opponents are causing bs arguments, that's not the system's fault.
Extra charts, really? Is memorising that armor goes from 10 to 14 is difficult for somebody? Is the game supposed to be by infants with no mental capacity?
Excludigng the point of how dumb having no armor values is, they could have still done facings using toughness with like a penalty if you are shooting from the side or rear. But nope, let's just throw the system out of the window, because less tactics is more fun!
You really think thats what im saying?
it is the systems fault for being loosy goosy with the concept allowing the gak situations to happen. same deal with all the abuse cases
Im not saying memorizing charts is hard. its not. but it IS having 2 different systems in a game and trying to balance both properly is a lot of extra work for basically no reward.
they decided the bloat was not worth trying to sift through so they rebuilt EVERYTHING from the ground up gak had to go and im glad they went that route.
Every system is gonna allow gak to happen. Sure, in some situations would have used clarifications but that is not justifying destroying the whole thing.
Oh, wow. More than 1 system is hard. So having psychic phase, saves, to wound, to hit charts, charging and overwatch is fine, but having armor suddenly makes it a broken bloated mess? Yeah sure.
I fail to see how removing one of the few things that forced tactical desicions and actual flanking in a game where 90% of the time units move toward/away or objective is somehow a good thing.
Believing that every moronic decision on GW's part is a part of a great master plan to magically fix everything and therefore justified is a wishful thinking at best. GW in no way deserves the benefit of the doubt, not with their reputation.
tactical decisions? is that why people were spamming tanks in 7th? it was a massive weak link in the system and didnt mesh well glad its gone. and im glad they blew up the whole thing. it had absolutely no redeeming features.
They left the universe mostly in tact and took the parts they liked from AoS and mixed them with 2nd edition 40k. To get a kind of neat hybrid system. We will have to see it in play to actually make real decision on if it fixed the major issues.
My guess is it will have created new issues and completely killed off the old ones. After the first few months players will have the meta down on what works and what doesn't.
If you wanted to make vehicle facing simple to determine, you could just use Flame's of war's system, where you draw a line across the front of the tank (or the tips of the wave serpent's prongs, for those of you obsessed with that), in front of that is front, anywhere else is "side", and close combat uses "top". If you wanted to keep the system of toughness and wounds you could simply give vehicles a "threshold" meaning that shooting below a certain strength could not penetrate at all. It would speed up the game, since now you have to sit there and roll a pile of dice to try to put a couple of wounds through. It wouldn't have used more than a page or two.
To be fair, 40K hasn't really ever had that great a tactical system, but this this is a step in the wrong direction.
godardc wrote: Thank you, Matt !
So, casualities aren't directionnal anymore ? Casualities are choosen by the owner ? It seems less tactical too, doesn't it ?
Actually, that is a huge advantage for the owning player. Remember overflow wounds just kills a model quicker it doesn't overflow to the next model.
Example:
Five man strike squad charge a pack of chaos terminators. They each swing twice and hit once each. A total of 4 wounds get through with a force weapons for 1, 1, 2, 2, wounds. Now, it's the chaos players turn to allocate out those wounds. The chaos player chooses to allocate out those wounds as 1,2,1,2. Then rolls the saves. If he fails all saves his 2 wound terminators take 1 wound then 2 wounds and dies, then the second one takes 1 wound and 2 wounds and dies.
The chaos player only loses two terminators instead of three on those wound because he gets to choose how those wounds are allocated.
That's not gonna work because you won't roll for damage until after saves, just like AoS. So you'll just have 4 wounding hits you'll have to save, won't make a difference which order you take them in. Any wounding hits you fail to save will then do D3 wound.
kestral wrote: If you wanted to make vehicle facing simple to determine, you could just use Flame's of war's system, where you draw a line across the front of the tank (or the tips of the wave serpent's prongs, for those of you obsessed with that), in front of that is front, anywhere else is "side", and close combat uses "top". If you wanted to keep the system of toughness and wounds you could simply give vehicles a "threshold" meaning that shooting below a certain strength could not penetrate at all. It would speed up the game, since now you have to sit there and roll a pile of dice to try to put a couple of wounds through. It wouldn't have used more than a page or two.
To be fair, 40K hasn't really ever had that great a tactical system, but this this is a step in the wrong direction.
I disagree. Flame of War doesn't have giant space ants to murderlate, thus doesn't work as a perfect comparison of "better".
We have a weird mix between vehicles and big stompy things and it makes balance more difficult when they have different systems. Giving the big stompy things AV values doesn't work from a logical stand point, so they went the other way.
kestral wrote: If you wanted to make vehicle facing simple to determine, you could just use Flame's of war's system, where you draw a line across the front of the tank (or the tips of the wave serpent's prongs, for those of you obsessed with that), in front of that is front, anywhere else is "side", and close combat uses "top". If you wanted to keep the system of toughness and wounds you could simply give vehicles a "threshold" meaning that shooting below a certain strength could not penetrate at all. It would speed up the game, since now you have to sit there and roll a pile of dice to try to put a couple of wounds through. It wouldn't have used more than a page or two. To be fair, 40K hasn't really ever had that great a tactical system, but this this is a step in the wrong direction.
then again thats only if you are working on killing it with a bunch of chump weapons. it seems like legit anti tank fire will get through it relatively ok. meaning people will have to make though full well balanced lists to cover there bases. not that niche or spam tactics wont work. we dont know that one yet.
Breng77 wrote: Dumbing down is an idea that stems from the idea that complicated rules mean more meaningful tactical play. I'm not sure I agree, I think the opposite is often true, because the more complex the rules the more winning relies on who has a better understanding of the rules than who plays better.
Dropfleet Commander and SW: Armada show that complexity is not needed for a good game that makes things interesting.
Primaris Marines can be made from preexisting Marines.
So you're saying that the Games Workshop Adeptus Astartes, as a company branch of the Imperium, can phase out standard Space Marines miniatures, over a period of years?
NivlacSupreme wrote: I don't have many Blood Angels. Next week I was going to order enough to do a Demi Company. Not any more!
Looking at the BA upgrade sprue the only bits not usable on the spacecasts will be the bodys (assuming the hands stay the same size and you're ok with MK7 heads on MK10 armor). I sort of want to stick the Death Mask, chalice and backpack decoration on that commander guy because he isn't pimped enough for my tastes.
Or they'll release new upgrade sprues (Death Company?) and make nipple armor for the spacecasts which I want really badly.
I miss my Blood Falcons... But alas, my reconstituted Vesh’yo Sept Tau will be amazing. I am doing what you are doing and getting a decent force put together. Getting some Crisis Suits, Firewarriors, some kits (pathfinder+Devilfish sounds good) and maybe a Riptide for funsy.
The whole edition is great so far. Lack of balance drove me away, balance is bringing me bacm
Primaris Marines can be made from preexisting Marines.
So you're saying that the Games Workshop Adeptus Astartes, as a company branch of the Imperium, can phase out standard Space Marines miniatures, over a period of years?
opponents are causing bs arguments, that's not the system's fault.
Extra charts, really? Is memorising that armor goes from 10 to 14 is difficult for somebody? Is the game supposed to be by infants with no mental capacity?
Excludigng the point of how dumb having no armor values is, they could have still done facings using toughness with like a penalty if you are shooting from the side or rear. But nope, let's just throw the system out of the window, because less tactics is more fun!
You really think thats what im saying?
it is the systems fault for being loosy goosy with the concept allowing the gak situations to happen. same deal with all the abuse cases
Im not saying memorizing charts is hard. its not. but it IS having 2 different systems in a game and trying to balance both properly is a lot of extra work for basically no reward.
they decided the bloat was not worth trying to sift through so they rebuilt EVERYTHING from the ground up gak had to go and im glad they went that route.
Every system is gonna allow gak to happen. Sure, some situations a bit of clarification would have been nice but that is not justifying destroying the whole thing.
Oh, wow. More than 1 system is hard. So having psychic phase, saves, to wound, to hit charts, charging and overwatch is fine, but having armor suddenly makes it a broken bloated mess? Yeah sure.
I fail to see how removing one of the few things that forced tactical desicions and actual flanking in a game where 90% of the time units move toward/away of an enemy or objective is somehow a good thing.
Believing that every moronic decision on GW's part is a part of a great master plan to magically fix everything and therefore justified is a wishful thinking at best. GW in no way deserves the benefit of the doubt, not with their reputation.
Armor values didn't force any kind of tactical decision. You simply deep struck a unit behind or to the side of it and melta'd it. There was no more tactics to that scenario then placing your long range heavy weapons on an elevated position in cover. It's just 'what you do'. The reality is, many of the things some people consider 'tactics' in this game are simply the most effective way of dealing with a given situation. Those aren't necessarily tactics. Tactics are when you can bait an enemy vehicle out of a solid firing position that covers his weaker armor so you can effectively deal with it. Or sacrificing a unit to an enemy CC unit to pull them closer to you and further away from them so you can engage them with little fear of reprisal from the rest of his army.
Deep Striking or Outflanking a suicide melta unit into their back lines is not some fantastic 'tactical decision' on your part. It is simply the most efficient way to handle a situation. I mean, I love my hexa-fusion crisis suit bomb as much as the next Tau player, but I don't delude myself that I'm some strategic Einstein because I appear and pop a rhino/razorback or two.
this was my thinking until pete said on the stream that the other chapter guys can be juiced up to a primis marine. So its obvious they will be updating everything over time. All I am saying if you're going to do it anyways just do it and dont mess with the lore just because you're trying to cover up upsetting customers.
I think you missed the point.
If they updated just a part of the marine range, we're left with armies that are wildly out of scale internally. Giant Tactical Marines and whatever other kits they can squeeze into the initial release, and everyone else still being the current size. And poor Azrael looking even less awe-inspiring than ever before...
By adding the Claytons Marines as a separate unit, albeit with fairly lame fluff (which seems to be par for the course these days anyway) they can slowly drip-feed out upgrades and expansions alongside the existing range without having to completely invalidate that existing range overnight. And then once they've sold through the backlog of existing marine kits, and produced enough of a range of new kits (by which point the majority of players with the older models either have full armies or have left the hobby) they just quietly drop the old stuff and the new embigged guys become the 'standard'.
It's playing the long game, and it's actually a reasonably clever way of going about it.
It's still scale creep, though, so I'm predisposed to hate the models on a cellular level. Same thing killed my interest in starting Infinity, despite some of the cracking sculpts in their range.
MLaw wrote: I am actually at a loss. I am looking in my copy of Freebooterz, which I have thought for the longest time was 2nd ed.. and that's how the Dreadnought on p46 is listed. It has a toughness of 5. However, I am seeing for 2nd ed datacards and they are showing armor values per limb. I came in after 2nd ed (late in 3rd) and got into 2nd later.. so this is a bit of a puzzle for me.
Freebooterz was a Rogue Trader book.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ClockworkZion wrote: Flame of War doesn't have giant space ants to murderlate,....
Which seems like a clear and obvious oversight, frankly.
opponents are causing bs arguments, that's not the system's fault.
Extra charts, really? Is memorising that armor goes from 10 to 14 is difficult for somebody? Is the game supposed to be by infants with no mental capacity?
Excludigng the point of how dumb having no armor values is, they could have still done facings using toughness with like a penalty if you are shooting from the side or rear. But nope, let's just throw the system out of the window, because less tactics is more fun!
You really think thats what im saying?
it is the systems fault for being loosy goosy with the concept allowing the gak situations to happen. same deal with all the abuse cases
Im not saying memorizing charts is hard. its not. but it IS having 2 different systems in a game and trying to balance both properly is a lot of extra work for basically no reward.
they decided the bloat was not worth trying to sift through so they rebuilt EVERYTHING from the ground up gak had to go and im glad they went that route.
Every system is gonna allow gak to happen. Sure, some situations a bit of clarification would have been nice but that is not justifying destroying the whole thing.
Oh, wow. More than 1 system is hard. So having psychic phase, saves, to wound, to hit charts, charging and overwatch is fine, but having armor suddenly makes it a broken bloated mess? Yeah sure.
I fail to see how removing one of the few things that forced tactical desicions and actual flanking in a game where 90% of the time units move toward/away of an enemy or objective is somehow a good thing.
Believing that every moronic decision on GW's part is a part of a great master plan to magically fix everything and therefore justified is a wishful thinking at best. GW in no way deserves the benefit of the doubt, not with their reputation.
No it f****** didn't. All you did was D-shot them out or charge them with Krak Grenades. Vehicles didn't cause tactical decision because they sucked so bad no one used them unless they were FREE.
You do know that most of the stuff that has armor values now would've had a toughness value in 2nd edition instead right?
Wasn't it vice versa? Bikes, Wraithguard and even Cyborks had armour values.
I am actually at a loss. I am looking in my copy of Freebooterz, which I have thought for the longest time was 2nd ed.. and that's how the Dreadnought on p46 is listed. It has a toughness of 5. However, I am seeing for 2nd ed datacards and they are showing armor values per limb. I came in after 2nd ed (late in 3rd) and got into 2nd later.. so this is a bit of a puzzle for me.
