https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/25/warhammer-40000-unit-profiles/

Not as extremely changed as I expected to be honest

Interesting that Dreads now have a LD stat. Will all vehicles?
Or just walker types? Hmmm.

They did say that the idea of vehicles and MC/infantry having radically different profiles was pretty much gone, so I'd expect so, but I do kinda wish they'd shown a tank in there.

 Ratius wrote:
Interesting that Dreads now have a LD stat. Will all vehicles?
Or just walker types? Hmmm.

They stated that every single model will have the same stat line.

 Ratius wrote:
Interesting that Dreads now have a LD stat. Will all vehicles?
Or just walker types? Hmmm.

It'd be a bit weird to only give it to some vehicles and not others.
Maybe Dark Eldar will be able to scare the crew to death with their soul fright weapons.....

 Ratius wrote:
Interesting that Dreads now have a LD stat. Will all vehicles?
Or just walker types? Hmmm.

I don't see why not. Vehicles have crew. Crew have morale.

Interesting. The Leadership on a standard Space Marine is now 7. On a Terminator, it's 8. That represents a bit of a drop. Wonder if that will be across the board?

What about Eldar walkers, they dont really have pilots (hence likely dont feel fear), nor do the DE talos thingys.
What about monoliths, no evidence of them having pilots either.

Just nitpicking

Those were MCs before and already had a Ld value, even if they generally were Fearless. I expect they still will.

Tru dat.

I'm curious as to how multiple rounds of combat work without initiative works. Does the charge just strike first every round? and WS, do marines really hit say, Lelith Hesperax on a 3+?

Possibly good fighters like lilly will have some sort of -1/-2 to hit ability? Like an inbuilt dodge or something?

Probably, but there are inbetween examples, like versus regular wyches, or incubi, etc. I get that the static roll to hit makes it easier, but it seems silly that even when marines go up against more skilled fighters, lore wise, they still hit on a 3+

On the other hand, a generic dodge(X) USR would take care of it fairly well I suppose.

 Wolfblade wrote:
I'm curious as to how multiple rounds of combat work without initiative works. Does the charge just strike first every round? and WS, do marines really hit say, Lelith Hesperax on a 3+?

I bet that's where the situational modifiers they mentioned come in. Lelith, Bloodthirsters, the Avatar of {Khaine,Ynnead}, Dante and other combat badasses probably have some kind of hard-to-hit field.

The static to hit in melee and shooting is interesting, and really the only revelation With just the stat line it's hard to reach many conclusions because we don't know if their special rules, and what equipment/weapons do.

We can guesstimate how many las gun shots it takes to kill a dreadnought,

1/2 (chance to hit) * 1/6 (chance to wound) * 1/3 (chance to fail a save) = 36 shots to a wound which is 288 las gun shots to take down a Dreadnoughts 8 wounds. That's assuming that a six always wounds, and there is not some Necromunda style need higher than a six mechanic.

Robby G is even crazier, 1/2 * 1/6 * 1/6 = 72 shots to a wound, so 648 las gun shots to kill him assuming he doesn't have IWND or FnP.

Things that make me happy

- No AoSigmaification
- Killing off of the I stat, be gone vile eldar we always strike first deathstars that just had to be pushed forward
- 6" move for space marines. -> So this game isn't going to be move 4 slow
- The possibility of hitting things in close combat on a 2+ instead of the no better than a 3+ and no worse than a 4+ ( or 5+ in nearly never occurring extremes)
- Fixing BS so that it becomes less confusing.

Things that make me less happy
- No more AV
- Wound inflation. We all know that this is going to happen.

So Whoo I might just like this edition a lot : D

 oldzoggy wrote:
Things that make me happy

- No AoSigmaification

Every day that goes by, this term becomes more and more vague.

What exactly were you afraid of here?

Well, it's what we've asked for over the years. Let's see if it's what we actually wanted.

SJ

Also, yeah. Termies got their second wound. It just took an edition change!

 Ratius wrote:
What about Eldar walkers, they dont really have pilots (hence likely dont feel fear), nor do the DE talos thingys.
What about monoliths, no evidence of them having pilots either.

Just nitpicking

Eldar Walkers do have pilots. The soulstones within that carry a dead Eldars soul... And the Talos is a monstrosity that's been altered by the Haemonculi.

 Captain Joystick wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:
Things that make me happy

- No AoSigmaification

Every day that goes by, this term becomes more and more vague.

What exactly were you afraid of here?

We don't need.......... the thingies..... something something something..... Heresy! XD

I think it looks pretty good. I like the static BS and WS rolls, assuming that there will be WS modifiers for certain models. It is just so much more simple for pretty much the same results. I also like the wound inflation - though it's pretty easy to change balance in a game by simply giving a unit more or less health, I think it's another good change toward the rules being more straightforward, while hopefully still maintaining depth.

On the page they say they'll show us weapon profiles tomorrow. I'm eagerly awaiting that.

The wheel hasn't exactly been reinvented, more like the tires have just been changed. Would have been cool to see a selection of different standard infantry for various factions. We'd be in a much better position to actually compare things, it'll come, but I'm impatient.

Close Combat is definitely going to be weird, as your WS, even if it didn't affect it that much, still meant your stat had some way of mitigating the opponent. However this simplification is welcomed as trying to remember that funky chart without the "Double plus one" rhyme was a pain (not to mention it being so unique meant that a lot of new players got confused about it).

I'm both happy and kinda sad that they're removing vehicle rules. Happy in that the entire section has become needlessly bloated and redundant. Sad that this effectively changes how we approach vehicles, as a single highpowered shot might not be enough to take out a vehicle anymore and now guns with high volume of fire and armor penetration (i.e: high armor reduction modifiers) will be the premier vehicle buster.

Regardless, I feel like this is a good move, as it consolidates some of the weirder rules we've been seeing (like the whole "Wraithknight VS Imperial Knight" thing)

EDIT: I'm also glad they're removing the cap for Strength and Toughness. The whole "capped at 10" was the reason for the debacle that was S: D. While I kinda wish they would have instead reorganized everything under a standard of 10, this at least future-proofs it in case they want to make something really huge. Hopefully the removal of the cap for Toughness means we'll also see them remove "Superheavies" and "Gargantuan creatures" from the game (although poison will have to be rebalanced into something else).

Without seeing profiles for weapons it's hard to discern if these stats are good or bad.

The leadership change is a huge concern based on how they said it will work.

Can you imagine how low Ork and Guard leadership will be? Hello, my name is sweeping advance. nice to meet you.

Confirmed BS modifiers, welp, I am less and less attracted to this, guess I'll see when the weapon profiles are released.

LD may be the Bravery equivalent for HTH,
roll a d6, add the number of wounds taken,
for every point over the LD an additional figure runs away?

I miss Init for HTH,
I thought they could have fixed it by giving +1 when charging
a further +1 for assault troops,
and extra +s for certain units (bikes, jump packs, etc)
I never have liked the old idea that a guy charging with a dagger hits before the 8 deep pike block behind a wall
(old hangover fears from Fantasy... shudder)

still, gonna be better for my Orkses!!

