The key point is whether you think luck should be very decisive or possible to mitigate, and I lean heavily on the latter.
I guess we can all agree on this point Reserve rolls, to my minds, were often particularly frustrating
Do you know for sure that we will be able to assault after having disembarked ? If yes, do we have any idea of if there is a movement limitation, like "can disembark only if you have moved less than 6" " ?
Leth wrote: Okay, so after reading the DE post here is what I think I can extrapolate
So poisoned is a thing still and I am (guessing) it still wounds on a fixed value, however from what he said I am guessing that it has a special interaction with the vehicle key word where it only works on a 6.
Open Topped vehicles still allow you to shoot when it moves, so I am guessing that there is no longer cruising speed/combat speed. In addition if I had to guess fast will translate to "dont have -1 to shoot heavy weapons when they move" ability
If I had to guess the lance rule is being translated into +1 Armor Pen as a flat bonus to weapons.
So some weapons will do random damage and some weapons will do flat damage, interesting to see. I wonder if that is how they are going to combine weapons that had two profiles like the disintigrator.
Another thing is that on a 6 the klavix does a fixed number of additional wounds, which strikes me as a solid replacement for the instant death type weapons/rules
I am guessing Jink is being replaced with a 5+ invul save(unless that is to replace flicker fields but I doubt it).
Also an interesting thing to note is that wyches get the invul in the fight PHASE, so they will have their invul save against overwatch. Quite nice.
No escape is worded as a general rule, not necessarily wych specific so we will probably see it sprinkled around other armies. It definitely seems like a rule that should be a Command Point for some factions.
Agree on Poisoned, thats what I was expecting it to do from the start.
I suspect vehicle types like Fast and Open Topped to be completely gone and replaced by special rules, it will be interesting to see how many other vehicles get to ignore the -1 BS from Heavy weapons.
I would say your guess on Lance is completely wrong. Armour Pen is no longer a game mechanic, and it's equivelant would be more like +1S but since the DL is still S8 that hasn't happend, all it's gained is effectively going from AP1 to AP2 so if it doesn't have an equivelant to the Lance rule now it's actually going to be much worse against tough vehicles like Land Raiders than it currently is, though it's general usefulnes shas been much increased with the damage mechanic.
Not really a surprise that ID has been replaced with extra Damage since the ID rule is superflous in this system. The interesting thing with the Klaivex is that he didn't have such a rule previously, only Rampage.
No word on Jink or Nightshields, I expect it's just a case of Flickerfields being handed out to all of our vehicles again like in 5th (though being standard rather than paid for).
Thats not a change for Wyches as it seems that charging and fighting have been seperated out into different phases.
I'm guessing No Escapes wording is so that other Wych Cult units, like Blood Brides, Succubi, Lelith, Hellions, Beastpacks and Reavers can use it rather than being a USR available to other armies. I also expect that Lelith and Succubi will have give bonuses to that roll.
The key point is whether you think luck should be very decisive or possible to mitigate, and I lean heavily on the latter.
I guess we can all agree on this point Reserve rolls, to my minds, were often particularly frustrating
Do you know for sure that we will be able to assault after having disembarked ? If yes, do we have any idea of if there is a movement limitation, like "can disembark only if you have moved less than 6" " ?
No news on that, still waiting on an article for Transports.
tneva82 wrote: Problem is this went too far. Extremes are not good. Now there's zero variance with tervigon for example. 100% trustworthy. Totally unrealistic. Stupid godview
in the case of the nids that makes a whole lot of sense. They have an entire interconnected single consciousness.
I'm going to bet that when we see rules for things like mishap, they will make a lot of sense.
Having assault terminators placed almost 60 inches away from an opponents models because the game needs randomness does nothing to make the game good... It sucks for me that I paid 200 points for a squad that cant do jack; and it sucks that my opponent has an opportunity to make the game that much easier for himself. The games should be good, and fairly equal.
tneva82 wrote: Problem is this went too far. Extremes are not good. Now there's zero variance with tervigon for example. 100% trustworthy. Totally unrealistic. Stupid godview
in the case of the nids that makes a whole lot of sense. They have an entire interconnected single consciousness.
I'm going to bet that when we see rules for things like mishap, they will make a lot of sense.
Having assault terminators placed almost 60 inches away from an opponents models because the game needs randomness does nothing to make the game good... It sucks for me that I paid 200 points for a squad that cant do jack; and it sucks that my opponent has an opportunity to make the game that much easier for himself. The games should be good, and fairly equal.
I don't think there's been any indication that mishap will be a thing anymore, just that some armies mightl have reserves arriving less reliably than others.
Some of you may have heard tell of the report of brave Trooper Perkins, whose lone, well-aimed lasgun shot took down a rampaging enemy Helbrute.*
Yes, it is of course completely possible to take down any foe with the mighty lasgun: king of weapons.
The lasgun is a feared and deadly firearm, and the envy of non-Imperial infantry across the galaxy. While not strictly advisable to use in an anti-armour role, in the likely event that the disciplined fire of your platoon has already accounted for all enemy infantry forces within range, you will be authorised to open fire on enemy vehicle assets.
In this example, we consider the Ork Stompa – as detestable a conglomeration of heretical alien technology as you are ever likely to face. Consider its weak points – visible missiles, open ammunition caches, poorly armoured fire ports – all easy targets for a disciplined marksman to exploit. Calmly hold your ground, choose your target, and cripple the brute with a well-placed shot. Repeat this process until the foe is no longer a threat.**
BringItDownTarget
Note that, while a single lasgun is, of course, capable of taking down such a brute, it is still not advisable to take one on alone. We would recommend you secure some support before attempting to face a foe of this class.***
There you have it, Guardsmen. We hope we have redoubled your faith in your blessed lasgun.
Thought for the day:
‘Do not ask how you may give your life for the Emperor. Ask instead how you may give your death.’
* Actual post-battle analysis now reveals the likely cause of the Helbrute’s death was the volley of meltagun shots from the Catachan Veteran Squad concealed nearby, and in fact, Perkins not only missed his one shot, he was immolated in the ensuing explosion as the Helbrute’s reactor blew. Still, what a hero.
** Note: The estimated number of lasgun shots required to destroy the example enemy war machine is several orders of magnitude higher than the number of charges supplied in a single lasgun. Additional ammunition, and/or lasguns, may be required.
*** Such as a battalion of several thousand Guardsmen, some heavy weapons support, an artillery barrage and an orbital bombardment.
Regimental standard keeps being the ever-cheeky guys.
I would say your guess on Lance is completely wrong. Armour Pen is no longer a game mechanic, and it's equivelant would be more like +1S but since the DL is still S8 that hasn't happend, all it's gained is effectively going from AP1 to AP2 so if it doesn't have an equivelant to the Lance rule now it's actually going to be much worse against tough vehicles like Land Raiders than it currently is, though it's general usefulnes shas been much increased with the damage mechanic.
Previously a lance needed a 4 to glance and a 5 or 6 to pen a LR.
Now at S8 it doesn't matter what toughness the LR is (unless T16) -- a 5 will wound it.
So, really the odds of it truly hurting a LR hasn't changed with a small exception that the LR is likely to have a 2+ save. But, if it does, this makes the lance better than a lascannon if the LR is T10.
I'd rather shoot a lascannon at a morkanaut, but since DE don't have those a lance will do just fine if a little worse. A disentegrator cannon might be better for that target.
I would say your guess on Lance is completely wrong. Armour Pen is no longer a game mechanic, and it's equivelant would be more like +1S but since the DL is still S8 that hasn't happend, all it's gained is effectively going from AP1 to AP2 so if it doesn't have an equivelant to the Lance rule now it's actually going to be much worse against tough vehicles like Land Raiders than it currently is, though it's general usefulnes shas been much increased with the damage mechanic.
Previously a lance needed a 4 to glance and a 5 or 6 to pen a LR.
Now at S8 it doesn't matter what toughness the LR is (unless T16) -- a 5 will wound it.
So, really the odds of it truly hurting a LR hasn't changed with a small exception that the LR is likely to have a 2+ save. But, if it does, this makes the lance better than a lascannon if the LR is T10.
I'd rather shoot a lascannon at a morkanaut, but since DE don't have those a lance will do just fine if a little worse. A disentegrator cannon might be better for that target.
I'd forgotten about that. I doubt the Disintegrator will be a better choice against anything that is T6 or higher as I reckon it'll still be S5.
Oaka wrote: The wording of No Escape seems to suggest it won't be unique to Wyches. And it looks like you just need one model with the rule to force the roll-off. I might prefer to go with a Succubus rather than an entire unit of Wyches.
That's a pretty important roll for a Dark Eldar player to save command points for.
Haha yup - oh I rolled a 1 and you rolled a 2? Reroll! Of course Tau can too if they have the CP...
I say go ahead and waste a command point trying to get the opportunity to leave combat. That's one less use for something like Morale.
Decision making? oh no!
man im liking everything so far.
I never said that it was a bad thing for things to be this way. I really like it as well. Hopefully units like Khorne Berserkers and Death Company have No Escape as well.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I never said that it was a bad thing for things to be this way. I really like it as well. Hopefully units like Khorne Berserkers and Death Company have No Escape as well.
People are trying to apply this rule to everything. You need to not expect this to be a universal thing. Those units will have their own perks.
My Nurgle army is going to have to readjust how I build units. I own Typhus+2 chaos lords plus 5 ranged deathguard terminators plus 20 lightning clawed deathguard terminators. I normally field those with 90 plague zombies.
So, 3 heroes + 5 terminator packs means I will need to break those zombies into 9 squads of 10 to be able to deploy them.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I never said that it was a bad thing for things to be this way. I really like it as well. Hopefully units like Khorne Berserkers and Death Company have No Escape as well.
People are trying to apply this rule to everything. You need to not expect this to be a universal thing. Those units will have their own perks.
Agreed. In fact I think it'd actually be a pretty bad rule to give to lots of Assault units, if only because of how tilting it would be every time you fail the roll. I'd rather just expect a fallback and have mitigating it be part of the plan than try to rely on old-school locked in Assault safety that doesn't function half the time.
Also, it is a particularly flavorful rule for Wyches with their nets and such. I'd rather other units have their own flavorful combat tricks.
Tactical Reserves Q: Can reserved units enter the game whenever the owning player wants them to? For example, the subterrainian assault doesn't say if the units can remain underground to come up later or does it have to arrive first turn since it doesn't say it can wait?
A: Have a look at the Trygon; it's rules simply say "end of any of your movement phases". Now, that rule is specifically for the Trygon; other units may require a roll, but it will be noted on their datasheet if it is.
Q: err... did i read that correctly.... assaulting from deepstrike?? in that Bloodletters can now actually do what they were made to!!! ok i may have just been sold on this edition
A: You did read that! Of course, they will be over 9" away, so that's a hard charge on 2D6. That, of course is where your Command Points for re-rolling dice might be useful...
Q: I do hope every genestealer cult unit has the option to perform an ambush of some kind. Needing a certain amount of units starting on the table is fair enough, but i think every cult unit woukd get the option of ambushing.
Can't wait now. Hurry up already A: There will be so much ambushing. So much. Watch this space for the Cult Faction Focus coming soon.
Q: I think Tyranid players will like that the Tryon tunnels will actually function properly (instead of whatever unit the player intended on coming through the tunnel arriving first)
And Charge from reserve (even a long one) is better than the units having to twiddle their thumbs if they aren't a shooty unit
A: It's a 9" charge.. so, a risky roll... but certainly doable! Trygons arriving is now a truly terrifying prospect...
Q: Will all Daemons still be able to deep strike or whatever their new rule will be called? Will any of them have abilities to increase their charge distance? Thinking hounds or some of the faster moving Slaanesh stuff here.
A: We haven't seen those rules yet, Phillip; watch this page for more news when we get it.
Q: What about the special rule Hunters from Hyperspace for Necron Deathmarks ? And give us a faction focus : Necrons today please instead of those sadistic pansy Dark Eldar A: You've waited for millennia under the sands... what's a little more waiting to a Necron...
Q: Question, for non-competitive games, would an all drop pod army still be allowed? I've been working on an Ultramarines 2nd company with all drop pods.
A: If you're playing an Open or Narrative game and you agree something with an opponent before the game.. then do as you wish!
Q: So genestealer cult needs to deploy half the army during deployment? Is infiltrate a part of deployment in 8th? (maybe it is in 7th as well don't have the rulebook at hand) Do they still arrive with infiltrate?... So many questions and not enough answers :O
Keep up the awesome work
A: There is a sneaky Genestealer Cult Faction Focus article working it's way through the shadows to jump us from behind any time soon...
Q: I'm also really interested how it will work for deepstrike army like for example deathwatch. Striking precisly into heart of enemy force was something iconic for them.
A: There is a Deathwatch Faction Focus on it's way soon.
Q: So any hints on how daemons will appear on the battlefield?
A: With a big zzzap, a puff of smoke and a "ta-daa!". Those daemons love their dramatic entrances.
Q: So...assault from the-deployment-type-formally-known-as-deep-strike? Yes, please. Looks like I'll finally have to change my saying: "Deep striking is for suckers."
A: *EDIT: "winners"
Q: Klopp Question: How do the new Primaris Marines taste? My Trygon is asking for a friend. Is it like a Coke vs Coke Zero thing?
A: We asked the Lictor which hangs around in the office. He said they taste like blue cheese, blueberries and blue candies. But then, they were Ultramarines that he noshed on.
Q: Will there be rules for my Dreadnought to surf on top of my Land Raider?
A: Pics or it didn't happen.
Q: Will an Autarch's Path of Command still function as it's current form?
A: All the rules are being re-done from bottom up.... so, perhaps! We'll have to wait until we see the Autarch rules...
Q: So is it confirmed we can charge from deep striking in 8th? Will Warp Talons do something useful the turn they rip out of the warp?
A: Remember, there is no such thing as the special rule "Deep Strike" any more. Each unit's rules will be noted on it's data sheet. Perhaps the Warp Talons one is the same.. perhaps it's different.. .we don't know until we see it!
Q: Are we going to see a Skitarii preview in the near future?
A: Absolutely, yes.
Q: Will Black Templars keep their Vows when arriving from reserves?
A: Maybe? We'll have to see when the Space Marine Focus hits!
Q: This is great! So if I have a pool of points to summon daemons in matched play, do they all have to be summoned before the end of the third battle round?
A: That's a great question, Robert; we just don't know right now! There's loads more coming soon, all is good.
Q: NICE! Assault from Deepstrike!
I hope my Khornis can advance and charge or get additional inches... Booom that will be powerful! No more walking around and hoping for reserves. They just come when I need them! SOOOOOO good!!!!!!
I want to dance and sing!
A: Dance and sing?
Sounds like Noise Marines might be more up your street.
Q: Weren't we supposed to get a dark eldar article? Just asking, not trying to badger.
A: Maybe you get both today...
Q: The new Trygon rules sound awesome. Bringing a buddy with him really opens up tactical options. 30x termagants popping up across the board to claim an objective while the Trygon terrorizes some fancy new marines sounds great.
A: By "great", you mean "truly terrifying", right?!
Q: Showing up in a silent storm of steel and shuriken fire the Harlequins burst forth from the Webway!
Can i expect this to be a tactic for the Harlequins in 8th?
I mean Harlequins showing up, killing stuff before disapearing back into the webway! How cool would that be right?!
A: That sounds ace! Watch out for the Harlequin Faction Focus, coming soon.
Q: I've asked questions before and didn't get answered but I gotta try again: how does this work for drop pods? In matched play if you take pods for everyone, half start on the field? Thx in advance for the reply gw A: Hey Eryk,
We'll transports, and drop pods specifically in an article soon.
