Unfortunately, due to my time zone, I will be away when this goes down so wondering if people could discuss it here and also make a transcript of it. Can't wait to see them make or brake the game!

The docs will be up before then i'm sure. It's F5'o'clock!!

How does one 'tune into facebook'?
Is there a direct link to the stream?

HMint wrote:
How does one 'tune into facebook'?
Is there a direct link to the stream?

Go to FB and visit the Warhammer 40,000 page. You'll see the live stream pop up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
20 minutes!!

Hope Facebook has live chat, because it would be hilariously salty no matter what happens in the FAQ.

 meleti wrote:
Hope Facebook has live chat, because it would be hilariously salty no matter what happens in the FAQ.

It does. I have high hopes for this FAQ since they're actually putting it out live and facing the storm.

I'm pretty stooked - It's time for me to be proved wrong! I hate being right all the time.

Also notice it says Errata, Updates, Beta rules, FAQ.

We can really expect a lot from this!

Oh, so the stream shows up there only once it starts?
Thanks.

--I'm out of snacks. Always keep an emergency stack for occasions like this guys.

HMint wrote:
Oh, so the stream shows up there only once it starts?
Thanks.

--I'm out of snacks. Always keep an emergency stack for occasions like this guys.

Correct. We need more popcorn!

oh feth I'm at work. *panic*

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
oh feth I'm at work. *panic*

The docs will go up at the same time. And there will be tons of entertainment in the forums.

Anybody willing to post up some sweet rage post screenshots for my amusement later?

Process wrote:
Anybody willing to post up some sweet rage post screenshots for my amusement later?

Here:

Please somebody record it and the chat! I need to see the salt!

 lolman1c wrote:
Please somebody record it and the chat! I need to see the salt!

FB saves it in their videos for viewing later IIRC.

Would love it if they could just release the FAQ already and stop with the theatrics

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Would love it if they could just release the FAQ already and stop with the theatrics

It's 4:31 - THEY'RE LATE!

I bet they're waiting until the next big tournament to do the stream.

Yep, they're late. REEEEEEEEEE fix my army GW.

OMG FAQ delayed again; it's 3 minutes late.

More like "July FAQ" amirite?

God they can't even keep their own deadlines.

Such incompetence.

(Sarcasm Disclaimer: This Post Is Sarcasm)

Omious music is playing. Fitting.

Is there a file I can download? Might get fired if I watch this.

You all realise they'll probably not even do much major. XD that's the funniest thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I can't wathc it riht now, pls people copy and paste the salt from the chat! I ned to know!

 Xenomancers wrote:
Is there a file I can download? Might get fired if I watch this.

nada

We're live!

FYI - use this link guys :

https://www.facebook.com/pg/WarhammerTVteam/videos/?ref=page_internal


Automatically Appended Next Post:
GK ARE EXEMPT FROM SMITE RULE!

Lunch time!!!

Only Brotherhood of psyker units. Same for Thousand sons.

Weidekuh wrote:
Only Brotherhood of psyker units. Same for Thousand sons.

Yea, baby!

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Weidekuh wrote:
Only Brotherhood of psyker units. Same for Thousand sons.

Yea, baby!

T sons are not brotherhood's. Their is a sorcerer that is casting the spells

 Backspacehacker wrote:


T sons are not brotherhood's. Their is a sorcerer that is casting the spells

Yea i'm still ok with that with the softer rule.

I missed the CP change. Did someone catch it?

Nvm - Battalions 3 to 5. Brigade 9 to 12. Not sure how I feel about that brigade change.

So it turns out that the documents aren't up.

Neat. Keep us updated I guess XD

Holy moly - no more multiple saves.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Point changes included. Not as sweeping.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dark Reapers up in points.
Tyrants up a bit.

3 unit limit on datasheets confirmed as a suggestion for Matched Play in Events.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

What does this mean? No stacking 'FNP-style' saves and armour saves? No armour + invulnerable?

Rule of 3 (suggested) for tournaments - no more than 3 of a datasheet excluding troops and transports.

Rule of three! OhhYeah!! No more spam one unit armies!

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

What does this mean? No stacking 'FNP-style' saves and armour saves? No armour + invulnerable?

I took it as Morty could take Invuln and FNP, but not benefit from a stratagem or something after. Anything that "ignores wounds" is limited to 1.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Rule of 3 (suggested) for tournaments - no more than 3 of a datasheet excluding troops and transports.

Which is fine, still kind of dumb, but fine. I say dumb because I'm not sure how much this really effects. Imperial Knights are each a different datasheet so unless you want to take 4 Crusaders it doesn't even effect them.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

What does this mean? No stacking 'FNP-style' saves and armour saves? No armour + invulnerable?

I took it as Morty could take Invuln and FNP, but not benefit from a stratagem or something after. Anything that "ignores wounds" is limited to 1.

Wait, I don't understand still. What stratagem would they benefit after? Is there "another save" stratagem?

 Wibe wrote:
Rule of three! OhhYeah!! No more spam one unit armies!

To be clear: this is GW's suggestion to TOs, not actually part of the Matched Play rules.

Audustum wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Rule of 3 (suggested) for tournaments - no more than 3 of a datasheet excluding troops and transports.

Which is fine, still kind of dumb, but fine. I say dumb because I'm not sure how much this really effects. Imperial Knights are each a different datasheet so unless you want to take 4 Crusaders it doesn't even effect them.

It only stops the really heavy spam.
4+ Custodes bike captains, 4+ Hive Tyrants. That sorta deal. 99% of 'normal' lists shouldn't have an issue with it or be easily able to work around it.

 meleti wrote:

 Wibe wrote:
Rule of three! OhhYeah!! No more spam one unit armies!

To be clear: this is GW's suggestion to TOs, not actually part of the Matched Play rules.

True, but it will hopefully become the standard in tournaments

SOUP IS DEAD ! No more Chaos, Imperium, Tyranids or Aeldari keywords can be used !

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

What does this mean? No stacking 'FNP-style' saves and armour saves? No armour + invulnerable?

I took it as Morty could take Invuln and FNP, but not benefit from a stratagem or something after. Anything that "ignores wounds" is limited to 1.

Wait, I don't understand still. What stratagem would they benefit after? Is there "another save" stratagem?

I assume its stuff like Disgusting Resilience plus the BRB Warlord trait for another 6+++.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Aaranis wrote:
SOUP IS DEAD ! No more Chaos, Imperium, Tyranids or Aeldari keywords can be used !

Within a detachment or at all?

BETA - No chaos, imperium, etc IN a singular detachment. Exceptions for assassins and the like.

Welp. guess my list just found 250 points to spend, goodbye dear Celestine.

 Aaranis wrote:
SOUP IS DEAD ! No more Chaos, Imperium, Tyranids or Aeldari keywords can be used !

In DETACHMENTS not ARMIES.

So, if you can't use Aeldari for a detachment, how can you field Corsairs?

BETA - full half by units and PL ON THE TABLE!

If it arrives FIRST TURN ONLY IN YOUR DEPLOYMENT ZONE.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
BETA - No chaos, imperium, etc IN a singular detachment. Exceptions for assassins and the like.

Thats a good middle ground. I was fearing my 15 SoS wouldnt be playable

 Galas wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
BETA - No chaos, imperium, etc IN a singular detachment. Exceptions for assassins and the like.

Thats a good middle ground. I was fearing my 15 SoS wouldnt be playable

They said SoS were getting a special rule too but didn't say what.

 Aaranis wrote:
SOUP IS DEAD ! No more Chaos, Imperium, Tyranids or Aeldari keywords can be used !

ohh, my "deathguard" maraudersnipers... But even so, I agree with the rule.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
BETA - full half by units and PL ON THE TABLE!

If it arrives FIRST TURN ONLY IN YOUR DEPLOYMENT ZONE.

GSC EXEMPTED

 Daedalus81 wrote:
BETA - full half by units and PL ON THE TABLE!

If it arrives FIRST TURN ONLY IN YOUR DEPLOYMENT ZONE.

Well this is completely idiotic: How would I know the power level of my units? I play points games.
Do I now have to calculate both each time?...

HMint wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
BETA - full half by units and PL ON THE TABLE!

If it arrives FIRST TURN ONLY IN YOUR DEPLOYMENT ZONE.

Well this is completely idiotic: How would I know the power level of my units? I play points games.
Do I now have to calculate both each time?...

It's on the datasheet...and absurdly easy to figure out.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

HMint wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
BETA - full half by units and PL ON THE TABLE!

If it arrives FIRST TURN ONLY IN YOUR DEPLOYMENT ZONE.

Well this is completely idiotic: How would I know the power level of my units? I play points games.
Do I now have to calculate both each time?...

It's on the datasheet...and absurdly easy to figure out.

You don't even need to calculate gear lol

It's not on my army lists though??? Obviously.
PL are so arbitrary, now I am forced to use them even in points games. I do not like this.
PL was ok when I was allowed to ignore its existance.

Warhammer community is now down for maintenance. We're too many people accessing it or are they having to take it down to upload the FAQ?

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
Warhammer community is now down for maintenance. We're too many people accessing it or are they having to take it down to upload the FAQ?

F5'd to death.

I believe they said "or points if you use points" so don't worry for the half army on the table.

HMint wrote:
It's not on my army lists though??? Obviously.
PL are so arbitrary, now I am forced to use them even in points games. I do not like this.
PL was ok when I was allowed to ignore its existance.

So...write it down. It's not arbitrary. It's a rough calculation of the unit strength and an easy guideline for deepstrikers.

Lots of interesting changes... completely changes building army lists, and definitely moves the power scale quite substantially. Can;t wait for the points and all that!

