Inevitable_Faith wrote: Here's the disconnect I have with your argument though HBMC: The scarabs and tervigon extra models were not summoning.
The premise of my argument is that "Generating models during a game = Summoning". If that turns out to be a false premise, and that they are infact talking about summoning Daemons, as opposed to just the generation of new miniatures, then that's fine. In that instance you'll be 100% right, my argument will be flawed and I will in fact be fine with that.
My concern is that GW has looked at summoning Daemons and gone "Summoning bad! GW SMASH!" and just done this to anything that generates any miniatures in complete over reaction (ie. fixing the general rule when it was a specific rule causing the problem).
Inevitable_Faith wrote: Summon spam lists that wrecked tourneys were psychic summoning, these two units are not that. It's entirely possible that both the Tervigon and Canoptec spider have retained their ability to reinforce or make new units of scarabs and termagaunts, if this is the case I'd imagine a small portion of the points cost of these units may be rolled into the cost of the Tervigon and Spider themselves. I fully expect to see a model reinforcement mechanic to be built into both the Tervigon and Spider, neither of which we've seen the rules for yet so we have no way of knowing for sure at this time. What we do know is that psychic summoning has been changed a lot and in my opinion much to the benefit of the game. I feel you've seen a portion of a rule for one mechanic (psychic daemon summoning), correlated it to another unrelated mechanic (Tervigon birthing and spider scarab reinforcement) and somehow come to the conclusion that this is punishing armies? Perhaps you've jumped the gun on this?
Psychic summoning absolutely needed the axe, it was a ridiculous implementation from the get-go. The new method is much more reliable, maintains the tactical versatility of being able to select the right daemon for the job and since you pay points for those daemons is much more balanced, from what we've seen I'd say it's a win all around. You may disagree that the new summoning system is an improvement and that's definitely a matter worth discussing and looking in to even with our very limited knowledge of it right now but I feel that discussion has little (if anything) to do with the mechanics of a Tervigon, Canoptek Spider or even a Ghost Ark for that matter. The latter three will have rules specific to them that will dictate how they function apart from the core Daemon summoning rules.
I don't disagree with any of this, and I fully admit that we don't know what Tervigons or Tomb Spyders or any of them are actually going to do yet. I am simply expressing a concern that stems from an educated guess using GW's prior behaviour when it comes to "balancing".
I've also fully acknowledge that the constantly Daemon summoning was a bad thing, so people need to stop coming back at me was "But Daemon summoning was breaking the game! This change needed to happen!". I get it, but as I have said numerous times in this thread in one way or another, just because I'm concerned for an 8th Ed rules ---does not mean--- I am advocating for 7th Ed rules.
I believe I understand your point a lot more clearly now HBMC, when I read the summoning teaser info I jumped straight to the psychic summoning of Daemons and didn't even consider that it may apply to other means of generating models. To me at least it was strictly a teaser on new Daemon summoning and other model generation methods would remain as individual rules specific to the unit they come with. If GW does indeed apply this general summoning principle to every army in the game that can generate models then I'd tend to agree with you that it seems a bit heavy-handed. My hope is that the Ghost Ark, Spider and Tervigon all have unique rules specific to themselves that take their unique method of model generation into account on their profile and that the summoning teaser we saw would apply exclusively to Daemon summoning. We can't say either way at the moment but GWs attitude and implementation of this edition seems to be counter to their history over past years and so I'm cautiously optimistic that they'll roll out these features with a bit more finesse than they have previously. For now it's a "wait and see" game but I'm glad I was able to understand your point much more clearly all the same.
Ghaz wrote: They're still 'free models'. I don't see a reason why 'free models' should be treated differently due to the name of the rule.
As HMBC says, context.
If you can just place new units down then you have much more flexibility than replacing casualties in new units.
If a unit is dead you can't add to it. hence ability is no longer useful.
If the unit hasn't taken casualties you can't add to it.
Putting down a new unit can be huge in terms of suddenly blocking enemy units, or grabbing objectives etc.
Of course in some cases it may be that casualty replacement is very potent, but they are different rules with different affects in a turn limited objective based matched game, so treating them the same does not seem better then treating them different.
Ghaz wrote: They're still 'free models'. I don't see a reason why 'free models' should be treated differently due to the name of the rule.
because GW thinks summoning is the problem and not free models in general
the same as a multi faction death star is evil but a single faction death star is not
the same people don't like too much randomness and GW thinks this is what makes the game fun in the first place
Whether it's Daemon Summoning or spawning new units, seems it's all done out of your allotted points now.
Summoning in AoS remains useful because you don't buy units to summon, just put aside points. That of course means you're in with the chance to summon exactly the right kind of unit you need to tip the balance, but at the obvious risk of fielding a far smaller force from the outset.
From what I've read, seems 40k is doing it in an identical way - though I suspect the Tervigon will just become a transport.
To be fair, Scarabs became kinda overcosted and slightly nerfed at the same time in the 7th codex. I assumed that was intentional because you could spawn free ones into an existing unit.
Just a thought but what if the "Reinforcement generators" (tervigon, etc) have abilities that reduce the cost of what they bring out? Let's say if a guants is 8 points you get it for 4-6? Per gaunt? What if it was 2-4?
We just don't know enough yet. Now I am likely foot in mouth here but who knows.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You know what I want to see? The tervigon allowinga special weapon to appear with its spawnlings. Like the Web gun or something for X more points. Give her versatility! Make her more than Mama Gaunt! Makes Mama Gaunt and the Dangerous Spawnings!
Having read the last few pages, I'm quite shocked people are defending a rule that should never have existed period .
Free models, regardless of source, should not have been added to the game, it's been a headache since the tervigon originally dropped, deamon summon spam just exposed the issue even more.
Formosa wrote: Having read the last few pages, I'm quite shocked people are defending a rule that should never have existed period .
Free models, regardless of source, should not have been added to the game, it's been a headache since the tervigon originally dropped, deamon summon spam just exposed the issue even more.
What about older rules like Send In the Next Wave for conscripts? I would hope there are exceptions for fluffy rules like that in Narrative scenarios at least, to represent overwhelming waves of infantry or demonic invasions.
One thing to consider is that on an abstract level there's not that much difference between a Tervigon spawning a Termagant to replace a dead one vs the Tervigon providing an extra save for the Gant so it doesn't die in the first place. I'm thinking of Ressurection Protocols work for Necron. We could see the Tervigon (and other similar units) shift to work like that, if unit replacement is off the table.
What about older rules like Send In the Next Wave for conscripts? I would hope there are exceptions for fluffy rules like that in Narrative scenarios at least, to represent overwhelming waves of infantry or demonic invasions.
I believe they confirmed in one of the FB posts that Meatgrinder would be in, which would do just that.
Formosa wrote: Having read the last few pages, I'm quite shocked people are defending a rule that should never have existed period .
Free models, regardless of source, should not have been added to the game, it's been a headache since the tervigon originally dropped, deamon summon spam just exposed the issue even more.
What about older rules like Send In the Next Wave for conscripts? I would hope there are exceptions for fluffy rules like that in Narrative scenarios at least, to represent overwhelming waves of infantry or demonic invasions.
One thing to consider is that on an abstract level there's not that much difference between a Tervigon spawning a Termagant to replace a dead one vs the Tervigon providing an extra save for the Gant so it doesn't die in the first place. I'm thinking of Ressurection Protocols work for Necron. We could see the Tervigon (and other similar units) shift to work like that, if unit replacement is off the table.
In AoS, Reinforcement Points is a Matched Play rule and doesn't apply to Open or Narrative Play (unless agreed to by the players).
JohnnyHell wrote: HBMC has made his position clear, but no-one is under any obligation to somehow disprove that view. That's not how this discussion thing works. We just disagree and move on. The subject of the thread is not "HBMC is right: discuss" (not being rude to HBMC here, to be clear, I'm just illustrating that the convo has gone a little circular and is eating itself).
Galas wrote: And what about the Ork Warboss that killed a Titan runing trought his face with his bike. Hm? What about that?! Isn't that fluffy enough?!
where did you read this I need thee book for my collection.
Galas wrote: And what about the Ork Warboss that killed a Titan runing trought his face with his bike. Hm? What about that?! Isn't that fluffy enough?!
where did you read this I need thee book for my collection.
So..... they changed the spelling of the Tau to T'au. For maximum copyright I assume, and they introduced a plot hook for why are there T'au in other places of the galaxy. I like it.
The Fourth Sphere Expansion fleet set off almost immediately once the fires in the Gulf had subsided, but with the Great Rift was still raging through that region of space, all contact with them was soon lost. Were they all killed by some unknown attacker(s)? Did they just lose contact due to interference? Perhaps they entered the Warp – intentionally or not – becoming lost (or worse) in the violent empyrean tides? Maybe they will yet be found, or emerge somewhere unexpected in the galaxy, a lost portion of this optimistic new empire ever intent on conquest…
So Tau got super murdered after trying to take Damocles for their 4th expansion after the warp rift snuffed out the raging inferno the Imperium started at the end of the old campaign and no one knows where the missing fleets are (assuming they're alive). So now we have a 5th expansion and a chance to potentially kill Tau on Terra.
The Fourth Sphere Expansion fleet set off almost immediately once the fires in the Gulf had subsided, but with the Great Rift was still raging through that region of space, all contact with them was soon lost. Were they all killed by some unknown attacker(s)? Did they just lose contact due to interference? Perhaps they entered the Warp – intentionally or not – becoming lost (or worse) in the violent empyrean tides? Maybe they will yet be found, or emerge somewhere unexpected in the galaxy, a lost portion of this optimistic new empire ever intent on conquest…
Chaos Tau confirmed.
That or Necrons found a better source to make Pariahs out of....
So Tau got super murdered after trying to take Damocles for their 4th expansion after the warp rift snuffed out the raging inferno the Imperium started at the end of the old campaign and no one knows where the missing fleets are (assuming they're alive). So now we have a 5th expansion and a chance to potentially kill Tau on Terra.
Or Cadia or Baal.
Concept-wise, I guess it's as good as any to make it so that Tau can be in more than just the Eastern Fringe.
Galas wrote: And what about the Ork Warboss that killed a Titan runing trought his face with his bike. Hm? What about that?! Isn't that fluffy enough?!
where did you read this I need thee book for my collection.
Seneca wrote: So..... they changed the spelling of the Tau to T'au. For maximum copyright I assume, and they introduced a plot hook for why are there T'au in other places of the galaxy. I like it.
Well, their main homeworld is called T'au as well, so I guess that makes sense.
Seneca wrote: So..... they changed the spelling of the Tau to T'au. For maximum copyright I assume, and they introduced a plot hook for why are there T'au in other places of the galaxy. I like it.
You do know that their homeworld has been always T'au, don't you? This is most likely to be the editor mixing up names.
I... They aren't paying attention to the terminology. They're called sphere expansions because they increase the empire's territory. If the fourth sphere expeditionary fleet vanishes then it doesn't stop being the fourth sphere expansion.
I don't know if this was known, but the June White Dwarf has a street date of 6/23 (much later usual), so it stands to reason that 8th will come out on that date or a week later.
changemod wrote: I... They aren't paying attention to the terminology. They're called sphere expansions because they increase the empire's territory. If the fourth sphere expeditionary fleet vanishes then it doesn't stop being the fourth sphere expansion.
It does when the Aun'va hologram declares the Fourth Sphere Expansion an unmitigated success at expanding Tau holdings clear across the galaxy, thus the Fifth Sphere Expansion can begin...
Also, FYI: Rob and Eddie have said on Twitch that there will be another Q&A with Andy Smillie and Pete Foley (on Facebook) this coming Thursday (probably about 5pm ish like last time)
It's not a binary problem. It's a contextual problem. Unlimited summoning of power units like Daemons and Daemonic characters is obviously a major issue, something we all saw happen in current 40K. On the flip-side making a few Scarab bases is an order of magnitude different to the Daemon example.
The same solution needn't be applied to everything.
They say that when all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. But there are different sized hammers. GW need not always go for the biggest one.
Everything comes with a cost. If something gets models for free they're going to pay for it up front or with weaker models. Tyranids don't get free stuff with no downside just because that's what they're supposed to do.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I don't know if this was known, but the June White Dwarf has a street date of 6/23 (much later usual), so it stands to reason that 8th will come out on that date or a week later.
Subscribers get it even earlier, so it don't think the edition itself will release that late. Also they aren't really forced to release everything alongside a white dwarf issue, releasing the WD issue a week after the launch for example wouldn't make a big difference. Also the leaked days where store managers aren't allowed to take vacations were on and around the 16th AFAIR.
changemod wrote: I... They aren't paying attention to the terminology. They're called sphere expansions because they increase the empire's territory. If the fourth sphere expeditionary fleet vanishes then it doesn't stop being the fourth sphere expansion.
It does when the Aun'va hologram declares the Fourth Sphere Expansion an unmitigated success at expanding Tau holdings clear across the galaxy, thus the Fifth Sphere Expansion can begin...
Here we have the mind of a Ethereal at work. Good job!
That or Necrons found a better source to make Pariahs out of....
Or maybe they found Demiurg...
I can see them easily adding a few units here and there of found races to the Tau lineup.
We need Demiurg, maybe is a little soon after the Kharadron Overlords, but... they are so cool.
Spoiler:
That would be great! I've always thought they've missed a trick with not fleshing out the different Xenos that are part of the greater good, it'd be nice to be able to take a squad of humans too. Maybe a future upgrade sprue?
The Fourth Sphere Expansion fleet set off almost immediately once the fires in the Gulf had subsided, but with the Great Rift was still raging through that region of space, all contact with them was soon lost. Were they all killed by some unknown attacker(s)? Did they just lose contact due to interference? Perhaps they entered the Warp – intentionally or not – becoming lost (or worse) in the violent empyrean tides? Maybe they will yet be found, or emerge somewhere unexpected in the galaxy, a lost portion of this optimistic new empire ever intent on conquest…
Chaos Tau confirmed.
I'll collect them lol. Would be neat to see crazed Mon'tau. Also the 4th wave didn't get destroyed, but a huge expeditionary force that size being used by chaos is going to put some hurt on things. Whatever happened to them I'm sure it will be plot significant if it's the first new thing worth learning about them.
I love the narrative points, and hope that they become the default for casual games and not matched.
RE: Summoning I think it can't be as bad as in AOS, where summoning is basically worthless unless you have some kind of gimmick. But people are too caught up in "BUT IT'S NOT FAIR YOU GET SOMETHING FOR FREE!" to do anything but whine and cry if they see any perceived advantage of their opponent.
Slaanesh is all about speed, baby. They will almost always swing first in combat, even if they did not charge, due to their Quicksilver Swiftness special rule! This means even relatively fragile units such as Daemonettes can be a threat at all times. They’re one of my favourite units – I own nearly 100 of them at present (I might have a problem) – and I can’t wait to get them on the table.
The good news is that these crab-armed warriors are absolutely lethal, especially if taken in units of twenty or more models. In large units like this, the Graceful Killers special rule grants them a bonus attack with their Piercing Claws (which are resolved at AP-4 when you roll a 6+ to wound!) allowing them to slice through armour in melee.
The Fourth Sphere Expansion fleet set off almost immediately once the fires in the Gulf had subsided, but with the Great Rift was still raging through that region of space, all contact with them was soon lost. Were they all killed by some unknown attacker(s)? Did they just lose contact due to interference? Perhaps they entered the Warp – intentionally or not – becoming lost (or worse) in the violent empyrean tides? Maybe they will yet be found, or emerge somewhere unexpected in the galaxy, a lost portion of this optimistic new empire ever intent on conquest…
Chaos Tau confirmed.
I'll collect them lol. Would be neat to see crazed Mon'tau. Also the 4th wave didn't get destroyed, but a huge expeditionary force that size being used by chaos is going to put some hurt on things. Whatever happened to them I'm sure it will be plot significant if it's the first new thing worth learning about them.
I'd rather guess that they were swallowed and then spit out in several different places, ready to fight in other warzones against other enemies, justifying fluff-wise how they can be on the table against anyone.
From what I've read, seems 40k is doing it in an identical way - though I suspect the Tervigon will just become a transport.
I'm hoping the Tervigon is a transport similar to the Ghost Ark in that it can hold a unit of Guants, but also add D6 Guants to exising units within 6" up to their starting size.
Ghost Arks adding Warriors to existing units or Spiders adding scarabs was never a game breaking issue. Making new units could be.
I'm really hoping you don't have to pay for Splitting Horrors because they would make the rule worthless (just deploy them normally)
Galef wrote: I'm really hoping you don't have to pay for Splitting Horrors because they would make the rule worthless (just deploy them normally)
-
They have just said that But I assume that it will work like Age of Sigmar, so if you have a unit of Pink Horrors and other of Blue, whenever a Pink Horror dies, you can add two to the nearby blue horrors unit for free.
Save some Reinforcement Points for Blue Horrors and Brimstone Horrors as well, as these still split out of their parent unit like a series of Russian Dolls and are great for grabbing objectives and keeping enemy units busy long after other units would have been destroyed.
\
So even if the unit isn't summoned through psychic powers, you still need Reinforcement points.
Don Savik wrote: Very dissapointed to see 2+ rerollable INVULNERABLE saves. I thought 8th was doing away with this gak. Screamers weren't that awful...
Don Savik wrote: Very dissapointed to see 2+ rerollable INVULNERABLE saves. I thought 8th was doing away with this gak. Screamers weren't that awful...
If you read this, the author is talking about the state of things in 7th when he mentions the 2++ rerollables.