...which.. actually illustrates my point a bit I think. I'm pretty sure the people who were, at some point use to Dreadnoughts having a T value.. were as miffed about the transition to AVs as I was about vehicles getting Hull Points. Ultimately, IMO.. it's a game.. if the rules are consistent then who cares what you call the number that tells you how hard the armor is to crack?
I totally agree. I started in 2nd edition but bought some (well... all) 1st edition books later. In the Vehicle Manual even the Carnifex/Screamer Killer had armour values. He didn't had those before and lost them in 2nd edition.... I'm okay with the new rules and the idea isn't really that new - Jervis published something like that in the Citadel Journal for 2nd edition.
Wowza, they're some serious anger being thrown around here!
I mean 'text' anger, but still the temperature is getting up.
As for vehicles, they did allow TACTICS but the main gameplay bonus was maneuvering! That's what the different facings where for, that's what STUNNED and WEAPON DESTROYED where for.
There will now be a large loss of those awesome moments where your single surviving Guardsmen takes out a charging Chaos Defiler with a missile launcher.
With these new rules you have to take something down to a low wound count before using one of your "Damage X" weapons.
It sucks. That's opinion on them, I feel the studio dropped the ball on that one and didn't turn on the landing lights when it came time to land.
@Vyrce: Since when where the vehicle rules considered bloat? Damn, I've played 4 editions of 40k and never heard someone say that the vehicle rules are unnecessary.
But why improve things when you can just throw them out, eh?
ClockworkZion wrote: Flame of War doesn't have giant space ants to murderlate,....
Which seems like a clear and obvious oversight, frankly.
Indeed. I love 40k's variety in the kind of things you can play, fight and murderlate.
Historical based wargames just don't fill that niche in my nerdy little black heart.
Team yankee is silly fun. though wish they would explore more of the what ifs. like a slightly toned down verson of red alert. though this going way OT
opponents are causing bs arguments, that's not the system's fault.
Extra charts, really? Is memorising that armor goes from 10 to 14 is difficult for somebody? Is the game supposed to be by infants with no mental capacity?
Excludigng the point of how dumb having no armor values is, they could have still done facings using toughness with like a penalty if you are shooting from the side or rear. But nope, let's just throw the system out of the window, because less tactics is more fun!
You really think thats what im saying?
it is the systems fault for being loosy goosy with the concept allowing the gak situations to happen. same deal with all the abuse cases
Im not saying memorizing charts is hard. its not. but it IS having 2 different systems in a game and trying to balance both properly is a lot of extra work for basically no reward.
they decided the bloat was not worth trying to sift through so they rebuilt EVERYTHING from the ground up gak had to go and im glad they went that route.
Every system is gonna allow gak to happen. Sure, in some situations would have used clarifications but that is not justifying destroying the whole thing.
Oh, wow. More than 1 system is hard. So having psychic phase, saves, to wound, to hit charts, charging and overwatch is fine, but having armor suddenly makes it a broken bloated mess? Yeah sure.
I fail to see how removing one of the few things that forced tactical desicions and actual flanking in a game where 90% of the time units move toward/away or objective is somehow a good thing.
Believing that every moronic decision on GW's part is a part of a great master plan to magically fix everything and therefore justified is a wishful thinking at best. GW in no way deserves the benefit of the doubt, not with their reputation.
tactical decisions? is that why people were spamming tanks in 7th? it was a massive weak link in the system and didnt mesh well glad its gone. and im glad they blew up the whole thing. it had absolutely no redeeming features.
Are you actually taking a piss right now? Tanks were spammed in 7th? Not MC's, not GC's, not psykers/bikes/jetbikes/grav centurions, but tanks? Are we at calling black white point already?
BTW, nice "ur wrong im right" argument.
Are you actually taking a piss right now? Tanks were spammed in 7th? Not MC's, not GC's, not psykers/bikes/jetbikes/grav centurions, but tanks? Are we at calling black white point already?
BTW, nice "ur wrong im right" argument.
You ok bud you seem upset.
it took vehicles becoming literally free for them to be used in any sort of non dicking around setting.
As for vehicles, they did allow TACTICS but the main gameplay bonus was maneuvering! That's what the different facings where for, that's what STUNNED and WEAPON DESTROYED where for.
There will now be a large loss of those awesome moments where your single surviving Guardsmen takes out a charging Chaos Defiler with a missile launcher.
Well, sure... but they've been replaced by those awesome moments where your single surviving Chimera does a backflip and kicks the Daemon Prince in the danglies, so ... woo!
As for vehicles, they did allow TACTICS but the main gameplay bonus was maneuvering! That's what the different facings where for, that's what STUNNED and WEAPON DESTROYED where for.
There will now be a large loss of those awesome moments where your single surviving Guardsmen takes out a charging Chaos Defiler with a missile launcher.
Well, sure... but they've been replaced by those awesome moments where your single surviving Chimera does a backflip and kicks the Daemon Prince in the danglies, so ... woo!
More like spins in place and runs over his small toe claw.
My guess is that it will be either T8 with a 2+ save or T9 with a 3+ save. I'm guessing between 15 and 18 wounds (it's got to outclass the Russ's 12 wounds).
As for vehicles, they did allow TACTICS but the main gameplay bonus was maneuvering! That's what the different facings where for, that's what STUNNED and WEAPON DESTROYED where for.
There will now be a large loss of those awesome moments where your single surviving Guardsmen takes out a charging Chaos Defiler with a missile launcher.
Well, sure... but they've been replaced by those awesome moments where your single surviving Chimera does a backflip and kicks the Daemon Prince in the danglies, so ... woo!
Nobody remember the history of that Land Raider possesed by his own Machine Spirit that killed hundreds of Orks yelling "FOR THE EMPEROR!" with his speakers? It ended killing the Ork Warboss when he opened hitself simulating his "death", and after the Orks entered inside to loot him, he just closed the door and exploded.
Pedro Kantor recovered his registry and now the Crimson Fist have it as a Empire Hero.
opponents are causing bs arguments, that's not the system's fault.
Extra charts, really? Is memorising that armor goes from 10 to 14 is difficult for somebody? Is the game supposed to be by infants with no mental capacity?
Excludigng the point of how dumb having no armor values is, they could have still done facings using toughness with like a penalty if you are shooting from the side or rear. But nope, let's just throw the system out of the window, because less tactics is more fun!
You really think thats what im saying?
it is the systems fault for being loosy goosy with the concept allowing the gak situations to happen. same deal with all the abuse cases
Im not saying memorizing charts is hard. its not. but it IS having 2 different systems in a game and trying to balance both properly is a lot of extra work for basically no reward.
they decided the bloat was not worth trying to sift through so they rebuilt EVERYTHING from the ground up gak had to go and im glad they went that route.
Every system is gonna allow gak to happen. Sure, some situations a bit of clarification would have been nice but that is not justifying destroying the whole thing.
Oh, wow. More than 1 system is hard. So having psychic phase, saves, to wound, to hit charts, charging and overwatch is fine, but having armor suddenly makes it a broken bloated mess? Yeah sure.
I fail to see how removing one of the few things that forced tactical desicions and actual flanking in a game where 90% of the time units move toward/away of an enemy or objective is somehow a good thing.
Believing that every moronic decision on GW's part is a part of a great master plan to magically fix everything and therefore justified is a wishful thinking at best. GW in no way deserves the benefit of the doubt, not with their reputation.
Armor values didn't force any kind of tactical decision. You simply deep struck a unit behind or to the side of it and melta'd it. There was no more tactics to that scenario then placing your long range heavy weapons on an elevated position in cover. It's just 'what you do'. The reality is, many of the things some people consider 'tactics' in this game are simply the most effective way of dealing with a given situation. Those aren't necessarily tactics. Tactics are when you can bait an enemy vehicle out of a solid firing position that covers his weaker armor so you can effectively deal with it. Or sacrificing a unit to an enemy CC unit to pull them closer to you and further away from them so you can engage them with little fear of reprisal from the rest of his army.
Deep Striking or Outflanking a suicide melta unit into their back lines is not some fantastic 'tactical decision' on your part. It is simply the most efficient way to handle a situation. I mean, I love my hexa-fusion crisis suit bomb as much as the next Tau player, but I don't delude myself that I'm some strategic Einstein because I appear and pop a rhino/razorback or two.
Except reliable meltadrop is very uncommon, and outflank can be countered.
Which forces you to to outflank (as in moving units around the board and not the special rule) a vehicle with your units, prefferably several, so you will always have a shot on it's weakest armor or/and fforce the enemy to focus on a less desirable target.
Also, what? Tactics are exactly the most effective way of dealing with a given situation. That's the whole point.
Primaris Marines can be made from preexisting Marines.
So you're saying that the Games Workshop Adeptus Astartes, as a company branch of the Imperium, can phase out standard Space Marines miniatures, over a period of years?
At least they didn't invalidate old Astartes from the get go...
I expect to have alot of people try and "counts as" old SM as Primaris.
As for vehicles, they did allow TACTICS but the main gameplay bonus was maneuvering! That's what the different facings where for, that's what STUNNED and WEAPON DESTROYED where for.
There will now be a large loss of those awesome moments where your single surviving Guardsmen takes out a charging Chaos Defiler with a missile launcher.
Well, sure... but they've been replaced by those awesome moments where your single surviving Chimera does a backflip and kicks the Daemon Prince in the danglies, so ... woo!
Nobody remember the history of that Land Raider possesed by his own Machine Spirit that killed hundreds of Orks yelling "FOR THE EMPEROR!" with his speakers? It ended killing the Ork Warboss when he open itsellf simulating his "death", and after the Orks enter to loot him, he just closed the door and exploded.
Pedro Kantor recovered his registry and now the Crimson Fist have it as a Empire Hero.
My guess is that it will be either T8 with a 2+ save or T9 with a 3+ save. I'm guessing between 15 and 18 wounds (it's got to outclass the Russ's 12 wounds).
As for vehicles, they did allow TACTICS but the main gameplay bonus was maneuvering! That's what the different facings where for, that's what STUNNED and WEAPON DESTROYED where for.
There will now be a large loss of those awesome moments where your single surviving Guardsmen takes out a charging Chaos Defiler with a missile launcher.
Well, sure... but they've been replaced by those awesome moments where your single surviving Chimera does a backflip and kicks the Daemon Prince in the danglies, so ... woo!
More like "the severely wounded Daemon prince, down on his hands and knees trying to recover from the wounds he has suffered, looks up just in time to see the bright spotlight of a chimera, right before it ground him in to the mud".
This will be a rare occurrence, but makes for an awesome moment.
Normally the chimera will crash in to him, only to be ripped apart.
Edit: oh dear, it looks like I just became a shill for Forge the Narrative™.
Probably because I have a great imagination
Are you actually taking a piss right now? Tanks were spammed in 7th? Not MC's, not GC's, not psykers/bikes/jetbikes/grav centurions, but tanks? Are we at calling black white point already?
BTW, nice "ur wrong im right" argument.
You ok bud you seem upset.
it took vehicles becoming literally free for them to be used in any sort of non dicking around setting.
what on earth are you even on about.
So do you care to explain how this has anything to do whith facings and why should ar ork battlewagon or leman russ be as hard to damage from the front as from the rear?
lol, I'm just here wondering if anyone complaining about vehicle spam actually played during the great Rhino rush era..
Either way I fully expect the normal
*cry cry cry*
*new edition comes out*
*buys it and plays while complaining*
*new edition announced*
*cry cry cry*
*repeat*
After watching so many editions come and go, it really is the same cycle over and over.
Are you actually taking a piss right now? Tanks were spammed in 7th? Not MC's, not GC's, not psykers/bikes/jetbikes/grav centurions, but tanks? Are we at calling black white point already?
BTW, nice "ur wrong im right" argument.
You ok bud you seem upset.
it took vehicles becoming literally free for them to be used in any sort of non dicking around setting.
what on earth are you even on about.
So do you care to explain how this has anything to do whith facings and why should ar ork battlewagon or leman russ be as hard to damage from the front as from the rear?
To be fair, by fluff standards Ork anything looks like it's about to fall apart basically all the time, so why should it have any armor value?
My problem with all this new space marine model info, isn't the fluff.
When I look at 2 models side by side which are very similar. My brain doesn't tell me "Cool, the bigger one is a harder better cooler version"
It just cries "Wrong scale". See picture for exaggerated example.
To me, that Primarch Guilliman model just looks silly next to the space marines. Not bigger and cooler like he's giant sized, more like it was made at the wrong scale.
I worry that's how the new Space Marines will look.
Are there pics of nuMarines side by side with oldMarines yet?
On a positive note, by reselling their largest selling brand in it's entirety again to everyone that plays Space Marines is an obvious move by GW. The profits from this will keep them going for years. In another couple of release cycles we'll have a great range of figures to play the original Inquisitor with.
Are you actually taking a piss right now? Tanks were spammed in 7th? Not MC's, not GC's, not psykers/bikes/jetbikes/grav centurions, but tanks? Are we at calling black white point already? BTW, nice "ur wrong im right" argument.
