So in the absence of more rumors, I thought it might be a worthy discussion to wishlist... I mean, speculate, on various armies line troops in 8th edition using the updated Necromunda.. I mean, Shadow War Armageddon, rules and the other leaks we've seen trickling in.

I'll take, for example, a Blood Angels Tactical Marine squad as mine.

Points (guesswork here):
~70 points for 5x models, 1x Sergeant & 4x marines.
Up to 5 more marine models can be added to the squad at 14 points per model.

Stats for Sergeant & Marine models:
M:4"
WS:4
BS:4
S:4
T:4
W:1
I:4
A:1
Ld:8

Wargear:
A Blood Angels Space Marine has a Bolt Gun, Bolt Pistol, Frag & Krak Grenades, and Power Armor.

Blood Angels Space Marines Special Rules:
And They Shall Know No Fear: (However GW makes it work in the new rules/edition.)
Red Thirst: When charging into melee combat, add +1 to the S characteristic of all Blood Angels models in the unit.

Wargear listing options, special or heavy weapon list for one model unless the squad is 10 models strong then one may have a special and one may have a heavy, etc.

The rest of the entry would be for the Sergeant/Veteran Sergeant with +1 attack and leadership value stats listed. Then, whatever other options/wargear lists, hand to hand, pistol, and ranged weapons are available to the character as options.

That's my thought process on at least one entry. I suspect most loyalist marine troops squad entries will look mostly similar with chapter tactics adding the odd special rule to the squad depending on the chapter in question.

More to come later. Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Nah, we will reverse to the days of fourth where marines cost 16ppm and had to buy frag and krak grenades for 1 - 2 ppm.

Charging out of any vehicle!
Troops + fast dedicated are suddenly brilliant.

Crazyterran wrote:Nah, we will reverse to the days of fourth where marines cost 16ppm and had to buy frag and krak grenades for 1 - 2 ppm.

Anything is possible, they took the standard Krak Grenades away from guard Veteran Squads in the last Guard codex so I guess we shall see.

Dakka Wolf wrote:Charging out of any vehicle!
Troops + fast dedicated are suddenly brilliant.

I suspect that Assault//open topped vehicles will allow for charges without penalty and normal non assault vehicle models will allow for charges but models charging the same turn they disembark will get no charging bonus attack or have some kind of penalty on them.

Just my speculation on that.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Well, I've had this idea in my head for a while (ever since I re-watched star wars episode 1, drunk. Again.) And thought about how the droid army marched into battle, and that's how I imagined Necrons marching to war.

So, for 8th edition I wouldn't mind seeing this:

Necron Warrior Squad - 150pts
10 warriors armed with Gauss flayers. Up to 10 extra warriors can be added to the squad for 15pts each.

M - 3"
WS - 4
BS - 4
S - 4
T - 4
I - 2
W - 1
Ld - 10

Special Rules:

Reanimation Protocols - unchanged from 7th edition.

Immortal Slaves - Necron warriors have no other will than that what their lord commands, let alone emotion. Warriors are immune to all forms of negative leadership modifiers, but are NOT fearless and make leadership tests where and when required.

Inorganic - No longer are Necrons creatures of flesh and blood, but of metal and circuitry. The special rules of Fleshbane and Shred ignored. Additionally, the special rules for Poisoned are ignored entirely.

I don't Necrons should ignore poison, take astartes hellfire rounds for example, they're described as being a very strong acid and I believe are specifically mentioned as being effective against Necrons.

But is anyone else concerned that having movements of less than 6'' is going to slow down gameplay more and make foot slogging even more pointless?
Especially if jump infantry is only x2 movement or something, 8'' move assault marines is awful.

I think assaulting from non-assault vehicles being disorganised would be good though, it would mitigate the 'Rhino rush' of the past and yet give assault armies without assault vehicles a chance.
What a Blood Angel wouldn't do for a Landspeeder Storm atm lol.

A lot of BA players see their army as an assault one, but this codex is not designed for assault

 Red__Thirst wrote:

Crazyterran wrote:Nah, we will reverse to the days of fourth where marines cost 16ppm and had to buy frag and krak grenades for 1 - 2 ppm.

Anything is possible, they took the standard Krak Grenades away from guard Veteran Squads in the last Guard codex so I guess we shall see.

Dakka Wolf wrote:Charging out of any vehicle!
Troops + fast dedicated are suddenly brilliant.

I suspect that Assault//open topped vehicles will allow for charges without penalty and normal non assault vehicle models will allow for charges but models charging the same turn they disembark will get no charging bonus attack or have some kind of penalty on them.

Just my speculation on that.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

You might be right but a disordered charge out of a Rhino is still a big step up from disembark, shoot - hope the unit doesn't get blown away, move, shoot/run then attack.

The Deer Hunter wrote:
A lot of BA players see their army as an assault one, but this codex is not designed for assault

We are an assault army.
Because if we're not assaulting, we're Marines-1.
Maybe not as assault focused as 'Nids or Orks but we're an assault army none the less.

 Freddy Kruger wrote:


Inorganic - No longer are Necrons creatures of flesh and blood, but of metal and circuitry. The special rules of Fleshbane and Shred ignored. Additionally, the special rules for Poisoned are ignored entirely.

And in the process making it completely impossible for Dark Eldar to be played against Necrons, so hell no.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
A lot of BA players see their army as an assault one, but this codex is not designed for assault

We are an assault army.
Because if we're not assaulting, we're Marines-1.
Maybe not as assault focused as 'Nids or Orks but we're an assault army none the less.

Nids or Orks? Blood Angels aren't as assault focused as most Space Marines, they've been truly left behind. Troop choice Scouts and Tacticals with access to Jump Packs would probably be a good start, a unique Open Topped Rhino that can carry Jump Marines would be a close second.

I dig the idea of something like the TMNT party wagon launcher from the 90s cartoon.
Youtube the opening theme to see it.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
A lot of BA players see their army as an assault one, but this codex is not designed for assault

We are an assault army.
Because if we're not assaulting, we're Marines-1.
Maybe not as assault focused as 'Nids or Orks but we're an assault army none the less.

Nids or Orks? Blood Angels aren't as assault focused as most Space Marines, they've been truly left behind. Troop choice Scouts and Tacticals with access to Jump Packs would probably be a good start, a unique Open Topped Rhino that can carry Jump Marines would be a close second.

I dig the idea of something like the TMNT party wagon launcher from the 90s cartoon.
Youtube the opening theme to see it.

Just because we're a bad assault army doesn't mean we're not an assault army ;P
If Landraiders ceased to suck, our troops getting them as dedicated transports again would be cool as beans. Maybe getting an assault-flyer, like a mini Cassius Assault Ram (or whatever it's called).
Make this a reality.

Tyranid Malefactors make a come back

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
A lot of BA players see their army as an assault one, but this codex is not designed for assault

We are an assault army.
Because if we're not assaulting, we're Marines-1.
Maybe not as assault focused as 'Nids or Orks but we're an assault army none the less.

Nids or Orks? Blood Angels aren't as assault focused as most Space Marines, they've been truly left behind. Troop choice Scouts and Tacticals with access to Jump Packs would probably be a good start, a unique Open Topped Rhino that can carry Jump Marines would be a close second.

I dig the idea of something like the TMNT party wagon launcher from the 90s cartoon.
Youtube the opening theme to see it.