Don Savik wrote: Very dissapointed to see 2+ rerollable INVULNERABLE saves. I thought 8th was doing away with this gak. Screamers weren't that awful...
I think that paragraph is referencing the current state in 7th.
Well, my question from yesterday was answered... reading between the lines, it seems like 8th Ed 40k Daemonettes are pretty damn close to their AoS counterparts (down to sharing rule names)... though perhaps even better.
Their volume of cheap attacks being super-rending on 6's to wound make me a happy man. Just the image of drowning Knights, etc... in Daemonettes and them having a legit chance to cleave it to bits, should be fun!
Save some Reinforcement Points for Blue Horrors and Brimstone Horrors as well, as these still split out of their parent unit like a series of Russian Dolls and are great for grabbing objectives and keeping enemy units busy long after other units would have been destroyed.
\
So even if the unit isn't summoned through psychic powers, you still need Reinforcement points.
Good.
Sigh. Yet more kneejerk reactions because "but it's not fair you get something for free!". This is why I really hope that matched play does NOT become the default mode of play. For a tournament sure, reinforcement points work. For casual games it's obnoxious.
Their volume of cheap attacks being super-rending on 6's to wound make me a happy man. Just the image of drowning Knights, etc... in Daemonettes and them having a legit chance to cleave it to bits, should be fun!
Heres to hoping Genestealers return to such heady heights......
I'm gonna insist that summoning for free actual units that have a cost for themselves can't be balanced.
You need summoning focus unit that in general spawn "low" tier units, and have the capacity of spamming other units builded into their costs, for example, a Tervigon.
The summoning of Daemons should be deserved to specific daemons made to that end, with specific summoner casters.
Obviously, speaking about Tournament/Matched play.
To narrative play, if you want to summon a Bloodthirster if the battleplan goes around that, then it can be very cool.
That would normally be a very dangerous proposition for a unit of little guys, but the children of Nurgle are Disgustingly Resilient – which means they ignore wounds on a roll of 5 or 6!
This is FNP under a different name. Makes it pretty obvious that the same damn rule will appear over and over under different names.
Save some Reinforcement Points for Blue Horrors and Brimstone Horrors as well, as these still split out of their parent unit like a series of Russian Dolls and are great for grabbing objectives and keeping enemy units busy long after other units would have been destroyed.
\
So even if the unit isn't summoned through psychic powers, you still need Reinforcement points.
Good.
Sigh. Yet more kneejerk reactions because "but it's not fair you get something for free!". This is why I really hope that matched play does NOT become the default mode of play. For a tournament sure, reinforcement points work. For casual games it's obnoxious.
Well, yeah - if we're talking POINTS, we're talking about fairness concerns.
But for casual games (where there are no points, but only bring-whatever-you-want-and-count-its-power and play-this-historic-battle-using-your-models, and so you won't need Reinforcement points) where fairness isn't a huge concern, players aren't going to have to worry about the obnoxiousness, if any, of Reinforcement points.
What if Power Level includes "cost" for the unit's ability to summon while Points don't and instead are calculated based on the need for Reinforcement Points?
Save some Reinforcement Points for Blue Horrors and Brimstone Horrors as well, as these still split out of their parent unit like a series of Russian Dolls and are great for grabbing objectives and keeping enemy units busy long after other units would have been destroyed.
\
So even if the unit isn't summoned through psychic powers, you still need Reinforcement points.
Good.
Pretty thrilled about this in general, I was never a fan of free stuff, and I'm glad they learned their lesson from 7E on that. That got really tiring to face and deal with.
In a game balanced by points, it's always been really absurd to get units for 0 points. Tervigons should pay for the upgrade to spit out gaunts based on average # on 3d6 and same goes for Pink Horrors. Then you wouldn't be getting a large advantage for doing nothing.
I think the most interesting thing in that article was the fact that Daemonettes get that special power in units of 20+. That says to me, and obviously I'm just spit-balling, that there may be a trend in 8th of tying special unit powers to larger unit sizes, at least in some cases. That's good news for the boyz before toyz crowd.
Having to chose between the tactics of MSU and special rules for bigger units makes for more nuanced list building. IMO anyway.
Honestly I'd have preferred if horrors were priced appropriately for their splitting power: It's a phenomenal waste of time to leave your army undersized in the vague hope that your opponent will target and kill them early enough in the game that you can bring in their replacements.
Still, Horrors couldn't split for many editions and now to all intents and purposes they can't split again. Pretty harmless, but kinda disappointing when they have models now.
In AoS Daemonette units can have a max size of 30, which creates an interesting dynamic. Does a saavy opponent try to divide their fire getting several units of 30, below 20 to reduce their attacks that much more, or do they burn down a unit getting precariously close to them?
AoS definitely has tactical rewards for both elite, power units, but also hordes of small gribblies... something I really missed from 7th Ed 40k, where MSU was king.
changemod wrote: Honestly I'd have preferred if horrors were priced appropriately for their splitting power: It's a phenomenal waste of time to leave your army undersized in the vague hope that your opponent will target and kill them early enough in the game that you can bring in their replacements.
Still, Horrors couldn't split for many editions and now to all intents and purposes they can't split again. Pretty harmless, but kinda disappointing when they have models now.
Horrors are priced for their splitting power - if you want to give your Pink Horrors the power to split, you pay the price of a unit of Blue Horrors as an upgrade.
For example, in AoS, Pinks are 140 for 10 and Blues are 50 for 10. If you want to have Pinks that can split, don't think of it as "setting aside" 50 points, think of it as upgrading the unit for 50 points. Except the upgrade can also affect any Pink unit on the table.
changemod wrote: Honestly I'd have preferred if horrors were priced appropriately for their splitting power: It's a phenomenal waste of time to leave your army undersized in the vague hope that your opponent will target and kill them early enough in the game that you can bring in their replacements.
Still, Horrors couldn't split for many editions and now to all intents and purposes they can't split again. Pretty harmless, but kinda disappointing when they have models now.
Horrors are priced for their splitting power - if you want to give your Pink Horrors the power to split, you pay the price of a unit of Blue Horrors as an upgrade.
For example, in AoS, Pinks are 140 for 10 and Blues are 50 for 10. If you want to have Pinks that can split, don't think of it as "setting aside" 50 points, think of it as upgrading the unit for 50 points. Except the upgrade can also affect any Pink unit on the table.
I don't think you thought this through all the way. For the same price, you could make use of the blues and pinks at the same time. That's not pricing the pinks appropriately to carry on weaker when killed, it's buying a seperate unit.
Death-triggered creation of a weaker unit isn't really the same thing as any time summoning of potentially stronger units.
Kirasu wrote: In a game balanced by points, it's always been really absurd to get units for 0 points. Tervigons should pay for the upgrade to spit out gaunts based on average # on 3d6 and same goes for Pink Horrors. Then you wouldn't be getting a large advantage for doing nothing.
That's exactly how tervigons works in 7th, with the exception that cannot decide to NOT have that upgrade. Unless you seriously think that the tervigon is worth her points without the ability to spawn gants.
changemod wrote: Honestly I'd have preferred if horrors were priced appropriately for their splitting power: It's a phenomenal waste of time to leave your army undersized in the vague hope that your opponent will target and kill them early enough in the game that you can bring in their replacements.
Still, Horrors couldn't split for many editions and now to all intents and purposes they can't split again. Pretty harmless, but kinda disappointing when they have models now.
Horrors are priced for their splitting power - if you want to give your Pink Horrors the power to split, you pay the price of a unit of Blue Horrors as an upgrade.
For example, in AoS, Pinks are 140 for 10 and Blues are 50 for 10. If you want to have Pinks that can split, don't think of it as "setting aside" 50 points, think of it as upgrading the unit for 50 points. Except the upgrade can also affect any Pink unit on the table.
I don't think you thought this through all the way. For the same price, you could make use of the blues and pinks at the same time. That's not pricing the pinks appropriately to carry on weaker when killed, it's buying a seperate unit.
Death-triggered creation of a weaker unit isn't really the same thing as any time summoning of potentially stronger units.
Well we don't know what the pointing is going to be like. Maybe if you only split off 3 Blues you only pay for 3. Or you pay for the full unit and can split into that unit up to 10 for free after (in AoS, you can refill a unit for free but going past that costs points).
changemod wrote: Honestly I'd have preferred if horrors were priced appropriately for their splitting power: It's a phenomenal waste of time to leave your army undersized in the vague hope that your opponent will target and kill them early enough in the game that you can bring in their replacements.
Still, Horrors couldn't split for many editions and now to all intents and purposes they can't split again. Pretty harmless, but kinda disappointing when they have models now.
Horrors are priced for their splitting power - if you want to give your Pink Horrors the power to split, you pay the price of a unit of Blue Horrors as an upgrade.
For example, in AoS, Pinks are 140 for 10 and Blues are 50 for 10. If you want to have Pinks that can split, don't think of it as "setting aside" 50 points, think of it as upgrading the unit for 50 points. Except the upgrade can also affect any Pink unit on the table.
I don't think you thought this through all the way. For the same price, you could make use of the blues and pinks at the same time. That's not pricing the pinks appropriately to carry on weaker when killed, it's buying a seperate unit.
Death-triggered creation of a weaker unit isn't really the same thing as any time summoning of potentially stronger units.
If you don't see how awesome having a troop unit you have to kill 3 times to get off of an objective is that's kinda on you.
changemod wrote: Honestly I'd have preferred if horrors were priced appropriately for their splitting power: It's a phenomenal waste of time to leave your army undersized in the vague hope that your opponent will target and kill them early enough in the game that you can bring in their replacements.
Still, Horrors couldn't split for many editions and now to all intents and purposes they can't split again. Pretty harmless, but kinda disappointing when they have models now.
Horrors are priced for their splitting power - if you want to give your Pink Horrors the power to split, you pay the price of a unit of Blue Horrors as an upgrade.
For example, in AoS, Pinks are 140 for 10 and Blues are 50 for 10. If you want to have Pinks that can split, don't think of it as "setting aside" 50 points, think of it as upgrading the unit for 50 points. Except the upgrade can also affect any Pink unit on the table.
I don't think you thought this through all the way. For the same price, you could make use of the blues and pinks at the same time. That's not pricing the pinks appropriately to carry on weaker when killed, it's buying a seperate unit.
Death-triggered creation of a weaker unit isn't really the same thing as any time summoning of potentially stronger units.
Well we don't know what the pointing is going to be like. Maybe if you only split off 3 Blues you only pay for 3. Or you pay for the full unit and can split into that unit up to 10 for free after (in AoS, you can refill a unit for free but going past that costs points).
It's nice if you can spawn a single blue with your leftover 5 points, I guess. A pretty petty gimmick if so though.
changemod wrote: Honestly I'd have preferred if horrors were priced appropriately for their splitting power: It's a phenomenal waste of time to leave your army undersized in the vague hope that your opponent will target and kill them early enough in the game that you can bring in their replacements.
Still, Horrors couldn't split for many editions and now to all intents and purposes they can't split again. Pretty harmless, but kinda disappointing when they have models now.
Horrors are priced for their splitting power - if you want to give your Pink Horrors the power to split, you pay the price of a unit of Blue Horrors as an upgrade.
For example, in AoS, Pinks are 140 for 10 and Blues are 50 for 10. If you want to have Pinks that can split, don't think of it as "setting aside" 50 points, think of it as upgrading the unit for 50 points. Except the upgrade can also affect any Pink unit on the table.
I don't think you thought this through all the way. For the same price, you could make use of the blues and pinks at the same time. That's not pricing the pinks appropriately to carry on weaker when killed, it's buying a seperate unit.
Death-triggered creation of a weaker unit isn't really the same thing as any time summoning of potentially stronger units.
If you don't see how awesome having a troop unit you have to kill 3 times to get off of an objective is that's kinda on you.
It's almost as nice as having those same 3 units on the board(or normal deepstrike) doing stuff offensively and defensively the entire time for the same number of points....
changemod wrote: Honestly I'd have preferred if horrors were priced appropriately for their splitting power: It's a phenomenal waste of time to leave your army undersized in the vague hope that your opponent will target and kill them early enough in the game that you can bring in their replacements.
Still, Horrors couldn't split for many editions and now to all intents and purposes they can't split again. Pretty harmless, but kinda disappointing when they have models now.
Horrors are priced for their splitting power - if you want to give your Pink Horrors the power to split, you pay the price of a unit of Blue Horrors as an upgrade.
For example, in AoS, Pinks are 140 for 10 and Blues are 50 for 10. If you want to have Pinks that can split, don't think of it as "setting aside" 50 points, think of it as upgrading the unit for 50 points. Except the upgrade can also affect any Pink unit on the table.
I don't think you thought this through all the way. For the same price, you could make use of the blues and pinks at the same time. That's not pricing the pinks appropriately to carry on weaker when killed, it's buying a seperate unit.
Death-triggered creation of a weaker unit isn't really the same thing as any time summoning of potentially stronger units.
If you don't see how awesome having a troop unit you have to kill 3 times to get off of an objective is that's kinda on you.
It's almost as nice as having those same 3 units on the board doing stuff offensively and defensively the entire time for the same number of points....
Or in deep strike reserve, able to land quicker and anywhere you need them.
Also, when was the last time the ability to hold one objective -really well- mattered all that much? Obsec spam works because you can grab maelstrom points all over the place from the six objectives on the board.
You guys dont get it, the big reveal later will be that you only have 2 minutes per phase to do everything, then it moves on.
So having just 2 unit of horrors and the rest in reinforcement points(tm) will be super super tactical.
Plus, it will be super fluffy since daemons cant move in big hordes (fluff pending).
Also, about the Daemonettes, there's nothing saying that they lose that ability of the unit is reduced below 20 during the game. They might, but they also might not. Personally, I'd prefer if they kept the ability during game, mostly because its relatively easy to kill 5 or 10 lesser daemons and it might not be enough of an incentive to field large units if the resulting buff was so easily lost.
Fenris-77 wrote: Also, about the Daemonettes, there's nothing saying that they lose that ability of the unit is reduced below 20 during the game. They might, but they also might not. Personally, I'd prefer if they kept the ability during game, mostly because its relatively easy to kill 5 or 10 lesser daemons and it might not be enough of an incentive to field large units if the resulting buff was so easily lost.
Yea it is one thing in AoS when not everything shoots to get to CC with a big unit. 40K is a different beast so i'll be curious to see the factors at play here. I doubt they'll keep it, but a point cost adjustment may be in order.
On the plus side S5 weapons don't wound them on 2s anymore...
Kirasu wrote: In a game balanced by points, it's always been really absurd to get units for 0 points.
Not exactly. There are plenty of systems that work with summoning, but what it comes down to is you should pay for that opportunity. Maybe the summoner is overpriced otherwise, or maybe the ability to summon costs points, or maybe it comes with restrictions or limitations or action costs or option losses or risks.
The problem isn't 0 points, it's that the mechanic as a whole doesn't add up to something balanced. I don't think the new system is particularly innovative or imaginative, but do think it basically gets the job done and will be easy to balance.
Tervigons summoning was a bad thing and demon summoning is bad as well.
As an example to the question of "was gaunt summoning or scarab summoning that bad?"
The answer is a simple yes. In order to go any further i would like to see how it was a good thing. (Did people really forget in 5th where tervigons summoned 3x 3d6 models per turn? Anectodal evidence, the only that stopped our tyranid players was their model numbers running out)
Free summoning should have never existed and glad to see them gone. I even hope replacements are costed.
They create nothing but bloat for the game for rules such as how do you place them?, can you directly summon into combat since it is not a movement? .
You can have many many abilities that are fluffy and actually only work when they are answered correctly, which creates even more complex rules. Summoning is one of them and just too much hassle for what it brings to the game.
Fenris-77 wrote:I think the most interesting thing in that article was the fact that Daemonettes get that special power in units of 20+. That says to me, and obviously I'm just spit-balling, that there may be a trend in 8th of tying special unit powers to larger unit sizes, at least in some cases. That's good news for the boyz before toyz crowd.
Having to chose between the tactics of MSU and special rules for bigger units makes for more nuanced list building. IMO anyway.
Every unit in AoS that has a unit size of 10-30 or more gets buffs for being over 10/20/30 models, so yeah that's pretty safe to say.
Yonasu wrote:You guys dont get it, the big reveal later will be that you only have 2 minutes per phase to do everything, then it moves on. So having just 2 unit of horrors and the rest in reinforcement points(tm) will be super super tactical. Plus, it will be super fluffy since daemons cant move in big hordes (fluff pending).
Or just use Blue and Brimstone Horrors as separate units that, if AoS is anything to go by, will be super cheap, very useful and see a lot of play. No need to overreact.
Kirasu wrote: In a game balanced by points, it's always been really absurd to get units for 0 points.
Not exactly. There are plenty of systems that work with summoning, but what it comes down to is you should pay for that opportunity. Maybe the summoner is overpriced otherwise, or maybe the ability to summon costs points, or maybe it comes with restrictions or limitations or action costs or option losses or risks.
The problem isn't 0 points, it's that the mechanic as a whole doesn't add up to something balanced. I don't think the new system is particularly innovative or imaginative, but do think it basically gets the job done and will be easy to balance.
"The problem isn't that summoning costs 0 points, it works in other games. It's just you should have to pay something for it."
Regarding the Tervigon, what if they did something similar to the current one, were you were required to take 30 gaunts to take one as troop, but in 8th you need 30 gaunts + a tervigon in order for the tervigon to spawn new gaunts and the newly spawned gaunts cannot exceed beyond the 30 gaunts you brought from the start?
