MarkyMark wrote: Just got the book, quite interesting small changes, annoyed that terrify no longer removes fearless though. I have wrote a few things I have noticed if anyone wants to read
Spoiler:
So got the book. Will jot down the things I notice
There is now a start of turn which is specfically before movement
Mastery level governs how many spells you can attempt to cast per psyhic phase as well as how many spells you generate. Psykers that take all their spells from one table know the sig spell. So lvl 1';s will know the sig and another random spell but you can only cast 1.
Psykers can know the same spells (which is a big difference form fantasy)
Perils table is pretty much take a wound with no saves of any kind, plus another feature, the rumours are true for these (on 1 you do a ld test, pass you take a wound, fail removed from play).
Something chew just asked, it is indeed correct IC's cannot join units that contain MCs or vehicles....
snap shots are bs1 still
Overwatch is still as it is now, no test to do it, no penatly for doing it
Charging through terrain is -2 to distance rolled and still int1
Multi assault. Still the same up to this point
A charging model is not permitted to move into base contact with a model in a secondary target, unless it cannot move into base contat with a unegaged model in primary target (think thats different?)
The wording for jet pack thrust move is still the same, in that it describes the jet pack unit. Cannot find anything to explain what a jet pack unit is....
FMC's cannot charge is they have changed flight mode that turn.
swooping is 12 to 24 still, 90degree turn before it moves, still run 2d6, grounding is still on a 1 or 2 and suffering a wound has to test end of phase but if grounded can charge.
Flyers now, if immobilsed crash and burn on a 1 or 2,
Ignoring the rest of the vehicle section for now (yes super heavies are in)
Excess wounds are indeed transferred to the unit from challenges
Ignoring terrain for now
Deployements are still the same
'Night fighting is just everyone has stealth
FMCS, zooming flyers or units in them are not scoring, claimed buildings are SCORING LOL With reserves, I am struggling to find how much you can reserve, it doesnt actually say!
force weapons are now acitvated in the psyhic phase, one test for the unit
Dedicated transports can now infiltrate
IC's cannot infiltate with a unit unless he has infiltrate as well
Jink is 4+ but can only fire snap shots until end of their next turn
You need a 6 to hit for precision shot,
ignores cover is no cover saves against wounds pens or glances
power weapons are the same
Psyhic powers
Iron arm doesnt give EW anymore,
enfeeble is minus 1 str and toughness treats all terrain as difficult
Endurance is warp charge 2, targets friendly unit, they gain EW, FNP 4+ and relentless wow
rest are pretty much the same, the numbers have changed though (i.e endurance is now 5)
Prescience is wc2 now, 12inch range gives re roll to hit still
Foreboding is the same
Forewarning is the same
perfect timing is the same
Pre cog is the same
Misfortune, is different, all attacks that target that unit have the rending special rule... wow
Scriers gaze is you can now re roll the reserves roll outflank and mysterious objective
Daemonology we all know from leaks
santic no 6 is vortex of doom, str d small blast
pyro is still crap
Telekinesis, no gate....
replaced with levitation
targets the psyker he may move 12inches... they then cannot charge
psyhic malestrom is no 6, wc3, str 10 ap1 large blast barrage
Telepathy
Dominate the same
mental fort, the same
terrify, -1 ld, treats all units as having fear, and must take moral check end of phase, no longer removes fearless
Shourding, new power, gives pskyer and all units within 6 shrouded
Invis, all units targetting the unit with it cast on can only snap shot at it
Hallicunation, the same?
Happen to be any Ork hardware in the back of the book to give us a sneak peak at new Ork stuff?
=)
I'm done. The invalidating of the psychic cards was the last straw for me. FW continues to have my attention as long as they keep producing excellent books and Mechanicum stuff, but I'm done with GW's bull gak. It's been a long couple of decades, but I've had enough.
Sigvatr wrote: Haha, so if that's true, GW is seriously pulling off a FIFA and sells what basically is an update to 6th for full price?
And invalidating all our psychic cards at the same time (but buying the new cards helps us to better forge a narrative, so that's ok I guess).
no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm done. The invalidating of the psychic cards was the last straw for me. FW continues to have my attention as long as they keep producing excellent books and Mechanicum stuff, but I'm done with GW's bull gak. It's been a long couple of decades, but I've had enough.
Sigvatr wrote: Haha, so if that's true, GW is seriously pulling off a FIFA and sells what basically is an update to 6th for full price?
And invalidating all our psychic cards at the same time (but buying the new cards helps us to better forge a narrative, so that's ok I guess).
yeah... it does kind of feel like they've only done these tweaks to justify buying another book with all the other books that have been released over the last year inside it.
Still, I like the tweaks they have made and wouldn't want them to change too much of the game otherwise... it might not be 40k.
I'll just wait for a pdf to rock up on 4shared and pirate me a scanned copy and put it on my micro iPad/ giant iPhone!
azreal13 wrote: Not to say that particular rumour is wrong, but currently pens count as two wounds for combat resolution, there is a chance that it may have got lost in translation, so to speak.
Not saying that is the case, but in all the excitement things could get overlooked/misunderstood.
Oh, I understand. But if that rumor is wrong, than it is even *worse* for the Nids...
MarkyMark wrote: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
When assaulting vehicles that have moved, are you still hitting on 3+?
Is HOW still 1 hit for most things? Is it still AP: -?
MarkyMark wrote: Just got the book, quite interesting small changes, annoyed that terrify no longer removes fearless though. I have wrote a few things I have noticed if anyone wants to read
Spoiler:
So got the book. Will jot down the things I notice
There is now a start of turn which is specfically before movement
Mastery level governs how many spells you can attempt to cast per psyhic phase as well as how many spells you generate. Psykers that take all their spells from one table know the sig spell. So lvl 1';s will know the sig and another random spell but you can only cast 1.
Psykers can know the same spells (which is a big difference form fantasy)
Perils table is pretty much take a wound with no saves of any kind, plus another feature, the rumours are true for these (on 1 you do a ld test, pass you take a wound, fail removed from play).
Something chew just asked, it is indeed correct IC's cannot join units that contain MCs or vehicles....
snap shots are bs1 still
Overwatch is still as it is now, no test to do it, no penatly for doing it
Charging through terrain is -2 to distance rolled and still int1
Multi assault. Still the same up to this point
A charging model is not permitted to move into base contact with a model in a secondary target, unless it cannot move into base contat with a unegaged model in primary target (think thats different?)
The wording for jet pack thrust move is still the same, in that it describes the jet pack unit. Cannot find anything to explain what a jet pack unit is....
FMC's cannot charge is they have changed flight mode that turn.
swooping is 12 to 24 still, 90degree turn before it moves, still run 2d6, grounding is still on a 1 or 2 and suffering a wound has to test end of phase but if grounded can charge.
Flyers now, if immobilsed crash and burn on a 1 or 2,
Ignoring the rest of the vehicle section for now (yes super heavies are in)
Excess wounds are indeed transferred to the unit from challenges
Ignoring terrain for now
Deployements are still the same
'Night fighting is just everyone has stealth
FMCS, zooming flyers or units in them are not scoring, claimed buildings are SCORING LOL With reserves, I am struggling to find how much you can reserve, it doesnt actually say!
force weapons are now acitvated in the psyhic phase, one test for the unit
Dedicated transports can now infiltrate
IC's cannot infiltate with a unit unless he has infiltrate as well
Jink is 4+ but can only fire snap shots until end of their next turn
You need a 6 to hit for precision shot,
ignores cover is no cover saves against wounds pens or glances
power weapons are the same
Psyhic powers
Iron arm doesnt give EW anymore,
enfeeble is minus 1 str and toughness treats all terrain as difficult
Endurance is warp charge 2, targets friendly unit, they gain EW, FNP 4+ and relentless wow
rest are pretty much the same, the numbers have changed though (i.e endurance is now 5)
Prescience is wc2 now, 12inch range gives re roll to hit still
Foreboding is the same
Forewarning is the same
perfect timing is the same
Pre cog is the same
Misfortune, is different, all attacks that target that unit have the rending special rule... wow
Scriers gaze is you can now re roll the reserves roll outflank and mysterious objective
Daemonology we all know from leaks
santic no 6 is vortex of doom, str d small blast
pyro is still crap
Telekinesis, no gate....
replaced with levitation
targets the psyker he may move 12inches... they then cannot charge
psyhic malestrom is no 6, wc3, str 10 ap1 large blast barrage
Telepathy
Dominate the same
mental fort, the same
terrify, -1 ld, treats all units as having fear, and must take moral check end of phase, no longer removes fearless
Shourding, new power, gives pskyer and all units within 6 shrouded
Invis, all units targetting the unit with it cast on can only snap shot at it
Hallicunation, the same?
Happen to be any Ork hardware in the back of the book to give us a sneak peak at new Ork stuff?
=)
I am reading some of these posts and seeing "No Assaults at all on turn 1" and they are saying they can run up into your face on their turn one and then on your turn one you can't assault them? If this is the case then Some fast assaulty Deathstars got a little bit better.
Suppose now is as good a time as any to start posting.
Sorry if its been asked Marky and this is abit of a long shot but are their any changes to the soul blaze rule? Can it at-least "stack" now or is it still just a pointless special rule?
MarkyMark wrote: no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
No unit or no model? So if you deny one warlock casting Stealth no other warlock in the unit can cast stealth?
Xerics wrote: I am reading some of these posts and seeing "No Assaults at all on turn 1" and they are saying they can run up into your face on their turn one and then on your turn one you can't assault them? If this is the case then Some fast assaulty Deathstars got a little bit better.
Didn't think about it like that, unless your assaulty death star wants to hit them because they are now close enough
Xerics wrote: I am reading some of these posts and seeing "No Assaults at all on turn 1" and they are saying they can run up into your face on their turn one and then on your turn one you can't assault them? If this is the case then Some fast assaulty Deathstars got a little bit better.
Didn't think about it like that, unless your assaulty death star wants to hit them because they are now close enough
Only scout cannot charge game turn 1, inflitrate cannot charge their first turn, couldnt see any other restrictions.
MarkyMark wrote: no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
No unit or no model? So if you deny one warlock casting Stealth no other warlock in the unit can cast stealth?
As long as their in the same unit , then I think the answer is NO. but if seperate units YES.
Xerics wrote: I am reading some of these posts and seeing "No Assaults at all on turn 1" and they are saying they can run up into your face on their turn one and then on your turn one you can't assault them? If this is the case then Some fast assaulty Deathstars got a little bit better.
Didn't think about it like that, unless your assaulty death star wants to hit them because they are now close enough
But if neither player can assault on their turn 1 then the player who goes first can just turbo boost their bikes to your face and then assault you on their turn 2 because you weren't allowed to assault on your turn one. Gives the player who goes first the first chance to shoot and the first chance to assault if this is the case making going first waaaaaay more advantageous then it was before.
MarkyMark wrote: Soul blaze is awesome in 6th, killing off those last few kroot or pinging more wounds on guard is worth it., it is still the same for 7th
Eh i'm sure some people get use out of it but seeing how my meta is 90% marines I guess it will stay pointless for me. I assume then aside from Jink most of the special rules have stayed the same?
MarkyMark wrote: no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
No unit or no model? So if you deny one warlock casting Stealth no other warlock in the unit can cast stealth?
As long as their in the same unit , then I think the answer is NO. but if seperate units YES.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
MarkyMark wrote: no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
No unit or no model? So if you deny one warlock casting Stealth no other warlock in the unit can cast stealth?
As long as their in the same unit , then I think the answer is NO. but if seperate units YES.
Ill have to read the rulebook myself because I flat out don't believe this. I think its the same model because making it so that no unit can do it makes things like warlock council more useless then shining spears.
MarkyMark wrote: no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
No unit or no model? So if you deny one warlock casting Stealth no other warlock in the unit can cast stealth?
As long as their in the same unit , then I think the answer is NO. but if seperate units YES.
Ill have to read the rulebook myself because I flat out don't believe this. I think its the same model because making it so that no unit can do it makes things like warlock council more useless then shining spears.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm done. The invalidating of the psychic cards was the last straw for me. FW continues to have my attention as long as they keep producing excellent books and Mechanicum stuff, but I'm done with GW's bull gak. It's been a long couple of decades, but I've had enough.
Sigvatr wrote: Haha, so if that's true, GW is seriously pulling off a FIFA and sells what basically is an update to 6th for full price?
And invalidating all our psychic cards at the same time (but buying the new cards helps us to better forge a narrative, so that's ok I guess).
MarkyMark wrote: no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
No unit or no model? So if you deny one warlock casting Stealth no other warlock in the unit can cast stealth?
As long as their in the same unit , then I think the answer is NO. but if seperate units YES.
Ill have to read the rulebook myself because I flat out don't believe this. I think its the same model because making it so that no unit can do it makes things like warlock council more useless then shining spears.
It says unit more then once mate.
Well here's hoping to an FAQ that changes that. There is no reason why another Psyker in the same squad wouldn't be able to cast a power that his buddy got denied. Definitely going to throw that up for the FAQ people to look at.
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
Nope, it is in the main rules for pyskers, seer council has been nerfed.
Where in the book does it actually say armies can take the Daemonlogy disciplines PLEEEASE tell me they made this big deal about Daemonology but don't outright state which armies have access to it. I've read this elsewhere.
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
Nope, it is in the main rules for pyskers, seer council has been nerfed.
Still going to send the question up to GW. Probably an oversight on their part.
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
A cheesy list you happen to like no longer works like it used to. That's a shame - but not a bad thing for the game as a whole.
Markymark - does a psychic power still go off if the caster perils? Perils and dies?
Hollismason wrote: Where in the book does it actually say armies can take the Daemonlogy disciplines PLEEEASE tell me they made this big deal about Daemonology but don't outright state which armies have access to it. I've read this elsewhere.
Didn't the preview snapshot from the codex covered this? Mentioning that everyone but Daemons could take it?
Hollismason wrote: Where in the book does it actually say armies can take the Daemonlogy disciplines PLEEEASE tell me they made this big deal about Daemonology but don't outright state which armies have access to it. I've read this elsewhere.