What with a Dreadnought having 8 wounds, I am curious as to how many wounds would be on a Warlord Titan! It'll take a whole lot of Dakka to bring one of those down!

I guess the move stat i the new initiative. So in the second round in a CC the model with the higher M will attack first. Kinda makes sense. When you move very fast you need fast reflexes. so you a more likely to have fast reflexes.

 Captain Joystick wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:
Things that make me happy

- No AoSigmaification

Every day that goes by, this term becomes more and more vague.

What exactly were you afraid of here?

AoS reskinned and marketed as the new 40k.
There still could be a lot that I do not like that much in the new edition. ( such as the removal of templates, dirt slow orks or less customization options etc. ) But it sure isn't just AoS with a new skin.
This was what a large quantity of the people here where asking for and I am glad that they didn't go that road.

NOLA Chris wrote:
LD may be the Bravery equivalent for HTH,
roll a d6, add the number of wounds taken,
for every point over the LD an additional figure runs away?

I miss Init for HTH,
I thought they could have fixed it by giving +1 when charging
a further +1 for assault troops,
and extra +s for certain units (bikes, jump packs, etc)
I never have liked the old idea that a guy charging with a dagger hits before the 8 deep pike block behind a wall
(old hangover fears from Fantasy... shudder)

still, gonna be better for my Orkses!!

I agree with all of the init comments above. removing it completely is not how i would have gone, but, i'm not authoring the rules.

 Hollow wrote:
The wheel hasn't exactly been reinvented, more like the tires have just been changed. Would have been cool to see a selection of different standard infantry for various factions. We'd be in a much better position to actually compare things, it'll come, but I'm impatient.

well if you compare the 7th edition versions with each other you can roughly guess at what their stats might look like. It's not THAT different from 7th after all

Tactical Marine
7th: WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 A1 Ld8 Sv3+ I4 translated to
8th: WS3+ BS3+ S4 T4 W1 A1 Ld7 Sv3+ M6

So WS/BS is equal to ToHit, STWA+Sv stay the same, Ld is -1 and Move MIGHT be 2+Initiative, but that's a really wild guess.

Your average Bloodletter of Khorne:
7th: WS5 BS5 S4 T3 W1 A1 Ld7 Sv6+ I4
8th: WS2+ BS2+ S4 T3 W1 A1 Ld6 Sv6+ M6 ?

Dire Avenger:
7th: WS4 BS4 S3 T3 W1 A1 Ld9 Sv4+ I5
8th: WS3+ BS3+ S3 T3 W1 A1 Ld8 Sv4+ M7 ?

nekooni wrote:

 Hollow wrote:
The wheel hasn't exactly been reinvented, more like the tires have just been changed. Would have been cool to see a selection of different standard infantry for various factions. We'd be in a much better position to actually compare things, it'll come, but I'm impatient.

well if you compare the 7th edition versions with each other you can roughly guess at what their stats might look like. It's not THAT different from 7th after all

Tactical Marine
7th: WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 A1 Ld8 Sv3+ I4 translated to
8th: WS3+ BS3+ S4 T4 W1 A1 Ld7 Sv3+ M6

So WS/BS is equal to ToHit (vs WS3), STWA+Sv stay the same, Ld is -1 and Move MIGHT be 2+Initiative, but that's a really wild guess.

Your average Bloodletter of Khorne:
7th: WS5 BS5 S4 T3 W1 A1 Ld7 Sv6+ I4
8th: WS2+ BS2+ S4 T3 W1 A1 Ld6 Sv6+ M6 ?

Dire Avenger:
7th: WS4 BS4 S3 T3 W1 A1 Ld9 Sv4+ I5
8th: WS3+ BS3+ S3 T3 W1 A1 Ld8 Sv4+ M7 ?

I agree with most of this. But i can't see a normal Bloodletter hit on 2+. We shall see.

nordsturmking wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Hollow wrote:
The wheel hasn't exactly been reinvented, more like the tires have just been changed. Would have been cool to see a selection of different standard infantry for various factions. We'd be in a much better position to actually compare things, it'll come, but I'm impatient.

well if you compare the 7th edition versions with each other you can roughly guess at what their stats might look like. It's not THAT different from 7th after all

Tactical Marine
7th: WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 A1 Ld8 Sv3+ I4 translated to
8th: WS3+ BS3+ S4 T4 W1 A1 Ld7 Sv3+ M6

So WS/BS is equal to ToHit (vs WS3), STWA+Sv stay the same, Ld is -1 and Move MIGHT be 2+Initiative, but that's a really wild guess.

Your average Bloodletter of Khorne:
7th: WS5 BS5 S4 T3 W1 A1 Ld7 Sv6+ I4
8th: WS2+ BS2+ S4 T3 W1 A1 Ld6 Sv6+ M6 ?

Dire Avenger:
7th: WS4 BS4 S3 T3 W1 A1 Ld9 Sv4+ I5
8th: WS3+ BS3+ S3 T3 W1 A1 Ld8 Sv4+ M7 ?

I agree with most of this. But i can't see a normal Bloodletter hit on 2+. We shall see.

Yeah, it feels odd, but that's the best I can come up with without any other profile. Maybe WS5 translates to 3+ with a special rule to reroll 1s on the "warscroll"

Its no issue to make a Vehicle Fearless.

nordsturmking wrote:
I guess the move stat i the new initiative. So in the second round in a CC the model with the higher M will attack first. Kinda makes sense. When you move very fast you need fast reflexes. so you a more likely to have fast reflexes.

where are you reading this?

 BunkhouseBuster wrote:
What with a Dreadnought having 8 wounds, I am curious as to how many wounds would be on a Warlord Titan! It'll take a whole lot of Dakka to bring one of those down!

It didn't already?

I am very happy with these profiles. Seems easier to understand at a glance (BS and WS are looking to be what you need to roll to hit), Initiative is gone, stuff have more wounds but get hampered, representing tougher to kill models but damage taking its toll.

Yes, very happy.

just need cheaper models

 Bobthehero wrote:
Confirmed BS modifiers, welp, I am less and less attracted to this, guess I'll see when the weapon profiles are released.

Nah, don't worry about this. It will turn out to be fine.

Interesting to see the stat lines -

if Shadow War is any indication of things to come -

Shuriken Pistol - +2 to hit @ 0-6" Str 4 Dmg 1, -1 to save roll
Fusion Pistol - +1 to hit @ 0-4", Str 8 Dmg D6, -5 to save roll

Tau -
Pulse Rifle - Str5 Dmg 1, -2 to saves
Ion Rifle - Str 6, Dmg D3, -3 to saves
Rail Rifle - Str 6, Dmg D6, -5 to saves

The save mods in SW:A seems really way too high.

I mean -2 saves on a basic gun is nuts.

 BunkhouseBuster wrote:
What with a Dreadnought having 8 wounds, I am curious as to how many wounds would be on a Warlord Titan! It'll take a whole lot of Dakka to bring one of those down!

best guess given the 3 hp to 8 wounds a warhound's 9 hp become 24 with whatever the equivalent of 2 void shields will be

 Marmatag wrote:
The save mods in SW:A seems really way too high.

