Why are people so hung up on this aspect of the game?
I understand that the amount that template weapons generally hit was significantly reduced. But damn. I hate fumbling with them looking to see how many are under and "oh the arrow is pointing that way" " I actually think it's this way"
Frankly I hope they never return

I liked them.
They were a very instinctive abstraction that were fun to use and a cool visual prompt and made model positioning pretty important. It made sense that taking blast weapons or carrying flamers would force horde units to spread out more to avoid hits at the risk of being less able to use smaller pieces of cover from other attacks.
Now that they are just rolled in with X additional dice they seem pretty dry.

I agree that mortars could have been streamlined and units with many multiple template weapons were a bit clunky though.

Templates were just fun as hell, and it felt rewarding. Who didn’t feel like an absolute champ when you got to count everyone under your flamer?

Templates were a garbage mechanic that often slowed the game down to half speed. Furthermore, they often lead to lengthy discussions because every template application relied heavily on judgement calls. I don't miss units like burnas or wyverns spitting out 4000 templates a second, or waiting on my opponent to meticulously move his ocean of Hormagaunts, keeping every single model 2" away from its neighbour.

The replacement for templates and scatter die, essentially D6 shots, is not really satisfactory. But at least the game is not slowed or killed by rolling a single die.

On the one hand I liked putting down flamer templates, and absolutely loved that blasts could scatter onto unintended targets. Moments like a Looted Wagon horribly missing it's target and instead blasting a friendly Trukk are very amusing.

On the other hand templates are the reason I never fielded more than ~60 total gaunt variants in a battle, despite really liking the mental image of a tyranid swarm. I find having to space out multiple 30 model squads every movement phase so very tedious. It really slows the game down.

All in all the playability gains outweigh the cost imo, but I definitely think there was a cost.

shortymcnostrill wrote:
On the one hand I liked putting down flamer templates, and absolutely loved that blasts could scatter onto unintended targets. Moments like a Looted Wagon horribly missing it's target and instead blasting a friendly Trukk are very amusing.

On the other hand templates are the reason I never fielded more than ~60 total gaunt variants in a battle, despite really liking the mental image of a tyranid swarm. I find having to space out multiple 30 model squads every movement phase so very tedious. It really slows the game down.

All in all the playability gains outweigh the cost imo, but I definitely think there was a cost.

Yes, that is what I think too. And the same is true for things like firing arcs and vehicle facings. The application of those mechanics were often a point of contention, but not having these mechanics makes the game feels somewhat stale at times. It is annoying that a tank can shoot out of its butt through a tiny window across the field as if normal. But in general I prefer no mechanics to bad mechanics.

Templates were fine in smaller games, became a pain in larger ones, since 40k has moved from its origins as a game with maybe two dozen models per side and one or two weapons lobbing blast markers (plus grenades, don't go there) to company sized games and above the mechanic just doesn't work.

Not for the actual mechanic itself but for the interaction with the movement phase and how that slows down.

Liking the ability to handle larger units quickly as exact placement matter less.

The game could do with a few mechanics to scale the number of hits on some weapons a bit more than "do this, or this if the target is 10+ models", e.g. a <scale:n> keyword on weapons that have a number of dice, where you add "n" dice for every ten models.

e.g.

Horde Slaying Blasting Big Bang Weapon, 2d6 Hits <Scale:2>

Doing 2d6 hits to units with 1-9 models, 4d6 for 10-19, 6d6 for 20-29 etc

Glad they're gone. My biggest issue with them was scattering because NO ONE would ever read the angle properly in my group and always shifted it in their favor. I had to start asking them to roll the dice right next to where they aimed and even then when the template traveled it tended to veer off in odd and interesting ways.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Glad they're gone. My biggest issue with them was scattering because NO ONE would ever read the angle properly in my group and always shifted it in their favor. I had to start asking them to roll the dice right next to where they aimed and even then when the template traveled it tended to veer off in odd and interesting ways.

Used to prefer the templates they had in V1 Epic, that had a clock face of a sort on them (or the earlier ones with an actual clock face 1-12), put the template down, roll a normal die (or D12) and thats the direction it goes in, shown on the template itself.

Not an arrow on a die rolled somewhere else thats a good idea in theory and doesn't work in practice.

I felt pretty bummed when I heard that there would be no more templates in 8th.I honestly don't understand all that talking about arguing for any lengthy time wether or not a template hits one or more model. I NEVER had an argument about a template hitting someone or not in all my 10 years of playing 40k. Seriously, never. Granted, we did play rather laid-back, but at times we also had our more competitive games. Also, unit coherency always was a thing, but I personally only heard crying about spreading models out as much as possible in the lasts few years.
Plus, I feel like weapons like flamers aren't that great against hordes than they used to be. I think they (and most former template weapons in general) need a mechanic that they hit x models plus y if there are more than z models in the unit. I think it is wierd that for example battle cannons can inflict up to 6 hits onto a single model that can deal x wounds each (I don't have the exact figures right now). Same with flamers, really. I think the wording should be changed to inflict x hits on MODELS rather than x hits in general.

But yeah, these are just my two cents. All in all I miss templates and think that the transition of template-based weapons to random hits could have been smoother.

Sure, they were a problem for WAAC players due to them wanting to argue over every position to benefit them (but they do that for every mechanic so why are templates any different?), but for games played just for fun they were, well, fun! No matter which side of the board your on, there is something incredibly enjoyable about someone quite literally placing a target over the top of a large unit of models. Some of the most fun I've had in apocalypse games were when someone cracked out the MASSIVE templates and then we'd all watch in terror and excitement as an entire section of the board just disapeared.

Rolling dice to show that 10 models have been hit doesn't have the same impact as seeing for yourself the number of models caught in a blast radius.

(Also, as someone said above, there is also the tactical aspect of it people miss: trying to get as many models as you can within cover without making them too vulnerable to template weapons)

I'm pleased that templates are gone. No one ever got the scatter direction correct and it meant that armies strung their units out in a weird unrealistic (yes I know it's an abstract game) fashion to save models from being hit. Just having a straight forward roll to hit and wound is a much better mechanic if a less visual one.

Templates where a thematic and cool edition in my opinion and the game feels more bland for them being gone.

But 40k has increased over the years to a scale where templates are impractical to use.

GW would never reduce the scale of battles, in fact there has been scale creep with every edition because GW likes nothing more than selling those that collect even elite armies, horeds of models.

Templates would ruin the new design of 8th editon .... "EVERYONE DO THE BLOB-STAR"

Can you imagine how devastating little plastic templates would be to the 8th editon meta???

Well, 8th was designed around not using templates, hence the change to "aura-Hammer" we've seen in the main rules. It stands to reason if templates were still around, you wouldn't have aura-based rules to begin with.

Personally I don't miss them. Even in casual games, I saw way too many "misrepresentations" of the scatter die, etc. The time they added was way too much, and if we're honest once they went beyond the 3" Demolisher cannon template things just got stupid.

The pie-plates and armageddon-based templates were simply stupid, a victim of the game scale creep with no really good solution to it other than ridiculous templates. Templates may have made sense in 2nd (and even then a unit throwing frag grenades was incredibly tedious), but when you have template weapon rules and you introduce titans and crazy war machines, you end up with literal pie-plates. While thematic, perhaps, it's obnoxious during actual game play.

I miss templates for flame weapons. Are you going to tell me I hit a 30 man conscript squad with a Hellhound and I'd only get d6 of them? The variable damage die doesn't scale for densely packed models.

But, that argument is entirely undone by wasting 45 friggin' minutes as a guard player carefully measures 2" maximum between every single model in a 20-30 man squad or unit...feth that noise.

The time wasted in preventing template coverage was of borderline biblically stupid proportions. Removing that was massively important.

 Brotherjulian wrote:
I miss templates for flame weapons. Are you going to tell me I hit a 30 man conscript squad with a Hellhound and I'd only get d6 of them? The variable damage die doesn't scale for densely packed models.

10,000 times this.

No counter to cheap hordes. Guess what rules now?

The biggest problem I see is that templates have remained the same size since I started playing (2nd) but base sizes have increased. Therefore you got fewer models under a template as editions increased base size.