With the changes to CP. Guard got aassive buff
As the army that can spam CP has even more CP to spam with.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
BETA - full half by units and PL ON THE TABLE!

If it arrives FIRST TURN ONLY IN YOUR DEPLOYMENT ZONE.

So basically, shooting armies are buffed, melee armies are nerfed?

No more tying things up with T1 deepstrike+charge; meanwhile, you can still T1 blast from all the way across the table.

I thought Orks would still have "Da' Jump", but seeing as how they deployed as per reinforcements - we'll see what the FAQ's wording is.

Well that wss boring. Everything seemed pretty well thought out... now I have nothing to complain about.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

HMint wrote:
It's not on my army lists though??? Obviously.
PL are so arbitrary, now I am forced to use them even in points games. I do not like this.
PL was ok when I was allowed to ignore its existance.

So...write it down. It's not arbitrary. It's a rough calculation of the unit strength and an easy guideline for deepstrikers.

Huh? only caught like the last 2-3 mins of the stream cos i was driving home from work.. What's this about PL?

So deep-strike protection is less reliable now, since you have to wait until Turn 2 to drop in outside of your own DZ if I understand correctly?

Well.. with only watching the stream and listening to them describe things and not having read it myself. I am happy with what they mentioned! It all sounded good.

Terrible Q&A though... answered like 2 questions from chat.

Is it over?

I don't think I like the deepstrike change.
Feels like they fethed up deepstriking this edition and now that its not a single rule they can tweak they just slam a dumb restriction on it rather then fix dozens of individual rules.

Not being able to meaningfully Deepstrike turn 1 feths up so many armies/units.

I'm worried that these changes mean that if your army can't cross the table T1, such as Tyranids/Genestealer madness (do they need to deepstrike The Swarmlord for this?), or reach out and touch someone, such as Imperial Guard; you're dead in the water?

Deepstriking nerfed to deployment zone on T1 is a massive blow to any army that relied on getting in range, especially those that are close-combat based (Orks, Da' Jump).

Oh, nevermind that Imperial Guard are getting even MORE CPs from the detachment changes apparently.

I'm not quite sure that whole bit about 'Alpha Strike' made a lot of sense.
They started out with how there are so many guns in the game and those guns tend to blow your stuff off the table turn 1.
Which of course means they need to limit deepstrike...?
Last time I checked most of those guns fire across the table no problem and don't need deepstrike.

I guess they specifically meant CC alpha strike?

 Ordana wrote:
I don't think I like the deepstrike change.
Feels like they fethed up deepstriking this edition and now that its not a single rule they can tweak they just slam a dumb restriction on it rather then fix dozens of individual rules.

Not being able to meaningfully Deepstrike turn 1 feths up so many armies/units.

On the other hand putting more on the table and deploying it aggressively is more doable since you don't have to worry about getting stuff in your face.

So screens to prevent getting obliterated in CC 1st turn have become less important. We might have some armies that have a chance to shoot something now.

Disappointed it's a beta rule for the keywords limitations... The problem is multiple different faction detachments, not mixing in the same. You already lose too much boni when doing that. And if it's a beta rule half the players won't like it and will say they don't have to apply it, will feel great in LGS.

 Aaranis wrote:
So screens to prevent getting obliterated in CC 1st turn have become less important. We might have some armies that have a chance to shoot something now.

Disappointed it's a beta rule for the keywords limitations... The problem is multiple different faction detachments, not mixing in the same. You already lose too much boni when doing that. And if it's a beta rule half the players won't like it and will say they don't have to apply it, will feel great in LGS.

Big tournies will take up the Beta rules and eventually they'll become standard after tweaking.

True. I feel like Blood Angels are gonna feel that the most. Isn't that their entire schtick!?

Glad my Scions will still be useful. Will just have to rely on my Guardsmen to withstand the storm before they drop in and deal with the tough stuff.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
I don't think I like the deepstrike change.
Feels like they fethed up deepstriking this edition and now that its not a single rule they can tweak they just slam a dumb restriction on it rather then fix dozens of individual rules.

Not being able to meaningfully Deepstrike turn 1 feths up so many armies/units.

On the other hand putting more on the table and deploying it aggressively is more doable since you don't have to worry about getting stuff in your face.

Right. Part of the double-whammy of a good alpha strike army was forcing you to deploy screens/expendables in front of stuff, and then nuking the stuff off the board because it couldn't effectively move up through its own screens. At least now, they've neutered the double-whammy, which means that all that is required to balance the game is making super long-ranged "reach out and touch you" shooting either more expensive or less lethal. It's half the problem solved.

Or, they could reduce lethality.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
I don't think I like the deepstrike change.
Feels like they fethed up deepstriking this edition and now that its not a single rule they can tweak they just slam a dumb restriction on it rather then fix dozens of individual rules.

Not being able to meaningfully Deepstrike turn 1 feths up so many armies/units.

Aaranis wrote:So screens to prevent getting obliterated in CC 1st turn have become less important. We might have some armies that have a chance to shoot something now.

Disappointed it's a beta rule for the keywords limitations... The problem is multiple different faction detachments, not mixing in the same. You already lose too much boni when doing that. And if it's a beta rule half the players won't like it and will say they don't have to apply it, will feel great in LGS.

On the other hand putting more on the table and deploying it aggressively is more doable since you don't have to worry about getting stuff in your face.

Meanwhile, shooting armies can still shoot you, same as always. This just means they can obliterate MORE of your army on the first turn; and they're less punished by going second - your melee units won't be in range to stop them, even if they don't go first.

 Ordana wrote:
I don't think I like the deepstrike change.
Feels like they fethed up deepstriking this edition and now that its not a single rule they can tweak they just slam a dumb restriction on it rather then fix dozens of individual rules.

Not being able to meaningfully Deepstrike turn 1 feths up so many armies/units.

Yeah but it also frees up a lot of other armies. No longer mandatory to spam-shield your deployment zone. Making it less mandatory to have those cheap screens. Could make some interesting changes in army builds.

Any bets on when the GW machines come back online? XD

If I heard correctly they said IG get so many CP anyway that it doesn't even mater if they get more... this kinda just illustrates how the 40k devs think... it's kinda lazy... unless I heard wrong.

 Kelligula wrote:
True. I feel like Blood Angels are gonna feel that the most. Isn't that their entire schtick!?

Glad my Scions will still be useful. Will just have to rely on my Guardsmen to withstand the storm before they drop in and deal with the tough stuff.

BA are basically dead with these deepstrike rules yeah.
They get 1 DC unit across the board turn 1 (using pre-game move). which are out all on their own and no one else will show up until T2 atleast.

Soon(tm).

RIP Grey Knights? I mean, their only viable strategy is to deepstrike and assault, if they are forced to wait for the 2nd turn most likely they will be tabled before their army can get in.

Gunline 40k.

I think that the 50% points on the table is a good enough change, it limits deepstrikes without killing it entirely with the deployment zone limit.

R.I.P. Farsight Enclaves.

I love how people think that no T1 deepstrike = no need for screens, and that army lists will significantly change.

Why?

You still need screens for T2 deepstrikers; and, if you're a gunline, you don't give a feth about needing to move. The only thing will change is that non-gunline armies will have a weaker alpha strike, as more points will need to be spent on durability to weather the first turn alpha strike; meaning less offense, meaning your gunline operates just as well.

MalfunctBot wrote:
Gunline 40k.

I think that the 50% points on the table is a good enough change, it limits deepstrikes without killing it entirely with the deployment zone limit.

R.I.P. Farsight Enclaves.

As long as it's power levels, FSE bombs might survive. Crisis suits cost way more points than power.

If it's points in points games though... rip. That's like 1100 points of deep striking units, minimum.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
With the changes to CP. Guard got aassive buff
As the army that can spam CP has even more CP to spam with.

Guard run out of effective things to do with CP, and they've already been able to soft-cap CP, so it doesn't really matter. What this change DOES matter for is allowing elite Imperial armies not NEED to bring along a CP farm detachment of Guard in order to have enough CP to fuel their stratagems.

 Ordana wrote:

 Kelligula wrote:
True. I feel like Blood Angels are gonna feel that the most. Isn't that their entire schtick!?

Glad my Scions will still be useful. Will just have to rely on my Guardsmen to withstand the storm before they drop in and deal with the tough stuff.

BA are basically dead with these deepstrike rules yeah.
They get 1 DC unit across the board turn 1 (using pre-game move). which are out all on their own and no one else will show up until T2 atleast.

Meh, BA will be fine. They'll use the same old tricks they've been using, they just don't have this one shiny toy. It seems like it's more likely to affect GK than anyone, and they could use some love.

fe40k wrote:
I love how people think that no T1 deepstrike = no need for screens, and that army lists will significantly change.

Why?

You still need screens for T2 deepstrikers; and, if you're a gunline, you don't give a feth about needing to move. The only thing will change is that non-gunline armies will have a weaker alpha strike, as more points will need to be spent on durability to weather the first turn alpha strike; meaning less offense, meaning your gunline operates just as well.

Basically.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
BETA - full half by units and PL ON THE TABLE!

If it arrives FIRST TURN ONLY IN YOUR DEPLOYMENT ZONE.

So shooting is the only way to play the game now?

So in regards to the deepstrike rule, what I’m getting from GW is to play Alpha Legion or die.

fe40k wrote:
I love how people think that no T1 deepstrike = no need for screens, and that army lists will significantly change.

Why?

You still need screens for T2 deepstrikers; and, if you're a gunline, you don't give a feth about needing to move. Their army list won't change, and neither will yours.

Lists might not change (I think they will, but no matter), but the pressure to Precision Deploy will be reduced, speeding up deployment.

At this point, if it can deepstrike, it needs a points decrease.