Kirasu wrote: In a game balanced by points, it's always been really absurd to get units for 0 points.
Not exactly. There are plenty of systems that work with summoning, but what it comes down to is you should pay for that opportunity. Maybe the summoner is overpriced otherwise, or maybe the ability to summon costs points, or maybe it comes with restrictions or limitations or action costs or option losses or risks.
The problem isn't 0 points, it's that the mechanic as a whole doesn't add up to something balanced. I don't think the new system is particularly innovative or imaginative, but do think it basically gets the job done and will be easy to balance.
"The problem isn't that summoning costs 0 points, it works in other games. It's just you should have to pay something for it."
What?
Points aren't the only resource in a game; summoning for no points can be balanced if it negatively impacts some other thing.
It can also be balanced if the summoning ability is itself costed to account for the summoned models but that's still a point cost.
If you're going after "alternate resources" in nu40k though, I'd go straight for Command Points myself.
And/or making it so that you can't summmon units that you don't have spare "slots" for on your force org chart (e.g. if you have a single CAD as your list, and already have three elite units, no elite summons for you).
If you want to make bug Tyranid creatures worth it, having them hurt themselves for the in-lore function they're meant to provide seems counter-productive.
pizzaguardian wrote: Tervigons summoning was a bad thing and demon summoning is bad as well.
As an example to the question of "was gaunt summoning or scarab summoning that bad?"
The answer is a simple yes. In order to go any further i would like to see how it was a good thing. (Did people really forget in 5th where tervigons summoned 3x 3d6 models per turn? Anectodal evidence, the only that stopped our tyranid players was their model numbers running out)
Free summoning should have never existed and glad to see them gone. I even hope replacements are costed.
They create nothing but bloat for the game for rules such as how do you place them?, can you directly summon into combat since it is not a movement? .
You can have many many abilities that are fluffy and actually only work when they are answered correctly, which creates even more complex rules. Summoning is one of them and just too much hassle for what it brings to the game.
Tervigons ran out when they rolled a double on any of the 3 dice. It really wasn't a problem.
Off work now, so let's round up the Q&As for the day:
Damocles Gulf
Q: When you decide to show a battle report of the new 40k, could you have Tau vs Daemons, as these are the two of the most extreme armies, it would be good to see how the balance actually works.
A: Great idea! Chaos vs Xenos... whoever loses, the Imperium wins.
Q: That picture of Chaos ripping Tau to shreds... that's the best thing I've ever seen. Do daemons like the taste of fish?
A: Tau sushi is a delicacy in the Warp.
Q: DUNT CARE BOUT DESE FISH EADS! SHOW US SOME ORKS!!!! WAAAAAGGHHH!!!!!
A: OI! Keep da noize daan! I has a bangin' 'eadache after 'eadbuttin' that Ogryn da ovva day!
Q: Speaking of Tau, how do you pronounce it properly? btw even my gf laughed with the profile joke. hehehehe
A: Glad you liked it! We pronounce as if it rhymes with Cow. NOT so it rhymes with roar.
Q: Show me a rail gun profile !!! Need to know !! Who is the new leader ??? Farsight with shadowsun or new figure
A: We couldn't resist.
Q: DUNT CARE BOUT DESE FISH EADS! SHOW US SOME ORKS!!!! WAAAAAGGHHH!!!!!
A: OI! Keep da noize daan! I has a bangin' 'eadache after 'eadbuttin' that Ogryn da ovva day!
Q: did I miss last day's army focus or where there none to be found?
Will there be one today? ...
....Maybe two?
A: We're not doing one EVERY day...! You haven't missed one today
Q: Can we see an army showcase for Squats?
A: Sure thing. I think there's at least a couple in this picture...
Q: Dead Tau is good Tau
A: You know it.
Daemon Faction Focus Q: Whoever took over the handling of social media and the new approach needs a raise that's for sure.
A: Would we tease you guys?! Would we?!*
THE VERY NEXT POST: *yes.
Q: To be entirely honest, I am only following this post for more comedy-gold comments by Warhammer 40,000 admins
A: Thanks- we're here all week! Try the steak!*
Next Post: *Actually, don't.. The Commissar's cat went missing yesterday...
Q: I know this will come off as fanboy-ing, but I really like the new community engagement from Games Workshop. Keep up the good work!
A: Thank you! Wanna know a secret... we're all massive Warhammer 40,000 fanboys too....
Q: Nick Brown this is for you.
Can we see a faction focus on adeptus sororitas next please?
much love if so
A: They are certainly getting one, have faith!
Q: so basically every 2 days there is going to be a Faction Focus? ok, I can candle that, just can't wait till you get to space wolves soon
A: Maaaaaybe....!
Q1: As someone who has only started the game about 2 weeks ago and selected the army i like. When will we be seeing the trynaid faction focus? I want to see what to what changes/focus of the nids so i can feel more confident in buying new models before the release of 8th ed
A1: The Tyranid Faction Focus is on the way, lumbering it's way towards us like a grumpy Tyrannofex.
Q2: Warhammer 40,000 You're going to use all the "adjective/tyranid unit name" at some point, You'd better release the tyranid article next so you don't have to think of new ones every day
A2: We aren't going to run out of Tyranid metaphors; we just keep em' coming... like an overly-productive Tervigon.
Q: Interesting, on a side note what about the huge explosion templates that we used to use with the knight titan, will they still be needed in 8th ?
A: Hey Matt - templates have gone from the new edition- it is a template-free zone!
Q: Great news everyone, the rumors of Slaanesh down fall were false.
Can we finally get a starter box for Slaanesh daemons like the other three?
Please Warhammer 40,000. We all want that great deal all three other gods already have at GWs.
A: Great point. We will pass this on to the chaps in the studio.
Q: Why don't your packaging peanuts taste like real peanuts?
A: Ummmm...Trent... we...we need to talk.
Q: Still waiting for the Deathwatch Faction Focus
A: Warhammer TV's Dan has been raving about how good Deathwatch are in the new edition. There will be a Faction Focus article on them... soon!
Q: FAN-TABULOUS!
Love it!!!
A: Whole new words from Horton
Q: Are khorne daemonkin still playable?
A: Yes, absolutely. We don't wanna make Khorne players angry... we value our skulls.
If you want to make bug Tyranid creatures worth it, having them hurt themselves for the in-lore function they're meant to provide seems counter-productive.
I mean in lieu of making you pay points for the models it spawns, or building that point cost directly into the tervigon itself.
The is a precedent for this I think, isn't this how the Necron Spyder worked way back in 4th ed when it spawned scarabs?
And in lord of the rings sbg there's a Spider Queen monster which loses a wound in return for spawning spider brood swarms. (Not directly relevant to 40k I know but I bring it up to illustrate that GW has done it before).
I can understand why some people may feel put off by Tervigons producing free models, but let's be honest: the function was a part of its cost when it first came out. You'd get on average 1-2 spawnings out of it and that was it.
Frankly it'd be more well rounded as a Tyranid Ghost Ark that could carry Gaunts and spit out replacement models. It's a function that could be pushed into the cost of Tervigon and move it into the Transport category so you can't take one unless you've taken another unit. Make it so it can only heal existing units and it becomes even more restrictive, but more utilitarian than before. I'm pretty sure a Capacity 20 transport that can potentially heal a unit of Gaunts 1D3 models (or 2D3 models but it takes a wound if it rolls doubles due to pulling a spincter) would be a fair, fluffy and balanced way to put them on the table.
At least that's my point of view. Obvious others disagree.
That aside, Endless Swarm was an upgrade from the 4th edition codex. You got units back with all their upgrades but it cost a fair chunk per model in the unit. I could see stuff like this coming back, but if it does it feels like it should be a flat cost for the unit (pushing people to running large hordes instead of MSUs to abuse the ability).
ClockworkZion's new Facebook Round-up is now in the original post, with the other 6 he has done! Go have a read if you haven't yet (not a lot of new content, but a good read thanks to the GW social media team)
So we have regular wounds, mortal wounds, armour saves, invulnerable saves and basically-FnP, with rules here and there to allow re-rolls of various saves.
I was hoping it would be a little tidier if I'm honest, with extra toughness/wounds for units that previously had FnP (just to cut down on how much rolling was going on).
Do we know if invuns are separate saves from armour (choosing the best), or just making the armour save a capped amount against modifiers?
For the tervigon it appeared to spend 25-30 points on summoning gaunts. This meant that it had to spawn at least 9 gaunts to earn the points back. The average on 3d6 (not 3x3d6) is 10, but the power shut down on any roll of doubles (which is a 50% chance on 3 dice) and if it died it also killed nearby gaunts including ones percussed.
Since those gaunts wanted to be nearby because synapse those gaunts had a decent chance to be destroyed when momma went down.
Flood wrote: So we have regular wounds, mortal wounds, armour saves, invulnerable saves and basically-FnP, with rules here and there to allow re-rolls of various saves.
I was hoping it would be a little tidier if I'm honest, with extra toughness/wounds for units that previously had FnP (just to cut down on how much rolling was going on).
Do we know if invuns are separate saves from armour (choosing the best), or just making the armour save a capped amount against modifiers?
If it works like AoS, then an Invul save will be taken after a failed armor save. If not, then maybe you will pick the highest.
Hopefully we won't have any Harbinger of Decay shenanigans with a possible 4 saves in a row at 4+, 5+, 5+. 5+ or what not.
Flood wrote: So we have regular wounds, mortal wounds, armour saves, invulnerable saves and basically-FnP, with rules here and there to allow re-rolls of various saves.
All of which are things in AoS and thus should not really be a shock to see in 40k. Still, we shouldn't be seeing things as broken as re-rollable 2++ saves.
Flood wrote: I was hoping it would be a little tidier if I'm honest, with extra toughness/wounds for units that previously had FnP (just to cut down on how much rolling was going on).
Plague Marines are already T5 (T6 on a Bike) and have FnP. Do you really think they should be T6 (T7 on a bike) to make up for losing FnP?
Giving them FnP to shrug off wounds is fine assuming the points costs for the ability are properly balanced.
Flood wrote: Do we know if invuns are separate saves from armour (choosing the best), or just making the armour save a capped amount against modifiers?
From what I understand from what has come out, Invulnerable saves look like they're seperate saves. That said, they are definitely an option if a Rend value takes you past the Invulnerable save's value you can probably roll it instead of the armour. If it was like the old Fantasy Ward save where you rolled armour, then ward it'd be slow and clunky.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: For the tervigon it appeared to spend 25-30 points on summoning gaunts. This meant that it had to spawn at least 9 gaunts to earn the points back. The average on 3d6 (not 3x3d6) is 10, but the power shut down on any roll of doubles (which is a 50% chance on 3 dice) and if it died it also killed nearby gaunts including ones percussed.
Since those gaunts wanted to be nearby because synapse those gaunts had a decent chance to be destroyed when momma went down.
Seems perfectly fair to me.
Exactly. It was fair, balanced bonuses with risks and generally worked well as a concept. You know, unlike Daemon Summoning lists.
Flood wrote: So we have regular wounds, mortal wounds, armour saves, invulnerable saves and basically-FnP, with rules here and there to allow re-rolls of various saves.
I was hoping it would be a little tidier if I'm honest, with extra toughness/wounds for units that previously had FnP (just to cut down on how much rolling was going on).
Do we know if invuns are separate saves from armour (choosing the best), or just making the armour save a capped amount against modifiers?
AoS has saves and "other saves". Other saves do not get rerolls.
It's still anyone's guess as to whether we'll be doing armor and ward in 8th. I'm doubtful currently since it is distinct and separate unlike AoS.
Bulldogging wrote: As long as the new summoning has no chance for perils and does not take up a power slot of the psycher I won't care.
I'd prefer they just gave faction chaos drop pods though.
Fluff wise you should have the DREADCLAW, but even that seems to be swept under the rug all the time.
Renegades should definitely be able to purchase Drop Pods and Razorbacks. Maybe Centurions too. You know, to compensate for not having Legion Tactics basically give them Vanilla Marine toys as wargear.
Wait, so in Age of Sigmar Blue Horrors are an upgrade that you have to pay for? Where does it say that? Is it just implied? I don't think this counts as summoning, after all, you can't control what unit you're setting points aside for, so there is a significant difference. I wish they made that clear...
...And if that is how it works, then that makes Pink Horrors insanely expensive, and allows, if not encourages players to play blue horrors as a unit next to pink horrors that don't spawn anything when they die?
Quarterdime wrote: Wait, so in Age of Sigmar Blue Horrors are an upgrade that you have to pay for? Where does it say that? Is it just implied? I don't think this counts as summoning, after all, you can't control what unit you're setting points aside for, so there is a significant difference. I wish they made that clear...
...And if that is how it works, then that makes Pink Horrors insanely expensive, and allows, if not encourages players to play blue horrors as a unit next to pink horrors that don't spawn anything when they die?
They're not an upgrade, but you leave reserve points for them for when your PHorrors die. Then you can summon them in place. Same for Brimstones. The made note of it in an FAQ i believe.
I haven't seen anyone in my local group take them, and our Main Tzeentch player wishes they were free. (I don't.)
Edit: The Split rule also allows them to be present and when the step above dies they add to the unit. So you can run them either way.
I can't say I am thrilled to see that Blue and Brimstone Horrors have to be purchased separately. I would have rather had Pink Horrors priced appropriately for the ability to split. It kind of is the same thing, but it is more bookkeeping.
My hope for the Tervigon is that you just buy the unit it spits out, sort of like a transport. That way if the Tervigon gets blown up, it bursts into a big blob of gaunts.
I wasn't thrilled to see a unique bespoke rule for feel no pain. It means other units that traditionally have FNP are going to probably have a bespoke rule unique to them as well. I suppose it opens up the design space because those other units could have something happen in addition to the wound being ignored (perhaps gaining an attack in CC or +1 to attack rolls).
I can't wait for my armies to get their faction focus articles. Hopefully they do Space Marines all together, rather than have six separate articles.
Quarterdime wrote: Wait, so in Age of Sigmar Blue Horrors are an upgrade that you have to pay for? Where does it say that? Is it just implied? I don't think this counts as summoning, after all, you can't control what unit you're setting points aside for, so there is a significant difference. I wish they made that clear...
...And if that is how it works, then that makes Pink Horrors insanely expensive, and allows, if not encourages players to play blue horrors as a unit next to pink horrors that don't spawn anything when they die?
I'm strongly thinking that the splitting will be factored into the Pink Horrors (and perhaps some kind of weakening Psychic Mastery level mechanic too) because to have to pay to use the mechanic would be a level of stupid I can't imagine them falling into. Well, at least not with playtesters on hand to tell them that Pink Horrors suck if you have to pay for their extra weaker forms.
Rippy wrote: Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it
It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).
Good point, though we haven't seen the Death Guards version yet (if they still have it!)
I'd be willing to bet that Nurglings and Plaguebearer only have M4", so they'll need that "FnP" as they are like to take twice the shooting. Are we pretty sure the Instant Death is no longer in 40K? Isn't that why weapons now have Damage ratings and Mortal Wounds are a thing? So no more squished Nurgling bases against Str6 and they probably get that "FnP" too.
Rippy wrote: Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it
It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).
Good point, though we haven't seen the Death Guards version yet (if they still have it!)
I'd be willing to bet that Nurglings and Plaguebearer only have M4", so they'll need that "FnP" as they are like to take twice the shooting.
Are we pretty sure the Instant Death is no longer in 40K. Isn't that why weapons now have Damage ratings and Mortal Wounds are a thing?
So no more squished Nurgling bases against Str6. and they probably get that "FnP" too.
-
Disgustingly Resilient is likely that. In AoS, Plaugebearers have it and it can ignore wounds and Mortal Wounds.
Hmmm. Seems like a virtual port of Chaos Daemons AOS rules. Which is good in my opinion.
GENERAL THOUGHTS:
Sounds like were about to loose our random for the random god rules, good.
Downside we'll probably loose all the wargear options not currently available in the existing model kits.
Which effect Slaanesh and Tzeentch more that the others tow sine they don't usually have melee weapons to proxy in.
So good by ether blades, lash of despair, and other weapon themed gifts and rewards.
Also, free summoning, invulnerable saves stacking to 2++, and flying circuses.
Removing instant death takes us right back to the 4th edition codex where everything was immune to it.
So all of the Chaos Daemon multi-wound models get a boost but especially our elite units.
The Greater Daemons seem to be getting a significant bump in durability, with 15+ wounds and hopefully they are not still T6.
That could make non flying greater more viable.
Although I'd like Daemon Princes to have more wounds, capping the wounds at 10 would allow non-flying Daemon Princes to be viable again.
Also hope we have some D3 and D6 damage from elites and or something .
So we don't have to rely on Greater Daemons and Damon Princes to crack open vehicles for our infantry.
SLAANESH:
Piercing Claws:
Spoiler:
Slaaneshi daemons got to keep rending attacks at AP-4. I was almost certain that they would be just a flat AP-1, and 2-3 attacks.
If we're lucky they might still have base attacks at AP-1. Probably not but I dream, right?
Not as good as 7th Edition rending since you always get a 6+ save and can potentially improve the save.
Graceful Killers:
Nearly a straight port over from AOS, but now effects units of 20+ rather than effecting units of 10+ of 6+ wound roll; and units of 20+ on a 5+ wound roll. So a bit weaker.
Quicksilver Swiftness:
Oh please let this be the same as AOS.
Where its either "run and charge" in the same turn or "run and charge" with a 2D6 run.
