting for the point cost.
I agree we will have to see. The vectored strike rule is something like d3 hits on a unit it flies over. Can it fly over another flyer? The venom cannon is str 9 and flyers have big models which make it harder to scatter off. All you need to do it glance twice and the flyer is down. I'm not 100%, but I have reason to think I am close. As you say we will have to see.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Coming soon to a galaxy near you: Abaddon and his gretchin legions unleash their 14th black crusade. Space wolves and thousand sons unite, and Commissar Yarrick teams up with the orks....
Abaddon leading a Green Crusade of Gretchin Legions is the best idea I've heard for an army yet. Thanks!
I don't know about the rest of the world but it's saturday night here in the UK and I need to blot out the Spain Vs France game!!
Let the drinks flow!!
Anyway, back on topic. The lack of info about the new rules seems disturbing, given that the rulebook is there in store for people to preview. The law of averages says that somebody should have had a good read by now, cover to cover. As for vehicles, I suspect that Leman Russes, and Land Raiders will be more durable than your standard ork truck. I can buy a load of glancing hits taking out a truck, especially if it's open topped (bursting tyres, lucky shot on driver etc etc) but a bunch of fire warriors or necron warriors shooting down a land raider. Hmm...
Just Dave wrote:As a company that makes rules to be used within games, Games Workshop should really be aware of exploitation possibilities and aim to prevent it IMHO.
Games Workshop has stated several times that they're first and foremost a miniatures company that has rules only so you can play with those miniatures. This is not meant to be sardonic or cynical in any way.
Plus, we don't know if Allies rules are 100% official rules meant to be used in all games of 40k. Many sources still point to it being a variant.
Regardless, what better way to sell miniatures to people that already have entire armies than to sell miniatures to them from OTHER armies?
Play Necrons? They're friends with Blood Angels now, don't you know?
Play Tau? They're cool with Chaos if you are!
Play Black Templar and hate everyone? Eldar want to be your friend and bring some Xenos Witches!
I'm not sure that any stores did actually have the rules, my store didnt (we did however have a MASSIVE tank battle, sort of a farewell and good riddance to 5th ed, one guy had over 100 tank I belive, enough to fill 2 realm of battle tiles, I digress) so i'd assume that no store (no GW's anyway) had the rulebook.
Just Dave wrote:As a company that makes rules to be used within games, Games Workshop should really be aware of exploitation possibilities and aim to prevent it IMHO.
Games Workshop has stated several times that they're first and foremost a miniatures company that has rules only so you can play with those miniatures. This is not meant to be sardonic or cynical in any way.
Oh I know this and understand it from GW's perspective. But my above point still stands.
Have to agree with Just Dave... they make rules, they make 400+ page rulebooks, they push the game as an integral part of the experience... there is no excuse for making gak rules and saying 'well we don't really care'. If you are going to do it, do it right, especially when doing it half-assed still takes a ton of effort and expense and could hurt you, and doing it right takes not much more effort and expense and could benefit you significantly.
If I want space marines in my force, I'll go space marines. If I want GK, I'll buy GK. If I want orks to command, I'll go orks. If I want IG to led into battle....I'll go Imperial guard
I can buy into the idea of Guard and Marines in Apoc games. I could even buy into Dark Angels and thousand sons teaming up to take out those bearded ginger gits on fenris (who can blame them ) but Abaddon and the gretchin legions!! WTF x 1000
Of course, when the rules are officially on the shelves, and something is revealed that makes all this 50+ pages of moaning redundant, I reserve the right to change my mind and declare 6th edition to be a work of genius and mat ward a living saint
You're right of course, but remember that their rules are mostly good enough. I've been in the game for twenty years and I can't remember a time when something wasn't blatantly overpowered or easily abusable. We've always had a ton of fun nevertheless, and each time the problems have been possible to rectify with composition scoring or other restrictions. The players are already organised when they arrange tournaments and it takes little to no effort at all to add your house rules, fixes and tweaks to the mission pack. Of course we'd like things to be perfect straight out of the box but it's just a pipe dream.
DarthDiggler wrote:I'm pretty sure most major North American tournaments will allow allies as some army books are unplayable without them. It's really not that bad in practice.
As for the Necron Phalanx being back, I thought losing an assault and getting the whole unit run down killed that unit? Are negative modifiers to morale in a losing assault gone? Otherwise I don't see 12 warriors and a Phaeron being around very long on the tabletop.
But don't you see? They won't get into an assault. Charge distances are random, and the Necrons can manilpulate that distance; wound allocation starts with the closest models, and Snap Fire allows the Necrons to shoot in response to an assault. Not to mention the rumour that relentless adds 1 shot to RF. So think about this:
1x Overlord w/ Phaeron
20x Warriors
1x Harbinger of Transmogrification
If that unit is charged, then they will get to shoot potentially 60 Gauss shots, and the Harbinger of Transmogrification will also get to shoots his Voltaic Staff, which is a blast, and will decrease the charge distance by D3. Now, imagine what would happen if that assaulting unit had already been hit my the staff in the previous shooting phase: the unit would have its charge distance reduced by D3 already, and then another D3 from the defensive fire. That would very easily cause a failed charge.