You ok bud you seem upset.
it took vehicles becoming literally free for them to be used in any sort of non dicking around setting.
what on earth are you even on about.
So do you care to explain how this has anything to do whith facings and why should ar ork battlewagon or leman russ be as hard to damage from the front as from the rear?
The game as a whole is an abstraction in the first place.
and even then there is literally nothing important on the back side of an ork battle wagon why is shoot there is much easier when there is nothing vital. same with a chimera, if anything shooting and penning the back armor should be killing crew and passenger.
why is the land raider so hard to shoot in back armor when literally the massive exhaust is exposed and exceptionally susceptible to potatoes (grenades).
It adds nothing to the game except arbitrary weaknesses allows for stupid arguments and situations.
RedSarge wrote: Wowza, they're some serious anger being thrown around here!
I mean 'text' anger, but still the temperature is getting up.
As for vehicles, they did allow TACTICS but the main gameplay bonus was maneuvering! That's what the different facings where for, that's what STUNNED and WEAPON DESTROYED where for.
There will now be a large loss of those awesome moments where your single surviving Guardsmen takes out a charging Chaos Defiler with a missile launcher.
With these new rules you have to take something down to a low wound count before using one of your "Damage X" weapons.
It sucks. That's opinion on them, I feel the studio dropped the ball on that one and didn't turn on the landing lights when it came time to land.
@Vyrce: Since when where the vehicle rules considered bloat? Damn, I've played 4 editions of 40k and never heard someone say that the vehicle rules are unnecessary.
But why improve things when you can just throw them out, eh?
It's 5th Edition all over again!
A missle launcher can't kill a defiler in a single shot from full...unless you mean immobilize, which is just as lame for the Defiler owner as it is cool for the Guardsmen. And no, you fire all of you Damage X weapons at high HP targets so you don't waste damage and use your Damage 1 weapons on troops, yunno, like tactics.
And for the record, I've heard plenty of people talk about how certain vehicles rules are stupid and how AV sucked and everything should have toughness instead on this very forum.
Gimgamgoo wrote: My problem with all this new space marine model info, isn't the fluff.
When I look at 2 models side by side which are very similar. My brain doesn't tell me "Cool, the bigger one is a harder better cooler version"
It just cries "Wrong scale". See picture for exaggerated example.
To me, that Primarch Guilliman model just looks silly next to the space marines. Not bigger and cooler like he's giant sized, more like it was made at the wrong scale.
I worry that's how the new Space Marines will look.
Are there pics of nuMarines side by side with oldMarines yet?
On a positive note, by reselling their largest selling brand in it's entirety again to everyone that plays Space Marines is an obvious move by GW. The profits from this will keep them going for years. In another couple of release cycles we'll have a great range of figures to play the original Inquisitor with.
MLaw wrote: lol, I'm just here wondering if anyone complaining about vehicle spam actually played during the great Rhino rush era..
Either way I fully expect the normal
*cry cry cry*
*new edition comes out*
*buys it and plays while complaining*
*new edition announced*
*cry cry cry*
*repeat*
After watching so many editions come and go, it really is the same cycle over and over.
I played during the Rhino Rush era but it wasn't a popular tactic locally.
Are you actually taking a piss right now? Tanks were spammed in 7th? Not MC's, not GC's, not psykers/bikes/jetbikes/grav centurions, but tanks? Are we at calling black white point already?
BTW, nice "ur wrong im right" argument.
You ok bud you seem upset.
it took vehicles becoming literally free for them to be used in any sort of non dicking around setting.
what on earth are you even on about.
So do you care to explain how this has anything to do whith facings and why should ar ork battlewagon or leman russ be as hard to damage from the front as from the rear?
To be fair, by fluff standards Ork anything looks like it's about to fall apart basically all the time, so why should it have any armor value?
That's not really an argument. There are a ton of occations where fluff specifies the quality of vehicle's armor. They even make a big deal about land raider being equally well-armored from all sides, and that's not going into all the imperial armor content.
Gimgamgoo wrote: My problem with all this new space marine model info, isn't the fluff.
When I look at 2 models side by side which are very similar. My brain doesn't tell me "Cool, the bigger one is a harder better cooler version"
It just cries "Wrong scale". See picture for exaggerated example.
To me, that Primarch Guilliman model just looks silly next to the space marines. Not bigger and cooler like he's giant sized, more like it was made at the wrong scale.
I worry that's how the new Space Marines will look.
Are there pics of nuMarines side by side with oldMarines yet?
On a positive note, by reselling their largest selling brand in it's entirety again to everyone that plays Space Marines is an obvious move by GW. The profits from this will keep them going for years. In another couple of release cycles we'll have a great range of figures to play the original Inquisitor with.
Personally I'll argue that the ones in "wrong scale" are the old marines.
Gimgamgoo wrote: My problem with all this new space marine model info, isn't the fluff.
When I look at 2 models side by side which are very similar. My brain doesn't tell me "Cool, the bigger one is a harder better cooler version"
It just cries "Wrong scale". See picture for exaggerated example.
To me, that Primarch Guilliman model just looks silly next to the space marines. Not bigger and cooler like he's giant sized, more like it was made at the wrong scale.
I worry that's how the new Space Marines will look.
Are there pics of nuMarines side by side with oldMarines yet?
On a positive note, by reselling their largest selling brand in it's entirety again to everyone that plays Space Marines is an obvious move by GW. The profits from this will keep them going for years. In another couple of release cycles we'll have a great range of figures to play the original Inquisitor with.
So which of these are in the wrong scale?...
Speaking as a 6'5" individual, it's clearly the one in the right.
So found this in my email with the title "Introducing the saviours of the Imperium":
Looks like the standard Marine base. Maybe someone can work out something from such a clear picture on exactly how big they are.
For people asking for references. It should be noted how the Primaris its being viewed from the front and the normal space marine from a profile, so he appears even smaller.
Gimgamgoo wrote: My problem with all this new space marine model info, isn't the fluff.
When I look at 2 models side by side which are very similar. My brain doesn't tell me "Cool, the bigger one is a harder better cooler version"
It just cries "Wrong scale". See picture for exaggerated example.
To me, that Primarch Guilliman model just looks silly next to the space marines. Not bigger and cooler like he's giant sized, more like it was made at the wrong scale.
I worry that's how the new Space Marines will look.
Are there pics of nuMarines side by side with oldMarines yet?
On a positive note, by reselling their largest selling brand in it's entirety again to everyone that plays Space Marines is an obvious move by GW. The profits from this will keep them going for years. In another couple of release cycles we'll have a great range of figures to play the original Inquisitor with.
Personally I'll argue that the ones in "wrong scale" are the old marines.
Agreed. Guardsmen where the same size as them, which is horribly wrong.
Are you actually taking a piss right now? Tanks were spammed in 7th? Not MC's, not GC's, not psykers/bikes/jetbikes/grav centurions, but tanks? Are we at calling black white point already? BTW, nice "ur wrong im right" argument.
You ok bud you seem upset.
it took vehicles becoming literally free for them to be used in any sort of non dicking around setting.
what on earth are you even on about.
So do you care to explain how this has anything to do whith facings and why should ar ork battlewagon or leman russ be as hard to damage from the front as from the rear?
The game as a whole is an abstraction in the first place.
and even then there is literally nothing important on the back side of an ork battle wagon why is shoot there is much easier when there is nothing vital. same with a chimera, if anything shooting and penning the back armor should be killing crew and passenger.
why is the land raider so hard to shoot in back armor when literally the massive exhaust is exposed and exceptionally susceptible to potatoes (grenades).
It adds nothing to the game except arbitrary weaknesses allows for stupid arguments and situations.
So if it's an abstraction it justifies less tactics and less sense just to cut some time?
What. Do you even realise how armor works? A shot from a leman russ cannon ain't just gonna hit some barrel at the back of a truck and sit there because barrel is not important. It's gonna go right through, potentially damaging it's internal systems or/and killing it's crew (crew is imprortant btw, the more you know). We put armor on tanks to prevent exacly that from happening.
Maybe because shooting off the top of exhaust pipe will do you no good in battle and there is such thing as grate which you can put inside the pipe to prevent things falling down through it?
Gimgamgoo wrote: My problem with all this new space marine model info, isn't the fluff.
When I look at 2 models side by side which are very similar. My brain doesn't tell me "Cool, the bigger one is a harder better cooler version"
It just cries "Wrong scale". See picture for exaggerated example.
To me, that Primarch Guilliman model just looks silly next to the space marines. Not bigger and cooler like he's giant sized, more like it was made at the wrong scale.
I worry that's how the new Space Marines will look.
Are there pics of nuMarines side by side with oldMarines yet?
On a positive note, by reselling their largest selling brand in it's entirety again to everyone that plays Space Marines is an obvious move by GW. The profits from this will keep them going for years. In another couple of release cycles we'll have a great range of figures to play the original Inquisitor with.
Personally I'll argue that the ones in "wrong scale" are the old marines.
Agreed. Guardsmen where the same size as them, which is horribly wrong.
Thats more fault of the Cadian models. But even compared with Genestealer Cultists, Chaos Cultists or Skitarii, the normal Space Marines and Chaos Marines are very short and smaller than how they should be.
MLaw wrote: lol, I'm just here wondering if anyone complaining about vehicle spam actually played during the great Rhino rush era..
Either way I fully expect the normal
*cry cry cry*
*new edition comes out*
*buys it and plays while complaining*
*new edition announced*
*cry cry cry*
*repeat*
After watching so many editions come and go, it really is the same cycle over and over.
I played during the Rhino Rush era but it wasn't a popular tactic locally.
In the Virginia Beach area it was all the rage. Other armies were doing similar but Rhino rush was easily heaviest attendance at RTTs.
Gimgamgoo wrote: My problem with all this new space marine model info, isn't the fluff.
When I look at 2 models side by side which are very similar. My brain doesn't tell me "Cool, the bigger one is a harder better cooler version"
It just cries "Wrong scale". See picture for exaggerated example.
To me, that Primarch Guilliman model just looks silly next to the space marines. Not bigger and cooler like he's giant sized, more like it was made at the wrong scale.
I worry that's how the new Space Marines will look.
Are there pics of nuMarines side by side with oldMarines yet?
On a positive note, by reselling their largest selling brand in it's entirety again to everyone that plays Space Marines is an obvious move by GW. The profits from this will keep them going for years. In another couple of release cycles we'll have a great range of figures to play the original Inquisitor with.
So which of these are in the wrong scale?...
Speaking as a 6'5" individual, it's clearly the one in the right.
So if it's an abstraction it justifies less tactics and less sense just to cut some time?
What. Do you even realise how armor works? A shot from a leman russ cannon ain't just gonna hit some barrel at the back of a truck and sit there because barrel is not important. It's gonna go right through, potentially damaging it's internal systems or/and killing it's crew (crew is imprortant btw, the more you know). We put armor on tanks to prevent exacly that from happening.
Maybe because shooting off the top of exhaust pipe will do you no good in battle and there is such thing as grate which you can put inside the pipe to prevent things falling down through it?
Do you know how exhausts work? have you seen the exhaust on a land raider? damaging or otherwise blowing up the exhaust of most vehicles is REALLY bad for the engine. heck the back side of the landraider IS the engine and a direct hit should be taking it out
or otherwise shooting the open front of a land raider as people get out should be basically an instant kill. but that would be another page of rules for how shots work with models that can be altered (Doors opening)
its an abstraction for the sake of the game.
this is far better as it puts them on equal terms with things like MCs.
Probably time to take the armour mechanics discussion elsewhere, guys. The massive nested quotes and antogonistic tone aren't adding anything constructive to the thread
RedSarge wrote: There will now be a large loss of those awesome moments where your single surviving Guardsmen takes out a charging Chaos Defiler with a missile launcher.
It's been replaced with those "awesome moments" where your single surviving guardsman takes out a charging defiler by removing its last wound with his lasgun.
There must be a name for some kind of logical fallacy in which something has no value but people lose their minds and become emotionally invested in it once it goes away.
Like it's a fair assumption to make that 90% of 40K players have gone their entire existence without using tank shock, but now that it's going the way of the dodo it's suddenly this beloved mechanic that provides tactical and narrative depth to the game? Yeah fething right.
RedSarge wrote: There will now be a large loss of those awesome moments where your single surviving Guardsmen takes out a charging Chaos Defiler with a missile launcher.
It's been replaced with those "awesome moments" where your single surviving guardsman takes out a charging defiler by removing its last wound with his lasgun.
There must be a name for some kind of logical fallacy in which something has no value but people lose their minds and become emotionally invested in it once it goes away.
Like it's a fair assumption to make that 90% of 40K players have gone their entire existence without using tank shock, but now that it's going the way of the dodo it's suddenly this beloved mechanic that provides tactical and narrative depth to the game? Yeah fething right.
"You do not know what you have, until you lose it"?
I was thinking that the white and red striped model was a sergreant, but there is a red helmet in the background (denoting a vet) so maybe the one with the sword is a captain? He does have fancier armour.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also he's on a 40mm base.