The striking first in combat rule could just be "always strike first" unless the enemy unit has the same rule, like it was in fantasy.
Or more likely its a dice roll to steal the charge, kind of like rolling to seize is now.
Keeper of Secrets:
I'm excited for this one, if they follow AOS then she's moving 12" a turn before advancing.
She going to have at least as many wounds as the LOC so 16 at minimum.
Probably only a 5+ invulnerably save and no armor.
But maybe a -1 to hit modifier within a certain radius due to its disturbing beauty.
Masque:
I guess now that all the other characters are also unable to join units...she's better now?
Or at least your no more penalized that taking any other herald.
Chariots:
With increased wounds and a single toughness value for the model these might actually do something in combat for the first time since the 4th edition!
Sadly, since AP-4 rending still exists the 40K version probably wont be causing mortal wounds when its charges.
KHORNE:
So Khornate daemons receive +1 attack and +1 Strength in combat if they charge or are charged.
Probably applies to all Khorne daemons, and possibly is the new mark of Khorne as well.
Bloodthirster:
I'm calling it now the BT will be hitting and wounding on a 2+, and doing D3, D6 or a flat 6 depending on the weapon.
If a Lord of Change the least durable of the Greater Daemons has 16 wounds, the BT will have 18+, and a 2-3+ armor save.
TZEENTCH:
Tzeentchian Daemons: +1 to their invulnerable saves.
Possilbly also the new mark of Tzeentch as well, given Rubics were revealed to have a 5+ invulnerable save.
Lord of Change:
4+ invulnerable save and 16 wounds.
So two more wounds than the new Tzeentch Battle-tome version.
Horrors:
They're still Psykers.
They also are able to deal with some of the tougher enemy units.
Blue Horrors and Brimstone Horrors:
Require that you save some Reinforcement Points to split out of their parent unit.
So no more free models.
Seems fair but I rarely used summoning anyway.
NURGLE:
If they port over the -2 to hit in the shooting phase, and the -1 to hit in the combat phase for 20+ model units Plague bearers will be quite scary.
Especially if they port over some of the mortal wound causing disease abilities.
Or at least cause D3 or D6 damage.
Great Unclean One:
Since Glottkin in AOS has 18 wounds, and they say in the article the LOC has 16.
The GUO could easily 20+ wounds and T8.
Disgustingly Resilient:
Nurgle Daemons ignore wounds on a roll of 5+.
Another straight port over from AOS and essentially FNP.
Yeah, so there your new mark of Nurgle
Mischief Makers:
Allows Nurglings to deploy near enemy models and engage them quickly.
Sounds like a scout move.
Rippy wrote: Woo was worried my Nurgle lads wouldn't have their FNP, this shows good hope if the Daemons retain it
It's better than FnP since you can ignore Mortal Wounds with it (which seem to have replaced the ID mechanic).
Good point, though we haven't seen the Death Guards version yet (if they still have it!)
I'd be willing to bet that Nurglings and Plaguebearer only have M4", so they'll need that "FnP" as they are like to take twice the shooting.
Are we pretty sure the Instant Death is no longer in 40K? Isn't that why weapons now have Damage ratings and Mortal Wounds are a thing?
So no more squished Nurgling bases against Str6 and they probably get that "FnP" too.
-
I agree though I think it will be movement 5 for plague eaters, if rubrics are anything to go off. Remember in the fluff, Nurgle Daemons are always noted for moving much faster than they look like they should be able to.
I love my Tervigons, but am not put-off by them no longer spawning free models (if that's even what happens). It was basically about ~50 pts worth of free models anyway, which is not a big deal. Tervigons will get their own cool buffs for 8th Ed, which I am excited to see what they do. It's also cool if you can use them to "summon" gaunts from a pool of points you set aside. That is way better than simple acting as a transport.
rollawaythestone wrote: I love my Tervigons, but am not put-off by them no longer spawning free models (if that's even what happens). It was basically about ~50 pts worth of free models anyway, which is not a big deal. Tervigons will get their own cool buffs for 8th Ed, which I am excited to see what they do. It's also cool if you can use them to "summon" gaunts from a pool of points you set aside. That is way better than simple acting as a transport.
Quarterdime wrote: Wait, so in Age of Sigmar Blue Horrors are an upgrade that you have to pay for? Where does it say that? Is it just implied? I don't think this counts as summoning, after all, you can't control what unit you're setting points aside for, so there is a significant difference. I wish they made that clear...
...And if that is how it works, then that makes Pink Horrors insanely expensive, and allows, if not encourages players to play blue horrors as a unit next to pink horrors that don't spawn anything when they die?
I'm strongly thinking that the splitting will be factored into the Pink Horrors (and perhaps some kind of weakening Psychic Mastery level mechanic too) because to have to pay to use the mechanic would be a level of stupid I can't imagine them falling into. Well, at least not with playtesters on hand to tell them that Pink Horrors suck if you have to pay for their extra weaker forms.
pizzaguardian wrote: Tervigons summoning was a bad thing and demon summoning is bad as well.
As an example to the question of "was gaunt summoning or scarab summoning that bad?"
The answer is a simple yes. In order to go any further i would like to see how it was a good thing. (Did people really forget in 5th where tervigons summoned 3x 3d6 models per turn? Anectodal evidence, the only that stopped our tyranid players was their model numbers running out)
Free summoning should have never existed and glad to see them gone. I even hope replacements are costed.
They create nothing but bloat for the game for rules such as how do you place them?, can you directly summon into combat since it is not a movement? .
You can have many many abilities that are fluffy and actually only work when they are answered correctly, which creates even more complex rules. Summoning is one of them and just too much hassle for what it brings to the game.
Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.
Really though, why is anyone even here then? Why not just shut down the whole N&R forum and replace it with a link to Atia and BOLS?
It's a discussion forum, for discussion, where we discuss things. The disclaimer that we're discussing incomplete information and so our discussions are by their very nature provisional is inherent to the place, it doesn't need to be stated constantly, and people don't need to be constantly reminded of it. This is by no means only directed at you, there's half a dozen posters on here who seem to come and contribute almost nothing bar accusations of negativity and demands that people stop engaging in the entire purpose of the forum; speculative discourse based on rumours as we understand them at any given time.
The reverse is also true, there's a good handful of posters whose sole argument is "this is change, and I don't like it" dressed up in any number of ad hoc justifications.
You know what, I typed out a big long reply to this, but I reached the end and decided to just take my own closing bit of advice to make greater use of the ignore feature.
The Fourth Sphere Expansion fleet set off almost immediately once the fires in the Gulf had subsided, but with the Great Rift was still raging through that region of space, all contact with them was soon lost. Were they all killed by some unknown attacker(s)? Did they just lose contact due to interference? Perhaps they entered the Warp – intentionally or not – becoming lost (or worse) in the violent empyrean tides? Maybe they will yet be found, or emerge somewhere unexpected in the galaxy, a lost portion of this optimistic new empire ever intent on conquest…
Chaos Tau confirmed.
I'll collect them lol. Would be neat to see crazed Mon'tau. Also the 4th wave didn't get destroyed, but a huge expeditionary force that size being used by chaos is going to put some hurt on things. Whatever happened to them I'm sure it will be plot significant if it's the first new thing worth learning about them.
I'd rather guess that they were swallowed and then spit out in several different places, ready to fight in other warzones against other enemies, justifying fluff-wise how they can be on the table against anyone.
Yup, that and they'll hold a chunk of them in their back pocket for when a summer campaign generates a result they don't like or they accidentally write themselves into a corner, so a nice hefty Tau fleet can pop out of nowhere aligned with whichever side was losing, to maintain the status quo.
pizzaguardian wrote: Tervigons summoning was a bad thing and demon summoning is bad as well.
As an example to the question of "was gaunt summoning or scarab summoning that bad?"
The answer is a simple yes. In order to go any further i would like to see how it was a good thing. (Did people really forget in 5th where tervigons summoned 3x 3d6 models per turn? Anectodal evidence, the only that stopped our tyranid players was their model numbers running out)
Free summoning should have never existed and glad to see them gone. I even hope replacements are costed.
They create nothing but bloat for the game for rules such as how do you place them?, can you directly summon into combat since it is not a movement? .
You can have many many abilities that are fluffy and actually only work when they are answered correctly, which creates even more complex rules. Summoning is one of them and just too much hassle for what it brings to the game.
Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.
Ok, what did it add to the game than? Can we make the game work without that being free and giving the tervigon a discount?
Also lets go with your math,
*1st turn - 3 tervigons, 135 points of summon. (1 stops)
*2nd turn 2 tervigons 90 points of summon. (1 stops)
*3rd turn 1 tervigon summon 45 points summon (1 stops)
You can even make the math for only 5 batches, that still 200+ points worth of 5 different units. They can act as blockers or obj controllers.
These didn't need to be free and they don't need to be free now. Just make the tervigon cheaper and make summon cost points.
Really though, why is anyone even here then? Why not just shut down the whole N&R forum and replace it with a link to Atia and BOLS?
It's a discussion forum, for discussion, where we discuss things. The disclaimer that we're discussing incomplete information and so our discussions are by their very nature provisional is inherent to the place, it doesn't need to be stated constantly, and people don't need to be constantly reminded of it. This is by no means only directed at you, there's half a dozen posters on here who seem to come and contribute almost nothing bar accusations of negativity and demands that people stop engaging in the entire purpose of the forum; speculative discourse based on rumours as we understand them at any given time.
The reverse is also true, there's a good handful of posters whose sole argument is "this is change, and I don't like it" dressed up in any number of ad hoc justifications.
You know what, I typed out a big long reply to this, but I reached the end and decided to just take my own closing bit of advice to make greater use of the ignore feature.
Well, assuming I've not just been on the receiving end of the longest delayed piece of "I'm telling everyone I'm ignoring you, rather than just ignoring you" yet recorded, and you're actually just stating you're going to deploy ignore more often, then I'd say that runs contrary to what you're saying. After all, what's the point of discussion if all you do is shut down people because they think differently and hold different opinions? Then you really might as well shut the whole thing down and read a blog written by someone you agree with.
I think it's perfectly reasonable to have limited model generation that's accounted for in the cost of the model doing the generation.
They key being that both limited and the creating model costing more must be present.
So for example, a Spyder can create one scarab base per turn, and you have to buy a monstrous creature that's half the speed of the horde unit it's buffing to do said generation. Whilst Canoptek units have been a huge part of the meta lately, that's more for reanimating wraiths paired with 3 scarabs and 1 Spyder. When was the last time you saw someone running a scarab farm list as if it were super scary rather than a themed gimmick list?
shadowfinder wrote: Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.
Regarding Daemon summoning, what do people think of the following suggestions?:
Summoned Units: -cannot summon other units -cannot score -cannot contest -do not come with upgrades or squad leaders, you only get the basic daemons (so no icons, musicians, heralds or whatever it is that daemon units get).
In addition, the Summoner must sacrifice a number of models from a unit within 3" (e.g. Cultists) equivalent to the Warp Charge level of the Summoning Power, or perhaps as a random D3/D6/2D6 (depending on the strength of the Summoning power and Unit) removing them as casualties.
This forces you to lose units/points in order to summon units/points, and you run the risk of incurring a deficit if you roll high for the sacrifices and roll low for the summoned units.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: For the tervigon it appeared to spend 25-30 points on summoning gaunts. This meant that it had to spawn at least 9 gaunts to earn the points back. The average on 3d6 (not 3x3d6) is 10, but the power shut down on any roll of doubles (which is a 50% chance on 3 dice) and if it died it also killed nearby gaunts including ones percussed.
Seems perfectly fair to me.
Actually, the average is 10.5 Gaunts. An extra 5% is worth noting.
Honestly I think deep strike on all daemons is a perfectly acceptable depiction of them being summoned and the only awkward bit is simulating horror splitting (made all the worse by it apparently being decided last year they should double split)
Being forced to put points into reserve for summoning is still better than choosing before hand. Let's say you are playing a 2000 point game and have 400 points in reserve. It seems like you have no real advantage, but you do. On the fly you can decide that you need a super-assault bloodletter unit, a horde of Nurglings to annoy, or a keeper of secrets to wreck an HQ. It's like being able to write a new list on the fly depending on what your opponent does. That's a HUGE advantage.
With Tervigons and Necron Spyders you know exactly what they poop out. no surprise, and you can plan for it. If a tomb spyder could create Scarabs, Wraiths, other Spyders, or a C'Tan shard, that would be all kinds of broken, and about what daemon summoning was like in 7th.
cuda1179 wrote: Being forced to put points into reserve for summoning is still better than choosing before hand. Let's say you are playing a 2000 point game and have 400 points in reserve. It seems like you have no real advantage, but you do. On the fly you can decide that you need a super-assault bloodletter unit, a horde of Nurglings to annoy, or a keeper of secrets to wreck an HQ. It's like being able to write a new list on the fly depending on what your opponent does. That's a HUGE advantage.
With Tervigons and Necron Spyders you know exactly what they poop out. no surprise, and you can plan for it.
You shouldn't have to cast a psychic power to Summon it then, it should be treated as any other Deep Striking unit arriving from Reserves. Otherwise, what would be the appeal of putting Units that you have purchased into Reserve, and then having to cast a Psychic power with a chance of losing the psyker?
Icons of Chaos, Sorcerors, Dark Apostles etc might then act like Locator Beacons, reducing or outright eliminating the distance that the Daemons scatter on the Deep Strike.
Wait, nevermind. I misunderstood. You have 400 pts in reseve, but you don't have to actually choose what those 400 pts are until the moment you place them on the table? That is a cool idea.
The worst part of summoning in AoS is how easy is to snipe characters, so your summoners are easy removed from the board and you lose instantly all the points invested in reserves to summoning.
As in 40k you can't snipe summoners so easy, I think that It will, I don't know if worth it, but at least better than in AoS.
Galas wrote: The worst part of summoning in AoS is how easy is to snipe characters, so your summoners are easy removed from the board and you lose instantly all the points invested in reserves to summoning.
As in 40k you can't snipe summoners so easy, I think that It will, I don't know if worth it, but at least better than in AoS.
So far the only sniping we've seen in 40k involves actual snipers.
auticus wrote: I'm over the moon that free points is now gone. Free points from detachments, summoning, etc... has no place when you also want to discuss "balance".
Some of those "free points" were abilities factored into the cost of the model. Summoningnwas a psychic power which was a mechanic seperate from the cost of any individual psyker.
The ability to generate extra models from a model that pays for the ability is not the same mechanic as the ability to summon free units by abusing a mechanic you didn't pay extra to use.
Azreal13 wrote: I'd still contend it's impossible to factor in a points cost for summoning non-daemon units and have it fair to both parties.
I'd argue that it's possible to factor it it based on an arverage and be fairly well balanced. It wouldn't be perfect but it'd do most of the time. Especially if there is a risk mechanic involved for the user (losing wounds on a Spyder when you roll bad as it currently does as an example).
There is definitely a large gap between "can summon a unit with no upgrades" and what daemon summoningmlists where doing and using the hammer that was needed against the daemon lists on things like Ghost Arks, Tervigons and Tomb Spyders seems like an unneeded nerfing to models that don't need it.
In a vacuum, pointing based on averages is totally fine. I just think that given that averages mean nothing if your dice are swinging one way or the other, coupled with the sheer variance in the impact that the summoned unit can have (everything from capturing the final objective or blocking a potentially game ending assault to absolutely zero) mean that the average isn't likely to be terribly well represented on a consistent game by game basis.
In which case, I'm guessing that the conclusion I'm drawing myself towards is to allow units like Spyders and Tervigons to generate a fixed number of units of a fixed size, that way nobody gets lucky, nobody gets surprised, and the unit can always be costed appropriately. Of course, should a unit be killed before it's spawned all it's able then the controller loses out, but then that should be in the hands of the players, at least, and not the vagaries of dice.
Indeed, if the tervigon had a fixed number of spawns I'd be ok with the claim that the termgants were factored in to the cost. But it wasn't like that at all. Sure, the average is around 20 Gant's in 2 batches, but the possibility exists to create 90 per tervigon over a 6 turn game. I've been on the receiving end of to many lucky spawns and I'm not sad to see that go away.
This is why for my own house rules I did the obvious thing and made them a transport with capacity 20 with an appropriate point reduction.
Yeah, as I said, I believe in the old thread, summong is a thing that is fluffy, but is very very hard to balance in a Wargame like warhammer, both the daemonic and other types of summonings.
You can balance better a unit like a Tervigon, because is a specific unit make to summon other units, and those units are fixed. But balancing psykers that can summon what they want is pretty difficult. Thats why I think that the classic summoning to psykers should be restringed to a Summoner-clase of psychers, that did have that hability costed in them.
Thats why Pink Horrors, for example, should be costed with the hability to split included in themselves, but with a discount, because then the enemy player has a choice: Focusing the pink horrors to kill them all, and then the blues and brimstones, or don't, and having the player that has buy the pink horrors waste those points.
It shouldn't be a 1:1 total of points, because that way is just better to pick them separated.
But all comes to the same: Specific units that can be balanced around the fact that they spawn X specific unit.
Not really, its pretty darn simple to balance summoning.
See, if a specific daemon seems to be too good when summoned (as a counter summon), yet not too good when taken properly, you simply need to increase the difficulty of the summoning spell.
For example should bloodletters reach a point where nobody ever fields them, but they are a very common summon-you make 'em a bit cheaper, and make the summoning spell a bit harder.
If burning chariots are often taken in the list, but never summoned-you increase the point cost, and make the summon easier.