Just because we're a bad assault army doesn't mean we're not an assault army ;P
If Landraiders ceased to suck, our troops getting them as dedicated transports again would be cool as beans. Maybe getting an assault-flyer, like a mini Cassius Assault Ram (or whatever it's called).
Make this a reality.

Yeah...it kind of does, like a flyer thar can't get airborne.

Anyway, I think Land Raiders have had their day - especially if the rumours about assaulting out of any vehicles in 8th ed proves true, even if it's effectively a disordered charge.
Still, I'd like to see them on the field outside the Ironwolves formation.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
A lot of BA players see their army as an assault one, but this codex is not designed for assault

We are an assault army.
Because if we're not assaulting, we're Marines-1.
Maybe not as assault focused as 'Nids or Orks but we're an assault army none the less.

An assault army without any rules to assault !!

Something special for Assault Squads, or Vanguard, maybe Tactical marines with chainsword and boltpistol. Nothing.

Furious charge and Red Thirst are not enough, BA decurion is ludicrous, every other army get a bonus, BA to get a bonus must have a drawback too. Wanna assault after deep striking? Disordered charge. Take your decurion to get your special rule, Zealot? Well, only after half your unit dies.

There's no hope...

Tyranids are a assult army without assault rules.. It is really sad

 Freddy Kruger wrote:
Well, I've had this idea in my head for a while (ever since I re-watched star wars episode 1, drunk. Again.) And thought about how the droid army marched into battle, and that's how I imagined Necrons marching to war.

So, for 8th edition I wouldn't mind seeing this:

Necron Warrior Squad - 150pts
10 warriors armed with Gauss flayers. Up to 10 extra warriors can be added to the squad for 15pts each.

M - 3"
WS - 4
BS - 4
S - 4
T - 4
I - 2
W - 1
Ld - 10

Special Rules:

Reanimation Protocols - unchanged from 7th edition.

Immortal Slaves - Necron warriors have no other will than that what their lord commands, let alone emotion. Warriors are immune to all forms of negative leadership modifiers, but are NOT fearless and make leadership tests where and when required.

Inorganic - No longer are Necrons creatures of flesh and blood, but of metal and circuitry. The special rules of Fleshbane and Shred ignored. Additionally, the special rules for Poisoned are ignored entirely.

so basically I want a power boost for my unit / Army.

Necrons are not (currently) Robots - they are people who were made into mechanical creatures that resemble robots.

If you want pure killing machines that march forward relentlessly add in:

Implacable: Each turn, each Necron unit must move its full movement towards the nearest enemy unit. You also want to put in something about them being particuarily effected by EMP type effects

I'm hoping Marines go back up to 300 points a squad. where they should be.

 warhead01 wrote:
I'm hoping Marines go back up to 300 points a squad. where they should be.

So you just don't want to see marines at all do you.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:
I'm hoping Marines go back up to 300 points a squad. where they should be.

So you just don't want to see marines at all do you.

It's not really that. I mostly want to see the points per model go away for block points per 5 or per 10. I'm a little tired of the way it is now.
I played with 300 point Tack squads, it was rough. And not the best use of points but things were different then.
I'd be ok with 100 points for 5 Marines.
But anything is possible in new edition.

 warhead01 wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:
I'm hoping Marines go back up to 300 points a squad. where they should be.

So you just don't want to see marines at all do you.

It's not really that. I mostly want to see the points per model go away for block points per 5 or per 10. I'm a little tired of the way it is now.
I played with 300 point Tack squads, it was rough. And not the best use of points but things were different then.
I'd be ok with 100 points for 5 Marines.
But anything is possible in new edition.

Standard marines have no business being 20ppm. Thats GK Stike Squad prices, and a Tac Marine has neither the wargear, nor special rules to warrant such a cost.

Standard marines have no business being 20ppm. Thats GK Interceptor prices, and a Tac Marine has neither the wargear, nor special rules to warrent such a cost.

I don't agree, those other unit prices should probably go up as well.

They should also be given stat boosts. It doesn't make sense that an Imperial Guard veteran can shoot as well as a marine.

 warhead01 wrote:

Standard marines have no business being 20ppm. Thats GK Interceptor prices, and a Tac Marine has neither the wargear, nor special rules to warrent such a cost.

I don't agree, those other unit prices should probably go up as well.

So ZeboLizard was right - you just don't want to see Marines at all. If we were paying tbose prices for Tac Marines, or i was paying 30ppm for a Strike Squad, I would simply shelf my GK, and marine players would shelve their armies. I already never see a standard Tac squad anymore, most marine players I know take Scout Squads to fill their troop slots. There would be even less reason to field them, and if Tac Marines are 20ppm, what would Vanguard Vets be..? 35? 40? Terminators at 50ppm? Bikes too?

Anything is possible when staring down the barrel of a new edition, but I'd bet my extensive army collections that we're not going to see price increases anywhere near that extreme. GW may have started turning things around in the last year or so, but they still want our money. And raising Marines to 20ppm (and by proxy, all other options in their 'dex) is a sure way to get people to -not- buy them.

 warhead01 wrote:

Standard marines have no business being 20ppm. Thats GK Interceptor prices, and a Tac Marine has neither the wargear, nor special rules to warrent such a cost.

I don't agree, those other unit prices should probably go up as well.

dude the standard tactical marine is at best an average unit. Marines over all are a powerful army but that's mostly due to formations and pyskers.

The Deer Hunter wrote:


Furious charge and Red Thirst are not enough, BA decurion is ludicrous, every other army get a bonus, BA to get a bonus must have a drawback too. Wanna assault after deep striking? Disordered charge. Take your decurion to get your special rule, Zealot? Well, only after half your unit dies.

Dark eldar don't even have a decurion.... orks' one? Only one real bonus, fearless. Unfortunately you have to include over 500 points of taxes between the warband and the council. SW one? There are a couple of nice combos, like the blackmanes or the ironwolves, but only a few people use the decurion, as other options are more efficient.

 NivlacSupreme wrote:
They should also be given stat boosts. It doesn't make sense that an Imperial Guard veteran can shoot as well as a marine.

This.

No normal man should be able in something as a space marine is. It's the fluff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blackie wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:


Furious charge and Red Thirst are not enough, BA decurion is ludicrous, every other army get a bonus, BA to get a bonus must have a drawback too. Wanna assault after deep striking? Disordered charge. Take your decurion to get your special rule, Zealot? Well, only after half your unit dies.

Dark eldar don't even have a decurion.... orks' one? Only one real bonus, fearless. Unfortunately you have to include over 500 points of taxes between the warband and the council. SW one? There are a couple of nice combos, like the blackmanes or the ironwolves, but only a few people use the decurion, as other options are more efficient.

Since other decurion are worst, thats not a reason cause BA one should be a mess. SW decurion is good, if its not played cause there are better options, none the less it is good. I'd change it with the BA one

If they do end up making vehicles play the same as monstrous creatures I could see them giving certain units some sort of "machine" special rule that makes them immune to poison but vulnerable to haywire. I could see Necrons getting that rule.

Something would have to be done about DE weapons, though, or they would have a really tough time against Necrons.


They do want to sell models, but my understanding is that they reduced the size of armies when going from WHFB to AoS partly because it cost so much to start playing WHFB. I could see them giving raising the points of Space Marines but also giving them buffs to make up for it. Like, maybe they get two wounds and a 2+ armor save?