There's very little reason to take deepstrikers, when you also need to take enough durable units so your army doesn't get wiped out ("boots on the ground" rule).

Gunline 40k; probably the most apt description of it at this point.

fe40k wrote:
I love how people think that no T1 deepstrike = no need for screens, and that army lists will significantly change.

Why?

You still need screens for T2 deepstrikers; and, if you're a gunline, you don't give a feth about needing to move. The only thing will change is that non-gunline armies will have a weaker alpha strike, as more points will need to be spent on durability to weather the first turn alpha strike; meaning less offense, meaning your gunline operates just as well.

It gives gunlines 1 more turn of free shooting. Which is a big deal. Aswell as give them a free turn to spread out and deny even more area to deepstrike in for the assault list.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

WOW.

feth Iron Hands players huh?

It's about staggering the alpha strike potential over multiple turns. Sure now you only get to do that turn 2 but that is a turn of shooting/ preparing your target gets.

DCannon4Life wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
With the changes to CP. Guard got aassive buff
As the army that can spam CP has even more CP to spam with.

Guard run out of effective things to do with CP, and they've already been able to soft-cap CP, so it doesn't really matter. What this change DOES matter for is allowing elite Imperial armies not NEED to bring along a CP farm detachment of Guard in order to have enough CP to fuel their stratagems.

I don't quite get this reasoning. The reason those armys had few CP to begin with, was that they have trouble filling out detachments. That is still the case.
And the CP farm detachment is even better now at +5, right?

Soo...

 Ordana wrote:

 Kelligula wrote:
True. I feel like Blood Angels are gonna feel that the most. Isn't that their entire schtick!?

Glad my Scions will still be useful. Will just have to rely on my Guardsmen to withstand the storm before they drop in and deal with the tough stuff.

BA are basically dead with these deepstrike rules yeah.
They get 1 DC unit across the board turn 1 (using pre-game move). which are out all on their own and no one else will show up until T2 atleast.

Blood Angels veterans please educate me if you think otherwise... but RIP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

WOW.

feth Iron Hands players huh?

GW doesn't even try to hide their complete disregard for them lol

They confirmed not a lot of points changes so I don't think it should majorly change local meta's/ lists. Tournaments will be affected but they always are.

 GuardStrider wrote:
RIP Grey Knights? I mean, their only viable strategy is to deepstrike and assault, if they are forced to wait for the 2nd turn most likely they will be tabled before their army can get in.

Sudden death only kicks in on the second battle round, so if the GK player goes first and initial deployments get tabled they can still bring the pain. If they went second.... Auto loss

 Earth127 wrote:
They confirmed not a lot of points changes so I don't think it should majorly change local meta's/ lists. Tournaments will be affected but they always are.

Point increase for Dark Reapers. Tyrand list got hit by the max 3 limit.

 Earth127 wrote:
It's about staggering the alpha strike potential over multiple turns. Sure now you only get to do that turn 2 but that is a turn of shooting/ preparing your target gets.

Gunlines alpha strikes aren't "staggered".

If they were, there would be a -1/-2/-3 to hit penalty for all shooting in the first round; but the addition that a natural roll of 6 always hits.

Feth melee armies, right?

 Ordana wrote:

fe40k wrote:
I love how people think that no T1 deepstrike = no need for screens, and that army lists will significantly change.

Why?

You still need screens for T2 deepstrikers; and, if you're a gunline, you don't give a feth about needing to move. The only thing will change is that non-gunline armies will have a weaker alpha strike, as more points will need to be spent on durability to weather the first turn alpha strike; meaning less offense, meaning your gunline operates just as well.

It gives gunlines 1 more turn of free shooting. Which is a big deal. Aswell as give them a free turn to spread out and deny even more area to deepstrike in for the assault list.

As a Guard player I can easily see myself nuking anything without having to worry about T1 deepstrike. It feels really dirty now.

The detachement CP change makes it even better to have a AM batallion for CP farming.

MalfunctBot wrote:
Gunline 40k.

I think that the 50% points on the table is a good enough change, it limits deepstrikes without killing it entirely with the deployment zone limit.

R.I.P. Farsight Enclaves.

I believe it is 50% points AND 50% Power level on the table lol... Trying to make Power Level mean something

 Aaranis wrote:
SOUP IS DEAD ! No more Chaos, Imperium, Tyranids or Aeldari keywords can be used !

Soup is still in as far as I can see, they don't understand what soup is. You can still build a AM / Guard battery. Have a separate detachment of Blood Angels, and spend every CP in the Blood Angels detachment.

Unless I missed something which is possible, I have a bad signal in this concrete block I call my work office it cut out several times.

Weidekuh wrote:
The detachement CP change makes it even better to have a AM batallion for CP farming.

Yup; it just further magnifies CP inbalances between armies.

I'm still a fan of the suggestion someone posted - All armies have a base CP (say, 10), and detachments provide a negative, not a positive - larger armies are harder to command than small, elite armies.

 lolman1c wrote:

fe40k wrote:
I love how people think that no T1 deepstrike = no need for screens, and that army lists will significantly change.

Why?

You still need screens for T2 deepstrikers; and, if you're a gunline, you don't give a feth about needing to move. The only thing will change is that non-gunline armies will have a weaker alpha strike, as more points will need to be spent on durability to weather the first turn alpha strike; meaning less offense, meaning your gunline operates just as well.

Basically.

It actually makes screens less important as you don't have to weather the T1 strikes. It doesn't change my list, but it does change other lists.

 Kelligula wrote:

Blood Angels veterans please educate me if you think otherwise... but RIP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

WOW.

feth Iron Hands players huh?

GW doesn't even try to hide their complete disregard for them lol

You guys should read the rest of the stuff before you spaz out.

You guys understand the deep strike thing is a BETA rule amd as such can be changed by your feedback right? Why are you bitching about a rule that is both no official and still subject to change.

Kdash wrote:

MalfunctBot wrote:
Gunline 40k.

I think that the 50% points on the table is a good enough change, it limits deepstrikes without killing it entirely with the deployment zone limit.

R.I.P. Farsight Enclaves.

I believe it is 50% points AND 50% Power level on the table lol... Trying to make Power Level mean something

Oh no - a simple way for your opponent to verify that you dropped a proper amount of stuff. How terrible.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kelligula wrote:

Blood Angels veterans please educate me if you think otherwise... but RIP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

WOW.

feth Iron Hands players huh?

GW doesn't even try to hide their complete disregard for them lol

You guys should read the rest of the stuff before you spaz out.

Is it incorrect that multiple FNP doesn't stack?

That does, in fact, mean screw Iron Hands players. They can't even get benefit with their slightly better Dreads!

 Sim-Life wrote:
You guys understand the deep strike thing is a BETA rule amd as such can be changed by your feedback right? Why are you bitching about a rule that is both no official and still subject to change.

No, they do not understand any difference. Even when they saw previous beta rules get modified.

 Sim-Life wrote:
You guys understand the deep strike thing is a BETA rule amd as such can be changed by your feedback right? Why are you bitching about a rule that is both no official and still subject to change.

Because it is likely to be adopted by most play groups just like the previous Beta rules were. And our whining here does not stop us from also sending feedback to GW?

 Sim-Life wrote:
You guys understand the deep strike thing is a BETA rule amd as such can be changed by your feedback right? Why are you bitching about a rule that is both no official and still subject to change.

It's because it shows the designers have no clue what they're doing. They basically said "LOL what are Grey Knights?", which is easily the most hurt army by the change.

 Sim-Life wrote:
You guys understand the deep strike thing is a BETA rule amd as such can be changed by your feedback right? Why are you bitching about a rule that is both no official and still subject to change.

We are discussing it. Because it is a BETA rule and that is the purpose of a BETA rule, right?

So - as I expected. Nothing good in this FAQ. In fact - the 2 biggest changes are about the dumbest thing they could have done.

T1 DS gone - so most melle units will never see play now.
CP changes - uhhh...that's just about the dumbest thing they could have done.

Armies that are almsot unplayable now.
Tyranids (without tyrgons and hive tyrant DS - the army such massive chode)
I guess I can just take 9 Carnifex on 3 data slates - I thought they wanted to stop spam - not encourage it!?!?!

Grey Knights - somehow they made this army worse? I mean...Really?
Blood Angels?
Korne Daemons?
BUFF IG CP generator?

No mentions about -1 to hit stacking and -1 to hit army traits (the most busted gak in the game)

As expected - nothing good comes out of this FAQ. Plus they make the game worse LOL.

This team needs to be fired.

As far as the deep strike limit, they said it was half your units or Power Level, IF YOU'RE USING POWER LEVEL. If you're not using power level, all you have to worry about is the number of units you have.

They also said their were exceptions to the 1st turn deep strike limitation. So everyone who is having an aneurysm over that one should wait until they see the actual FAQs for what they play before they flip out too much.

Yeah; if you had any hope for the game - this FAQ is all the proof you need to see to understand that the designers have ZERO clue what they're doing.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kelligula wrote:

Blood Angels veterans please educate me if you think otherwise... but RIP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

WOW.

feth Iron Hands players huh?

GW doesn't even try to hide their complete disregard for them lol

You guys should read the rest of the stuff before you spaz out.

You're probably right. Is the GW site back up? I couldn't get to the FAQ page.

How do Imperial Knights play with the Rule of 3 is going to be interesting...

 Ordana wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
You guys understand the deep strike thing is a BETA rule amd as such can be changed by your feedback right? Why are you bitching about a rule that is both no official and still subject to change.

Because it is likely to be adopted by most play groups just like the previous Beta rules were. And our whining here does not stop us from also sending feedback to GW?

Sure, but acting like GW hurt your baby is not discussing it.