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
A cheesy list you happen to like no longer works like it used to. That's a shame - but not a bad thing for the game as a whole.
Markymark - does a psychic power still go off if the caster perils? Perils and dies?
Yes you can peril and die and power still works (unless it targets psyker) you can peril and fail to cast the power.
Almost all Nid MCs need to Smash Attack to even have a chance of hurting a Land Raider.
Assuming the land Raider moved, that is a 3+ to hit, and a 4+ to glance. Now lets say the earlier rumor is correct, and Smash Attack allows reroll Pens, and Pens remove 2HP.
Even with that, on average, an MC will remove .6666 HP per turn. So it will take *6 turns* for an MC to Smash Attack a Land Raider to death. And that is *after* it has run across the table and finally caught the thing.
There is one possible caveat to this.... if you can still add attacks from charging and multiple weapons, it will make it a small bit better.
But were Smash Attacks overpowered before..??
There is another solution to AV14 in our codex - Crushing Claws. +1S, AP2, Armourbane. Either on a brood of scytal fexes, or haruspex models.
Sure, we also have the choice between a bad model, and a laughably bad model... just in case someone brings heavy armor.
Spoiler:
Also this:
This image from monday shows that you CAN include as many detachments in an army as you have models, and points for and still be battle forged. Tyranids can spam hive tyrants all day if that's what gets the job done, or just take 2 HQ, 4 Troops, and load up on 6 heavy slots....The possibilities are endless.
I'm still not buying it. Yes, in general, you can take lots of detachments, but that doesn't mean there are no restrictions nor limits for specific detachments. I find it hard to believe that armies are specifically disallowed from allying with themselves, but will be allowed to take multiple Combined Arms detachments.
Hell, no one will bother with allied detachments, just take another combined arms detachment from a different codex.
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
A cheesy list you happen to like no longer works like it used to. That's a shame - but not a bad thing for the game as a whole.
Markymark - does a psychic power still go off if the caster perils? Perils and dies?
Yes you can peril and die and power still works (unless it targets psyker) you can peril and fail to cast the power.
What happens if you Peril for a Possession?
So there's no downside to Peril on a Possession Power?
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
A cheesy list you happen to like no longer works like it used to. That's a shame - but not a bad thing for the game as a whole.
Markymark - does a psychic power still go off if the caster perils? Perils and dies?
That's not the point I am making here. It doesn't make sense for one guy to be disallowed to manifest a power because another individual in his squad was denied the same power if they don't have brotherhood of psykers because only 1 guy was manifesting at the time of denial. If they had to manifest the power all together then it would make sense but they don't.
Hollismason wrote: Woah that is a huge fething nerf to Flying Monstrous creatures.
Like that's Minimum 3rd turn charge.
feth you Bloodthirster.
Consider the fewer number of grounding tests and the fact that it can move as jump infantry turn 1 for a turn 2 assault. Quit being instantly negative without considering the whole picture.
WrentheFaceless wrote: So has it been stated how perils work in relation to multiple dice? Say you roll 3 do you roll perils twice or just once?
White Dwarf says a perils test is on 2 or more 6's. which leads me to believe that it's just 1 Peril's check regardless of the number of Boxcars you throw.
I think you are right, I think it would have been an interesting mechanic that every additional 6 was a -1 on the Perils chart.
(Before folks run with this, *completely* made that up in my head just now...)
Hollismason wrote: Woah that is a huge fething nerf to Flying Monstrous creatures.
Like that's Minimum 3rd turn charge.
feth you Bloodthirster.
Remember that because Grounding Tests are now taken at the end of the phase rather than immediately, FMCs can't just be blown apart by every weapon on the board the second they fail one. At worst they can be assaulted, and that's not so bad for Bloodthirsters, is it?
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
Nope, it is in the main rules for pyskers, seer council has been nerfed.
Still going to send the question up to GW. Probably an oversight on their part.
It couldn't be targeted at BoP. They can only generate 1 instance of a power anyway. It's targeted at units like Warlocks. Deny is hard enough as it is. Don't believe it's an oversight.
Dunno if it is allready mentioned, but a guy on the french boards said that there is a paragraphe in the new book about Weapons/Abilities that deal direct dammages, like Haywire or grav-guns.
They don't negate Cover or Invul saves!!!!
thats fething right, take your freakin Grav crap shooters and stick it where the sun don't shine motherfreakin Shenanigans!
Also asked about Jump infantry getting Jink and could use their packs for move&assault, he said that jump packs din't chance and stayed the same.
Slayer le boucher wrote: Dunno if it is allready mentioned, but a guy on the french boards said that there is a paragraphe in the new book about Weapons/Abilities that deal direct dammages, like Haywire or grav-guns.
They don't negate Cover or Invul saves!!!!
thats fething right, take your freakin Grav crap shooters and stick it where the sun don't shine motherfreakin Shenanigans!
Also asked about Jump infantry getting Jink and could use their packs for move&assault, he said that jump packs din't chance and stayed the same.
I don't get what you're saying about the cover or invulnerable saves. Mind giving a link?
I think I decyphered it. You're saying Grav-guns and Haywire explicitly allow vehicles saves?
I don't get what you're saying about the cover or invulnerable saves. Mind giving a link?
I think I decyphered it. You're saying Grav-guns and Haywire explicitly allow vehicles saves?
Think thats what he's saying, Grav and Haywire can have saves taken against
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
A cheesy list you happen to like no longer works like it used to. That's a shame - but not a bad thing for the game as a whole.
Markymark - does a psychic power still go off if the caster perils? Perils and dies?
That's not the point I am making here. It doesn't make sense for one guy to be disallowed to manifest a power because another individual in his squad was denied the same power if they don't have brotherhood of psykers because only 1 guy was manifesting at the time of denial. If they had to manifest the power all together then it would make sense but they don't.
You're mistakenly adding fluff explanations to game mechanics, which doesn't work. But if you want a fluff explanation, perhaps all of the psykers are concentrating and summoning their powers through the warp at the same time, rather than one psyker waiting to see if his buddy got his power off, so he can try to back him up?
I mean, 9 warlocks on jetbikes, veering through terrain with creatures/humanoids firing lethal rounds at them, may be more concerned about getting the power they originally focused on to manifest rather than also trying to pay attention to his friend and altering his communion with the warp.
Slayer le boucher wrote: Dunno if it is allready mentioned, but a guy on the french boards said that there is a paragraphe in the new book about Weapons/Abilities that deal direct dammages, like Haywire or grav-guns.
They don't negate Cover or Invul saves!!!!
thats fething right, take your freakin Grav crap shooters and stick it where the sun don't shine motherfreakin Shenanigans!
Also asked about Jump infantry getting Jink and could use their packs for move&assault, he said that jump packs din't chance and stayed the same.
I don't get what you're saying about the cover or invulnerable saves. Mind giving a link?
I think I decyphered it. You're saying Grav-guns and Haywire explicitly allow vehicles saves?
Yeah, now i'm not sure about haywire, but the example was Grav-guns, since haywire weapons function in the same way has Grav-guns...
Might be wrong though, gotta wait tommorow for me to pick up my book and i'll shall see for myself.
tetrisphreak wrote: I hope D-weapons do not have ignores cover. I also hope they allow FNP. also I wonder if FNP went to (4+). It's a Shame markymark had to go.
Now where is samurai_eduh and his book?? Lol
From what I've been able to gather 2-5 does D3+1 wounds still, saves are subject to the AP of the D weapon.
Most are AP 2 or less so that leaves cover and invulns. Invulns are confirmed, cover not so much yet. As for feel no pain, there isnt a # str value, it just deals wounds, so I believe you cant FNP against it like normal. At least thats what I think
Hollismason wrote: It's specifically probably written that way to prevent you from casting spells over and over and over again wtih Brotherhood of Psykers.
But warlocks don't have the brotherhood of psykers rule. It may be targeted at brotherhood of psykers only if that's the case.
A cheesy list you happen to like no longer works like it used to. That's a shame - but not a bad thing for the game as a whole.
Markymark - does a psychic power still go off if the caster perils? Perils and dies?
That's not the point I am making here. It doesn't make sense for one guy to be disallowed to manifest a power because another individual in his squad was denied the same power if they don't have brotherhood of psykers because only 1 guy was manifesting at the time of denial. If they had to manifest the power all together then it would make sense but they don't.
You're mistakenly adding fluff explanations to game mechanics, which doesn't work. But if you want a fluff explanation, perhaps all of the psykers are concentrating and summoning their powers through the warp at the same time, rather than one psyker waiting to see if his buddy got his power off, so he can try to back him up?
I mean, 9 warlocks on jetbikes, veering through terrain with creatures/humanoids firing lethal rounds at them, may be more concerned about getting the power they originally focused on to manifest rather than also trying to pay attention to his friend and altering his communion with the warp.
I still hope they change it. It breaks warlocks so badly that the only reason to ever take them would be in a squad of guardians to give them stealth in ruins while they camp the objective and shoot their star cannons/bright lances at targets. Seems like a waste now.
Xerics wrote: I still hope they change it. It breaks warlocks so badly that the only reason to ever take them would be in a squad of guardians to give them stealth in ruins while they camp the objective and shoot their star cannons/bright lances at targets. Seems like a waste now.
Dude. Relax.
First of all, they no longer need to rely on their paltry Ld to get it off. Second, if you throw a couple of dice at the guy casting it, he's very likely to pass, and denying it is more or less impossible. Third, all of the Warlocks get Conceal/reveal in addition to whatever else they roll. Fourth, they're still besties with the Baron.
The Seer Council is fine. And now it scores too! Yay!
Xerics wrote: It breaks warlocks so badly that the only reason to ever take them would be in a squad of guardians to give them stealth in ruins while they camp the objective and shoot their star cannons/bright lances at targets. Seems like a waste now.
I still hope they change it. It breaks warlocks so badly that the only reason to ever take them would be in a squad of guardians to give them stealth in ruins while they camp the objective and shoot their star cannons/bright lances at targets. Seems like a waste now.
They have no reason to change it back. They've gotten your money on the Warlocks. Now they need to change things up a bit so you'll buy something else.
Hollismason wrote: It doesn't break them, it's still ridiculously hard to get a deny the witch off on it, natural sixes and needing to equal their successes.
And higher lv spells need multiple 6s so good luck on that.
I still hope they change it. It breaks warlocks so badly that the only reason to ever take them would be in a squad of guardians to give them stealth in ruins while they camp the objective and shoot their star cannons/bright lances at targets. Seems like a waste now.
They have no reason to change it back. They've gotten your money on the Warlocks. Now they need to change things up a bit so you'll buy something else.
LOL i have 3 units of every Eldar unit that GW produces. So unless they make me some new models I have nothing left to buy from them.
Hollismason wrote: It doesn't break them, it's still ridiculously hard to get a deny the witch off on it, natural sixes and needing to equal their successes.
And higher lv spells need multiple 6s so good luck on that.
Is there at least something in there that changes space wolves to not have their crazy 4+ deny all the things sticks? Because with their outdated codex still with the rules as written they need a single 4+ to deny any ability which completely breaks the psyker phase in their favor.
Xerics wrote: Is there at least something in there that changes space wolves to not have their crazy 4+ deny all the things sticks? Because with their outdated codex still with the rules as written they need a single 4+ to deny any ability which completely breaks the psyker phase in their favor.
It will probably come with an FAQ. otherwise it seems wise to have some Wolf lords with some wolf tails wolfing around with the rest of your army for psyker protection.
Ok, this still hasn't been answered... When a monstrous creature smashes, does he halve his attacks or reduce them to 1? If 1, is there any new mechanic for MCs that makes it easier to kill vehicles?
Second, is it confirmed that you can consolidate into assault?
...which is exactly why them not having access to anything except for Daemonology and Force powers (when they don't even have Force weapons) is a bit of a strange design choice.
unless you account for the fact that GW knows whats in the unreleased ork codex, and that force weapons are somthing that the orks desparatly need added to their codex.
they also likely have their own trees as do other codexes, so likely will make more sense later
No doubt they will. But unless they have a pretty massive array of powers in the codex, that won't change the fact that there is a fairly wide imbalance in the range of powers available to different armies.Nor does it make Daemon-summoning orks any less nonsensical.
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Flying Circus kind of got a nerf.
Seerstar kind of got a nerf.
Screamer Star got a Nerf
Buffcommander on Riptides got a nerf.
Kind of interesting.
Hence why I never buy power armies. Time kills them.
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Flying Circus kind of got a nerf.
Seerstar kind of got a nerf.
Screamer Star got a Nerf
Buffcommander on Riptides got a nerf.
Kind of interesting.
indeed hopefully it will allow other armies to start sprouting up. though i fear we may start seeing a lot of imperium sanctuary 2++ nonsense or at the least a lot more mixed armies with anti psykers EVERYWHERE!.
i know for sure though i will probably running alot of psyocculumes to help out greatly.
It's time to play the game as it will be written. No "1999+1", no "battle forged only", no "omit lords of war".
Let it all in. Enforce WYSIWYG. Let the cream rise to the top and the game will shake out itself - one list will win a tournament, the meta will counter with a new list at the next. Innovators and smart players will, as they always have, remain at the top 16 of tournaments.
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Flying Circus kind of got a nerf.
Seerstar kind of got a nerf.
Screamer Star got a Nerf
Buffcommander on Riptides got a nerf.
Kind of interesting.
Well if the seerstar got nerfed so badly ill just have to use all the points they cost me and throw in 2 more wraithknights. They are still have decent guns and the smash attack never really mattered due to them being STR10 in the first place so no big loss there. I had only been using 1 but now there is no reason for me not to bring out the other 2 from the foam.
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Flying Circus kind of got a nerf.
Seerstar kind of got a nerf.
Screamer Star got a Nerf
Buffcommander on Riptides got a nerf.
Kind of interesting.
Tyranids got nerfed... Collateral Damage?
Skyblight Tyranids would have had us begging for a nerf within a few months. The FMC nerf just gets it out of the way early. Heading off problems before they become problems is good game design, so that is at least one thing GW have done right.
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Flying Circus kind of got a nerf.
Seerstar kind of got a nerf.
Screamer Star got a Nerf
Buffcommander on Riptides got a nerf.