Its incredibly easy to balance when you got multiple valves to work with in regard to how the unit is used. you tune down the ones who are overused, and tune up the ones underused.
BoomWolf wrote: Not really, its pretty darn simple to balance summoning.
See, if a specific daemon seems to be too good when summoned (as a counter summon), yet not too good when taken properly, you simply need to increase the difficulty of the summoning spell.
For example should bloodletters reach a point where nobody ever fields them, but they are a very common summon-you make 'em a bit cheaper, and make the summoning spell a bit harder.
If burning chariots are often taken in the list, but never summoned-you increase the point cost, and make the summon easier.
Its incredibly easy to balance when you got multiple valves to work with in regard to how the unit is used. you tune down the ones who are overused, and tune up the ones underused.
But you are talking, assuming that you pay for what you summon, or that you summon them for free?
I think it's a large game with a lot of different things going on, so I think they can do things in different ways and still stay fair. I can see there being rules where Tervigons generate Termagants without having to pay reinforcement points and I can see them doing it in a way where they do have to pay reinforcement points. Is a Tervigon adding 1d6 more Gants to a unit each turn that different than FNP/RP or a Tech Priest restoring wounds to vehicle? Are those examples of free models?
I can see them requiring us to pay points when Tervigons spawn Termagants, despite them only having the choice of one unit and it only being able to deploy near the Tervigon. That wouldn't be so bad in the context of the Tyranids being a "summoning" heavy army. My understanding is that there are non-magical ways to "summon" units in AoS. For instance, a Chaos Lord on foot has a sort of super-outflank command ability where during the Hero Phase on a 4+ he can setup a Slaves to Darkness unit (he doesn't have to pick which unit in advance) within 5" of any table edge. This isn't a spell so it can't be countered.
Between burrowing griblies and spores raining down from the sky I could see Tyranids making use of a lot of non-Psychic summoning. Maybe Lictors will be "summoners" whose pheromone trails allow Tyranid players to place a unit of their choice within 9" of the enemy. Maybe Tervigons primarily will act as a buff for nearby Termagants, with their ability to spawn more Termagants (at a cost) being a secondary ability that acts to ensure they will have something around to buff.
It might be interesting if most or all armies have access to non-psychic summoning. It could be a way of essentially giving players a sideboard to help keep them from running into hard-counters to their army.
Obviously I have no idea how likely any of that is.
Seems like everybody is arguing for the same thing here, that excessive free stuff, whether it's summoned Daemons/Genestealer Cutlists, Termagant broods, tranports or upgrades, has no place in a game that wants a sembelance of balance and we're all happy they're gone.
Smaller things like re-enforcing a depleted unit or fixed summoning (where the summoned units cost can be accounted for) is much better.
BoomWolf wrote: Not really, its pretty darn simple to balance summoning.
See, if a specific daemon seems to be too good when summoned (as a counter summon), yet not too good when taken properly, you simply need to increase the difficulty of the summoning spell.
For example should bloodletters reach a point where nobody ever fields them, but they are a very common summon-you make 'em a bit cheaper, and make the summoning spell a bit harder.
If burning chariots are often taken in the list, but never summoned-you increase the point cost, and make the summon easier.
Its incredibly easy to balance when you got multiple valves to work with in regard to how the unit is used. you tune down the ones who are overused, and tune up the ones underused.
First of all, if they're free and you aren't punished for failing you just spam out whatever model has the best effectivenss/summonability ratio with no risks or drawback and still end up with a totally risk free extra few hundred points.
Secondly this would have fallen on it's face in 7th immediately because even if it was warp charge 8 you'd still see daemon armies casting it with very few issues.
BoomWolf wrote: Not really, its pretty darn simple to balance summoning.
See, if a specific daemon seems to be too good when summoned (as a counter summon), yet not too good when taken properly, you simply need to increase the difficulty of the summoning spell.
For example should bloodletters reach a point where nobody ever fields them, but they are a very common summon-you make 'em a bit cheaper, and make the summoning spell a bit harder.
If burning chariots are often taken in the list, but never summoned-you increase the point cost, and make the summon easier.
Its incredibly easy to balance when you got multiple valves to work with in regard to how the unit is used. you tune down the ones who are overused, and tune up the ones underused.
But you are talking, assuming that you pay for what you summon, or that you summon them for free?
Doesn't matter, works both ways.
Its just that when summons are free, you need to tune up the summoning difficulty higher, making it more of an investment to pull off, and when they cost points, you need to make it easier, as you shouldn't pay TOO much for mere flexibility, especially when it also has a cost of time (and the risk factor of losing your summoners, and then losing out the things you wanted to summon)
Whatever the core system is, either reserve points or free-its simple to balance summoning around it when you can tune the individual difficulty to summon each unit.
ERJAK wrote: First of all, if they're free and you aren't punished for failing you just spam out whatever model has the best effectivenss/summonability ratio with no risks or drawback and still end up with a totally risk free extra few hundred points.
Secondly this would have fallen on it's face in 7th immediately because even if it was warp charge 8 you'd still see daemon armies casting it with very few issues.
You are talking nonsense
If they are free, they are still not REALLY free. as you need the casters to actually summon them.
Sure, you can theoretically summon infinite numbers, but the game has a timer. and summoners gets killed.
As for the second point, the mere fact you try to argue anyone would even bother with summoning had it cost 8(!!!) charges baffles me.
Sure, deamon armies COULD pull it off. but to get a decent change (over 80%) it would take 19 dice. the sheer amount of points sank into generating 19 dice means that even if the sucess rate was 100% with 19 dice, you would never be remotely close to actually closing the gap between your investment and your output compared to just fielding actual units to begin with that can kill stuff.
Even at cost 3, daemon sumoning lists were strong-but not the very top. at 4 they would be relegated to once-in-a-while utility spells, and at 5 they would be utter trash.
Now, in the AoS system, you get a different summon spell for each individual unit-that means you got SO much more control over the power levels.
Even assuming its "free", by tuning up difficulty of summon you can EASILY reach the point that a summoner, on average, would not get over twice his points during the game.
"but its free points!" you say. true, but its free points LATER, rather than sooner. ask any drop pod army-the most important turn is turn 1.
Zustiur wrote: Indeed, if the tervigon had a fixed number of spawns I'd be ok with the claim that the termgants were factored in to the cost. But it wasn't like that at all. Sure, the average is around 20 Gant's in 2 batches, but the possibility exists to create 90 per tervigon over a 6 turn game. I've been on the receiving end of to many lucky spawns and I'm not sad to see that go away.
This is why for my own house rules I did the obvious thing and made them a transport with capacity 20 with an appropriate point reduction.
If we go down this road it'd be best to give it a set number of models it can summon, say 30, and then allow the player to use them once per turn either use them to reinforce wounded units (up to their starting size), summon as a new unit of up to the max size, or summon in smaller batches over the course of several turns or all of the above. If the Tervigon dies then all remaining models die as well with no save.
This gives player agency while limiting the resource available and creates a series of risk-reward decisions. Do they just move and dump the max unit turn 1? Or do they keep summoning smaller batches of screening units over several turns while using the Tervigon's other abilities/wargear? Or do they use it solely to reinforce a horde that suffers casualties as it gets into range?
And each of these choices presents downsides and even a hybrid of the above choices may not be the best answer depending on play styles, opponents, mission type, ect.
On the flipside, this introduces more book keeping which is one of the perks of the random distribution system: you don't need to log expended models like you would in a fixed production model.
shadowfinder wrote: Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.
Regarding Daemon summoning, what do people think of the following suggestions?:
Summoned Units:
-cannot summon other units
-cannot score
-cannot contest
-do not come with upgrades or squad leaders, you only get the basic daemons (so no icons, musicians, heralds or whatever it is that daemon units get).
In addition, the Summoner must sacrifice a number of models from a unit within 3" (e.g. Cultists) equivalent to the Warp Charge level of the Summoning Power, or perhaps as a random D3/D6/2D6 (depending on the strength of the Summoning power and Unit) removing them as casualties.
This forces you to lose units/points in order to summon units/points, and you run the risk of incurring a deficit if you roll high for the sacrifices and roll low for the summoned units.
Geez, what's the point of even having summoned units? So many things against, why not remove them?
Imateria wrote: Seems like everybody is arguing for the same thing here, that excessive free stuff, whether it's summoned Daemons/Genestealer Cutlists, Termagant broods, tranports or upgrades, has no place in a game that wants a sembelance of balance and we're all happy they're gone.
Smaller things like re-enforcing a depleted unit or fixed summoning (where the summoned units cost can be accounted for) is much better.
Which was why I mentioned basically making the Tervigon into a kind of Ghost Ark equiv: can carry Gaunts (and only Gaunts) and can replace a small number of lost models per turn. 1d3, or even 2d3 extra gaunt wounds (up to the original unit size only of course) isn't going to break the game since they have such weak saves and are only T3. It'll make a unit more durable but requires a whole second unit to get the effect. An effect that may not see use at first since you could ride the Tervigon for a couple of turns for protection before dumping out to cover things in beetles, worms and ichor based things.
BoomWolf wrote: Not really, its pretty darn simple to balance summoning.
See, if a specific daemon seems to be too good when summoned (as a counter summon), yet not too good when taken properly, you simply need to increase the difficulty of the summoning spell.
For example should bloodletters reach a point where nobody ever fields them, but they are a very common summon-you make 'em a bit cheaper, and make the summoning spell a bit harder.
If burning chariots are often taken in the list, but never summoned-you increase the point cost, and make the summon easier.
Its incredibly easy to balance when you got multiple valves to work with in regard to how the unit is used. you tune down the ones who are overused, and tune up the ones underused.
First of all, if they're free and you aren't punished for failing you just spam out whatever model has the best effectivenss/summonability ratio with no risks or drawback and still end up with a totally risk free extra few hundred points.
Secondly this would have fallen on it's face in 7th immediately because even if it was warp charge 8 you'd still see daemon armies casting it with very few issues.
While Tzeentch Armies could certainly cast a Warp Charge 8 powers with little difficulty, it would come at the cost of casting other powers and would reduce the summon spam.
And it's not like there aren't risks. In the case of summoning powers they came at the cost of a chance of Perils and the opportunity cost of not casting your offensive shooting powers. The problem was that the advantages far outweighed the benefits for Tzeentch Daemon armies because most their psykers really don't care about perils (thanks to being Brotherhoods of Psykers) and that the cost of their offensive powers was outweighed too much by the utility of summoning.
Given that summoning in 8th will cost points Summoning powers better have a low-ish casting value, otherwise the opportunity cost will be too high. Why bother trying to summon unit X for situation Y when you're wasting casting attempts with a difficult to cast power when you could just bring it or a different unit as a part of your army from the very beginning and either start with it on the board or Deep Strike it from reserves?
There's a reason full on Summoning sees little use in Matched Age of Sigmar - Wizards are easily sniped, summoning powers tend to have too high of a casting value to be anywhere close to reliable AND you can only attempt to cast a single power per phase. 8th Edition 40k will lack the first for the most part, and we haven't heard anything about the 3rd being true, however if summoning values are too high it'll be to unreliable to be worthwhile most of the time.
shadowfinder wrote: Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.
Regarding Daemon summoning, what do people think of the following suggestions?:
Summoned Units: -cannot summon other units -cannot score -cannot contest -do not come with upgrades or squad leaders, you only get the basic daemons (so no icons, musicians, heralds or whatever it is that daemon units get).
In addition, the Summoner must sacrifice a number of models from a unit within 3" (e.g. Cultists) equivalent to the Warp Charge level of the Summoning Power, or perhaps as a random D3/D6/2D6 (depending on the strength of the Summoning power and Unit) removing them as casualties.
This forces you to lose units/points in order to summon units/points, and you run the risk of incurring a deficit if you roll high for the sacrifices and roll low for the summoned units.
Geez, what's the point of even having summoned units? So many things against, why not remove them?
I'm playing devils advocate, asking if people that hate summoning would be satisfied with this.
I have no vested interest in this either way, I haven't played since 5th Ed.
Psykers were reported to only get to cast a total number of powers up to their mastery level.
Also since testing is on a 2d6 vs target number system (a hybrid of 5th and 6th mechanics it seems) it means that balancing summoning will be easier since they can chane the target number if it becomes an issue.
Aside from that, we don't even know who will get to summon anymore. It might be reduced from an "anyone can do this" to something restricted to just Chaos to cut down the use of sideboarding daemons into any list with a psyker in it.
That said the points cost side board that you can freely spend to gain a unit that is tailored to hurt your opponent more is a good mechanic. You start down points, must actually cast the power to succeed, and the unit misses e chance to move since movement is before the psychic phase (assuming turn order based on the order of the released articles about turn phases) and in an army with very little shooting that makes them less likely to be an immediate problem for the opposing player.
Moving in a different direction, I was just thinking about wha we know about some points costs. A multi-melta Marine comes in at exactly 50 points. That was staggering to notice for me because that was a huge shift from the original 10 point upgrade it was.
Now I can imagine the Heavy Bolter going up the least, perhaps to 15 or 20 points from it's current cost, but what about the Heavy Flamer?
Currently it's 10 points on most models that can take it. With the loss of templates I was thinking that peraps we'll see a range buff (double range from the Flamer, so 16") since it,s a bigger weapon throwing out a stronger spray of promethium but bumping it to 2d6 hits or 2d3 (one has a higher number of average hits but is swingier, while the other gives more consistent hits than the Flamer and a higher minimum number of hits) could be done to show the same thing.
I am willing to guess it's going to copy the HB though in that it'll stay S5 and go to a -1 rend. But I can't puzzle out how they'll change it going forward other than that.
The MM may be the only one with a significant cost increase since it hurts so much more now. Plus it could have extra shots. It's hard to sort it all out right now.
I don't see them doubling both the range and the hits on the Heavy Flamer. Seems a bit strong unless the point jump is really big. Maybe one or the other (probably not range, then we're talking about a different class of flamer weapon).
If it stays cheap I can see it being just S5 D6 hits -1Sv.
I just realized. So if you're paying [x] amount of points to summon something, then the objective benefit is that you're sending an untouched unit to a location that they may have had a tough time reaching in the first place.
The downside is that if your wizard/psyker is spending their time trying to summon something instead of casting other spells, then you are not only paying for the unit in points cost, but you are also paying for it by preventing your own wizard from being able to cast other useful spells.
So is transporting a unit of daemons from A to B truly worth locking down another unit for multiple turns? Especially if the summoned unit could have been casting spells or shooting the enemy as well. That's 2 units that you're disabling for multiple turns. I don't see how this could possibly make Pink Horrors worth summoning. Plaguebearers, I can see, but definitely not Pink Horrors.
Just imagine it, Sorcerer leads to Pink Horrors leads to Blue Horrors leads to Brimstone, and you're paying for each one of them, turning what could have been an advantage into sending your units out one at a time into a meat grinder. At least the Sorcerer and Horrors are likely to alive at the same time. With the rest, you actually have to wait for one to die to send in the other. It's a meat grinder by definition.
The MM may be the only one with a significant cost increase since it hurts so much more now. Plus it could have extra shots. It's hard to sort it all out right now.
Oh, you're right. Math fail on my part there.
And it's true that it might be the only signifigant increase. But I can't see them skipping the change to give a little more difference between it and the regular flamer since it isn't bound by templates to determine it's AOE.
Then again, my primary army, and until recently, only, army was Sisters so maybe I just want to see some extra ranged options for them in terms of burning things.
Then again I'm the sort of nerd that hopes Volkite gets a chance to come back in the future via the army (by pullingit from a crypt on Terra like they did the Exorcist) since the weapon's special rule is defined as "the act of heating a substance so that it burns quickly". Plus the guns look cool.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fenris-77 wrote: I don't see them doubling both the range and the hits on the Heavy Flamer. Seems a bit strong unless the point jump is really big. Maybe one or the other (probably not range, then we're talking about a different class of flamer weapon).
If it stays cheap I can see it being just S5 D6 hits -1Sv.
I meant it as a one or the other upgrade. Something like the Flamestorm cannon could justify both since it's a "compensating for something" sized flamer, but not the Heavy Flamer.
pizzaguardian wrote: Tervigons summoning was a bad thing and demon summoning is bad as well.
As an example to the question of "was gaunt summoning or scarab summoning that bad?"
The answer is a simple yes. In order to go any further i would like to see how it was a good thing. (Did people really forget in 5th where tervigons summoned 3x 3d6 models per turn? Anectodal evidence, the only that stopped our tyranid players was their model numbers running out)
Free summoning should have never existed and glad to see them gone. I even hope replacements are costed.
They create nothing but bloat for the game for rules such as how do you place them?, can you directly summon into combat since it is not a movement? .
You can have many many abilities that are fluffy and actually only work when they are answered correctly, which creates even more complex rules. Summoning is one of them and just too much hassle for what it brings to the game.
Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.
Ok, what did it add to the game than? Can we make the game work without that being free and giving the tervigon a discount?
Also lets go with your math,
*1st turn - 3 tervigons, 135 points of summon. (1 stops)
*2nd turn 2 tervigons 90 points of summon. (1 stops)
*3rd turn 1 tervigon summon 45 points summon (1 stops)
You can even make the math for only 5 batches, that still 200+ points worth of 5 different units. They can act as blockers or obj controllers.
These didn't need to be free and they don't need to be free now. Just make the tervigon cheaper and make summon cost points.
Tervigon one dies, lose 40 points of models, repeat.