Personally I'd love to see the flamer template come back so that you can try to direct and maximize the targets hit. That might help against blobs since they tend to clump up when charging into melee.

I preferred templates, my weapons where better with them as they where more reliable.

The 8th implementation of blasts was lazy and turns them into pseudo-machineguns.

I still see 2" coherency shenanigans in 8th due to aura congalines and ensuring that units are spaced exactly 18" apart for no-DS shenanigans. One game I witnessed earlier this month, one player spent most of their game ensuring that all Brimstones were connected to Changeling, all Nurglings were spaced out in front to create a no-DS zone, etc. And 8th still has the odd "pseudo-AOE" stratagem or weapon, notBeam Psychic Power, etc.

The issue with trying to make damage "scale" by enemy unit size is that it fails to model the ability for an AOE to hit multiple enemy units. Say your opponent takes multiple Culexus Assassins (to use a lazy example). Your flamethrower/cluster bomb must attempt to kill *one* assassin at a time, and if it misses...nothing.

So either bring back blasts with either Bolt Action Scatter (funny factoid, Bolt Action used random damage for blasts in 1st edition then went to using templates), "make a to-hit roll for each model underneath", or something else not contingent on exact scatter die angle. And if you're complaining "but my 2-inch spacing," play against less awful people as those people will find a reason to spend time spacing.

Yeah the 30" congo lines for buffs are just hideous.

Yeah I loved my flamer templates when I play against my DE friend. Now I can't cook them but at the same time he gets to play more simply because I don't have ap on most of my things

Pancakey wrote:
Yeah the 30" congo lines for buffs are just hideous.

So were perfectly spaced out units that also conga lined to avoid as much of a template as possible.

 Brotherjulian wrote:
I miss templates for flame weapons. Are you going to tell me I hit a 30 man conscript squad with a Hellhound and I'd only get d6 of them? The variable damage die doesn't scale for densely packed models.

No, I'm not, I'm going to tell you that you got 3d6 of them.

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
I liked them.
They were a very instinctive abstraction that were fun to use and a cool visual prompt and made model positioning pretty important. It made sense that taking blast weapons or carrying flamers would force horde units to spread out more to avoid hits at the risk of being less able to use smaller pieces of cover from other attacks.
Now that they are just rolled in with X additional dice they seem pretty dry.

I agree that mortars could have been streamlined and units with many multiple template weapons were a bit clunky though.

Couldn't agree more bud.

Templates were completely fine, you did have a few asshats that would try and game them (maximizing distance between models, etc.) and eat up time, but most players wouldn't be that anal. Barrage weapons were clunky, as were mortars and a few others, but in general templates were fine, game flavor to units, and encouraged strategic choices in weaponry and allowed for fun shenanigans (like Hellhounds "ranged flamer")

Doubling the time it took to take your movement phase because you had to space everything out exactly into maximum coherency was not fun and I'm glad it's gone.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Doubling the time it took to take your movement phase because you had to space everything out exactly into maximum coherency was not fun and I'm glad it's gone.

Sitting there arguing that at a certain angle you got 5 doods under the template but from another slighting off angle you only get 4.

there was a lot of good and a lot of bad on templates but it took soo much time from multiple phases. especially if people were abusing it.

not that i like the current set up as much. its an improvement but it could be much more intuitive.

I'm happy they're gone, and I'm a Guard player. About half my weapons used templates, sometimes multiple templates, such as my Thudd Gun battery, and I don't miss them now that they're gone. I get that some of them are slightly less effective now than they used to be, but the effectiveness of a template weapon was always situational and variable in the past. The benefits of not using them, far exceeds having them, in my opinion.

I agree with the sentiment that they've been reduced to "pseudo machineguns", but at the scale of average 40k games, I think that's an abstraction that had to happen. I think 8th edtition has found a nice balance between abstraction and "realism" (or simulation), although it's still far from perfect.

I miss flamer templates immensely, as someone who's built an entire GSC army around that template it was sad to see it go. I understand the blast templates being removed due to scatter arguments but I think they could've stayed with a different mechanic.

Just doesn't seem likely that I'd shoot a flame template at a squad and only get 1 hit ya know?

That's an entirely different discussion - how they implemented the rolls. Should a flamer be 3+D3? Probably, but the loss of templates is something I'm completely fine with. You'll note that even GW is trying to "fix" some of the super lackluster weapons with special rules, etc.

Things I don't miss:

Templates
Scatter Dice
Sustained Fire Dice (and Jams)
Guess Weapons (even with the Pythagorean grid)
Drifting Templates

Seriously, I love the fact that I can show up to a game with my army, my dice, and a tape measure! You people trying to add the cruft back to the game are the reason we can't have nice things.

 Elbows wrote:
But, that argument is entirely undone by wasting 45 friggin' minutes as a guard player carefully measures 2" maximum between every single model in a 20-30 man squad or unit...feth that noise.

The time wasted in preventing template coverage was of borderline biblically stupid proportions. Removing that was massively important.

Movement trays. Make them mandatory for large units in the main rules, sorted.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
But, that argument is entirely undone by wasting 45 friggin' minutes as a guard player carefully measures 2" maximum between every single model in a 20-30 man squad or unit...feth that noise.

The time wasted in preventing template coverage was of borderline biblically stupid proportions. Removing that was massively important.

Movement trays. Make them mandatory for large units in the main rules, sorted.

Didnt always work for some tables or terrain but yeah its a massive help on some very flat open tables. was really useful moving 400 skaven models

 Desubot wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
But, that argument is entirely undone by wasting 45 friggin' minutes as a guard player carefully measures 2" maximum between every single model in a 20-30 man squad or unit...feth that noise.

The time wasted in preventing template coverage was of borderline biblically stupid proportions. Removing that was massively important.

Movement trays. Make them mandatory for large units in the main rules, sorted.

Didnt always work for some tables or terrain but yeah its a massive help on some very flat open tables. was really useful moving 400 skaven models

True, but I think the time spent working out a way to represent the unit's position when the whole tray couldn't fit (such as placing down models in the positions of the corners of the unit etc.), was less than the time it would have otherwise taken to move them all without trays whilst maintaining formation

You could alternatively introduce rules whereby particularly large units cannot enter extremely dense terrain, due to them being unable to maintain their formation/communication amongst the unit (or whatever other excuse you want ). So that means all armies would need to make sure they have small units of scout-y skirmishers to hold/clear out enemies from dense terrain, or weapons designed to flush them out (flamers, napalm for clearing forests etc.)

Certainly ways of house ruling terrain. though personally i think the removal of templates is much easier for everyone.

im glad they did bring it back for necromunda levels of games though.

i think it makes more sense in smaller more granular type games.

 Desubot wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
But, that argument is entirely undone by wasting 45 friggin' minutes as a guard player carefully measures 2" maximum between every single model in a 20-30 man squad or unit...feth that noise.

The time wasted in preventing template coverage was of borderline biblically stupid proportions. Removing that was massively important.

Movement trays. Make them mandatory for large units in the main rules, sorted.

Didnt always work for some tables or terrain but yeah its a massive help on some very flat open tables. was really useful moving 400 skaven models

Trays were good in FB, yes, but are utterly useless on any 40k table I'd personally like to play on as there should be a metric ton of ruins, rocks, rubble, woods, buildings and whatnot everywhere that require individual placement of the miniatures to function. Open tables create problems

On the topic of templates, glad they're gone from a company level game. I liked the scattering chance to hit your own troops and I support the notion that unit size should dictate the number of hits somewhat, but those could very well be ruled in differently.

 Desubot wrote:
Certainly ways of house ruling terrain. though personally i think the removal of templates is much easier for everyone.

im glad they did bring it back for necromunda levels of games though.

i think it makes more sense in smaller more granular type games.

Almost certainly, but then a game at the model count of 40K shouldn't really be considering the individual placement of models to the extent that it does. 8th went some way to fixing that, but not far enough. Having to go down and check LOS for every model in a 30 strong unit is idiotic, for example.

As much as I dislike the current system even I have to admit templates sucked. They favoured certain armies too well and caused arguments. The current systme would be fixed by just increasing the fire rates like the IG got.

 supreme overlord wrote:
I miss flamer templates immensely, as someone who's built an entire GSC army around that template it was sad to see it go. I understand the blast templates being removed due to scatter arguments but I think they could've stayed with a different mechanic.