The last Betas got mainstream when LVO pushed them out. Nothing says that these will do the same. There's also exemptions and other items to consider from the docs we don't yet have.

And above all - maybe we should TRY playing with them for a couple games and give proper feedback?

 Sim-Life wrote:
You guys understand the deep strike thing is a BETA rule amd as such can be changed by your feedback right? Why are you bitching about a rule that is both no official and still subject to change.

I know it's the Beta Rule, but it's one that I do not believe should become a full rule in its current form, so I am presenting this point of view on an internet message board about the discussion of plastic army men to try and convince others towards my perspective as to prevent this ruling from becoming official legislation.

Also I found it hilarious that when they were talking about limiting Alpha Strikes in the lead up to this rule in the stream, the guy used a squad of Hellblasters killing his Tesseract Vault Turn 1 as an example... Before immediately admitting that no, Hellblasters do not Deep Strike.

Reemule wrote:
How do Imperial Knights play with the Rule of 3 is going to be interesting...

It's why Amigers exist as a 3 per selection essentially.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
How do Imperial Knights play with the Rule of 3 is going to be interesting...

It's why Amigers exist as a 3 per selection essentially.

Keep in mind, there already are 4-5 knight datasheets, which is what the rule of 3 is limiting. So taking 4 Knight Errants would be no good, but 3 Errants and a Crusader would be fine?

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_The_Big_FAQ_1_2018_en.pdf

FAQ LINK

fe40k wrote:
Yeah; if you had any hope for the game - this FAQ is all the proof you need to see to understand that the designers have ZERO clue what they're doing.

"ZERO clue" Seriously? Please contribute something thoughtful or refrain from clogging this thread with pointless, baseless, inane, hyperbolic statements. Cheers.

Geronimo509 wrote:
As far as the deep strike limit, they said it was half your units or Power Level, IF YOU'RE USING POWER LEVEL. If you're not using power level, all you have to worry about is the number of units you have.

They also said their were exceptions to the 1st turn deep strike limitation. So everyone who is having an aneurysm over that one should wait until they see the actual FAQs for what they play before they flip out too much.

I half expect drop pods to supersede this, that's their point right?

HuskyWarhammer wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
How do Imperial Knights play with the Rule of 3 is going to be interesting...

It's why Amigers exist as a 3 per selection essentially.

Keep in mind, there already are 4-5 knight datasheets, which is what the rule of 3 is limiting. So taking 4 Knight Errants would be no good, but 3 Errants and a Crusader would be fine?

Yea, seems so.

Reemule wrote:
How do Imperial Knights play with the Rule of 3 is going to be interesting...

It's 3 of the same DATASHEET. Every Knight is a different datasheet. So no change.

Kdash wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_The_Big_FAQ_1_2018_en.pdf

FAQ LINK

Is that the entire FAQ?

 fraser1191 wrote:

Kdash wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_The_Big_FAQ_1_2018_en.pdf

FAQ LINK

Is that the entire FAQ?

Looks like it... 6 pages....

Kdash wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Kdash wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_The_Big_FAQ_1_2018_en.pdf

FAQ LINK

Is that the entire FAQ?

Looks like it... 6 pages....

Oh...

Good bye Fire Raptor spam.

Yep, no reason to use Iron Hands literally ever. Their specific Warlord Trait is garbage and the Trait doesn't even stack with then Ven Dreads because apparently that was just too silly!

At least they have that nice-ish Relic..

BATTLE BROTHERS
All of the units in each Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common. In addition, this keyword cannot
be Chaos, Imperium, Aeldari, Ynnari or Tyranids, unless the Detachment in question is a Fortification Network. This has no effect on your
Army Faction.

This is the new beta detachment anti soup rule.

Kdash wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Kdash wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_The_Big_FAQ_1_2018_en.pdf

FAQ LINK

Is that the entire FAQ?

Looks like it... 6 pages....

That's just the big changes/general summary. A bunch of Codexes got their FAQs updated as well.

Just DL'd the PDF...


If this is their "big FAQ", consider me unimpressed.

Also...looking at their "Interim Points Review"...im left with two questions. 1st, they damn sure dont appear to be taking any holistic or consistent approach to any of thi (e.g. they reduced the cost of the now nerfed commissars...but not any of the other nonfunctional units like Vanquishers...)

2nd...why do DKoK units all have to be more expensive than their codex counterparts?


Edit: the Character issue still appears to remain...if you drop a character below 10 wounds it looks like you can no longer target it...

 fraser1191 wrote:

Kdash wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Kdash wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_The_Big_FAQ_1_2018_en.pdf

FAQ LINK

Is that the entire FAQ?

Looks like it... 6 pages....

Oh...

The rest of the FAQs for specific factions are presented in the normal style as seperate documents.

 Ordana wrote:
I don't think I like the deepstrike change.
Feels like they fethed up deepstriking this edition and now that its not a single rule they can tweak they just slam a dumb restriction on it rather then fix dozens of individual rules.

Not being able to meaningfully Deepstrike turn 1 feths up so many armies/units.

I am so glad they did this. I kept screaming that turn one chargeable deep strike is way more powerful then people were thinking. The fact they have away to metigate it is fine now. It's going back more toward how it used to be.

 fraser1191 wrote:

Geronimo509 wrote:
As far as the deep strike limit, they said it was half your units or Power Level, IF YOU'RE USING POWER LEVEL. If you're not using power level, all you have to worry about is the number of units you have.

They also said their were exceptions to the 1st turn deep strike limitation. So everyone who is having an aneurysm over that one should wait until they see the actual FAQs for what they play before they flip out too much.

I half expect drop pods to supersede this, that's their point right?

Only exception is Genestealer Cult Ambush and Pre-game stratagems like the Raven Guard and Alpha Legion.

MalfunctBot wrote:

Kdash wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Kdash wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_The_Big_FAQ_1_2018_en.pdf

FAQ LINK

Is that the entire FAQ?

Looks like it... 6 pages....

That's just the big changes/general summary. A bunch of Codexes got their FAQs updated as well.

Those are not live yet.

Someone explain me who autowon using Warlock Conclave. Or maybe I missed something lol.

DCannon4Life wrote:

fe40k wrote:
Yeah; if you had any hope for the game - this FAQ is all the proof you need to see to understand that the designers have ZERO clue what they're doing.

"ZERO clue" Seriously? Please contribute something thoughtful or refrain from clogging this thread with pointless, baseless, inane, hyperbolic statements. Cheers.

I'm sorry, but - as a player who has been holding out hope for a reasonable Ork codex (despite every indication that I really shouldn't be); this is the straw that breaks my will to play 40k.

How can any reasonable player, more importantly, developer; think that nerfing the weakest aspect of the game (Melee), on the most critical turn of the game (Round 1), with NO penalty to gunline armies - be fair in any capacity?

Stopping Melee armies from deepstriking round 1? Sure - but only if you also stop shooting armies from having effecitve shooting round 1 either.

And this isn't the first insane, knee-jerk reaction they've had either - there's countless examples that people can point out; I care, but not enough to dig for them. My only interest in 40k at the moment is in seeing if this change ever gets reverted.

If it doesn't - 40k 8th edition is dead, and that's not hyperbole.

Gunline armies WILL rule the game (as if they don't already, LOL). A free turn of shooting against your "entire" army? I say that in quotes, because if you think any of your points are disposable, well; I'm glad you think that playing 1000 points of melee vs 2000 points of gunline is fair.

Death Guard DP's can take a Plaguespewer now! NEAT!

fe40k wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:

fe40k wrote:
Yeah; if you had any hope for the game - this FAQ is all the proof you need to see to understand that the designers have ZERO clue what they're doing.

"ZERO clue" Seriously? Please contribute something thoughtful or refrain from clogging this thread with pointless, baseless, inane, hyperbolic statements. Cheers.

I'm sorry, but - as a player who has been holding out hope for a reasonable Ork codex (despite every indication that I really shouldn't be); this is the straw that breaks my will to play 40k.

How can any reasonable player, more importantly; developer, think that nerfing the weakest aspect of the game (Melee), on the most critical turn of the game (Round 1), with NO penalty to gunline armies - be fair in any capacity?

Stopping Melee armies from deepstriking round 1? Sure - but only if you also stop shooting armies from having effecitve shooting round 1 either.

THE RULE ISN'T FINAL YET.

Why do people keep acting like it?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

MalfunctBot wrote:

Kdash wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Kdash wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_The_Big_FAQ_1_2018_en.pdf

FAQ LINK

Is that the entire FAQ?

Looks like it... 6 pages....

That's just the big changes/general summary. A bunch of Codexes got their FAQs updated as well.

Those are not live yet.

Well the Tau and DE FAQs are up and the space marine one has today's date. So I guess its been updated? Which I'm not even surprised, just disappointed

 Zid wrote:
Death Guard DP's can take a Plaguespewer now! NEAT!

Is...is there a model for that?

 Sim-Life wrote:

fe40k wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:

fe40k wrote:
Yeah; if you had any hope for the game - this FAQ is all the proof you need to see to understand that the designers have ZERO clue what they're doing.

"ZERO clue" Seriously? Please contribute something thoughtful or refrain from clogging this thread with pointless, baseless, inane, hyperbolic statements. Cheers.

I'm sorry, but - as a player who has been holding out hope for a reasonable Ork codex (despite every indication that I really shouldn't be); this is the straw that breaks my will to play 40k.

How can any reasonable player, more importantly; developer, think that nerfing the weakest aspect of the game (Melee), on the most critical turn of the game (Round 1), with NO penalty to gunline armies - be fair in any capacity?

Stopping Melee armies from deepstriking round 1? Sure - but only if you also stop shooting armies from having effecitve shooting round 1 either.