Kind of interesting.
Tyranids got nerfed... Collateral Damage?
That's what Tyranids are now in the game. They are there to be constantly beaten. Think it is the price they pay for being the end game according to the background.
Xerics wrote: I am reading some of these posts and seeing "No Assaults at all on turn 1" and they are saying they can run up into your face on their turn one and then on your turn one you can't assault them? If this is the case then Some fast assaulty Deathstars got a little bit better.
Didn't think about it like that, unless your assaulty death star wants to hit them because they are now close enough
Only scout cannot charge game turn 1, inflitrate cannot charge their first turn, couldnt see any other restrictions.
Well that pretty much settles my problem with Khornedogs...
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Flying Circus kind of got a nerf.
Seerstar kind of got a nerf.
Screamer Star got a Nerf
Buffcommander on Riptides got a nerf.
Kind of interesting.
Tyranids got nerfed... Collateral Damage?
Skyblight Tyranids would have had us begging for a nerf within a few months. The FMC nerf just gets it out of the way early. Heading off problems before they become problems is good game design, so that is at least one thing GW have done right.
Yeah, and if 6th edition hadn't disallowed assaulting out of transports, it would have been Khorne Berzerker cheese... I don't think Nids are as bad off as you say, but we'll need to see the FAQs.
Xerics wrote: I am reading some of these posts and seeing "No Assaults at all on turn 1" and they are saying they can run up into your face on their turn one and then on your turn one you can't assault them? If this is the case then Some fast assaulty Deathstars got a little bit better.
Didn't think about it like that, unless your assaulty death star wants to hit them because they are now close enough
Only scout cannot charge game turn 1, inflitrate cannot charge their first turn, couldnt see any other restrictions.
Well that pretty much settles my problem with Khornedogs...
Scouts can't charge on game turn 1 currently. No change there. The nerf was to infiltrators. Limiting "first turn" into "first game turn"
Xerics wrote: I am reading some of these posts and seeing "No Assaults at all on turn 1" and they are saying they can run up into your face on their turn one and then on your turn one you can't assault them? If this is the case then Some fast assaulty Deathstars got a little bit better.
Didn't think about it like that, unless your assaulty death star wants to hit them because they are now close enough
Only scout cannot charge game turn 1, inflitrate cannot charge their first turn, couldnt see any other restrictions.
Well that pretty much settles my problem with Khornedogs...
Scouts can't charge on game turn 1 currently. No change there. The nerf was to infiltrators. Limiting "first turn" into "first game turn"
Which means i could roll up in a buffed seerstar on turn one to your face and on your turn you wouldn't be allowed to assault me even if I was 1" away from your face? Then on my turn 2 I rebuff as much as possible and get the first assaults out of the way killing off the best unit I could turbo boost into? Makes it seem like whomever gets the first turn gets a distinct advantage.
H.B.M.C. wrote: So if you fail to cast a power, then anyone else who has that power in your army can't cast it that turn? Please tell me that's wrong.
Weren't you "done?"
Or did you just say that for effect? I mean there is a misconception you seem to have that some people seem to share in believing that nothing has improved at all. Well, allow me to put this way. The changes to vehicles alone are already a massive improvement on the idiocy of MC's compared to vehicles durability issue, which may just have single handedly taken my entire Space Marine mechanized army off a dusty shelf.
Hollismason wrote: Woah that is a huge fething nerf to Flying Monstrous creatures.
Like that's Minimum 3rd turn charge.
feth you Bloodthirster.
Consider the fewer number of grounding tests and the fact that it can move as jump infantry turn 1 for a turn 2 assault. Quit being instantly negative without considering the whole picture.
Most of the resiliency of any FMC is the Hard to Hit rule from Swooping, once it is forced to Glide for a turn first, it tends to get shot up and killed.
Further, one of the big benefits of FMCs is having the option, and your opponent must take that into account. Now the opponent *knows* he is safe from assault.
Big nerf....
Yes, there is added resiliency *while swooping*....
NamelessBard wrote: As much as I hate to say it, it seems like we got suckered into a 2 year beta test we had to pay for.
$3.12 a month is a fine price to pay to play a game I enjoy. That's pretty close to what the rulebook cost us for 6th edition. Shorter than normal sure but worth the price for the amount of time I got to play.
Hollismason wrote: Woah that is a huge fething nerf to Flying Monstrous creatures.
Like that's Minimum 3rd turn charge.
feth you Bloodthirster.
Consider the fewer number of grounding tests and the fact that it can move as jump infantry turn 1 for a turn 2 assault. Quit being instantly negative without considering the whole picture.
Most of the resiliency of any FMC is the Hard to Hit rule from Swooping, once it is forced to Glide for a turn first, it tends to get shot up and killed.
Further, one of the big benefits of FMCs is having the option, and your opponent must take that into account. Now the opponent *knows* he is safe from assault.
Big nerf....
Yes, there is added resiliency *while swooping*....
Interestingly though, if you're grounded you can still assault after. Which means, don't shoot at the angry monster or you just may die...
Xerics wrote: I am reading some of these posts and seeing "No Assaults at all on turn 1" and they are saying they can run up into your face on their turn one and then on your turn one you can't assault them? If this is the case then Some fast assaulty Deathstars got a little bit better.
Didn't think about it like that, unless your assaulty death star wants to hit them because they are now close enough
Only scout cannot charge game turn 1, inflitrate cannot charge their first turn, couldnt see any other restrictions.
Well that pretty much settles my problem with Khornedogs...
Scouts can't charge on game turn 1 currently. No change there. The nerf was to infiltrators. Limiting "first turn" into "first game turn"
Which means i could roll up in a buffed seerstar on turn one to your face and on your turn you wouldn't be allowed to assault me even if I was 1" away from your face? Then on my turn 2 I rebuff as much as possible and get the first assaults out of the way killing off the best unit I could turbo boost into? Makes it seem like whomever gets the first turn gets a distinct advantage.
You are misunderstanding. Scouting units can't charge - they can still get assaulted if they move close enough to an enemy that deployed normally.
Hollismason wrote: Woah that is a huge fething nerf to Flying Monstrous creatures.
Like that's Minimum 3rd turn charge.
feth you Bloodthirster.
Consider the fewer number of grounding tests and the fact that it can move as jump infantry turn 1 for a turn 2 assault. Quit being instantly negative without considering the whole picture.
Most of the resiliency of any FMC is the Hard to Hit rule from Swooping, once it is forced to Glide for a turn first, it tends to get shot up and killed.
Further, one of the big benefits of FMCs is having the option, and your opponent must take that into account. Now the opponent *knows* he is safe from assault.
Big nerf....
Yes, there is added resiliency *while swooping*....
Interestingly though, if you're grounded you can still assault after. Which means, don't shoot at the angry monster or you just may die...
So does this mean FMC's have to spend an entire turn on the ground prior to assaulting and can't move 18" followed by an assault from the air? Seems like a good thing to me.
well looks like I'll have to take be'lakor with my thirtser now, I'll swoop belk, and invisibility the thirster. I'll live with that. no rage quit yet.
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Flying Circus kind of got a nerf.
Seerstar kind of got a nerf.
Screamer Star got a Nerf
Buffcommander on Riptides got a nerf.
Kind of interesting.
Tyranids got nerfed... Collateral Damage?
Skyblight Tyranids would have had us begging for a nerf within a few months. The FMC nerf just gets it out of the way early. Heading off problems before they become problems is good game design, so that is at least one thing GW have done right.
Did they need to nerf swarlord, walkrants, mawlocs, trygons, tervigons, tyrannofexes and other MCs to fix skyblight?
Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
MarkyMark wrote: Just got the book, quite interesting small changes, annoyed that terrify no longer removes fearless though. I have wrote a few things I have noticed if anyone wants to read
Probably answered by now, but, hey.
Do we have confirmation on Swarms being scoring yay or nay?
Do we have confirmation on Jump Infantry, Jet Infantry, or FMCs having Jink saves?
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Flying Circus kind of got a nerf.
Seerstar kind of got a nerf.
Screamer Star got a Nerf
Buffcommander on Riptides got a nerf.
Kind of interesting.
Tyranids got nerfed... Collateral Damage?
Skyblight Tyranids would have had us begging for a nerf within a few months. The FMC nerf just gets it out of the way early. Heading off problems before they become problems is good game design, so that is at least one thing GW have done right.
Did they need to nerf swarlord, walkrants, mawlocs, trygons, tervigons, tyrannofexes and other MCs to fix skyblight?
Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Oh, I see. None of that is really that big a deal, so this isn't something I care about. PM me in a year when you see I was right and I'll quietly accept the recognition.
H.B.M.C. wrote: So if you fail to cast a power, then anyone else who has that power in your army can't cast it that turn? Please tell me that's wrong.
Weren't you "done?"
Or did you just say that for effect? I mean there is a misconception you seem to have that some people seem to share in believing that nothing has improved at all. Well, allow me to put this way. The changes to vehicles alone are already a massive improvement on the idiocy of MC's compared to vehicles durability issue, which may just have single handedly taken my entire Space Marine mechanized army off a dusty shelf.
You know, you have a nasty habit of randomly jumping on posters with very strongly worded, flirting with impolite, posts for no apparent reason.
I hope you start getting more hugs, grow out of it or do whatever you need to be 'done' with it, or I suspect Dakka may start to become 'done' with you.
Hollismason wrote: I think it's really interesting that if you look at the changes, they're almost specifically made to depower some of the top armies.
Flying Circus kind of got a nerf.
Seerstar kind of got a nerf.
Screamer Star got a Nerf
Buffcommander on Riptides got a nerf.
Kind of interesting.
Tyranids got nerfed... Collateral Damage?
Skyblight Tyranids would have had us begging for a nerf within a few months. The FMC nerf just gets it out of the way early. Heading off problems before they become problems is good game design, so that is at least one thing GW have done right.
Did they need to nerf swarlord, walkrants, mawlocs, trygons, tervigons, tyrannofexes and other MCs to fix skyblight?
Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
You could always not use smash and get your full attacks and glance a rhino to death. S6 MC's (7 with certain wargear) with 5 attacks on the charge against armor 10 3 hull points. If you don't glance it to death in one or 2 turns your doing it wrong or the dice gods hate you. They made vehicles a little more durable which was needed. In 6th if you weren't playing eldar or AV14 your vehicles crumbled to dust in no time. It means you actually need anti tank weapons to be anti tank... OMG WHAT A CONCEPT!
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
MarkyMark wrote: Just got the book, quite interesting small changes, annoyed that terrify no longer removes fearless though. I have wrote a few things I have noticed if anyone wants to read
Probably answered by now, but, hey.
Do we have confirmation on Swarms being scoring yay or nay?
Do we have confirmation on Jump Infantry, Jet Infantry, or FMCs having Jink saves?
I don't know about Swarms but Jump and Jet Infantry were confirmed to not have Jink.
Xerics wrote: I am reading some of these posts and seeing "No Assaults at all on turn 1" and they are saying they can run up into your face on their turn one and then on your turn one you can't assault them? If this is the case then Some fast assaulty Deathstars got a little bit better.
Didn't think about it like that, unless your assaulty death star wants to hit them because they are now close enough
Only scout cannot charge game turn 1, inflitrate cannot charge their first turn, couldnt see any other restrictions.
Well that pretty much settles my problem with Khornedogs...
Scouts can't charge on game turn 1 currently. No change there. The nerf was to infiltrators. Limiting "first turn" into "first game turn"
In 6E infiltrators and scouts can't assault first player turn. In 7E Scouts can't charge first game turn.
Skyblight Tyranids would have had us begging for a nerf within a few months. The FMC nerf just gets it out of the way early. Heading off problems before they become problems is good game design, so that is at least one thing GW have done right.
Did they need to nerf swarlord, walkrants, mawlocs, trygons, tervigons, tyrannofexes and other MCs to fix skyblight?
Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Well clearly your not collecting right.
you should have A LOT more models the forge the narrative better. to represent nids properly, your table half should contain no less than 800 models.
I think we are missing further information. otherwise AV14 shouldn't be as big of a deal as people are making it out to be.
90% of things that you need to crack open will be rear 11 at most and if the pen = 2 HP thing is true then it shouldn't take that long..
You will have a super bad time against land raiders probably but unless they are specifically spamming it against you, it shouldn't be a problem for all the other games.
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
MarkyMark wrote: Just got the book, quite interesting small changes, annoyed that terrify no longer removes fearless though. I have wrote a few things I have noticed if anyone wants to read
Probably answered by now, but, hey.
Do we have confirmation on Swarms being scoring yay or nay?
Do we have confirmation on Jump Infantry, Jet Infantry, or FMCs having Jink saves?
I don't know about Swarms but Jump and Jet Infantry were confirmed to not have Jink.
He said that as far as he could see, Swarms did not have a scoring restriction. So, inconclusive at the moment.
Xerics wrote: Well if the seerstar got nerfed so badly ill just have to use all the points they cost me and throw in 2 more wraithknights. They are still have decent guns and the smash attack never really mattered due to them being STR10 in the first place so no big loss there. I had only been using 1 but now there is no reason for me not to bring out the other 2 from the foam.
Chill out. Re-read markymark's posts about how 1) casting works and 2) denial works, specifically the example of needing 5 6s to neuter a power successfully cast with 5 dice and the needing straight 6s to deny blessings.
How many mastery levels do you have in that unit? In your entire army? If you want your stealthy powers to go off, they can. You'll just have to throw more dice at them.
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
The problem isn't the damage chart, that was a good change. The problem is the change to Smash Attack, that is a *huge* nerf... and we really *can't* do anything at range. We have to spend 2-3 turns trying to chase down a vehicle, and now must spend 2-3 turns trying to kill it.
Not even sure what Nids or Demons will do if they see 2+ Land raiders....
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
Please remember that Tyranids now have no ranged attacks that can fit the role of anti tank, sure we can strip hull points off with weight of numbers, but we have no ranged attacks that can one hit kill a vehicle with armour 13+. Combat is our only way to deal with such things, and now it is made worse. When the Codex came out we lost a lot, and now we are losing more... it just feels like GW have no idea what to do with Tyranids, If the losses were accompanied by a meaningful boost to balance it out, that would be fine. However we don't have that.