The Deer Hunter wrote:

 NivlacSupreme wrote:
They should also be given stat boosts. It doesn't make sense that an Imperial Guard veteran can shoot as well as a marine.

This.

No normal man should be able in something as a space marine is. It's the fluff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blackie wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:


Furious charge and Red Thirst are not enough, BA decurion is ludicrous, every other army get a bonus, BA to get a bonus must have a drawback too. Wanna assault after deep striking? Disordered charge. Take your decurion to get your special rule, Zealot? Well, only after half your unit dies.

Dark eldar don't even have a decurion.... orks' one? Only one real bonus, fearless. Unfortunately you have to include over 500 points of taxes between the warband and the council. SW one? There are a couple of nice combos, like the blackmanes or the ironwolves, but only a few people use the decurion, as other options are more efficient.

Since other decurion are worst, thats not a reason cause BA one should be a mess. SW decurion is good, if its not played cause there are better options, none the less it is good. I'd change it with the BA one

The thing is we'd have to move to a much broader system so that you could represent super good humans without infringing on marines.

 Blackie wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:


Furious charge and Red Thirst are not enough, BA decurion is ludicrous, every other army get a bonus, BA to get a bonus must have a drawback too. Wanna assault after deep striking? Disordered charge. Take your decurion to get your special rule, Zealot? Well, only after half your unit dies.

Dark eldar don't even have a decurion.... orks' one? Only one real bonus, fearless. Unfortunately you have to include over 500 points of taxes between the warband and the council. SW one? There are a couple of nice combos, like the blackmanes or the ironwolves, but only a few people use the decurion, as other options are more efficient.

Those few players are probably the Space Wolf players who want to prove that their army is better than just components in a Deathstar.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warhead01 wrote:

Standard marines have no business being 20ppm. Thats GK Interceptor prices, and a Tac Marine has neither the wargear, nor special rules to warrent such a cost.

I don't agree, those other unit prices should probably go up as well.

I actually agree with Warhead.
From what the guys at my club told me Apocalypse games in 4th edition used to be the same amount of models as current 1850 games.
In order to make sales armies have been points discounted to the point where cheap units like those in Astra Militarum and Ork armies often have have the same cost as much stronger units, if GW actually does do something about it they'll add extra models to the cheap units.
In a lot of ways a complete reset in unit points prices and stats would be a better thing but that would still be a points price rise.
Shifting to a D10 or D20 system would be the best step in my opinion.

I want troops to actually be a serious threat in the game. Standard rifles should be feared by other infantry if flanked, and or out in the open.

I also hope that infantry receive some kind of cover bonuses against vehicles. The reason I say this is because infantry typically are the first targeted not because they are the highest threat, but because they are the easiest to kill (and people just simply like killing things).

I also hope that infantry are not made slower as foot sloggers are slow enough as it is.

Yeah, I really hope the average move is 6" in 8th edition. I'd be okay with slow troops (Plaguebearers, for instance) being less, but by and large? 6" or better.

 Sledgehammer wrote:
I want troops to actually be a serious threat in the game. Standard rifles should be feared by other infantry if flanked, and or out in the open.

I also hope that infantry receive some kind of cover bonuses against vehicles. The reason I say this is because infantry typically are the first targeted not because they are the highest threat, but because they are the easiest to kill (and people just simply like killing things).

I also hope that infantry are not made slower as foot sloggers are slow enough as it is.

Not always.
I run Space Wolves, rarely do I run Deathstars as such, I run Wulfen boosted TWC and they usually die to troops. Got to the point I started adding Flamer Dreads in Drop Pods just to clear the rotten things, works alright for Scattbikes and Vehicles as well.

In keeping with the spirit of the OP, I'll add my contribution to how troops might look in 8th Edition:

Guardian Defenders: 100 points

M: 6"

W: 1

Sv: 5+

Bv: 7

Ranged Weapons: Range/Attacks/To Hit/To Wound/Rend/Damage
Shuriken Catapault 12" 2 4+ 4+ -1 1

Weapons Platform 36" 2 4+ 3+ -2 D3

Description:
A unit of Guardian Defenders consists of ten models. It may include the following options:
Weapons Platform- 20 points
Up to 10 additional Guardian Defenders- 10 points each

Abilities:
Ancient Doom: All Eldar have an ingrained fear and hatred of Slaanesh and the followers of She Who Thirsts. Models from this unit make Battleshock tests at -1 Bravery if there is a unit with the Slaanesh Keyword within 6" of this unit, but also re-roll To Hit in the Combat Phase against models with the Slaanesh Keyword.

Battle Focus: This unit may Run before or after resolving its attacks in the Shooting Phase. You must completely resolve the shooting attacks and/or Run moves of a unit with Battle Focus before moving onto another unit in the Shooting Phase.

Weapons Platform: A Weapons Platform model is part of unit of Guardian Defenders for the purpose of Bravery Tests and casualties. A model from this unit of Guardian Defenders within 2" of the Weapons Platform may forgo its normal shooting attack to allow the Weapons Platform to make an attack. The Weapons Platform does not make any attacks in the Combat Phase. The Weapons Platform may be modeled with one of the following listed options; otherwise the Weapons Platform is modeled with a Shuriken Cannon

Scatter Laser: When an enemy model suffers damage from this weapon, the Weapons Platform may make an additional attack at the same enemy unit.

Starcannon: Treat this weapon as having an additional -1 for its Rend profile.

Eldar Missile Launcher: Add 1 to the damage dealt by this weapon to a unit consisting of 5 or more models.

Bright Lance: This weapon deals Mortal Wounds to enemy models. Roll a D6 to determine the number of wounds against an enemy vehicle model.

Bladestorm: Shuriken weapons are capable of penetrating even the heaviest of armour plate with their monomolecular blades. When resolving wounds from Shuriken Catapaults or a Shuriken Cannon, any roll of 6 To Wound adds an additional -2 to its Rend profile for that wound.

Keywords: Eldar, Craftworlds, Guardian Defenders

I expect to continue to not be given all the available weapon options for my Termagants. GW, I know it is too much, but give us spike rifles. And stranglewebs. That have better rules. And the right to buy actual ripper swarm broods through your site, but not 14 dollars for 1 single 13ppm base.

One of the issues I'm considering now is that while I'd like Tac squads, and all marine squads points to go up it's dependent on the rule set for 8th edition.
Space Marines have Tac squads and Scout squads as troop choices. The question I have is how many troop choices will be mandatory? In 2nd it was simply a matter 25% points spent on squads which governed every kind of squad, as far as I can remember. So you didn't have to take Tac's or Scouts if you didn't want to. I'm wondering about the army structure in 8th and if it's like AoS. That comes out to 3 Battle line minimum. (or is it 2? have to look.)
There's a few options for pricing units they could move to. Set a cost for the first number in the unit then a changed cost for the next amount and so on. 5+100 next 5+70 next 5 and ?
I'm an Ork player. Previously 1 Marine was roughly worth 3 Orks. Costs have come down with the power of special rules and the current standard equipment. A Marine having to Buy a Frag and a Krak at an additional 3 or so points, and the now standard issue of bolt pistol as well. (I can't be sure about that anymore.It may have been standard for longer.)
I just want them to find a good and balanced points cost for , drum roll please.... every unit in the game.
I have extremely low expectations.
We'll see. I'm hoping that ork bob sizes go up. I'd like to be able to field a mob of 40 or 50 boys.and a few smaller mobs in trukks. I'm a huge fan of troop choices more than the other slots. I love my green tides, I have easily 3 of them or more.
So being able to put a durable chunk of boys down with out all the trappings of over 100 models sounds good to me. And leave points for everything else.
Stats? doesn't really matter as long as I can keep them from running off or killing each other.