I mean -2 saves on a basic gun is nuts.

I think SW:A is mostly just a port of 2nd Ed era stats, and I would hope not the same thing as 8th ed. Although having the same weapons in each and giving them different stats would leave a higher potential for confusion.

 oldzoggy wrote:

 Captain Joystick wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:
Things that make me happy

- No AoSigmaification

Every day that goes by, this term becomes more and more vague.

What exactly were you afraid of here?

AoS reskinned and marketed as the new 40k.
There still could be a lot that I do not like that much in the new edition. ( such as the removal of templates, dirt slow orks or less customization options etc. ) But it sure isn't just AoS with a new skin.
This was what a large quantity of the people here where asking for and I am glad that they didn't go that road.

As much as I enjoy AoS, I'm glad 40k is still going to feel different. I didn't need two of the same game.

 Jancoran wrote:
Its no issue to make a Vehicle Fearless.

Jup it probably will come with its unit type / keywod

 Marmatag wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:
I guess the move stat i the new initiative. So in the second round in a CC the model with the higher M will attack first. Kinda makes sense. When you move very fast you need fast reflexes. so you a more likely to have fast reflexes.

where are you reading this?

I saw this but i am just guessing:

You’ll see that the stats are still recognisably Warhammer 40,000, but with just a few changes. We’ve gained a Movement stat in exchange for a Initiative stat. With charging units now striking first, movement and co-ordination of your assault army becomes a big factor. You can also see that WS and BS are now standard rolls (Ballistic Skill sort of always was), though you can expect modifiers to both of these stats from in-game effects.

nordsturmking wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:
I guess the move stat i the new initiative. So in the second round in a CC the model with the higher M will attack first. Kinda makes sense. When you move very fast you need fast reflexes. so you a more likely to have fast reflexes.

where are you reading this?

I saw this but i am just guessing:

You’ll see that the stats are still recognisably Warhammer 40,000, but with just a few changes. We’ve gained a Movement stat in exchange for a Initiative stat. With charging units now striking first, movement and co-ordination of your assault army becomes a big factor. You can also see that WS and BS are now standard rolls (Ballistic Skill sort of always was), though you can expect modifiers to both of these stats from in-game effects.

Ok, I see how you're reading it. It's an interesting thought.

But how would Thunder Hammers fall into this? A thunder hammer striking at Initiative 6 on an assault marine would be... fairly strong.

Not to mention, units moving faster already have a huge advantage in general. With the whole -save mod, +2 save won't mean much really.

With only a 5" move, i'm hoping terminators get some boost to overwatch or they're already outclassed in melee.

 Wolfblade wrote:
I'm curious as to how multiple rounds of combat work without initiative works. Does the charge just strike first every round? and WS, do marines really hit say, Lelith Hesperax on a 3+?

As opposed to a 4+?

I'm annoyed they kept Strength and toughness. I was hoping for something like:

To Wound: 4+
Damage: 1

Naaris wrote:
Interesting to see the stat lines -

if Shadow War is any indication of things to come -

Shuriken Pistol - +2 to hit @ 0-6" Str 4 Dmg 1, -1 to save roll
Fusion Pistol - +1 to hit @ 0-4", Str 8 Dmg D6, -5 to save roll

Tau -
Pulse Rifle - Str5 Dmg 1, -2 to saves
Ion Rifle - Str 6, Dmg D3, -3 to saves
Rail Rifle - Str 6, Dmg D6, -5 to saves

Cut the rend in half, saves will probably be 1d6


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tag8833 wrote:
I'm annoyed they kept Strength and toughness. I was hoping for something like:

To Wound: 4+
Damage: 1

So much this. Works almost exactly the same in the end but is just that little bit quicker.

basic marines with only 1 W.... well if just "simple" weapons like bolters will have a rend -1, unless they will have some more special rules they will disappear from the tables like happened in 2nd edition.

I am fine with this, and GW did say things would die.

8 wounds and a save at T7. Wow. Dreadnoughts might actually be useful now/

Pretty sure the Assault phase now works as IGOUGO.

So,
Player 1 charges units A B C D into Units E F G.
Player 1 activates Unit B and resolves all hand to hand and damage on Unit F
Player 2 activates Unit E and resolves all hand to hand and damage on Units A and C
Player 1 activates Unit C and resolves all hand to hand and damage on Unit E
.... rinse repeat til all units have gone.


No need for initiative in that setup. The player that charged chooses which unit goes first. Then you bounce back and forth.

CHARGE!

 Marmatag wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:
I guess the move stat i the new initiative. So in the second round in a CC the model with the higher M will attack first. Kinda makes sense. When you move very fast you need fast reflexes. so you a more likely to have fast reflexes.

where are you reading this?

I assumed Charger goes first every turn and then each side can use Command points to steal first turn etc.

 Jancoran wrote:
CHARGE!

OVERWATCH!

Hahaha, I wonder how this will interact now!

 Marmatag wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:
I guess the move stat i the new initiative. So in the second round in a CC the model with the higher M will attack first. Kinda makes sense. When you move very fast you need fast reflexes. so you a more likely to have fast reflexes.

where are you reading this?

I saw this but i am just guessing:

You’ll see that the stats are still recognisably Warhammer 40,000, but with just a few changes. We’ve gained a Movement stat in exchange for a Initiative stat. With charging units now striking first, movement and co-ordination of your assault army becomes a big factor. You can also see that WS and BS are now standard rolls (Ballistic Skill sort of always was), though you can expect modifiers to both of these stats from in-game effects.

Ok, I see how you're reading it. It's an interesting thought.

But how would Thunder Hammers fall into this? A thunder hammer striking at Initiative 6 on an assault marine would be... fairly strong.

Not to mention, units moving faster already have a huge advantage in general. With the whole -save mod, +2 save won't mean much really.

With only a 5" move, i'm hoping terminators get some boost to overwatch or they're already outclassed in melee.

Thunder hammer could get something like -5 on M when it comes to who strikes first. Or it could be handeled like the CC in AoS or something else. I guess we will see tomorrow.

Take a day to digest all that, and we’ll be back tomorrow with some info on the weapon stat lines you’ll be using in the new edition.

Actually, I wonder if OVERWATCH is a command point action now?

Spend 1 command point to fire overwatch at an opponent's unit who has assaulted you this turn.


Edited: because you probably shouldn't shoot at your opponent... just his units.

One thing I've always disliked immensely in 40K, back as far as 2nd ed. was the 7+ to hit type of rolling, so a 6+, followed by a 4+.

It's a janky mechanic and they should just cut it off above 6+. So when they say "everything can hurt everything", if you have a Strength 2 weapon against a Land Raider who may be, say, Toughness 10. How will this be resolved?

Roll a 6+...followed by a 6+....followed by a 5+, etc? Re-rolling is awful unless it's kept to a real minimum. It's such a weak way out of creating real rules. I see it waaaaay too prevalent in current 40K. It's even worse when it's used en masse in large infantry units.