Sure we will have no issue dealing with armour 12, due to Devourers with Brainleech worms,
gr1m_dan 59239b2d99de29a60da7a3c6e70e72b4b.jpg wrote:Turbo boosting no longer grants a bonus to Jink.
But I think that Jink is now a straight 4+. Not a bad change, as it can sometimes get hard to remember which units/vehicles boosted/moved flat out in the previous turn.
When Mark is back, can someone ask if the Conjuration spell type prevents the newly summoned units from charging straight out? It will probably influence which "elementals" I build for my Farseer first.
But I think that Jink is now a straight 4+. Not a bad change, as it can sometimes get hard to remember which units/vehicles boosted/moved flat out in the previous turn.
When Mark is back, can someone ask if the Conjuration spell type prevents the newly summoned units from charging straight out? It will probably influence which "elementals" I build for my Farseer first.
Is it straight worse because it's not like you gain a 4+. They changed jink to PRIOR to the enemy rolling To Hit rolls you need to declare jink, and then you get a 4+ but can only fire snapshots next turn. That's a massive nerf for all non-flyers
NamelessBard wrote: As much as I hate to say it, it seems like we got suckered into a 2 year beta test we had to pay for.
$3.12 a month is a fine price to pay to play a game I enjoy. That's pretty close to what the rulebook cost us for 6th edition. Shorter than normal sure but worth the price for the amount of time I got to play.
Other than Orks, which books didn't see an update in 6e? I honestly don't know. Because with GW speeing up the release rate for codecies (and even adding new ones in!), I'm not sure how those complaining about the shortened edition cycle thought this would go down. Were people honestly thinking GW would update (almost) everyone and then just sit around with no big new releases?
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
Please remember that Tyranids now have no ranged attacks that can fit the role of anti tank, sure we can strip hull points off with weight of numbers, but we have no ranged attacks that can one hit kill a vehicle with armour 13+. Combat is our only way to deal with such things, and now it is made worse. When the Codex came out we lost a lot, and now we are losing more... it just feels like GW have no idea what to do with Tyranids, If the losses were accompanied by a meaningful boost to balance it out, that would be fine. However we don't have that.
Sure we will have no issue dealing with armour 12, due to Devourers with Brainleech worms,
As for being good against infantry, I wish.
You have a flyer that has 4 haywire attacks with 36" range... I think thats plenty of antitank.
Automatically Appended Next Post: and it has a 360 degree arc of fire with them.
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
Please remember that Tyranids now have no ranged attacks that can fit the role of anti tank, sure we can strip hull points off with weight of numbers, but we have no ranged attacks that can one hit kill a vehicle with armour 13+. Combat is our only way to deal with such things, and now it is made worse. When the Codex came out we lost a lot, and now we are losing more... it just feels like GW have no idea what to do with Tyranids, If the losses were accompanied by a meaningful boost to balance it out, that would be fine. However we don't have that.
Sure we will have no issue dealing with armour 12, due to Devourers with Brainleech worms,
As for being good against infantry, I wish.
You have a flyer that has 4 haywire attacks with 36" range... I think thats plenty of antitank.
Haywire which has insufficient AP to one hit kill a vehicle. So this one unit is plenty of anti-tank, it can fire two a turn, so can't kill by hull pints in one go. Are you really saying that that is a good Anti-tank? A unit that if lucky is going to have to take 2 turns to kill a vehicle.
Are you really saying that 1 unit is all a Codex requires for it's anti-tank capabilities?
MarkyMark wrote: no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
Please tell me I understood this wrong and that you can't now reroll armor saves more than once. I don't want to go back to 2nd ed
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
Please remember that Tyranids now have no ranged attacks that can fit the role of anti tank, sure we can strip hull points off with weight of numbers, but we have no ranged attacks that can one hit kill a vehicle with armour 13+. Combat is our only way to deal with such things, and now it is made worse. When the Codex came out we lost a lot, and now we are losing more... it just feels like GW have no idea what to do with Tyranids, If the losses were accompanied by a meaningful boost to balance it out, that would be fine. However we don't have that.
Sure we will have no issue dealing with armour 12, due to Devourers with Brainleech worms,
As for being good against infantry, I wish.
You have a flyer that has 4 haywire attacks with 36" range... I think thats plenty of antitank.
Automatically Appended Next Post: and it has a 360 degree arc of fire with them.
This is sarcasm right? You really believe 4 SINGLE USE weapons are enough anti tank? Wow :p
You have a flyer that has 4 haywire attacks with 36" range... I think thats plenty of antitank.
and it has a 360 degree arc of fire with them.
And those 4 attacks are for the *entire game*. And they hit on a 4+. That flyer can put about 1 HP on a turn, for 2 whole turns. Yeah, I bet those vehicles are shaking now....
Yes, 2 Crones should be able to deal with any one vehicle (unless it gets a cover save). Then what? Do you really think Crons will only take 1 A-barg? Or Am will take only 1 Leman Russ? There is a good chance those two crones can't take out a Land Raider.
And this assumes there are no flyers for them to deal with (which is their primary mission)
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
Please remember that Tyranids now have no ranged attacks that can fit the role of anti tank, sure we can strip hull points off with weight of numbers, but we have no ranged attacks that can one hit kill a vehicle with armour 13+. Combat is our only way to deal with such things, and now it is made worse. When the Codex came out we lost a lot, and now we are losing more... it just feels like GW have no idea what to do with Tyranids, If the losses were accompanied by a meaningful boost to balance it out, that would be fine. However we don't have that.
Sure we will have no issue dealing with armour 12, due to Devourers with Brainleech worms,
As for being good against infantry, I wish.
You have a flyer that has 4 haywire attacks with 36" range... I think thats plenty of antitank.
Haywire which has insufficient AP to one hit kill a vehicle. So this one unit is plenty of anti-tank, it can fire two a turn, so can't kill by hull pints in one go. Are you really saying that that is a good Anti-tank? A unit that if lucky is going to have to take 2 turns to kill a vehicle.
Are you really saying that 1 unit is all a Codex requires for it's anti-tank capabilities?
Don't they have 4 haywire shots each? If not then someone was cheating pretty hard core against me.
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
It does not. Most armies have access to AP2 shooting. In fact, many armies have AP1 melta. Tyranids don't. They had assault with MCs. MCs that are generally slower than the vehicles they are trying to pop. The only fast MCs are FMCs and they can no long assault after flying. Tyranids got the shaft on wargear options and that was a problem that has become more dire.
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
Please remember that Tyranids now have no ranged attacks that can fit the role of anti tank, sure we can strip hull points off with weight of numbers, but we have no ranged attacks that can one hit kill a vehicle with armour 13+. Combat is our only way to deal with such things, and now it is made worse. When the Codex came out we lost a lot, and now we are losing more... it just feels like GW have no idea what to do with Tyranids, If the losses were accompanied by a meaningful boost to balance it out, that would be fine. However we don't have that.
Sure we will have no issue dealing with armour 12, due to Devourers with Brainleech worms,
As for being good against infantry, I wish.
You have a flyer that has 4 haywire attacks with 36" range... I think thats plenty of antitank.
Haywire which has insufficient AP to one hit kill a vehicle. So this one unit is plenty of anti-tank, it can fire two a turn, so can't kill by hull pints in one go. Are you really saying that that is a good Anti-tank? A unit that if lucky is going to have to take 2 turns to kill a vehicle.
Are you really saying that 1 unit is all a Codex requires for it's anti-tank capabilities?
Don't they have 4 haywire shots each? If not then someone was cheating pretty hard core against me.
They have 4 one shot missiles, but as they are a FMC can fire 2 a turn... 2 of their one shot missiles, not great anti-tank. My Crone has so far never used the missiles, Vector Strike, which also took a massive nerf, and the Drool Cannon.
MarkyMark wrote: no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
Please tell me I understood this wrong and that you can't now reroll armor saves more than once. I don't want to go back to 2nd ed
M.
I think he's just dispelling the rumour that rerollable 2+ saves would be capped in some way, as there were rumours/wish lists about rerolls being capped at 4+ on a reroll a while ago. I'm 99% sure rerolls will still be limited to once only.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm done. The invalidating of the psychic cards was the last straw for me. FW continues to have my attention as long as they keep producing excellent books and Mechanicum stuff, but I'm done with GW's bull gak. It's been a long couple of decades, but I've had enough.
They were invalidated a couple weeks ago when we learned that they were going to a Warp Charge system honestly.
So do unused warp charge dice roll over into the next turns? For example, I have 4 warp charge dice 'floating' and choose not to cast anything, next psychic phase I add a d6 + collective mastery lvls of my psykers?
Errata implies improvement, a fixing of things that are broken. None of these things appear to be true about 7th.
But narratives, forging, and so forth.
Hey, to be fair, the errata is free. They are just charging you $85 to need free errata.
That's one of the things that I really just can't believe about this edition. NOT ONLY do you not appear to fix almost ANY of the problems which many, many, people have complained about, GW, you roll out a rulebook which requires extensive errata for almost every army.
This, after you stopped providing any errata for A YEAR for your current rule books.
Do you not see how that is a giant middle finger to your customers? Can you really not see it?
"Not only can we not be bothered to provide you with a relatively error/confusion free product, we can't be bothered to HELP you with the product that you have purchased. Our energies are entirely focused on creating a new product for you to buy, and providing support for THAT product."
It would be like Microsoft discontinuing support for their current OS to put more people on development for the next OS.
BTW, HBMC, if this does, in fact, drive you entirely off GW (save Forgeworld), I'll miss your posts on the topic. Even if I disagreed with you on something, I was always interested in seeing what you had written. Not only do I normally agree with your sense of what is good and valuable about Warhammer 40,000, your posts were always intelligently composed, and, unlike mine, short and to the point.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm done. The invalidating of the psychic cards was the last straw for me. FW continues to have my attention as long as they keep producing excellent books and Mechanicum stuff, but I'm done with GW's bull gak. It's been a long couple of decades, but I've had enough.
They were invalidated a couple weeks ago when we learned that they were going to a Warp Charge system honestly.
Not really. The 'technically still current' psychic cards indicated a warp charge on them. There was no need to change the rules of many existing psychic powers, nor add some and remove some. GW could have just changed the way you figured out how much warp charge you had available to spend and kept the "technically still current" psychic cards and powers. I'm not saying that would have been the best game design decision, but it sure would have been less irritating to those of us who bought the old psychic power cards.
In fact, you could have kept ALL of the old psychic cards and just replaced them codex by codex as each book was released. That way, GW could sell new psychic power cards with each new codex, leaving the old ones valid until replaced. That would also allow more 'customization' of psychic powers for each army (and you could do more cards for each army, since those were the only ones they got). I'm still of the opinion that each significant psyker faction should basically be using their own disciplines anyway. I don't think that Eldar farseers and Ork Wyrdboys and Space Wolf Runepriests should really have very much in common in terms of scholarship. Sure, Blood Angels and Dark Angels and Space Wolves and Ultramarines might have some powers in common between them, but even then, I think you would want some 'chapter specific' disciplines too.
Hollismason wrote: Tyranids actually got a huge nerf when it comes to destroying vehicles.
They pretty much have to glance them to death.
And they can't blow them up with shooting really.
Wanna be safe from Tyranids hide in a Rhino.
Except glancing rhino's to death is incredibly easy to do (requires half the average shots to do than to kill a 5E rhino) and largely what they were doing before anyway barring heavy MC attacks.
Xerics wrote: You could always not use smash and get your full attacks and glance a rhino to death. S6 MC's (7 with certain wargear) with 5 attacks on the charge against armor 10 3 hull points. If you don't glance it to death in one or 2 turns your doing it wrong or the dice gods hate you. They made vehicles a little more durable which was needed. In 6th if you weren't playing eldar or AV14 your vehicles crumbled to dust in no time. It means you actually need anti tank weapons to be anti tank... OMG WHAT A CONCEPT!
Maybe you're not not paying attention but no one complaining about Smash going to 1 attack was doing so in reference to Rhinos. Armies that rely on MCs to be their anti-tank (mostly Daemons and Nids) will be hard pressed to deal with AV13+ vehicles.
Again, Rhinos are not the issue. They will still die to a stiff breeze. So please stop bringing up Rhinos and other light vehicles when you're tying to justify the nerf to Smash.
streamdragon wrote: Other than Orks, which books didn't see an update in 6e? I honestly don't know. Because with GW speeing up the release rate for codecies (and even adding new ones in!), I'm not sure how those complaining about the shortened edition cycle thought this would go down. Were people honestly thinking GW would update (almost) everyone and then just sit around with no big new releases?
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm done. The invalidating of the psychic cards was the last straw for me. FW continues to have my attention as long as they keep producing excellent books and Mechanicum stuff, but I'm done with GW's bull gak. It's been a long couple of decades, but I've had enough.
They were invalidated a couple weeks ago when we learned that they were going to a Warp Charge system honestly.
Not really. The 'technically still current' psychic cards indicated a warp charge on them. There was no need to change the rules of many existing psychic powers, nor add some and remove some. GW could have just changed the way you figured out how much warp charge you had available to spend and kept the "technically still current" psychic cards and powers. I'm not saying that would have been the best game design decision, but it sure would have been less irritating to those of us who bought the old psychic power cards.
In fact, you could have kept ALL of the old psychic cards and just replaced them codex by codex as each book was released. That way, GW could sell new psychic power cards with each new codex, leaving the old ones valid until replaced. That would also allow more 'customization' of psychic powers for each army (and you could do more cards for each army, since those were the only ones they got). I'm still of the opinion that each significant psyker faction should basically be using their own disciplines anyway. I don't think that Eldar farseers and Ork Wyrdboys and Space Wolf Runepriests should really have very much in common in terms of scholarship. Sure, Blood Angels and Dark Angels and Space Wolves and Ultramarines might have some powers in common between them, but even then, I think you would want some 'chapter specific' disciplines too.
I disagree that you could have kept the old ones. The way Warp Charges balance requires more changes than "ML = WC" and it shows. Or else Divination would be a WC1 power.