The thing is, Troops were never meant to be "good", at least not compared to Elites, Fast Attack and Heavy Support. Troops are suppose to represent your most common troopers and were suppose to be a points sink. This is most evident with Space Marines as Veterans, Assault Marines and Devastators are all point for point much better than the standard Tactical Squad.

This is actually a balancing factor. One that was completely destroyed in 7th edition with formations and special detachments (arguably it was destroyed way back in 4th-5th edition with the few armies that could manipulate the FoC with very little drawbacks, like Orks and Dark Angels). They would not seem as bad if people were restricted from taking other options, rather than run "all (x)" armies left and right.

I am hoping to see... This would help troops more then anything.

Required Formation:
1-2 HQ choices
2-6 Troops choices
0-6 Fast attack (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-6 Elites (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-6 Heavy Support (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-2 Lords of War (No more then 1 per HQ choice)
0-2 Fortifications (No more then 1 per HQ choice)

Youn wrote:
I am hoping to see... This would help troops more then anything.

Required Formation:
1-2 HQ choices
2-6 Troops choices
0-6 Fast attack (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-6 Elites (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-6 Heavy Support (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-2 Lords of War (No more then 1 per HQ choice)
0-2 Fortifications (No more then 1 per HQ choice)

I like that I'd give it a go.

If we are talking about wishlisting; Id really love it open topped went back to str 3 when it explodes

Youn wrote:
I am hoping to see... This would help troops more then anything.

Required Formation:
1-2 HQ choices
2-6 Troops choices
0-6 Fast attack (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-6 Elites (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-6 Heavy Support (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-2 Lords of War (No more then 1 per HQ choice)
0-2 Fortifications (No more then 1 per HQ choice)

The only way this works is if troops are equally useful or at least well balanced for their points. Some armies really get a lot of mileage out of their troops, or simply have super cheap troops available to pay this "troop tax", while others have expensive or marginally useful troops. Take current elder as an example, they can pay their "troop tax" with scat bikes vs say Grey Knights needing to pay it with expensive Strike Squads, or Terminators. The "HQ tax" here is similar, some armies have good and cheap HQ choices and others do not. If you wanted a more balanced approach you would need to make it 1 choice for x points of Troops.

Just for example Orks could fill 2 HQ and 6 troops for 280 points, Grey Knight need to spend 330 just to get 1 HQ and 2 Troops

Eldar can get 2 HQ and 6 Scat bike squads for 556 points.

So for this to work we would need to assume that the GK stuff is way better than what is available to other armies point for point.

This also assumes that all books have equally good things in all slots. It benefits armies that have at least 1 good choice in all FOC slots, because you need to pay less tax to get good units.

I would like to see allies become more restricted with no battle brothers at all except for a very few exceptions like Inq with most non marine imperial factions. Only one "allied" detachment per army composition, most being allies of convenience. Each alien faction should have one allie or subfaction that they are battle brothers with ie.

Each army should have it's own flavor special strengths and be able to stand on it's own with allies adding spice not making them viable.


Oh and formations should be only for your main army/detachment not for allies. No more multiple formations in an army except for the army specific Decurion and those should be dialed back a little for most.

 Vryce wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:
I'm hoping Marines go back up to 300 points a squad. where they should be.

So you just don't want to see marines at all do you.

It's not really that. I mostly want to see the points per model go away for block points per 5 or per 10. I'm a little tired of the way it is now.
I played with 300 point Tack squads, it was rough. And not the best use of points but things were different then.
I'd be ok with 100 points for 5 Marines.
But anything is possible in new edition.

Standard marines have no business being 20ppm. Thats GK Stike Squad prices, and a Tac Marine has neither the wargear, nor special rules to warrant such a cost.

And no one in their right mind uses PAGK.

TAC squads are not the reason any form of space marines are competitive. You need very specific formations to make them anything but useless.

I hope 8th just gives Sgt. and their equivalents 2 wounds, like how Skittari do. I would be more willing to invest into upgrades for them at that point and would lead to better challenge dynamics.

Youn wrote:
I am hoping to see... This would help troops more then anything.

Required Formation:
1-2 HQ choices
2-6 Troops choices
0-6 Fast attack (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-6 Elites (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-6 Heavy Support (No more then 1 per troop choice)
0-2 Lords of War (No more then 1 per HQ choice)
0-2 Fortifications (No more then 1 per HQ choice)

You know some armies get what equates to Fast Attack and Heavy Support in the Troops choices right?

That's another thing, I hope they reshuffle the choices that were never meant to be in troop choices back to their appropriate place.

Like Eldar Jetbikes. The only reason they became troops was to keep Saim Hann Craft World Armies legal during the transition from 3rd edition to 4th edition (where Saim Hann use to have fast attack as compulsories instead of troops until the 4th ed codex) and every subsequent codex writer forgot this little fact.

Also I kinda wish they would ditch the old FoC with a min/max slot system in favour of something akin to Old Fantasy or AoS, where you get a minimum number of "Core/Troop" choices and a max amount of everything else per 1000 points.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
A lot of BA players see their army as an assault one, but this codex is not designed for assault

We are an assault army.
Because if we're not assaulting, we're Marines-1.
Maybe not as assault focused as 'Nids or Orks but we're an assault army none the less.

I don't think so. BA are neither a shooting list nor an assault list. Because they really can't do either well.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
The thing is, Troops were never meant to be "good", at least not compared to Elites, Fast Attack and Heavy Support. Troops are suppose to represent your most common troopers and were suppose to be a points sink. This is most evident with Space Marines as Veterans, Assault Marines and Devastators are all point for point much better than the standard Tactical Squad.

I don't know, I'd like to see Troops being "good" as in good for the points. It's pretty lame when iconic units suck and are only taken because they have to be. I think it would be nice if elites, fast attack, and heavy support could be really good situationally and when played well but not worth their points in certain scenarios or when played poorly. I'm sure that's easier said than done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Also I kinda wish they would ditch the old FoC with a min/max slot system in favour of something akin to Old Fantasy or AoS, where you get a minimum number of "Core/Troop" choices and a max amount of everything else per 1000 points.

I like that way of doing things. I'm not sure what the point is in differentiating between Heavy Support, Elites and Fast Attack when it comes to restricting things.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
The thing is, Troops were never meant to be "good", at least not compared to Elites, Fast Attack and Heavy Support. Troops are suppose to represent your most common troopers and were suppose to be a points sink. This is most evident with Space Marines as Veterans, Assault Marines and Devastators are all point for point much better than the standard Tactical Squad.

I don't know, I'd like to see Troops being "good" as in good for the points. It's pretty lame when iconic units suck and are only taken because they have to be. I think it would be nice if elites, fast attack, and heavy support could be really good situationally and when played well but not worth their points in certain scenarios or when played poorly. I'm sure that's easier said than done.

I think this should be how it shakes out:

HQs
Come in three types. Hero types, who are great at what they do, Tactical types, who give short range buffs, and Strategic types, who give much larger range buffs.