Just doesn't seem likely that I'd shoot a flame template at a squad and only get 1 hit ya know?

Seems about as likely as my Riptide shooting his Ion Accelerator at a Leman Russ a couple inches in front of him and have the shot not just miss, but land behind the Riptide on the opposite side from the Leman Russ and where he was facing because the Scatter Dice said so.

Say what you will about trying to explain how a flamer could only hit one guy when shot at a 30 man squad bunched up inside a building, but that's much easier to explain in my mind than a super advanced giant robot shooting a direct fire energy weapon at a tank right in front of him and the shot not only missing but impacting behind the giant robot in the opposite direction of the way his weapon was pointed.

 GI_Redshirt wrote:

 supreme overlord wrote:
I miss flamer templates immensely, as someone who's built an entire GSC army around that template it was sad to see it go. I understand the blast templates being removed due to scatter arguments but I think they could've stayed with a different mechanic.

Just doesn't seem likely that I'd shoot a flame template at a squad and only get 1 hit ya know?

Seems about as likely as my Riptide shooting his Ion Accelerator at a Leman Russ a couple inches in front of him and have the shot not just miss, but land behind the Riptide on the opposite side from the Leman Russ and where he was facing because the Scatter Dice said so.

Say what you will about trying to explain how a flamer could only hit one guy when shot at a 30 man squad bunched up inside a building, but that's much easier to explain in my mind than a super advanced giant robot shooting a direct fire energy weapon at a tank right in front of him and the shot not only missing but impacting behind the giant robot in the opposite direction of the way his weapon was pointed.

It is pretty easy to explain: it bounced.
I miss template too. They were efficient and fun, and 40 is a game, game are supposed to be fun.

 godardc wrote:
...They were efficient and fun, and 40 is a game, game are supposed to be fun.

No. Games are what ever you want out of them. They aren't exclusively for fun. There is a reason some people actually choose to play games competitvely

I'm thrilled templates are gone. I hope they never return.

 CrownAxe wrote:

 godardc wrote:
...They were efficient and fun, and 40 is a game, game are supposed to be fun.

No. Games are what ever you want out of them. They aren't exclusively for fun. There is a reason some people actually choose to play games competitvely

Why do people believe that 'fun' and 'competitive' are mutually exclusive?

I don't miss templates. Rolling a die is way (like wayyyyy) faster.

 amanita wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 godardc wrote:
...They were efficient and fun, and 40 is a game, game are supposed to be fun.

No. Games are what ever you want out of them. They aren't exclusively for fun. There is a reason some people actually choose to play games competitvely

I
Why do people believe that 'fun' and 'competitive' are mutually exclusive?

Yeah man, you tell him

You do realize that I didn't even speak about competitivness ? I just said they were fun. You, and only you, excluded competitivness. I was speaking about having fun with the template and the mini. Never did I say "they were not competitive so they were fun", although I think 40k is beer and bretzel and that there are tons of truly competitive games out there.
But I will never ask someone to stop, I may even try it this year. You see ? I'm open minded and I don't try to take anything from you, so just stop being aggressive.
(I play several video games competitvely, so don't worry, I know one can have fun trying to win)

I never liked them myself. You're relying on people eyeballing the angle and what units are covered. That can rely heavily on what exact angle your viewing the template from and ended in arguements too often. It also slowed things down a ton with people spreading things out as far as possible. I wouldn't even call it a real tactical decision as it had no downsides in most editions.

Also for as much as people say they felt logical, torrent always truck me as the dumbest thing ever. "No guys, the flamethrower goes in a straight line and then curves 90 degrees before spreading out." >.>

Granted, I feel some weapons that were templates have been depowered a bit and could have the number of possible hits upped a bit.

Hatachi wrote:
I never liked them myself. You're relying on people eyeballing the angle and what units are covered. That can rely heavily on what exact angle your viewing the template from and ended in arguements too often. It also slowed things down a ton with people spreading things out as far as possible. I wouldn't even call it a real tactical decision as it had no downsides in most editions.

Also for as much as people say they felt logical, torrent always truck me as the dumbest thing ever. "No guys, the flamethrower goes in a straight line and then curves 90 degrees before spreading out." >.>

Granted, I feel some weapons that were templates have been depowered a bit and could have the number of possible hits upped a bit.

Yeah, torrent was fething stupid
They should have made a torrent template, like a 16" flame template !

I miss Templates and scatter dice a lot.

I feel they suffered from GWs poor implimentation and excessive use than being a poor concept.

I also really don't get why everyone is suddenly thrilled they don't have to space their units out so carefully when every discussion on the current competative meta is about carefully spacing your units out to deny deepstrike, congaline to a specific model, to hang out in this guys aura.

If you're not playing competatively, you don't have to do that, but just as much you never had to spent your movement phase dedicated to ensuring I hit less models with my battlecannon, either.

If you're playing games with people whom you have _actual arguements_ that neither of you enjoy about the scatter dice, I strongly suspect you're playing with the wrong people, and the removal of the scatter dice is unlikely to have turned your opponent from TFG till your best bro.
Likely now you're arguing about some obsecure loopholl in the rules, like if Tallarn transports can outflank with non tallarn infantry in using the stratagem.

Problem players always exist. That's not the scatter dice's fault. 40k's rules have never held up under super compeative play, but stuff like scatter dice and templates often made it more fun for casual play. I miss that. It is, as people keep repeatedly noting, a lot more bland now.

 godardc wrote:
You do realize that I didn't even speak about competitivness ? I just said they were fun. You, and only you, excluded competitivness. I was speaking about having fun with the template and the mini. Never did I say "they were not competitive so they were fun", although I think 40k is beer and bretzel and that there are tons of truly competitive games out there.
But I will never ask someone to stop, I may even try it this year. You see ? I'm open minded and I don't try to take anything from you, so just stop being aggressive.
(I play several video games competitvely, so don't worry, I know one can have fun trying to win)

yeah but you are wrong for saying games are supposed to be fun. I was using using competitive players as an example.

No need to get your panties in a bunch

With Orks I love aiming blast weapons into the middle of the enemy lines and watching shots scatter onto other units. Scatter weapons really give a feeling of the battlefield and spacing being important to the game instead of it just being a game of point and shoot. Templates where not the easiest to read and many mild arguments crop up due to interpreting how many models are under the template and how it scattered but it really gave the game character and was far less mathy than regular shooting. Its one of the ommisions that really ruins 8th for me because the game feels so sterile and bland without it.

 Vankraken wrote:
With Orks I love aiming blast weapons into the middle of the enemy lines and watching shots scatter onto other units. Scatter weapons really give a feeling of the battlefield and spacing being important to the game instead of it just being a game of point and shoot. Templates where not the easiest to read and many mild arguments crop up due to interpreting how many models are under the template and how it scattered but it really gave the game character and was far less mathy than regular shooting. Its one of the ommisions that really ruins 8th for me because the game feels so sterile and bland without it.

I will say i do miss the random unintended target nature of blasts. but the speed of just getting the number of hits and not needing to deal with arguments on the quantum nature of which side a molecule of hydro carbon is in relation to the perpendicular line of the blast template is a god send. (sure it never really happend thaaat much but it sucked when it did in situations where both sides of the table wouldnt yield and mean while your template is shifting side to side while you are trying to hold it up)

 Lum wrote:
I think it is wierd that for example battle cannons can inflict up to 6 hits onto a single model that can deal x wounds each (I don't have the exact figures right now).

It's great. I always found the idea the Vindicator shot that can level bunkers and turn Terminators into a bloody mist can only ever deal 1 wound to Monstrous Creature or T6+/EW characters to be patently absurd. Now it's realistically dangerous. Ditto for flamers, when you focus it on single target instead of spraying in an arc it definitely should deal more damage...

Pancakey wrote:

 Brotherjulian wrote:
I miss templates for flame weapons. Are you going to tell me I hit a 30 man conscript squad with a Hellhound and I'd only get d6 of them? The variable damage die doesn't scale for densely packed models.

10,000 times this.