So yeah, cards invalidated three weeks ago, even if they didn't change powers around.
streamdragon wrote: Other than Orks, which books didn't see an update in 6e? I honestly don't know. Because with GW speeing up the release rate for codecies (and even adding new ones in!), I'm not sure how those complaining about the shortened edition cycle thought this would go down. Were people honestly thinking GW would update (almost) everyone and then just sit around with no big new releases?
Crons? DEldar? GK? BA? SW? And technically SoB
Yeah, Sisters didn't get a codex, they got an errata they had to pay for that dragged the army down an alley and beat it with a nerf bat.
....Not that I'm bitter or unhappy about that since people tell me I'm some kind of White Knight every now and then when I don't see everything as 100% bad. Which means I could neverEVER dislikeanythingGW does. [/sarcasm]
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
If it was just the vehicle damage chart, I don't think me or other MC-using players would be complaining. But the damage charge change and the nerf to Smash will render MCs ineffectual against AV13+ vehicles. Inform yourself before bringing out the attitude.
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
If it was just the vehicle damage chart, I don't think me or other MC-using players would be complaining. But the damage charge change and the nerf to Smash will render MCs ineffectual against AV13+ vehicles. Inform yourself before bringing out the attitude.
How many AV13+ rear armor vehicles exist in 40k???
Oh wait - just land raiders. And those are *everywhere*. Psssh
I find it kind of funny how in certain situations FMC want to actually fail their grounding check so they can charge the next turn.
I think it forces you to actual plan instead of getting guaranteed charges whenever you want it.
Almost all of the death stars got serious nerfs, vehicles got a little more durable while not turning back into 5th edition. Number of BB got kind of toned down. Everyone can self ally giving non-cross codex armies a lot of the benefits.
MarkyMark wrote: no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
Nothing capping re rollable saves.
Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen
Please tell me I understood this wrong and that you can't now reroll armor saves more than once. I don't want to go back to 2nd ed
M.
I think he's just dispelling the rumour that rerollable 2+ saves would be capped in some way, as there were rumours/wish lists about rerolls being capped at 4+ on a reroll a while ago. I'm 99% sure rerolls will still be limited to once only.
I hope you are right.
I'm sure I'd love to play a game were whole units get a 2+ rerollable save with infinite rerolls via buffs And while we are at it why not bring back the old roll as many saves as you want back? Imagine the narratives you can make with SM captains with a 2+++* armor save!
tag8833 wrote: [Smash being 1 attack is huge. The pen table needing a 7 is huge. TMCs seem to have taken it hard with the nerf bat. The scary world destroyers are going to have a rough time popping a rhino in close combat.
Those big scary nasty WS3 I2 A3 TMC that can be felled by the MIGHTY lasgun, sure did get balanced, boy, were they far too powerful before.
Sarcasm.
TMC didn't lose their effectiveness against infantry. They are just not able to one shot vehicles just like scatter lasers can't one shot rhinos anymore. Quit crying about your TMC's. The new damage chart effects everyone equally.
If it was just the vehicle damage chart, I don't think me or other MC-using players would be complaining. But the damage charge change and the nerf to Smash will render MCs ineffectual against AV13+ vehicles. Inform yourself before bringing out the attitude.
How many AV13+ rear armor vehicles exist in 40k???
Oh wait - just land raiders. And those are *everywhere*. Psssh
Even Armor 11 is now a pain. Even a Hive Tyrant on the charge is going to average one hull point off an Annihilation Barge. Smash, and it's even less.
It's true - heavy armor will be harder to kill. However there's also the bit that penetrating hits in CC strip 2 HP instead of 1. That helps. Also nids get a s10 ap2 lance power. There are ways to tackle tanks when it really matters, but it will require the use of foresight and allocating resources to get it done.
I understand the pain but vehicles have always been the tyranids' weak spot. I've still managed to find ways to win. Hell, aren't lists already including dakkafexes these days? S9 in melee is always nice.
Hollismason wrote: Well your entire Daemon Army with a few psychic powers get a 3+ invulnerable and if their Tzeentch they get to reroll 1s. So that's kind of awesome.
Fortune - Cursed Earth
You must live in a magical world where you always get the powers you want. Also, you can only get the +1 from Cursed Earth once. They don't stack.
TimmyIsChaos wrote: So now I can run Cypher in a Dark Angels list, right? Makes sense.
If you wanted to use him before he went "bad guy" or somehow a repented Cypher. Yes it does make sense, if someone wanted that kind of story for their army. Simply don't do it and you won't have a problem.
tetrisphreak wrote: However there's also the bit that penetrating hits in CC strip 2 HP instead of 1.
WTFGW. How stupid do you have to be to look at the 6th edition rules and decide that what we really need is for vehicles to die even faster if they get charged.
How many AV13+ rear armor vehicles exist in 40k???
Oh wait - just land raiders. And those are *everywhere*. Psssh
You are missing the point. The problem is *all* AV13/14 front armor vehicles. We have virtually nothing that can deal with that at range. So our *only* option is to try and chase it down across the board. That is bad enough, but now, even when we get there... it will take 2-3 turns to kill it. And that assumes we can successfully chase it down in the first place.
Our walking MCs always had that problem, but at least stood a decent chance of killing one once it was caught.
Our FMCs are fast enough to catch it, but now they have to land the turn *before* and hope to not die before charging.
tetrisphreak wrote: It's true - heavy armor will be harder to kill. However there's also the bit that penetrating hits in CC strip 2 HP instead of 1.
The 'bit' that is from a single source and has not been confirmed by anyone?
That helps. Also nids get a s10 ap2 lance power.
One a walking model with no transports, and an 18" range. Not to mention having to pass the Psy test and the DtW dice.
There are ways to tackle tanks when it really matters, but it will require the use of foresight and allocating resources to get it done.
Ah yes... the famous "learn to play" response. If only we were as experienced and tactically adept as you we could figure it all out.
I understand the pain but vehicles have always been the tyranids' weak spot. I've still managed to find ways to win. Hell, aren't lists already including dakkafexes these days? S9 in melee is always nice.
Sure is... except those fexes are moving 6" a turn, so it should only take 3-5 turns to get into charge range... assuming those tanks don't move or anything....
Lobukia wrote: Wow the silly Nid whine is getting crazy. Your force just got better.
Really? Oh do tell....
The FMCs got much more resilient, but their ability to actually kill things has been greatly reduced. Casting psychic powers has gotten more unreliable. Vector Strike and Smash Attack have both been heavily nerfed. What great buffs am I missing...??
Lobukia wrote: Wow the silly Nid whine is getting crazy. Your force just got better.
Really? Oh do tell....
The FMCs got much more resilient, but their ability to actually kill things has been greatly reduced. Casting psychic powers has gotten more unreliable. Vector Strike and Smash Attack have both been heavily nerfed. What great buffs am I missing...??
We can ally ourselves, that's about it. Basically we just got shoehorned into shooty FMC spam, and we can't even pretend to assault now.
streamdragon wrote: Other than Orks, which books didn't see an update in 6e? I honestly don't know. Because with GW speeing up the release rate for codecies (and even adding new ones in!), I'm not sure how those complaining about the shortened edition cycle thought this would go down. Were people honestly thinking GW would update (almost) everyone and then just sit around with no big new releases?
Crons? DEldar? GK? BA? SW? And technically SoB
I'm so happy that you included SoB in that list despite the "update" they got.
I can't believe those idiots made dispelling blessings that difficult AND made invisibility game breaking.
Anyone compliaining about their seer council is an idiot, the war,locks don't even need powers anymore. They just farm dice and chuck spears. With two seers you have great odds at invisility meaning you are imune to all templates in the game. Are only hit on 6's from shooting AND HtH!!!!!!!
This annoys me so much. A seer coucil has what 15 dice minimum. 8 from the locks and 6 from the seers plus a min 1 roll. In fact against none psychic armies they WANT a low roll so you have less dispell dice!!!
"I'll just chuck 8 dice at invisibility, oh hey 4 success, have fun trying to get 4 6's...erm.. oh wait you only have 3 dice, sorry... Oh and I'll just use one more WC to ghost helm the perils even if I roll quad 6's!"
Seriously stupid.
Even imperial armies making Knights invisible is game breaking.... aRgh!
streamdragon wrote: Other than Orks, which books didn't see an update in 6e? I honestly don't know. Because with GW speeing up the release rate for codecies (and even adding new ones in!), I'm not sure how those complaining about the shortened edition cycle thought this would go down. Were people honestly thinking GW would update (almost) everyone and then just sit around with no big new releases?
Crons? DEldar? GK? BA? SW? And technically SoB
Let's be real. Crons were a 6e book, or at least designed for 6e. Fair point to the others, like I said I honestly didn't know. So a small handful (really 4; SoB got a [really, really bad and poorly done] new "update", even if just about every SoB player including myself is bitter about it) missed the cycle. 5 of 17 it looks like, including Orks?
I'm not saying people shouldn't be upset, but I'm honestly wondering if people thought GW would keep up a 4 year cycle for rulebooks when the release rate ramped up so much. If in 2 years we're getting 8e, I'll be right there saying "nope, not this time". I'm just wondering if people would accept longer/slower releases again? I can't imagine DEldar want to wait as long for their next update as they waited for their last update.
forgive me if I'm wrong but smash attacks with carnifexes are s10ap2 so thats 5+ to pen with a fex (then a 6+ to explode which isnt great but then alot of weapons are in this boat now) on a landraider, so 2 pens will wreck it with the pen=2HP thing
Otherwise you can make your normal attacks at s9 needing 6 to pen and 5s to glance. (which is 15 on the charge, if you have 3 fexes)
likelihood of 5+6s is 1/3rd 1/3rd of 15 dice is 5 pens/glances, statiscally that should see off a raider.
everyone I know takes these in broods of 3 so you should be doing quite well.
I think I will play my Nids, and take the Tyrannic War Vets formation along with them. Make those TW Vets help me kill space marines... Forge *that* Narrative...
We can ally ourselves, that's about it. Basically we just got shoehorned into shooty FMC spam, and we can't even pretend to assault now.
Its looking more and more like we can take multiple Combined Arms detachments... but I am still not believing it until I see it in print. I just can't believe they would make that allowable.....
We can ally ourselves, that's about it. Basically we just got shoehorned into shooty FMC spam, and we can't even pretend to assault now.
Its looking more and more like we can take multiple Combined Arms detachments... but I am still not believing it until I see it in print. I just can't believe they would make that allowable.....
I like how my Chaos Mariens can't ally with IG anymore.
But don't worry, I'm sure someone will be standing by to tell chaos players not to worry! They will totally get a Lost and the Damned book right alongside that Chaos Knight book that GW is totally going to do!
NamelessBard wrote: As much as I hate to say it, it seems like we got suckered into a 2 year beta test we had to pay for.
You are assuming 6th edition was the beta testing and 7th edition is the finished product.
Just… whoa! Exalted, man!
ClockworkZion wrote: Yeah, Sisters didn't get a codex, they got an errata they had to pay for that dragged the army down an alley and beat it with a nerf bat.
....Not that I'm bitter or unhappy about that since people tell me I'm some kind of White Knight every now and then when I don't see everything as 100% bad. Which means I could neverEVER dislikeanythingGW does. [/sarcasm]
Well, obviously you do not have a problem with that, else you might be looking at the competition rather than buying even more GW miniatures to thank them for that nerf bat, right ?
For anybody with the book, did the Sweeping Advance wording get cleaned up enough to clear up the old SA vs EL debate? Do destroyer weapons still negate reanimation protocols (and other such abilities)?
NamelessBard wrote: As much as I hate to say it, it seems like we got suckered into a 2 year beta test we had to pay for.
You are assuming 6th edition was the beta testing and 7th edition is the finished product.
Just… whoa! Exalted, man!
ClockworkZion wrote: Yeah, Sisters didn't get a codex, they got an errata they had to pay for that dragged the army down an alley and beat it with a nerf bat.
....Not that I'm bitter or unhappy about that since people tell me I'm some kind of White Knight every now and then when I don't see everything as 100% bad. Which means I could neverEVER dislikeanythingGW does. [/sarcasm]
Well, obviously you do not have a problem with that, else you might be looking at the competition rather than buying even more GW miniatures to thank them for that nerf bat, right ?
Maybe if someone ACTUALLY made models that fit the Sisters aesthetic and sold them AND the codex didn't suck then maybe. As it stands? My army is in it's carrying case in the closet and its staying there for now.
Da Butcha wrote: BTW, HBMC, if this does, in fact, drive you entirely off GW (save Forgeworld), I'll miss your posts on the topic. Even if I disagreed with you on something, I was always interested in seeing what you had written. Not only do I normally agree with your sense of what is good and valuable about Warhammer 40,000, your posts were always intelligently composed, and, unlike mine, short and to the point.
I'll always be around for snarky remarks. It's too entertaining not to.
What I mean by "done" is that I've reached the point where I don't want to be burnt any more. I know I've said this at least twice already during the course of this long and winding thread, but I hated 4th and 5th to the point where I didn't buy anything for them, but with 6th I saw things that were (in my mind) improvements over the previous two editions. So many of my personal "deal-breakers" (especially the ones from the 5th Ed vehicle rules) were removed, and while I still dislike Hull Points and the idiotic method of casualty removal in 6th it was a level of bull gak that I was willing to accept for what was otherwise a better rule set than the previous to. And I bought into it. I got the rulebook, the starter box, Apoc, all the Warzones (other than Damocles, as I didn't know it was limited edition), all the psychic cards even for the armies I didn't play, the Apoc Cards, templates, Escalation, Strongpoint Assault. Everything. I was fully invested and it felt good to be 'back in the game', so to speak.