On the flip side, if you want everything to wound everything, you can't limit the roll to just 6+. Then you have 20-man Imperial Guard squads being "preferred" to kill large targets etc. Curious how they'll address this. How is it handled in AoS with such a huge disparity between two units?

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
CHARGE!

OVERWATCH!

Hahaha, I wonder how this will interact now!

A worthy question. Overwatch seems like a cool rule to me, and I like it in Flames of War. There's just no way in modern warfare that the chargers aren't met with a complete lack of ammunition discipline. Lol.

On the other hand letting the charger go first, PERIOD seems like it really helps counterbalance things because some armies get destroyed by terrain effects and the overwatch is just insult to injury. Space Marines have it made with Grenades but not everyone is as well trained with them. =)

My Dark Eldar are kinda excited about the whole situation,,,

Flyers are an interesting case. I wonder what they will do with them... I mean the balance seems to be okay, Jets havent dominated and are seen but arent auto includes so I've felt the balance was right on them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Youn wrote:
Actually, I wonder if OVERWATCH is a command point action now?

Spend 1 command point to fire overwatch at an opponent's unit who has assaulted you this turn.


Edited: because you probably shouldn't shoot at your opponent... just his units.

Right. that would make sense. So theres going to be some resource management added to the game eh?

 Bobthehero wrote:
I am fine with this, and GW did say things would die.

yes but basic marine will disappear, that can be fine for you but it is not, in 2nd edition only termies was played...

Plenty of people played normal marines here in 2nd. Guess that depends on where you live and play.

 Marmatag wrote:

NOLA Chris wrote:
LD may be the Bravery equivalent for HTH,
roll a d6, add the number of wounds taken,
for every point over the LD an additional figure runs away?

I miss Init for HTH,
I thought they could have fixed it by giving +1 when charging
a further +1 for assault troops,
and extra +s for certain units (bikes, jump packs, etc)
I never have liked the old idea that a guy charging with a dagger hits before the 8 deep pike block behind a wall
(old hangover fears from Fantasy... shudder)

still, gonna be better for my Orkses!!

I agree with all of the init comments above. removing it completely is not how i would have gone, but, i'm not authoring the rules.

+1 Init when charging and another +1 for certain troops is just more special rules for somebody to learn, when GW are said to be looking to simplify.

What we don't yet know is the context this type of stat line has within the core rules of the game, which will be vastly changed. Maybe there will be special rules that allow certain units, armed with special weapons to strike first even when charged, who knows? At this stage, I almost wish they hadnt released the unit profiles without giving them some context and explanation!

ERJAK wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:
I'm curious as to how multiple rounds of combat work without initiative works. Does the charge just strike first every round? and WS, do marines really hit say, Lelith Hesperax on a 3+?

As opposed to a 4+?

5+, lillith is WS9, which is double +1 the marines WS.

In AoS you pretty much expect things to die. So, if a mass of archers shoot at a dragon. That dragon will probably take multiple wounds. The issue comes when that dragon then smashes into that pile of archers. Here is a perfect example using that dreadnought vs 10 tactical marines.


10 Tactical Marines shoot at the dreadnought
10d6 looking for 3+ to hit. Results in 7 hits. Strength 4 vs Toughness 7 should be 6+ to wound. Or say 2 wounds.
With 3+ save that might be 1 failure for 1 wound.

Now, the dreadnought attacks back with say a Multi-Melta. Assuming strength 8 with 1d6 wounds at Rend -2. That will hit the tactical squad 1 time, Wound on a 2+ and do about 4 wounds that are saved on a 5+. If 4 marines die they will have to make a Moral(Battleshock test) rolling 1d6+4 vs their 7 leadership. We will say the person rolls a 4 for 8 on the roll. Now, another marine dies with no save.

Its probably gonna kill a lot more, I can't picture the MM having such a low rend value.

Edit: We'll see that tomorrow, I guess, with the weapon profile. I am personally not looking forward to it.

If I had to bet, multi-damage weapons won't spill over, and will only cook one model. AoS has spillover, but I'm betting they won't keep that, so as to make horde-buster and big-stuff-buster weapons notably different.

That's another possibility, according to the main thread, we won't be able to shoot in melee like in AOS ( ), so its not a straight up copy paste.

how invulnerable saving throws are ruled in AoS? they get no rend malus?

My guess would be that they limit the rend.

For example, a Terminator that gets hit with a lascannon with a rend of -5 would still get a 5+ save. Bumped to a 3+ with a Stormshield.

 blackmage wrote:
basic marines with only 1 W.... well if just "simple" weapons like bolters will have a rend -1, unless they will have some more special rules they will disappear from the tables like happened in 2nd edition.

The problem with Marines in 2nd Edition wasn't that they usually had a 4+ save (that was merely annoying). The problem was that they cost 30 points a piece, before any equipment was added.

Besides, extra info from Twitter posts has cover granting save bonuses. So remember your 2nd Edition mantra of "stick to cover unless you prefer dying" and marines should do just fine.

And of course, we still have no idea what form ASM's will take. 2nd Edition went overboard (why yes, I'm glad SW:A finally nerfed the bloody Shuriken Catapult!), with too many weapons having mods and the mods going far to high. If we reduce it to -1 to -3 (maybe -4) and get a lot more sparing with it (i.e. lasguns shouldn't have a -1 ASM for just one example) then it should fix the issue with most saves actually being one lower in practice than they actually were.

But to be sure, marines were underpowered in 2nd because they were so bloody expensive to field. At their current price, it is a lot more reasonable.

2 wounds termies... how many wounds will Paladins get then? I am intrigued...

I'm less annoyed after seeing this. Still unsure about vehicle damage facings, and the comments about the importance of positioning replacing Initiative have me worried they'll have tried to push melee too hard, but at least we've still got stat comparisons for the to-wound roll. Reserving judgement overall until I've seen more (weapon statlines will help in trying to figure out whether they're trying to bork the shooting/melee balance too hard).

 blackmage wrote:
how invulnerable saving throws are ruled in AoS? they get no rend malus?

Depends. "Ignore Rend characteristic", "Ignore Rend characteristic unless it's -2 or better", and "If you take a wound or mortal wound roll a die, on a (4+ to 6+) ignore it" (more like a WHFB Ward save than an Invulnerable save) all exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quickjager wrote:
2 wounds termies... how many wounds will Paladins get then? I am intrigued...

Two, obviously. If GW had any interest in making Paladins good they'd have fixed them instead of making golder/shinier/better Paladins for all your allied-Imperial-deathstar needs.

(Only sort of kidding.)

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I'm less annoyed after seeing this. Still unsure about vehicle damage facings, and the comments about the importance of positioning replacing Initiative have me worried they'll have tried to push melee too hard, but at least we've still got stat comparisons for the to-wound roll. Reserving judgement overall until I've seen more (weapon statlines will help in trying to figure out whether they're trying to bork the shooting/melee balance too hard).

 blackmage wrote:
how invulnerable saving throws are ruled in AoS? they get no rend malus?

Depends. "Ignore Rend characteristic", "Ignore Rend characteristic unless it's -2 or better", and "If you take a wound or mortal wound roll a die, on a (4+ to 6+) ignore it" (more like a WHFB Ward save than an Invulnerable save) all exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quickjager wrote:
2 wounds termies... how many wounds will Paladins get then? I am intrigued...