Like it's a fair assumption to make that 90% of 40K players have gone their entire existence without using tank shock, but now that it's going the way of the dodo it's suddenly this beloved mechanic that provides tactical and narrative depth to the game? Yeah fething right.
Unless you're assuming that the people arguing for tank shock are from amongst the 90% who never actually used it, I'm not sure what 'logical fallacy' you're seeing here.
ClockworkZion wrote: I was thinking that the white and red striped model was a sergreant, but there is a red helmet in the background (denoting a vet) so maybe the one with the sword is a captain? He does have fancier armour.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also he's on a 40mm base.
Plus from the datasheet the Intercessor Sgt can only carry a Bolt Rifle, Bolt Pistol and Frag/Krak Grenades like any other member of the squad. So that guy is something else.
ClockworkZion wrote: I was thinking that the white and red striped model was a sergreant, but there is a red helmet in the background (denoting a vet) so maybe the one with the sword is a captain? He does have fancier armour.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also he's on a 40mm base.
Plus from the datasheet the Intercessor Sgt can only carry a Bolt Rifle, Bolt Pistol and Frag/Krak Grenades like any other member of the squad. So that guy is something else.
If that is a new captain than my god that is the most not blinged out character iv ever seen. i dont know what to think about it. at least give the poor guy a cape.
ClockworkZion wrote: I was thinking that the white and red striped model was a sergreant, but there is a red helmet in the background (denoting a vet) so maybe the one with the sword is a captain? He does have fancier armour.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also he's on a 40mm base.
Plus from the datasheet the Intercessor Sgt can only carry a Bolt Rifle, Bolt Pistol and Frag/Krak Grenades like any other member of the squad. So that guy is something else.
I'm almost 100% certain the Sarge is the red helmeted guy in the back.
ClockworkZion wrote: I was thinking that the white and red striped model was a sergreant, but there is a red helmet in the background (denoting a vet) so maybe the one with the sword is a captain? He does have fancier armour.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also he's on a 40mm base.
Plus from the datasheet the Intercessor Sgt can only carry a Bolt Rifle, Bolt Pistol and Frag/Krak Grenades like any other member of the squad. So that guy is something else.
If that is a new captain than my god that is the most not blinged out character iv ever seen. i dont know what to think about it.
ClockworkZion wrote: I was thinking that the white and red striped model was a sergreant, but there is a red helmet in the background (denoting a vet) so maybe the one with the sword is a captain? He does have fancier armour.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also he's on a 40mm base.
Red denotes Sergeant. White denotes veteran status.
If he is some kind of "Captain", yeah. I can't spot differences between him and the other Primaris, only the sword and the base. I assume they made him of the same kit. No way I'm gonna pay more by a lone Primaris with a sword that is just exactly the same that other Intercessors
ClockworkZion wrote: I was thinking that the white and red striped model was a sergreant, but there is a red helmet in the background (denoting a vet) so maybe the one with the sword is a captain? He does have fancier armour.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also he's on a 40mm base.
Red denotes Sergeant. White denotes veteran status.
The bigger base screams "character" though.
That said, he could be a vet sergeant upgrade assuming GW withheld part of the datasheet from us.....
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: If he is some kind of "Captain", yeah. I can't spot differences between him and the other Primaris, only the sword and the base. I assume they made him of the same kit. No way I'm gonna pay more by a lone Primaris with a sword that is just exactly the same that other Intercessors
Desubot wrote: There seems to only be 9 of them as well.
According to the article, the "Tactical" (I forgot their new, not-tac squad's name) Primaris marines come in squads of 5, so it seems to be more of a photoshoot setup than anything else.
Galas wrote: If he is some kind of "Captain", yeah. I can't spot differences between him and the other Primaris, only the sword and the base. I assume they made him of the same kit. No way I'm gonna pay more by a lone Primaris with a sword that is just exactly the same that other Intercessors
I've got from a very good source that this guy will cost 33,00$ USD.
Galas wrote: If he is some kind of "Captain", yeah. I can't spot differences between him and the other Primaris, only the sword and the base. I assume they made him of the same kit. No way I'm gonna pay more by a lone Primaris with a sword that is just exactly the same that other Intercessors
I've got from a very good source that this guy will cost 33,00$ USD.
Galas wrote: If he is some kind of "Captain", yeah. I can't spot differences between him and the other Primaris, only the sword and the base. I assume they made him of the same kit. No way I'm gonna pay more by a lone Primaris with a sword that is just exactly the same that other Intercessors
I've got from a very good source that this guy will cost 33,00$ USD.
Galas wrote: If he is some kind of "Captain", yeah. I can't spot differences between him and the other Primaris, only the sword and the base. I assume they made him of the same kit. No way I'm gonna pay more by a lone Primaris with a sword that is just exactly the same that other Intercessors
I've got from a very good source that this guy will cost 33,00$ USD.
Galas wrote: If he is some kind of "Captain", yeah. I can't spot differences between him and the other Primaris, only the sword and the base. I assume they made him of the same kit. No way I'm gonna pay more by a lone Primaris with a sword that is just exactly the same that other Intercessors
I've got from a very good source that this guy will cost 33,00$ USD.
Is he made of gold plated plastic?
Nah just the finest of all plastic. The one and only Citadel Miniatures Plastic™!
But I just took the price of the lone Stormcast Eternals heroes from AoS and they are 33,00$ so I don't see why they wouldn't.
Does anybody have a picture of the new Cypher compaired to current space marines? I'm wondering if old space marine characters are going to get a primaris reboot.
Galas wrote: If he is some kind of "Captain", yeah. I can't spot differences between him and the other Primaris, only the sword and the base. I assume they made him of the same kit. No way I'm gonna pay more by a lone Primaris with a sword that is just exactly the same that other Intercessors
I've got from a very good source that this guy will cost 33,00$ USD.
Is he made of gold plated plastic?
Nah just the finest of all plastic. The one and only Citadel Miniatures Plastic™!
But I just took the price of the lone Stormcast Eternals heroes from AoS and they are 33,00$ so I don't see why they wouldn't.
Canadian?
anyway he is probably coming in the starter. will definitely be picking him up and if he is a captain he will be getting a cape
Anyone think that the primaris marine sales will flop after an attempt to swing space marines to the primaris as their core model? if they sell these guys for such a high price then I could see the compitition with ebay resellers and what not for cheaper older kits shutting that down. Not saying that is going to happen, just curious.
macluvin wrote: Anyone think that the primaris marine sales will flop after an attempt to swing space marines to the primaris as their core model? if they sell these guys for such a high price then I could see the compitition with ebay resellers and what not for cheaper older kits shutting that down. Not saying that is going to happen, just curious.
Currently the newmarines are said to have no overlap with the roles of the old ones, so no.
macluvin wrote: Anyone think that the primaris marine sales will flop after an attempt to swing space marines to the primaris as their core model? if they sell these guys for such a high price then I could see the compitition with ebay resellers and what not for cheaper older kits shutting that down. Not saying that is going to happen, just curious.
Nope, I think they'll sell well to newcomers and to vets either starting a new army or who don't mind the scale creep, because taken on their own they look awesome.
They'll only 'fail' to those who are priced out of buying them (who would have been priced out anyway even if they weren't embiggened) and to those like me who dislike scale creep (and I would very strongly suspect that I'm in a minority there).
They are better figures actually then the old, and I actually like "Look, a new race of giants" better than "gee, we just made them bigger". Still don't like the general trend to larger however.
macluvin wrote: Anyone think that the primaris marine sales will flop after an attempt to swing space marines to the primaris as their core model? if they sell these guys for such a high price then I could see the compitition with ebay resellers and what not for cheaper older kits shutting that down. Not saying that is going to happen, just curious.
Will the best space marine miniatures ever made flop?
Not in a million years. They make the current range look like it was sculpted in the mid 90's.
Not to sound like a total fanboy but I am blown away by the bigger marines. They just look so much more like a marine should; absolutely huge and with big ass gun. The current ones just look small and awkward compared to them.
Future War Cultist wrote: Not to sound like a total fanboy but I am blown away by the bigger marines. They just look so much more like a marine should; absolutely huge and with big ass gun. The current ones just look small and awkward compared to them.
I'm not a really big fan of space marines. I have a Dark Angel force because I love the robes thing, but... 1 month ago, the Space Marine kits to me looked allright, but after seeing the Primaris ones? I just can't see them with the same eyes anymore.
Franky I'm on the boat with the "scale correction" group. To be honest the Marines we have now (which are quite a lot better than the old squatty potty ones we had) are too short. Marines have always had this problem though and frankly the fact that they,re actually going to be the proper size makes me happy.
Future War Cultist wrote: Not to sound like a total fanboy but I am blown away by the bigger marines. They just look so much more like a marine should; absolutely huge and with big ass gun. The current ones just look small and awkward compared to them.
I'm not a really big fan of space marines. I have a Dark Angel force because I love the robes thing, but... 1 month ago, the Space Marine kits to me looked allright, but after seeing the Primaris ones? I just can't see them with the same eyes anymore.
Likewise. I've never considered Marines until I saw the Primaris sculpts. Now I'm thinking that these would look sweet in Imperial Fist livery...
I've been a truescale fan for a long time, and plan to do it to all my Marines eventually. I'm very glad for the corrected models, but I just wish the fluff wasn't so stupid.
The only thing that concerns me about the big marines is how they seem to be operating. Small squads with no specials or heavies...it seems like Girlyman is going back on his own Codex. I know this is a ploy to keep the older tactical marines relevant but I hope they are able to work as a stand alone force.
Frozen Ocean wrote: I've been a truescale fan for a long time, and plan to do it to all my Marines eventually. I'm very glad for the corrected models, but I just wish the fluff wasn't so stupid.
I keep hearing this but I don't really understand the why? I guess I'm not all that familiar with the nitty gritty of the grimdark but to me Cawl and Rowboat making new marines is pretty much the same as like...making a new type of bolter or a new rocket launcher or w/e. I mean, it kind of makes sense to try and improve the process/product over time. Admittedly 'doing things that make sense with technology' is not exactly 40k's calling card but still...
Same here, I love my blood angels the way they are, and likely won't be adding any of the numarines to them.
But I do like the models, so I'll start a new chapter based on the idea that Terra would have had Gene-seed for all the chapters/legions ever made. Thinking of using one of the traitor legions.
Frozen Ocean wrote: I've been a truescale fan for a long time, and plan to do it to all my Marines eventually. I'm very glad for the corrected models, but I just wish the fluff wasn't so stupid.
I keep hearing this but I don't really understand the why? I guess I'm not all that familiar with the nitty gritty of the grimdark but to me Cawl and Rowboat making new marines is pretty much the same as like...making a new type of bolter or a new rocket launcher or w/e. I mean, it kind of makes sense to try and improve the process/product over time. Admittedly 'doing things that make sense with technology' is not exactly 40k's calling card but still...
Thats exactly why the fluff goes against 40k theme. The regresion of techonolgy was one of the main themes of the Imperium. Nobody knows anything anymore. The Cult Mechanics is just that, a cult, they have more of religion that of science. Thats why all the equipement, marines, technology in general in the 30K era is superior to the one of the 40k era.
But personally, I have just changed my chip. To me, Pre-Roubote 40k and Post-Roubote 40k are just different settings like Fantasy and AoS.
Wait wait, so let me get this straight... A good number of Tau units get to retreat from combat and shoot with 0 penalty, but vehicles don't get the option to do so like they do now in 7th? That's a huge nerf to (non-CC) vehicles. They can more easily survive combat, I'd imagine, but they're made completely useless by being unable to shoot for the rest of the game. The ability to fight back does not even come close to making up for that travesty...
One Tau unit specifically, and anything that is a flyer (jump jet, skimmer)
As for vehicles, the special rule for the stormsurge references it's being a giant vehicle. I'd expect similar rules for vehicles.
Also, just don't charge your vehicles forward into melee if they're there to be shooty. Or just use them to soak overwatch for a viable melee option...
What difference can make having your legs in a realistic pose and a little better proportions , eh?
I have a space marine army that has been a work in progress with the Betrayal at Calth minis. I also started a Thousand Sons force over Christmas and compared the two minis and realized... I don't really like the current squatty pose marines with the huge shoulder pads. The proportions just look cartoony to me now.
So... I'm seriously considering selling off all the marine minis I have built and on sprue (one 80 of them) and just starting over. These Primaris just look too good. I'm hoping FW comes out with torsos to fit them as Alpha Legion would look really really good and I don't want the Aquila on the chest.
KommissarKiln wrote: Wait wait, so let me get this straight... A good number of Tau units get to retreat from combat and shoot with 0 penalty, but vehicles don't get the option to do so like they do now in 7th? That's a huge nerf to (non-CC) vehicles. They can more easily survive combat, I'd imagine, but they're made completely useless by being unable to shoot for the rest of the game. The ability to fight back does not even come close to making up for that travesty...
You don't have other units in the way? I would assume these shooting units wouldn't be driving towards the cc units.