Again, the tervigon KILLED termagaunts within synapse range even if they weren't the ones spawned. And if the termagaunts weren't in synapse range there was a significant chance you lost control of them and they hid in the nearest terrain feature negating their shooting to get there.
With combi weapons now being able to shoot the special weapon more than once, I'm curious to see the rules for the kombi skorcha. If we can now give our nobz heavy flamers that sounds pretty awesome, but I bet it would cost a lot of points.
pizzaguardian wrote: Tervigons summoning was a bad thing and demon summoning is bad as well.
As an example to the question of "was gaunt summoning or scarab summoning that bad?"
The answer is a simple yes. In order to go any further i would like to see how it was a good thing. (Did people really forget in 5th where tervigons summoned 3x 3d6 models per turn? Anectodal evidence, the only that stopped our tyranid players was their model numbers running out)
Free summoning should have never existed and glad to see them gone. I even hope replacements are costed.
They create nothing but bloat for the game for rules such as how do you place them?, can you directly summon into combat since it is not a movement? .
You can have many many abilities that are fluffy and actually only work when they are answered correctly, which creates even more complex rules. Summoning is one of them and just too much hassle for what it brings to the game.
Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.
Ok, what did it add to the game than? Can we make the game work without that being free and giving the tervigon a discount?
Also lets go with your math,
*1st turn - 3 tervigons, 135 points of summon. (1 stops)
*2nd turn 2 tervigons 90 points of summon. (1 stops)
*3rd turn 1 tervigon summon 45 points summon (1 stops)
You can even make the math for only 5 batches, that still 200+ points worth of 5 different units. They can act as blockers or obj controllers.
These didn't need to be free and they don't need to be free now. Just make the tervigon cheaper and make summon cost points.
Tervigon one dies, lose 40 points of models, repeat.
Again, the tervigon KILLED termagaunts within synapse range even if they weren't the ones spawned. And if the termagaunts weren't in synapse range there was a significant chance you lost control of them and they hid in the nearest terrain feature negating their shooting to get there.
They were not a problem.
No one said Tervigons/termigants were unfair or overpowered, it's the issue of free units setting a precedent that's the problem. A free unit is okay as long as there's roughly an equal downside, like the tervigon feedback mechanism or losing a wound off of a Tomb Spyder. The issue is then it opens the door for smaller and smaller penalties, and eventually just free stuff with power creep. "Oh, free demons are fair, you have to actually CAST the spell!"....did anyone believe that?
There's other ways to portray the tervigon going forward; either by paying the points ahead of time and using it as a pseudo-transport, or having it provide big buffs to gaunts, or any of a half dozen other options. You don't want to provide a precedent for free models being a thing, that opens a very slippery slope, regardless of how balance the precedent setter is.
So because I don't have access to a computer and am not a total masochist to copy and paste dozens of Q&A stuff on my tablet tomorrow, all of Sunday's stuff will get compiled on Monday if no one else jumps in and takes up the mostly pointless task I've taken up.
pizzaguardian wrote: Tervigons summoning was a bad thing and demon summoning is bad as well.
As an example to the question of "was gaunt summoning or scarab summoning that bad?"
The answer is a simple yes. In order to go any further i would like to see how it was a good thing. (Did people really forget in 5th where tervigons summoned 3x 3d6 models per turn? Anectodal evidence, the only that stopped our tyranid players was their model numbers running out)
Free summoning should have never existed and glad to see them gone. I even hope replacements are costed.
They create nothing but bloat for the game for rules such as how do you place them?, can you directly summon into combat since it is not a movement? .
You can have many many abilities that are fluffy and actually only work when they are answered correctly, which creates even more complex rules. Summoning is one of them and just too much hassle for what it brings to the game.
Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.
Ok, what did it add to the game than? Can we make the game work without that being free and giving the tervigon a discount?
Also lets go with your math,
*1st turn - 3 tervigons, 135 points of summon. (1 stops)
*2nd turn 2 tervigons 90 points of summon. (1 stops)
*3rd turn 1 tervigon summon 45 points summon (1 stops)
You can even make the math for only 5 batches, that still 200+ points worth of 5 different units. They can act as blockers or obj controllers.
These didn't need to be free and they don't need to be free now. Just make the tervigon cheaper and make summon cost points.
Tervigon one dies, lose 40 points of models, repeat.
Again, the tervigon KILLED termagaunts within synapse range even if they weren't the ones spawned. And if the termagaunts weren't in synapse range there was a significant chance you lost control of them and they hid in the nearest terrain feature negating their shooting to get there.
They were not a problem.
No one said Tervigons/termigants were unfair or overpowered, it's the issue of free units setting a precedent that's the problem. A free unit is okay as long as there's roughly an equal downside, like the tervigon feedback mechanism or losing a wound off of a Tomb Spyder. The issue is then it opens the door for smaller and smaller penalties, and eventually just free stuff with power creep. "Oh, free demons are fair, you have to actually CAST the spell!"....did anyone believe that?
There's other ways to portray the tervigon going forward; either by paying the points ahead of time and using it as a pseudo-transport, or having it provide big buffs to gaunts, or any of a half dozen other options. You don't want to provide a precedent for free models being a thing, that opens a very slippery slope, regardless of how balance the precedent setter is.
Or we could just acknowledge the fact that the mechanic in general is not the issue, the way it was implemented in 7th edition was.
In regards to the pricing for pink horrors and their diminutive counterparts, adding cost to their base price to represent their ability to split creates a much bigger problem. In particular it penalizes those who do not sink hundreds of dollars into the lesser versions to gain said benefit. Making the models part of a points based side board or having to use models generated to refill a unit already purchased allows the person who bought the models the chance to use them in a fun thematic way while not penalizing those who didn't. If you don't want to have your opponent get those free models, kill the blue/brimstone horrors first so there isn't anywhere to go.
If you have a unit of blues to summon or put on the table, then they should be available however they could enter the game. So in that instance they could be summoned onto the table via a spell, or dropped in via the links splitting. Either way they were paid for and should be able to hit the table however it is they are generated.
pizzaguardian wrote: Tervigons summoning was a bad thing and demon summoning is bad as well.
As an example to the question of "was gaunt summoning or scarab summoning that bad?"
The answer is a simple yes. In order to go any further i would like to see how it was a good thing. (Did people really forget in 5th where tervigons summoned 3x 3d6 models per turn? Anectodal evidence, the only that stopped our tyranid players was their model numbers running out)
Free summoning should have never existed and glad to see them gone. I even hope replacements are costed.
They create nothing but bloat for the game for rules such as how do you place them?, can you directly summon into combat since it is not a movement? .
You can have many many abilities that are fluffy and actually only work when they are answered correctly, which creates even more complex rules. Summoning is one of them and just too much hassle for what it brings to the game.
Tervigon had a 50% chance of never being able to spawn again each time you tried it. Also if you can't handle a 45 point unit of gaunt that die if you just kill the Tervigon something was wrong. and it wasn't the TYRANIDS. Tyranid and Necrons spawning was not a problem. Having unit that can summon other units that then could summon with no real risk was the issue. Not Necrons and Tyranids.
Ok, what did it add to the game than? Can we make the game work without that being free and giving the tervigon a discount?
Also lets go with your math,
*1st turn - 3 tervigons, 135 points of summon. (1 stops)
*2nd turn 2 tervigons 90 points of summon. (1 stops)
*3rd turn 1 tervigon summon 45 points summon (1 stops)
You can even make the math for only 5 batches, that still 200+ points worth of 5 different units. They can act as blockers or obj controllers.
These didn't need to be free and they don't need to be free now. Just make the tervigon cheaper and make summon cost points.
Tervigon one dies, lose 40 points of models, repeat.
Again, the tervigon KILLED termagaunts within synapse range even if they weren't the ones spawned. And if the termagaunts weren't in synapse range there was a significant chance you lost control of them and they hid in the nearest terrain feature negating their shooting to get there.
They were not a problem.
No one said Tervigons/termigants were unfair or overpowered, it's the issue of free units setting a precedent that's the problem. A free unit is okay as long as there's roughly an equal downside, like the tervigon feedback mechanism or losing a wound off of a Tomb Spyder. The issue is then it opens the door for smaller and smaller penalties, and eventually just free stuff with power creep. "Oh, free demons are fair, you have to actually CAST the spell!"....did anyone believe that?
There's other ways to portray the tervigon going forward; either by paying the points ahead of time and using it as a pseudo-transport, or having it provide big buffs to gaunts, or any of a half dozen other options. You don't want to provide a precedent for free models being a thing, that opens a very slippery slope, regardless of how balance the precedent setter is.
Or we could just acknowledge the fact that the mechanic in general is not the issue, the way it was implemented in 7th edition was.
In regards to the pricing for pink horrors and their diminutive counterparts, adding cost to their base price to represent their ability to split creates a much bigger problem. In particular it penalizes those who do not sink hundreds of dollars into the lesser versions to gain said benefit. Making the models part of a points based side board or having to use models generated to refill a unit already purchased allows the person who bought the models the chance to use them in a fun thematic way while not penalizing those who didn't. If you don't want to have your opponent get those free models, kill the blue/brimstone horrors first so there isn't anywhere to go.
If you have a unit of blues to summon or put on the table, then they should be available however they could enter the game. So in that instance they could be summoned onto the table via a spell, or dropped in via the links splitting. Either way they were paid for and should be able to hit the table however it is they are generated.
Precede this by saying I dont play any summoning / free stuff army or at least no lists that took advantage of it (orks tau sallies, eldar) but I gotta say, I didnt much care for the free model mechanic. I thought it was a cool idea but mainly only for daemons and tyranids. Fluffy for both... HOWEVER with daemons, it was just out of hand... being able to basically summon any battlefield role and to be able to summon more summoners... and those summoners undergo mitosis.... i mean c'mon.
Nids... it was a piain in the butt. And I thought the 3d6 mechanic was ok... as the liklihood of doubles was 42% or 44%. So we're talking 30-40 free gaunts. Thats a lot... but understandable in the context of the universe. Both summoning and hatching could be nerfed.... they did so...
They did it with a hatchet rather than a scalpel, but its done. There will be pain for everyone likely... except hooefully orks... we've endured enough (2 editions of being pooped on).
Rippy wrote: Hey guys, check out the topic, it isn't "should stuff be free?"
Sorry, not many mods arond on the weekend.
Go make a general thread
Stop pretending to be a mod when people are discussing the rumours in the rumour thread
This isn't "should units be free", they aren't. That isn't "discussing a rumour". It is off topic, and as a user (not a mod), I shouldn't have to sift through pages of "I think it should be free because of X reason". If mods were around on weekends, they would probably tell you as such, and as a user I got frustrated enough to point it out. If you want to discuss why you want things to be free, go make a new thread.
Edit: I am not talking about discussion if you like the news or not, just the off topic part
Dakka Flakka Flame wrote: With combi weapons now being able to shoot the special weapon more than once, I'm curious to see the rules for the kombi skorcha. If we can now give our nobz heavy flamers that sounds pretty awesome, but I bet it would cost a lot of points.
This will be AWESOME... no invuln save mechanic. Good armor. Multiple wounds. D6 hits....oh boy.
Rippy wrote: Hey guys, check out the topic, it isn't "should stuff be free?"
Sorry, not many mods arond on the weekend.
Go make a general thread
Stop pretending to be a mod when people are discussing the rumours in the rumour thread
This isn't "should units be free", they aren't. That isn't "discussing a rumour". It is off topic, and as a user (not a mod), I shouldn't have to sift through pages of "I think it should be free because of X reason". If mods were around on weekends, they would probably tell you as such, and as a user I got frustrated enough to point it out. If you want to discuss why you want things to be free, go make a new thread.
Edit: I am not talking about discussion if you like the news or not, just the off topic part
Remember all the other times you complained there was off topic stuff, remember when the mods participated in the debate about that "off topic" stuff?
Having started the previous topic on this matter, I read some pages where people complained about lack of 1st page updates, and I even received a pm from a user 'demanding' I update the first page (who didn't even take care to reply to my pm). In a thread that grows exponentially eventually sifting through the pages to catch new info from users was frustrating to say the least. The last four pages had content update from one user and the rest was discussing summoning! So if you're enjoying discussing a tangent of a rumour or info regarding the new edition it could perfectly well be done in a new thread as some users had the attention of creating. I know this is a free forum but that is no excuse to be, or come off as, a complete tool.
/rant
So, besides the Farsight enclaves we now may have another splinter of the faction? Also it seems a bit inconsequential, a 'sphere expansion' or whatever goes missing and they just launch another? I mean, what's stopping them from launchng multiple expansions as they apparently have the resources for that?
As for the 4th, I dont really believe in Chaos Tau but now they can show up in any place. A trip to Baal maybe?
I assumed the disappeared Tau Expansion is to give a fluff reason for why Tau are fighting things on the other side of the Rift, since there would be no way across it for them otherwise.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Or we could just acknowledge the fact that the mechanic in general is not the issue, the way it was implemented in 7th edition was.
That's what I've been saying. This is why I advocate fixing specific rules rather than sledgehammer 'fixes' to general rules.
The general rule wasn't the problem. The specific use and application of that rule was.
Crazyterran wrote: I assumed the disappeared Tau Expansion is to give a fluff reason for why Tau are fighting things on the other side of the Rift, since there would be no way across it for them otherwise.
Oh good point, I imagine we are going to see a bit of this to justify why certain parties are on the "Wrong" side of the rift.
Aeri wrote: Since GW Stated that Evers faction will have a viable psychic phase, maybe this is how Tau get theirs?
I think they clarified on Facebook afterwards that Tau (and Necron and Dark Elder) won't have Psykers still.
Yes, I believe they more meant to say "Every faction that has psykers, will have a viable psychic phase"
I can't wait for ork psykers to be more than a comedy interlude that makes any two of the following explode: himself, his unit, an enemy unit.
Some non-shooting attacks would be awesome for a change, or at least having them hit automatically like the buffed smite we have seen on the rubric sorcerer.
Aeri wrote: Since GW Stated that Evers faction will have a viable psychic phase, maybe this is how Tau get theirs?
I think they clarified on Facebook afterwards that Tau (and Necron and Dark Elder) won't have Psykers still.
Yes, I believe they more meant to say "Every faction that has psykers, will have a viable psychic phase"
I can't wait for ork psykers to be more than a comedy interlude that makes any two of the following explode: himself, his unit, an enemy unit.
Some non-shooting attacks would be awesome for a change, or at least having them hit automatically like the nerfed smite we have seen on the rubric sorcerer.
Forgive me if this is OT, but I'm kind of puzzled.
Of all the races of 40k, 3 stand out as psyker neutral - Necrons, Dark Eldar and Tau. The Necrons because they don't have a soul or flesh, the Dark Eldar because they dispose anyone who does psychic powers due to their history, and the Tau due to their young age.
But, does that mean these armies will get psychic defenses, rather than a psychic phase? My worry is that for all the strengths these armies have, it might be easy to counter with some psychic shenanigans, with no way themselves to stop it.
My hope is that in the case of the Necrons and Tau they get built in resilience to psychic attacks/effects, and the Dark Eldar get some... Painful gear to put the hurt on psykers.
Well the story is that the imperium has been studying the Tau to figure out why there are immune to psychics and the effects of chaos, perhaps they figured something out and made an anti-tau weapon that affects whatever system the Ethereals use to have sway over the other Tau. (I still think it's some sort of pheromone) If they did figure this out, the Culuxes Assassin is the idea delivery mechanism.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Tau aren't immune to psychic powers, otherwise they'd be a race of blanks, and they're not.
They have a limited presence in the Warp, making them far harder to hurt/detect. They're not all pariahs.
They have no more resistance to psychic attackes than anything else - in fact psykers are extremely effective against the Tau - see recent Damocles campaign from which the Assassin picture is from
Imperial Assassins are sent in to decapitate the Tau command structure - head Ethereal, Farsight and Shadowsun - only one of them succeeds in his mission
Tau are "blunt" so pure warp entities can not easily perceive them but a normal psyker using normal vision can target them just fine.
Mr Morden wrote: Tau are "blunt" so pure warp entities can not easily perceive them but a normal psyker using normal vision can target them just fine.
"Blunt" is a good way to put it actually.
To really affect a Tau in the same way they mess with humans, a Daemon would really need to grind away at a Tau for some time. I mean in Firewarrior it's a Daemon Prince giving Kais this seemingly heroic ability to fight untold odds (an in-universe explanation as to why one Firewarrior could do all that), and Kais does start to crack by the end, but a Daemon Prince doing that to a human would have done it in no time.
The Tau have a presence in the Warp because they're living creatures (humans only throw up psychic blanks because of the artificially introduced Pariah gene). But they don't burn brightly and have no pskers because, I would speculate, their species has never been exposed to the Warp. Remember that every human in the Imperium is descended from colonists who crossed the Immaterium millennia ago*, so that potential is written into their hereditary.
So if Tau ever start using proper Warp drives, they'll eventually evolve into a psychic race. Culexus Assassins still freak them out though because they're alive.
*In theory, there could be people on Terra whose entire lineage never left Earth at all, but that's a infinitesimally small proportion of the whole population of the Imperium.
Of all the races of 40k, 3 stand out as psyker neutral - Necrons, Dark Eldar and Tau. The Necrons because they don't have a soul or flesh, the Dark Eldar because they dispose anyone who does psychic powers due to their history, and the Tau due to their young age.
But, does that mean these armies will get psychic defenses, rather than a psychic phase? My worry is that for all the strengths these armies have, it might be easy to counter with some psychic shenanigans, with no way themselves to stop it.