Two, obviously. If GW had any interest in making Paladins good they'd have fixed them instead of making golder/shinier/better Paladins for all your allied-Imperial-deathstar needs.

(Only sort of kidding.)

paladins still get fnp, force weapons and are brotherhood of psychers.

I'm pleased I stat went away. It was largely useless anyways. Movement stat is nice if they don't ruin it by adding in a bunch of special rules to modify it. WS moving to fixed isn't too dramatic and may actually make it more of a valuable stat. As it stands, most everything is hitthing on a 3 or 4 anyways, so at least now we'll have some decent variation.

 blackmage wrote:
how invulnerable saving throws are ruled in AoS? they get no rend malus?

It usually says "Ignores this mortal wound on an XX"

Here's an example unit. https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-chaos-knights-en.pdf

Are we sure that vehicle AV has been removed?
People have been wanting the Dread to become an MC or faux MCs to become vehicles for a good long while.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Are we sure that vehicle AV has been removed?
People have been wanting the Dread to become an MC or faux MCs to become vehicles for a good long while.

Yes. The Dreadnought Is T 7 W 8 Sv 3+
Which hilariously is equal to making it armour 10(for strength 4 stuff) or 11 for everything else

(Based off current wound chart of course)

I was thinking about the dear example, and multimeltas probably aren't the weapon they will use to fight hordes, instead, they will probably use an assault cannon.

I'm betting assault cannons do something different now since AP isn't all or nothing, maybe they will be salvo, or my guess they get extra hits when you roll a six to hit, either exploding dice like in some systems (which would be a fun mechanic), or they function similar to tesla for Crons, roll a six get two hits instead of one. Probably has -2 rend modifier, and a six strength. You could get some serious marine murder on with that.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Are we sure that vehicle AV has been removed?
People have been wanting the Dread to become an MC or faux MCs to become vehicles for a good long while.

Yes.In the live FAQ they said AV is removed. At min 18 they start to talk about AV.

yes but ignore a mortal wound is not same thing as ignore rend..

But, W8/Sv3+, which matters an awful lot. That will last a lot longer than an AV11/HP3 version would. In practice it'll last a lot longer than the existing AV12/HP3 version.

Also, in the Q&A, they specifically said that AV was going away and everything has a T value now. The community website says the same: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/25/warhammer-40000-unit-profiles/. For better or for worse, they are not really known for flat-out lying about these sorts of things, so I'm inclined to believe it, though I don't doubt there's some fungus around somewhere. (Void shields, maybe?)

 blackmage wrote:
yes but ignore a mortal wound is not same thing as ignore rend..

Easiest solution on their end would be to make invulnerable saves ignore all modifiers.

 Luciferian wrote:

 blackmage wrote:
yes but ignore a mortal wound is not same thing as ignore rend..

Easiest solution on their end would be to make invulnerable saves ignore all modifiers.

Yep. Or treat them as a +save mod applied after the negative.

 Luciferian wrote:

 blackmage wrote:
yes but ignore a mortal wound is not same thing as ignore rend..

Easiest solution on their end would be to make invulnerable saves ignore all modifiers.

That's basically what it was in 2nd Edition when they were referred to as "unmodified saves".

The important question is going to be if they are taken instead of or in addition to a normal armour save. 2nd Edition allowed you to take all of your saves, most following editions of 40k nipped that in the bud, and even SW:A changed that (despite being built directly on the 2nd Edition/Necro engine). But from the sounds of AoS it went the opposite route and allows for a post-save roll to ignore wounds (which is more like WFB and 2nd Edition).

If units can take all their saves and they let terminators keep the 5+ invuln, then they just got a whole hell of a lot tougher (same if they ignore ASM's below a certain threshold).

There are still a ton of unknowns here, and it is intriguing to see it unfold.

Oh well.
R.I.P. AV - I will miss you.

I am hype, termies and dreadnoughts looking alot better than before!

I don't even own nurgle termies, but now I need to decide whether to get the FW upgrade set or wait for new ones!!

This is the post I've been waiting for to start my ork mek army stomped,morkanauts,deff dreads I can't wait to watch 7th and eddition burn and celebrate a new beginning thank you GW.

Can I just put in a vote to remove the stupid use of the word "rend". Just say save modifier or something simple. If you want to simplify the game, stop code-wording everything.

 Rippy wrote:
I am hype, termies and dreadnoughts looking alot better than before!

I don't even own nurgle termies, but now I need to decide whether to get the FW upgrade set or wait for new ones!!

I would wait for new ones. If nothing else, I have high expectations for all of GW's new models.

 Luciferian wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
I am hype, termies and dreadnoughts looking alot better than before!

I don't even own nurgle termies, but now I need to decide whether to get the FW upgrade set or wait for new ones!!

I would wait for new ones. If nothing else, I have high expectations for all of GW's new models.

Yeah the Death Guard pics we have seen so far do look amazing.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 blackmage wrote:
If units can take all their saves and they let terminators keep the 5+ invuln, then they just got a whole hell of a lot tougher (same if they ignore ASM's below a certain threshold).

yes is what im thunking about armies like demons for example, modified armour save and then unmodified inv save sound big

I'm mixed on this honestly. The movement value is one of the last WHF things left which makes sense to me. Should make the eldar armies and nids faster which is a good thing (well except for craftworld eldar).

Anyway i don't totally hate this. Not sure what to think of the WS and BS part since dark eldar are generally really good at both. My issue with AoS and their to hit system was it didn't matter what you hit you always hit them the same. It could be an ogre, a slaanesh daemon, a master swordsman or a daemon prince or vampire count. Same chance to hit each time. That said they said there were debuffs and possibly buffs which isn't too bad. I will admit the WS stat was a bit needless but rather simple when you got used to it. You generally always hit on 3's, 4's or 5's except in odd situations.

I like most of the changes theres just one thing that annoys me about striking first in combat if you charge. Take this extreme example, say a tau fire warrior charges a keeper of secrets how the hell does he strike first against such an agile opponent? Really breaks the immersion of the game unless im missing something?

pilchard8 wrote:
I like most of the changes theres just one thing that annoys me about striking first in combat if you charge. Take this extreme example, say a tau fire warrior charges a keeper of secrets how the hell does he strike first against such an agile opponent? Really breaks the immersion of the game unless im missing something?

The Fire Warriors ambush and sucker punch the Keeper of Secrets.

yes is pretty stupid they took out In...now a globlar attack 1st if charge anything, ok it will still die but.... is weird

I feel like some weapons that are currently Unwieldy should probably still strike last. Things like Thunder Hammers and Power Fists, for example. Those will become crazy powerful if they get to swing before the opponent's models.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

pilchard8 wrote:
I like most of the changes theres just one thing that annoys me about striking first in combat if you charge. Take this extreme example, say a tau fire warrior charges a keeper of secrets how the hell does he strike first against such an agile opponent? Really breaks the immersion of the game unless im missing something?