THE RULE ISN'T FINAL YET.

Why do people keep acting like it?

It's in the FAQ.

People play with matched play rules, period. Most will play with the beta rules because;

A) They're there, in official format (albeit listed as "beta")
B) If you don't - you're house ruling 40k, and at that point, there's a LOT more changes that should be made

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
I don't think I like the deepstrike change.
Feels like they fethed up deepstriking this edition and now that its not a single rule they can tweak they just slam a dumb restriction on it rather then fix dozens of individual rules.

Not being able to meaningfully Deepstrike turn 1 feths up so many armies/units.

I am so glad they did this. I kept screaming that turn one chargeable deep strike is way more powerful then people were thinking. The fact they have away to metigate it is fine now. It's going back more toward how it used to be.

It was the one thing keeping melee armies in the game for the first time since 5th edition. To nerf the melee alpha strike while leaving shooting untouched is just dumb.

Apart from that one change the rest seems okay and steps in the right direction, but gun lines hardly needed buffs.

 Sim-Life wrote:

fe40k wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:

fe40k wrote:
Yeah; if you had any hope for the game - this FAQ is all the proof you need to see to understand that the designers have ZERO clue what they're doing.

"ZERO clue" Seriously? Please contribute something thoughtful or refrain from clogging this thread with pointless, baseless, inane, hyperbolic statements. Cheers.

I'm sorry, but - as a player who has been holding out hope for a reasonable Ork codex (despite every indication that I really shouldn't be); this is the straw that breaks my will to play 40k.

How can any reasonable player, more importantly; developer, think that nerfing the weakest aspect of the game (Melee), on the most critical turn of the game (Round 1), with NO penalty to gunline armies - be fair in any capacity?

Stopping Melee armies from deepstriking round 1? Sure - but only if you also stop shooting armies from having effecitve shooting round 1 either.

THE RULE ISN'T FINAL YET.

Why do people keep acting like it?

Because if nobody is talking about the fact it is a fething garbage suggestion, the devs might think it was brilliant and then implement it.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
I don't think I like the deepstrike change.
Feels like they fethed up deepstriking this edition and now that its not a single rule they can tweak they just slam a dumb restriction on it rather then fix dozens of individual rules.

Not being able to meaningfully Deepstrike turn 1 feths up so many armies/units.

I am so glad they did this. I kept screaming that turn one chargeable deep strike is way more powerful then people were thinking. The fact they have away to metigate it is fine now. It's going back more toward how it used to be.

It was the one thing keeping melee armies in the game for the first time since 5th edition. To nerf the melee alpha strike while leaving shooting untouched is just dumb.

Apart from that one change the rest seems okay and steps in the right direction, but gun lines hardly needed buffs.

They should have had entire round 1 as no shooting, no close combat.

That way it could be used to jockey for position on the board.

fe40k wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

fe40k wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:

fe40k wrote:
Yeah; if you had any hope for the game - this FAQ is all the proof you need to see to understand that the designers have ZERO clue what they're doing.

"ZERO clue" Seriously? Please contribute something thoughtful or refrain from clogging this thread with pointless, baseless, inane, hyperbolic statements. Cheers.

I'm sorry, but - as a player who has been holding out hope for a reasonable Ork codex (despite every indication that I really shouldn't be); this is the straw that breaks my will to play 40k.

How can any reasonable player, more importantly; developer, think that nerfing the weakest aspect of the game (Melee), on the most critical turn of the game (Round 1), with NO penalty to gunline armies - be fair in any capacity?

Stopping Melee armies from deepstriking round 1? Sure - but only if you also stop shooting armies from having effecitve shooting round 1 either.

THE RULE ISN'T FINAL YET.

Why do people keep acting like it?

It's in the FAQ.

People play with matched play rules, period. Most will play with the beta rules because;

A) They're there, in official format (albeit listed as "beta")
B) If you don't - you're house ruling 40k, and at that point, there's a LOT more changes that should be made

I have literally never heard of anyone doing this.

So... the only real change SM's got is nerf to the ONLY list that works for them... Neat!

The FOC limit is only for tournaments I don't care about, the Deep Strike rule is Beta and HOPEFULLY won't be fully implemented, and 189 Points of Firewarriors/Cadres now generate 5CP instead of 3.

I'm happy. Could've been better, could've made my entire army irrelevant.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Zid wrote:
Death Guard DP's can take a Plaguespewer now! NEAT!

Is...is there a model for that?

Yes, the FW Nurgle Daemon Prince comes with Malefic Claws and A Plaguespewer:
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-EU/Nurgle-Daemon-Prince-Herald-2017

Point cost on guilliman goes UP AGAIN! Literally. Gak this rules team - they have their head up their butts. They have NO IDEA what is wrong with this game. Making bad armies worse doesn't help anyone - It certainly doesn't help them make money.

Warlocks and warlock conclave up 20 points each. Quite literally the worst units in the codex just went up in price about 40%.

 skchsan wrote:
So... the only real change SM's got is nerf to the ONLY list that works for them... Neat!

You've got Imperial Guard, Gulliman, and a feth-ton of shooting.

Xenos armies have none of those.

Consider yourself lucky that you're the favored children of 40k.

Are we sure the soup nerf is for in detachments only?

All of the units in each Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common. In addition, this keyword cannot
be Chaos, Imperium, Aeldari, Ynnari or Tyranids,

All units in each detachments.
Not all units in a detachment. but each.

Kinda does read like soup of any shape is dead.

 Ordana wrote:
Are we sure the soup nerf is for in detachments only?

All of the units in each Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common. In addition, this keyword cannot
be Chaos, Imperium, Aeldari, Ynnari or Tyranids,

All units in each detachments.
Not all units in a detachment. but each.

Kinda does read like soup of any shape is dead.

Well they specifly said that the change is only at the detachment level and that Imperium was valid for armies, so....

 Zid wrote:
Death Guard DP's can take a Plaguespewer now! NEAT!

Where can I find this? I only got the big faq, 6pages.

 Wibe wrote:

 Zid wrote:
Death Guard DP's can take a Plaguespewer now! NEAT!

Where can I find this? I only got the big faq, 6pages.

WarCom site

fe40k wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
So... the only real change SM's got is nerf to the ONLY list that works for them... Neat!

You've got Imperial Guard, Gulliman, and a feth-ton of shooting.

Xenos armies have none of those.

Consider yourself lucky that you're the favored children of 40k.

No, literally units with highest EPP were the two units nerfed in the FAQ - girlyman and fireraptors. GG GW.

So competently incompetent.

Soup is not even affected bro - you can take detachments of IG for command points and any other imperium army. You just can't mix detachments anymore. The only situation I can think of this actaully matters is with celestine - taking a unit of space marines scouts in a patrol - you can't do that anymore.

 Wibe wrote:

 Zid wrote:
Death Guard DP's can take a Plaguespewer now! NEAT!

Where can I find this? I only got the big faq, 6pages.

Death Guard FAQ was updated, lot of good stuff.


That said, there is no model for it; I'm just gonna say my dudes how smelly ass breath and puke at 'em. Its kinda the same argument with the warp bolter that most people cant see on the DP model...

 Ordana wrote:
Are we sure the soup nerf is for in detachments only?

All of the units in each Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common. In addition, this keyword cannot
be Chaos, Imperium, Aeldari, Ynnari or Tyranids,

All units in each detachments.
Not all units in a detachment. but each.

Kinda does read like soup of any shape is dead.

But then there's the sentence that says "this does not affect your Army faction." Which I assume means you can still have Army Faction: Imperium.

 ChargerIIC wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
Are we sure the soup nerf is for in detachments only?

All of the units in each Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common. In addition, this keyword cannot
be Chaos, Imperium, Aeldari, Ynnari or Tyranids,

All units in each detachments.
Not all units in a detachment. but each.

Kinda does read like soup of any shape is dead.

Well they specifly said that the change is only at the detachment level and that Imperium was valid for armies, so....

Well what they say and what the words say don't seem to match up.

 skchsan wrote:

fe40k wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
So... the only real change SM's got is nerf to the ONLY list that works for them... Neat!

You've got Imperial Guard, Gulliman, and a feth-ton of shooting.

Xenos armies have none of those.

Consider yourself lucky that you're the favored children of 40k.

No, literally units with highest EPP were the two units nerfed in the FAQ - girlyman and fireraptors. GG GW.

So competently incompetent.

EPP?

 Ordana wrote:
Are we sure the soup nerf is for in detachments only?

All of the units in each Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common. In addition, this keyword cannot
be Chaos, Imperium, Aeldari, Ynnari or Tyranids,

All units in each detachments.
Not all units in a detachment. but each.

Kinda does read like soup of any shape is dead.

Please remember that GW, writing in UK English, uses 'each' to mean 'every individual'. Thus: "All of the units in [every individual] Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common...". Detachment-level soup is dead. Army-level soup is still alive.

 Shadenuat wrote:
Someone explain me who autowon using Warlock Conclave. Or maybe I missed something lol.

Yeah I think the warlock price jump is insane. Warlock Skyrunners were already insanely expensive at 70 pts, and now they are 90. A Conclave of 2 bikes is 160. Why would anyone ever take that datasheet?

This deep strike change makes my Slaanesh Mono-Daemon army feel better actually. It makes our speed actually mean something and differentiates us from our slower Nurgle and Khorne fellows, even Tzeentch, who just dropped in ahead of us.. and was part of the reason Slaanesh was bashed on a bit.

I'm actually happy with that change for the most part.

I believe more exemptions should be made however. Probably for Tyranids and drop pods (making them relevant again).

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

fe40k wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
So... the only real change SM's got is nerf to the ONLY list that works for them... Neat!