But now? My cards are invalidated, my rulebook is worthless, my supplement books (Strongpoint and Escalation) aren't worth the paper they're printed on and once again Apoc is a set of rules written for a different edition. And all of this took place within two years of the previous edition. Two years! That's ludicrous. I could almost live with it if 7th Ed was GW making a new edition to fix the problems of 6th - like a 'break glass in case of stupidity' situation where they've seen what 40K has become (allies shenanigans, dataslates, and other nonsense) and they decided the best way to fix it was to tear the Band-Aid off quickly and reset everything with a new edition. But they're not doing that. They're adding more extraneous nonsense. More charts. More things to roll on. More cards (which I refuse to buy now). More dataslates (which are just DLC... and I have real problems with DLC that extend way beyond GW's method of selling them). More blatant disregard for the fluff (now Eldar can summon Slaaneshi Daemons every turn, Inquisitors and Dark Angels are BFFs, Dark Eldar would totally ally with a Slaaneshi Daemon army... but Guard will never ally with Chaos because Traitor Guard and reasons reasons reasons). The game has become "buy all our playsets and toys", where simply buying GW minis is the HHHobby rather than using them. And now we don't even have the certainty that what we have will stick around for any length of time. This edition is to fill a checkbox and make a full year report look better (because the half-year looked bad). It's cynical, and as I said a couple of pages back I am certain that Jervis' team holds an utterly different view of what 40K is and how it operates, and as tired as it is to make fun of the narrative forging and all that you can see how they see it as the most important thing, and that's a shame because they act as is having a balanced game with a tight and consistent set of rules (as opposed to a set of rules one might call unbound - geddit?) is mutually exclusive to forging another bloody narrative.
And I can't do it anymore!
I'm not a kid any more, playing 40K with his friends during school holidays or on weekends while at Uni. There are far better representations of 40K out there (the RPGs, which I adored before my personal bias of writing the RPG's became a factor), and they don't require wrestling with GW's inability to write a coherent and consistent set of rules. And that's before we even get into the questionable ethics of their bullying business practices, embargos, pricing structure, secrecy and all that other nonsense that sits beneath the surface.
And then this is exacerbated by the White Knights and their clueless "everything is fine, nothing is broken" attitute towards everything...
ClockworkZion wrote: As it stands? My army is in it's carrying case in the closet and its staying there for now.
Yeah, and IIRC you are buying GW's Chaos Marines instead. So, rewarding them by buying more miniatures from them rather than looking at the competition. GW thanks you .
Less model variation than my current Sisters army AND the codex still sucks. Which is the deal breaker on that one. What's the point of a nice looking army if you know how badly you'll be tabled before the game starts? I need more than new models (though that would help a LOT) to play Sisters again right now.
ClockworkZion wrote: As it stands? My army is in it's carrying case in the closet and its staying there for now.
Yeah, and IIRC you are buying GW's Chaos Marines instead. So, rewarding them by buying more miniatures from them rather than looking at the competition. GW thanks you .
I'm not working on Crimson Slaughter until the basic models get updated because the basic CSM don't match the new model design anymore and frankly they're boring to paint.
And boycotts just don't work. GW doesn't care if you stop buying and instead they like to punish their store employees instead of admitting their is a problem.
All I buy (which really is not much) I get through my FLGS so they get money from me instead of GW at least. And before you start: Warmachine. I've given up trying to get into the game. Starting with their fluff, to their model aesthetics to the gak that is "Page 5" I just don't like the game enough to throw my money down that hole. I just can't find one thing that pulls me in and makes me want to play. No, not even the rules.
Right now I'm at a tipping point with 40k. I love the models and the setting but depending on this edition and how it goes together I may just move to collecting/painting things I want to collect and paint and just flip the bird to the game itself until it changes. I last played a game of 40k last year when Apoc launched. I am not falling into a "sunk cost" fallacy with 40k. I'm willing to just stop playing, do my little reviews of the codexes and just not worry about actually bothering with playing.
Let's be real. Crons were a 6e book, or at least designed for 6e.
I still giggle when I read that, even 2 years later
Well, the necrons book had things like "heavy" vehicles before 6th, as well as a reference to monstrous creatures going to ground, which wasnt possible in 5th. I'd say it was definitely written as a 6th Ed book.
Da Butcha wrote: BTW, HBMC, if this does, in fact, drive you entirely off GW (save Forgeworld), I'll miss your posts on the topic. Even if I disagreed with you on something, I was always interested in seeing what you had written. Not only do I normally agree with your sense of what is good and valuable about Warhammer 40,000, your posts were always intelligently composed, and, unlike mine, short and to the point.
I'll always be around for snarky remarks. It's too entertaining not to.
What I mean by "done" is that I've reached the point where I don't want to be burnt any more.
Spoiler:
I know I've said this at least twice already during the course of this long and winding thread, but I hated 4th and 5th to the point where I didn't buy anything for them, but with 6th I saw things that were (in my mind) improvements over the previous two editions. So many of my personal "deal-breakers" (especially the ones from the 5th Ed vehicle rules) were removed, and while I still dislike Hull Points and the idiotic method of casualty removal in 6th it was a level of bull gak that I was willing to accept for what was otherwise a better rule set than the previous to. And I bought into it. I got the rulebook, the starter box, Apoc, all the Warzones (other than Damocles, as I didn't know it was limited edition), all the psychic cards even for the armies I didn't play, the Apoc Cards, templates, Escalation, Strongpoint Assault. Everything. I was fully invested and it felt good to be 'back in the game', so to speak.
But now? My cards are invalidated, my rulebook is worthless, my supplement books (Strongpoint and Escalation) aren't worth the paper they're printed on and once again Apoc is a set of rules written for a different edition. And all of this took place within two years of the previous edition. Two years! That's ludicrous. I could almost live with it if 7th Ed was GW making a new edition to fix the problems of 6th - like a 'break glass in case of stupidity' situation where they've seen what 40K has become (allies shenanigans, dataslates, and other nonsense) and they decided the best way to fix it was to tear the Band-Aid off quickly and reset everything with a new edition. But they're not doing that. They're adding more extraneous nonsense. More charts. More things to roll on. More cards (which I refuse to buy now). More dataslates (which are just DLC... and I have real problems with DLC that extend way beyond GW's method of selling them). More blatant disregard for the fluff (now Eldar can summon Slaaneshi Daemons every turn, Inquisitors and Dark Angels are BFFs, Dark Eldar would totally ally with a Slaaneshi Daemon army... but Guard will never ally with Chaos because Traitor Guard and reasons reasons reasons). The game has become "buy all our playsets and toys", where simply buying GW minis is the HHHobby rather than using them. And now we don't even have the certainty that what we have will stick around for any length of time. This edition is to fill a checkbox and make a full year report look better (because the half-year looked bad). It's cynical, and as I said a couple of pages back I am certain that Jervis' team holds an utterly different view of what 40K is and how it operates, and as tired as it is to make fun of the narrative forging and all that you can see how they see it as the most important thing, and that's a shame because they act as is having a balanced game with a tight and consistent set of rules (as opposed to a set of rules one might call unbound - geddit?) is mutually exclusive to forging another bloody narrative.
And I can't do it anymore!
I'm not a kid any more, playing 40K with his friends during school holidays or on weekends while at Uni. There are far better representations of 40K out there (the RPGs, which I adored before my personal bias of writing the RPG's became a factor), and they don't require wrestling with GW's inability to write a coherent and consistent set of rules. And that's before we even get into the questionable ethics of their bullying business practices, embargos, pricing structure, secrecy and all that other nonsense that sits beneath the surface.
And then this is exacerbated by the White Knights and their clueless "everything is fine, nothing is broken" attitute towards everything...
But I've gone on long enough...
As impassioned as your post is (and I do agree with almost all of the points), let's not forget that this isn't the first time you've said enough is enough... only to buy lots more a few weeks/months later. Remember the embargo kerfuffle?
You're a fanboy and there isn't anything wrong with that. You've also got a substantial collection and *NOT* using it punishes you, not GW. Just don't buy any more models and instead trade for what you want from your existing stock. Trading a ridiculously overpriced $20 model for another is leagues more palatable than buying it for $20.
H.B.M.C. wrote: [
What I mean by "done" is that I've reached the point where I don't want to be burnt any more.
I guess I feel that way, but I'm lucky in that my favorite army has always, always been Orks. I've never been a strong tournament player, and I've always been a "Collect the models I like" guy, even though that means I lose a LOT of games. These shenanigans have convinced me to unload my Chaos Marines, my Marines, my Necrons, and my Tyranids. I'll probably even offload the Space Wolves, though it pains me. I have held onto some Fantasy armies in the hopes that it will stop being a randomized suckfest, but that seems unlikely at this point.
I'm keeping my IG, but that's just because I have Praetorians.
I can stand all of their stupid practices with the orks, because I basically field one unit of everything. One set of Lobbas, one set of Zzap guns, etc. I do have multiple units of boys and nobs (some for every klan), but otherwise, I only have one unit of most things (I have multiple dreads, just to get almost all of the possible loadouts, etc). I hit the point about a month ago where I actually had ALL of the models that I wanted (other than some Forgeworld stuff). I'm looking forward to orks just to get new models!
So, I'm pretty insulated from edition changes and power creep and meta shifts. I don't have a lot of 'good stuff' nor do I have a lot of 'bad stuff'. However, I can't imagine how frustrating this whole thing is for the person with a competitive army or a themed army. "Just start over" seems to be their mantra at GW.
I would just shut up about it if GW was doing great. If I don't like the direction of the game, but sales are great, and your market share is growing, and your stock price is up? Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe I'm just in the minority. When I don't like the direction of the game, and your share price is down, your sales are down, and your market share is shrinking? Maybe I'm onto something.
I really, really don't want to see GW go belly up, but they seem determined to get out of that hole by digging faster.
So, is my $67 Space Marine codex I bought in September going to be 'invalid' in a couple of months for the NewER/EST/ Spe$$ Mahreen codex 7th Edition?
This might seem lame, But I do personal banking and my books say that I bought the 6th Ed Dark Angel Codex in JAN and the Space Marine Codex in SEPT. Doesn't this just feel like GW is dragging all of its players down some sort of glass lined hole? This sudden rush to sell as much paper and DLC as possible, as quick as possible. Yikes, you're background can only keep you afloat for so long guys... 40k is cool and we all LOVE it, but....
Let's be real. Crons were a 6e book, or at least designed for 6e.
I still giggle when I read that, even 2 years later
Well, the necrons book had things like "heavy" vehicles before 6th, as well as a reference to monstrous creatures going to ground, which wasnt possible in 5th. I'd say it was definitely written as a 6th Ed book.
That's all they had, a few vague references that ended up becoming real rules, as well as a long list of rules that got dropped or faq'ed to the extreme because they couldn't function correctly the following year. Not to mention a night scythe debacle where an over costed garbage transport no one used in 5th became an under costed power house they spawned immediate knee jerk reactions in the 6th edition codex's that followed.
It really gives the sense that the guys writing the codex and the guys writing the 6th rules were two separate teams with little communication between the two.
"Here's a list of things we're thinking of doing with the rules next year but we won't keep half of them. Just make your best guesses and I'm sure the giant FAQ will solve everything"
warboss wrote: As impassioned as your post is (and I do agree with almost all of the points), let's not forget that this isn't the first time you've said enough is enough... only to buy lots more a few weeks/months later. Remember the embargo kerfuffle?
Yeah, and I basically stopped buying (until 6th Ed hit) other than the odd thing, from a discounter, if I could find one that didn't ream me on the shipping. You know what happened after the embargo hit? I discovered the world of games that were out there. Up until that point it was basically 40K with bits of BattleTech. I never branched out. I wouldn't even use non-GW models for GW games. The embargo was a line in the sand, but also an epiphany. I started looking elsewhere, and while I'm not suddenly a hardcore Warmahordes player or stalking the Corvus Belli guys for the next bit of Infinity news, I'm far more open to trying new things.
I'll say that again: Far more open to trying new things, like, for instance, the 6th edition of a game I love(d) after skipping two editions. And I got burned.
RedSarge wrote: So, is my $67 Space Marine codex I bought in September going to be 'invalid' in a couple of months for the NewER/EST/ Spe$$ Mahreen codex 7th Edition?
Last rumored release lists I saw looked like this:
Spoiler:
via The Voice of the Chaos Gods
GW plans Events for an subsequently 30th Birthdays of Warhammer Fantasy. The new edition is supposed to be part of it. When exactly I can not say.
I "optimized" my release shedule:
LATE MAY
40k 7th Edition (as already official)
EARLY-MID JUNE
Orks
(New Codex and Models)
LATE JUNE
Ork Theme Apocalypse Supplement
(possible Invasion of Badlanding)
EARLY-MID JULY
Bretons
(Armybook and such things)
LATE JULY
Chaos Space Marines Sets and Supplement
(Legionary/Havoc/Chosen Box, old CSM Box remains)
EARLY AUGUST
40k New Starter Set
(DV Revised)
MID-LATE AUGUST
Blood Angels
(Vampires in Space! Codex and Models)
EARLY SEPTEMBER
Armageddon Apocalypse Supplement
(new and updated content)
MID SEPTEMBER
Warhammer Fantasy 9th Edition
(Such strange things called "Rules)
LATE SEPTEMBER - EARLY OCTOBER
Orcs and Goblins
(Armybook and new gitz)
MID OCTOBER
Fantasy Starter Set
(Empire vs. the green Guys)
LATE OCTOBER - EARLY NOVEMBER
Dark Eldar
(yes... Codex and Boxes)
MID-LATE NOVEMBER
EMPIRE
(A book with rules and models to play them, possibly new state troops, the design studio hates the current)
COMPLETE DECEMBER
The Hobbit and Scenery
(it calles "HObbit" not "BObiit"!)
JANUARY
Possible Space Wolves
(Vinkings in Space! Only without rob stupid christians )
So no. Also throwing dollar signs into words that you're intentionally misspell really isn't that clever. Honestly it just looks juvenile, like you're one of those "1337" kids from the late 90s.
warboss wrote: As impassioned as your post is (and I do agree with almost all of the points), let's not forget that this isn't the first time you've said enough is enough... only to buy lots more a few weeks/months later. Remember the embargo kerfuffle?
Yeah, and I basically stopped buying (until 6th Ed hit) other than the odd thing, from a discounter, if I could find one that didn't ream me on the shipping. You know what happened after the embargo hit? I discovered the world of games that were out there. Up until that point it was basically 40K with bits of BattleTech. I never branched out. I wouldn't even use non-GW models for GW games. The embargo was a line in the sand, but also an epiphany. I started looking elsewhere, and while I'm not suddenly a hardcore Warmahordes player or stalking the Corvus Belli guys for the next bit of Infinity news, I'm far more open to trying new things.