The Fire Warriors ambush and sucker punch the Keeper of Secrets.

The Keeper of Secret is taken aback buy the fact some puny Tau found their balls and decided to fight like real men.. Catching it off guard

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I feel like some weapons that are currently Unwieldy should probably still strike last. Things like Thunder Hammers and Power Fists, for example. Those will become crazy powerful if they get to swing before the opponent's models.

Well, considering that instead of a blanket insta-death rule we will now have things simply dealing multiple wounds, this isn't quite as bad as it seems anymore. When a PFist could brain anyone T4 or lower in one hit just by dint of wounding then hitting last was needed. But now they can just make it do d3 damage on a hit. Still handy against tougher elites (like nobz and terminators), but unlikely to chump a character (while becoming a bit more threatening to monstrous creatures, and a bit less threatening than they used to be to light vehicles).

In either case, allowing the bloody things to hit first (alongside the 3+ to-hit in CC) actually makes terminators really threatening in close combat if they charge. Luckily, they are a full 1" slower than a normal marine, so getting the charge against faster assault-heavy armies will be tricky. Perhaps the Land Raider will see some new popularity in the face of even tactical terminators being potentially nasty in CC.

There are a lot of variables to consider here, and I don't think forcing weapons to hit last is really needed now that damage isn't a binary one-wound/instant-death proposition.

 Ronin_eX wrote:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I feel like some weapons that are currently Unwieldy should probably still strike last. Things like Thunder Hammers and Power Fists, for example. Those will become crazy powerful if they get to swing before the opponent's models.

Well, considering that instead of a blanket insta-death rule we will now have things simply dealing multiple wounds, this isn't quite as bad as it seems anymore. When a PFist could brain anyone T4 or lower in one hit just by dint of wounding then hitting last was needed. But now they can just make it do d3 damage on a hit. Still handy against tougher elites (like nobz and terminators), but unlikely to chump a character (while becoming a bit more threatening to monstrous creatures, and a bit less threatening than they used to be to light vehicles).

In either case, allowing the bloody things to hit first (alongside the 3+ to-hit in CC) actually makes terminators really threatening in close combat if they charge. Luckily, they are a full 1" slower than a normal marine, so getting the charge against faster assault-heavy armies will be tricky. Perhaps the Land Raider will see some new popularity in the face of even tactical terminators being potentially nasty in CC.

There are a lot of variables to consider here, and I don't think forcing weapons to hit last is really needed now that damage isn't a binary one-wound/instant-death proposition.

All my T3 characters will definitely enjoy not dying to the first hit allocated to them every game.

Honestly my Lelith Hesperax has only survived a wound allocated to her once in 7th edition....

So, I wonder how powerful drop pod - dreadnoughts will end up being?

Youn wrote:
So, I wonder how powerful drop pod - dreadnoughts will end up being?

Depends on how you use them.
I currently drop Powerfist+Flamer/Multi-melta Dreads on Vehicles, Scatt Bikes and blob infantry. It will no longer be immune to S5 and below, so for that use it's lost a lot of kick.
If Monstrous Creatures still have ap2 as standard it still doesn't get a save against them in Melee. It can't be doubled out to insta-death so no more explosions...Drop Dreads like exploding though...

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I feel like some weapons that are currently Unwieldy should probably still strike last. Things like Thunder Hammers and Power Fists, for example. Those will become crazy powerful if they get to swing before the opponent's models.

But if not...15 nobs with power klaws and waaagh! banner will be the new deathstar.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
If Monstrous Creatures still have ap2 as standard it still doesn't get a save against them in Melee.

AP isn't a thing anymore. Save modifiers, there are save modifiers now. Whether they get a save or not will depend heavily on the range of modifiers we see and how they are distributed.

Hopefully seeing some weapon stats tomorrow will give us a better idea. And also keep in mind that we still don't have special rules for any of these units. There may be a lot more than meets the eye here.

 Ronin_eX wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
If Monstrous Creatures still have ap2 as standard it still doesn't get a save against them in Melee.

AP isn't a thing anymore. Save modifiers, there are save modifiers now. Whether they get a save or not will depend heavily on the range of modifiers we see and how they are distributed.

Hopefully seeing some weapon stats tomorrow will give us a better idea. And also keep in mind that we still don't have special rules for any of these units. There may be a lot more than meets the eye here.

Rend is still an armour penetration mechanic and I'm willing to bet MCs will get high enough rend values to ignore a 2+ armour save.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Ronin_eX wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
If Monstrous Creatures still have ap2 as standard it still doesn't get a save against them in Melee.

AP isn't a thing anymore. Save modifiers, there are save modifiers now. Whether they get a save or not will depend heavily on the range of modifiers we see and how they are distributed.

Hopefully seeing some weapon stats tomorrow will give us a better idea. And also keep in mind that we still don't have special rules for any of these units. There may be a lot more than meets the eye here.

Rend is still an armour penetration mechanic and I'm willing to bet MCs will get high enough rend values to ignore a 2+ armour save.

If you're using the AoS term for it, then you are aware that it goes to -3 in AoS and is actually handed out quite sparingly (especially in the higher values). It's also assuming that beyond their save they have no other defensive special rules (which are also a thing in AoS). That is too many assumptions at this point when all we have are some vague hints about the rules and a handful of statlines without their special rules or equipment to give them further context.

If 40k follows a similar trajectory in terms of its armour save mods, then I wouldn't go predicting a higher range of mods just yet (in fact, it would be a mistake if they went with 2nd Edition's wider array of mods), and I certainly wouldn't assume monstrous creatures get the highest possible save mod by dint of their unit type. My guess is that save mod and the damage a creature deals will be a creature-to-creature thing rather than a blanket edict.

But we wont have a good idea until we see a range of various shooting and melee weapons to know for sure.

 Ronin_eX wrote:

If 40k follows a similar trajectory in terms of its armour save mods, then I wouldn't go predicting a higher range of mods just yet (in fact, it would be a mistake if they went with 2nd Edition's wider array of mods), and I certainly wouldn't assume monstrous creatures get the highest possible save mod by dint of their unit type. My guess is that save mod and the damage a creature deals will be a creature-to-creature thing rather than a blanket edict.

Which, in turn, will make balancing things like Tyranid Monstrous Creatures much easier. Suddenly we can have support MCs that don't need to have Smash and other various MC rules baked in to their cost.

 Ronin_eX wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Ronin_eX wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
If Monstrous Creatures still have ap2 as standard it still doesn't get a save against them in Melee.

AP isn't a thing anymore. Save modifiers, there are save modifiers now. Whether they get a save or not will depend heavily on the range of modifiers we see and how they are distributed.

Hopefully seeing some weapon stats tomorrow will give us a better idea. And also keep in mind that we still don't have special rules for any of these units. There may be a lot more than meets the eye here.

Rend is still an armour penetration mechanic and I'm willing to bet MCs will get high enough rend values to ignore a 2+ armour save.

If you're using the AoS term for it, then you are aware that it goes to -3 in AoS and is actually handed out quite sparingly (especially in the higher values). It's also assuming that beyond their save they have no other defensive special rules (which are also a thing in AoS). That is too many assumptions at this point when all we have are some vague hints about the rules and a handful of statlines without their special rules or equipment to give them further context.