KommissarKiln wrote: Wait wait, so let me get this straight... A good number of Tau units get to retreat from combat and shoot with 0 penalty, but vehicles don't get the option to do so like they do now in 7th? That's a huge nerf to (non-CC) vehicles. They can more easily survive combat, I'd imagine, but they're made completely useless by being unable to shoot for the rest of the game. The ability to fight back does not even come close to making up for that travesty...
I think it does a good job of representing why it's a bad idea to let vehicles get close to enemy infantry without their own infantry support, and nowhere does it say they can't shoot for the rest of the game. Fall back, move your own infantry forward to screen the vehicle, shoot next turn, learn from your mistake and try to protect your shooty vehicle from getting engaged again via whatever clever tactic/dirty trick your opponent used.
I have a space marine army that has been a work in progress with the Betrayal at Calth minis. I also started a Thousand Sons force over Christmas and compared the two minis and realized... I don't really like the current squatty pose marines with the huge shoulder pads. The proportions just look cartoony to me now.
So... I'm seriously considering selling off all the marine minis I have built and on sprue (one 80 of them) and just starting over. These Primaris just look too good. I'm hoping FW comes out with torsos to fit them as Alpha Legion would look really really good and I don't want the Aquila on the chest.
I love my new Thousand Sons and i'm never looking back. I imagine the Primaris won't be much bigger than them.
It really comes down to the Chaos Marines. If they never release a Chaos Marine in the current size/scale, and all Chaos Marine releases from hereon in are NuMarine scale, then we'll know that their aim is to replace them all eventually.
Shame. I really wanted a plastic Havoc Squad. And Oblits. And Noise Marines. And Plague Marines. And new 'Zerkers.
I have a space marine army that has been a work in progress with the Betrayal at Calth minis. I also started a Thousand Sons force over Christmas and compared the two minis and realized... I don't really like the current squatty pose marines with the huge shoulder pads. The proportions just look cartoony to me now.
So... I'm seriously considering selling off all the marine minis I have built and on sprue (one 80 of them) and just starting over. These Primaris just look too good. I'm hoping FW comes out with torsos to fit them as Alpha Legion would look really really good and I don't want the Aquila on the chest.
I love my new Thousand Sons and i'm never looking back. I imagine the Primaris won't be much bigger than them.
Oh me too, they just look so good. Its not the scale really, its the pose and proportions that have me hooked. Even if they are slightly shorter I'm OK with that.
H.B.M.C. wrote: It really comes down to the Chaos Marines. If they never release a Chaos Marine in the current size/scale, and all Chaos Marine releases from hereon in are NuMarine scale, then we'll know that their aim is to replace them all eventually.
Shame. I really wanted a plastic Havoc Squad. And Oblits. And Noise Marines. And Plague Marines. And new 'Zerkers.
Yea, I may find myself poaching Primaris heavy weapons and sticking them on my Thousand Sons for Havocs. Assuming we see them any time soon.
H.B.M.C. wrote: It really comes down to the Chaos Marines. If they never release a Chaos Marine in the current size/scale, and all Chaos Marine releases from hereon in are NuMarine scale, then we'll know that their aim is to replace them all eventually.
Shame. I really wanted a plastic Havoc Squad. And Oblits. And Noise Marines. And Plague Marines. And new 'Zerkers.
Who's to say you won't have them? I have a feeling that all new "marine" kits will follow this trend. I do hope they update all those kits you mentioned soon. CSM needs better plastic if they are to be the big threat for new 40k.
Who's to say you won't have them? I have a feeling that all new "marine" kits will follow this trend. I do hope they update all those kits you mentioned soon. CSM needs better plastic if they are to be the big threat for new 40k.
My bet is we'll see legion marines. There won't be a "generic" CSM. Instead it will probably be Black Legion's own variant.
Frozen Ocean wrote: I've been a truescale fan for a long time, and plan to do it to all my Marines eventually. I'm very glad for the corrected models, but I just wish the fluff wasn't so stupid.
I keep hearing this but I don't really understand the why? I guess I'm not all that familiar with the nitty gritty of the grimdark but to me Cawl and Rowboat making new marines is pretty much the same as like...making a new type of bolter or a new rocket launcher or w/e. I mean, it kind of makes sense to try and improve the process/product over time. Admittedly 'doing things that make sense with technology' is not exactly 40k's calling card but still...
That's not the problem. It's the idea that Space Marines just aren't good enough. From those venerable Legionaries who first sailed out on the Great Crusade to the armies and characters we have now, the existence of the Primaris is GW saying "not good enough". It doesn't matter if they're 10,000 year old Chaos Marines, First Company Veterans, Terminators, Chapter Masters, Deathwatch, Grey Knights - they're not good enough. This post says it quite well:
warboss wrote: If it were just a model scale/asthetics change and a moderate fluff change (new Mk X armor and new pattern bolter!), I'd be fine with it. It's the fluff replacement of Adeptus Astartes with Adeptus Restartes that bothers me the most as it was unnecessary. I've dealt with the switch from monopose 2nd edition plastics and hybrid plastic/metals to 3rd edition omnimarine kit to specialized class plastic kits (like all plastic devs) to specialized variants for each chapter.. and I didn't bat an eyelash at any of them (and most I applauded at the time regardless if my own models were being replaced). Changing the fluff to officially make the original marines like an Iphone 4 in an 6S universe was completely unnecessary. If they wanted to improve marine stats to something more akin to what the fluff says, I'd have applauded that as well if they just grandfathered all marines in at the same time instead of downgrading the ones we already had.
It's obvious that they exist simply to give Marines a more appropriate scale, so why the in-universe changes? The new Rubric Marines are bigger, and they were given no fluff to explain it because it wasn't necessary. Deathwatch, too.
It's obvious that they exist simply to give Marines a more appropriate scale, so why the in-universe changes? The new Rubric Marines are bigger, and they were given no fluff to explain it because it wasn't necessary. Deathwatch, too.
Then perhaps the in universe changes are, because they wanted to tell the story that way? Those examples are really old and small subsets of the bigger ranges of marines out there.
It's obvious that they exist simply to give Marines a more appropriate scale, so why the in-universe changes? The new Rubric Marines are bigger, and they were given no fluff to explain it because it wasn't necessary. Deathwatch, too.
Then perhaps the in universe changes are, because they wanted to tell the story that way? Those examples are really old and small subsets of the bigger ranges of marines out there.
Rubrics and Deathwatch aren't old, but that's not the point. Any story they could get from the introduction of the Primaris is being trampled on by their out-of-universe motives, as in their need to ensure that the Primaris Marines are distributed galaxy-wide and in enormous numbers so that nobody is left out, not even Chaos (judging by the Deathguard model and the Alpha Legion book cover). The concept of Guilliman's secret weapon is a good one, but it seems it won't be used that way.
Future War Cultist wrote: The only thing that concerns me about the big marines is how they seem to be operating. Small squads with no specials or heavies...it seems like Girlyman is going back on his own Codex. I know this is a ploy to keep the older tactical marines relevant but I hope they are able to work as a stand alone force.
I assume the core of the army and bolter goons, and then heavy and special weapons will be in dedicated squads. Think 30k marines.
Rubrics and Deathwatch aren't old, but that's not the point. Any story they could get from the introduction of the Primaris is being trampled on by their out-of-universe motives, as in their need to ensure that the Primaris Marines are distributed galaxy-wide and in enormous numbers so that nobody is left out, not even Chaos (judging by the Deathguard model and the Alpha Legion book cover). The concept of Guilliman's secret weapon is a good one, but it seems it won't be used that way.
Rubrics were still a hybrid plastic/metal until this year...
I mean the new Rubrics and Deathwatch! Sorry, should have clarified that.
They had two options with bigger Marines. Either they make them a new unit entirely, invalidating Marines in fluff but not in models*, or they just make them the new standard Marine, invalidating Marine models but not touching the fluff.
* But they're still kind of invalid anyway.
EDIT: Meanwhile Rubric Marines are just big, apparently, because they've chosen the route of "the old plastics were accurate, the new Marines are just literally taller in-universe".
It's obvious that they exist simply to give Marines a more appropriate scale, so why the in-universe changes? The new Rubric Marines are bigger, and they were given no fluff to explain it because it wasn't necessary. Deathwatch, too.
Then perhaps the in universe changes are, because they wanted to tell the story that way? Those examples are really old and small subsets of the bigger ranges of marines out there.
Long Answer: Why the in-universe change, and not just "hey, here are new models if you want them, and like their aesthetics"?
Because with an fluff change, they are different units, with different units, they can have different rules; when those different rules are BETTER MARINES, players want them in their armies - and thus, even if they did not care for the appearance, they will buy them.
I mean, dreds are going to be good again (maybe.,..) would you field an old dred, or a New and Improved dred?
Things need refreshing. I know lots of people are excited about the idea of something actually changing in the 40k universe. I've heard lots of people talking about whether they are going to make an Ultima Founding chapter or a company of primaris marines that reinforces an existing chapter.
I personally like how the units arranged by Roboute use Horus Heresy era squad organizations with all bolters in Intercessor Squads and hope the rumour is true that the special and heavy weapons will be concentrated in their own squads.
I like how they acknowledged the fact we've all known for a while: space marines aren't good enough. They've barely kept a galaxy at a status quo. Their elite nature is often talked about in operational terms and is often outside the scope of the game of 40k. The Primaris marines at least are actually immediately obviously super human.
It's like Space Marines are finally going to match their ideal.
It's obvious that they exist simply to give Marines a more appropriate scale, so why the in-universe changes? The new Rubric Marines are bigger, and they were given no fluff to explain it because it wasn't necessary. Deathwatch, too.
Then perhaps the in universe changes are, because they wanted to tell the story that way? Those examples are really old and small subsets of the bigger ranges of marines out there.
Long Answer: Why the in-universe change, and not just "hey, here are new models if you want them, and like their aesthetics"?
Because with an fluff change, they are different units, with different units, they can have different rules; when those different rules are BETTER MARINES, players want them in their armies - and thus, even if they did not care for the appearance, they will buy them.
I mean, dreds are going to be good again (maybe.,..) would you field an old dred, or a New and Improved dred?
Short Answer: To sell more models, silly.
Also it kind of sucks to have this super cool new addition to all the space marine armies who cost more than roughriders and are barely more useful.
While I think that's generally true, GW rarely comes out with a new model that has bad rules, but sometimes the rules are just solid and not OP, I think it's a bit cynical to blame GW for wanting to sell more models. I mean the top brass are probably fairly wealthy but not like, oil baron Scrooge McDuck levels of rich, and it does cost a lot of money to develop new rule sets and run the stores we all play at and buy from and stuff.
Of course if all anybody plays after this summer is primaris marine armies or non-primaris vs non-primaris then there's a huge problem. What we've seen so far doesn't seem to bear that out though. They've got better bolters and two wounds, but are a fair bit more expensive and don't mix weapons in squads. With tac marines you can have a special and a heavy weapon, both of which can split fire, and defender chooses wound allocation so you can pop off your bolter marines when you get hit with a battle canon shot and save your missile launcher.
I'm kind of having a hard time figuring out how I will add Primaris Marines to my existing Marine forces. Assuming they will have some of the special rules for those chapters of course. Pitty, as I love the models. I'll still get them of course, they just might not see play.
Dark Angels. Sure, they may fit right in. I'm a little more shooting than assaulty.... so they may work.
Space wolves. Hm.... I generally run horde foot sloggers. Not exactly sure what they'd add here.
Death Watch. Well.... they could be good, but DW special ammo is still better than the Primaris bolter. Don't think they'd add much unless I can mix them in a squad with terminators (now that'd be sweet).
Grey knights. Now this is totally silly. A GK Primaris would be worse in almost every way than a standard GK. A storm bolter is probably (judging by combi bolter stats) going to be better in most regards than a Primaris bolter. Also, Primaris will lack any force weapons to use.
H.B.M.C. wrote: It really comes down to the Chaos Marines. If they never release a Chaos Marine in the current size/scale, and all Chaos Marine releases from hereon in are NuMarine scale, then we'll know that their aim is to replace them all eventually.
Shame. I really wanted a plastic Havoc Squad. And Oblits. And Noise Marines. And Plague Marines. And new 'Zerkers.
I would say good riddance. The plastic chaos space marines are horrible models (that I unfortunately own a big number of). They were made as a exercise work for some new sculptors back in the day, and it unfortunately shows.
docdoom77 wrote: I am so stoked that they confirmed defender chooses casualties.
Casualty removal is soooo bad in 7th.
It kinda made sense that things would die from the front when getting shot from the front. but realistically all it did was put special characters wayyy in the back and that looks lame. i love this change. also wonder if snipers can chose their targets too. i know they can for characters but special weapon sniping is important yo.
Actually now it's worse. Before characters often DID lead from the front with their 2+/3++/5+++ with rerolls soaking wounds. Now that will lead to instant vaporization so characters will be at the rear. Or rather surrounded by other guys.
Problem was it allowed for silly exploits like that and without those kind of characters made assault rather hard.
H.B.M.C. wrote: It really comes down to the Chaos Marines. If they never release a Chaos Marine in the current size/scale, and all Chaos Marine releases from hereon in are NuMarine scale, then we'll know that their aim is to replace them all eventually.