Now, there are a few things that are unclear:
1) can you use defensive fire against a failed assault?
2) if your defensive fire mows down the front ranks so that no charging enemy models are within 1" of your Warriors, does the assault fail?
3) does defensive fire occur when the unit declares its charge, or does it occur when the two units collide? The example I gave with the Voltaic Staff means that the answer to this question will have a huge impact to the Necrons, as being able to fire off a blast that reduces charge distance is incredibly powerful during defensive fire.
Dantalian wrote:GW totally has been growing the size of the armies with every edition. This can be seen in tournament/open gaming events they have held of the last 10 years now, each consecutive one has been larger and larger. These "events" for some reason tend to become the new average point size since people tend to build their lists to match the events rules. I remember when the average game was about 1000pts.
1000points has never been the standard size for 40K.
GW has certainly been providing for larger games as time goes by... but that's not entirely being driven by GW. The change from 2nd edition's skirmish system to the more 'streamlined' 3rd edition was pushed just as much by the players as by GW. GW simply capitalised on the fact that during the lifespan of 2nd edition, players kept playing larger and larger games. By the end of 2nd edition, even with a ruleset that got ridiculously clunky over 3000 points or so, we were regularly playing 5-10000 point games... and my gaming group wasn't the only one doing that.
People kept playing bigger games, so GW gave them a ruleset that was better able to handle that. People then not only kept playing bigger games, but started asking for titans and thunderhawks and baneblades (oh my!)... and so GW gave them a ruleset to handle that.
The increase in tournament sizes has likewise not just been pushed by GW. From what I recall, it was the indies that started pushing the tournie points limit up... GW just followed suit.
Not arguing that larger games is good for GW, because it means more sales... just that it's not just GW saying that we should be playing bigger games.
Dantalian wrote:Also If you were even in the hobby around 2nd and 3rd, you would realize 1000pts was a HUGE game.
It really wasn't. 1000 points in 2nd edition was more or less the equivalent of Combat Patrol. 2000 points was the standard, and was equivalent to 1500 points in 3rd.
Happygrunt wrote:While everyone complains about the rules, I am sitting her wondering how I am supposed to justify a $75 game book. I mean, seriously.
You can buy a new video game, which these days generally seems to get you around 8 to 10 hours of play time... Or you can buy a rulebook that will get you how many times more than that?
azazel the cat wrote:Okay... so the Necrons can ally with the Black Templars... I understand that ally =/= BFF, but I'm pretty sure the Necron codex mentions that at some point, Imotekh cut off Helbrecht's arms. So one way or another, I just don't understand how those two races are gonna fist-bump.
As has been mentioned, that's covered quite well by the Allies of Convenience set-up. There are all sorts of scenarios possible where two forces can find themselves with similar objectives without being BFFs.
TBD wrote:And why would Sisters of Battle & Black Templars be an "unholy alliance" :question
It's possible that the BTs would take a dim view of ladies who sprout wings and flit around the battlefield waving flaming swords and throwing doves at people...
MajorTom11 wrote:Have to agree with Just Dave... they make rules, they make 400+ page rulebooks, they push the game as an integral part of the experience... there is no excuse for making gak rules and saying 'well we don't really care'. If you are going to do it, do it right, especially when doing it half-assed still takes a ton of effort and expense and could hurt you, and doing it right takes not much more effort and expense and could benefit you significantly.
I mean c'mon. lol
But, in reading JJ's Standard Bearer, he constantly makes reference to the narrative side of things and I get a distinct feeling that people who exploit the gaping flaws in the rules are viewed as 'bad folks you shouldn't play against', which doesn't even take pick up games into account, let alone tourneys.
Instead of seeking balance in the rules, I see an amount of nostalgia for Rogue Trader from the design team, coupled with a desire to sell models immediately regardless of playability from the corporate side.
Of course, I've yet to sit down and read these rules, but 'take what you want' unless your tyranids, seems very silly, as does buying buildings in a standard game.
Eldar Craft wrote:So with all the talk of allies being basically a mirror of the allies system in 8th edition fantasy. How does that work? How does it play out balance-wise, and is it allowed in tournaments? There are obvious holes in what we have come to know as the races in 40k and how they are supposed to fight together under almost any circumstances but if GW has already introduced this to fantasy I was wondering how well it works for that system.
Actually, once the WD came out, and then the glimpse of the allies rules in the video teaser, these comparisons more or less cease.
In WHFB the allies section is explicitly for the purpose of allowing two players with their own armies to team up. It makes no attempt at being balanced, and I assume it is completely ignored in single player tournaments (but adhered to in doubles tournaments).
These 40K ally rules are clearly meant for one player to combine units from different armies in a single list, so the comparison to the WHFB system doesn't work that well.
(thats 60 in troops then 40 more in another org chart)
Orks 
This is an actual hinderance. To get the 3 extra slots (fast, heavy & elite. You'll probably won't use all of them),