If 40k follows a similar trajectory in terms of its armour save mods, then I wouldn't go predicting a higher range of mods just yet (in fact, it would be a mistake if they went with 2nd Edition's wider array of mods), and I certainly wouldn't assume monstrous creatures get the highest possible save mod by dint of their unit type. My guess is that save mod and the damage a creature deals will be a creature-to-creature thing rather than a blanket edict.

But we wont have a good idea until we see a range of various shooting and melee weapons to know for sure.

Armour better than a 4+ is also handed out quite sparingly and very few things shoot more than twenty four inches. Just because I know the mechanic doesn't mean I believe they'll copy and paste it.

I wonder if the force USR is going to remain in the game, or at least in its current incarnation.

I feel like having availability to instant death on that level is going to be massively powerful with the wounds creep we are going to be seeing in this edition.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
I wonder if the force USR is going to remain in the game, or at least in its current incarnation.

I feel like having availability to instant death on that level is going to be massively powerful with the wounds creep we are going to be seeing in this edition.

I imagine current instant death stuff will just become a multi-wound attack

I was wondering how will be keeping track of remaining wounds with all this multi-wounds models. Dices? Markers?

Every time a move my tanks I have to move a ton of markers... or I cant imagine 7 tracking dices spread on the battlefield.. oops, I touched your Rhino's dice, how many were its wounds, 5? No, it were 7! No, no I'm sure, no more then 5, I shoot it in the first turn then again in third, remember?

No I don't, you are cheating.......

For stuff that large probably D10's which stand out from the d6's you will be rolling. Also color coded dice. Red for wound markers and no rolls and whatever your preferred color for your rolls.

ERJAK wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

tag8833 wrote:
I'm annoyed they kept Strength and toughness. I was hoping for something like:

To Wound: 4+
Damage: 1

So much this. Works almost exactly the same in the end but is just that little bit quicker.

No. Same roll required to wound REGARDLESS OF TARGET is wrong in so many levels it's not even possible to count.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Youn wrote:
Now, the dreadnought attacks back with say a Multi-Melta. Assuming strength 8 with 1d6 wounds at Rend -2. That will hit the tactical squad 1 time, Wound on a 2+ and do about 4 wounds that are saved on a 5+. If 4 marines die they will have to make a Moral(Battleshock test) rolling 1d6+4 vs their 7 leadership. We will say the person rolls a 4 for 8 on the roll. Now, another marine dies with no save.

Another shouldn't be possible. d6 wound hit should not kill d6 models. There should be difference with guns that are good at killing lone tough models(multiple wounds) and large swath of weak guys.

Wound bleeding. Bleh. Leads even less variety with weapons.

The problem with armour save modifiers being linked to strength in 2nd edition (and in fantasy) is that you got hit with a double-whammy when hit by a high strength weapon. Not only were you wounded more easily as your toughness was overwhelmed, but your armour save also became worse making it harder to save the inflicted wound.

Making the "rend" value of a weapon independent of its strength makes it much easier to balance. An autocannon at strength 7 (-4 armour save) would reduce a Marine's save to nothing, but if it's given the "Rend -2" rule then Marines are still getting a 5+ save against it.

The Deer Hunter wrote:
I was wondering how will be keeping track of remaining wounds with all this multi-wounds models. Dices? Markers?

Easiest would be to use markers like Magic The Gathering life markers for large, multiple-wound models. Just one circular marker that can go all the way up yo or down from 20 or 30, depending on what kind you used.

 JimOnMars wrote:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I feel like some weapons that are currently Unwieldy should probably still strike last. Things like Thunder Hammers and Power Fists, for example. Those will become crazy powerful if they get to swing before the opponent's models.

But if not...15 nobs with power klaws and waaagh! banner will be the new deathstar.

It won't be as much of a deathstar if they lose a third in, say, shooting and another third due to battleshock before getting there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

tag8833 wrote:
I'm annoyed they kept Strength and toughness. I was hoping for something like:

To Wound: 4+
Damage: 1

So much this. Works almost exactly the same in the end but is just that little bit quicker.

No. Same roll required to wound REGARDLESS OF TARGET is wrong in so many levels it's not even possible to count.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Youn wrote:
Now, the dreadnought attacks back with say a Multi-Melta. Assuming strength 8 with 1d6 wounds at Rend -2. That will hit the tactical squad 1 time, Wound on a 2+ and do about 4 wounds that are saved on a 5+. If 4 marines die they will have to make a Moral(Battleshock test) rolling 1d6+4 vs their 7 leadership. We will say the person rolls a 4 for 8 on the roll. Now, another marine dies with no save.

Another shouldn't be possible. d6 wound hit should not kill d6 models. There should be difference with guns that are good at killing lone tough models(multiple wounds) and large swath of weak guys.

Wound bleeding. Bleh. Leads even less variety with weapons.

Wait, do you mean the space marine armory can have less variety than grav-guns and bolters?

The Deer Hunter wrote:
I was wondering how will be keeping track of remaining wounds with all this multi-wounds models. Dices? Markers?

Every time a move my tanks I have to move a ton of markers... or I cant imagine 7 tracking dices spread on the battlefield.. oops, I touched your Rhino's dice, how many were its wounds, 5? No, it were 7! No, no I'm sure, no more then 5, I shoot it in the first turn then again in third, remember?

No I don't, you are cheating.......

Use Adobe to add wound boxes to the data sheets. Print them out and laminate them (about $0.25/ea). Mark off damage with white board markers during the game.

 Asmodai wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
I was wondering how will be keeping track of remaining wounds with all this multi-wounds models. Dices? Markers?

Every time a move my tanks I have to move a ton of markers... or I cant imagine 7 tracking dices spread on the battlefield.. oops, I touched your Rhino's dice, how many were its wounds, 5? No, it were 7! No, no I'm sure, no more then 5, I shoot it in the first turn then again in third, remember?

No I don't, you are cheating.......

Use Adobe to add wound boxes to the data sheets. Print them out and laminate them (about $0.25/ea). Mark off damage with white board markers during the game.

Do you want a cookie? You deserve it for that idea
Simple and effective.

 Rippy wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
I was wondering how will be keeping track of remaining wounds with all this multi-wounds models. Dices? Markers?

Every time a move my tanks I have to move a ton of markers... or I cant imagine 7 tracking dices spread on the battlefield.. oops, I touched your Rhino's dice, how many were its wounds, 5? No, it were 7! No, no I'm sure, no more then 5, I shoot it in the first turn then again in third, remember?

No I don't, you are cheating.......

Use Adobe to add wound boxes to the data sheets. Print them out and laminate them (about $0.25/ea). Mark off damage with white board markers during the game.

Do you want a cookie? You deserve it for that idea
Simple and effective.

Yeah it works well in various games from Skirmish to Navy/Space ship battles. Might be worth suggesting to GW as something to add to datacards if they have not already.

https://store.warlordgames.com/collections/gaming-equipment/products/pin-markers



I picked up these for marking building damage in Dropzone Commander, and they should work for tracking wounds in 40k too. I sprayed the bases black and picked out the numbers in white.