My hope is that in the case of the Necrons and Tau they get built in resilience to psychic attacks/effects, and the Dark Eldar get some... Painful gear to put the hurt on psykers.
Your thoughts guys?
Well for Tau, I think this is the perfect opportunity to get some psychic auxiliaries in. The auxiliaries could use some love. Necron's should get a resistance to psychic powers, being soulless and with warp dampening tec and all. Dark Eldar could get bonuses to attacking psykers, since they're their favorite playthings.
EDIT:
I've been out of the loop for a few days. What's set to be unveiled tomorrow?
Just a heads up to anyone: Apparently, the Gathering Storm books are NOT included in their voucher program.
Kind of disingenuous...
Probably because they're not codexes or the core rules books but are campaign books.
Them giving any kind of voucher is still a huge step forward from the GW of the past. Used to be they sold theold stuff at fll price ntil he last seond and if you didn't know the new editon was coming tough luck.
Probably because they're not codexes or the core rules books but are campaign books.
Them giving any kind of voucher is still a huge step forward from the GW of the past. Used to be they sold theold stuff at fll price ntil he last seond and if you didn't know the new editon was coming tough luck.
I totally agree. The voucher system is great, and I'm glad they're doing anything to help people out. People that bought the books for the rules and tourney play are pretty much dunked by this, though.
I'm wondering if Armored Breakthrough lists will still be battleforged. I guess they could just do a force org that needs 1 HQ 2 HS. With chronic that would let you do ultramarines tank lists as well.
Just a heads up to anyone: Apparently, the Gathering Storm books are NOT included in their voucher program.
Kind of disingenuous...
People should have known the gathering storm was a prelude to an all new edition. Pretty much everyone knew that except those that stick their heads in the sand. Those books are merely for reading enjoyment.
I think it is a really good idea and helps maintain the health of the game/meta. Giving a reward to people that take variety over min maxing and spamming is always a plus.
The true test however will be when they start releasing army books and giving unique command traits. This then becomes much harder to balance as opposed to everyone getting the same ones upon release.
So while I am happy about the initial introduction of strategums, I am cautiously optimistic for where they head when they start becoming unique to factions.
Really liking the look of Strategems (and arguably the first mechanic we've seen that has no equivelant in AoS), will be very interesting to see the full array of Strategems each army has.
Summary:
-current Battle Forged armies will stay Battle Forged
-Battle forged armies get 3 command points (I'm guessing this is from the FOC we saw a couple weeks ago that gives 3 since a Battle Forged FOC fits in it)
-some characters (like Bjorn) can give you extra command points just by being in your army
-generic options: -you can only spend Command Points once per hase, so no buying rerolls multiple times per the fight sub phase for example.
NivlacSupreme wrote: I'm wondering if Armored Breakthrough lists will still be battleforged. I guess they could just do a force org that needs 1 HQ 2 HS. With chronic that would let you do ultramarines tank lists as well.
Only way to know for sure is when we finally see the full compliment of FOC's they provide for Battleforged armies.
Depending on what the army specific ones are, it seems like you might be able to put some brute force behind your tactics.
Like Orks, for instance. They mentioned ignoring a punishing morale test, but if there's a specific Ork one to run and charge as well, you might be able to get high degrees of certainty with one key unit, and then plan around that.
Red Corsair wrote: I think it is a really good idea and helps maintain the health of the game/meta. Giving a reward to people that take variety over min maxing and spamming is always a plus.
The true test however will be when they start releasing army books and giving unique command traits. This then becomes much harder to balance as opposed to everyone getting the same ones upon release.
So while I am happy about the initial introduction of strategums, I am cautiously optimistic for where they head when they start becoming unique to factions.
I think it was said in the original Q&A stream that each faction will get unique Strategems at launch, but the varying cost in Command Points means there is at least a balancing mechanic availbale that can be adjusted.
Something I would like to be able to field would be a 100% Armored Taskforce for my Blood Angels effectively
Tanks and Aircraft with some transports.
EDIT: Would also like to be able to field Stormtalons and the like...
-Battle forged armies get 3 command points (I'm guessing this is from the FOC we saw a couple weeks ago that gives 3 since a Battle Forged FOC fits in it)
From the way they wrote that, and the fact that each FOC shown has it's CP listed as +3 or +9 suggests that you get 3 CP automatically for having a Battle Forged army and the specific FOC used plus any special characters give extra CP on top of that.
ClockworkZion wrote: Summary:
-current Battle Forged armies will stay Battle Forged
-Battle forged armies get 3 command points (I'm guessing this is from the FOC we saw a couple weeks ago that gives 3 since a Battle Forged FOC fits in it)
-some characters (like Bjorn) can give you extra command points just by being in your army
-generic options: -you can only spend Command Points once per hase, so no buying rerolls multiple times per the fight sub phase for example.
Actually you can spend command points multiple times per phase, just not on the same stratagem.
ClockworkZion wrote: Summary:
-you can only spend Command Points once per hase, so no buying rerolls multiple times per the fight sub phase for example.
Correction: You cannot use the same strategem more than once in the same phase, but otherwise you can potentially use up all of the CPs on different statagems in a single phase.
Neronoxx wrote: Something I would like to be able to field would be a 100% Armored Taskforce for my Blood Angels effectively
Tanks and Aircraft with some transports.
EDIT: Would also like to be able to field Stormtalons and the like...
I think the idea is that you can field this, but you won't be battle-forged and you won't get command points which are used for bidding for first turn and for stratagems, putting you at a disadvantage.
What would be really interesting for some factions, would be if you could use command points to get summon points. Like 40 points per command point spent.
The true test will be if the stratagems breach the power gap that inevitably will be found and exploited.
It's all well and good taking a AM or even a space marine infantry company and going to town with one of the larger and more fluffy/balanced FOC charts, but if triple riptide and triple ghost keels are still going to rain supreme without strategems then they don't really do the job they are supposed to do.
Those 3 stratagems for example aren't THAT powerful to be honest. What's the point in being able to re-roll one dice when you need to re-roll a lot more due to uber units raining down ridiculous fire power.
-Battle forged armies get 3 command points (I'm guessing this is from the FOC we saw a couple weeks ago that gives 3 since a Battle Forged FOC fits in it)
From the way they wrote that, and the fact that each FOC shown has it's CP listed as +3 or +9 suggests that you get 3 CP automatically for having a Battle Forged army and the specific FOC used plus any special characters give extra CP on top of that.
Looks like it is 3 for Battle Forged Army plus Command Benefits from your Detachments, plus those for specific characters.
Remember, the three revealed detachments are Patrol (0 Command Points), Battalion (+3 Command Points), and Brigade (+9 Command Points). This puts a Command Point premium on bringing more balanced list of less factions rather than just going for a hodgepodge of units from a number of factions. One can speculate that the more specialized detachments that are made up of just Elites, Fast Attack, Heavy Support or Lords of War will award less Command Points then these generalist detachments.
Counter defensive seems kinda wimpy. Not -worthless-, but wimpy.
Honestly without bringing faction specific abilities into account I'd probably save all my points for the rerolls. Kairos is a big deal for a reason after all.
Neronoxx wrote: Something I would like to be able to field would be a 100% Armored Taskforce for my Blood Angels effectively
Tanks and Aircraft with some transports.
EDIT: Would also like to be able to field Stormtalons and the like...
I think the idea is that you can field this, but you won't be battle-forged and you won't get command points which are used for bidding for first turn and for stratagems, putting you at a disadvantage.
Wait, when did they mention bidding for first turn?
Stratagems are going to be a good way of replacing 7E formation special rules, while still keeping a measure of control over them. So for example, Knights could replicate Adamantine Lance by having a stratagem allowing them to re-roll all saving throws for a phase, but at the cost of several command points.
This has two pretty nice advantages. First everything will behave consistently, as stratagems will apply regardless of which detachment a given unit is in. Secondly, they're a limited resource and it will be tough to both bring a lot of command dice while min/maxing the units that benefit most.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: The true test will be if the stratagems breach the power gap that inevitably will be found and exploited.
It's all well and good taking a AM or even a space marine infantry company and going to town with one of the larger and more fluffy/balanced FOC charts, but if triple riptide and triple ghost keels are still going to rain supreme without strategems then they don't really do the job they are supposed to do.
Those 3 stratagems for example aren't THAT powerful to be honest. What's the point in being able to re-roll one dice when you need to re-roll a lot more due to uber units raining down ridiculous fire power.
Rerolling a singe dice is less important for shooting armies, but for assault armies you can reroll charge distances.
You can also reroll the d6 hits for large blasts. You can reroll the wound or damage of a lascannon.
There are many single rolls with a lot of influence on the game.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: The true test will be if the stratagems breach the power gap that inevitably will be found and exploited.
It's all well and good taking a AM or even a space marine infantry company and going to town with one of the larger and more fluffy/balanced FOC charts, but if triple riptide and triple ghost keels are still going to rain supreme without strategems then they don't really do the job they are supposed to do.
Those 3 stratagems for example aren't THAT powerful to be honest. What's the point in being able to re-roll one dice when you need to re-roll a lot more due to uber units raining down ridiculous fire power.
It's in the evaluation of situations that make them more or less powerful. Proper play and counterplay will make many decisions more thoughtful.
I'm sure there will be "better" ones, but the points and the accessibility will be a factor.
The stratagem system looks like gold to me. The ones we've seen so far look to be low end of the scale bonuses. Perhaps the top end ones will be orbital bombardments or mass redeployment or something. With these, armies made up of basic but well organised troops might finally be able to take out the high powered cheese floating around these days.
lord_blackfang wrote: I wonder if abilities like banshees' "mostly strike first" tie in to these. Maybe they can simply perform a Counter-Offensive without spending CP.
Nah that's a unit ability that is sometimes countered by stuff like daemonettes.
lord_blackfang wrote: I wonder if abilities like banshees' "mostly strike first" tie in to these. Maybe they can simply perform a Counter-Offensive without spending CP.
Or they give your army that strategem. Maybe the Avatar gives you one that lets you spend CP to ignore mortal wounds.
In the Necrons 5th edition codex the Chronometron allowed for a reroll of a single D6 each phase. I found that it was pretty invaluable a lot of times.
Future War Cultist wrote: The stratagem system looks like gold to me. The ones we've seen so far look to be low end of the scale bonuses. Perhaps the top end ones will be orbital bombardments or mass redeployment or something. With these, armies made up of basic but well organised troops might finally be able to take out the high powered cheese floating around these days.
Not likely that extreme. They will be more along the lines of 'instead of rolling you succeed' - charges, psychic tests/summoning, etc. Bigger ones will just affect more units or more rolls.
lord_blackfang wrote: I wonder if abilities like banshees' "mostly strike first" tie in to these. Maybe they can simply perform a Counter-Offensive without spending CP.
Or they give your army that strategem. Maybe the Avatar gives you one that lets you spend CP to ignore mortal wounds.
I can see this being very plausible since they said that the Avatar could ignore some mortal wounds, not ALL.
only three generic stratagems isn't great - we've been spoiled by Cities of Death and 2nd ed Stratagy cards, I thought we'd have a whole range to choose from.
Hopefully there are a lot of faction stratagems to choose from, but the ones we've seen are very nice. ignoring a morale test is a big one
Future War Cultist wrote: The stratagem system looks like gold to me. The ones we've seen so far look to be low end of the scale bonuses. Perhaps the top end ones will be orbital bombardments or mass redeployment or something. With these, armies made up of basic but well organised troops might finally be able to take out the high powered cheese floating around these days.
Not likely that extreme. They will be more along the lines of 'instead of rolling you succeed' - charges, psychic tests/summoning, etc. Bigger ones will just affect more units or more rolls.
Depending on what the army specific ones are, it seems like you might be able to put some brute force behind your tactics.
Like Orks, for instance. They mentioned ignoring a punishing morale test, but if there's a specific Ork one to run and charge as well, you might be able to get high degrees of certainty with one key unit, and then plan around that.
I was thinking then same, murderous charge CP allows 1 squad to charge its full range automaticaly ignoring difficult terrain,the charged unit cannot over watch.
It would take a CP of this calibre to make CC effective IMO and TBHGW have repeatedly told us CC is more vicious than ever so I can imagine orks having some pretty nasty strategies,formations,command points coming there way.
Hey, remember Creed's Tactical Genius?
Guess where it gets its power from now…
That said, if Bjorn showing up is worth one CP, how many CP do you think Robot Guilleman brings to the table?
As for balance questions: the fact that CP are a resource generated pre-game in a predictable manner will aid this greatly. As will the once-per-phase rule in Matched Play. As long as the annual points review includes CP allocation and costs then we should be good.
Charax wrote: only three generic stratagems isn't great - we've been spoiled by Cities of Death and 2nd ed Stratagy cards, I thought we'd have a whole range to choose from.
Hopefully there are a lot of faction stratagems to choose from, but the ones we've seen are very nice. ignoring a morale test is a big one
What makes you think there are only these three generic strategems?
Charax wrote: only three generic stratagems isn't great - we've been spoiled by Cities of Death and 2nd ed Stratagy cards, I thought we'd have a whole range to choose from.
Hopefully there are a lot of faction stratagems to choose from, but the ones we've seen are very nice. ignoring a morale test is a big one
What makes you think there are only these three generic strategems?
"Many of these will be specific to certain missions or factions, but there are three that every army can use:"
We can only hope that Command points are restricted to units or characters that genuinely merit them: Imperial Guard Colonels, Force Commanders, Phoenix Lords etc etc
Gaining a CP from capturing an objective, say, a radio station or something, would be acceptable in my opinion.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: We can only hope that Command points are restricted to units or characters that genuinely merit them: Imperial Guard Colonels, Force Commanders, Phoenix Lords etc etc
Gaining a CP from capturing an objective, say, a radio station or something, would be acceptable in my opinion.
But they shouldn't be handed out willy-nilly.
Ahriman, Guilliman, Creed, Yarrick - guys like that. I can't see non-unique units getting them nor objectives.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: We can only hope that Command points are restricted to units or characters that genuinely merit them: Imperial Guard Colonels, Force Commanders, Phoenix Lords etc etc
Gaining a CP from capturing an objective, say, a radio station or something, would be acceptable in my opinion.
But they shouldn't be handed out willy-nilly.
Ahriman, Guilliman, Creed, Yarrick - guys like that. I can't see non-unique units getting them nor objectives.
Hmmm. This is not good. We have already lost re-roll for Twin-linked, Re-roll strategem... this may mean a loss of common re-rolls. Given that the bolter that pierced the armor of the guardsmen, now it will be just an autogun with S4... And dreadnoughts still die from a two meltas... Sounds not good for SM.
It makes me think of a faction change. Maybe 'nids? Or powerfull eldar with lots of S6 dakka?
Lost re roill for twin linked? Having 2 guns instead is flat out better you know. Think of all those twin linked SM systems on Land Raiders, Preds, Talons, Razors etc, thats a big buff. Dreads can die to 2 meltas but they can't die from one now.
I'm wondering if other factors can increase or decrease your CPs. For example, in the future IG orders will be automatic, so what are vox casters supposed to do now? Maybe they could be CP generators. Like, for every 3-6 units in your army equipped with one or more, you generate an extra CP. This probably wouldn't happen (or work in practice) though. Just a thought.
Sturmgeschutz wrote: Hmmm. This is not good. We have already lost re-roll for Twin-linked, Re-roll strategem... this may mean a loss of common re-rolls. Given that the bolter that pierced the armor of the guardsmen, now it will be just an autogun with S4... And dreadnoughts still die from a two meltas... Sounds not good for SM.
It makes me think of a faction change. Maybe 'nids? Or powerfull eldar with lots of S6 dakka?
Eh, without even seeing the rules you're weighing a faction chance because of a perceived lack of strength your figurines will have? There's not really any way to constructively respond that without being rude.
RandyMcStab wrote: Lost re roill for twin linked? Having 2 guns instead is flat out better you know. Think of all those twin linked SM systems on Land Raiders, Preds, Talons, Razors etc, thats a big buff. Dreads can die to 2 meltas but they can't die from one now.
But now Dred may die from lasguns and autopistols! I never use a LR, Predators and Razors. And even this will not make me play them. I like dreadnoughts and tacticool guys in 3+.
Sturmgeschutz wrote: Hmmm. This is not good. We have already lost re-roll for Twin-linked, Re-roll strategem... this may mean a loss of common re-rolls. Given that the bolter that pierced the armor of the guardsmen, now it will be just an autogun with S4... And dreadnoughts still die from a two meltas... Sounds not good for SM.
It makes me think of a faction change. Maybe 'nids? Or powerfull eldar with lots of S6 dakka?
You can if you want but you have no idea what armies are good or not. We haven't seen any of the nid rules yet and S6 got rather heavily nerfed by the new toughness system and no AV.
But hey, don't let logic or reason stop you from being a reactionary bandwagoner.
Future War Cultist wrote: I'm wondering if other factors can increase or decrease your CPs. For example, in the future IG orders will be automatic, so what are vox casters supposed to do now? Maybe they could be CP generators. Like, for every 3-6 units in your army equipped with one or more, you generate an extra CP. This probably wouldn't happen (or work in practice) though. Just a thought.
I guarantee vox caster now will boost the range of orders, like they always should have done.
RandyMcStab wrote: Lost re roill for twin linked? Having 2 guns instead is flat out better you know. Think of all those twin linked SM systems on Land Raiders, Preds, Talons, Razors etc, thats a big buff. Dreads can die to 2 meltas but they can't die from one now.