Troops
Your basic, go-to unit. Can be made good for most situations, but will usually be outshone by something else that's dedicated to that role.

Elites
Like Troops, but a lot more specialized. For instance, one elite might be great at tank hunting, another might be great at clearing out hordes.

Fast Attack
Very fast. Highly mobile, and good for pushing flanks and ambushing people, but not so hot in direct, mano-a-mano combat (so, your average FA squad should lose to equal points of Troops-but, their mobility should let them gang up on the Troops).

Heavy Support
Very killy, very tough, or both, but slow, and vulnerable to certain tactics.

Lords of War
Possibly mimic HQs, but bigger.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
The thing is, Troops were never meant to be "good", at least not compared to Elites, Fast Attack and Heavy Support. Troops are suppose to represent your most common troopers and were suppose to be a points sink. This is most evident with Space Marines as Veterans, Assault Marines and Devastators are all point for point much better than the standard Tactical Squad.

I don't know, I'd like to see Troops being "good" as in good for the points. It's pretty lame when iconic units suck and are only taken because they have to be. I think it would be nice if elites, fast attack, and heavy support could be really good situationally and when played well but not worth their points in certain scenarios or when played poorly. I'm sure that's easier said than done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Also I kinda wish they would ditch the old FoC with a min/max slot system in favour of something akin to Old Fantasy or AoS, where you get a minimum number of "Core/Troop" choices and a max amount of everything else per 1000 points.

I like that way of doing things. I'm not sure what the point is in differentiating between Heavy Support, Elites and Fast Attack when it comes to restricting things.

The original design philosophy from Warhammer Fantasy (which predated 40k and was the basis of it) was that Core Choices (i.e: their troops) would be the most numerous in most armies but also not very effective. They were not suppose to excel at any one thing but not terrible at it either. Special and Rare Choices (the equivallent of Elites, HS and FA all together) were more specialized, with Special choices having some unique abilities but still generally all around good, while Rare choices were devastatingly powerful in one aspect but could be easily defeated with a proper counter. Most armies also went another step with the 1+ restriction, where you had to field at least one unit of generic usefulness before you even got to any of the good stuff (this was often because the "elite" of the army was already in the Core Section, such as Ironguts, Stormvermin and Temple Guard). Heavy Support, FA and Elites were based on that idea, but compartmentalized instead into "Powerful Weapons but slower than the rest", "Quicker but more fragile" and "better than the rest but more expensive" rather than "slightly different but still generic" and "crippling overspecialization".

I think 5th edition did it the best where Troops were just suppose to be survivable units sitting on objectives, as that's basically their role. if you make them fast, killy, or too good for their points (i.e: all three happened to the Scatbike) then they not only invalidate other troop choices, but also the rest of the army.

That seems like a reasonable way of doing things. I think I just misunderstood you because the word "good" can have more than one meaning.

Slightly tonight down MCs would make troops way more viable.

Mobility is a huge problem for a lot of units, too. A 6" move really doesn't do enough, JSJ and Jetbike = laughing at 6" move.

I'm in the school of thought that the mobility issue isn't due to these units being slow, but due to movement modifiers and transports being far too ubiquitous. Previously when Rhinos were 50 points a piece, Bikes being over 30 points a pop (and in Fast Attack almost exclusively), Jump Units being fairly rare and expensive (Raptors use to be almost 30 points a pop as well!) and Beasts and cavalry only having 12" charge instead of 12" move, 6" of movement is fairly reasonable. Plus back then Deepstrike and Infiltrate were only usable in certain missions (and thus a lot of people only saw it as a bonus, never a strategy to build a whole army around) and Scout was exceedingly rare.

Now everyone and their grannies can move 12" through buffs or wargear and deepstrike/infiltrate/scout is not only everywhere but also manditory for all missions, so the base movement has become obsolete. This is another issue of the designers of the current rules system forgetting the design principles. I hope that 8th edition will scale back such movement speeds to be the exception rather than the norm.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I'm in the school of thought that the mobility issue isn't due to these units being slow, but due to movement modifiers and transports being far too ubiquitous. Previously when Rhinos were 50 points a piece, Bikes being over 30 points a pop (and in Fast Attack almost exclusively), Jump Units being fairly rare and expensive (Raptors use to be almost 30 points a pop as well!) and Beasts and cavalry only having 12" charge instead of 12" move, 6" of movement is fairly reasonable. Plus back then Deepstrike and Infiltrate were only usable in certain missions (and thus a lot of people only saw it as a bonus, never a strategy to build a whole army around) and Scout was exceedingly rare.

Now everyone and their grannies can move 12" through buffs or wargear and deepstrike/infiltrate/scout is not only everywhere but also manditory for all missions, so the base movement has become obsolete. This is another issue of the designers of the current rules system forgetting the design principles. I hope that 8th edition will scale back such movement speeds to be the exception rather than the norm.

That was kinda my point. A 12" move isn't the end of the world. It's when you've got units that can move like 18-24" and still fire a ton of weapons.

Rhinos, and any transport that exists solely to move units, are not a part of the problem, at least to me.

I expect to see granular point costs go away and burn in a fire like they did in AOS. So you can't buy model by model anymore.

 auticus wrote:
I expect to see granular point costs go away and burn in a fire like they did in AOS. So you can't buy model by model anymore.

I can see how that simplifies the list-building part of the game, but it can also be kind of frustrating, especially when it comes to high-cost units.

 auticus wrote:
I expect to see granular point costs go away and burn in a fire like they did in AOS. So you can't buy model by model anymore.

40K flips back and forth between Marines coming in anywhere from 5 to 10 or coming in precisely 5 or 10.

I made all my squads 10-strong back when that was mandatory, so changing back wouldn't affect me much.

if they make it 5, 10 or bust, then my chaos armies will have a conniption.

I'm still habitually building my armies based on the god's favoured numbers. Nurgle will be displeased if I no longer have 7 units of 7 plague marines.

They could always make the god specific chaos marines only come in the god numbers.

As for always 5 or 10, unless points work out evenly I'm not a big fan because it removes a way to pick up a few points here or there. It makes playing a variety of point levels more difficult.

Breng77 wrote:

As for always 5 or 10, unless points work out evenly I'm not a big fan because it removes a way to pick up a few points here or there. It makes playing a variety of point levels more difficult.

That's exactly why I hope they go that way. I'm starting to think not letting players completely control their points spending will lead to a form of balance.
(Although I fully expect players to learn to game that as well. It's what they do.)

It's a double-edged sword. To have a better control over balance you need less variables. But less variables means less customization for the player. Even in the age of Formations and detachments, players still find ways to make their own forces somewhat unique to their own since we still have a slew of artefacts, items and unit options. If they take away such options and have set model counts, they can accurately gauge just how powerful a certain set of units would be rather than leave it up to the players to find some unholy combination, but it also means that anyone wishing to use that bundle will inevitably be using something not that dissimilar from another person using the same bundle.

I'm not saying either one is bad, but it all depends on which direction the devs and audience wants it to go.

Devil's advocate but at competitive level games, most of the lists seem to resemble each other very closely anyway.

If this is a thing I would expect a lot of people to be up in arms about it, just like they were when the GHB came out for AOS. I know when I wrote Azyr Comp for AOS, one of the biggest constant complaints I got was that you couldn't buy individual models.