Shame. I really wanted a plastic Havoc Squad. And Oblits. And Noise Marines. And Plague Marines. And new 'Zerkers.
We already know we're getting new Plague Marines...
Unusual Suspect wrote: I'm quite surprised with how they translated the Annihilation Barge. It seems like they really missed the obvious opportunity to just give it Quantum-level stats (T8 2+ or 3+) but subject the vehicle to degradation effects (as seen in the Morkonaut profile).
...Which they clearly didn't do, because the released statline doesn't have stars for T or Save values.
So instead of using a perfectly usable mechanics that is a reasonable implementation of the fluff, they've (probably) decided to use a Bespoke rule. Kinda disappointing.
Or maybe Quantum Shielding makes it so that weapons can only ever do 1 damage at a time, making it a very survivable long-range unit that is more vulnerable to small arms fire than other heavy tanks. That would be pretty unique for the Necrons and make for an interesting unit on the table top.
I do like the fluff that old marines can become Primaris, let's our old favorite heroes live on with moar powah.
Wait, wut?
Source?
The Q&A they did early (really early) this morning for us Australians.
The said that the process to create Primaris Marines isn't just growing them in test tubes, but also can follow the current way Space Marines are made on top of also being used to upgrade existing Marines.
Azazelx wrote: He's also on a 40mm base rather than a 32mm, and he has a CCW/Power Sword, so he's a fancy-something.
And he's by himself!
I'm going to name him Steve! And no one can stop me!
For his last birthday I got my friend the DKoK Commissar that's unsheathing his sword. He uses him as a Lord Commissar. I started calling him Steve. It sort of stuck.
I do like the fluff that old marines can become Primaris, let's our old favorite heroes live on with moar powah.
Wait, wut?
Source?
Yea, I think they meant our old plastic models can be used as Primaris, not that Primaris is a new career path.
From the sound of the Q&A, that seems like more of a background thing - Primaris marines can either be vat-grown, or recruited as normal, or converted from normal Marines
So you could, conceivably, have Marneus Calgar undergo the Primaris process
Frozen Ocean wrote: I've been a truescale fan for a long time, and plan to do it to all my Marines eventually. I'm very glad for the corrected models, but I just wish the fluff wasn't so stupid.
I keep hearing this but I don't really understand the why? I guess I'm not all that familiar with the nitty gritty of the grimdark but to me Cawl and Rowboat making new marines is pretty much the same as like...making a new type of bolter or a new rocket launcher or w/e. I mean, it kind of makes sense to try and improve the process/product over time. Admittedly 'doing things that make sense with technology' is not exactly 40k's calling card but still...
That's not the problem. It's the idea that Space Marines just aren't good enough. From those venerable Legionaries who first sailed out on the Great Crusade to the armies and characters we have now, the existence of the Primaris is GW saying "not good enough". It doesn't matter if they're 10,000 year old Chaos Marines, First Company Veterans, Terminators, Chapter Masters, Deathwatch, Grey Knights - they're not good enough. This post says it quite well:
warboss wrote: If it were just a model scale/asthetics change and a moderate fluff change (new Mk X armor and new pattern bolter!), I'd be fine with it. It's the fluff replacement of Adeptus Astartes with Adeptus Restartes that bothers me the most as it was unnecessary. I've dealt with the switch from monopose 2nd edition plastics and hybrid plastic/metals to 3rd edition omnimarine kit to specialized class plastic kits (like all plastic devs) to specialized variants for each chapter.. and I didn't bat an eyelash at any of them (and most I applauded at the time regardless if my own models were being replaced). Changing the fluff to officially make the original marines like an Iphone 4 in an 6S universe was completely unnecessary. If they wanted to improve marine stats to something more akin to what the fluff says, I'd have applauded that as well if they just grandfathered all marines in at the same time instead of downgrading the ones we already had.
It's obvious that they exist simply to give Marines a more appropriate scale, so why the in-universe changes? The new Rubric Marines are bigger, and they were given no fluff to explain it because it wasn't necessary. Deathwatch, too.
But marines AREN'T good enough. They have failed and fallen on literally apocalyptic scale, they've inherited all the evils of men while at the same time being themselves inhuman. Some of them even have obvious incurable defects that people seem pretty cool ignoring. The one thing I've taken away from all the fluff revolving space marines is that for genetically perfect super soldiers they sure do screw things up a lot.
In the Warhammer TV FAQ on Facebook they said the Imperium has the technology that existing marines can be upgraded to Primaris. I guess they get lots of surgery and put in a pod or something.
Frozen Ocean wrote: I've been a truescale fan for a long time, and plan to do it to all my Marines eventually. I'm very glad for the corrected models, but I just wish the fluff wasn't so stupid.
I keep hearing this but I don't really understand the why? I guess I'm not all that familiar with the nitty gritty of the grimdark but to me Cawl and Rowboat making new marines is pretty much the same as like...making a new type of bolter or a new rocket launcher or w/e. I mean, it kind of makes sense to try and improve the process/product over time. Admittedly 'doing things that make sense with technology' is not exactly 40k's calling card but still...
That's not the problem. It's the idea that Space Marines just aren't good enough. From those venerable Legionaries who first sailed out on the Great Crusade to the armies and characters we have now, the existence of the Primaris is GW saying "not good enough". It doesn't matter if they're 10,000 year old Chaos Marines, First Company Veterans, Terminators, Chapter Masters, Deathwatch, Grey Knights - they're not good enough. This post says it quite well:
warboss wrote: If it were just a model scale/asthetics change and a moderate fluff change (new Mk X armor and new pattern bolter!), I'd be fine with it. It's the fluff replacement of Adeptus Astartes with Adeptus Restartes that bothers me the most as it was unnecessary. I've dealt with the switch from monopose 2nd edition plastics and hybrid plastic/metals to 3rd edition omnimarine kit to specialized class plastic kits (like all plastic devs) to specialized variants for each chapter.. and I didn't bat an eyelash at any of them (and most I applauded at the time regardless if my own models were being replaced). Changing the fluff to officially make the original marines like an Iphone 4 in an 6S universe was completely unnecessary. If they wanted to improve marine stats to something more akin to what the fluff says, I'd have applauded that as well if they just grandfathered all marines in at the same time instead of downgrading the ones we already had.
It's obvious that they exist simply to give Marines a more appropriate scale, so why the in-universe changes? The new Rubric Marines are bigger, and they were given no fluff to explain it because it wasn't necessary. Deathwatch, too.
But marines AREN'T good enough. They have failed and fallen on literally apocalyptic scale, they've inherited all the evils of men while at the same time being themselves inhuman. Some of them even have obvious incurable defects that people seem pretty cool ignoring. The one thing I've taken away from all the fluff revolving space marines is that for genetically perfect super soldiers they sure do screw things up a lot.
That's a major part of this universe. No matter what you do, no matter who you are, you can't win.
ShaneHM wrote: Or maybe Quantum Shielding makes it so that weapons can only ever do 1 damage at a time, making it a very survivable long-range unit that is more vulnerable to small arms fire than other heavy tanks. That would be pretty unique for the Necrons and make for an interesting unit on the table top.
Would also be change for sake of change. Quantum made it stronger against low S weapons. Low S being now weak point would be...odd.
The degrading T/save would have been appropriate if they wanted to keep it working in similar feel to before.
frozenwastes wrote: In the Warhammer TV FAQ on Facebook they said the Imperium has the technology that existing marines can be upgraded to Primaris. I guess they get lots of surgery and put in a pod or something.
This is, in my opinion, the single biggest piece of evidence leading to the phasing out of old marines.
frozenwastes wrote: In the Warhammer TV FAQ on Facebook they said the Imperium has the technology that existing marines can be upgraded to Primaris. I guess they get lots of surgery and put in a pod or something.
This is, in my opinion, the single biggest piece of evidence leading to the phasing out of old marines.
For me I was convinced when I saw just how close they are to regular marines in general appearance.
If they really were meant to be alongside them as a separate elite force I would have expected something that looks more ornate and special. Like the stormcast eternals with all their flourishes in their armour. Or the Deathwatch stuff with extra distinct parts. It makes no sense to make marines that are very similar looking but just bigger and pretend it is a completely distinct product range.
Yea, marines are failing. They can't hold the line, and many switch sides.
The numarines are not going to turn the tide even, just help hold on.
Cawl made 12k of them. 12k.
The thousand sons alone, has recently poured into the galaxy in a force of about 10k, out of which 1k are sorcerers and the rest rubrics/scarabs.
Saud rubrics/scarabs are meaner than numarines, sorcerers much more so.
This "new life" of the imperium is MAYBE enough to fight back the thousand sons, if the entire founding is decided to it.
Except the black legion also bursted into the scene in force, and we know the death guard is coming really soon. (and reasons to suspect the world eaters and emperor's children are not far behind)
Oh, and the IoM just lost a big portion of it's fighting power due to a massive rift cutting the galaxy in half, fenris and the rock getting messed up, cadia exploding, and bad things happening all over.
I don't see how things got less grimdark.
This so called indominus Crusade isn't trying to conquer the galaxy, it's a desperate attempt to hold to the little left.
If anything the IoM is in an even more dire start despite the numarines than in was prior to WoM.
As for the people saying "IoM inventing new stuff breaks the setting"
No its not? Multiple foundings were obviously experiments with mixing geneseed, using traitor geneseed and outright modification of the geneseed.
Things like spontaneous combustion, giant bone blades and gak don't "just happens". Someone made an experiment, and it went poorly.
With 10k years, and the experimental data of hundreds of chapters made during that time, finally getting it right would be the expected result. You just repeat the things that worked well,and avoid the things that horribly backfired.
The IoM getting a breakthrough once in a blue moon is reasonable. It's just that the IoM propaganda makes a huge deal of these numarines, when they really are not all that much of a big deal - it's not even enough to even the scale with chaos' latest advancements.
I really doubt there will ever be another CSM release in the old scale. We don't need Primaris Marines, Thousand Sons and Plague Marines already show the way. They are bigger than the old ones and they are better models for it. This is already half the cult troops, it's save to say the others wont be smaller once they get updates and they need updates.
Personally, I don't think it's an issue either, I got a lot of old CSM and I will keep using them next to the new ones till I'm bored of them, and then I'll replace them with big, fancy new ones.
frozenwastes wrote: In the Warhammer TV FAQ on Facebook they said the Imperium has the technology that existing marines can be upgraded to Primaris. I guess they get lots of surgery and put in a pod or something.
This is, in my opinion, the single biggest piece of evidence leading to the phasing out of old marines.
Yep - I totally agree this is exactly how they will phase out the current range. Any character they want to take forward will undergo Primaris transformation and be re-released in a new upscaled version. All others will slowly be killed in fluff or drop out of it. The units already sound like they are set for replacement, for example the Intercessors replace the Tacticals, reverting to the 30K squad equivalent where the specials exist in unique support squads. There's blurred image suggestion of new Assault squads. GW themselves rumoured new Dreadnaughts.
eedden wrote: I really doubt there will ever be another CSM release in the old scale. We don't need Primaris Marines, Thousand Sons and Plague Marines already show the way. They are bigger than the old ones and they are better models for it. This is already half the cult troops, it's save to say the others wont be smaller once they get updates and they need updates.
Personally, I don't think it's an issue either, I got a lot of old CSM and I will keep using them next to the new ones till I'm bored of them, and then I'll replace them with big, fancy new ones.
Yes, and that's the reason why no CSM kits have been updated the last years. They have waited until they can make them Primaris size without getting scale-creep flak for it.
ClockworkZion wrote:I was thinking that the white and red striped model was a sergreant, but there is a red helmet in the background (denoting a vet) so maybe the one with the sword is a captain? He does have fancier armour.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also he's on a 40mm base.
Azazelx wrote:He's also on a 40mm base rather than a 32mm, and he has a CCW/Power Sword, so he's a fancy-something.
Red helmets in the Ultramarines denote Sergeants, White denotes Veteran status. Red and White is typically a Veteran Sergeant, unless Guilliman changed that portion of the Codex heraldry guide when he woke up. His armour also is no where near bling enough to be a captain of GW's new lovechild. He's at best a Veteran Sergeant with a wider base to accomodate his wide pose.
His chest looks a bit more rounded and a bit more like a Tartaros Terminator chestplate. They took the best elements of MkIV and VIII power armour for the MkX, maybe they took the best parts of Tartaros terminator armour and MkVIII for the new TDA.
You know how if you're embarked on an open topped transport you'll be able to shoot out?
And how you can fire Pistols whilst in CC (not sure which phase though, but I assume the shooting phase?)
And how your vehicles can now charge?
What happens if you've got say, Banshees on a Raider, and the Raider charges? Do the Banshees get to fight? Enquiring minds wish to know!
Well you can't disembark in the assault phase (or fight phase now) so if they disembark the next turn they can charge in.
Also to those asking about old marines being upgraded to Primaris in the fluff, QA summary in the OP
Think there's confusion here.
I'm wondering if units embarked on an open topped transport will get to fight in HTH should that self same transport charge something.