But now Dred may die from lasguns and autopistols! I never use a LR, Predators and Razors. And even this will not make me play them. I like dreadnoughts and tacticool guys in 3+.
Every time someone says something something lasgun/landraider god cries at humanity's wasted potential.
RandyMcStab wrote: Lost re roill for twin linked? Having 2 guns instead is flat out better you know. Think of all those twin linked SM systems on Land Raiders, Preds, Talons, Razors etc, thats a big buff. Dreads can die to 2 meltas but they can't die from one now.
But now Dred may die from lasguns and autopistols! I never use a LR, Predators and Razors. And even this will not make me play them. I like dreadnoughts and tacticool guys in 3+.
Oh okay, you do know that if you jump to 'Nids that your new Shiny Swarmlord (mine's gonna be named Mr. Gribble btw) could die to lasguns too, and is probably tougher than a Dreadnought. But hey, don't let the lowly lasgun stop you from worrying about things die-ing.
OT: I do hope the more specialised FOC's don't give out too many CP's. I'd be a bit miffed if the Knights are running around with 5-10 CP's just for taking 4 models when the Marine player can't get that without paying through the nose, it'd feel a bit weighted unfairly then.
Whilst Dreads do have a possibility of losing wounds from crappy basic weapons they also can make saves against Lascannons, and can't be stunned/immobilised/weapon destroyed; swings and roundabouts. It does seem that they will be better than anytime since 2nd Ed.
RandyMcStab wrote: Lost re roill for twin linked? Having 2 guns instead is flat out better you know. Think of all those twin linked SM systems on Land Raiders, Preds, Talons, Razors etc, thats a big buff. Dreads can die to 2 meltas but they can't die from one now.
But now Dred may die from lasguns and autopistols! I never use a LR, Predators and Razors. And even this will not make me play them. I like dreadnoughts and tacticool guys in 3+.
Doubtful. Given that they need a 6 to wound and the Drednought has a 3+ save it would take such an amount of Lasguns and Autopistols to wound a Drednought that any opponent doing this is wasting their firepower. Sure they may be able to take off a wound here and there, but honestly thinking that Drednoughts are going to die to small arms fire is very reactionary.
As for Melta. it won't die to 1, and should be able to survive 2 hits, a third hit however should see it reduced to molten metal.
Sturmgeschutz wrote: Hmmm. This is not good. We have already lost re-roll for Twin-linked, Re-roll strategem... this may mean a loss of common re-rolls. Given that the bolter that pierced the armor of the guardsmen, now it will be just an autogun with S4... And dreadnoughts still die from a two meltas... Sounds not good for SM. It makes me think of a faction change. Maybe 'nids? Or powerfull eldar with lots of S6 dakka?
Yea, you have fun with that. Jump factions if that's what you think is going to happen. I happen to disagree.
Dreads can possibly die to two melta hits, if they both roll above or at average. That melta could do one wound, or two, etc. It's entirely dependent on how well your opponent rolls if they hit.
I like the proposed changes, to include boltguns allowing armor saves. It's more balanced that way in my opinion.
OT: I do hope the more specialised FOC's don't give out too many CP's. I'd be a bit miffed if the Knights are running around with 5-10 CP's just for taking 4 models when the Marine player can't get that without paying through the nose, it'd feel a bit weighted unfairly then.
Judging by what's the article said, in fact the exact opposite of that is true. Armies with a wide variety of units and lots of troop choices have command points galore while the guy bringing three riptides barely has any. Indeed, maybe not any at all.
RandyMcStab wrote: Lost re roill for twin linked? Having 2 guns instead is flat out better you know. Think of all those twin linked SM systems on Land Raiders, Preds, Talons, Razors etc, thats a big buff. Dreads can die to 2 meltas but they can't die from one now.
But now Dred may die from lasguns and autopistols! I never use a LR, Predators and Razors. And even this will not make me play them. I like dreadnoughts and tacticool guys in 3+.
Doubtful. Given that they need a 6 to wound and the Drednought has a 3+ save it would take such an amount of Lasguns and Autopistols to wound a Drednought that any opponent doing this is wasting their firepower. Sure they may be able to take off a wound here and there, but honestly thinking that Drednoughts are going to die to small arms fire is very reactionary.
As for Melta. it won't die to 1, and should be able to survive 2 hits, a third hit however should see it reduced to molten metal.
And this did not improve the vitality of the dreadnoughts. 1-2 are melted - okay, but when they fly in 4-5 at a time - you will not feel any changes. I was hoping that the dreadnought would be a badass fighting machine worthy of the ancient one sitting in it. And what now, what in the future is a useless waste of points with crappy weaponry, low speed and poor armor. Yes, and -1 on to-hit if moved...
This ties in pretty nicely with the force org. article as having single, big detatchment is quite a bit better than having two smaller detachments. (Bonus CPs for bigger forces) Given that you get 3 CPs for turning up, and another 3 for taking a batallion-scale detatchment, I think there will be enough CPs to not feel starved of CPs, but they still need to be used wisely in a normal-sized game.
The big clincher is re-rolls, they are cheap uses of CPs and will almost certainly be the most used stratagem. Failed a 2+ roll? Missed a charge you expected to hit? Need some reserves this turn? Cough up a CP and youre in buisiness.
Are we really back to the Lasgun/Land Raider stupidity again?
Alright, so far the edition is all about having the right tool for the right job. Shooting your lasguns and autopistols at a Land Raider, or Dreadnought as it were, is like hammering in a nail with a screwdriver. Sure you can do it, but it isn't the most effective tool to use for the job. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
RandyMcStab wrote: Lost re roill for twin linked? Having 2 guns instead is flat out better you know. Think of all those twin linked SM systems on Land Raiders, Preds, Talons, Razors etc, thats a big buff. Dreads can die to 2 meltas but they can't die from one now.
But now Dred may die from lasguns and autopistols! I never use a LR, Predators and Razors. And even this will not make me play them. I like dreadnoughts and tacticool guys in 3+.
Doubtful. Given that they need a 6 to wound and the Drednought has a 3+ save it would take such an amount of Lasguns and Autopistols to wound a Drednought that any opponent doing this is wasting their firepower. Sure they may be able to take off a wound here and there, but honestly thinking that Drednoughts are going to die to small arms fire is very reactionary.
As for Melta. it won't die to 1, and should be able to survive 2 hits, a third hit however should see it reduced to molten metal.
And this did not improve the vitality of the dreadnoughts. 1-2 are melted - okay, but when they fly in 4-5 at a time - you will not feel any changes. I was hoping that the dreadnought would be a badass fighting machine worthy of the ancient one sitting in it. And what now, what in the future is a useless waste of points with crappy weaponry, low speed and poor armor. Yes, and -1 on to-hit if moved...
from the previews we now that a Multimelta costs 27pts, and a Space Marine costs 13pts. So 40pts for each Space Marine armed with a Multimela, I think the maximum allowed in a unit is 4, so 160pts. Which is dedicated anti-vehicle and monstrous creature, Yes they can kill a Dreadnought, but they are a very specialised unit, against a large unit of infantry they are going to find themselves struggling. Plus I imafine the Dreadnought can take longer ranged firepower that should whittle down the threat of such a unit.
I'm doubtful that a Dreadnought will cost 160pts, so it is fair that a unit that has invested so many points into doing one job and only one job very well can be a threat to large models in 40K.
DaemonJellybaby wrote: This ties in pretty nicely with the force org. article as having single, big detatchment is quite a bit better than having two smaller detachments. (Bonus CPs for bigger forces)
Given that you get 3 CPs for turning up, and another 3 for taking a batallion-scale detatchment, I think there will be enough CPs to not feel starved of CPs, but they still need to be used wisely in a normal-sized game.
The big clincher is re-rolls, they are cheap uses of CPs and will almost certainly be the most used stratagem.
Failed a 2+ roll? Missed a charge you expected to hit? Need some reserves this turn?
Cough up a CP and youre in buisiness.
Agreed. One of my favorite things about Blood Bowl is the team re-rolls. You have a limited number for each half, so when a player flubs an important roll, you need to consider whether it's worth spending a valuable re-roll or just eating the turnover. The CP system looks like it's bringing that mechanic to 40k, plus expanding it to faction-specific benefits while encouraging balanced armies. That's all to the good in my book.
I like the Stratagem system. Every system that gives the player mone tactical choices and resource management at the same time that it reduces randomness (If you need THAT charge to sucess, you can reduce the randomness using a resource that you have planed to use in that situation and rerroll the charge if you fail, for example) is a good system to me.
Now, we have to see if the different Stratagems of different factions are balanced.
Killing Dreads was never a priority unless it was maybe standing on an Objective. Immobilizing them was all that was needed to make them combat ineffective.
That's gone now... just that alone makes Dreads so much better.
A bit underwhelmed, but that's an issue I've had with a lot of GW stuff lately - considering how well they're doing.
I hope there are more stratagems and better ones. I'm achingly tired of the super-lazy "re-roll" being about the only special rule that GW feels like doling out. This was terrible in 7th (where everyone ignores rules or re-rolls them) and may be just as bad in 8th. I refuse to believe that the design team can't do better. This is lazy game-making at its worst.
"Let's make this guy different..."
"He ignores X."
"Perfect."
"Let's make this unit different..."
"They re-roll X."
"Perfect."
It's the same piss poor lazy nonsense that lead to "it shall not cry" and "eternal blender". It's hard to take a rule set seriously when 50% of its additional rules, simply negate the main rules or ignore them. I was hoping for far better from GW going into 8th. I hope it's not a sign of more laziness to come. /rant
OT: I do hope the more specialised FOC's don't give out too many CP's. I'd be a bit miffed if the Knights are running around with 5-10 CP's just for taking 4 models when the Marine player can't get that without paying through the nose, it'd feel a bit weighted unfairly then.
4 models, likelv 1000 pts or more. Think marines can gej 5-10 cp cheaper than that
RandyMcStab wrote: Lost re roill for twin linked? Having 2 guns instead is flat out better you know. Think of all those twin linked SM systems on Land Raiders, Preds, Talons, Razors etc, thats a big buff. Dreads can die to 2 meltas but they can't die from one now.
But now Dred may die from lasguns and autopistols! I never use a LR, Predators and Razors. And even this will not make me play them. I like dreadnoughts and tacticool guys in 3+.
Doubtful. Given that they need a 6 to wound and the Drednought has a 3+ save it would take such an amount of Lasguns and Autopistols to wound a Drednought that any opponent doing this is wasting their firepower. Sure they may be able to take off a wound here and there, but honestly thinking that Drednoughts are going to die to small arms fire is very reactionary.
As for Melta. it won't die to 1, and should be able to survive 2 hits, a third hit however should see it reduced to molten metal.
2 hits basically is decided on wound rolls. Both wound and odds are dead dread. Dreads likely get toasted faster in 8th ed as heavy guns really toast them. Yeah scatter bikes have harder time but those aren"t all.
zedsdead wrote: Killing Dreads was never a priority unless it was maybe standing on an Objective. Immobilizing them was all that was needed to make them combat ineffective.
That's gone now... just that alone makes Dreads so much better.
Plus the fact that you simply cannot one shot them with most weapons. That by itself changes the complexion of the whole game quite a bit.
We've all had games where one side or the the other had some good dice on turn one and vaporized pretty much every vehicle on the board. Now players have to invest a more reasonable amount of shooting to kill armored targets. Sure, you can still roll well, but on a Dread that means 2-3 shots rather than 4-5, which is a huge upgrade from, "maybe just one shot". It also dramatically changes the impact of things like the scatter lasers that only do (I'd guess) one wound at a time in terms of their effectiveness in cleaning up even light and medium armor. IMO Light armor with moderate threat levels, like sentinels, just got a whole lot more survivable, just based on target priority for the first two turns in a game with moderate armor saturation.
Obviously units of melta-armed dudes will still vape most targets in one turn, but that sounds appropriate.
I wonder if we'll see a lot of what are currently re-rolls turned into "roll two dice and discard the lowest" in 8th? It has the advantage of being slightly faster, and the Command Re-Roll Stratagem can be stacked on top of it.
That would only work for rolls that you make one-at-a-time though, as it wouldn't work to roll handfuls of dice at once unless they were all color coded.
Light armored models are the ones that got it better with 8th. They are really hard to take down with small weapons at no less than T6 and 4+, while not being a worthy target for heavy stuff. The real counter would be the goold old mid strenght high ROF weapons, but i think we are not going to see a lot of those now.
The wording of the Counter Offensive strategem is pretty wierd, can anyone (preferably with AoS experience) explain what it is supposed to do? Seems wierd to be able to fight a unit somehow that already charged and had its combat resolved (what is the worth in that? Does it have to be another unit locked in the same combat?).
A bs 4 lascannon requires 4,5 shots to take down 7 wounds, which is probably sentinel and rhino level. Not really a good use for a lascannon platform for the whole game.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ragnar Blackmane wrote: The wording of the Counter Offensive strategem is pretty wierd, can anyone (preferably with AoS experience) explain what it is supposed to do? Seems wierd to be able to fight a unit somehow that already charged and had its combat resolved (what is the worth in that? Does it have to be another unit locked in the same combat?).
It is used only when you are charged by multiple units. Usually, all those units would be able to attack before you do, with the stratagem only one attacks, then you can choose one unit to fight before the other charging attackers are resolved.
2 hits basically is decided on wound rolls. Both wound and odds are dead dread. Dreads likely get toasted faster in 8th ed as heavy guns really toast them. Yeah scatter bikes have harder time but those aren"t all.
It's 4/6 to wound (previous odds to wound was 30/36 and to glance was 33/36). Plus their save. Plus it's a 30% chance to roll enough wounds.
Dakka Flakka Flame wrote: I wonder if we'll see a lot of what are currently re-rolls turned into "roll two dice and discard the lowest" in 8th? It has the advantage of being slightly faster, and the Command Re-Roll Stratagem can be stacked on top of it.
That would only work for rolls that you make one-at-a-time though, as it wouldn't work to roll handfuls of dice at once unless they were all color coded.
Umm for one at a time no difference. At least all i know roll 2 dices for rerollable throws. Faster
Elbows wrote: A bit underwhelmed, but that's an issue I've had with a lot of GW stuff lately - considering how well they're doing.
I hope there are more stratagems and better ones.
As the game plays on, you can use these Command Points to activate a variety of Stratagems. Many of these will be specific to certain missions or factions
Elbows wrote: A bit underwhelmed, but that's an issue I've had with a lot of GW stuff lately - considering how well they're doing.
I hope there are more stratagems and better ones.
As the game plays on, you can use these Command Points to activate a variety of Stratagems. Many of these will be specific to certain missions or factions
Actually reading the article helps.
Doesn't say anything about are they more interesting op more rerolls
So as they have said, the unit that charged that turn gets to go first.
So the person whose turn it is might have three units charge. So they get to have one unit attack, then they have their second unit attack. At this point someone might use command points to interrupt and have one of their units attack before the third charging unit goes.
After that it is alternating activation's for all units that did not charge that turn.
So it is actually insanely powerful if they dont pick the right unit to attack with first you might be able to use your command points to wipe out a unit that charged before they get to swing.
Ragnar Blackmane wrote: The wording of the Counter Offensive strategem is pretty wierd, can anyone (preferably with AoS experience) explain what it is supposed to do? Seems wierd to be able to fight a unit somehow that already charged and had its combat resolved (what is the worth in that? Does it have to be another unit locked in the same combat?).
Say your opponent charges with 4 units in their turn. Normally in the Fight phase they would get to attack first with those 4 units, then both players take it in turns to attack with any other units in a combat.
With that stratagem, your opponent is only guaranteed to attack first with 1 unit. If you use it, you can strike before units 2/3/4 & likely weaken them before they hit you.
So people are underwhelmed from a teaser/preview? I mean you know this is not all they are showing right? My god us nerds/geeks are a shameful folk. First we complain GW doesn't show previews and now they do, we complain or lamblast them for doing so. They are teasers/previews so of course they are not going to show all of them. So why complain and say they are lacking? I just don't get it.
Like why not wait and say they are underwhelming until we know the bigger picture? Then we can actually say they are underwhelming and why. To say they are underwhelming and not give an excuse is just giving us nerds and geeks a bad name and proving Kirby was right about us all along.
These stratagems seem good and I can't wait to see the others that will be available for different factions. Could quite possibly make it worthwhile to take one of those bigger detachments full of troops and what-not.
Regarding dreadnoughts and other similar units, at least my feeling is that vehicles seem to be much stronger in the New Edition. They might be taken down with dedicated anti tank weaponry, but are much harder to take out with other weapons. Meaning that heavy weaponry will be very valuable and this seems to be taken into account as multi melta is so expensive. Especially those Light vehicles that used to be very easilly killed might be quite annoying if they have 5-6 wounds with 4+ save. Especially if they'll have some hit modifier causing jinking rule.
For tyranids, if they tie the stratagems with the synapse, i'm a happy bug player.
Can you imagine? Shadow in the warp (1 CP) : You can use this stratagem when an enemy psyker tries to manifest a power while within 18" of a model with the synapse keyword, before he rolls the dice. The psyker suffers a penalty of -3 to the roll to manifest that single power.
Spoletta wrote: For tyranids, if they tie the stratagems with the synapse, i'm a happy bug player.
Can you imagine? Shadow in the warp (1 CP) : You can use this stratagem when an enemy psyker tries to manifest a power while within 18" of a model with the synapse keyword, before he rolls the dice. The psyker suffers a penalty of -3 to the roll to manifest that single power.
much love if so