Its smoothed over since then, but I still see that complaint fairly regular.

Simplifying it is good for the competitive scene, where less variables is always preferred since it puts more focus on player skill. Chess is the logical conclusion to such a balance system, where both players end up with the exact same force where you have at least one unit for every task, and it's completely up to you to figure out how to get one over your opponent.

However it does no favours to the casual crowd, where customization is far more common and encouraged. There will also be less instances of "Fringe" armies coming in to sweep tournaments since most variables could be accounted for.

Again, neither is bad. It'll just depend on which direction they want to go towards.

I think the "Base" movement will be 5" rather than 4" like 2nd edition was.
Most of the armies in AOS have their (standard) guys moving 1" faster than they did in WHFB

I'm not totally against buying units in blocks, I just hope it's implemented well and doesn't frequently stick people in the position of being a few points short of buying another block of the unit their army is themed around.

Kind of like how I think having weapon and wargear profiles included on a unit's warscroll could work out well, but I hope GW doesn't extremely simplify the wargear choices of units.

I'm cautiously optimistic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So IIRC in WHFB units moved double distance when they ran instead of rolling, while in AoS units they add +1d6" of movement. Did they move double in 2nd Edition 40k or +1d6"?

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:
So IIRC in WHFB units moved double distance when they ran instead of rolling, while in AoS units they add +1d6" of movement. Did they move double in 2nd Edition 40k or +1d6"?

Double move. Same for a charge.. Except for Khorne Berserkers. They charger further..Like 10 to 12" I can't recall.

I would like to see troops have more supportive roles. The elites and heavy supports and fast attacks can bring out the big guns, but be unable to move and shot in one turn or move slow or have limited ammunition.
The troops could have abilities like "hold perimeter" which allows them to shoot once an enemy unit takes an action inside a certain area.
Or "pinning fire" which forces an enemy unit to move away from them or take additional hits.
Or "draw fire" forcing enemies to attack the troops rather than the elites.
Or "marker lights" to improve their elites' attacks.

This could buy the hard hitters time to move into position or set up their guns to take out bigger targets like tanks or MCs.

In the end every unit would be useful. Sure you can run all Devestators, but without Tacs drawing fire maybe they'll be pinned all game by Guardsmen while two tanks just run them over.

I do hope to see at least a little longer than 4" movement for standard infantry, personally (5" move being the 'standard'. and 6" move being the 'quicker' races such as Eldar, Dark Eldar, and the faster Tyranid bioforms).

Running move being double that in inches, but if you run you forgo effective shooting (maybe allow what we know as Snap Firing in the current edition so you can at least 'spray and pray' on the way in) and then in order to assault you declare a charge while moving/running and you end your movement in base-to-base contact with an enemy model.

Perhaps, if you declare you are going to charge in while moving+running, you add an additional D6" of movement to your models as they charge, so you can go for a long charge in hopes you roll high to add to the move+run distance. Maybe make this a benefit of more melee oriented units? Not sure.

Jump Infantry can work in that they always move as though they are running but may still fire weapons as though they are moving normally, ignore terrain penalties (whatever they may be) unless they end their movement in terrain, at which point they take a dangerous terrain test, etc. They could also add a D6" to their charge distance if declared, and may re-roll the D6 if they wish (Jump Packs).

Alternatively they may be given an 8" move and a 5" run + D6" charge. I personally would like to see this as it would make your jump infantry fast and able to react more effectively.

Bikes similarly would work at moving and running without the loss of firepower per-se but they would not ignore terrain (save for jetbikes of course) and would take dangerous terrain tests as needed. Of course setting their base move at 8" to coincide with jump pack movement, etc.

I always felt like Jump Packs and Bikes worked too similarly considering the drastic difference in method of movement. Granted, on a tabletop they can only be differentiated so much, but I still feel like Bikes are essentially Jump Packs +1 for the most part. I'd like to see both as equally viable options instead of one being so obviously superior to the other.

Bikes currently give you +1 Toughness, improved movement by double, Relentless, turbo boosting for even more movement, Jink cover save (4+) and always on hammer of wrath. Plus, in most instances, they also have a twinlinked version of the basic infantry weapon of the model that is riding it.

Jet packs/Jump Infantry give you improved movement by double, deep strike, the ability to ignore terrain while moving, and re-roll charge distances + conditional hammer of wrath if you don't use the jump pack for movement in the movement phase. (If you're not Raven Guard, anyway)

It's obvious which is the have and which is the have-not. I don't mind that one has abilities that the other doesn't have or move movement, but at present there's little reason to run a jump pack heavy force (Which I love to do, being a Blood Angels player) when you can put equal points in bikes on the table.

Just my thoughts on that. Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

So, if we think of stormcast as sigmarines as people like to kid around with calling them.

Judicators (guys with armor and bows) move 5"
Liberators (guys with hammer and shield) move 5"
Procecutors (guys with wings and javelins) move 12"

Handgunners (Humans) for free people move 5"

White Lions (High elf infantry) move 6"
Orruks (orcs) move 5"

So, I would guess assuming they like playing on the same size tables we will see:

Marines and Imperial guard move 5"
Eldar move 6" except howling banshees which move 7"
Tyranid termigaunts and genestealers will move 6"
Large creatures will move 5"

Jump packed troops will move 10-12"
Vehicles will move 10-12"
Dreadnoughts/Wraithlords will move 5-6"

This would be my guess. Because they are made by same company and meant to be played on same gaming surface.


What made movement annoying on 2nd edition is most tournament games were 4 turns long. And one of the victory conditions was get squad into enemy deployment zone.

So, if you didn't run at least one turn. It was impossible to win with just troops. And if you played squats with their 3" move, 6" on run. It was always impossible to win by that victory condition.

I expect movement profiles to be largely standardized, truth be told. I don't foresee infantry as we currently know it being able to move much beyond 12" at maximum. Maybe slightly more with a random charge distance mechanic, though I don't personally like that myself.

I don't mind some random movement, such as consolidation moves, but I am not a fan of completely randomized charge distances.

Partially random I can deal with, such as 6+D6" charge. If you're 4" to 5" from a target, you should be able to just charge in without having to roll for distance. You've already weathered at least one to two turns of shooting to get into position to charge (worst case scenario) and then are likely going to take overwatch (in whatever form it takes) too on top of that.

Rolling the unlucky 2, 3 or 4 on the 2D6" charge roll, especially for units that don't get any rerolls from fleet or other rules (Jump Pack units with Raven Guard Chapter Tactics for example), is pretty much the death knell of whatever squad was about to try and get stuck in as they're about to take even more fire from the enemy and IF.they survive they get to try again and the (possibly) take overwatch fire again.

Make long charges a thing with some randomization (Try for that 8" to 10" charge and hope for the best.) but if you get within 6" to 7" you should be able to get in without issue (overwatch deaths and whatever terrain mechanics/penalties not-withstanding).

Just my opinion on that, Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Edit: I will clarify the above is for standard infantry and things that move like standard infanry. Not Jump Infantry/Calvary/bikes, etc.

I was reading my old Warzone books and was reminded very much of the transition between 2nd and 3rd edition 40k, but in Warzone the change was kind of reversed.

Going between 2nd and 3rd Games Workshop tried to simplify rules, to make it faster to play with larger armies.