Q: Does that mean that deep striking no longer scatters. As someone whose has to red faced explain how I lost Kaldor Draigo himself to a deep strike mishap on far too many occasions, that's awesome
A: Hey Steven,
"Deep strike" no longer exists. Units all have their own deployment rules. The trygon we can see here, certainly doesn't scatter.
Q: Is it only specific units that can charge from reserve? And will character like Abaddon be deep striking solo then? Or will he get his bringers of despair
A: Hey Christopher,
There is no "Deep Strike" as such.
Whether a unit can charge or not after deploying using an unusual mechanism will be specified on it's own datasheet. Most Terminators will get this in some capacity.
Q: Hey Warhammer 40,000, these new rules look great, but can you clarify if an 8 roll with the dice is enough to assault ? thanks
A: Hmm, we don't think so.
If you are more than 9" away, then moving 8" puts you by definition more than 1" away.
Q: So will tyranids get different rules for which hive fleet they belong to??? That's awesome!!
Any limits from tactical reserves arriving all on turn 1? Even in matched play?
A: It would certainly imply that in that Trygon article, wouldn't it? We'll just have to wait for the Tyranid Faction Focus and see, won't we...
Q: Will drop pods need to land 9" away too? I'm hoping no so I can land on some heretics and make them pulp. You know, like the rules studio guys where doing...
A: There will be loads more on transports, including Drop Pods soon.
Q: So this reads that they arrive when you want, no rolling, but if you forget em in matched play till turn 4 they are destroyed? Assuming I got that right, love it.
A: That's certainly what it says on that Trygon profile...
Q: So drop pod armies are dead then, guess i'll have to start selling some off as i wont be able to use my full drop company.
That sucks.
A: We haven't covered Drop Pods yet, so it will be worth waiting and seeing. There's a transports article incoming at Combat Speed any time now...
Q: Are we going to see an update on taking saves for units with mixed armor values? Inquiring Deathwatch and Black Templar players want to know!
A: Hey Patrick,
Saves change quite a lot with the new AP rules.
We'll see if we can cover mixed units specifically in the future.
Q: Well I was going to build a Mawloc but now I just might have to make him a Trygon
A: Both Good, but Trygons certainly get a boost in the new Warhammer 40,000.
Q: now the question is how you get your reserve units out of reserve. do you roll or do you automatically say when they come in ?
A: Hey William,
The unit's datasheet will specify.
On the Trygon, we've seen so far, there is no roll.
Dark Eldar Faction Focus Q: Any chance of some faction names we can pronounce?
Please don't change Orks
A: You mean, the green Oorookiagoths?
Q: so instead of a whole new faction they just gave the Dark Eldar a new name and a fresh coat of paint.... i am not impressed
A: Why would they be a whole new Faction?
What they got was some awesome new rules so that you guys with Dark Eldar minitures can kick face on the tabletop.
Q: Hello. Thank you very much for all this teasing on the new edition. It is going to be awesome. Could we have a focus on the Space Wolves, the Fenris Warzone and the primaris for the Space Wolves, please ? My wolves want to tear heretic throats, especially some made of dust.
A: I bet we can.
Q: It still doesn't solve the basic problem of getting Wytches into close combat though. Or Incubi for that matter.
A: If only Raiders were better.
Oh wait! They are.
Q: Necrons next please. Or you shall be deemed heretics
A: We think they overthrew and imprisoned their gods. So, would that make all Necrons Heretic by definition?
Q: Afternoon... I it's quite specific will the warhammer world command tanks get rules for 8th?
A: They will, yes.
Q: How do poison weapons interact with Vehicles? Do Splinter Rifles really wound Land Raiders on a 4+?
A: We haven't seen what splinter rifles do yet.
Q: so, what's going to be Friday's faction focus?
A: You'll find out on Friday.
Q: Are we going to hear about orks!?
A: Yes,
We'll have a new Faction Focus for you guys every other day, and Orks will certainly be one.
Q: The Drunk hairys???
A: Sure.
Q: Why Drukhari and not Dark Eldar ?
A: Drukhari is what they call themselves.
Q: Who da faq are Drukhari?!
A: That's Eldar for Commorites.
Problem is this went too far. Extremes are not good. Now there's zero variance with tervigon for example. 100% trustworthy. Totally unrealistic. Stupid godview
Going from too far one way to too far other way does not result in gappy medium. Just another extreme. Extremes either way are bad.
Good point and while I agree that extremes aren't good, I think it's a bit premature to judge it now. This edition pretty much is a hard reset. Time will tell.
Nightlord1987 wrote: We're all gonna start sounding like salty old veterans soon. I remember Deepstrike! Teleported right into a wall did he.
"Remember back when rolling a double one on your deep strike caused your unit to auto mishap? Yarrick Remembers"
Good times!
But really, DS / summoning / outflank should be a straight BS test against the General:
6 - place anywhere / enter any edge without restrictions
Hit! - place as normal / enter either side
Miss - place in own DZ / enter own edge
1 - opponent places as desired / chooses entry point
So, now we know why you'd want to summon something rather than just not-deepstrike it: summoned units can arrive after turn three.
And they can compose more than half your force, maybe.
Q: Any chance of some faction names we can pronounce?
Please don't change Orks
A: You mean, the green Oorookiagoths?
Either they're joking and are aware of how dumb their new naming schemes are, or they're not. At this point, I'm not confident that they are...
Is Drukhari a new term? Or are they like the old warhammer fantasy Druchii, Dawi, Asrai, etc...?
It is. The old "Eldarspeak" term for Dark Eldar was Eldarith Ynneas, but this was basically never used. Druchii was used by Black Library once or twice as far as I know, but I know that it was used pretty often by people in their own works. Honestly I'd be okay with Drukhari if it weren't for all the "Aeldari" and "T'au" nonsense.
I suddenly realized that my stormtroopers are probably going to have a rule called 'Grav-Chute Commandos' that lets them do non scattering deep strike when I want it (provided that I put them 9 inches away from the enemy). I'm really happy with that! Now they might actually be useful! If they can fix hotshot lasguns then we'll be in business!
EnTyme wrote:
Deus ex machine : a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly resolved by the inspired and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability or object.
I think it's actually the reverse here. The problems the Imperium is facing are not being solved by a Deus ex machina, but were created to allow for it. They aren't reintroducing Guilliman and his Primaris marines to abruptly resolve something through unexpected introduction. They suddenly and abruptly introduced The Coming Storm in order to justify the reappearance and ongoing struggle of the Primarch and his Primaris friends. There's no unsolvable problem that is suddenly and abruptly resolved, but an ongoing struggle that has been suddenly and abruptly introduced. Diabolis ex machina?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frozen Ocean wrote: It is. The old "Eldarspeak" term for Dark Eldar was Eldarith Ynneas, but this was basically never used. Druchii was used by Black Library once or twice as far as I know, but I know that it was used pretty often by people in their own works. Honestly I'd be okay with Drukhari if it weren't for all the "Aeldari" and "T'au" nonsense.
I must admit as silly as I originally found all the renaming of Age of Sigmar stuff, now that I've been seeing it typed and hearing it in podcast, it actually sounds fine. Duardin sounds better to me than dwarf. Freeguild is just fine. Seraphon is certainly less generic than "lizard men"
What about ogors, orruks and aelfs? What about Astra Militarum, T'au and Aeldari? New names can be good - I agree with you about the Seraphon - but that doesn't mean all of them have been.
That's not to mention that the Dark Eldar don't refer to themselves as anything other than "Eldar" (or Aeldari, I guess). They don't think of themselves as "the Dark Kin", they think of themselves as the real Eldar and they're very proud about it.
EDIT: Oh, and Fyreslayers, because we all know that the letter i just isn't cool.
It is. The old "Eldarspeak" term for Dark Eldar was Eldarith Ynneas, but this was basically never used. Druchii was used by Black Library once or twice as far as I know, but I know that it was used pretty often by people in their own works. Honestly I'd be okay with Drukhari if it weren't for all the "Aeldari" and "T'au" nonsense.
T'au is because Tau is a Greek alphabet letter and cannot be copyrighted. That would be like asking the Copyright office if you could license alpha or beta.
It is. The old "Eldarspeak" term for Dark Eldar was Eldarith Ynneas, but this was basically never used. Druchii was used by Black Library once or twice as far as I know, but I know that it was used pretty often by people in their own works. Honestly I'd be okay with Drukhari if it weren't for all the "Aeldari" and "T'au" nonsense.
T'au is because Tau is a Greek alphabet letter and cannot be copyrighted. That would be like asking the Copyright office if you could license alpha or beta.
I think you mean Trademarked since it's used as a product name and for marketing.
It is. The old "Eldarspeak" term for Dark Eldar was Eldarith Ynneas, but this was basically never used. Druchii was used by Black Library once or twice as far as I know, but I know that it was used pretty often by people in their own works. Honestly I'd be okay with Drukhari if it weren't for all the "Aeldari" and "T'au" nonsense.
T'au is because Tau is a Greek alphabet letter and cannot be copyrighted. That would be like asking the Copyright office if you could license alpha or beta.
I think you mean Trademarked since it's used as a product name and for marketing.
That doesn't make it not stupid. I know they're doing this for licensing reasons, but I think it's stupid and that they should stop it.
It is. The old "Eldarspeak" term for Dark Eldar was Eldarith Ynneas, but this was basically never used. Druchii was used by Black Library once or twice as far as I know, but I know that it was used pretty often by people in their own works. Honestly I'd be okay with Drukhari if it weren't for all the "Aeldari" and "T'au" nonsense.
T'au is because Tau is a Greek alphabet letter and cannot be copyrighted. That would be like asking the Copyright office if you could license alpha or beta.
I think you mean Trademarked since it's used as a product name and for marketing.
That doesn't make it not stupid. I know they're doing this for licensing reasons, but I think it's stupid and that they should stop it.
Meh. Protecting your IP isn't really that stupid. At least they're just doing this instead of running around launching lawsuits like a Space Marine Battle Barge launches boarding torpedos on Space Hulks.
It is. The old "Eldarspeak" term for Dark Eldar was Eldarith Ynneas, but this was basically never used. Druchii was used by Black Library once or twice as far as I know, but I know that it was used pretty often by people in their own works. Honestly I'd be okay with Drukhari if it weren't for all the "Aeldari" and "T'au" nonsense.
T'au is because Tau is a Greek alphabet letter and cannot be copyrighted. That would be like asking the Copyright office if you could license alpha or beta.
I think you mean Trademarked since it's used as a product name and for marketing.
That doesn't make it not stupid. I know they're doing this for licensing reasons, but I think it's stupid and that they should stop it.
Meh. Protecting your IP isn't really that stupid. At least they're just doing this instead of running around launching lawsuits like a Space Marine Battle Barge launches boarding torpedos on Space Hulks.
But is this really necessary? Were they losing any sales because of names like Eldar or Imperial Guard?
EDIT: Malekith is a good change, though; they were in direct conflict with Marvel over the name, so they changed it. But not only did they change it, they provided a story explanation for the change; he's a new being now, Malerion, merged with his dragon.
Frozen Ocean wrote: What about ogors, orruks and aelfs? What about Astra Militarum, T'au and Aeldari? New names can be good - I agree with you about the Seraphon - but that doesn't mean all of them have been.
That's not to mention that the Dark Eldar don't refer to themselves as anything other than "Eldar" (or Aeldari, I guess). They don't think of themselves as "the Dark Kin", they think of themselves as the real Eldar and they're very proud about it.
EDIT: Oh, and Fyreslayers, because we all know that the letter i just isn't cool.
As opposed to Blood this and Blood that? And wolfy woof woofs?
It is. The old "Eldarspeak" term for Dark Eldar was Eldarith Ynneas, but this was basically never used. Druchii was used by Black Library once or twice as far as I know, but I know that it was used pretty often by people in their own works. Honestly I'd be okay with Drukhari if it weren't for all the "Aeldari" and "T'au" nonsense.
T'au is because Tau is a Greek alphabet letter and cannot be copyrighted. That would be like asking the Copyright office if you could license alpha or beta.
I think you mean Trademarked since it's used as a product name and for marketing.
That doesn't make it not stupid. I know they're doing this for licensing reasons, but I think it's stupid and that they should stop it.
Meh. Protecting your IP isn't really that stupid. At least they're just doing this instead of running around launching lawsuits like a Space Marine Battle Barge launches boarding torpedos on Space Hulks.
But is this really necessary? Were they losing any sales because of names like Eldar or Imperial Guard?
They felt they had a problem enough to launch money wasting lawsuits at Chapter House and the Spots the Space Marine book, so this is likely a continuation of that.
Still, getting the "this is what the race calls themselves properly" isn't that stupid. I mean all the normal names (Guard, Space Marines, Pointy Ear Space Ponces) are still applicable as "Low Gothic" versions of their names, so that's fine by me.
Stupid name changes trump wasting tons of money on lawsuits that could be used to update Cult Marines, Aspect Warriors and (Emperor Willing) Sisters into a full plastic line.
As opposed to Blood this and Blood that? And wolfy woof woofs?
Those are bad too, but they didn't rename those things with new nonsense words. Actually, Age of Sigmar has plenty of that - Bloodstokers are my favourite. Maybe Bloodsecrator.
Oaka wrote: The wording of No Escape seems to suggest it won't be unique to Wyches. And it looks like you just need one model with the rule to force the roll-off. I might prefer to go with a Succubus rather than an entire unit of Wyches.
That's a pretty important roll for a Dark Eldar player to save command points for.
Haha yup - oh I rolled a 1 and you rolled a 2? Reroll! Of course Tau can too if they have the CP...
I say go ahead and waste a command point trying to get the opportunity to leave combat. That's one less use for something like Morale.
Decision making? oh no!
man im liking everything so far.
I never said that it was a bad thing for things to be this way. I really like it as well. Hopefully units like Khorne Berserkers and Death Company have No Escape as well.
Wasnt directed at you just making a morning quip to get my day started
Q: Hey Warhammer 40,000, these new rules look great, but can you clarify if an 8 roll with the dice is enough to assault ? thanks
A: Hmm, we don't think so.
If you are more than 9" away, then moving 8" puts you by definition more than 1" away.
That's incredibly poor wording, operating in nebulously defined fractional inches when everything else is in exact values is needlessly confusing.
In fact, it also makes placement awkward if dealing with exacting people. The sensible, likely completely standard approach to maximise placement for a unit that wants to get close is to put it 9 inches away and count it as being infinitesimally back a little for charge distances, but you could get into an argument with an opponent who wants you to scootch it back an inch.
Q: Hey Warhammer 40,000, these new rules look great, but can you clarify if an 8 roll with the dice is enough to assault ? thanks A: Hmm, we don't think so. If you are more than 9" away, then moving 8" puts you by definition more than 1" away.
That's incredibly poor wording, operating in nebulously defined fractional inches when everything else is in exact values is needlessly confusing.
In fact, it also makes placement awkward if dealing with exacting people. The sensible, likely completely standard approach to maximise placement for a unit that wants to get close is to put it 9 inches away and count it as being infinitesimally back a little for charge distances, but you could get into an argument with an opponent who wants you to scootch it back an inch.
Is it needlessly confusing or confusing at all?
More than = more than
no way around that. if some one wants to sit there and demand that you measure using micrometers and 0 tolerance gauge blocks than you got to ask why are you playing this person.
They are just saying since, it has to be more the 9" way if you roll an 8 you will always been more then an 1" away from the charge. Since, you know you just placed them down, you suddenly don't make up the distance when you measure to move. You stop just short of the 1" mark.
Common sense says you erred in setting the model down if you were too close.
Q: Hey Warhammer 40,000, these new rules look great, but can you clarify if an 8 roll with the dice is enough to assault ? thanks
A: Hmm, we don't think so.