I'll say that again: Far more open to trying new things, like, for instance, the 6th edition of a game I love(d) after skipping two editions. And I got burned.
Again.
I only got burned once (back when they simultaneously increased prices AND did the finecast rollout) but I stuck with my decision to not start any new armies from that point on and largely shy away from buying unless it is 1) with money earned from selling existing stuff and 2) second hand. I've traded stuff (including an unfinished army for another) in the meantime plus traded for other figs but I haven't bought a new fig from GW since the GK figs I preordered came out other than last year's Gamesday mini. Being in Oz doesn't help but trading still might be an option. I've gotten in trades a few items that otherwise I wouldn't have bought because I've largely given up on GW. I still buy the codex books for my existing armies but I don't buy any more just for reference like I used to do back in 3rd-5th. You'll obviously have to wait for "new" releases to become old enough for them to appear in people's trade "haves" but they do inevitably appear there.
puma713 wrote: I haven't bought a model or played 40K in two years and I still participate in GW relate threads on 40K.
Well clearly we're doing it wrong puma. We have to leave and never talk about it ever again, and never speak to anyone who still does speak about it, because apparently 40K is now scientology.
puma713 wrote: I haven't bought a model or played 40K in two years and I still participate in GW relate threads on 40K.
Well clearly we're doing it wrong puma. We have to leave and never talk about it ever again, and never speak to anyone who still does speak about it, because apparently 40K is now scientology.
That is obviously not what I meant.
I just don't get people who spend allot of time here on something that frustrates them so much.
I'll always be around for snarky remarks. It's too entertaining not to.
Spoiler:
What I mean by "done" is that I've reached the point where I don't want to be burnt any more. I know I've said this at least twice already during the course of this long and winding thread, but I hated 4th and 5th to the point where I didn't buy anything for them, but with 6th I saw things that were (in my mind) improvements over the previous two editions. So many of my personal "deal-breakers" (especially the ones from the 5th Ed vehicle rules) were removed, and while I still dislike Hull Points and the idiotic method of casualty removal in 6th it was a level of bull gak that I was willing to accept for what was otherwise a better rule set than the previous to. And I bought into it. I got the rulebook, the starter box, Apoc, all the Warzones (other than Damocles, as I didn't know it was limited edition), all the psychic cards even for the armies I didn't play, the Apoc Cards, templates, Escalation, Strongpoint Assault. Everything. I was fully invested and it felt good to be 'back in the game', so to speak.
But now? My cards are invalidated, my rulebook is worthless, my supplement books (Strongpoint and Escalation) aren't worth the paper they're printed on and once again Apoc is a set of rules written for a different edition. And all of this took place within two years of the previous edition. Two years! That's ludicrous. I could almost live with it if 7th Ed was GW making a new edition to fix the problems of 6th - like a 'break glass in case of stupidity' situation where they've seen what 40K has become (allies shenanigans, dataslates, and other nonsense) and they decided the best way to fix it was to tear the Band-Aid off quickly and reset everything with a new edition. But they're not doing that. They're adding more extraneous nonsense. More charts. More things to roll on. More cards (which I refuse to buy now). More dataslates (which are just DLC... and I have real problems with DLC that extend way beyond GW's method of selling them). More blatant disregard for the fluff (now Eldar can summon Slaaneshi Daemons every turn, Inquisitors and Dark Angels are BFFs, Dark Eldar would totally ally with a Slaaneshi Daemon army... but Guard will never ally with Chaos because Traitor Guard and reasons reasons reasons). The game has become "buy all our playsets and toys", where simply buying GW minis is the HHHobby rather than using them. And now we don't even have the certainty that what we have will stick around for any length of time. This edition is to fill a checkbox and make a full year report look better (because the half-year looked bad). It's cynical, and as I said a couple of pages back I am certain that Jervis' team holds an utterly different view of what 40K is and how it operates, and as tired as it is to make fun of the narrative forging and all that you can see how they see it as the most important thing, and that's a shame because they act as is having a balanced game with a tight and consistent set of rules (as opposed to a set of rules one might call unbound - geddit?) is mutually exclusive to forging another bloody narrative.
And I can't do it anymore!
I'm not a kid any more, playing 40K with his friends during school holidays or on weekends while at Uni. There are far better representations of 40K out there (the RPGs, which I adored before my personal bias of writing the RPG's became a factor), and they don't require wrestling with GW's inability to write a coherent and consistent set of rules. And that's before we even get into the questionable ethics of their bullying business practices, embargos, pricing structure, secrecy and all that other nonsense that sits beneath the surface.
And then this is exacerbated by the White Knights and their clueless "everything is fine, nothing is broken" attitute towards everything...
puma713 wrote: I haven't bought a model or played 40K in two years and I still participate in GW relate threads on 40K.
Well clearly we're doing it wrong puma. We have to leave and never talk about it ever again, and never speak to anyone who still does speak about it, because apparently 40K is now scientology.
I thought it was fight club.
Not directed at you guys, but the rate of rage quitting to returning to 40k on dakkadakka gets almost embarrassing.
BarBoBot wrote: Has anything changed with the selection of psychic powers? Is a mastery 1 psyker still forbidden from keeping a mastery 2 power if its rolled?
If so, then the conjuration powers will require a mastery 3 psyker and it would be their only power.
I wouldn't think so, considering that 3 of the primaris powers (Santic: Banishment, Malefic: Summoning and Divinationrescience) are warp charge 2+. Though I could be surprised. Especially before, the idea was that you only had enough warp charges each = mastery levels, so you couldn't possibly cast WC2 spells. However now there seems to be a pool of WC dice, plus D6, so the minimum WC you have with one psyker is 2.
Are we absolutely certain about the mechanics of casting powers? This is the way I understand it currently:
1) You generate (sum of your mastery levels)+D6 warp charges at the start of your psychic phase
2) You select a psyker, choose a power to cast, and an amount out of your total warp charges to cast it with
3) Roll X dice, any 4+s are successes. 2 or more 6's is perils?? (that seems odd, perils will be very common that way :/)
4) Your opponent can try to deny, needing to get the same amount of successes that you did. They need natural 6's against blessings(/conjurations?) but possibly better than that against other powers
puma713 wrote: I haven't bought a model or played 40K in two years and I still participate in GW relate threads on 40K.
Well clearly we're doing it wrong puma. We have to leave and never talk about it ever again, and never speak to anyone who still does speak about it, because apparently 40K is now scientology.
That is obviously not what I meant.
I just don't get people who spend allot of time here on something that frustrates them so much.
It is probably because (for me at least) I love what the game used to be. I love the 40K universe, I love the camaraderie from large-scale events and local gaming clubs, I love the close battles and the late nights reading through codices trying to figure out what my next list should be.
There are so many things I could list about what I love about 40K. But the greed from GW and their disdain for their customers has overwhelmed all those feelings. Now, when I think of 40K, I get that excited feeling about flipping through new rules and planning my next strategy, but then my heart sinks and I get a pang of sickness in my stomach as I realize what the hobby has become for me. I guess you could call me jaded and maybe reading through the brings me a bit of hopefulness about the hobby. But there is a also an underlying feeling of schedenfreude that has, no doubt, come from my resentment toward GW.
It's funny explaining all this about a game of toy soldiers, but 40K has been a part of my life for 20ish years so to just let it go without a fight is difficult. But then, eventually, you come to the realization that the fight is futile and they don't care that you care so much about what they've created. All you are is dollar signs to them. That is when the love of the game evaporates and all you have left is fuzzy memories.
puma713 wrote: It is probably because (for me at least) I love what the game used to be. I love the 40K universe, I love the camaraderie from large-scale events and local gaming clubs, I love the close battles and the late nights reading through codices trying to figure out what my next list should be.
There are so many things I could list about what I love about 40K. But the greed from GW and their disdain for their customers has overwhelmed all those feelings. Now, when I think of 40K, I get that excited feeling about flipping through new rules and planning my next strategy, but then my heart sinks and I get a pang of sickness in my stomach as I realize what the hobby has become for me. I guess you could call me jaded and maybe reading through the brings me a bit of hopefulness about the hobby. But there is a also an underlying feeling of schedenfreude that has, no doubt, come from my resentment toward GW.
It's funny explaining all this about a game of toy soldiers, but 40K has been a part of my life for 20ish years so to just let it go without a fight is difficult. But then, eventually, you come to the realization that the fight is futile and they don't care that you care so much about what they've created. All you are is dollar signs to them. That is when the love of the game evaporates and all you have left is fuzzy memories.
Thank you for taking the time out to respond, I appreciate your view and it helps understand where you are coming from. I can certainly see you are not just a GW hating troll! haha
I think for me.. I missed allot of price hikes, missed CnD letters, missed what some department head said in a trial once etc.. and got into 40K at the beginning of 6th. All I have known are the prices as they are, flyers, D weapons, fortifications, massive release schedules etc.. so maybe I don't have the amount of disappointment that seems to have come from the past? Give me 20 years in the hobby though and we might see eye to eye lol.
I've also been playing since '91. I've grown up with this game and it (kind of embarrassingly) hurts to see it fall to what it's becoming. What I want is for GW to stop acting like incompetent villains from a children's movie about the "evil corporation" and get back to making a game they love. When the rules are dictated by corporate suits that have nothing but disdain for the gamers, you're not going to get the best game out of it.
I remember when folks said the same things about people who didn't like 8th ed fantasy - that they should go away and stop playing and posting if they didn't like the game. People listened and did go away.... Lots of people went away.
So be careful what you wish for, you just might get it. A person posting about a game, even if unhappy about it, is at least still connected, and might come back in time, but a person told to go away is more likely to just stay away.
MWHistorian wrote: I've also been playing since '91. I've grown up with this game and it (kind of embarrassingly) hurts to see it fall to what it's becoming. What I want is for GW to stop acting like incompetent villains from a children's movie about the "evil corporation" and get back to making a game they love. When the rules are dictated by corporate suits that have nothing but disdain for the gamers, you're not going to get the best game out of it.
Same boat here, speaking for "length of service". It's such a shame.
WrentheFaceless wrote: Well the thread has turned into a "I quit thread" guess its run its course then?
OR there's a major vacuum of leaks.
I'm nabbing up "classic" models off eBay right now and looking for good deals to make a small BA army. My Eldar and BA will be labors of love down the road in years to come, probably. I have a ton of models squirreled away from many game lines (and just plain collectible ones), but my GW budget will be cut off as soon as I get my metal BA heroes.
And while going down a dark, DARK hole on ebay, I realize how broke I'd have been if I was wargaming during the time Rackham came out. GW was not making the best models out there in the 2000s with those guys floating around. Astoundingly gorgeous.
WrentheFaceless wrote: Well the thread has turned into a "I quit thread" guess its run its course then?
No, I just think everyone is waiting for MarkyMark to wake up!
Lololol
Ok, so the banshees in raider, if its a DT you cannot deploy in there, the restriction that only units that bought the DT can deploy in there is still there. But yes BB's can embark on allied transports.
Hollismason. No if you peril you resolve the perils stright away, the sequence is this. Select psyker and power Delcare target Take pyshic test (this is where you can peril) Deny the witch Resolve power.
So if you peril and die you wont get the chance to resolve the power.
Here is the quote from page 24 for the pyshic powers
No unit can attempt to manifest the same psyhic power more then once per phase & Under pysker and psychic power (in the sequence table) ..... select a psyhic power known to the selected unit that the unit has not already attempted to manifest in this psychic phase.
So much for me getting my hands on a copy of the rules... GW is all out. Just tried to check-out and the computer advised me the product is no longer available...
I feel like an old friend and I are slowly drifting apart. We try to get together but it just never seems to work out. Then one day we haven't talked in years and I always wonder what happened to them.
I've played 40k since 1998 or so, I have several very large armies and huge conversion projects used to get me pumped to try new things out and look forward to the next game.
I haven't even played a 6e game and have no desire to buy 7e at all. None of my armies interest me and there's no drive to play. I love 40k, it will always be my first wargame and I'll always fondly remember the many hours spent rolling dice. I hope 40k survives and improves one day so I can jump back in but I don't see that happening with GW's current direction.
Until then Warmahordes will get my gaming dollar and actually excite me and get me to look forepaw are to the next game.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Can you assault from Outflank? Can you assault from transports (stationary or otherwise)?
No cannot assault from outflank and can only assault if its a assault vehicle (already answered).
Reading it again, it does look like you can reserve as much as you like. There is now a distincation between rolling for reserves and moving them on. You roll for reserves start of turn then you must move your reserves on first.
Earlier you said Dedicated Transports have Infiltrate. So there is no need for Infiltrate unit/ICs to be embarked on to Infiltrate/Outflank the Dedicated Transport?
If I have an Inquisitor in my IG army, can he start in a unit of veterans in a valkyrie (that isnt a dedicated transport) and come on with them when they make their reserve roll?
Or would he have to start on the board and get picked up by the valk when it comes on?
Is there any limitation to the number of Combined Arms detachments you can take?
Smash Attack, does it replace the attack characterisitc to 1, (so you still get charge bonus attacks etc) or are you limited to one attack total?
Does it have Armorbane? Does it allow a reroll on the Pen die?
Is there any restriction to dedicated transports getting Objective Secured (super scoring) for Battle Forged detachments?
Does Feel No Pain default to 4+ or 5+?
Does Shrouded still give +2 to cover saves?
Getting the Primaris for 'free' if you take only spells from one disciplne. Is that per model, or per detachment, or per army?
Can you still switch for the primaris if you want to?
Sorry mate, what I meant is can a battle brother ally start the game embarked onto a flying vehicle chosen from the main army (that is not a dedicated transport)?
Marky any chance you could shed a tad more light on denial of powers. Do you need to deny every 4+ they mmake or just get them below the # of WC needed.
Any idea if there were any changes to Night Fight (does it function differently, can you shoot farther than 36" with weapons that don't need LoS, is it still in every mission?)
Did the Barrage rules change at all? (are they still excellent sniper weapons?)