For units (e.g. Terminators), I suspect they'll carry on with the rule that you remove whole models where possible, so you'll only need to track w-1 wounds across a unit as a whole, where w is the number of Wounds that models in the unit have.

Terminators have two attacks - that's an upgrade, isn't it? I thought they only have one in 7th.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
I was wondering how will be keeping track of remaining wounds with all this multi-wounds models. Dices? Markers?

Every time a move my tanks I have to move a ton of markers... or I cant imagine 7 tracking dices spread on the battlefield.. oops, I touched your Rhino's dice, how many were its wounds, 5? No, it were 7! No, no I'm sure, no more then 5, I shoot it in the first turn then again in third, remember?

No I don't, you are cheating.......

Use Adobe to add wound boxes to the data sheets. Print them out and laminate them (about $0.25/ea). Mark off damage with white board markers during the game.

Do you want a cookie? You deserve it for that idea
Simple and effective.

Yeah it works well in various games from Skirmish to Navy/Space ship battles. Might be worth suggesting to GW as something to add to datacards if they have not already.

You should send them an email

zerosignal wrote:
Terminators have two attacks - that's an upgrade, isn't it? I thought they only have one in 7th.

They've.. had 2A since a long time. Terminator honors used to bump things up +1A.

I think it's a pretty weak-dick improvement to Terminators honestly. It seems to come from a "let's make Terminators better", rather than "let's make Terminators more accurate to the fluff...".

Literally all we've seen is the profile.
We don't know anything about the changes to their wargear and special rules.

It's a bit early to conclude that they've not made Terminators accurate to the fluff (even though being tough WAS a big part of their fluff alongside Tactical Insertion).

 Rippy wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
I was wondering how will be keeping track of remaining wounds with all this multi-wounds models. Dices? Markers?

Every time a move my tanks I have to move a ton of markers... or I cant imagine 7 tracking dices spread on the battlefield.. oops, I touched your Rhino's dice, how many were its wounds, 5? No, it were 7! No, no I'm sure, no more then 5, I shoot it in the first turn then again in third, remember?

No I don't, you are cheating.......

Use Adobe to add wound boxes to the data sheets. Print them out and laminate them (about $0.25/ea). Mark off damage with white board markers during the game.

Do you want a cookie? You deserve it for that idea
Simple and effective.

Yeah it works well in various games from Skirmish to Navy/Space ship battles. Might be worth suggesting to GW as something to add to datacards if they have not already.

You should send them an email

The idea has already has been posted on facebook

Lack of initiative is depressing. Have DE not lost enough already?

 Elbows wrote:
I think it's a pretty weak-dick improvement to Terminators honestly. It seems to come from a "let's make Terminators better", rather than "let's make Terminators more accurate to the fluff...".

I said it elsewhere, but that's kind of how I feel in regards to both Tacticals and Terminators.

I could have seen:
3W Terminators and Centurions
2W "Full" Astartes(Tactical, Assault, Devastator, etc)
1W Scouts

Hopefully Tacticals and Terminators have some rule that makes them a bit more survivable, because I personally feel like they missed a big opportunity here.

i dont know if someone already posted it

There's a thread for those.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I think it's a pretty weak-dick improvement to Terminators honestly. It seems to come from a "let's make Terminators better", rather than "let's make Terminators more accurate to the fluff...".

I said it elsewhere, but that's kind of how I feel in regards to both Tacticals and Terminators.

I could have seen:
3W Terminators and Centurions
2W "Full" Astartes(Tactical, Assault, Devastator, etc)
1W Scouts

Hopefully Tacticals and Terminators have some rule that makes them a bit more survivable, because I personally feel like they missed a big opportunity here.

Maybe they'll take cover against small arms.

I mean, if cover adds to a models save and a 1 isn't auto-fail, then Terminators could just be flat out immune to small arms. That would be interesting. Hard to come to any conclusion until all the context is in.

Also, if no Initiative, what does a Powerfist do? Maybe Terminators are absolute terrors in CC now. We just don't know.

Terminators were already decent at it, but they don't contribute until that stage. Plus, MCs laughing at them with universal AP 2 on their attacks.

 Elbows wrote:
I think it's a pretty weak-dick improvement to Terminators honestly. It seems to come from a "let's make Terminators better", rather than "let's make Terminators more accurate to the fluff...".

Good, the fluff should always take a back seat to good gameplay. representing the fluff is important sure, but just think about this; D weapons and invisibility are the most fluff accurate rules in the game.

Now if only the storm bolter gets AP -1. That would make them actually useful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ERJAK wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I think it's a pretty weak-dick improvement to Terminators honestly. It seems to come from a "let's make Terminators better", rather than "let's make Terminators more accurate to the fluff...".

Good, the fluff should always take a back seat to good gameplay. representing the fluff is important sure, but just think about this; D weapons and invisibility are the most fluff accurate rules in the game.

Not really. Invis makes it so you can't template them or blast them. The most effective ways to hit invisible opponents. Besides, there are other ways to detect opponents than the visible spectrum of light, so it's not accurate there either.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I think it's a pretty weak-dick improvement to Terminators honestly. It seems to come from a "let's make Terminators better", rather than "let's make Terminators more accurate to the fluff...".

I said it elsewhere, but that's kind of how I feel in regards to both Tacticals and Terminators.

I could have seen:
3W Terminators and Centurions
2W "Full" Astartes(Tactical, Assault, Devastator, etc)
1W Scouts

Hopefully Tacticals and Terminators have some rule that makes them a bit more survivable, because I personally feel like they missed a big opportunity here.

Maybe they'll take cover against small arms.

I mean, if cover adds to a models save and a 1 isn't auto-fail, then Terminators could just be flat out immune to small arms. That would be interesting. Hard to come to any conclusion until all the context is in.

Also, if no Initiative, what does a Powerfist do? Maybe Terminators are absolute terrors in CC now. We just don't know.

One's will always auto fail, Sigmar used to not have this rule and it screwed EVERYTHING up and there are 0 models with native 2+ saves in sigmar.

As for terminators and marines, you're thinking about there durability relative to 7th's damage output which will likely not be the case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Now if only the storm bolter gets AP -1. That would make them actually useful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ERJAK wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I think it's a pretty weak-dick improvement to Terminators honestly. It seems to come from a "let's make Terminators better", rather than "let's make Terminators more accurate to the fluff...".

Good, the fluff should always take a back seat to good gameplay. representing the fluff is important sure, but just think about this; D weapons and invisibility are the most fluff accurate rules in the game.

Not really. Invis makes it so you can't template them or blast them. The most effective ways to hit invisible opponents. Besides, there are other ways to detect opponents than the visible spectrum of light, so it's not accurate there either.

But some other BS as*pull justification as to why invisibilty could get around your BS as*pull explanation, followed up by talking about only using the ITC systems and how dumb it would be to randomly flamethrower/bomb areas just in case something invisible might be there.

See I can make up contrarian nonsense to make myself feel better too!

double post