If you are more than 9" away, then moving 8" puts you by definition more than 1" away.
That's incredibly poor wording, operating in nebulously defined fractional inches when everything else is in exact values is needlessly confusing.
In fact, it also makes placement awkward if dealing with exacting people. The sensible, likely completely standard approach to maximise placement for a unit that wants to get close is to put it 9 inches away and count it as being infinitesimally back a little for charge distances, but you could get into an argument with an opponent who wants you to scootch it back an inch.
Is it needlessly confusing or confusing at all?
More than = more than
no way around that. if some one wants to sit there and demand that you measure using micrometers and 0 tolerance gauge blocks than you got to ask why are you playing this person.
Indeed there is no issue here - if you are told to place a unit MORE than 9" away then both players know that an 8 on the dice roll does not reach - it does not need measuring or anything else. If you are told this in the rules and somehow place it closer either you made a mistake (or the table was knocked etc) or you are cheating but even then it should not matter as you were not allowed to place it that close so you simply can; not make the charge with a 8 on the roll.
It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Jeez how do you deal with all the other measurements in the game ? How do you deal with deployment zones? What game/s have you ben playing?
You can place the model more than 9" away - the distance is up to you - however you can;t place it closer than that - or you are mistaken or cheating.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
You are free to put it anywhere between 9 and 10 and it won't make a difference.
It's incredibly simple.
If you roll an 8 then there's no way you can possibly charge them.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
How in the world is it fuzzy its 100% black and white.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Pretty sure people are going to rely on the values marked on their tape measures more than being exactly one atomic particle over 9".
Q: Any chance of some faction names we can pronounce?
Please don't change Orks
A: You mean, the green Oorookiagoths?
Either they're joking and are aware of how dumb their new naming schemes are, or they're not. At this point, I'm not confident that they are...
Further down on the facebook page, they say they were just joking, it's still Orks.
Good for the Orks. It means they're aware of the absurdity of the new names, though. That makes it worse.
You do know Orks is spelled differently than it is in most (all?) fantasy literature right? So it likely was not an issue. In WH fantasy they used to be Orcs, which was they standard fantasy name.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Jeez how do you deal with all the other measurements in the game ? How do you deal with deployment zones? What game/s have you ben playing?
You can place the model more than 9" away - the distance is up to you - however you can;t place it closer than that - or you are mistaken or cheating.
It's literally only a problem because it's optimal to put it as close as possible, but nothing else uses infinitely thin precision.
Otherwise if a gun has a 12 inch range you hold a tape over it and if it looks 12 inches at a glance it's in range. In this case, a model will look 9 inches at a glance when measured but actually count as a micron further away.
Or in other words, it shouldn't cause a problem 99% of the time, but is still very sloppy.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
You are free to put it anywhere between 9 and 10 and it won't make a difference.
It's incredibly simple.
If you roll an 8 then there's no way you can possibly charge them.
Exactly. It doesn't matter where you put it inside that range because you can't make the charge on an 8.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Pretty sure people are going to rely on the values marked on their tape measures more than being exactly one atomic particle over 9".
Exactly. That is the exact reason this is sloppy rules writing: Because a tape measure will say the model is 9 inches away but you have to for this single purpose and no other use more nebulous definitions.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Pretty sure people are going to rely on the values marked on their tape measures more than being exactly one atomic particle over 9".
Exactly. That is the exact reason this is sloppy rules writing: Because a tape measure will say the model is 9 inches away but you have to for this single purpose and no other use more nebulous definitions.
or people that read the rules for all of 2 seconds will understand that more than means more than and so will know that a roll of an 8 is impossible and move on, even if a model was accidentally placed 1 atom inside of 9" because of plate tectonics.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Pretty sure people are going to rely on the values marked on their tape measures more than being exactly one atomic particle over 9".
Exactly. That is the exact reason this is sloppy rules writing: Because a tape measure will say the model is 9 inches away but you have to for this single purpose and no other use more nebulous definitions.
Azreal13 wrote: I guess it's a good sign that people can't find anything more important to criticize than whether something that's 9" away is, in fact, 9" away?
The one person in the entire world that thinks its confusing
Man I find it funny that Frankie is acting like they made major changes to Incubi and wyches. I mean, the incubi klaive already was +1S and AP2, so now Marines get saves when they didn't... Yea, hardly an improvement. I know grenades don't effect combat, but that's universal, you can't really brag about their gear because it actually got worse.
As for wyches, I am not really excited yet. They maintained the exact same save, which appears to STILL not work on over watch and apparently their gear STILL remains underwhelming. I mean 1 special weapon per 5 gets -1 rend on an elf statline.. WOW don't get carried away fellas /s
No escape is neat, but the example they pulled using crisis suits was awful. I mean, don't forget fellas, in 8th you can fire unlimited numbers of overwatch. So in theory, if I take a wych cult army, I could set up a charge on a team of XV8's from 5 units of wyches and if they have flamers they can hit each unit with 3d6 s4 hits...
My biggest beef so far with this edition is the unlimited overwatch, it makes shooty wall of death units nearly impossible to engage in HTH unless your point blank with a mob sized unit or they roll incredibly poor.
I really wish they would leak the assault phase already, because so far it isn't looking good for light armored assaulters.
Q: Hey Warhammer 40,000, these new rules look great, but can you clarify if an 8 roll with the dice is enough to assault ? thanks
A: Hmm, we don't think so.
If you are more than 9" away, then moving 8" puts you by definition more than 1" away.
That's incredibly poor wording, operating in nebulously defined fractional inches when everything else is in exact values is needlessly confusing.
In fact, it also makes placement awkward if dealing with exacting people. The sensible, likely completely standard approach to maximise placement for a unit that wants to get close is to put it 9 inches away and count it as being infinitesimally back a little for charge distances, but you could get into an argument with an opponent who wants you to scootch it back an inch.
You ever measured an exact inch with a tape measure and miniatures? Not possible. So this isn't "nebulous" or about "fractional inches". It's pretty simple - deploy "more than 9" away", an 8" move cannot get you into combat.
If you can't agree movement with your opponent, get new opponents. If you can't agree that more than 9" minus 8" = still more than 1", someone has a maths issue and is also trying to cheat. ;-)
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Jeez how do you deal with all the other measurements in the game ? How do you deal with deployment zones? What game/s have you ben playing?
You can place the model more than 9" away - the distance is up to you - however you can;t place it closer than that - or you are mistaken or cheating.
It's literally only a problem because it's optimal to put it as close as possible, but nothing else uses infinitely thin precision.
Otherwise if a gun has a 12 inch range you hold a tape over it and if it looks 12 inches at a glance it's in range. In this case, a model will look 9 inches at a glance when measured but actually count as a micron further away.
Or in other words, it shouldn't cause a problem 99% of the time, but is still very sloppy.
If the range is 12" then its 12" - or do you play that oh its about 12" so I am in range. You measure it right? If its more than 12" its out of range - right?
This is even simplier - you need to roll a 9 or more if you put the model as close as possible - you both know it cant be closer than that so there is no need to even measure if you declare I- am placing "just over 9" and less than 10" - what could be more simple?
Pre-measuring is n play so you can both check it if you really want to - if you find its a bit shorted than 9" due to table knocks etc then you play as if it was more than 9".
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Pretty sure people are going to rely on the values marked on their tape measures more than being exactly one atomic particle over 9".
Or that the models can't have been properly deployed if a 9" charge happens to connect, on account they need to be more than 9" away, thus requiring a 9" roll (because of the 1" rule).
Man, people are really failing with the nitpicking (not you, was adding to your comment)
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Pretty sure people are going to rely on the values marked on their tape measures more than being exactly one atomic particle over 9".
Exactly. That is the exact reason this is sloppy rules writing: Because a tape measure will say the model is 9 inches away but you have to for this single purpose and no other use more nebulous definitions.
Even if you "screw up" and put it on the 9" line you still can't make the charge because you're not supposed to be close enough.
If it's so hard to understand, just put the model at 10" from the unit you want to be close to. It's still a roll of a 9+ to make the charge and there is less confusion.
The wording is the way it is to give people the ability to place almost anywhere on the table as long as they stay more than 9" from an enemy unit. Special rules may decrease that distance (Lictors for example might let you pop up closer).
Wow, is that fluff for the numarines terrible. They should just have upscaled them and called it a day. Wont bother me as much when eventually all marines are replaced by numarines (iirc, hasting said regular marines wont get any new support), but still, it gives the impression that they really are creatively bankrupted .
Must say that i kind of like drukari as name, a lot better than dark eldar
The only thing I'd concede, and it is defined in other systems, is if something is precisely on the edge of the range, whether that is considered within or not.
Convention and common sense would say yes, and, to my knowledge, any game that does define it does it as such, but for absolute clarity one sentence wouldn't hurt.
streetsamurai wrote: Wow, is that fluff for the numarines terrible. They should just have upscaled them and called it a day. Wont bother me as much when eventually all marines are replaced by numarines (iirc, hasting said regular marines wont get any new support), but still, it gives the impression that they really are creatively bankrupted .
Must say that i kind of like drukari as name, a lot better than dark eldar
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Pretty sure people are going to rely on the values marked on their tape measures more than being exactly one atomic particle over 9".
Exactly. That is the exact reason this is sloppy rules writing: Because a tape measure will say the model is 9 inches away but you have to for this single purpose and no other use more nebulous definitions.
No it won't if your tape measure touches the base of a model at 9" you are too close, simple. Just like if your tape is just short for your 12" shot you are out of range even if that margin is paper thin. It is no different than how measurement works now. Furthermore since all stats are in full inches being 9.00000000000000000000000000001" away provides almost no advantage to being 9.2" away. An 8" charge will still fail, a 9" charge will succeed, A 9" range gun will be out or range, a 10" range gun will be in range, etc.
streetsamurai wrote: Wow, is that fluff for the numarines terrible. They should just have upscaled them and called it a day. Wont bother me as much when eventually all marines are replaced by numarines (iirc, hasting said regular marines wont get any new support), but still, it gives the impression that they really are creatively bankrupted .
Must say that i kind of like drukari as name, a lot better than dark eldar
Marketting fluff =/= actual lore presented in the books.
I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt to have something better in the works for the lore than "LOOK HOW AWESOME THESE SLIGHTLY TALLER MARINES ARE!!!!ONE111!!"
changemod wrote: Yeah I'm not saying it's -confusing-, I'm saying it's sloppy. If they mean more than 9 then they should say 10.
Why the hell do you think they got that FAQ question in the first place? Everything else is measured in inches, not in about an inch-ish.
More than 9 =/= 10. There is more of a likelihood that you will not be exactly 10" away than that you will be more than 9" away. Further at 10" there may be members of your squad that need to deploy further back and may then be out of range etc.
I hope people do understand the reason it says "over 9" is so you're not locked into putting your units right next to your opponent's models instead of, say, on top of that unguarded objective in the corner.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
Pretty sure people are going to rely on the values marked on their tape measures more than being exactly one atomic particle over 9".
Exactly. That is the exact reason this is sloppy rules writing: Because a tape measure will say the model is 9 inches away but you have to for this single purpose and no other use more nebulous definitions.
This is satire right?
I'm struggling guys, help me out.
I go back to the early 2000s on this site, and this discussion just might be an all-time classic.
Back on topic, the Q&A makes me encouraged that GCults will still have plenty of ambush juice. And I'm very interested to see the drop pod article for what implications that might have for my 30K World Eaters...eventually.
If it says that Wyches get their 4+ Inv in the fight phase, and overwatch happens during the fight phase, I see no reason why they wouldn't get their save against overwatch fire. Am I missing something?
Fenris-77 wrote: If it says that Wyches get their 4+ Inv in the fight phase, and overwatch happens during the fight phase, I see no reason why they wouldn't get their save against overwatch fire. Am I missing something?
Nothing but the actual rule itself, but it's a safe bet currently.
My biggest beef so far with this edition is the unlimited overwatch
yeah its my only real sore spot on all of this.
i get its easier for book keeping. guess its going to be a lot of positioning and counter positioning to guarantee good charges.
If it's locked in at a flat 6 and we don't see the return to the at the full bs I'll be a little happier about it.
Your not factoring in wall of death guns. Flamers on things like admech and tau are INSANE now.
We're assuming that Wall of Death has changed from being a D3" roll to being the normal shooting profile.
EDIT: Also, don't the weapons have to be in range? If you make a 9+" charge those flamers are useless.
^ This. Wall of death lines will have a counter in the fast assault units than can reliably roll an 8" on a charge (almost everyone with command points).
Fenris-77 wrote: If it says that Wyches get their 4+ Inv in the fight phase, and overwatch happens during the fight phase, I see no reason why they wouldn't get their save against overwatch fire. Am I missing something?
They've made charging it's own phase, which is kinda unnecessary but I guess makes it easier to remember you technically aren't supposed to forget to make a charge, fight an unrelated combat then say "oh right I was also going to charge those Devastators".
Even through I'm not sure I've ever seen a game where that hasn't happened.
Fenris-77 wrote: If it says that Wyches get their 4+ Inv in the fight phase, and overwatch happens during the fight phase, I see no reason why they wouldn't get their save against overwatch fire. Am I missing something?
They've made charging it's own phase, which is kinda unnecessary but I guess makes it easier to remember you technically aren't supposed to forget to make a charge, fight an unrelated combat then say "oh right I was also going to charge those Devastators".
Even through I'm not sure I've ever seen a game where that hasn't happened.
My biggest beef so far with this edition is the unlimited overwatch
yeah its my only real sore spot on all of this.
i get its easier for book keeping. guess its going to be a lot of positioning and counter positioning to guarantee good charges.
If it's locked in at a flat 6 and we don't see the return to the at the full bs I'll be a little happier about it.
Your not factoring in wall of death guns. Flamers on things like admech and tau are INSANE now.
We're assuming that Wall of Death has changed from being a D3" roll to being the normal shooting profile.
EDIT: Also, don't the weapons have to be in range? If you make a 9+" charge those flamers are useless.
^ This. Wall of death lines will have a counter in the fast assault units than can reliably roll an 8" on a charge (almost everyone with command points).
Yep besides to worry about it means the opponent specifically designed their army to be flamer heavy. that really wont happen toooo often unless its REALLY efficient so until we see everything we wont really know.
My biggest beef so far with this edition is the unlimited overwatch
yeah its my only real sore spot on all of this.
i get its easier for book keeping. guess its going to be a lot of positioning and counter positioning to guarantee good charges.
If it's locked in at a flat 6 and we don't see the return to the at the full bs I'll be a little happier about it.
Your not factoring in wall of death guns. Flamers on things like admech and tau are INSANE now.
We're assuming that Wall of Death has changed from being a D3" roll to being the normal shooting profile.
EDIT: Also, don't the weapons have to be in range? If you make a 9+" charge those flamers are useless.
^ This. Wall of death lines will have a counter in the fast assault units than can reliably roll an 8" on a charge (almost everyone with command points).
Yep besides to worry about it means the opponent specifically designed their army to be flamer heavy. that really wont happen toooo often unless its REALLY efficient so until we see everything we wont really know.
Flamer heaviest armies would be Rubrics and Wraithguard, everyone else is just pretending.
I don't think they've confirmed when, during the assault phase, Overwatch attacks are taken, and thus when ranges would be checked. It's quite possible that you check range AFTER the charge is made, thus allowing Flamers to almost always shoot in Overwatch (like they can now).
Which would kinda make sense. It would seem quite odd if having a larger distance you needed to run to get into combat gave you invulnerability to the flamers you're running towards.
But then, I'm a Tau player and biased. I'm not the only one who ever wanted a 9 man Crisis Suit team using nothing but flamers, right? (Average of 94.5 S4 hits!)