On one hand, it makes a certain amount of sense. On the other, it does seem awfully dangerous. On the not-at-all-suspicious third hand...the Raider and Venom kits do have those natty riders....
You know how if you're embarked on an open topped transport you'll be able to shoot out?
And how you can fire Pistols whilst in CC (not sure which phase though, but I assume the shooting phase?)
And how your vehicles can now charge?
What happens if you've got say, Banshees on a Raider, and the Raider charges? Do the Banshees get to fight? Enquiring minds wish to know!
I think you might be on to something there!
It sounds plausible passengers of a raider could do a swashbuckling pirate raid without even disembarking.
And orks should be able to fight from a trukk that assault a unit.
It could get messy, but would be a real treat for those armies -and cinematic, if thats still a thing.
Is it possible that instead of fighting while inside an open topped transport, you can charge from an engaged transport?
Say for example, a squad of Wyches are embarked on a Raider, and the Raider charges or is charged by an enemy unit. On the next turn, assuming the Raider hasn't been hacked to pieces, can the embarked squad then charge from it, symbolising the Ork Boyz/Wyches/Scouts, leaping from their Trukk/Venom/Land Speeder Storm into the melee?
Deadshot wrote: Is it possible that instead of fighting while inside an open topped transport, you can charge from an engaged transport?
Say for example, a squad of Wyches are embarked on a Raider, and the Raider charges or is charged by an enemy unit. On the next turn, assuming the Raider hasn't been hacked to pieces, can the embarked squad then charge from it, symbolising the Ork Boyz/Wyches/Scouts, leaping from their Trukk/Venom/Land Speeder Storm into the melee?
I hope so, the idea of a Raider charging in with a Shock Prow, Chain Flails to do some serious damage on the charge and then have my Wyches/Incubi/Grotesques leap out into the fray next turn is awesome.
I really love the prospect of vehicles in cc - finally Deffrolla and Wrecking Ball may get some use - and maybe a Grabba Klaw can be used to prevent the enemy from disengaging. Maybe your Boyz/Nobz can fight from the transport (with a penalty, but stay protected), or charge out to fight on foot?
leopard wrote: Since a vehicle can now carry multiple units if it has space, any ideas if a unit can split between multiple vehicles if they don't fit in one?
leopard wrote: Since a vehicle can now carry multiple units if it has space, any ideas if a unit can split between multiple vehicles if they don't fit in one?
Presumably requiring the vehicles to stay close?
E.g. 20 man marine squad in two rhinos
That would be a ballache, so I doubt it.
Furry nuff, just wondered. Mind you will vehicle squadrons still be a thing? Which presumably would be the only practical way to do it anyway
People fighting from within vehicles I suspect will be the new "chariot" rule.
Something like Keyword "Chariot"
If this vehicle is in CC, then the occupant can attack units engaged with the vehicle. the unit engaged with the vehicle may split attacks between the chariot, and the occupants.
My guess is that assualt vechicles will allow their occupants to 'pile in' directly out of the vechicle and into melee. This would happen during the vechicles activation, possibly instead of the vechicle getting to make its attacks.
cuda1179 wrote: It's not an more niche than Cavalry. The only armies that have Cavalry are Imperial Guard, Daemons, and Space wolves.
Yeah, but cavalry are just variant bikes. There's little difference, and honestly little reason for them to -not- be one category.
There are several differences between cavalry and bikes, namely that bikes are faster (turbo-boost) and provide +1T, over bikes. Plus, cavalry are better over terrain that bikes as a giant wolf climbs over cliffs and roots better than a 2-wheel motorcycle.
Now it's mentioned, Necrons might actually have Cavalry? Couldn't tell you what (possibly Scarabs for movement? Been ages since I looked at my codex, let alone played with them!)
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Now it's mentioned, Necrons might actually have Cavalry? Couldn't tell you what (possibly Scarabs for movement? Been ages since I looked at my codex, let alone played with them!)
Canoptek Wraiths and Scarabs are Beasts, Tomb Spyders are Monstrous Creatures.
cuda1179 wrote: It's not an more niche than Cavalry. The only armies that have Cavalry are Imperial Guard, Daemons, and Space wolves.
Yeah, but cavalry are just variant bikes. There's little difference, and honestly little reason for them to -not- be one category.
There are several differences between cavalry and bikes, namely that bikes are faster (turbo-boost) and provide +1T, over bikes. Plus, cavalry are better over terrain that bikes as a giant wolf climbs over cliffs and roots better than a 2-wheel motorcycle.
It is strange that you seem to think that is a disagreement rather than restating my point.
Incidentally, cavalry frequently do raise the model's toughness, just not automatically.
Honestly, I am pretty sure that now that everything has an M stat, there will not be any kind of unit type. Vehicles might have a keyword so that weapons that once had Haywire, Guass, etc can continue to have a specific effect on them.
But Beasts, Bikes, Cav, MCs, etc will just have bespoken rules on a unit-to-unit basis to show whatever differences GW wants to showcase
cuda1179 wrote: It's not an more niche than Cavalry. The only armies that have Cavalry are Imperial Guard, Daemons, and Space wolves.
Yeah, but cavalry are just variant bikes. There's little difference, and honestly little reason for them to -not- be one category.
There are several differences between cavalry and bikes, namely that bikes are faster (turbo-boost) and provide +1T, over bikes. Plus, cavalry are better over terrain that bikes as a giant wolf climbs over cliffs and roots better than a 2-wheel motorcycle.
It is strange that you seem to think that is a disagreement rather than restating my point.
Incidentally, cavalry frequently do raise the model's toughness, just not automatically.
The disagreement is that bikes and cavalry share no similarities other than being faster than standard infantry. Calavry can have a higher T than infantry but 90% of armies can't get cavalry and the few that do, well, Rough Riders are always calvary, CSM Lords don't get extra T from rider their mounts, Bloodcrushers and Plagueflies aren't getting any bonuses, and that leaves Wolf characters taking a Thunderwolf. Whereas bikes are commonly available to Space Marines, CSM, Eldar, DE, Orks (,Tau Tetras???) and Necrons. Bikes get +1T and if a Thunderwolf mount model was also given the choice to ride a bike, this would give him +1T as well, as Thunderwolves don't get a bonus, they have their normal statline, same as all other natural cavalry models. Bikes and Cavalry have very different rules and benefits and restrictions to each other.
Whereas Chariots ARE vehicles and they ARE transports, that have a particular limit and specification on the unit they can transport. The difference between say, Grimnar's sled, and a Land Raider, is that the Land Raider can transport 10 models who can disembark, and cannot fight from embarkation. The Sled can transport one particular model, Grimnar, who cannot disembark and can fight from embarkation. They are both, at their core however, a transport vehicle.
Galef wrote: Honestly, I am pretty sure that now that everything has an M stat, there will not be any kind of unit type. Vehicles might have a keyword so that weapons that once had Haywire, Guass, etc can continue to have a specific effect on them.
But Beasts, Bikes, Cav, MCs, etc will just have bespoken rules on a unit-to-unit basis to show whatever differences GW wants to showcase
-
We've already seen that "Infantry" is a keyword.
I would expect to see Beasts, Bikes, Cavalry, Monster, etc as keywords because they said that Cover (for example) would affect things based on keywords.
cuda1179 wrote: It's not an more niche than Cavalry. The only armies that have Cavalry are Imperial Guard, Daemons, and Space wolves.
Yeah, but cavalry are just variant bikes. There's little difference, and honestly little reason for them to -not- be one category.
There are several differences between cavalry and bikes, namely that bikes are faster (turbo-boost) and provide +1T, over bikes. Plus, cavalry are better over terrain that bikes as a giant wolf climbs over cliffs and roots better than a 2-wheel motorcycle.
It is strange that you seem to think that is a disagreement rather than restating my point.
Incidentally, cavalry frequently do raise the model's toughness, just not automatically.
The disagreement is that bikes and cavalry share no similarities other than being faster than standard infantry. Calavry can have a higher T than infantry but 90% of armies can't get cavalry and the few that do, well, Rough Riders are always calvary, CSM Lords don't get extra T from rider their mounts, Bloodcrushers and Plagueflies aren't getting any bonuses, and that leaves Wolf characters taking a Thunderwolf. Whereas bikes are commonly available to Space Marines, CSM, Eldar, DE, Orks (,Tau Tetras???) and Necrons. Bikes get +1T and if a Thunderwolf mount model was also given the choice to ride a bike, this would give him +1T as well, as Thunderwolves don't get a bonus, they have their normal statline, same as all other natural cavalry models. Bikes and Cavalry have very different rules and benefits and restrictions to each other.
I'm still waiting to see anything that doesn't fall under my initial "Yeah, but cavalry are just variant bikes. There's little difference, and honestly little reason for them to -not- be one category". It's all mounted models, just some are bikes and some are alive.
You seem to be using a lot of words to express that you think the distinction is major rather than minor, I guess. We're ultimately explaining the same distinction though.
Also note that even Games Workshop plays fast and loose with this, counting screamers and screamer mounted characters (disks of Tzeentch are canonically Screamers acting as mounts) as jetbikes for no reason other than that they felt turbo boost better simulated them than run did.
macluvin wrote: Anyone think that the primaris marine sales will flop after an attempt to swing space marines to the primaris as their core model? if they sell these guys for such a high price then I could see the compitition with ebay resellers and what not for cheaper older kits shutting that down. Not saying that is going to happen, just curious.
Nope, I think they'll sell well to newcomers and to vets either starting a new army or who don't mind the scale creep, because taken on their own they look awesome.
They'll only 'fail' to those who are priced out of buying them (who would have been priced out anyway even if they weren't embiggened) and to those like me who dislike scale creep (and I would very strongly suspect that I'm in a minority there).
Vehicles look too small now, last thing we need is bigger marines.
Would be happy with larger vehicles for the larger marines, If we finally get a consistent and fixed scale for models and not the slightly weird almost-sort-of situation we have now.
If they don't do them to actually look right in relation to the models (e.g. have a land raider a Terminator looks like it could get into and out of without a cutting torch) then just leave the models alone
Automatically Appended Next Post: Side though, the 'power' basic costs idea, in effect treats the unit as a fire team, options mattering a lot less..
coupled with the lack of blast templates meaning you could go for movement trays.
Anyone else see these rules as also working decently for Epic scale stuff?
cuda1179 wrote: It's not an more niche than Cavalry. The only armies that have Cavalry are Imperial Guard, Daemons, and Space wolves.
Yeah, but cavalry are just variant bikes. There's little difference, and honestly little reason for them to -not- be one category.
There are several differences between cavalry and bikes, namely that bikes are faster (turbo-boost) and provide +1T, over bikes. Plus, cavalry are better over terrain that bikes as a giant wolf climbs over cliffs and roots better than a 2-wheel motorcycle.
It is strange that you seem to think that is a disagreement rather than restating my point.
Incidentally, cavalry frequently do raise the model's toughness, just not automatically.
The disagreement is that bikes and cavalry share no similarities other than being faster than standard infantry. Calavry can have a higher T than infantry but 90% of armies can't get cavalry and the few that do, well, Rough Riders are always calvary, CSM Lords don't get extra T from rider their mounts, Bloodcrushers and Plagueflies aren't getting any bonuses, and that leaves Wolf characters taking a Thunderwolf. Whereas bikes are commonly available to Space Marines, CSM, Eldar, DE, Orks (,Tau Tetras???) and Necrons. Bikes get +1T and if a Thunderwolf mount model was also given the choice to ride a bike, this would give him +1T as well, as Thunderwolves don't get a bonus, they have their normal statline, same as all other natural cavalry models. Bikes and Cavalry have very different rules and benefits and restrictions to each other.
I'm still waiting to see anything that doesn't fall under my initial "Yeah, but cavalry are just variant bikes. There's little difference, and honestly little reason for them to -not- be one category". It's all mounted models, just some are bikes and some are alive.
You seem to be using a lot of words to express that you think the distinction is major rather than minor, I guess. We're ultimately explaining the same distinction though.
Also note that even Games Workshop plays fast and loose with this, counting screamers and screamer mounted characters (disks of Tzeentch are canonically Screamers acting as mounts) as jetbikes for no reason other than that they felt turbo boost better simulated them than run did.
Bikes and Cavalry are completely different, and I've listed the differences. They in fact share no actual rules or things in common other than being mounted.
Screamers are jetbikes because their method of transport better resembles jetbikes than cavalry, as they fly across the surface like a stingray in water. They don't run, so not cavalry, they don't jump up and land far away, so not Jump, and they don't hover around like Jetpacks. They go far and fast across the ground but flying, like Jetbikes. They aren't mounts though, they are a platform for a warrior to stand on. They're close to a catacomb command barge than a horse or wolf.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
leopard wrote: Would be happy with larger vehicles for the larger marines, If we finally get a consistent and fixed scale for models and not the slightly weird almost-sort-of situation we have now.