MarkyMark, hope I'm not being too obnoxious about asking you again. You told us an IC cannot join a MC. But there's a case of an ICMC (O'Vesa, from Farsight Enclaves). Is there any exception regarding that situation in either MC or IC rules in BRB? Or now isn't possible to add him to a Farsight 'the Eight' unit, barring a FAQ for Farsight Enclaves?
ClockworkZion wrote: So just out of curiousity: Terminators get any buffs? Just curious if they altered Terminator armour in the rulebook mostly.
Don't think so. AFAIK, Terminator's rules (as a wargear) are in their relevant codex, not in the BRB.
Clauss wrote: Marky any chance you could shed a tad more light on denial of powers. Do you need to deny every 4+ they mmake or just get them below the # of WC needed.
Also snap shots are the same?
Already been answered. Anything else that overlaps with what I have answered I wont reply to, otherwise I'd be here all day!
NF gives everyone stealth, no mention of ranges so thats a big change.
Barrage is the same except all wounds from mutliple barrage comes from the first shot only.
Wound allocation from shooting has changed as per the rumours
Jink, you have to declare before rolls to hit are made, you can still assault after but can only snap shot
Vector Strike wrote: MarkyMark, hope I'm not being too obnoxious about asking you again. You told us an IC cannot join a MC. But there's a case of an ICMC (O'Vesa, from Farsight Enclaves). Is there any exception regarding that situation in either MC or IC rules in BRB? Or now isn't possible to add him to a Farsight 'the Eight' unit, barring a FAQ for Farsight Enclaves?
ClockworkZion wrote: So just out of curiousity: Terminators get any buffs? Just curious if they altered Terminator armour in the rulebook mostly.
Don't think so. AFAIK, Terminator's rules (as a wargear) are in their relevant codex, not in the BRB.
Doesn't mean things can't change! I mean Power Weapons changed last edition after all! And I fail to see the harm in asking.
H.B.M.C. wrote: So you can't even assault out of a stationary vehicle... God damn it...
I'm pretty much at the think happy thoughts phase. Not liking a lot of what I'm seeing, and some of what I'm not.
I get it though, I already own a vehicle, why let me assault out of it, no, better to buy a bunker I don't want or really need, because that I can assault out of. Narrative :(
Wound allocation from shooting has changed as per the rumours
the rumors were not very precise.
How does the book determine 'weapon type'. Is it grouped by S? AP? Range? Name of weapon?
Do all weapons fire, all hit, all wound, then allocate wounds by weapon type?
Or do you fire one weapon type, wound allocate. Then move on to the next weapon type?
Do you get to choose what order to allocate wounds? Or do you always have to use the shortest range first?
Wound allocation from shooting has changed as per the rumours
the rumors were not very precise.
How does the book determine 'weapon type'. Is it grouped by S? AP? Range? Name of weapon?
Do all weapons fire, all hit, all wound, then allocate wounds by weapon type?
Or do you fire one weapon type, wound allocate. Then move on to the next weapon type?
Do you get to choose what order to allocate wounds? Or do you always have to use the shortest range first?
Thanks
WD mentioned needing to fire a flamer seperately from the bolters in a unit so type probably means all "like" weapons fire are resolved in a group. Basically name and/or statline determines grouping I'd assume.
Suspicions, from Warseer, posted some interesting stuff:
Terrain has seen some tweaking. There is no Area Terrain, for instance. Each kind of purchasable terrain kit that GW sells has its own unique rules. Moonscape craters, for instance, provide only a 6+ cover, and are -not- difficult ground! In general, -moving- through difficult terrain is entirely unchanged. Assaulting through it takes 2 off your highest roll, but is otherwise the same. The generic Mysterious Terrain table is a thing of the past, but future Terrain kits may be released that have the Mysterious Terrain rule attached them... in such instances, they will have their own unique tables. The Crashed Aquila Lander kit, for instance, has a table unique to it.
Cover, by and large, is unchanged. Focus Fire, as a rule, is no more; and cover saves are granted on a model by model basis. Is it in cover (25% obscured?) from the shooters POV? If so, then yes, you get a cover save. If not, then no. The exceptions to this are clearly defined. Ruins, always grant cover if you are -inside- them, regardless if you're physically obscured or not. Same for Twisted Copses (citadel wood) and Craters.
+1 cover save for vehicles if you can see a part of the vehicle, (therefore allowing you to shoot it) but you can't see the facing of the vehicle that you lay in arc of is still in, just as it was before. The rumor that vehicles could not claim cover from Infantry was a falsehood; however Vehicles are the exception to the above "if you're -in it- you get cover" rule associated with Ruins, woods, and craters. They must still be 25% obscured to claim cover.
Vehicle Wreckage (0 hull points) is, you leave the vehicle in place. It is now Difficult Terrain. Unless otherwise noted, a model taking cover behind Difficult Terrain gets a 5+ cover save. Explodes results, on the other hand, to not instruct you to place a crater. You simply explode, and remove the model (after resolving the explosion effects)
Ruins, and the overall -absence- of "Area Terrain" do not provide you with a +2 cover for going to ground within them. They are difficult, they provide 4+ cover for those inside, regardless if they are 25% obscured. Nothing more. Now...the specific Ruins...Basilica Administratum, Sanctum Imperialis, Shrine of the Aquila....they are the exact same...but each have their own unique special rule. You and your opponent may choose to ignore these rules.
The datasheet rules in Stronghold Assault for each piece of terrain is used for those pieces. Defense Lines and Barricades, in general, provide a 4+ cover. Defense Lines (aegis and wall of martyrs) provide +2 to cover if you go to ground behind them/within them...so there is still plenty of 2+ cover. Walls, barricades, and defense lines you are behind (in contact of) count you as being in contact with an enemy who charges them. (i.e. that enemy need not charge all the way to your models, just the barricade they are hiding behind)
I can find no reference to a limit on how many units may be held in Reserves.
Nightfighting has been simplified to be an option that either player can invoke in a mission where that rule is used. If neither does so, there is no Night Fighting. If one does, it is rolled for only on game turn 1. On a 4+ -everything- has Stealth. Simple...no?
Each piece of purchasable Citadel Terrain has its own unique rules. Sanctum Imperialis, for instance, or Moonscape, or "Twisted Copse" as they call the Woods. Shrine of the Aquila...all have unique rules.
Also, there are no longer any guidelines on restrictions or maximums for amount of terrain on a battlefield, or how to deploy it. It is left up to player preference and agreement. (which I vastly prefer)
Factions is a term that refers to what most players are accustomed to calling "Race" or sometimes more vaguely, "Army"; but is perhaps better interpreted as "Codex". Imperials is -not- a Faction. Adepta Sororitas, Astra Militarum, Imperial Knights, and each type of loyal Space Marine are all individual Factions; for instance.
The only time this is of particular import is when you are building a Battleforged Army; as your "Combined Arms Detachment" (what we recognize as the standard FOC) must consist of units only from a single Faction (codex)... or, alternatively, -no- Faction. (an option that I suspect will become available somewhere down the line) Savvy?
Furthermore, your "Allied Detachment" (which is identical to what we know already) must include units only from a single Faction, and that this Faction must be a different one from your "Primary Detachment".
All in all, it looks as though Combined Arms Detachment, and Allied Detachment are the -only- detachments so far...but that there will be others...and they will have their own, unique, FOCs. They will also have their own requirements and Command Benefits. Some Detachments, for instance, may have the requirement of needing to consist of units taken solely from the Orks Faction...
Formations, consequently, are also Detachments, but of a very special kind. Formations, consequently, are the -only- kind of Detachment that an Unbound army may take.
Lastly, with regards to Factions, is that each Codex Supplement is specifically the -same- Faction as the Codex that it is a Supplement for. Codex: Clan Raukan -is- the same Faction as the Space Marines Faction. Codex: Iyanden is the same Faction as the Eldar Faction. So yeah, you can't have an Allied Detachment of Crimson Slaughter to your Primary Detachment of Chaos Space Marines...but you really don't need to...you can take a Crimson Slaughter Combined Arms Detachment instead.
[USRs]Some have been altered for simplicity. Split Fire and Counter Attack, for instance, no longer require the Ld test they did before. Most are identical, but some have been tweaked. Rampage, for instance, no longer grants any benefit in the case of a Disordered Charge. The best change is that most of the rules are very clearly written, with regards to how they interact with one another, obscure rules, and special situations. Most of the USRs are entirely self-contained, and do not require that you reference other sections of the book to decipher them. Precisions Shots is now a USR, rather than an addendum attached to the Character section. Vector Strike is 1 hit, or d3 against things high in the air. All in all, nothing ground breakingly different.
Soulblaze is unchanged.
Deepstriking vehicles count as moving Combat Speed, rather than Cruising.
Walkers have Hammer of Wrath, and neither they, nor Monstrous Creatures, nor anyone else have a forbiddance on climbing up levels of ruins...at least not that I have found.
No assaulting out of stationary vehicles unless they are Assault Vehicles (open-topped still are Assault Vehicles, btw.). However, you may assault after disembarking from a building.
Battle Brothers may now ride along in one another's transports.
You may have -any number- of detachments in a Battleforged army, but each unit must belong to a Detachment, and no model may belong to more than one detachment at a time.
You may assault on turn 1. Scouts and Infiltrators may not assault on -their- first assault phase if they make use of their special deployment rules. Clarity: If you infiltrate and take -even the bottom- of turn one, you may not assault.
Also, yes, Smash is 1 attack only.
Warlords are no longer always those with the Highest Ld in your army. It can be -any- Character model you choose. Yes, this means a Sergeant can be your Warlord.
The 3 Warlord Trait tables we know are changed to be much more useful (generally speaking), and they've added a 4th table to go hand in hand with the new Objectives system incorporated for the Maelstrom of War scenarios.
Heavy Vehicles are better at Ramming (which is different now in that distance moved does not factor into the strength of the attack) but have no further ability to prevent Ordinance Weapons from making them Snap fire.
The rumor of Snap Shots being -2 BS is....BS.
The rumor of consolidating into a new combat is also BS.
I could find no restriction on Monsters or Walkers moving up and down levels of Ruins, beyond the normal "model must be able to fit".
There is also no more "area terrain". Craters are not difficult ground, and provide a 6+ cover, but maintain the +2 to cover saves for going to ground instead of +1. Trees are difficult, and provide a 5+, but lack the +2 to cover for going to ground.
Chaos Psykers -always- get the Primaris power associated with their respective deity, in addition to their other powers.
The only real -change- I can see in Assault revolves around Challenges. Overkill wounds from a Challenge spill over to the surrounding combatants now instead of going to waste. Moral Support is gone (no more re-rolls based on how many models are left out of the fight). All in all though, it is much more clearly written. This is not the edition where a Chainsword is more powerful than or as important as the Bolter. Still very much a close fire-fight style game.
Unless the charged units have gone to ground, or the assaulting unit has Assault Grenades. Just like before. Biggest change there is that there is no more 3d6 drop the highest. It's just -2 to your roll.
A good example of the clarity of this new book is here as well. They specifically write that you must attack at I 1 -regardless of other Initiative Modifiers-. No more confusion on if my + Initiative effect occurs before or after I drop to I1. Very clear.
It's also worth noting, on the wording of your question..."subsequent" assault phase...
The Assault Phase is still divided into two sub phases. The Charge sub-phase, and the Fight sub-phase. If even a single model in a unit -charges- through difficult terrain (in the Charge sub phase), the -entire unit- fights at I1 in the Fight sub-phase of that same Assault Phase.
From Natfka so salt and blah blah blah, here's the rumors stuff:
via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
No more Double Force Org at 2k points.
When making a Battle Forged army, you can have as many force orgs as you want. So at 1k points, if you want 3 ICs, you'd just need 6 troops (divided evenly) to still count as "bound" in order to maintain your Objective Secured rule, etc.
Being able to ally with yourself is just an extension of this, because it lets you alternatively take a 3rd HQ, needing only 1 troop for his allied detachment.
This is relevant, why?
Many new things will specify "This model's detachment" in the near future. Unbound armies do not have detachments, even though they are one entity. So some wargear, or special rules won't work in unbound, rewarding use of the forge organization chart as a bonus, more so than a punishment to unbound (I'm sure some people will just see this as a negative, and not the positive as is the nature of the internet).
Most Warlord traits won't specify detachment, and will still apply globally to the army (or based on range, etc as it is now).
This is also a subtle way to affect formations, which count as their own detachment outside of the Force Organization chart. While an army may remain "bound" despite exceeding certain limits via an additional Formation, the Formation represents and operates as a self contained entity.
This will also limit ally shenanigans somewhat as allies are their own detachment.
Essentially: A bound army can have any number of detachments now, one must be listed as primary (from which your Warlord is drawn, so no taking multiple detachments and picking a Warlord based on scenario or opponent). Detachments must still follow the Force Organization chart, be they a normal army or allied detachment, or must be formations.
Unbound armies throw this out, and you just have all your models in one big mishmash, don't count as a detachment for rules that specify "this detachment" and just pick a warlord out of all the possible HQs. This freedom comes at the cost of objective secured and the rerolled warlord trait, and potentially other things down the line specific to codexes.
A hint as to what that very last line means? Imagine your HQ getting bonuses if the compulsory troops chosen for his detachment are a specific unit, or elites allowed to be taken as compulsory troops only in their detachment.
Also from Natfka:
via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
This was unexpected, take a look at these.
Shrine of Aquila
Terrain Type: Ruins
the ruins are difficult terrain and all models inside receive a 4+ cover save regardless if they are 25% obscured.
Rules: Armies of the Imperium can re-roll failed morale checks if any models in their unit are inside the ruin. Any others get Hatred (armies of the imperium)
Manufactorum
Terrain Type: Ruins
the ruins are difficult terrain and all models inside receive a 4+ cover save regardless if they are 25% obscured.
Rules: Models in the Manufactorum that are firing weapons that have the "gets hot" rule, can re-roll failed saves from wounds inflicted with the Gets Hot rule.
For people that are thinking of asking questions, you will want to click that "Filter Thread" button by Marky's picture. It will show only his posts and let you quickly see if your question has been answered.
do you roll perils twice or just once?
And while we are at it why not bring back the old roll as many saves as you want back? Imagine the narratives you can make with 
.