Unusual Suspect wrote: I don't think they've confirmed when, during the assault phase, Overwatch attacks are taken, and thus when ranges would be checked. It's quite possible that you check range AFTER the charge is made, thus allowing Flamers to almost always shoot in Overwatch (like they can now).
Which would kinda make sense. It would seem quite odd if having a larger distance you needed to run to get into combat gave you invulnerability to the flamers you're running towards.
But then, I'm a Tau player and biased. I'm not the only one who ever wanted a 9 man Crisis Suit team using nothing but flamers, right? (Average of 94.5 S4 hits!)
I'm thinking it's "declare, overwatch, roll to charge". At least you don't pull from the front.
Phew, OP up to date, new Facebook summary by ClockworkZion up (don't forget to check them out if you haven't). Time to catch up on ten pages of reading. Should be quick as I can skip all the off topic discussion about old faction fluff...
Fenris-77 wrote: If it says that Wyches get their 4+ Inv in the fight phase, and overwatch happens during the fight phase, I see no reason why they wouldn't get their save against overwatch fire. Am I missing something?
Nothing but the actual rule itself, but it's a safe bet currently.
There is a charge phase, this is when overwatch happens, not the fight phase.
NivlacSupreme wrote: That doesn't really make sense. They could just say you have to deploy at least 10" away. We are going to see WAAC players positioning 9.0000000000000000000000000000000000000001 inches away and then slightly nudging a model to make the one inch distance.
That would be cheating, because the model had to have started more than 9" away, so nudging or not, it can't ever make a 9" charge.
Because almost all write-ups in AoS is Over 9". I now have the question is Overwatch measured from the start point, the closest point or any point along the way.
The reason is a flamer has an 8" range. So, if a teleport in my terminators at 9" from you then I charge you. Are you allowed to fire the flamer at me running in? Or are you too far away to shoot me because I had to start more then 9" away from you?
My biggest beef so far with this edition is the unlimited overwatch
yeah its my only real sore spot on all of this.
i get its easier for book keeping. guess its going to be a lot of positioning and counter positioning to guarantee good charges.
If it's locked in at a flat 6 and we don't see the return to the at the full bs I'll be a little happier about it.
Your not factoring in wall of death guns. Flamers on things like admech and tau are INSANE now.
We're assuming that Wall of Death has changed from being a D3" roll to being the normal shooting profile.
EDIT: Also, don't the weapons have to be in range? If you make a 9+" charge those flamers are useless.
Sure, i am not saying things won't vary. Currently you don't need to be in range to overwatch (7th ed) and so far we have seen nothing to indicate that changed. As for wall of death being a d6 or a d3, also something to consider but I am guessing your not a DE player because 3d3 s4 auto hits when your s3 t3 6+ save may as well be a death sentence. I am not suggesting this ruins DE, far from it, I'll simply dark light the living christ out of those suits, but considering I haven't enjoyed using wyches since 3rd edition when they were actually good, I was hoping they would see more table time. Things like multiple overwatch IMHO are not good game design, when 6 units converge on one it is silly that you get to shoot up to 6 times, but when one unit assaults you shoot one time.
NivlacSupreme wrote: That doesn't really make sense. They could just say you have to deploy at least 10" away. We are going to see WAAC players positioning 9.0000000000000000000000000000000000000001 inches away and then slightly nudging a model to make the one inch distance.
… and if they "accidentally" place within 9" and roll and 8 on their charge and somehow are miraculously in range, you'll know they cheated and can call them on it. Because that's what they would have done; broken the rules to gain advantage.
My biggest beef so far with this edition is the unlimited overwatch
yeah its my only real sore spot on all of this.
i get its easier for book keeping. guess its going to be a lot of positioning and counter positioning to guarantee good charges.
If it's locked in at a flat 6 and we don't see the return to the at the full bs I'll be a little happier about it.
Your not factoring in wall of death guns. Flamers on things like admech and tau are INSANE now.
We're assuming that Wall of Death has changed from being a D3" roll to being the normal shooting profile.
EDIT: Also, don't the weapons have to be in range? If you make a 9+" charge those flamers are useless.
^ This. Wall of death lines will have a counter in the fast assault units than can reliably roll an 8" on a charge (almost everyone with command points).
Yep besides to worry about it means the opponent specifically designed their army to be flamer heavy. that really wont happen toooo often unless its REALLY efficient so until we see everything we wont really know.
Flamer heaviest armies would be Rubrics and Wraithguard, everyone else is just pretending.
This has to be sarcasm. I mean, you claim you play sisters
casvalremdeikun wrote: I never said that it was a bad thing for things to be this way. I really like it as well. Hopefully units like Khorne Berserkers and Death Company have No Escape as well.
People are trying to apply this rule to everything. You need to not expect this to be a universal thing. Those units will have their own perks.
Agreed. In fact I think it'd actually be a pretty bad rule to give to lots of Assault units, if only because of how tilting it would be every time you fail the roll. I'd rather just expect a fallback and have mitigating it be part of the plan than try to rely on old-school locked in Assault safety that doesn't function half the time.
Also, it is a particularly flavorful rule for Wyches with their nets and such. I'd rather other units have their own flavorful combat tricks.
I think it would be a neat rule if warp talons could immediately attempt a charge if/after a unit retreats.
NivlacSupreme wrote: That doesn't really make sense. They could just say you have to deploy at least 10" away. We are going to see WAAC players positioning 9.0000000000000000000000000000000000000001 inches away and then slightly nudging a model to make the one inch distance.
… and if they "accidentally" place within 9" and roll and 8 on their charge and somehow are miraculously in range, you'll know they cheated and can call them on it. Because that's what they would have done; broken the rules to gain advantage.
How do people keep responding to that? It was up for about a minute.
Youn wrote: Because almost all write-ups in AoS is Over 9". I now have the question is Overwatch measured from the start point, the closest point or any point along the way.
The reason is a flamer has an 8" range. So, if a teleport in my terminators at 9" from you then I charge you. Are you allowed to fire the flamer at me running in? Or are you too far away to shoot me because I had to start more then 9" away from you?
I hope they changed over watch and made it a two way street. If the deepstrikers can't shoot their flamer while the defenders can that would be pretty stupid.
Youn wrote: Because almost all write-ups in AoS is Over 9". I now have the question is Overwatch measured from the start point, the closest point or any point along the way.
The reason is a flamer has an 8" range. So, if a teleport in my terminators at 9" from you then I charge you. Are you allowed to fire the flamer at me running in? Or are you too far away to shoot me because I had to start more then 9" away from you?
I hope they changed over watch and made it a two way street. If the deepstrikers can't shoot their flamer while the defenders can that would be pretty stupid.
I'm interested to see whether Overwatch has any restrictions. For instance, could it require a Ltd test? Will you need LoS at the start of the charge?
There may very well not be, but I'm interested to find out more all the same.
Fenris-77 wrote: If it says that Wyches get their 4+ Inv in the fight phase, and overwatch happens during the fight phase, I see no reason why they wouldn't get their save against overwatch fire. Am I missing something?
Nothing but the actual rule itself, but it's a safe bet currently.
There is a charge phase, this is when overwatch happens, not the fight phase.
Yup, correct. I'm still wrapping my head around the new phases. Dang, that sounded good for the DE.
Okay -now- OP is up to date, missed the "Drukhari" focus.
Caught up on the conversation also.
So teleporting beacons with drop pods might still be a wonderful thing, especially with the dudes in the drop pod being able to disembark 3" (if drop pods follow the same rules we saw for other transports)
Rippy wrote: Okay -now- OP is up to date, missed the "Drukhari" focus.
Caught up on the conversation also.
So teleporting beacons with drop pods might still be a wonderful thing, especially with the dudes in the drop pod being able to disembark 3" (if drop pods follow the same rules we saw for other transports)
I think it is highly likely that transports that can arrive through deepstriking will have rules like the Trygon's tunnel unit - must be placed within 3" of the Trygon, but more than 9" away from enemy models.
Rippy wrote: Okay -now- OP is up to date, missed the "Drukhari" focus.
Caught up on the conversation also.
So teleporting beacons with drop pods might still be a wonderful thing, especially with the dudes in the drop pod being able to disembark 3" (if drop pods follow the same rules we saw for other transports)
I think it is highly likely that transports that can arrive through deepstriking will have rules like the Trygon's tunnel unit - must be placed within 3" of the Trygon, but more than 9" away from enemy models.
Possible, but I also wouldn't expect everything to work the same (in this case with a teleport beacon)
Some of you may have heard tell of the report of brave Trooper Perkins, whose lone, well-aimed lasgun shot took down a rampaging enemy Helbrute.*
Yes, it is of course completely possible to take down any foe with the mighty lasgun: king of weapons.
The lasgun is a feared and deadly firearm, and the envy of non-Imperial infantry across the galaxy. While not strictly advisable to use in an anti-armour role, in the likely event that the disciplined fire of your platoon has already accounted for all enemy infantry forces within range, you will be authorised to open fire on enemy vehicle assets.
In this example, we consider the Ork Stompa – as detestable a conglomeration of heretical alien technology as you are ever likely to face. Consider its weak points – visible missiles, open ammunition caches, poorly armoured fire ports – all easy targets for a disciplined marksman to exploit. Calmly hold your ground, choose your target, and cripple the brute with a well-placed shot. Repeat this process until the foe is no longer a threat.**
Note that, while a single lasgun is, of course, capable of taking down such a brute, it is still not advisable to take one on alone. We would recommend you secure some support before attempting to face a foe of this class.***
There you have it, Guardsmen. We hope we have redoubled your faith in your blessed lasgun.
Thought for the day:
‘Do not ask how you may give your life for the Emperor. Ask instead how you may give your death.’
* Actual post-battle analysis now reveals the likely cause of the Helbrute’s death was the volley of meltagun shots from the Catachan Veteran Squad concealed nearby, and in fact, Perkins not only missed his one shot, he was immolated in the ensuing explosion as the Helbrute’s reactor blew. Still, what a hero.
** Note: The estimated number of lasgun shots required to destroy the example enemy war machine is several orders of magnitude higher than the number of charges supplied in a single lasgun. Additional ammunition, and/or lasguns, may be required.
*** Such as a battalion of several thousand Guardsmen, some heavy weapons support, an artillery barrage and an orbital bombardment.
Any unit that begins its hero phase
embarked within an Arkanaut Ironclad can
disembark. When a unit disembarks, set it up so
that all its models are within 3" of the vessel and
none are within 3" of any enemy models – any
disembarking model that cannot be set up in this
way is slain.
Units that disembark can then act normally,
including using abilities that can be used in the
hero phase, for the remainder of their turn. A unit
cannot disembark and embark in the same turn.
Any unit that begins its hero phase
embarked within an Arkanaut Ironclad can
disembark. When a unit disembarks, set it up so
that all its models are within 3" of the vessel and
none are within 3" of any enemy models – any
disembarking model that cannot be set up in this
way is slain.
Units that disembark can then act normally,
including using abilities that can be used in the
hero phase, for the remainder of their turn. A unit
cannot disembark and embark in the same turn.
Drukhari™ ....Jeez, what the actual feth, GW. I've read through whole Dark Eldar Omnibus and haven't found a single Drukhari™ name in there...
Also, what's with those Frankie and Reec? Why are there only two of them? Reading these articles feels like GW has done everything what they've wishlisted...
Any unit that begins its hero phase
embarked within an Arkanaut Ironclad can
disembark. When a unit disembarks, set it up so
that all its models are within 3" of the vessel and
none are within 3" of any enemy models – any
disembarking model that cannot be set up in this
way is slain.
Units that disembark can then act normally,
including using abilities that can be used in the
hero phase, for the remainder of their turn. A unit
cannot disembark and embark in the same turn.
Seems likely and should work fine?
Well, 40K doesn't have a hero phase so they would have to disembark in the move phase so there is some chance they might not be able to move, but it seems really likely that all transports will be assault transports now.
dosiere wrote: Do we know the phase order yet? I imagine they'd just move the disembarking to the move/charge phase if there's no hero phase.
Not exactly, but I'm pretty sure that the T'au are Fethed Phase comes right before the Shooting Phase, and right after the I Refuse to Buy NuMarinesPhase. Obviously this all comes after the Who in the thread Can Use a Tape Measure Phase, which comes right before the Movement Phase. I'm not sure if the I Can Predict All of 8th Ed From Insufficient Evidence Phase comes before or after the Psychic Phase though, sorry.
CragHack wrote: Also, what's with those Frankie and Reec? Why are there only two of them? Reading these articles feels like GW has done everything what they've wishlisted...
They're fairly well known tournament organizers who have a podcast and a store. They are known to have been involved in playtesting the new edition. Supposedly a bunch of other people playtested it as well, so I'm not sure why it's just the two of them doing these articles, other than they have a sizable audience that GW might be looking to capitalize on.
These articles are supposed to be hype pieces. They're not supposed to give away all that much information, or be a critical review of the upcoming edition, their primary purpose is to get people excited. I can see why they might not be doing such a good job of that for some people, but I've been enjoying them well enough as long as I keep in mind what they're supposed to be.
streetsamurai wrote: Wow, is that fluff for the numarines terrible. They should just have upscaled them and called it a day. Wont bother me as much when eventually all marines are replaced by numarines (iirc, hasting said regular marines wont get any new support), but still, it gives the impression that they really are creatively bankrupted .
Must say that i kind of like drukari as name, a lot better than dark eldar
Marketting fluff =/= actual lore presented in the books.
I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt to have something better in the works for the lore than "LOOK HOW AWESOME THESE SLIGHTLY TALLER MARINES ARE!!!!ONE111!!"
I honestly don't really see how they will able to make them interesting, since they are already so similar to current marines, only better
The thing that bother's me the most is that they release these guys less than a year after DW and thousand sons, hence making them rather obsolete.
changemod wrote: It's a problem because it's pointlessly fuzzy. If I have to place a model 9.00000000000000000000000000-repeat forever-000001 inches away from something then my skin is going to crawl.
There's an infinite range of values between 9 and 10 inches. It's sloppy at best.
You are free to put it anywhere between 9 and 10 and it won't make a difference.
It's incredibly simple.
If you roll an 8 then there's no way you can possibly charge them.
Exactly. It doesn't matter where you put it inside that range because you can't make the charge on an 8.
I like complaining as much as anyone, but I don't see the problem with this either.
I used to run Tau mech with some suits and kroot, and that certainly looks good in these rules. Weather the first turn in your transports, drop you suits en mass on a vulnerable point and nuke them from orbit. The downside is that I don't love deep striking being a no brainer - I kind of preferred the days when you might not even be able to deepstrike at all. Made for more interesting variety of games and harder decisions in list building. I recall the fondly the time an odd tournament judging call caused me to start with my drop pods on the table - I made a wall out of them and used it like a castle.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I hope for a return to the status of brutal auxiliaries for the kroot - at one time with cover being what it was and their stats, they used to actually win quite a few fights. I gather they're just cheap bodies in 7E, and the 8E cover rule looks awful for them, but who knows, maybe they'll get something neat.
Either Sept, chapter tactics, or hive fleet. I am wondering if this is a thematic army bonus ala the current chapter tactics system for every army.
Could grant the sexy thematic bonuses we all love so much to allow for more viability of different army lists.
I was thinking that too, every army getting "chapter tactics" is a fantastic way to encourage fluffy list building
Automatically Appended Next Post: It is going to be 2:30am for me when this live QA is on, if someone makes a summary, can you please PM me, so I can credit you and add it to the OP.
The thing that bother's me the most is that they release these guys less than a year after DW and thousand sons, hence making them rather obsolete.
I don't think that calling quality, fully functioning and supported factions "obsolete" is a fair assessment.