Target Games tried to encourage people to play with larger armies, but at the same time they made the rules more intensive.

Intensive rules work with small skirmish games. I really enjoy Malifaux, but Wyrd's system would grind to a halt if you were trying to handle much more than twenty models (combined) on the table at one time.

Warzone's sweet spot, in my view, was both sides fielding a couple of squads, with about six to eight models in each squad, with a couple of individuals on top of that.

In 2nd Warzone required you to field a squad of basic troops for each elite squad you fielded, and a squad for every individual model. If you wanted to field a squad of Golden Lions and a squad of Blood Berets you had to take two squads of Trenchers, instantly doubling the number of models required to get to the table, and as said, the rules became more intensive.

The larger the game scale the more abstract the rules have to become if you want to complete a game in any reasonable amount of time. Warmaster, like Epic, gave a great deal of abstraction in order to ensure reasonable speed of play.

I hope GW either moves to a small intensive style of play, or a large abstract style of play, but with their past performance in mind I'm not holding my breath.

War of the Ring provided a larger, more abstract, version of Lord of the Rings, but allowed players to use the same models across the systems. Of course, because it was a good system, GW discontinued it.

A major change to balance I'd like to see is basic troops be disproportionately cheap to the point where they're the stars of every codex. Imagine 8 point tactical marines and CSM's? Cheap troops would be the building blocks of every competitive list

Superheavies, gargantuans and pseudo versions of either (Magnus etc.) would be increased in points to the point they become pretty inefficient to take. That way they'd still exist for people wanting to play with the big toys, but they wouldn't dominate games and would have little competitive use

The rest can stay priced more or less as they are. Adjustments for balance of course, but they'd deliberately not be balanced against troops.

That way games of 40k would actually see full sized infantry units like ork boyz and guardians interacting with each other, or large guard platoons fighting chaos marines, tactical squads fighting waves of hormagaunts etc.

 Snake Tortoise wrote:
A major change to balance I'd like to see is basic troops be disproportionately cheap to the point where they're the stars of every codex. Imagine 8 point tactical marines and CSM's? Cheap troops would be the building blocks of every competitive list

Superheavies, gargantuans and pseudo versions of either (Magnus etc.) would be increased in points to the point they become pretty inefficient to take. That way they'd still exist for people wanting to play with the big toys, but they wouldn't dominate games and would have little competitive use

The rest can stay priced more or less as they are. Adjustments for balance of course, but they'd deliberately not be balanced against troops.

That way games of 40k would actually see full sized infantry units like ork boyz and guardians interacting with each other, or large guard platoons fighting chaos marines, tactical squads fighting waves of hormagaunts etc.

I don't see how that would be an improvement at all.
You wouldn't balance the game at all and you'd massively increase the scale of the game to the point when even a small ~500pt game could have 3 or 4 basic squads easily.

 warhead01 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

As for always 5 or 10, unless points work out evenly I'm not a big fan because it removes a way to pick up a few points here or there. It makes playing a variety of point levels more difficult.

That's exactly why I hope they go that way. I'm starting to think not letting players completely control their points spending will lead to a form of balance.
(Although I fully expect players to learn to game that as well. It's what they do.)

In 2nd edition, a Space Marine squad was 300 points for 10 Marines; no more, no less. Towards the end, they introduced a rule that you could field a single under-strength squad to fill up odd points. IIRC only Marines were allowed this; Guard were sufficiently cheap that it didn't matter so much, and most other armies were more flexible anyway.

Just rules wise, I'd like to see dark Eldar warriors get an option to get an armor save better than 5+, or an option to get better shooting weapons

Madoch1, I doubt that the basic troops choice will have a way to improve their armor save, sadly.

But, lots of other armies have 5+ save on their basic troops option(s), as well as poor to mediocre 'standard' shooting weapon options (especially Guard). Eldar, Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar, Orks (which are even worse, with a 6+ save), all have a 5+ save on their line troopers.

I doubt we'll see much change in the saves department, though I do expect if they bring back armor modifiers as a Rend system similar to what is done in AoS, that certain armor values will be less effective than they once were, and others that were less effective will normalize some.

An example being that you will likely get to roll more saves more often, versus just picking up models being shot at out in the open, but those saves may be only on 6+.

While it may not be worth much, getting to roll a 6+ save where before you got no save under the Armor Penetration (AP) system is at least a small improvement. I'd rather take the shot at 6+ (or even the normal 5+) save than not get to roll a save at all, personally speaking.

We'll see. I'm cautiously optimistic here regarding 8th and what we'll see develop.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

I personally do not wish to see Dark Eldar getting easier access to 4+ or better saves. Their entire gimmick is to be fast alpha strikers and currently it translates well into the game. Giving them heavy armor just makes them into Scions.

Make a distinction from Leadership Tests and Moral Tests and Fear tests....too many players get them and the exceptions all mixed up.

Make Moral tests based on double your toughness or something like that

something to clean up the psychology mess that has been around since rogue trader

 Red__Thirst wrote:
Madoch1, I doubt that the basic troops choice will have a way to improve their armor save, sadly.

But, lots of other armies have 5+ save on their basic troops option(s), as well as poor to mediocre 'standard' shooting weapon options (especially Guard). Eldar, Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar, Orks (which are even worse, with a 6+ save), all have a 5+ save on their line troopers. Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

IIRC Orks and Guard can both upgrade their troops to have 4+ armour,

Eldar just cheese it (no surprise) and jump from 5+ to 3+ for absolutely no reason. on their bikes

Dark Eldar +5+ armour I am fine with for the most part, Incubi can have 3+ of course and I do think that Archons should have a general 3+ option.

I think the current Shadowfield is a good enough substitute for 3+ armor. What the Archon really needs is a Reaver Jetbike option (which it had two editions ago).

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I think the current Shadowfield is a good enough substitute for 3+ armor. What the Archon really needs is a Reaver Jetbike option (which it had two editions ago).

But every Dark Eldar player knows that the shadowfield is cursed to roll a 1 on the first strength 6 hit allocated to the Archon....

Jbz` wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I think the current Shadowfield is a good enough substitute for 3+ armor. What the Archon really needs is a Reaver Jetbike option (which it had two editions ago).

But every Dark Eldar player knows that the shadowfield is cursed to roll a 1 on the first strength 6 hit allocated to the Archon....

Last big game we had with multiple Archons vs Imperials - we assumed the other Archons were jamming the Shadowfield when it failed.

Personally I think all HQs should have access to a 2+ save.

I would like wounds and wounds to be distinguished.
As in the things that you cause after a successful to-wound roll. And the things that you take after failing a save.

Probably most of the arguments over how a rule works is is the wound applied before or after the save? Both are called wounds.
Call them wounds (before saves) and injuries (after saves) for example, and rename the wound characteristic to hp or something.

Most HQs are already kitted out for close combat and generally all go for the same set of special rules when selecting their melee weapons, so making all of their armors the same would essentially make them all pretty much identical. I think they should instead give HQ choices more funky abilities outside of being melee blenders. Tau and IG HQ choices are more fun to me for this reason alone.

 Mr Morden wrote:


IIRC Orks and Guard can both upgrade their troops to have 4+ armour,

Eldar just cheese it (no surprise) and jump from 5+ to 3+ for absolutely no reason. on their bikes

Dark Eldar +5+ armour I am fine with for the most part, Incubi can have 3+ of course and I do think that Archons should have a general 3+ option.