No counter to cheap hordes. Guess what rules now?

Take off rosy nostalgia glasses and do tell how many models usually fit under a flame template against a competent opponent. Max was usually 2-3, 1 less than current average of 3-4, and getting 6 you could now was all but impossible. In fact, it was even worse because in 7th it was usually big fat zero as short range flamers either were torrented out as first casualty if in front or were unable to fire at all because template clipped 0.1 mm of friendly base in most positions if you tried to hide them behind friendlies.

But hey, keep targeting that strawman you set up based on your image of 8th ed rules with small blast. No wonder you miss so often

 Irbis wrote:

 Lum wrote:
I think it is wierd that for example battle cannons can inflict up to 6 hits onto a single model that can deal x wounds each (I don't have the exact figures right now).

It's great. I always found the idea the Vindicator shot that can level bunkers and turn Terminators into a bloody mist can only ever deal 1 wound to Monstrous Creature or T6+/EW characters to be patently absurd. Now it's realistically dangerous. Ditto for flamers, when you focus it on single target instead of spraying in an arc it definitely should deal more damage...

Pancakey wrote:

 Brotherjulian wrote:
I miss templates for flame weapons. Are you going to tell me I hit a 30 man conscript squad with a Hellhound and I'd only get d6 of them? The variable damage die doesn't scale for densely packed models.

10,000 times this.

No counter to cheap hordes. Guess what rules now?

Take off rosy nostalgia glasses and do tell how many models usually fit under a flame template against a competent opponent. Max was usually 2-3, 1 less than current average of 3-4, and getting 6 you could now was all but impossible. In fact, it was even worse because in 7th it was usually big fat zero as short range flamers either were torrented out as first casualty if in front or were unable to fire at all because template clipped 0.1 mm of friendly base in most positions if you tried to hide them behind friendlies.

But hey, keep targeting that strawman you set up based on your image of 8th ed rules with small blast. No wonder you miss so often

Couldn't you have it where you use a template (spread out, 1 wound each) or a focused blast (profiles like we have now)? Flamers doing d6 hits seems pretty meh compared how they used to be, they were used for anti-horde, now they're the same no matter who you face. I really think that old template weapons could indeed do more hits than what they do now. I get why they did away with templates, and I love them myself, but they did neuter the effect of some of these weapons.

 Zid wrote:


Couldn't you have it where you use a template (spread out, 1 wound each) or a focused blast (profiles like we have now)? Flamers doing d6 hits seems pretty meh compared how they used to be, they were used for anti-horde, now they're the same no matter who you face. I really think that old template weapons could indeed do more hits than what they do now. I get why they did away with templates, and I love them myself, but they did neuter the effect of some of these weapons.

They had the potential to do more than 6 hits but that was rare out side people not caring about spacing out in a situation where you got the flamers in close. the best you were ever getting besides torrent weapon was going to be maybe 2-3 against a spread out conga, or potentially more off a DS ring or off multi story buildings.

D6 flamers as it currently is IS weaker against hords now yes. a simple demolishes style you do 2d6 or some other fancyness against units that have 10-15-20 more models or some flavor of that would help significantly.
but its not all nerfs.

a flamer used to only do a max 1 hit against a solo model. now you get to bathe them in napalm.


Oh speaking of nerfs the other thing that changed which i 100% agree on was overwatching. it made no sense you could have a flamer in a conga line litterally on the other side of the table but still get auto D3 hits in. though now we do get the full flamer profile instead of just d3.

Unless you were using a Torrent Flamer, you were lucky to really get more than 4 models, which is oddly around the average for the current Flamer.

What MAKES it seem weaker is that Infantry and Gaunts and Orks get their saves now.

 Desubot wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Yeah the 30" congo lines for buffs are just hideous.

So were perfectly spaced out units that also conga lined to avoid as much of a template as possible.

Couldn't both be dealt with by forcing models to all be within (X) inches of the squad leader (Sergeant/Nob etc)

"Fluff" reason could be they need to hear the squad leader's orders so can't go too far from them (I imagine units without a character leader could have one treated as it for such purposes. Maybe a use for Ld beyond morale- use that for the distance they can be from the focal model- e with a boost for super large horde units)

I dont miss the never ending arguments my grenade launchers brought to the table one bit. I do miss their bypass of the junket IG BS ability. The GL did not transition well in 8th and thats a big mistake. GL were the thermobaric flamer of old. Go out and touch few enemies out there a nice way to deal with hordes at the platoon level. Unless they get buffed they are useless especially since they share the slot with yhe mighty plasmagun. Sad to see their demise .

Bolt Action 1 did not have templetes...version 2 does..i wonder why?

licclerich wrote:
Bolt Action 1 did not have templetes...version 2 does..i wonder why?

Because everyone makes mistakes?

ERJAK wrote:

licclerich wrote:
Bolt Action 1 did not have templetes...version 2 does..i wonder why?

Because everyone makes mistakes?

And then they correct those mistakes in version 2.

Jbz` wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Yeah the 30" congo lines for buffs are just hideous.

So were perfectly spaced out units that also conga lined to avoid as much of a template as possible.

Couldn't both be dealt with by forcing models to all be within (X) inches of the squad leader (Sergeant/Nob etc)

"Fluff" reason could be they need to hear the squad leader's orders so can't go too far from them (I imagine units without a character leader could have one treated as it for such purposes. Maybe a use for Ld beyond morale- use that for the distance they can be from the focal model- e with a boost for super large horde units)

It gets confusing with units that dont have squad leaders additionally its going to look even more wonky seeing everyone in massive clumps.

I used to miss templates, as they were cool to use (flamer ones especially.)

However after playing a few games of 8th, I've come to prefer the dice system. It is quicker and easier.

Another odd thing that it has allowed me to do (not something I really use as a tactical advantage) is actually advance guard units in "ordered lines of men" as described in the fluff, something that would have been suicidal with templates. Looks really cool on the tabletop.

Precisely

Templates are bad and you should feel bad for liking them...

...and scatter dice...
...and artillery dice...
...and rapid fire dice...
...and any dice that aren't simple d6s when playing this game.

The previous statement was purely hyperbolic opinion, enjoy.

But really, you should feel bad.

You're a horrible person.

Why do you hate nice things? and puppies?

Templates are a mechanic suited to an RPG or skirmish scale game. There, they work well enough when implemented properly.

At the scale of a 40k game, they dont work so fine. Too much fiddlyness, too many points of argumentation, too much time, etc.

pismakron wrote:
Templates were a garbage mechanic that often slowed the game down to half speed. Furthermore, they often lead to lengthy discussions because every template application relied heavily on judgement calls. I don't miss units like burnas or wyverns spitting out 4000 templates a second, or waiting on my opponent to meticulously move his ocean of Hormagaunts, keeping every single model 2" away from its neighbour.

The replacement for templates and scatter die, essentially D6 shots, is not really satisfactory. But at least the game is not slowed or killed by rolling a single die.

This. Templates slowed the game down some much if your opponent was trying to mitigate the amount of models that could be covered in the movement phase. And if you ever played an army that had like 10 of them in it the shooting phase took forever, especially if there was "discussion" about what models were covered and the direction of the scatter dice.

I miss scattering. Now if I miss with an artillery piece, the shell just...fades off somewhere.

The problem IMO with the new mechanic is that templates were supposed to represent weapons that almost never missed entirely because of their large blast radius, but had variable damage depending on how many models were caught in the blast. Now they feel more like weird variable-rate-of-fire machine guns where you can potentially hit a single target multiple times with one shell and roll independently to hit for each part of the shot. And from an efficiency point of view they're almost always worse than weapons that don't have a random number of shots. Having to roll to discard some of your shots before you even roll to hit is just another opportunity to lose firepower, and it resulted in things like the index LRBT averaging less than one wound per shot. This then forces GW to compensate with ridiculous buffs like giving LRBTs double the number of shots, superheavies getting a free additional D6, etc.