Considering that there is quite a few DW players who said that they feel that their faction is cheapend by the release of Numarines, I would argue it is a fair assesment. It is, IMO a perfect case of perceived obsolescence
Apologies if this has been mentioned already but during the AOS skirmish live stream, they mentioned that the new 40k would be playable at warhammer fest. This makes the rumours that preorders will be that weekend even more likely.
The thing that bother's me the most is that they release these guys less than a year after DW and thousand sons, hence making them rather obsolete.
I don't think that calling quality, fully functioning and supported factions "obsolete" is a fair assessment.
Considering that there is quite a few DW players who said that they feel that their faction is cheapend by the release of Numarines, I would argue it is a fair assesment. It is, IMO a perfect case of perceived obsolescence
Obviously every Marine Faction is gonna feel cheapened. But personally I think GW already give the new Deathwatch marine a bigger stature to justify the "New Deatwatch marines are just Primaris Marines". So I feel that of every loyalist marine factions, the Deathwatch is the one that is gonna fell all of this the least.
Probably the basic Deathwatch marines are gonna have 2 wounds, mark my words!
Judging by the pictures released of the Nu-Marines, these guys are way bigger and bulkier than any previous marine release. The DW and the Thousand Sons certainly aren't in scale (they're really only in scale with each other).
For the perspective specialist in here, how does the current DW adn TS compare to numarines size-wise?
Pretty much identical, you can see in some of the preview pics normal marines and the new guys in the same image, and they really don't look out of place.
I love the sound of the rules and that they rebuilt every army for it. Though I have a large number of codexes I do like them for their content and holding on to the rules within would have hampered this edition. Looking forward to seeing a variety of armies on tables, in battle reports and on paint tables!
NuMarines. Models do look amazing and rules don't make them seem to dissimilar to standard marines but overall I am concerned with how much they are doing here.
New edition + new marines + new fluff.
GW - "We are not blowing up the setting". Yeah you went as close to as you could though eh. Could they not at least staggered it... IMHO that's how they did AoS wrong... too much in one go. Could have done the rules first and then the fluff and then the Stormcas... Marines.
The new marines fluff seems (from what we know) dreadful and they are doing the stupid Stormcast naming for each type of guy with a different weapon. "Oh these guys are the dominators, they carry whips". I guess this is the lame IP protection (honestly I am embarrassed to say some of the names (to non gamers i know) they come up with these days. But mostly its the way it cheapens regular marines. Reminds me of Saturday morning cartoons when they introduce a new cool toy to kids by making them "badass+1". It also seems weird that the typically techno-repressive Imperium is ok with it.
The new marines fluff seems (from what we know) dreadful and they are doing the stupid Stormcast naming for each type of guy with a different weapon. "Oh these guys are the dominators, they carry whips". I guess this is the lame IP protection (honestly I am embarrassed to say some of the names (to non gamers i know) they come up with these days. But mostly its the way it cheapens regular marines. Reminds me of Saturday morning cartoons when they introduce a new cool toy to kids by making them "badass+1". It also seems weird that the typically techno-repressive Imperium is ok with it.
Like devastators, terminators, sternguard, vanguard, ...
The new marines fluff seems (from what we know) dreadful and they are doing the stupid Stormcast naming for each type of guy with a different weapon. "Oh these guys are the dominators, they carry whips". I guess this is the lame IP protection (honestly I am embarrassed to say some of the names (to non gamers i know) they come up with these days. But mostly its the way it cheapens regular marines. Reminds me of Saturday morning cartoons when they introduce a new cool toy to kids by making them "badass+1". It also seems weird that the typically techno-repressive Imperium is ok with it.
Like devastators, terminators, sternguard, vanguard, ...
Not really, all these units had numerous different weapons available to them. The Numarines unit we saw can only take bolter. Might be different for the other units though
Either Sept, chapter tactics, or hive fleet. I am wondering if this is a thematic army bonus ala the current chapter tactics system for every army.
Could grant the sexy thematic bonuses we all love so much to allow for more viability of different army lists.
I was thinking that too, every army getting "chapter tactics" is a fantastic way to encourage fluffy list building
Is it? Or does it result in unfluffy all biker white scar armies? After all if we go from fluff core of white scars are tactical squads(generally in rhinos). Not bike marines.
Either Sept, chapter tactics, or hive fleet. I am wondering if this is a thematic army bonus ala the current chapter tactics system for every army.
Could grant the sexy thematic bonuses we all love so much to allow for more viability of different army lists.
I was thinking that too, every army getting "chapter tactics" is a fantastic way to encourage fluffy list building
Is it? Or does it result in unfluffy all biker white scar armies? After all if we go from fluff core of white scars are tactical squads(generally in rhinos). Not bike marines.
And (for likely the millionth time this has been rebuked) a 40K game is but one battlefield of the wide, wide galaxy, and if you choose to collect a force that's largely bikers that is operating on that one field at that one time? That's fine. Stop telling people how they're allowed to collect and have fun. It's no weirder than half the Dark Angels first company appearing at every battle, or the 'new, rare' Riptide being there in every force... times 3.
I don't collect White Scars, it's just annoying to see them get beaten with the Fluffy Stick so often. They specialise in bikes, people like that and want to collect that? That's cool.
Either Sept, chapter tactics, or hive fleet. I am wondering if this is a thematic army bonus ala the current chapter tactics system for every army.
Could grant the sexy thematic bonuses we all love so much to allow for more viability of different army lists.
I was thinking that too, every army getting "chapter tactics" is a fantastic way to encourage fluffy list building
Is it? Or does it result in unfluffy all biker white scar armies? After all if we go from fluff core of white scars are tactical squads(generally in rhinos). Not bike marines.
Well White Skars are known for their bikes, though that just means that bikes needed toning down, not that it didn't allow for fluffy rules.
Is it? Or does it result in unfluffy all biker white scar armies? After all if we go from fluff core of white scars are tactical squads(generally in rhinos). Not bike marines.
Well it is carrot rather than stick init? They won't stop people taking all bike armies but as you need some troops to fill out a battalion and get those tasty command points you will be encouraged to take tactical squads in rhino transports.
So what are we guessing today's post on vehicles will be about? Will it be flyers? Transports? Maybe something which will affect their facing? Something else?
Eyjio wrote: So what are we guessing today's post on vehicles will be about? Will it be flyers? Transports? Maybe something which will affect their facing? Something else?
Eyjio wrote: So what are we guessing today's post on vehicles will be about? Will it be flyers? Transports? Maybe something which will affect their facing? Something else?
Knights supposedly.
Knights are the next faction focus. I would guess today would be about vehicles movement, facings and such.
People are assuming theres going to be fscings still? Knights might have to choose a direction for their shield, but there wont be traditional facings.
Edit: they can fix all biker armies by not letting bikes be troops.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also if someone could please make a summary of the live Q&A, that would be great If not, I will do one up in 17 hours on my lunch break lol
tneva82 wrote: I would expect transport rules get a mention.
And yeah no facings. GW decided to say screw to logic.
It's easy to fix in your own group, just say -1 toughness for side armour, -2 for rear, then make certain units immune like vehicles with the same av all sound. Actually now I think of it, this is something that should be in the game anyway, except the exceptions, that's just a thought due to legacy rules.
tneva82 wrote: I would expect transport rules get a mention.
And yeah no facings. GW decided to say screw to logic.
Well I imagine they said
Vehicle Facings
We did not bother with it for Age of Sigmar and for MCs and GCs in 40k We are streamlining the game - will this add to the game
Will it be complicated and lead to arguments with the shape of many vehicles compared to say tanks in most games which are pretty square?
Do other games use this system for all their big things - some do and some don't
Then they said - yeah the relative benefit is likely not worth it - there are plenty of tactical elements already, lets drop it.
and they did - we will see how it works in reality.
tneva82 wrote: I would expect transport rules get a mention.
And yeah no facings. GW decided to say screw to logic.
It's easy to fix in your own group, just say -1 toughness for side armour, -2 for rear, then make certain units immune like vehicles with the same av all sound. Actually now I think of it, this is something that should be in the game anyway, except the exceptions, that's just a thought due to legacy rules.
Yeah this would work even better in the narrative gamestyle (check out OP for more info).
I would argue it would be more balanced if it was +1 to front armour, -1 to rear armour though
tneva82 wrote: I would expect transport rules get a mention.
And yeah no facings. GW decided to say screw to logic.
Logic as in Space Marine carrying heavy bolter shoots at chimera - and is unable to put as much as a dent into the chimera. He moves half an inch to the right and shoots again - the shot now suddenly penetrates the armor plates of the chimera, hits a vital piece of equipment and the APC explodes in a fireball, killing everybody inside. You know, because it mattered where the marine was standing, and not where he was aiming.
Facings were totally logical. Especially on anything the tau or eldar call a vehicle.
You could either write six pages of rules and draw a diagram for every single vehicle ever, or you could just drop the whole thing, making the rules a lot simpler with little to no loss.
tneva82 wrote: I would expect transport rules get a mention.
And yeah no facings. GW decided to say screw to logic.
It's easy to fix in your own group, just say -1 toughness for side armour, -2 for rear, then make certain units immune like vehicles with the same av all sound. Actually now I think of it, this is something that should be in the game anyway, except the exceptions, that's just a thought due to legacy rules.
Yeah this would work even better in the narrative gamestyle (check out OP for more info).
I would argue it would be more balanced if it was +1 to front armour, -1 to rear armour though
Facings were an interesting mechanic to have, but it's not needed in a wargame.
Warmachine has a smaller scale, facings marked on the base of every model, a strenght vs armor mechanic and focuses on big models, yet it uses a single armor profile.
Either Sept, chapter tactics, or hive fleet. I am wondering if this is a thematic army bonus ala the current chapter tactics system for every army.
Could grant the sexy thematic bonuses we all love so much to allow for more viability of different army lists.
Warbikers with the <Evil Sunz> keyword could more 13" instead of 12"! I'm pretty sure ork klanz will be a thing in 8th!
But only if they're painted red. It's the only situation where i not only want the specific paint job of a model to affect it's rules, but i demand it !
Either Sept, chapter tactics, or hive fleet. I am wondering if this is a thematic army bonus ala the current chapter tactics system for every army.
Could grant the sexy thematic bonuses we all love so much to allow for more viability of different army lists.
Warbikers with the <Evil Sunz> keyword could more 13" instead of 12"! I'm pretty sure ork klanz will be a thing in 8th!
But only if they're painted red. It's the only situation where i not only want the specific paint job of a model to affect it's rules, but i demand it !
You 40k lot are not prepared for the levels of painting argument that are about to follow, unless GW clarify
I love the chapter/force/clan etc specific rules, it makes the force feel more personal, and if done right, fits the type of army.
It's the only situation where i not only want the specific paint job of a model to affect it's rules
Would everybody hate if there was some sort of guidance saying that if you want to use a particular faction keyword then there must be something on the models to signify that it is part of that faction? Be that back banners, decals paint schema or whatever.
I think that would prevent people from 'faction hoping' to gain an advantage against different opponents, although people like that would probably just find a different way to game the system!
It's the only situation where i not only want the specific paint job of a model to affect it's rules
Would everybody hate if there was some sort of guidance saying that if you want to use a particular faction keyword then there must be something on the models to signify that it is part of that faction? Be that back banners, decals paint schema or whatever.
I think that would prevent people from 'faction hoping' to gain an advantage against different opponents, although people like that would probably just find a different way to game the system!
That something that might be worth a option tournament rule tbh - causual games less important IMO
They covered something extremely broadly similar in 8th Ed Warhammer.
Used to be that when it came to Wizards, those that could choose their deck/college/lore would do so after deployment.
This meant some armies with wide access could pick whichever was most advantageous. Against Chaos or Bretonnians? Metal was good. Orcs or Ogres? Shadow tended to punish low Initiative values.
8th Ed changed that to Lore/College/Deck being chosen when you wrote your army list.
I think that would prevent people from 'faction hoping' to gain an advantage against different opponents, although people like that would probably just find a different way to game the system!
This isn't a problem in my book. If you want to play your purple marines as Imperial Fists today and Raven Guard tomorrow, that's fine. Just be clear at the start of the game.
I think that would prevent people from 'faction hoping' to gain an advantage against different opponents, although people like that would probably just find a different way to game the system!
This isn't a problem in my book. If you want to play your purple marines as Imperial Fists today and Raven Guard tomorrow, that's fine. Just be clear at the start of the game.
Completely agree. You can't force a guy playing with Dark Angels minis to stick to Dark Angels forever with said mins, when they can work as Salamanders or Blood Angels for today.
tneva82 wrote: I would expect transport rules get a mention.
And yeah no facings. GW decided to say screw to logic.
It's easy to fix in your own group, just say -1 toughness for side armour, -2 for rear, then make certain units immune like vehicles with the same av all sound. Actually now I think of it, this is something that should be in the game anyway, except the exceptions, that's just a thought due to legacy rules.
Personally I like how FoW handles this, you have 'front' armour which tends to be heavier, 'rear' which also covers the sides and is usually lighter, then 'top' which covers air attacks and is used in close assault (representing weak spots being found etc)
Draw a ling across the front of the model, are you when firing at the vehicle totally ahead of that line? if you front armour, if partly ahead or totally behind, rear armour. allow ordinance to use the top armour plus infantry in close assault.
-1 toughness to the side, -2 toughness to the top, done.
With vehicles likely to get their own data card, a simple diagram shows where you draw the line on a case by case basis, done.
The new marines fluff seems (from what we know) dreadful and they are doing the stupid Stormcast naming for each type of guy with a different weapon. "Oh these guys are the dominators, they carry whips". I guess this is the lame IP protection (honestly I am embarrassed to say some of the names (to non gamers i know) they come up with these days. But mostly its the way it cheapens regular marines. Reminds me of Saturday morning cartoons when they introduce a new cool toy to kids by making them "badass+1". It also seems weird that the typically techno-repressive Imperium is ok with it.
Like devastators, terminators, sternguard, vanguard, ...
Not really, all these units had numerous different weapons available to them. The Numarines unit we saw can only take bolter. Might be different for the other units though
In all fairness, the term intercessor is perfectly applicable in this case. It's a regular English word that rarely sees use in day to day communication. It's a predominantly religious term for a person or entity who intercedes on another's behalf... typically as a result of prayer. You know, like an angel. This fits with a basic Primaris Marine's intended function... to serve as the Emperor's Angels of Death and answer the 'prayers' of beleagured Imperial worlds. It also fits with the weirdly hyper-religious nature of the Imperium. Robby G doesn't like it, but seems to understand that if he wants cooperation, he needs to play ball. Intercessor is a perfect term. He can't exactly call them NuMarines or TallBoyz.
Personally I like how FoW handles this, you have 'front' armour which tends to be heavier, 'rear' which also covers the sides and is usually lighter, then 'top' which covers air attacks and is used in close assault (representing weak spots being found etc)
Draw a ling across the front of the model, are you when firing at the vehicle totally ahead of that line? if you front armour, if partly ahead or totally behind, rear armour. allow ordinance to use the top armour plus infantry in close assault.
-1 toughness to the side, -2 toughness to the top, done.
With vehicles likely to get their own data card, a simple diagram shows where you draw the line on a case by case basis, done.
Simple on paper. Not so simple in terms of balance.
It's the only situation where i not only want the specific paint job of a model to affect it's rules
Would everybody hate if there was some sort of guidance saying that if you want to use a particular faction keyword then there must be something on the models to signify that it is part of that faction? Be that back banners, decals paint schema or whatever.
I think that would prevent people from 'faction hoping' to gain an advantage against different opponents, although people like that would probably just find a different way to game the system!