You've got Imperial Guard, Gulliman, and a feth-ton of shooting.

Xenos armies have none of those.

Consider yourself lucky that you're the favored children of 40k.

No, literally units with highest EPP were the two units nerfed in the FAQ - girlyman and fireraptors. GG GW.

So competently incompetent.

EPP?

Efficiency-per-point

AKA Biggest bang for your buck!

Relic of Cadia is once per.

IG CP Factory is toned down.

This DS thing actually messes up RG. If you ant a turn one charge, you now have to blow all your cp, no DS support. And hey, feth you of you're a raptors player who wants to play issodon in tandem with strike from the shadows. At least I'm now happy the local GW house rules PL only.

 Zid wrote:

 Wibe wrote:

 Zid wrote:
Death Guard DP's can take a Plaguespewer now! NEAT!

Where can I find this? I only got the big faq, 6pages.

Death Guard FAQ was updated, lot of good stuff.


That said, there is no model for it; I'm just gonna say my dudes how smelly ass breath and puke at 'em. Its kinda the same argument with the warp bolter that most people cant see on the DP model...

Yes, there is a model for it:
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-EU/Nurgle-Daemon-Prince-Herald-2017

So when Commissars shoot someone, it no longer counts against the morale test...its interesting to see what GW fixes, ignores, and breaks with these sessions...

 Vaktathi wrote:
So when Commissars shoot someone, it no longer counts against the morale test...its interesting to see what GW fixes, ignores, and breaks with these sessions...

It's also optional now. Which is huge.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
So when Commissars shoot someone, it no longer counts against the morale test...its interesting to see what GW fixes, ignores, and breaks with these sessions...

It's also optional now. Which is huge.

That's actually a huge fix. They just need to make Conscripts not terrible again.

Deep striking assault turn 1 is one of the death knells of makiing sure maneuver matters in this game, and is one of the primary reasons I won't touch 40k right now.

It being curbed will have me looking at playing again.

And no I don't play gunline armies, I just prefer to have some maneuver matter again instead of just having to always include screening units to stop the deep strike assault "tactic" that requires next to no cognitive thought to execute.

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:
Someone explain me who autowon using Warlock Conclave. Or maybe I missed something lol.

Yeah I think the warlock price jump is insane. Warlock Skyrunners were already insanely expensive at 70 pts, and now they are 90. A Conclave of 2 bikes is 160. Why would anyone ever take that datasheet?

Warlocks are tricky because the buffs they provide for Shining Spears, Guardians, etc. are very valuable, and jet-bike Warlocks are very mobile. And, there's the problem of Ynnari synergies.... So, I suppose Warlocks are paying the price for the value they bring to other units, rather than their own inherent value.

 auticus wrote:
Deep striking assault turn 1 is one of the death knells of makiing sure maneuver matters in this game, and is one of the primary reasons I won't touch 40k right now.

It being curbed will have me looking at playing again.

And no I don't play gunline armies, I just prefer to have some maneuver matter again instead of just having to always include screening units to stop the deep strike assault "tactic" that requires next to no cognitive thought to execute.

You might want to get out of here, son. The melee mafia might hear you say that...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
So when Commissars shoot someone, it no longer counts against the morale test...its interesting to see what GW fixes, ignores, and breaks with these sessions...

It's also optional now. Which is huge.

ah missed that. So they cut the price of commisssars in half and fixed the ability, we'll see how that plays out.

Wish theyd have done something about Vanquishers though...

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Relic of Cadia is once per.

IG CP Factory is toned down.

It now produces more command points though - it's a net loss. This team is absurd.

DCannon4Life wrote:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:
Someone explain me who autowon using Warlock Conclave. Or maybe I missed something lol.

Yeah I think the warlock price jump is insane. Warlock Skyrunners were already insanely expensive at 70 pts, and now they are 90. A Conclave of 2 bikes is 160. Why would anyone ever take that datasheet?

Warlocks are tricky because the buffs they provide for Shining Spears, Guardians, etc. are very valuable, and jet-bike Warlocks are very mobile. And, there's the problem of Ynnari synergies.... So, I suppose Warlocks are paying the price for the value they bring to other units, rather than their own inherent value.

Yeah, but... but...

The difference in 10 points between Warlock and Spiritseer. A model of that price with .... bum da bum... 2 wounds. It's like Wraithguard but more expensive.

Explain O_o

And Shining Spears are totally ok?

DCannon4Life wrote:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:
Someone explain me who autowon using Warlock Conclave. Or maybe I missed something lol.

Yeah I think the warlock price jump is insane. Warlock Skyrunners were already insanely expensive at 70 pts, and now they are 90. A Conclave of 2 bikes is 160. Why would anyone ever take that datasheet?

Warlocks are tricky because the buffs they provide for Shining Spears, Guardians, etc. are very valuable, and jet-bike Warlocks are very mobile. And, there's the problem of Ynnari synergies.... So, I suppose Warlocks are paying the price for the value they bring to other units, rather than their own inherent value.

It's not tricky. Units that suck should not go up in points.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
So when Commissars shoot someone, it no longer counts against the morale test...its interesting to see what GW fixes, ignores, and breaks with these sessions...

It's also optional now. Which is huge.

Yeah that's the big difference. I don't think the model executed by the commissar ever counted towards the moral test.

 Shadenuat wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:
Someone explain me who autowon using Warlock Conclave. Or maybe I missed something lol.

Yeah I think the warlock price jump is insane. Warlock Skyrunners were already insanely expensive at 70 pts, and now they are 90. A Conclave of 2 bikes is 160. Why would anyone ever take that datasheet?

Warlocks are tricky because the buffs they provide for Shining Spears, Guardians, etc. are very valuable, and jet-bike Warlocks are very mobile. And, there's the problem of Ynnari synergies.... So, I suppose Warlocks are paying the price for the value they bring to other units, rather than their own inherent value.

Yeah, but... but...

The difference in 10 points between Warlock and Spiritseer. A model of that price with .... bum da bum... 2 wounds. It's like Wraithguard but more expensive.

Explain O_o

And Shining Spears are totally ok?

Spears are totally balanced. Guilliman though - that guy that can't even win games giving his whole army reroll hits and wounds needs a price jump. So OP.

Oh man this is all beautifull. The over-reactions, the changes...

 auticus wrote:
Deep striking assault turn 1 is one of the death knells of makiing sure maneuver matters in this game, and is one of the primary reasons I won't touch 40k right now.

It being curbed will have me looking at playing again.

And no I don't play gunline armies, I just prefer to have some maneuver matter again instead of just having to always include screening units to stop the deep strike assault "tactic" that requires next to no cognitive thought to execute.

That's nice of you, but just because you don't play gunline armys does not mean others won't?
The gunline will just use the points left over from reducing their screens to buy more big guns and still won't maneuver a single inch the whole game, thank you very much. The screens where the only thing maneuvering before, so now we can just scrap the movement phase alltogether.

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:
Someone explain me who autowon using Warlock Conclave. Or maybe I missed something lol.

Yeah I think the warlock price jump is insane. Warlock Skyrunners were already insanely expensive at 70 pts, and now they are 90. A Conclave of 2 bikes is 160. Why would anyone ever take that datasheet?

No, the skyrunner profiles are listed separately points wise.

So, a Farseer Skyrunner is still 135 (compared to on foot 110.
Warlock Skyrunner is still 70 (compared to 55 on foot... lol )
Conclave Skyrunner is still 130 (compared to 90 on foot)

 Xenomancers wrote:

Spears are totally balanced. Guilliman though - that guy that can't even win games giving his whole army reroll hits and wounds needs a price jump. So OP.

Maybe people should stop only using him as a support for Fire Raptors? I haven't seen anyone try to make an inventive list with him.

The movement phase has already basically been scrapped. Placing screens is not maneuver to me. Its playing magic the gathering with expensive models and tapping them to form "screen" defense.

What they need to do now is make a terrain / cover system that actually means a damn so gunline builds are crippling themselves in conjunction with preventing the all assault deepstriking "tactic" from happening.

My only potential concern is their "fix" to soup actually fixes nothing. Hardly anybody was taking multiple factions in a single detachment, it was things like taking a BA Vanguard alongside an IG Battalion with an IG spearhead that was the problem, and unless I misread, their beta fix doesn't affect that.

Great to see my inquisition army is dead and my grey Knights can’t smite or deepstrike anymore...

The warlock makes no sense.

I wish they'd give reasoning behind their changes. Some changes such as Dark Reapers tend to explain themselves, but the warlock and Farseer change are just weird. The changes also make the Skyrunners juicier as there is less point jump to a jetbike.

Still hoping for clarification on Baal Predator killshot, but I’m happy to see the SM update clarify cherub use with hellfire shells and flakk missiles. That’s pretty delicious.

Q: If I am playing a matched play organised event that has
an upper limit of 3 Detachments per Battle-forged army, what
is the maximum number of Drukhari Patrol Detachments I
can include?
A: 3.

Was this REALLY a question that needed FAQing?!?!?!?!!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?

Weidekuh wrote:
The detachement CP change makes it even better to have a AM batallion for CP farming.

where is this? I cant find any reference to Detachment CP changes yet.

 Jaxler wrote:
Great to see my inquisition army is dead and my grey Knights can’t smite or deepstrike anymore...

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/04/16/warhammer-40000-big-faq-1-the-low-downgw-homepage-post-1fw-homepage-post-2/

"For armies without an HQ choice of their own, worry not! Your Sisters of Silence, Officio Assassinorum et al are all allowed to be fielded in a Vanguard Detachment without one."

"4: Models with the Brotherhood of Psykers or Brotherhood of Sorcerers rules can manifest Smite without an increase in warp charge cost. They will always manifest Smite on a 5+.