A much better mechanic would be to keep the random dice, but make them automatically hit like flamers except you can't get more hits than the number of models in the unit. You can't miss entirely, but you might roll badly and only hit one model. Then remove the LRBT double shots rule, consider nerfing Baneblades back down, etc. Alternatively, if you want a more complicated rule that keeps BS relevant, you could do something like this:

Blast Weapons:
Some weapons have Blast X (where X is D3, D6, etc) in their special rules. Immediately after resolving the shot(s) for this weapon the target unit suffers an additional X hits, up to the number of remaining models in the unit, at half the strength value of the weapon. These additional hits apply even if all normal shots for the weapon miss.

Under this rule a LRBT's main gun might be Heavy 1, STR 8, AP -2, D D3, Blast D6. You still care about BS for that STR 8 main shot, but now you have a lot fewer turns where it does nothing.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
I miss Templates and scatter dice a lot.

I feel they suffered from GWs poor implimentation and excessive use than being a poor concept.

I also really don't get why everyone is suddenly thrilled they don't have to space their units out so carefully when every discussion on the current competative meta is about carefully spacing your units out to deny deepstrike, congaline to a specific model, to hang out in this guys aura.

If you're not playing competatively, you don't have to do that, but just as much you never had to spent your movement phase dedicated to ensuring I hit less models with my battlecannon, either.

If you're playing games with people whom you have _actual arguements_ that neither of you enjoy about the scatter dice, I strongly suspect you're playing with the wrong people, and the removal of the scatter dice is unlikely to have turned your opponent from TFG till your best bro.
Likely now you're arguing about some obsecure loopholl in the rules, like if Tallarn transports can outflank with non tallarn infantry in using the stratagem.

Problem players always exist. That's not the scatter dice's fault. 40k's rules have never held up under super compeative play, but stuff like scatter dice and templates often made it more fun for casual play. I miss that. It is, as people keep repeatedly noting, a lot more bland now.

I agree with everything that has been said here, the only thing probably being replacing the scatter die itself with a D6 scatter or making it "roll to hit each model under the template" or so. Scatter angles were always more prone to approximation. But the whole "obscure loophole" observation is spot-on.

Seriously, today's templates hit about the same amount of models. You only think they killed more because of the AP system working differently.

 CrownAxe wrote:

 amanita wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 godardc wrote:
...They were efficient and fun, and 40 is a game, game are supposed to be fun.

No. Games are what ever you want out of them. They aren't exclusively for fun. There is a reason some people actually choose to play games competitvely

I
Why do people believe that 'fun' and 'competitive' are mutually exclusive?

Yeah man, you tell him

Um, he's replying to you. Forget to log out of the old alt account or something there?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Seriously, today's templates hit about the same amount of models. You only think they killed more because of the AP system working differently.

They really don't. A LRBT's gun in 8th edition is D6 shots at a 4+ to hit, averaging 1.75 hits. A LRBT's gun in 7th edition usually had a minimum of 2-3 hits, and often 3-5. A plasma cannon on that LRBT is D3 shots at a 4+ to hit, averaging 1 hit with a significant chance of zero. That same plasma cannon in 7th had a minimum of 1 hit that was almost guaranteed, and could hit more models if you caught a target at less than 2" coherency. Hit rates have gone down significantly in 8th, on top of the reduction in overall damage from the to-wound table making it much harder to wound on a 2+ and the AP system making armor saves a lot more effective.

About the scatter dice, why hasn't anyone at GW thought to make a simple spinner with a laser sticking out of the arrowhead to represent direction so that the scatter would be easily determined? Could be a great little money-maker and very novel, solve the scatter issue and allow flamers to keep working like flamers, mortars and big gunz to keep working like mortars and big gunz and so on.
As for people complaining about how many doods being under a template, I would only play those fools once. Then I would not talk to them in a friendly tone again. Screw that noise. Maybe after an apology for having a bad day, a second or even third chance may be warranted but past that, any fool who gets hung up on a template placement and who can't see his/her way to rolling a d6 to sort things out or let it go to a third party to judge for that matter, well, better off painting than playing a game with such an animal again.
Templates were a counter to densely packed cheap troops on an already small tabletop, made model placement more important, and overall added strategy to army composition and movement.
But, when sales-snakes level everything down to idiot-level, we get super-buffmander lotto-hammer with extra bling.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Seriously, today's templates hit about the same amount of models. You only think they killed more because of the AP system working differently.

They really don't. A LRBT's gun in 8th edition is D6 shots at a 4+ to hit, averaging 1.75 hits. A LRBT's gun in 7th edition usually had a minimum of 2-3 hits, and often 3-5. A plasma cannon on that LRBT is D3 shots at a 4+ to hit, averaging 1 hit with a significant chance of zero. That same plasma cannon in 7th had a minimum of 1 hit that was almost guaranteed, and could hit more models if you caught a target at less than 2" coherency. Hit rates have gone down significantly in 8th, on top of the reduction in overall damage from the to-wound table making it much harder to wound on a 2+ and the AP system making armor saves a lot more effective.

Dude, I exalt so many of your posts, I would buy the coffee-table picture book compendium.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 xeen wrote:

pismakron wrote:
Templates were a garbage mechanic that often slowed the game down to half speed. Furthermore, they often lead to lengthy discussions because every template application relied heavily on judgement calls. I don't miss units like burnas or wyverns spitting out 4000 templates a second, or waiting on my opponent to meticulously move his ocean of Hormagaunts, keeping every single model 2" away from its neighbour.

The replacement for templates and scatter die, essentially D6 shots, is not really satisfactory. But at least the game is not slowed or killed by rolling a single die.

This. Templates slowed the game down some much if your opponent was trying to mitigate the amount of models that could be covered in the movement phase. And if you ever played an army that had like 10 of them in it the shooting phase took forever, especially if there was "discussion" about what models were covered and the direction of the scatter dice.

I can never understand why people are in such a hurry to get games over and done with when I spend most of my time wishing that I had time to sit for a good game with an old buddy and just getting the game to happen is the obstacle that stops it. This is supposed to be the best way to spend time, not a reason to hurry up and finish to do it again the same way with bad rules. Why? Better off one good long game full of heavy decisions and realistic interactions than a rapid-fire collectible card game with dice and a little hobby on the front end. I just don;t understand that mindset.

Oh, and for those hung up on getting to use ALL of their models every game, or playing some points level - 2000, 2500, 3000 - on a 6x4 table, complaining that templates discourage their packing dozens of models into a neat row, well, that is how it works in real life too - you don't wanna walk shoulder to shoulder, not since men added rifling to their gun barrels at the very least, and especially not since the grenade. So, yes, lots of guardsmen look cool all packed together, but this is to be discouraged from a tactical standpoint for obvious reasons. And, where the game does not discourage this practice, it breaks from realism in a rather avoidable way. Space your models or allow them to be blown to bits more easily, this is just how it is. You want to field large units of cheap infantry and avoid template weapons and mitigate damage from blast weapons, play on a larger table.

^ Well said.

And I'm sorry, but those who genuinely agonized over the use of templates are probably either playing against ass-hats or their opponents are.

Formosa places down template, rolls scatter "hey dude, lands there right?"
Opponent "yep"
Formosa "how many hits is that dude"
Opponent "looks like 5"
Formosa "cool"
Formosa rolls 5 dice for wounds

Wow.... really wish this was faster to play, maybe if they had me roll d6 for shots, then how ever many shots need rolling to hit, then wound.... wait.... how is this any faster or slower?

The real problem came in due to people (usually WAAC) trying to argue the point constantly, no that's 7 under the template !!! Kind of thing that slowed the game down, slightly.

 Formosa wrote:
Formosa places down template, rolls scatter "hey dude, lands there right?"
Opponent "yep"
Formosa "how many hits is that dude"
Opponent "looks like 5"
Formosa "cool"
Formosa rolls 5 dice for wounds

Wow.... really wish this was faster to play, maybe if they had me roll d6 for shots, then how ever many shots need rolling to hit, then wound.... wait.... how is this any faster or slower?

The real problem came in due to people (usually WAAC) trying to argue the point constantly, no that's 7 under the template !!! Kind of thing that slowed the game down, slightly.

40k has pretty much throughout its history been written assuming reasonable players, thankfully they are starting a slightly more defensive approach in righting now though.

Templates worked for reasonable people but a bit like "guess ranges" and "no pre-measuring" are easily abused and cause issues when playing some players that can easily be avoided.