No, because I like to see people coming up with their own paint schemes. If your electric space tigers want to use Salamanders rules because it makes the most sense in their fluff, I don't care.
You can't force a guy playing with Dark Angels minis to stick to Dark Angels forever with said mins, when they can work as Salamanders or Blood Angels for today.
Yea I suppose so, I would probably treat it like playing someone with unpainted models i.e. I wouldn't be thrilled about it, but wouldn't refuse to play them or try to make them feel bad about it.
I like I idea of having to work within a more restrictive rule set to promote your strengths and mitigate your weaknesses though, rather than just changing the rules you play by to suit whatever you need for that particular battle.
It's the only situation where i not only want the specific paint job of a model to affect it's rules
Would everybody hate if there was some sort of guidance saying that if you want to use a particular faction keyword then there must be something on the models to signify that it is part of that faction? Be that back banners, decals paint schema or whatever.
I think that would prevent people from 'faction hoping' to gain an advantage against different opponents, although people like that would probably just find a different way to game the system!
No, faction hoping isn't a problem, but screwing up people with wants to use custom-made order/klan/craftworld/dynasty/hive fleet does.
My preference would be for factions(chapter, hive fleet, craftworld etc) to cost points, as if they come with any kind of benefit the idea that all those benefits have an equivalent value seems unlikely.
Barring that I would hope they have built in restrictions on list building
We see it now with codex space marines where some chapters are clearly stronger than others.
I've been out of the 40K loop for a while, but the Trygon rules says "At the end of any of your movement phases, set up etc.."
Didn't we have to do some kind of reserve roll before, or is this just part of it's Subterranean Assault rule.
Will other "Tactical Reserves" also not need to roll do you think?
Marleymoo wrote: I've been out of the 40K loop for a while, but the Trygon rules says "At the end of any of your movement phases, set up etc.."
Didn't we have to do some kind of reserve roll before, or is this just part of it's Subterranean Assault rule.
Will other "Tactical Reserves" also not need to roll do you think?
I certainly hope so, because they have said that anything not in on turn 3 is destroyed.
Even if it were a 2+ roll, it'd suuuuuuuuuck to lose your deep striking unit just because you rolled 3 unlucky 1's.
If I had to guess, I would bank on small universal benefits for some, and others gaining slightly more powerful bonuses but only while within a certain range of an exceptionally thematic unit.
So lyanden faction gain bonuses for being within 6" of wraith constructs, but the construct themselves don't get these bonuses.
White scar units gain a bonus die when "advancing" choose the highest because their units are known for speed when closing with the enemy.
Marleymoo wrote: I've been out of the 40K loop for a while, but the Trygon rules says "At the end of any of your movement phases, set up etc.."
Didn't we have to do some kind of reserve roll before, or is this just part of it's Subterranean Assault rule.
Will other "Tactical Reserves" also not need to roll do you think?
I certainly hope so, because they have said that anything not in on turn 3 is destroyed.
Even if it were a 2+ roll, it'd suuuuuuuuuck to lose your deep striking unit just because you rolled 3 unlucky 1's.
I dont think rolling for reserves will be a thing this edition. It always struck me as odd that in a game based on tactics they would effectively force you to randomize said tactics with reserve rolls...
It's the only situation where i not only want the specific paint job of a model to affect it's rules
Would everybody hate if there was some sort of guidance saying that if you want to use a particular faction keyword then there must be something on the models to signify that it is part of that faction? Be that back banners, decals paint schema or whatever.
I think that would prevent people from 'faction hoping' to gain an advantage against different opponents, although people like that would probably just find a different way to game the system!
No, faction hoping isn't a problem, but screwing up people with wants to use custom-made order/klan/craftworld/dynasty/hive fleet does.
The Kharadon Overlords for AoS have rules that let you either field your army as one of their official ones or make your own, with slightly fewer advantages but being able to mix them as you see fit. That seems like a reasonable solution. It does slightly limit players who have a fixed set of traits for their homebrew subfaction vs. ones who change their rules to suit their list, but I think it's about as good as you can get.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: If I had to guess, I would bank on small universal benefits for some, and others gaining slightly more powerful bonuses but only while within a certain range of an exceptionally thematic unit.
So lyanden faction gain bonuses for being within 6" of wraith constructs, but the construct themselves don't get these bonuses.
White scar units gain a bonus die when "advancing" choose the highest because their units are known for speed when closing with the enemy.
It would be a cool thing to see on the tabletop.
I would highly suggest people look into the Stormcast and Kharadon Overlord books and the way the different Stormhosts/Ports work to get an idea as to how this might work.
Marleymoo wrote: I've been out of the 40K loop for a while, but the Trygon rules says "At the end of any of your movement phases, set up etc.."
Didn't we have to do some kind of reserve roll before, or is this just part of it's Subterranean Assault rule.
Will other "Tactical Reserves" also not need to roll do you think?
I certainly hope so, because they have said that anything not in on turn 3 is destroyed.
Even if it were a 2+ roll, it'd suuuuuuuuuck to lose your deep striking unit just because you rolled 3 unlucky 1's.
It was talked about a lot in yesterday's q&a. Basically, there are no more Deep Strike rules. Instead each unit gets a specific unique deployment rule and if that rule, e.g. "Subterranean Assault" doesn't say roll to deploy then you can use your own discretion when to deploy. Just don't forget about your units in reserves or else
And this is great! I never understood why Raveners that "deepstrike" by slowly approaching an enemy from underground, have the same accuracy and mishapp chances of something blindly teleporting on the battflefield from outside the orbit of the planet!
leopard wrote: Draw a ling across the front of the model, are you when firing at the vehicle totally ahead of that line? if you front armour, if partly ahead or totally behind, rear armour. allow ordinance to use the top armour plus infantry in close assault.
That works for FoW because they deal with a bunch of boxes. Trying to apply that mechanic to something like a creatively posed Wraithknight? Ork vehicle conversions? Even a Contemptor? Think I'd pass.
tneva82 wrote: I would expect transport rules get a mention.
And yeah no facings. GW decided to say screw to logic.
Logic as in Space Marine carrying heavy bolter shoots at chimera - and is unable to put as much as a dent into the chimera. He moves half an inch to the right and shoots again - the shot now suddenly penetrates the armor plates of the chimera, hits a vital piece of equipment and the APC explodes in a fireball, killing everybody inside. You know, because it mattered where the marine was standing, and not where he was aiming.
Facings were totally logical. Especially on anything the tau or eldar call a vehicle.
You could either write six pages of rules and draw a diagram for every single vehicle ever, or you could just drop the whole thing, making the rules a lot simpler with little to no loss.
I think GW has made the right choice.
I' a few pages behind but to address this, it did matter about where he was standing. See, when he stood an inch (or several meters in scale) to the right, he was firing at the side armour with a very steep angle, meaning the force of the round was not being applied perpendicular to the armour, but rather, closer to parrallel, so much force is lost. Step several meters (an inch) to the right and now you can fire at the vehicle closer to "face on" and apply much more force in the direction you need it to go, which is through the armour and into the (fuel cell, ammo, passenger, etc).
Spoletta wrote: And this is great! I never understood why Raveners that "deepstrike" by slowly approaching an enemy from underground, have the same accuracy and mishapp chances of something blindly teleporting on the battflefield from outside the orbit of the planet!
Have you ever tried slowly tunneling up under someone and getting it pinpoint accurate? I tried and dug through a neighbours water main.
It's the only situation where i not only want the specific paint job of a model to affect it's rules
Would everybody hate if there was some sort of guidance saying that if you want to use a particular faction keyword then there must be something on the models to signify that it is part of that faction? Be that back banners, decals paint schema or whatever.
I think that would prevent people from 'faction hoping' to gain an advantage against different opponents, although people like that would probably just find a different way to game the system!
No, because I like to see people coming up with their own paint schemes. If your electric space tigers want to use Salamanders rules because it makes the most sense in their fluff, I don't care.
Thank you, or as the Electric Space Tigers say, "Shock-ulah Meowkhan volt-brother!"
Spoletta wrote: And this is great! I never understood why Raveners that "deepstrike" by slowly approaching an enemy from underground, have the same accuracy and mishapp chances of something blindly teleporting on the battflefield from outside the orbit of the planet!
Have you ever tried slowly tunneling up under someone and getting it pinpoint accurate? I tried and dug through a neighbours water main.
To be fair, you are not a genetically engineered creature, designed specifically for this purpose, with special senses that apply to moving underground.
leopard wrote: Draw a ling across the front of the model, are you when firing at the vehicle totally ahead of that line? if you front armour, if partly ahead or totally behind, rear armour. allow ordinance to use the top armour plus infantry in close assault.
That works for FoW because they deal with a bunch of boxes. Trying to apply that mechanic to something like a creatively posed Wraithknight? Ork vehicle conversions? Even a Contemptor? Think I'd pass.
Its not hard at all. Look top down, draw and X from corner to corner (even works with none-boxy vehicles, I'll photoshop 2 lines on a top down later).
I agree its better off gone, but its really not hard. GW just expected players to think for themselves just a tiny bit, instead of having every niggly detail explained to the Nth degree
Spoletta wrote: And this is great! I never understood why Raveners that "deepstrike" by slowly approaching an enemy from underground, have the same accuracy and mishapp chances of something blindly teleporting on the battflefield from outside the orbit of the planet!
Have you ever tried slowly tunneling up under someone and getting it pinpoint accurate? I tried and dug through a neighbours water main.
You don't have alien bioengineered hypersentivity to vibration and the ability to pinpoint a heartbeat from miles away though.
Spoletta wrote: And this is great! I never understood why Raveners that "deepstrike" by slowly approaching an enemy from underground, have the same accuracy and mishapp chances of something blindly teleporting on the battflefield from outside the orbit of the planet!
Have you ever tried slowly tunneling up under someone and getting it pinpoint accurate? I tried and dug through a neighbours water main.
To be fair you're not an intergalactic alien worm.
Spoletta wrote: And this is great! I never understood why Raveners that "deepstrike" by slowly approaching an enemy from underground, have the same accuracy and mishapp chances of something blindly teleporting on the battflefield from outside the orbit of the planet!
Have you ever tried slowly tunneling up under someone and getting it pinpoint accurate? I tried and dug through a neighbours water main.
To be fair you're not an intergalactic alien worm.
HOW DO YOU KNOW
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Deadshot wrote: You don't have alien bioengineered hypersentivity to vibration and the ability to pinpoint a heartbeat from miles away though.
It's not what's been bioengineered to hypersensitivity but what you do with it that counts.
Shouldn't bugs all have LoS from any one of the creatures? If a bunch of bugs are on the surface, I would think the one underground can see exactly what's going on above it. Because, it has a hive mind.
You can't force a guy playing with Dark Angels minis to stick to Dark Angels forever with said mins, when they can work as Salamanders or Blood Angels for today.
Yea I suppose so, I would probably treat it like playing someone with unpainted models i.e. I wouldn't be thrilled about it, but wouldn't refuse to play them or try to make them feel bad about it.
I like I idea of having to work within a more restrictive rule set to promote your strengths and mitigate your weaknesses though, rather than just changing the rules you play by to suit whatever you need for that particular battle.
I always get a kick out of people commenting on Miniwargaming videos where they use the house chapter (color scheme is lime green and yellow). They play it with Ultramarines chapter tactics, but every video, you have someone commenting how "Your marines are green! You have to play them as Salamanders, you WAAC cheaters!". Apparently some people have never heard of successor chapters. The only chapter I can think of whose successors always stick with their proginetor's color scheme is Blood Angel. All their successors are black or red.
Youn wrote: Shouldn't bugs all have LoS from any one of the creatures? If a bunch of bugs are on the surface, I would think the one underground can see exactly what's going on above it. Because, it has a hive mind.
Possibly, and argument can be made for it, after all, its how Hive Guard Impaler Cannon beetles can curve round corners to hit targets out of LoS: they use the Hive Mind to navigate. However, those beetles are specially engineered to do so, and their entire brain capacity is designed for this. Ravenors had slightly more things to do, such as feed, hunt and kill, track and etc. They might not always have the HIve Mind either to guide them. They need to be capable of tracking and eliminating targets without supervision. Plus, think of the calculations the Hive Mind would need to do to triangulate that attack from multiple burrowing creatures and the eyesight of hundreds of thousands of Nids? What if there are no Nids to guide them, and they are simply the vanguard? The Hive Mind needs to keep unnecessary chatter to a minimum, as it needs to direct and plan the wider battle and develop new strategies and evolutions. That's why most Instinctive Behaviour creatures, although not reflected in the fluff, act exactly how they are supposed to when alone. Hormagaunts charge the enemy and kill and eat, lay eggs for a new wave. Termagants hide and lurk in the shadows to ambush you, and remain hidden years after in case of a defeat so that the swarm might be reborn decades later. Gargoyles see and destroy (hunt) particular targets, and Tyrannofexes hang back to shoot, because without the Hive Mind it's not certain of CQC support. The Tyranids are perfectly capable of functioning on their own without supervision, but they lack the coordination to remain a cohesive army and wouldn't have the strategic advantage.
There are exceptions of course – Ork vehicles can be kitted out with some pretty deadly close combat options, which now function just like any other specialist close combat weapon: get hit by a Deathroller, for example, and prepare to be a pancake.
Finally a use for all those grabby gadgets and wrecking balls!
Today we take a look at how vehicles work in the new Warhammer 40,000.
The best way to show you some of the changes is with an example. Because we haven’t really seen anything from the Necron dynasties yet, we’re going to look at the Annihilation Barge, staple fire-support gun platform of the undying legions:
So this thing looks VERY different in the new Warhammer 40,000.
For a start, it’s using the same stats as everyone else, so armour values on the various facings are out, and instead, we have Toughness, Wounds and an Armour Save, making it more comparable in durability to other large monsters and massive beasts of the Warhammer 40,000 universe.
Also, it’s got Attacks and Strength! So it can fight (albeit inexpertly) in combat. This represents it literally ramming or smashing into enemy units.
Some dedicated combat vehicles (commonly what used to be Walkers), will have melee weapons too, like the classic Dreadnought power fist, but most vehicles will need to make do with crushing enemies under tracks or crumpling them beneath anti-gravitic engines. Generally, these attacks will have a poor to hit roll (5+ or 6+) but high strength – because if a Land Raider runs you over, you’ll feel it. There are exceptions of course – Ork vehicles can be kitted out with some pretty deadly close combat options, which now function just like any other specialist close combat weapon: get hit by a Deathroller, for example, and prepare to be a pancake.
Vehicles will be affected by all the other new rules we’ve talked about too, so they will be able to move as any other model would, including advancing. They shoot just like everyone else does, including (with a few exceptions) -1 to hit with heavy weapons if they move. They can even charge! which effectively replaces the Tank Shock rules, except ANY vehicle can do it and they then fight just like any other unit in the Fight phase.
Generally, you’ll find that vehicles still fill the same roles in your army as they always have, but without so many exceptions to the core rules of the game. You’ll find them to be very durable, probably more so than they are today, and best used in coordination with infantry and where their own specialisations can be used to full effect.
So, if you surround a vehicle with troops inside. It won't be able to FALL BACK, because it cannot tank shock an opponent now. And won't have space to move away. Any troops that are inside will be instantly destroyed because they won't be able to deploy more then 1" away from an opponent and within 3" of the vehicle.
This is going to make 90 plague zombies deadly to something like a rhino with troops in it.
As someone who is working on an army of Templars this new change makes me super excited as you can have your Crusaders crusade from their Crusade which proceeds to lead the crusade into combat and protecting your guys from being shot in the face.
This may be the best new option in the new edition in my book.
I see transport supported charges becoming a common tactic.