Guard veterans can upgrade the armor to a 4+ but their regular troops infantry squads cannot upgrade armor.

Orks can upgrade I will agree. But it makes them a lot more expensive. Still most folks don't run all boyz with 4+ armor save that I've seen (some do, I'm certain, but I've never seen it.).

I do think Eldar should have at best been given a 4+ armor save on their jetbikes. They already get +1 toughness for being on the bike, plus the ability to have a jink save. But, I digress.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Why do so many people want to see slower troop movement?
That just skews things back in favour of mobile shooting armies like Tau and Eldar.

Short distance movement kind of works in AoS but most armies have to take some truly specialised units in order to fire over twelve inches.
Almost every troops choice in 40k fires twelve inches.

is AOS played on 6x4?

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Why do so many people want to see slower troop movement?
That just skews things back in favour of mobile shooting armies like Tau and Eldar.

Almost every troops choice in 40k fires twelve inches.

That is why they need to come up with a comprehensive ORDER of BATTLE. clearly define movement vs other actions. You can keep movement at 4" - 6" as it worked in 2n ed

I did like psychic powers as an alt shooting and not its own phase like 2nd /7th ed.

Phase 1....move or hide/go to cover/ground ...overwatch OR RALLY (which should always be first!!!)
Phase 2....run(just another move) or shoot
Phase 3....Charge into OR fight HtH combat

so you can move all 3 phases or move 2 and fight in cc or any combination that they think would work for the new stats. Just keep it tidy in an Order of Battle that you can use to be more mobile at the expense of fighting or shooting.

 admironheart wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Why do so many people want to see slower troop movement?
That just skews things back in favour of mobile shooting armies like Tau and Eldar.

Almost every troops choice in 40k fires twelve inches.

That is why they need to come up with a comprehensive ORDER of BATTLE. clearly define movement vs other actions. You can keep movement at 4" - 6" as it worked in 2n ed

I did like psychic powers as an alt shooting and not its own phase like 2nd /7th ed.

Phase 1....move or hide/go to cover/ground ...overwatch OR RALLY (which should always be first!!!)
Phase 2....run(just another move) or shoot
Phase 3....Charge into OR fight HtH combat

so you can move all 3 phases or move 2 and fight in cc or any combination that they think would work for the new stats. Just keep it tidy in an Order of Battle that you can use to be more mobile at the expense of fighting or shooting.

2nd edition shooting was a very different animal.
Unless a special rule permitted it models had a 90° shooting arc, to hit rolls were modified by cover rather than being used in the same phase as armour and invulnrable saves.
You had to shoot at the closest enemy unit regardless of its threat level.
Measuring range didn't happen until after your target had been chosen and if you'd chosen poorly tough luck.
Guns jammed.
Overwatch meant choosing to not shoot in your shooting phase in order to shoot during your opponent's turn.
Guard shooting was only a fraction better than Tyranid shooting, Tau didn't exist.

In spite of all that, shooting was still king.

I do agree with the concept of if you want to overwatch you don't get to shoot in the preceding turn's shooting phase. (But obviously Overwatch would allow to-hit at normal or only slightly reduced Ballistic Skill.)

I feel that should have been brought back in with Overwatch instead of how it currently allows for additional shooting to occur. Assault armies have to rely on gimmicks to really be effective or have a snowball's chance in hell of making it into assault versus Tau or Eldar with the jump-shoot-jump movement type.

I'm cautiously optimistic about the new edition. I hope to see some good streamlining come about and make a well balanced army a good option to take instead of relying on superfriends, or formation gimmicks, or whatever else to carry the day and make the list 'good'.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

I was having fun trying to streamline Warzone into a simple "attacker rolls dice and adds stat, defender rolls dice and adds stat" system, but had a thought about doing it to 40k too.

If you run the numbers a Space Marine with a bolter shooting another Space Marine with a bolter has a 1/9 chance of getting a kill. That's 4 /36 or approximately what you'd get if the Marine had an attack stat of 4+d6 and a defence stat of 6+D6, yet by the stat+D6 method you've reduced the hit/wound/save rolls down to a simple roll off.

Of course you gain greater granularity with a larger dice, like a D12 (Warzone was based on D20) which gives 144 possible outcomes instead of 36, but a D6 system is adequate.

In terms of troops in new40k, I think a good window into the current vision for transports by the design team is found in the Arkanaut Frigate for AoS:

PDF link:
https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/arkanaut-frigate_ENG.pdf



The "hero phase" happens before movement. So if that's any indication, I don't think we will see rhinos moving forward and marines assaulting the same turn. It'll be rhinos rush forward, opponent's turn, marines get out, move, shoot and charge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for the "if marines are more points no one will take them!" thinking, that assumes the game largely doesn't change. That the current relative strengths are going to be maintained. That the basic stats of the game won't change.

If marines go up to 30 points but are as awesome as 32 point Stormcast Judicators in AoS, people are going to love them.

It also is a question of quest restrictions are put on the rest of the army. For example:

If we make a general assumption that the CAD still will exist in it's basic form. Then 1 HQ plus 2 Troop are required. You cannot get away with skipping buying your troops.

Well, given that they said they are going with the 3 ways to play from the AoS general's handbook, I'm going to guess that army construction will have faction specific battleline units you have to take minimums of. So codex marines might have tactical squads, scout squads and so on. While a dark angels deathwing might count terminators as battleline. Or possibly have a formation you pay some points for and it includes counting a normally elite unit as battleline among other bonuses you get.

I don't think we'll see mandatory HQ choices at all.

At 2000 points, I think we'll see 3 battleline units minimum, a maximum of 6 heroes, 4 artillery pieces and 4 "behemoths" which will be things like truly large tanks and knights and the like. I think the AoS army construction system for matched play will work really well for 40k and given what GW has said about the success of General's Handbook sales, they're probably leaning in that direction for new40k.

The open and narrative modes will still allow for new players who grab a box of whatever they think is cool to immediately play with those units without worrying about the larger army structure right away. Sort of like unbound but without the attempt to force it into the same game mode as matched play.

I suspect we will see troops taking on an expanded role, thanks in part to a hopeful boost in effectiveness and of course more of them being needed as part of a 'normal' list.

I like this concept myself, as I've always preferred fielding more troops than anything else, to include full 10 man tactical squads.

We shall see. There's some kind of announcement coming tomorrow. Maybe it'll be info on 8th? Or more likely the Mortarion reveal. We shall see.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

 Red__Thirst wrote:
I suspect we will see troops taking on an expanded role, thanks in part to a hopeful boost in effectiveness and of course more of them being needed as part of a 'normal' list.

I like this concept myself, as I've always preferred fielding more troops than anything else, to include full 10 man tactical squads.

We shall see. There's some kind of announcement coming tomorrow. Maybe it'll be info on 8th? Or more likely the Mortarion reveal. We shall see.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

I like the idea of more emphasis on troops but nice as that sounds there is the question of Troops with extra movement - bikes/jetbikes.
Are all armies to have access to them or is every army going to have their own specialty troop?
Or is there going to be a massive gap between haves and have-nots?

I wouldn't be surprised if they ditched the concept of troops - or, perhaps more accurately - expanded it to the point where it covers the majority of infantry squads (and possibly things like bikers).

There would then be a separate category for your vehicles and monstrous creatures.