It may be worth considering "splash" damage though on adjacent units - say add back a "blast" keyword that can be assigned to weapons

Blast Weapons
Some weapons cause large explosions and can cause harm over an extended area, calculate the number of hits on the target unit as normal - any unit within 3" of the target unit takes half this number of hits with a strength and SP reduced by one point - no individual model in adjacent units can take more than a single hit


Will cover the dense clustering of units, specifically close in characters (though limited to a single hit so this stops being a sniper weapon) and smaller clusters of small units around buff characters, but is likely faster.

Note this also punishes players spreading large units out as far as possible to deny deep striking

 Formosa wrote:
Formosa places down template, rolls scatter "hey dude, lands there right?"
Opponent "yep"
Formosa "how many hits is that dude"
Opponent "looks like 5"
Formosa "cool"
Formosa rolls 5 dice for wounds

Wow.... really wish this was faster to play, maybe if they had me roll d6 for shots, then how ever many shots need rolling to hit, then wound.... wait.... how is this any faster or slower?

The real problem came in due to people (usually WAAC) trying to argue the point constantly, no that's 7 under the template !!! Kind of thing that slowed the game down, slightly.

To be fair, you did skip the part where you took the time to figure out where exactly to place the template to get as many hits as possible (sometimes that is a quick endeavor, sometimes it is not) and you skipped the part where both you and your opponent had to measure out 2" between each model in a unit every movement phase and had to take the time to position them just right so a template would hit as little as possible, even with a scatter.

Are you really going to try and sit there and tell me with a straight face that any shooting phase involving Wyverns back when templates were a thing went faster than they do now?

Also, generally speaking, yes, rolling for the number of shots you get, rolling to hit, then rolling to wound is gonna go faster than placing the template to maximize your number of hits, rolling to scatter, moving the template as necessary, figuring out again how many models you hit, then rolling to wound, and repeating for as many shots as you get.

 Peregrine wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Seriously, today's templates hit about the same amount of models. You only think they killed more because of the AP system working differently.

They really don't. A LRBT's gun in 8th edition is D6 shots at a 4+ to hit, averaging 1.75 hits. A LRBT's gun in 7th edition usually had a minimum of 2-3 hits, and often 3-5. A plasma cannon on that LRBT is D3 shots at a 4+ to hit, averaging 1 hit with a significant chance of zero. That same plasma cannon in 7th had a minimum of 1 hit that was almost guaranteed, and could hit more models if you caught a target at less than 2" coherency. Hit rates have gone down significantly in 8th, on top of the reduction in overall damage from the to-wound table making it much harder to wound on a 2+ and the AP system making armor saves a lot more effective.

I'll disagree on that. If the Battle Cannon was hitting 2-3 models minimum, it wouldn't have been as bad as it was. Scattering + spacing made hitting 3 models a rare prospect, when you were more likely to get just 1 or 2. With the new Grinding Advance rule, you're getting an average of 7 shots, which is 3.5.

And don't get me started on the Plasma Cannon sponson. Nobody took Plasma Cannons! At least now with the average of 2 shots you're getting a hit, rather than hoping the shot lands on at least one guy.

The wounding and AP mechanic is what really makes it a worse prospect.

Mixed emotions as most above. I loved the visual of a template, and think the d6 replacement is woefully inadequate.
On the other hand, the first person I played with the 2" template for model spacing in movement (and you people know who you are...) was the complete opposite of the "feel" templates brought.
Overall...like the simpler new way, just needs the numbers to be fiddled so those weapons are worthwhile again

 jeff white wrote:
About the scatter dice, why hasn't anyone at GW thought to make a simple spinner with a laser sticking out of the arrowhead to represent direction so that the scatter would be easily determined? Could be a great little money-maker and very novel, solve the scatter issue and allow flamers to keep working like flamers, mortars and big gunz to keep working like mortars and big gunz and so on.
As for people complaining about how many doods being under a template, I would only play those fools once. Then I would not talk to them in a friendly tone again. Screw that noise. Maybe after an apology for having a bad day, a second or even third chance may be warranted but past that, any fool who gets hung up on a template placement and who can't see his/her way to rolling a d6 to sort things out or let it go to a third party to judge for that matter, well, better off painting than playing a game with such an animal again.
Templates were a counter to densely packed cheap troops on an already small tabletop, made model placement more important, and overall added strategy to army composition and movement.
But, when sales-snakes level everything down to idiot-level, we get super-buffmander lotto-hammer with extra bling.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Seriously, today's templates hit about the same amount of models. You only think they killed more because of the AP system working differently.

They really don't. A LRBT's gun in 8th edition is D6 shots at a 4+ to hit, averaging 1.75 hits. A LRBT's gun in 7th edition usually had a minimum of 2-3 hits, and often 3-5. A plasma cannon on that LRBT is D3 shots at a 4+ to hit, averaging 1 hit with a significant chance of zero. That same plasma cannon in 7th had a minimum of 1 hit that was almost guaranteed, and could hit more models if you caught a target at less than 2" coherency. Hit rates have gone down significantly in 8th, on top of the reduction in overall damage from the to-wound table making it much harder to wound on a 2+ and the AP system making armor saves a lot more effective.

Dude, I exalt so many of your posts, I would buy the coffee-table picture book compendium.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 xeen wrote:

pismakron wrote:
Templates were a garbage mechanic that often slowed the game down to half speed. Furthermore, they often lead to lengthy discussions because every template application relied heavily on judgement calls. I don't miss units like burnas or wyverns spitting out 4000 templates a second, or waiting on my opponent to meticulously move his ocean of Hormagaunts, keeping every single model 2" away from its neighbour.

The replacement for templates and scatter die, essentially D6 shots, is not really satisfactory. But at least the game is not slowed or killed by rolling a single die.

This. Templates slowed the game down some much if your opponent was trying to mitigate the amount of models that could be covered in the movement phase. And if you ever played an army that had like 10 of them in it the shooting phase took forever, especially if there was "discussion" about what models were covered and the direction of the scatter dice.

I can never understand why people are in such a hurry to get games over and done with when I spend most of my time wishing that I had time to sit for a good game with an old buddy and just getting the game to happen is the obstacle that stops it. This is supposed to be the best way to spend time, not a reason to hurry up and finish to do it again the same way with bad rules. Why? Better off one good long game full of heavy decisions and realistic interactions than a rapid-fire collectible card game with dice and a little hobby on the front end. I just don;t understand that mindset.

Oh, and for those hung up on getting to use ALL of their models every game, or playing some points level - 2000, 2500, 3000 - on a 6x4 table, complaining that templates discourage their packing dozens of models into a neat row, well, that is how it works in real life too - you don't wanna walk shoulder to shoulder, not since men added rifling to their gun barrels at the very least, and especially not since the grenade. So, yes, lots of guardsmen look cool all packed together, but this is to be discouraged from a tactical standpoint for obvious reasons. And, where the game does not discourage this practice, it breaks from realism in a rather avoidable way. Space your models or allow them to be blown to bits more easily, this is just how it is. You want to field large units of cheap infantry and avoid template weapons and mitigate damage from blast weapons, play on a larger table.

So just to give a response on the time thing. I love this game and wish I could take all day to play games. I have been playing since I was 13 years old. I am 37 now. But I don't have all day to play one game anymore. I have a few hours if I am lucky as I have a family and a job and time for hobbies is really limited. That is why I like that the game now plays quicker, because I want to try to get a game in the limited time I have to play. That is why I love a lot of the changes that 8th made. I understand your point that you liked the greater layer of rules, which is a fair opinion, but as for your comment "I just don;t understand that mindset." as to wanting to play quicker, this just letting you know where that mindset comes from. It is not to rush for the sake of rushing, but so people like me can even play. If the game took all day, I would have to sell my stuff because I don't have a full day to play a game. In fact that is one of the reasons I didn't really play 7th, because games just to so long. That is why I can't do tournaments (even though I would love too). So this is why some of us want a faster paced game.

 xeen wrote:

So just to give a response on the time thing. I love this game and wish I could take all day to play games. I have been playing since I was 13 years old. I am 37 now. But I don't have all day to play one game anymore. I have a few hours if I am lucky as I have a family and a job and time for hobbies is really limited. That is why I like that the game now plays quicker, because I want to try to get a game in the limited time I have to play. That is why I love a lot of the changes that 8th made. I understand your point that you liked the greater layer of rules, which is a fair opinion, but as for your comment "I just don;t understand that mindset." as to wanting to play quicker, this just letting you know where that mindset comes from. It is not to rush for the sake of rushing, but so people like me can even play. If the game took all day, I would have to sell my stuff because I don't have a full day to play a game. In fact that is one of the reasons I didn't really play 7th, because games just to so long. That is why I can't do tournaments (even though I would love too). So this is why some of us want a faster paced game.