Finally, won't have to look up Tank Shock and read for 10 minutes every time someone gets the bright idea to use their Rhino for more than moving models. Less fluffy? Maybe a bit. Way easier to use? Frakkin right.
Youn wrote: So, if you surround a vehicle with troops inside. It won't be able to FALL BACK, because it cannot tank shock an opponent now. And won't have space to move away. Any troops that are inside will be instantly destroyed because they won't be able to deploy more then 1" away from an opponent and within 3" of the vehicle.
This is going to make 90 plague zombies deadly to something like a rhino with troops in it.
We don't know transport rules yet. Emergency disembark rules existed in 7th solely because of that tactics, and may still exist.
Requizen wrote: Finally, won't have to look up Tank Shock and read for 10 minutes every time someone gets the bright idea to use their Rhino for more than moving models. Less fluffy? Maybe a bit. Way easier to use? Frakkin right.
Loss of Tank Shock means losing Death or Glory which is nice as it was basically useless.
Also I can see dozer blades as possibly giving a bonus to the vehicle's attacks in some form or another on the charge. So wargear could buff our tanks as they run heretic over.
And of course they preview something for Necrons but still haven't showed how our weapons or RP will work now. Guess I'll just have to wait for our faction focus.
Requizen wrote: Finally, won't have to look up Tank Shock and read for 10 minutes every time someone gets the bright idea to use their Rhino for more than moving models. Less fluffy? Maybe a bit. Way easier to use? Frakkin right.
I'm just glad in all the years I have played that I never had to take the time to learn Tank Shock. I've heard a hundred interpretations and none made sense. Hooray for vehicles taking part in a combat rather than just sitting there getting grenaded to death.
We kind of know them because of how the Subterranean assault was written. I would think the models in the tunnel are similar to models in a transport. With the Must be set-up wholly within 3" of the Trygon. Any models that cannot be placed are destroyed.
That rule is almost a cut and paste from the AoS Arkanaut. Which is a transport balloon that if it blows up, you must be able to deploy within 3" of the target and more then 3" away from any enemy model or be destroyed. They already established in 40k you cannot approach within 1" of an enemy model unless you are activated in fight phase or are charging.
You can't force a guy playing with Dark Angels minis to stick to Dark Angels forever with said mins, when they can work as Salamanders or Blood Angels for today.
Yea I suppose so, I would probably treat it like playing someone with unpainted models i.e. I wouldn't be thrilled about it, but wouldn't refuse to play them or try to make them feel bad about it.
I like I idea of having to work within a more restrictive rule set to promote your strengths and mitigate your weaknesses though, rather than just changing the rules you play by to suit whatever you need for that particular battle.
I always get a kick out of people commenting on Miniwargaming videos where they use the house chapter (color scheme is lime green and yellow). They play it with Ultramarines chapter tactics, but every video, you have someone commenting how "Your marines are green! You have to play them as Salamanders, you WAAC cheaters!". Apparently some people have never heard of successor chapters. The only chapter I can think of whose successors always stick with their proginetor's color scheme is Blood Angel. All their successors are black or red.
Youn wrote: So, if you surround a vehicle with troops inside. It won't be able to FALL BACK, because it cannot tank shock an opponent now. And won't have space to move away. Any troops that are inside will be instantly destroyed because they won't be able to deploy more then 1" away from an opponent and within 3" of the vehicle.
This is going to make 90 plague zombies deadly to something like a rhino with troops in it.
Except that unless Wrecking rules still exist, they'll just get removed from the board when destroyed, and so you might just put your guys in the space where the vehicle was, just like when a vehicle explodes currently.
Spoletta wrote: And this is great! I never understood why Raveners that "deepstrike" by slowly approaching an enemy from underground, have the same accuracy and mishapp chances of something blindly teleporting on the battflefield from outside the orbit of the planet!
Have you ever tried slowly tunneling up under someone and getting it pinpoint accurate? I tried and dug through a neighbours water main.
"Knew I should've taken that right turn at albequerque"
There is no way you can fit 10 marines in the space of a rhino without being within 1" of the models that are in hand to hand with it. Assuming they piled into base to hull.
Edit: Well, that assumes your not allowed to pile their bases on top of each other.
Youn wrote: So, if you surround a vehicle with troops inside. It won't be able to FALL BACK, because it cannot tank shock an opponent now. And won't have space to move away. Any troops that are inside will be instantly destroyed because they won't be able to deploy more then 1" away from an opponent and within 3" of the vehicle.
This is going to make 90 plague zombies deadly to something like a rhino with troops in it.
Very fluffy actually. Trapped inside your APC, unable to jump out into the horde of zombies as far as the eye can see, firing desperately your bolt pistol out the window as you wait for them to tear it apart and eat your brain.
Youn wrote: There is no way you can fit 10 marines in the space of a rhino without being within 1" of the models that are in hand to hand with it. Assuming they piled into base to hull.
Edit: Well, that assumes your not allowed to pile their bases on top of each other.
You might be able to fit one or two, which if they have flamers, blasts, high ROF weapons or lots of melee attacks, could just be enough to see you through another round.
I always get a kick out of people commenting on Miniwargaming videos where they use the house chapter (color scheme is lime green and yellow). They play it with Ultramarines chapter tactics, but every video, you have someone commenting how "Your marines are green! You have to play them as Salamanders, you WAAC cheaters!". Apparently some people have never heard of successor chapters. The only chapter I can think of whose successors always stick with their proginetor's color scheme is Blood Angel. All their successors are black or red.
Oh don't get me wrong, I love to see successor chapters and home made chapters much more than the same old first founding chapters everyone collects.
What I wouldn't like though is for your home made chapter to use Salamander tactics when facing Orks, Blood Angel tactics when facing Chaos, Raven Guard tactics facing Eldar etc. just to get an advantage in every battle.
That just ain't Cricket if you ask me!
Yonasu wrote: So who wants to bet that supersonic fliers will be walking around on the ground now hitting people and being stuck in combat....
That would be bad, but i also don't see any sensible way to avoid that. We can be sure that they will be able to fall back (or fall forward in this case) and shoot, but them being immune to assault? I wouldn't bet on that.
Basically nothing new. Pretty dull update to be honest.
On a different note, what the **** are those annihilation barge stats? How has (effectively) a 13/13/11 Annihilation Barge now become easier to kill than a 12/12/10 dreadnought?! So, 12/12/10 walker with autocannons and decent assault is now T7 W8 3+, but a 13/13/11 skimmer with slightly better autocannons but awful assault is now T6 W8 4+? Quantum shielding's replacement had better be pretty amazing, or the whole feeling of "very tough shooting platform which doesn't like heavy weapons" is now just going to be "fast flimsy floating shooting platform which dies to a stiff breeze". I didn't want my annihilation barge to be a ravager, I wanted it to be an annihilation barge. I think I'd have rather them not show us these stats if quantum shielding DOES give a large buff, because now I'm just going to be wondering if they understood the appeal of Necrons at all.
SOoo... I can assault and then punch with my Rhino? This feels wrong.
I wonder if the Rhino would have to Fall Back from combat or if it can still simply drive away?
What's concerning from the article is vehicles will have the -1 To Hit modifier for Heavy weapons if they move. This could mean that all of our vehicles will need higher rolls across the board To Hit then previously. This makes them a lot less effective. I don't like this thought one bit.
All of my trukks and battlewagons get to charge and fight now? Awesome. Gonna be getting all of my deff rollas out of storage and finally pulling the wrecking balls off my trukk sprues!
Eyjio wrote: Basically nothing new. Pretty dull update to be honest.
On a different note, what the **** are those annihilation barge stats? How has (effectively) a 13/13/11 Annihilation Barge now become easier to kill than a 12/12/10 dreadnought?! So, 12/12/10 walker with autocannons and decent assault is now T7 W8 3+, but a 13/13/11 skimmer with slightly better autocannons but awful assault is now T6 W8 4+? Quantum shielding's replacement had better be pretty amazing, or the whole feeling of "very tough shooting platform which doesn't like heavy weapons" is now just going to be "fast flimsy floating shooting platform which dies to a stiff breeze". I didn't want my annihilation barge to be a ravenger, I wanted it to be an annihilation barge. I think I'd have rather them not show us these stats if quantum shielding DOES give a large buff, because now I'm just going to be wondering if they understood the appeal of Necrons at all.
That profile sounds fine for an 11/11/11 open topped vehicle, the same i would expect for land speeders.
Eyjio wrote: Basically nothing new. Pretty dull update to be honest.
On a different note, what the **** are those annihilation barge stats? How has (effectively) a 13/13/11 Annihilation Barge now become easier to kill than a 12/12/10 dreadnought?! So, 12/12/10 walker with autocannons and decent assault is now T7 W8 3+, but a 13/13/11 skimmer with slightly better autocannons but awful assault is now T6 W8 4+? Quantum shielding's replacement had better be pretty amazing, or the whole feeling of "very tough shooting platform which doesn't like heavy weapons" is now just going to be "fast flimsy floating shooting platform which dies to a stiff breeze". I didn't want my annihilation barge to be a raveger, I wanted it to be an annihilation barge. I think I'd have rather them not show us these stats if quantum shielding DOES give a large buff, because now I'm just going to be wondering if they understood the appeal of Necrons at all.
Because there was large portion of the GW playerbase and (apparently) designers that were affected by the "wraithlord trauma" psychological effect. Somehow T8 is too dangerous and is the pinnacle of resilience yet needing a 4+ to glance AV12 with STR 8 is fine. That is what I say is the reason why we see such low toughness values that are akin to AV10 rather than 12 or 13.
I find it interesting that the Annihilation barge has gone from AV 11 to T6, especially as the Marine Dreadnaught went from AV12 to T7. Is this a direct conversion rate of AV-5=T, or is there a cutoff point at T6 (to stop las guns wounding light vehicles on 5+?)
Requizen wrote: Finally, won't have to look up Tank Shock and read for 10 minutes every time someone gets the bright idea to use their Rhino for more than moving models. Less fluffy? Maybe a bit. Way easier to use? Frakkin right.
Loss of Tank Shock means losing Death or Glory which is nice as it was basically useless.
Well technically DoG is still there in a way:
Rhino charges
Your dudes overwatch
Rhino strikes first all be it on a 6 etc etc
I guess this also means if you engage any vehicle in combat they are going to have to withdraw in their phase and therefore cannot shoot (unless the have a spec rule)! - thats pretty huge for close combat units! Just chucking chaff units like cultists at a predator is gonna put its shooting out of action for a turn.
I wonder if vehicles also take battle shock tests? they have a LD and they said all the rules apply... could hurt tanks a fair bit of you do multiple wounds with something like a lascannon
I always get a kick out of people commenting on Miniwargaming videos where they use the house chapter (color scheme is lime green and yellow). They play it with Ultramarines chapter tactics, but every video, you have someone commenting how "Your marines are green! You have to play them as Salamanders, you WAAC cheaters!". Apparently some people have never heard of successor chapters. The only chapter I can think of whose successors always stick with their proginetor's color scheme is Blood Angel. All their successors are black or red.
Oh don't get me wrong, I love to see successor chapters and home made chapters much more than the same old first founding chapters everyone collects.
What I wouldn't like though is for your home made chapter to use Salamander tactics when facing Orks, Blood Angel tactics when facing Chaos, Raven Guard tactics facing Eldar etc. just to get an advantage in every battle.
That just ain't Cricket if you ask me!
See you're assuming the worst of your opponent. Maybe he just like several chapters and doesn't want to build multiple copies of the same army to play different rules.
Yonasu wrote:So who wants to bet that supersonic fliers will be walking around on the ground now hitting people and being stuck in combat....
Eyjio wrote: Basically nothing new. Pretty dull update to be honest.
On a different note, what the **** are those annihilation barge stats? How has (effectively) a 13/13/11 Annihilation Barge now become easier to kill than a 12/12/10 dreadnought?! So, 12/12/10 walker with autocannons and decent assault is now T7 W8 3+, but a 13/13/11 skimmer with slightly better autocannons but awful assault is now T6 W8 4+? Quantum shielding's replacement had better be pretty amazing, or the whole feeling of "very tough shooting platform which doesn't like heavy weapons" is now just going to be "fast flimsy floating shooting platform which dies to a stiff breeze". I didn't want my annihilation barge to be a ravager, I wanted it to be an annihilation barge. I think I'd have rather them not show us these stats if quantum shielding DOES give a large buff, because now I'm just going to be wondering if they understood the appeal of Necrons at all.
Shielding is the answer.
Makes sense that the "base" 11/11/11 vehicle becomes T6, when a 12/12/10 is T7 IMO. I imagine they will have something like +2 toughness or +2 to save until they take 1 or 2 wounds or something to that effect.
oni wrote: SOoo... I can assault and then punch with my Rhino? This feels wrong.
I wonder if the Rhino would have to Fall Back from combat or if it can still simply drive away?
What's concerning from the article is vehicles will have the -1 To Hit modifier for Heavy weapons if they move. This could mean that all of our vehicles will need higher rolls across the board To Hit then previously. This makes them a lot less effective. I don't like this thought one bit.
But, on the other hand, all heavy weapons just need a -1 modifier. Previously your Predator was move 6", firing 1 weapon at 3+, the rest at 6+ to hit. Now it moves fully (maybe 6 or more) and fires everything, just needing 4+, and can fire at different targets
Eyjio wrote: Basically nothing new. Pretty dull update to be honest.
On a different note, what the **** are those annihilation barge stats? How has (effectively) a 13/13/11 Annihilation Barge now become easier to kill than a 12/12/10 dreadnought?! So, 12/12/10 walker with autocannons and decent assault is now T7 W8 3+, but a 13/13/11 skimmer with slightly better autocannons but awful assault is now T6 W8 4+? Quantum shielding's replacement had better be pretty amazing, or the whole feeling of "very tough shooting platform which doesn't like heavy weapons" is now just going to be "fast flimsy floating shooting platform which dies to a stiff breeze". I didn't want my annihilation barge to be a ravenger, I wanted it to be an annihilation barge. I think I'd have rather them not show us these stats if quantum shielding DOES give a large buff, because now I'm just going to be wondering if they understood the appeal of Necrons at all.
That profile sounds fine for an 11/11/11 open topped vehicle, the same i would expect for land speeders.
The Vehicles being able to charge are really a HUGE boost to assault armies.
Charge first with vehicle and then with infantry, if the vehicle makes it, then the infantry doesn't have to suffer the overwatch. Between this and the assault from deepstrike i'm afraid that this edition will be really assault centered.
Eyjio wrote: Basically nothing new. Pretty dull update to be honest.
On a different note, what the **** are those annihilation barge stats? How has (effectively) a 13/13/11 Annihilation Barge now become easier to kill than a 12/12/10 dreadnought?! So, 12/12/10 walker with autocannons and decent assault is now T7 W8 3+, but a 13/13/11 skimmer with slightly better autocannons but awful assault is now T6 W8 4+? Quantum shielding's replacement had better be pretty amazing, or the whole feeling of "very tough shooting platform which doesn't like heavy weapons" is now just going to be "fast flimsy floating shooting platform which dies to a stiff breeze". I didn't want my annihilation barge to be a ravenger, I wanted it to be an annihilation barge. I think I'd have rather them not show us these stats if quantum shielding DOES give a large buff, because now I'm just going to be wondering if they understood the appeal of Necrons at all.
That profile sounds fine for an 11/11/11 open topped vehicle, the same i would expect for land speeders.
Good point, the annihilation barge is pretty fragile without quantum shielding so I imagine this stat line to reflect that with a special rule or two to make up for it.
Eyjio wrote: Basically nothing new. Pretty dull update to be honest.