This last bit of the rule (point 4) has been introduced based on a lot of feedback from Thousand Sons and Grey Knights players who pointed out that escalating Smite’s Warp Charge requirement might hurt their armies disproportionately. After plenty more playtesting, we agreed, and as such, models with the Brotherhood of Psykers/Brotherhood of Sorcerers ability now ignore the escalating penalties, offering each a strong niche and giving them mastery of the Psychic phase (as they should have!)."

 Jaxler wrote:
Great to see my inquisition army is dead and my grey Knights can’t smite or deepstrike anymore...

They can still smite as per normal, and don't suffer the +1 to cast with each smite (if they have the brotherhood of pyskers rule)

As for deep striking, they can still deep strike the same as before. Just you now have to wait to turn 2 to do it, rather than doing it on turn 1.

As for the Inquision army, i think it depends on what you are running

 Rune Stonegrinder wrote:

Weidekuh wrote:
The detachement CP change makes it even better to have a AM batallion for CP farming.

where is this? I cant find any reference to Detachment CP changes yet.

nevermind found it

Any reason why DG (and presumably TS (don't own their codex, so I can't check if they can do it anyway), as it is absent from their FAQ too) Dreads can't take twin Scourges/Hammers and CSM ones have been FAQed to be able to do so?

Yay for consistency!

GW is still loading FAQs. Some indexes just got their updates.

I'm actually really annoyed. I'd been buying up units in preparation for a list that mixed DS and stroke from the shadows and now GW has gone hurting deeply during your army is invalidated now. And I haven't even started using it yet, I can't imagine how pissed off I'd be if I'd been playing an army that used DS for a while.

Kdash wrote:

 Jaxler wrote:
Great to see my inquisition army is dead and my grey Knights can’t smite or deepstrike anymore...

They can still smite as per normal, and don't suffer the +1 to cast with each smite (if they have the brotherhood of pyskers rule)

As for deep striking, they can still deep strike the same as before. Just you now have to wait to turn 2 to do it, rather than doing it on turn 1.

As for the Inquision army, i think it depends on what you are running

Their 'Smite' is capped at 1 MW even if you roll 11+ and is only 12" in range. GK continue to suffer massively.

Kult of Speed incoming!!

Page 13 – Warboss on Warbike, Waaagh!
Change the rule to read:
‘Friendly Ork Infantry and Biker units within 6" of
this model at the start of the Charge phase can charge
even if they Advanced this turn.’

Dark Talons points increase 40 pts ! yikes

Pages 110 and 111 – Prosecutors, Vigilators,

Witchseekers and Null-Maiden Rhino, Abilities
Add the following ability:
‘Null Maidens: So long as your Warlord is from the
Imperium, you can include this unit in a Vanguard
Detachment even if that Detachment contains no
HQ units. However, if you do so, that Detachment’s
Command Benefits are changed to ‘None’.’

Pages 114 and 115 – Vindicare Assassin, Callidus

Assassin, Eversor Assassin and Culexus Assassin, Abilities
Add the following ability:
‘Execution Force: So long as your Warlord is from the
Imperium, you can include this unit in a Vanguard
Detachment even if that Detachment contains no
HQ units. However, if you do so, that Detachment’s
Command Benefits are changed to ‘None’.’

The DS cap for turn 1 is awful.

One thing that immediately strikes me is that in addition to buying a turn for the big guns, it also gives the gunline army a turn in which to move/advance their bubble wrap up the board, meaning that when your assault units do eventually get to be of use, and if the manage to make the charge role, they're miles away from their actual high priority targets. No more consolidating tie up, no more pressure. So the big guns kill what's on the table turn one, and the deepstrike element stuck in midfield turn 2. Mayyyyybe turn 3 their remnants can make in into combat with a unit worth more than 50pts. This won't remove bubblewrap from the game, it will just make it much much more powerful. Absurd.

Finally, most games at tournament level end at turn 3, so by deepstriking a unit you're removing 33% of their effective value.

How did they think this was a viable rule?

 grouchoben wrote:
The DS cap for turn 1 is awful.

One thing that immediately strikes me is that in addition to buying a turn for the big guns, it also gives the gunline army a turn in which to move/advance their bubble wrap up the board, meaning that when your assault units do eventually get to be of use, and if the manage to make the charge role, they're miles away from their actual high priority targets. No more consolidating tie up, no more pressure. So the big guns kill what's on the table turn one, and the deepstrike element stuck in midfield turn 2. Mayyyyybe turn 3 their remnants can make in into combat with a unit worth more than 50pts. This won't remove bubblewrap from the game, it will just make it much much more powerful. Absurd.

Finally, most games at tournament level end at turn 3, so by deepstriking a unit you're removing 33% of their effective value.

How did they think this was a viable rule?

Funny enough, on the stream they indicated they made this rule to nerf alpha shooting.

My take is that their brains are in the past and they were trying to nerf plasma drops. Keep the plasma far away T1 s you can't just DS it down and nuke a target into oblivion. In true GW fashion, they just completely forgot about assault units that aren't from special 'assault' armies like Genestealers, Raven Guard and Berserkers.

Does the 50% rule apply to units in transports? It's still unclear.

 Marmatag wrote:
Does the 50% rule apply to units in transports? It's still unclear.

They did say that a transport with 3 embarked units on the table counted as 4 units for reserves purposes, IIRC. One can reasonably conclude that "in a transport that is on the battlefield" is itself "on the battlefield" after a fashion.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Kult of Speed incoming!!

Page 13 – Warboss on Warbike, Waaagh!
Change the rule to read:
‘Friendly Ork Infantry and Biker units within 6" of
this model at the start of the Charge phase can charge
even if they Advanced this turn.’

This is great for me and my evil sunz kult of speed army that I'm just starting. Still hope that the "waaagh!" ability also works on vehicles if you're kult of speed.

Q: Is it possible to use a Stratagem from one codex to target a
unit from another?
A: Yes, so long as the unit the Stratagem is being used on
has the appropriate keywords (note that the Stratagems
in Codex: Chaos Daemons and Codex: Tyranids are specific
exceptions to this, as discussed in the relevant FAQs
and Errata).

For example, you can use the Tide of Traitors Stratagem
from Codex: Chaos Space Marines on a unit of Cultists
from a Death Guard Detachment (from Codex:
Death Guard) if your army has both an Alpha Legion
Detachment and a Death Guard Detachment in a
single Battle-forged army.

Also note that the only requirement to have access
to Stratagems is that you have a Detachment of the
appropriate Faction.

Update to the rulebook faq doc. Looks like you CAN still use stratagems from one codex, on units from another codex.

Kdash wrote:

Q: Is it possible to use a Stratagem from one codex to target a
unit from another?
A: Yes, so long as the unit the Stratagem is being used on
has the appropriate keywords (note that the Stratagems
in Codex: Chaos Daemons and Codex: Tyranids are specific
exceptions to this, as discussed in the relevant FAQs
and Errata).

For example, you can use the Tide of Traitors Stratagem
from Codex: Chaos Space Marines on a unit of Cultists
from a Death Guard Detachment (from Codex:
Death Guard) if your army has both an Alpha Legion
Detachment and a Death Guard Detachment in a
single Battle-forged army.

Also note that the only requirement to have access
to Stratagems is that you have a Detachment of the
appropriate Faction.

Update to the rulebook faq doc. Looks like you CAN still use stratagems from one codex, on units from another codex.

With the specific exceptions of Tyranids and Daemons of course, because feth them amirite?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


With the specific exceptions of Tyranids and Daemons of course, because feth them amirite?

Not feth them. There's some solid game breaking stuff in that nugget.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Does the 50% rule apply to units in transports? It's still unclear.

They did say that a transport with 3 embarked units on the table counted as 4 units for reserves purposes, IIRC. One can reasonably conclude that "in a transport that is on the battlefield" is itself "on the battlefield" after a fashion.

Did they actually come out and say this? The wording before today was what i was referencing. The general consensus is that the locale of the embarked units is the same as the locale of the transport. But it would be nice to see something explicit since things are points based now.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


With the specific exceptions of Tyranids and Daemons of course, because feth them amirite?

Not feth them. There's some solid game breaking stuff in that nugget.

Like what? With the deepstrike nerfs, there's hardly a reason for Denizens of the Warp to be restricted anymore, so I guess you can give them +1 Invuln for 2CP. *shrug* I think GK have the same thing, essentially.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Does the 50% rule apply to units in transports? It's still unclear.

They did say that a transport with 3 embarked units on the table counted as 4 units for reserves purposes, IIRC. One can reasonably conclude that "in a transport that is on the battlefield" is itself "on the battlefield" after a fashion.

Did they actually come out and say this? The wording before today was what i was referencing. The general consensus is that the locale of the embarked units is the same as the locale of the transport. But it would be nice to see something explicit since things are points based now.

Bottom of right column of Page 5 in main rulebook FAQ.

This one looks big - hurts Chaos, Eldar, Ynnari

The rules for reinforcements say that when a unit is set up on
the battlefield as reinforcements, it cannot move or Advance
further that turn, but can otherwise act normally (shoot,
charge, etc.).
Q: Can such a unit make a charge move? Can it pile in
and consolidate?
A: Yes to both questions – the unit can declare a charge
and make a charge move, and if it is chosen to fight, it
can pile in and consolidate.

Q: Can such a unit move or Advance for any other reason
e.g. because of an ability such as The Swarmlord’s Hive
Commander ability, or because of a psychic power such as
Warptime from the Dark Hereticus discipline, or because
of a Stratagem like Metabolic Overdrive from Codex:
Tyranids, etc.?
A: No.