Funny thing is, I don't find 8th to really be much faster.
2000 points before and after both take about the same time, certainly not all day affairs. 2-3 hours plus setup and cleanup.
The biggest gain for us has been advance instead of run. Greatly reduced double handling is a good change.

Zustiur wrote:

 xeen wrote:

So just to give a response on the time thing. I love this game and wish I could take all day to play games. I have been playing since I was 13 years old. I am 37 now. But I don't have all day to play one game anymore. I have a few hours if I am lucky as I have a family and a job and time for hobbies is really limited. That is why I like that the game now plays quicker, because I want to try to get a game in the limited time I have to play. That is why I love a lot of the changes that 8th made. I understand your point that you liked the greater layer of rules, which is a fair opinion, but as for your comment "I just don;t understand that mindset." as to wanting to play quicker, this just letting you know where that mindset comes from. It is not to rush for the sake of rushing, but so people like me can even play. If the game took all day, I would have to sell my stuff because I don't have a full day to play a game. In fact that is one of the reasons I didn't really play 7th, because games just to so long. That is why I can't do tournaments (even though I would love too). So this is why some of us want a faster paced game.

Funny thing is, I don't find 8th to really be much faster.
2000 points before and after both take about the same time, certainly not all day affairs. 2-3 hours plus setup and cleanup.
The biggest gain for us has been advance instead of run. Greatly reduced double handling is a good change.

And biggest speed up is lack of need for playing past turn 1. Turn 1 takes about as long as turn 1 of 7th ed or maybe even more. But after that no need to move models or roll dice all that much. And with 2 shooty armies even less reason to move models than before thanks to the 8th ed terrain rules that basically means any board not composed of big solid blocks is as good as open field=no need to manouver to say get shooting unit into position where it can ignore terrain.

Wonder how long before players do the ultimate speed boost. Forget the models! Just roll dice and see the casualties. 8th ed certainly works fairly well for that one. Models are basically just wound counters now but that can be done by dice and pen&paper as well. Remove deployment and bother of moving models and game goes even faster.

Yeah but is the game longer b.c more people are playing with more models? I mean i'm playing basically the same DE list and model count but my 5 turn games are for sure faster. Same for my Harlequins.

My Nids are much slower b.c i'm playing with gants, Genestealers now rather than 15 models.

I find (personally) that the new 'blast' system is actually heavily detrimental to both gameplay and the experience.
Back in 7th my LRBT fired a 5" blast that would catch on average 3 models (usually more in the crazy huge games some opponents wanted) and even if they missed and scattered miles the chance was they would still hit something. Hell, I once had a foolish opponent position several units close together and managed to land casualties on each of them, but anyway. Templates where also faster as it was simply a case of placing the template, rolling the relevant scatter and counting the number of hits and rolling to wound.

These days I have to roll a D6 to find how many shots I get, then I have to roll y shots worth of D6 to see how many times I hit, then I have to roll to wound. It not only takes longer (and is utterly daft) but I now average about 1 dead model per shot. wow, a whole casualty! Its not like the Battle Cannon used to be able to really hurt bunched units. And where do those missed shots go? To the unit stood right next to the target? Nope, they just vanish unto the abyss. My LRBT used to make MEQ's cry and wet themselves in fear. Now they throw snowballs.

 master of ordinance wrote:
I find (personally) that the new 'blast' system is actually heavily detrimental to both gameplay and the experience.
Back in 7th my LRBT fired a 5" blast that would catch on average 3 models (usually more in the crazy huge games some opponents wanted) and even if they missed and scattered miles the chance was they would still hit something. Hell, I once had a foolish opponent position several units close together and managed to land casualties on each of them, but anyway. Templates where also faster as it was simply a case of placing the template, rolling the relevant scatter and counting the number of hits and rolling to wound.

These days I have to roll a D6 to find how many shots I get, then I have to roll y shots worth of D6 to see how many times I hit, then I have to roll to wound. It not only takes longer (and is utterly daft) but I now average about 1 dead model per shot. wow, a whole casualty! Its not like the Battle Cannon used to be able to really hurt bunched units. And where do those missed shots go? To the unit stood right next to the target? Nope, they just vanish unto the abyss. My LRBT used to make MEQ's cry and wet themselves in fear. Now they throw snowballs.

8th only makes it longer by 1 set of roll and only if you play against people that dont try and argue about the scatter or number of models under a shaky template. additionaly any additional units hit required their own set of rolls making it longer too.

it happens and it takes a gak ton of time on tables when other people want to play.

and it does and did happen.

but now we no longer have to roll dice near models, its simple and it works. it could be better functionally.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 amanita wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 godardc wrote:
...They were efficient and fun, and 40 is a game, game are supposed to be fun.

No. Games are what ever you want out of them. They aren't exclusively for fun. There is a reason some people actually choose to play games competitvely

I
Why do people believe that 'fun' and 'competitive' are mutually exclusive?

Yeah man, you tell him

Um, he's replying to you. Forget to log out of the old alt account or something there?

Why would he be replying to me we're both saying the same thing

*meanwhile us 30k players are fielding 3k armies with templates and finishing in 2-2.5 hours*

Seriously, I don't know if it's a player mindset thing or just the generally similarly stats but in 30k I've never had a game that went over the time limit, especially in a tournament. And that's with dumb quad mortar templates.

All templates did was make the game last 4 times as long due to having to painstakingly spread out your dudes, and allowing Ork Burnaz to get 75 autohits out of a battlewaggon.

Good times. Good times.

Pancakey wrote:

 Brotherjulian wrote:
I miss templates for flame weapons. Are you going to tell me I hit a 30 man conscript squad with a Hellhound and I'd only get d6 of them? The variable damage die doesn't scale for densely packed models.

10,000 times this.

No counter to cheap hordes. Guess what rules now?

Gods, could you imagine if Vindicators still dropped S10 AP2 pie plates? It'd be glorious.

Primarily a HH player who enjoys 40k as well, I love me a blast template and was sad to see them go.

Nothing like dropping a pie plate on a horde of bodies.

I’m glad they are gone. As cool as they were visually they slowed the game down so much and caused so many arguments. Nothing fun about tripling the length of the movement phase just to make sure all your units were perfectly spaced. Then there was always that player whose template would drift directly to units despite not aiming that way and then the “does the template cover this guys toe” argument. Just giving blast weapons more shots or an increased amount against larger groups is definitely the way forward.

I mean, I don't know what people's communities are like on here but were people really arguing about blast templates?

"Hey man, does the template clip this model"

"Looks close enough to me, go ahead bud"

Is liek how 99% of my conversations about blast templates have ever gone.

They're called tournaments. The things we inexplicably provide tons of prize support, cash, and money for...and then wonder why people pull shenanigans.

 xeen wrote:


So just to give a response on the time thing. I love this game and wish I could take all day to play games. I have been playing since I was 13 years old. I am 37 now. But I don't have all day to play one game anymore. I have a few hours if I am lucky as I have a family and a job and time for hobbies is really limited. That is why I like that the game now plays quicker, because I want to try to get a game in the limited time I have to play. That is why I love a lot of the changes that 8th made. I understand your point that you liked the greater layer of rules, which is a fair opinion, but as for your comment "I just don;t understand that mindset." as to wanting to play quicker, this just letting you know where that mindset comes from. It is not to rush for the sake of rushing, but so people like me can even play. If the game took all day, I would have to sell my stuff because I don't have a full day to play a game. In fact that is one of the reasons I didn't really play 7th, because games just to so long. That is why I can't do tournaments (even though I would love too). So this is why some of us want a faster paced game.