On a different note, what the **** are those annihilation barge stats? How has (effectively) a 13/13/11 Annihilation Barge now become easier to kill than a 12/12/10 dreadnought?! So, 12/12/10 walker with autocannons and decent assault is now T7 W8 3+, but a 13/13/11 skimmer with slightly better autocannons but awful assault is now T6 W8 4+? Quantum shielding's replacement had better be pretty amazing, or the whole feeling of "very tough shooting platform which doesn't like heavy weapons" is now just going to be "fast flimsy floating shooting platform which dies to a stiff breeze". I didn't want my annihilation barge to be a ravenger, I wanted it to be an annihilation barge. I think I'd have rather them not show us these stats if quantum shielding DOES give a large buff, because now I'm just going to be wondering if they understood the appeal of Necrons at all.
That profile sounds fine for an 11/11/11 open topped vehicle, the same i would expect for land speeders.
Good point, the annihilation barge is pretty fragile without quantum shielding so I imagine this stat line to reflect that with a special rule or two to make up for it.
I imagine quantum shielding to be made into a flat Invulnerable save that lasts until its taken damage. Shielding implies a sort of forcefield so an invulnerable save would be appropriate
So glad tank shock is gone. If vehicles act like other models in close combat, does that mean they can't fire and have to withdraw? Huge boon for assault armies if so.
Spoletta wrote: The Vehicles being able to charge are really a HUGE boost to assault armies.
Charge first with vehicle and then with infantry, if the vehicle makes it, then the infantry doesn't have to suffer the overwatch. Between this and the assault from deepstrike i'm afraid that this edition will be really assault centered.
A few days ago people were saying it was going to be shoot centric again. Between this and that, I'd say it looks pretty balanced.
I just hope Nids get the fearsome factor back if transports will be this powerful.
Youn wrote: So, if you surround a vehicle with troops inside. It won't be able to FALL BACK, because it cannot tank shock an opponent now. And won't have space to move away. Any troops that are inside will be instantly destroyed because they won't be able to deploy more then 1" away from an opponent and within 3" of the vehicle.
This is going to make 90 plague zombies deadly to something like a rhino with troops in it.
Very fluffy actually. Trapped inside your APC, unable to jump out into the horde of zombies as far as the eye can see, firing desperately your bolt pistol out the window as you wait for them to tear it apart and eat your brain.
This isn't too different than how it works now, but at least in 7th edition you can Tank Shock your way out. In 8th it seems as though the transport will just have to sit there in the zombie tar pit - not fluffy and not good in my opinion. This may have been a terrible oversight.
Leggy wrote: I find it interesting that the Annihilation barge has gone from AV 11 to T6, especially as the Marine Dreadnought went from AV12 to T7. Is this a direct conversion rate of AV-5=T, or is there a cutoff point at T6 (to stop las guns wounding light vehicles on 5+?)
Which is such a simple conversion if that is indeed what GW is using as it mathematically incorrect. The numbering systems (AV and Toughness) aren't even the same and it blows my mind that GW or anyone else would think you can do a direct additional or subtraction.
It should have been converted based on previous minimum strength required to glance + 2 (As that equates needing a 6 to wound). IE a Rhino with AV11 would be T7 as you needed S5 to wound (+2). Wildly converting from a system that uses 10-14 to one that uses 1-10 is... what we all expected
Requizen wrote: Finally, won't have to look up Tank Shock and read for 10 minutes every time someone gets the bright idea to use their Rhino for more than moving models. Less fluffy? Maybe a bit. Way easier to use? Frakkin right.
Loss of Tank Shock means losing Death or Glory which is nice as it was basically useless.
Well technically DoG is still there in a way:
Rhino charges
Your dudes overwatch
Rhino strikes first all be it on a 6 etc etc
I guess this also means if you engage any vehicle in combat they are going to have to withdraw in their phase and therefore cannot shoot (unless the have a spec rule)! - thats pretty huge for close combat units! Just chucking chaff units like cultists at a predator is gonna put its shooting out of action for a turn.
I wonder if vehicles also take battle shock tests? they have a LD and they said all the rules apply... could hurt tanks a fair bit of you do multiple wounds with something like a lascannon
Morale is taken against models removed, not wounds. Single models are always immune, and tank squadrons will be affected only if the enemy can apply a huge penalty to discipline. Go Harlequins!!
Requizen wrote: Finally, won't have to look up Tank Shock and read for 10 minutes every time someone gets the bright idea to use their Rhino for more than moving models. Less fluffy? Maybe a bit. Way easier to use? Frakkin right.
Loss of Tank Shock means losing Death or Glory which is nice as it was basically useless.
Well technically DoG is still there in a way:
Rhino charges
Your dudes overwatch
Rhino strikes first all be it on a 6 etc etc
I guess this also means if you engage any vehicle in combat they are going to have to withdraw in their phase and therefore cannot shoot (unless the have a spec rule)! - thats pretty huge for close combat units! Just chucking chaff units like cultists at a predator is gonna put its shooting out of action for a turn.
I wonder if vehicles also take battle shock tests? they have a LD and they said all the rules apply... could hurt tanks a fair bit of you do multiple wounds with something like a lascannon
Individual models are immune to Battle Shock.
I see squadrons having some kind of mitigation like high morale.
Eyjio wrote: Basically nothing new. Pretty dull update to be honest.
On a different note, what the **** are those annihilation barge stats? How has (effectively) a 13/13/11 Annihilation Barge now become easier to kill than a 12/12/10 dreadnought?! So, 12/12/10 walker with autocannons and decent assault is now T7 W8 3+, but a 13/13/11 skimmer with slightly better autocannons but awful assault is now T6 W8 4+? Quantum shielding's replacement had better be pretty amazing, or the whole feeling of "very tough shooting platform which doesn't like heavy weapons" is now just going to be "fast flimsy floating shooting platform which dies to a stiff breeze". I didn't want my annihilation barge to be a ravager, I wanted it to be an annihilation barge. I think I'd have rather them not show us these stats if quantum shielding DOES give a large buff, because now I'm just going to be wondering if they understood the appeal of Necrons at all.
We all know that the appeal of Necrons is to be unkilliable. But as just as Tau gunlines are unfun, unkilliable necrons are too. Not that they shouldn't be durable, of course they should be. Personally I recommend to wait and see, just see the Rubric rule of +1 of armour save against 1 damage weapons.
this kinda works both ways too now i guess vehicles have high toughness and wounds and are faster. Load up on cheap orky buggies and plough them into assault with dedicated assault units like devastators to tie them up XD
Eyjio wrote: Basically nothing new. Pretty dull update to be honest.
On a different note, what the **** are those annihilation barge stats? How has (effectively) a 13/13/11 Annihilation Barge now become easier to kill than a 12/12/10 dreadnought?! So, 12/12/10 walker with autocannons and decent assault is now T7 W8 3+, but a 13/13/11 skimmer with slightly better autocannons but awful assault is now T6 W8 4+? Quantum shielding's replacement had better be pretty amazing, or the whole feeling of "very tough shooting platform which doesn't like heavy weapons" is now just going to be "fast flimsy floating shooting platform which dies to a stiff breeze". I didn't want my annihilation barge to be a ravenger, I wanted it to be an annihilation barge. I think I'd have rather them not show us these stats if quantum shielding DOES give a large buff, because now I'm just going to be wondering if they understood the appeal of Necrons at all.
That profile sounds fine for an 11/11/11 open topped vehicle, the same i would expect for land speeders.
LS are 10 all around, so I'd guess they'll be T5
I don't think each AV value gets a separate T. Dread with AV2 is T7, Russ wth AV14 is T8, leaving no room vor AV13. I guess the AV10 vehicles are T6, AV13 T7 or 8 and all around 14 like Monolith and Land Raider might be T9
Spoletta wrote: The Vehicles being able to charge are really a HUGE boost to assault armies.
Charge first with vehicle and then with infantry, if the vehicle makes it, then the infantry doesn't have to suffer the overwatch. Between this and the assault from deepstrike i'm afraid that this edition will be really assault centered.
A few days ago people were saying it was going to be shoot centric again. Between this and that, I'd say it looks pretty balanced.
I just hope Nids get the fearsome factor back if transports will be this powerful.
Don't fret, I'm sure in a couple of days we'll be right back to complaining about shooting again! The circle of life...
If charging out of rhinos is possible you can bring your little rhino pet into the melee to help you punch stuff. I see no rule saying you cant ride it into battle as well, so why not have rhino saddles?
No seriously how is this immersive at all? It's just dumb.. And if you get stuck in combat with a rhino and have to leave fight and cant shoot? Cmon...
Leggy wrote:I find it interesting that the Annihilation barge has gone from AV 11 to T6, especially as the Marine Dreadnaught went from AV12 to T7. Is this a direct conversion rate of AV-5=T, or is there a cutoff point at T6 (to stop las guns wounding light vehicles on 5+?)
That's my bet. Same with AP1=-4, AP2=-3, etc. Makes the most sense to be honest.
Spoletta wrote:That profile sounds fine for an 11/11/11 open topped vehicle, the same i would expect for land speeders.
Possible, but it's still really bad. Also, 12" movement feels really silly for something which is just a huge gun.
xerxeshavelock wrote:Simplest guess for Quantum Shielding is an invulnerable save. Possibly just against shooting, but maybe against anything.
God, I hope not, that would make it even MORE like a DE vehicle. It would also make them almost hilariously easy to kill - if it's a 4++, that means it would die in 34 bolter shots. That's... not a lot of shots, especially when it's currently completely immune to S6 or less.
I get that the Annihilation Barge is fragile without quantum shields in the current edition, but they also can't lose it to anything less than T8, and AV13 is much more durable than, say, it getting +2T. The 4+ save means it won't get a save from any guns which are currently AP2 - plasma guns in particular go from being one of the worst units you can fire at it to one of the best. At the end of the day, I understand that it's likely all been balanced out, but the entire reason I love Necrons is that they're like little ticks on the battlefield - not hugely devastating in terms of damage output, but hard to shift. The Annihilation Barge now looks like a paper airplane, or any other generic fast shooting platform that you expect to see in Eldar/DE armies. Heck, that was one of the reasons I found the match up against Eldar/DE so interesting - the armies play very differently, one being fast striking and mobile, the other being tough and hard hitting. If that's gone, I'll be very sad.
Leggy wrote: I find it interesting that the Annihilation barge has gone from AV 11 to T6, especially as the Marine Dreadnought went from AV12 to T7. Is this a direct conversion rate of AV-5=T, or is there a cutoff point at T6 (to stop las guns wounding light vehicles on 5+?)
Which is such a simple conversion if that is indeed what GW is using as it mathematically incorrect. The numbering systems (AV and Toughness) aren't even the same and it blows my mind that GW or anyone else would think you can do a direct additional or subtraction.
It should have been converted based on previous minimum strength required to glance + 2 (As that equates needing a 6 to wound). IE a Rhino with AV11 would be T7 as you needed S5 to wound (+2). Wildly converting from a system that uses 10-14 to one that uses 1-10 is... what we all expected
They have added armour saves and lots of wound though. I imagine they made toughness lower than a direct equivalent to account for this.
(Btw the Formula works for the Gorkanaut's change from AV13 to T8 too)
See you're assuming the worst of your opponent. Maybe he just like several chapters and doesn't want to build multiple copies of the same army to play different rules.
Maybe so! Like I said before, its not like I would refuse to play someone who did this but it would detract from my fun.
40k is essentially a collaborative story telling experience for me, so having a Chapter which fundamentally changes in character all the time would detract from the storyline that we are trying to build together.
I am deffo against faction hopping when it is done for the purpose of wringing an advantage out of the rules system with a complete disregard for the story.
However, if my opponent had gone to the trouble of writing a decent bit of background i would be much happier. Say a Chapter who doesn't know its Primarch and reveres them all equally.
Therefore, they are trained in all of the battle doctrines of all the famous chapters and apply them as they feel fit as the situation desmands.
Trouble with that is the weaknesses of a faction/character are usually the coolest bits about them and these guys sounds like the 'Bestmarines' who are always best at everything haha!
So with the info released about movement, and with all the info about how much shooting has been buffed, any unit in the game can now disengage while the rest of the army can now shred the enemy CC unit to diced confetti.
Most of the FB comments just waste space. People should really learn to stay relevant to the topic on hand.
Q: hey what about my stuff?
A: all will be answered in time.
Q:hey but what about MY stuff?
A: all will be answered in time.
Requizen wrote: Finally, won't have to look up Tank Shock and read for 10 minutes every time someone gets the bright idea to use their Rhino for more than moving models. Less fluffy? Maybe a bit. Way easier to use? Frakkin right.
Loss of Tank Shock means losing Death or Glory which is nice as it was basically useless.
Well technically DoG is still there in a way:
Rhino charges
Your dudes overwatch
Rhino strikes first all be it on a 6 etc etc
I guess this also means if you engage any vehicle in combat they are going to have to withdraw in their phase and therefore cannot shoot (unless the have a spec rule)! - thats pretty huge for close combat units! Just chucking chaff units like cultists at a predator is gonna put its shooting out of action for a turn.
I wonder if vehicles also take battle shock tests? they have a LD and they said all the rules apply... could hurt tanks a fair bit of you do multiple wounds with something like a lascannon
Morale does not affect units consisting of only one model. I believe they covered this in the Morale article. The unit has to suffer a casualty not just take wounds for Morale to trigger.
Deadshot wrote:
oni wrote: SOoo... I can assault and then punch with my Rhino? This feels wrong.
I wonder if the Rhino would have to Fall Back from combat or if it can still simply drive away?
What's concerning from the article is vehicles will have the -1 To Hit modifier for Heavy weapons if they move. This could mean that all of our vehicles will need higher rolls across the board To Hit then previously. This makes them a lot less effective. I don't like this thought one bit.
But, on the other hand, all heavy weapons just need a -1 modifier. Previously your Predator was move 6", firing 1 weapon at 3+, the rest at 6+ to hit. Now it moves fully (maybe 6 or more) and fires everything, just needing 4+, and can fire at different targets
A fair point. I like the current system where I can at least get one weapon off at full BS moving 6". However, giving more thought to this new way, I do like the simplicity.
Yonasu wrote: If charging out of rhinos is possible you can bring your little rhino pet into the melee to help you punch stuff. I see no rule saying you cant ride it into battle as well, so why not have rhino saddles?
No seriously how is this immersive at all? It's just dumb.. And if you get stuck in combat with a rhino and have to leave fight and cant shoot? Cmon...
Yes, because the fact that tank shock makes more sense is stupid. The fact that your tank can run people over while they try to stick grenades toit is stupid. Because running people over as a moving wall of metal to support the squishier elements who need to get into combat is stupid. Because adding new tactical options that make assaulting stronger is stupid. Because making wargear like the Rockgrinder and Deff Rolla is stupid.
Because making the game more balanced, more tactically interesting and making transports more important than just a temporary bunker is totally stupid, right?
Just because you have some kind of weird dislike for the game making things work in a way that makes the game better doesn't make it bad. A rhino leading a charge for a squad of Marines is no different than a Carnifex leading one for Hormagaunts. It's sound tactics to use somethhing durable to take punishment and lock up an enemy umit so a squishier unit can get locked in.
Zewrath wrote: So with the info released about movement, and with all the info about how much shooting has been buffed, any unit in the game can now disengage while the rest of the army can now shred the enemy CC unit to diced confetti.
RIP CC armies.
Aaand we have gone full circle, didn't even need one page!
Zewrath wrote: So with the info released about movement, and with all the info about how much shooting has been buffed, any unit in the game can now disengage while the rest of the army can now shred the enemy CC unit to diced confetti.
RIP CC armies.
Diengaging keeps e unit that backed up from shooting unless they have a special rule that let's them (like Fly or Walking Battleship).