No more deep striking a unit of Shining Spears, then using Quicken on them to move them closer.

Another Eldar nerfing ruling

Q: Can units embark inside a transport in a phase other than the
Movement phase, such as when they are using the Fire and Fade
Stratagem from Codex: Craftworlds, or when a unit performs a
Soulburst action to move again?
A: No, unless the rule in question specifically states that
the unit can embark inside a Transport.

 Marmatag wrote:
Does the 50% rule apply to units in transports? It's still unclear.

the combined Power Ratings of all the units you set up on the
battlefield during Deployment (including those that are embarked within Transports that are set up on the battlefield) must be at least half of your
army’s total Power Level, even if every unit in your army has an ability that would allow them to be set up elsewhere.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Does the 50% rule apply to units in transports? It's still unclear.

They did say that a transport with 3 embarked units on the table counted as 4 units for reserves purposes, IIRC. One can reasonably conclude that "in a transport that is on the battlefield" is itself "on the battlefield" after a fashion.

Did they actually come out and say this? The wording before today was what i was referencing. The general consensus is that the locale of the embarked units is the same as the locale of the transport. But it would be nice to see something explicit since things are points based now.

Yes, that is now written in the Rule Book FAQ.
But on the other hand, can someone explain why the transports are not counting as units themselves? Going by their example they don't.
EDIT: Oh wait, it is 1 transport with 3 units in it. I was reading it as 3 tranports with 1 unit in it each.

Kdash wrote:
This one looks big - hurts Chaos, Eldar, Ynnari

The rules for reinforcements say that when a unit is set up on
the battlefield as reinforcements, it cannot move or Advance
further that turn, but can otherwise act normally (shoot,
charge, etc.).
Q: Can such a unit make a charge move? Can it pile in
and consolidate?
A: Yes to both questions – the unit can declare a charge
and make a charge move, and if it is chosen to fight, it
can pile in and consolidate.

Q: Can such a unit move or Advance for any other reason
e.g. because of an ability such as The Swarmlord’s Hive
Commander ability, or because of a psychic power such as
Warptime from the Dark Hereticus discipline, or because
of a Stratagem like Metabolic Overdrive from Codex:
Tyranids, etc.?
A: No.

No more deep striking a unit of Shining Spears, then using Quicken on them to move them closer.

where are you seeing this??

 Marmatag wrote:

Kdash wrote:
This one looks big - hurts Chaos, Eldar, Ynnari

The rules for reinforcements say that when a unit is set up on
the battlefield as reinforcements, it cannot move or Advance
further that turn, but can otherwise act normally (shoot,
charge, etc.).
Q: Can such a unit make a charge move? Can it pile in
and consolidate?
A: Yes to both questions – the unit can declare a charge
and make a charge move, and if it is chosen to fight, it
can pile in and consolidate.

Q: Can such a unit move or Advance for any other reason
e.g. because of an ability such as The Swarmlord’s Hive
Commander ability, or because of a psychic power such as
Warptime from the Dark Hereticus discipline, or because
of a Stratagem like Metabolic Overdrive from Codex:
Tyranids, etc.?
A: No.

No more deep striking a unit of Shining Spears, then using Quicken on them to move them closer.

where are you seeing this??

Page 5, main rulebook FAQ, top left column.

 Jaxler wrote:
Great to see my inquisition army is dead and my grey Knights can’t smite or deepstrike anymore...

Grey knights ignore the smite thing in the rules from what I read.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Kdash wrote:
This one looks big - hurts Chaos, Eldar, Ynnari

The rules for reinforcements say that when a unit is set up on
the battlefield as reinforcements, it cannot move or Advance
further that turn, but can otherwise act normally (shoot,
charge, etc.).
Q: Can such a unit make a charge move? Can it pile in
and consolidate?
A: Yes to both questions – the unit can declare a charge
and make a charge move, and if it is chosen to fight, it
can pile in and consolidate.

Q: Can such a unit move or Advance for any other reason
e.g. because of an ability such as The Swarmlord’s Hive
Commander ability, or because of a psychic power such as
Warptime from the Dark Hereticus discipline, or because
of a Stratagem like Metabolic Overdrive from Codex:
Tyranids, etc.?
A: No.

No more deep striking a unit of Shining Spears, then using Quicken on them to move them closer.

where are you seeing this??

Page 5, main rulebook FAQ, top left column.

The english rulebook 1.2 faq update doesn't look like it's been uploaded yet. The french 1.2 version is up and those changes are in there.

Edit: Aaaaaand it looks like the english version was just uploaded.

Emissary wrote:


The english rulebook 1.2 faq update doesn't look like it's been uploaded yet. The french 1.2 version is up and those changes are in there.

It is up. Try CTRL+F5 to refresh without cache.

Emissary wrote:
The english rulebook 1.2 faq update doesn't look like it's been uploaded yet. The french 1.2 version is up and those changes are in there.

It absolutely has been uploaded. GW's notorious pants-on-headed-ness means they didn't change the date, but the FAQ is there behind the linky.

Does no one else think the new DSing rule help out speed armies a bit? I tried to make the point earlier in the thread but Daemons of Slaanesh seem to be in a better/viable spot with them being one of the few armies that can run up the board and get 1st turn charges. Before it was all turn 1 blood letter bombs everywhere.

ArmchairArbiter wrote:
Does no one else think the new DSing rule help out speed armies a bit? I tried to make the point earlier in the thread but Daemons of Slaanesh seem to be in a better/viable spot with them being one of the few armies that can run up the board and get 1st turn charges. Before it was all turn 1 blood letter bombs everywhere.

I agree in part, but i'm at a loss for what Khorne daemons and similar will do for armies. Perhaps the bomb really restricted their list variety anyway?

ArmchairArbiter wrote:
Does no one else think the new DSing rule help out speed armies a bit? I tried to make the point earlier in the thread but Daemons of Slaanesh seem to be in a better/viable spot with them being one of the few armies that can run up the board and get 1st turn charges. Before it was all turn 1 blood letter bombs everywhere.

This is going to push Tyranids towards speed builds. Kraken 'stealers just became the default 'nid build, because the other two common ones relied on (A) 7 of the same data sheet (B) three different things that got stopped. I guess someone at GW got a line of Horma's DS + Swarmy advanced into their IG tanks one too many times.

babelfish wrote:

ArmchairArbiter wrote:
Does no one else think the new DSing rule help out speed armies a bit? I tried to make the point earlier in the thread but Daemons of Slaanesh seem to be in a better/viable spot with them being one of the few armies that can run up the board and get 1st turn charges. Before it was all turn 1 blood letter bombs everywhere.

This is going to push Tyranids towards speed builds. Kraken 'stealers just became the default 'nid build, because the other two common ones relied on (A) 7 of the same data sheet (B) three different things that got stopped. I guess someone at GW got a line of Horma's DS + Swarmy advanced into their IG tanks one too many times.

I run the army you are describing. Your biggest problems will be synapse coverage, because they'll be out of range, and also losing your synapse creatures prior to your turn since they won't be DS Flyrants. If you go second you will probably lose the Swarmlord.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

WOW.

feth Iron Hands players huh?

Forgive for asking, but how? Most Iron Hands only get the one "Ignores Wound" roll anyway - where's the issue?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

ArmchairArbiter wrote:
Does no one else think the new DSing rule help out speed armies a bit? I tried to make the point earlier in the thread but Daemons of Slaanesh seem to be in a better/viable spot with them being one of the few armies that can run up the board and get 1st turn charges. Before it was all turn 1 blood letter bombs everywhere.

I agree in part, but i'm at a loss for what Khorne daemons and similar will do for armies. Perhaps the bomb really restricted their list variety anyway?

Maybe it will be less 30 bombs and more trying to find a balance? I run my Daemonettes in squads of 24 because it goes with the 6 being Slaaneshs number thing but I could easily find the right balance for maximizing the squads. Maybe they should all go down in price a little bit?

 Marmatag wrote:

babelfish wrote:

ArmchairArbiter wrote:
Does no one else think the new DSing rule help out speed armies a bit? I tried to make the point earlier in the thread but Daemons of Slaanesh seem to be in a better/viable spot with them being one of the few armies that can run up the board and get 1st turn charges. Before it was all turn 1 blood letter bombs everywhere.

This is going to push Tyranids towards speed builds. Kraken 'stealers just became the default 'nid build, because the other two common ones relied on (A) 7 of the same data sheet (B) three different things that got stopped. I guess someone at GW got a line of Horma's DS + Swarmy advanced into their IG tanks one too many times.

I run the army you are describing. Your biggest problems will be synapse coverage, because they'll be out of range, and also losing your synapse creatures prior to your turn since they won't be DS Flyrants. If you go second you will probably lose the Swarmlord.

I run the one that got super nerfed (Trygons delivering 'gants and 'stealers and Swarmy).

With Kraken, chain 40-60 'stealers to a Neurothrope/Venomthrope for 1st turn synapse then DS Swarmy second turn? Maybe a Jorgmundr battalion for sweet sweet CP and deep striking devourer 'gaunts? Exocrines like being Jorgmundr and the ignores cover warlord trait on a Neurothrope might be interesting.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Holy moly - no more multiple saves.

WOW.

feth Iron Hands players huh?

Forgive for asking, but how? Most Iron Hands only get the one "Ignores Wound" roll anyway - where's the issue?

They've got a bad Strategem, a worse Warlord Trait, and then just an okay relic. What they DID have, though, are Venerable Dreads that were even better because they had the 6+++ ability twice in a row. So at least they could make a fun, though probably overall ineffective, army. On top of that, with the Iron Resolve trait you could try and remake Smashbane.

They literally did away with all that for no good reason. At all.