First off, I don't see how templates slowed stuff down so much UNLESS players spent their time measuring 2inches between each model to minimize exposure rather than spacing by eye and theatrics, hugging the hillside or skirting the forest and so on. That is the fun of the game, for myself, and I don't understand the mindset that enjoys min-maxing to WAAC as if this fantastic battle simulation weren't the point. I just don't, frankly can't. Alien to me..

Now, so far as you have so little time (and I appreciate that, I really do, I have so little time too but also aim to get play time all at once, like for a whole day once every few months or even once a year! and I aim also for some scattered hours here and there for painting and so on in between) here is an idea:
Play with fewer models, on smaller tables.
Use better rules, greater realism, with fewer models on smaller tables. Do it more often, if that fits your schedule, but don't try to play 2000points in 2 hours, because that demands that the system get watered down for the rest of us who enjoy the fine grains and layers more than the wham-blam-thank-you-man dice-bonanza.

Asmodios wrote:
I’m glad they are gone. As cool as they were visually they slowed the game down so much and caused so many arguments. Nothing fun about tripling the length of the movement phase just to make sure all your units were perfectly spaced. Then there was always that player whose template would drift directly to units despite not aiming that way and then the “does the template cover this guys toe” argument. Just giving blast weapons more shots or an increased amount against larger groups is definitely the way forward.

Cover this guy's toes? We always count the base (except for skimmers) when using templates. The only time it gets tricky is when a template is near the table center and it's more difficult to get a top view of the template. Hardly worth scrapping the whole concept though. If people want to measure out their models in units to be exactly 2" apart there are other remedies, such as a 10 minute time limit per movement phase. We've even used 5 minute limits on movement phases (for other reasons) and even ork players can manage it.

 amanita wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I’m glad they are gone. As cool as they were visually they slowed the game down so much and caused so many arguments. Nothing fun about tripling the length of the movement phase just to make sure all your units were perfectly spaced. Then there was always that player whose template would drift directly to units despite not aiming that way and then the “does the template cover this guys toe” argument. Just giving blast weapons more shots or an increased amount against larger groups is definitely the way forward.

Cover this guy's toes? We always count the base (except for skimmers) when using templates. The only time it gets tricky is when a template is near the table center and it's more difficult to get a top view of the template. Hardly worth scrapping the whole concept though. If people want to measure out their models in units to be exactly 2" apart there are other remedies, such as a 10 minute time limit per movement phase. We've even used 5 minute limits on movement phases (for other reasons) and even ork players can manage it.

Yeah, I was always waiting for the laser skirted templates on elevated stands, but nobody ever came up with them - at least, I never saw anything like that for sale. Something that would shine a thread of light onto the table the size of a template, and which could be done by simply mounting a counterweighted lazer pointer on a base that allowed it to spin above the field, so that it could shine down an adjustable circle of light directly onto the table. Could solve all sorts of WAAC issues. But, in all the games that I ever played, there was never a problem that "I will get the next beer" wouldn't fix.

I'm happy they're gone.

Templates, when first introduced (when 3 tanks was a lot!) were okay.

Now, when you have all sorts of stuff running around, they don't make sense.

A good 7th question that bothered me is "why is a Baneblade cannon shell equally effective to a lascannon against single-model units?" That logic never followed, and the logic of 8th is that it actually does do more damage to single model units.

I also hated the fiddlyness of it. With each machine having two different-sized templates and one being 10" wide, then you ended up hitting multiple units. Or did you? It depends. Did your opponent space them out enough? If he took the time, I hope you had a book to read in the movement phase. If he didn't, then you still might not hit them because of scatter. In fact, scatter might be bad enough that you completely miss your original target, even with a 10" template. Oh but don't worry, now you have to fire this 5" template.

And then you fire your wyverns...

 amanita wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I’m glad they are gone. As cool as they were visually they slowed the game down so much and caused so many arguments. Nothing fun about tripling the length of the movement phase just to make sure all your units were perfectly spaced. Then there was always that player whose template would drift directly to units despite not aiming that way and then the “does the template cover this guys toe” argument. Just giving blast weapons more shots or an increased amount against larger groups is definitely the way forward.

Cover this guy's toes? We always count the base (except for skimmers) when using templates. The only time it gets tricky is when a template is near the table center and it's more difficult to get a top view of the template. Hardly worth scrapping the whole concept though. If people want to measure out their models in units to be exactly 2" apart there are other remedies, such as a 10 minute time limit per movement phase. We've even used 5 minute limits on movement phases (for other reasons) and even ork players can manage it.

by cover toes, I meant "touch the base" there was always issues with a select few players templates continuing to move a little extra or on a different line then the scatter dice indicated and these weren't WAAC players either I think some people honestly just kinda guide the template subconsciously the way they want it to go. It simply just slowed the game down too much and always left room for some dumb argument where a 3rd party would end up guiding templates. I originally had the "omg they took away our templates" thought but after one game I realized just how much quicker and more enjoyable it made games.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'll disagree on that. If the Battle Cannon was hitting 2-3 models minimum, it wouldn't have been as bad as it was. Scattering + spacing made hitting 3 models a rare prospect, when you were more likely to get just 1 or 2.

No, 2-3 was a pretty consistent minimum. Remember, at 2" coherency a 5" blast template centered over one model will hit that model and any model within coherency of it. Usually, unless you scattered all the way to the edge of a unit you'd have at least two models in coherency with your target model.

With the new Grinding Advance rule, you're getting an average of 7 shots, which is 3.5.

Only because GW acknowledged my point and gave LRBTs double shots. The single D6 that represents a 5" blast template is so inadequate that they had to give the LRBT the equivalent of two 5" blast templates per turn just to make it a relevant unit.

And don't get me started on the Plasma Cannon sponson. Nobody took Plasma Cannons! At least now with the average of 2 shots you're getting a hit, rather than hoping the shot lands on at least one guy.

Don't over-think it, it's just an example of a blast weapon. Feel free to pick any of the other D3 shot small blast equivalents. And before 8th you weren't hoping that the shot lands on at least one guy, you were almost guaranteed to get it. On all but the most extreme scatter you'd hit at least one model, and that's in the worst-case scenario of models at maximum coherency distance. That's a lot more consistency, on top of the ability to pile up tons of hits if you could catch your target at less than maximum coherency (such as if you just forced them to disembark from a transport).

Can someone explain to me how it's more "intuitive, realistic, and fun" to have my Demolisher tank shoot itself instead of the carnifex 6" in front of it?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Can someone explain to me how it's more "intuitive, realistic, and fun" to have my Demolisher tank shoot itself instead of the carnifex 6" in front of it?

You could make a rule where a unit could not shoot itself, but maybe still be damaged by a point blank explosion? Or drifts may not go past the front of the shooter?

But if you are looking for realism perhaps your quest should go beyond 8th Ed mechanics? You know, where a battle among super heavy tanks has all the tactical nuance of playing shuffle board with bowls of pudding. Less actually, since positioning is irrelevant. You could even remove spoonfuls of pudding to represent tank 'wounds' as the titanic bean counters slog it out. Now that would be fun!

Warmachine also solved the scatter dilemma it by stating that a weapon could not scatter more than half the distance to the target enemy unit in question. Tweak it accordingly (personally I have a soft spot for a game modelling being able to throw grenades through windows or bounce them off walls) and go from there.

I personally havent witnessed any time decrease due to the lack of templates. now I'm just rolling D6 multiple times . my game time hasnt dropped at all. if anything it's increased due to the number of models I can bring for the same points cost.

Sure, templates led to some stupid things (like my wolfy friends Vindicator shooting itself in the back when trying to point blank blast my Thunderer) but that was mainly due to GW's shoddy rules writing. As MagicJuggler mentioned, you simply have to implement a rule whereby blasts cannot scatter more than half the distance between the target and firing unit and you have your problem solved.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Can someone explain to me how it's more "intuitive, realistic, and fun" to have my Demolisher tank shoot itself instead of the carnifex 6" in front of it?

You used "realistic" in a sentence that also involved a Carnifex, a 20' tall alien killing machine that can punch bone spikes through tank armor 5x stronger than steel.