If they don't do them to actually look right in relation to the models (e.g. have a land raider a Terminator looks like it could get into and out of without a cutting torch) then just leave the models alone
Automatically Appended Next Post: Side though, the 'power' basic costs idea, in effect treats the unit as a fire team, options mattering a lot less..
coupled with the lack of blast templates meaning you could go for movement trays.
Anyone else see these rules as also working decently for Epic scale stuff?
You realise a true-scale Stormraven would be as big as FW Thunderhawk? The scale is abstract for a reason.
Azazelx wrote: He's also on a 40mm base rather than a 32mm, and he has a CCW/Power Sword, so he's a fancy-something.
And he's by himself!
I'm going to name him Steve! And no one can stop me!
For his last birthday I got my friend the DKoK Commissar that's unsheathing his sword. He uses him as a Lord Commissar. I started calling him Steve. It sort of stuck.
I used to work in a pet store. I named all the animals Steve. It's important that they be Steve for some reason.
On topic about the Primaris, I don't see the Chaos Legions or current renegades needing that since they can just get buffed (sometimes unwillingly like with the Iron Warriors) by THE TAINT OF CHAOS and make them bigger that way.
Now watching Primaris going renegade could be interesting....
Deadshot wrote: Bikes and Cavalry are completely different, and I've listed the differences. They in fact share no actual rules or things in common other than being mounted.
They have nothing in common except for their primary defining characteristic? Okay.
Screamers are jetbikes because their method of transport better resembles jetbikes than cavalry, as they fly across the surface like a stingray in water. They don't run, so not cavalry, they don't jump up and land far away, so not Jump, and they don't hover around like Jetpacks. They go far and fast across the ground but flying, like Jetbikes. They aren't mounts though, they are a platform for a warrior to stand on. They're close to a catacomb command barge than a horse or wolf.
This is clearly going nowhere honestly. You're just varying between stating the obvious and nitpicking, and I have no investment in this line of discussion. Feel free to have the last word if you want.
Deadshot wrote: Bikes and Cavalry are completely different, and I've listed the differences. They in fact share no actual rules or things in common other than being mounted.
They have nothing in common except for their primary defining characteristic? Okay.
Screamers are jetbikes because their method of transport better resembles jetbikes than cavalry, as they fly across the surface like a stingray in water. They don't run, so not cavalry, they don't jump up and land far away, so not Jump, and they don't hover around like Jetpacks. They go far and fast across the ground but flying, like Jetbikes. They aren't mounts though, they are a platform for a warrior to stand on. They're close to a catacomb command barge than a horse or wolf.
This is clearly going nowhere honestly. You're just varying between stating the obvious and nitpicking, and I have no investment in this line of discussion. Feel free to have the last word if you want.
Their primary definining characteristic isir relevant to their rules. Screamers are jetbikes, as I'll state obviously once again. The matter of whether or not they are mounted is irrelevant for rules. A cavalry can have 1 rider, 100 riders, or 0 riders and function the same. Its a fluff and modelling trait only. I'm not interested in that for this discussion.
Yup, realise true scale vehicles would get huge, thats actually my point, either do it right, or just leave vehicles as they are.
See no point in a larger rhino thats still too small to be practical, or a land raider that terminators still couldn't use as written - just leave the vehicles as they are.
Find it easier to think of the models for infantry being hugely oversized personally and the base as a sort of zone of control they have.
Its all so abstracted anyway, when you have pistols that cannot fire one end of a vehicle to the other you may as well give up on scale and stop worrying about it
Hell, if rough riders get new rules I am going to have to figureout how to convert up some guardsmen on Motorbikes.....Just kidding I play kriegers, we already have the best mounts.
Cant wait to see the imperial knight faction focus today! Combine that with CC weapons and it is going to send us into the weekend with plenty to complain about!
For an example of vehicles getting silly have a look over at Team Yankee, specifically the Mil-24D Hind as a 1:100 model, the things fething huge against the infantry in the same scale, as it should be, its also utterly impractical in the game, its longer than some anti tank missile ranges, and with its rotors more or less unusable without looking silly in game (its longer than the command distance).
Some things would have worked a lot better at say half the scale of the troops (or in that case the same 1:144 for the aircraft)
Leth wrote: Hell, if rough riders get new rules I am going to have to figureout how to convert up some guardsmen on Motorbikes.
Can't be harder than the Custodes on bullock jetbikes I had to convert recently, or the abhuman centaurs I started on, made two of and just got reminded I never finished.
I'd reccomend scout bikes as your starting point, those are lighter than the basic marine bikes and come with seated legs clad in fabric.
Bull0 wrote: This seems like a stunningly pointless argument to have. Every unit's rules will be on their datasheet from now on.
(In reference to deadshot and changemod).
To be fair, despite my dismissive tone towards the end of the actual argument, he was splitting hairs over the past distinction and making no commentary on the future rules.
macluvin wrote: Anyone think that the primaris marine sales will flop after an attempt to swing space marines to the primaris as their core model? if they sell these guys for such a high price then I could see the compitition with ebay resellers and what not for cheaper older kits shutting that down. Not saying that is going to happen, just curious.
Nope, I think they'll sell well to newcomers and to vets either starting a new army or who don't mind the scale creep, because taken on their own they look awesome.
They'll only 'fail' to those who are priced out of buying them (who would have been priced out anyway even if they weren't embiggened) and to those like me who dislike scale creep (and I would very strongly suspect that I'm in a minority there).
Vehicles look too small now, last thing we need is bigger marines.
Vehicles have always been too small on purpose. Otherwise it'd take two turns to walk from the back to the front of a Rhino (Goodwin,s actual words there). I mean table topwise a Land Raider should have the footprint that we have on a Baneblade.
Let’s take a look at some close combat weapons, shall we?
We’ve seen already that shooting weapons in the new Warhammer 40,000 use a Strength, AP, Damage system, and melee kit is much the same. The main differences being that there is no range on them, and a lot of them will use the user’s Strength as their basis.
Let’s look at some examples – we’ll start with the classic power weapon lineup.
In the current edition of Warhammer 40,000, the axe is the go-to weapon for a lot of folks. Players gladly took the unwieldy rule in exchange for AP2 and a bonus to Strength. Now, the obvious choice is far from obvious, as they clearly all have their uses. That sword, for example, is looking pretty deadly against most things, with the AP-3 helping it against every type of foe. Even with no bonus to Strength, using the new wounding chart shows that a Strength 4 Space Marine is wounding everything up to Toughness 7 on 5s (which is good, because a lot of our models have swords).
Even the humble chainsword gets a boost. No longer just a standard combat weapon, the iconic combat weapon wielded by the Adeptus Astartes and many other forces, now gives its bearer more attacks in combat. Perfect for grinding through hordes of low armoured troops, the chainsword now functions on the battlefield how it always has in your head. This change also helps differentiate dedicated combat troops from those just wielding improvised or side-arm weapons.
We can see that all of the above still only do 1 Damage, meaning that while they can chip wounds off bigger stuff, they are primarily infantry killers.
What about some anti-armour stuff though? Check out the power fist:
At the cost of being more cumbersome to swing, it’s dishing out multiple damage with every hit, and at a Strength that will find it easy to wound anything in the game.
Another high damage option is Force weapons. Take a Grey Knight squad of any sort: every guy in there has a blade that, as well as having all the benefits of the equivalent Power weapon, also dishes out D3 damage on every wound! Those guys are going to be phenomenal up-close killers, as they should be.
D3 Damage is good, but if you really want to kill something, try the reaper chainsword. This deals a flat 6 Damage to whatever it wounds. That’s enough to carve a Chaos Lord in half, and a couple of hits will wreck most small and medium vehicles in a single Fight phase
Make no mistake, when facing a dedicated melee unit, stuff is going to die in combat really, really fast.
Liking the close combat weapons, think the lack of a range stat is a shame as would be a nice way to handle longer polearms and similar.
Otherwise liking how they seem to be trying to avoid 'no brainer' choices on weapons, the chain sword finally getting a bonus is nice finally as well.
Adding a -1 to hit modifier for clumsy weapons is much more useful than the older initiative modifiers as its likely to actually matter, nice trade off for more clumsy but damaging weapons.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also nice you're not punching tanks to death quickly, but a few working together will maul them
Melee marines like the Black Templars and Carcharodons should be happy since the chainsword change fixes the lost attack from the bolt pistol/chainsword combo.
leopard wrote: Liking the close combat weapons, think the lack of a range stat is a shame as would be a nice way to handle longer polearms and similar.
Maybe that can be addressed through a weapon-specific special rule (e.g., a hypothetical spear has a special rule that lets you attack models up to 3" away or something).
Gah! They mention the GK off-hand, but don't actually show any of the stats for their different weapons! I want to see what the differences between Swords (which admittedly have already been showcased), Halberds, Falchions and Hammers!
Like what I see overall though. Nice to see that there's no longer "One weapon to rule them all", now. Variety! Woohoo!
leopard wrote: Liking the close combat weapons, think the lack of a range stat is a shame as would be a nice way to handle longer polearms and similar.
Maybe that can be addressed through a weapon-specific special rule (e.g., a hypothetical spear has a special rule that lets you attack models up to 3" away or something).
This is very true, given in most cases it won't matter probably the best way to do it.
It also represents that people will more skill will have fewer problems hitting. Quite a nice change. I also like how they let us know that the reaper chainsword does a fixed 6 damage with each wound. Very nice segue into the knight article later today. Having D weapons just do 6 fixed wounds instead of all the other crazy stuff they used to do is a welcome change. That also probably means that no single attack will ever do more than 6 damage. Also force is no longer something that needs to be activated but is a native part of the weapon profile. FINALLY
leopard wrote: Liking the close combat weapons, think the lack of a range stat is a shame as would be a nice way to handle longer polearms and similar.
Otherwise liking how they seem to be trying to avoid 'no brainer' choices on weapons, the chain sword finally getting a bonus is nice finally as well.
Adding a -1 to hit modifier for clumsy weapons is much more useful than the older initiative modifiers as its likely to actually matter, nice trade off for more clumsy but damaging weapons.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also nice you're not punching tanks to death quickly, but a few working together will maul them
Range would cause more problems than it solves: For example range 1 claws on Hormagaunts would ensure significantly less models could actually attack than under the current in range to fight system, bad when they're clearly wanting to make Melee hordes stronger.
Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
Gordon Shumway wrote: Wish they would have shown lightning claws. What do you think they will be? D3 wounds with a -3 rend, str user?
Personally would guess something like a chainsword but with a decent rend stat, so a very effective infantry shredder, especially as likely that since you have two you may be able to fight with both of them. Don't see the need for multiple wounds, just make them very effective as murdering infantry (and do more damage through the extra attacks)
While I was sort of expecting them to give melee weapons range like in AoS, I think it makes sense that they didn't - there's generally less reason to care about the difference between swords and spears in a sci-fi setting than there is in a Fantasy one.
leopard wrote: Liking the close combat weapons, think the lack of a range stat is a shame as would be a nice way to handle longer polearms and similar.
We know from Facebook that there is a standard 1" range of weapons. They may save mentioning a range for weapons with a range other than 1".
leopard wrote: Liking the close combat weapons, think the lack of a range stat is a shame as would be a nice way to handle longer polearms and similar.
Otherwise liking how they seem to be trying to avoid 'no brainer' choices on weapons, the chain sword finally getting a bonus is nice finally as well.
Adding a -1 to hit modifier for clumsy weapons is much more useful than the older initiative modifiers as its likely to actually matter, nice trade off for more clumsy but damaging weapons.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also nice you're not punching tanks to death quickly, but a few working together will maul them
Range would cause more problems than it solves: For example range 1 claws on Hormagaunts would ensure significantly less models could actually attack than under the current in range to fight system, bad when they're clearly wanting to make Melee hordes stronger.
Depends what range you gave them, see the point though, but if the range was in addition to the current, i.e. range 1 becomes further models attacking.
Looking forwards to basic troops actually being perhaps useful now, kit with various low bonus close combat stuff they will finally be able to swamp stuff thats not kitted for them as opposed to bouncing off.
Will be nice for an army to not be a few super models "and friends"
Interesting about the chainswords but if they have gotten rid of the second weapon CC attack which they look like they have ye average marine with BP and CS is actually worse off on the charge.
Shoot pistols
charge in two attacks
opposed to
Shoot pistols
charge in three attacks
further rounds of combat in the opponents turn they are the same
in you own turn ye better with a pistol shot and the two attacks
So with the new chainsword, Primaris Marines with a bolt pistol and chainsword will get 3 chainsword attacks in cc plus the chance to shoot their boltpistol at point blank range too? That's pretty much double what an older type assault marine was dishing out yes? If so, they're looking better already!
docdoom77 wrote: Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
*fingers crossed*
Maybe they'll give Choppa Boyz (or is it Slugga Boyz..? Not much up to date on Ork unit nomenclature), an extra base attack as compensation. I seem to recall that Orks had more base attacks than most other models anyway, right? So maybe they'll keep that going. Otherwise, yeah, they're gonna be in trouble.
Vryce wrote: Gah! They mention the GK off-hand, but don't actually show any of the stats for their different weapons! I want to see what the differences between Swords (which admittedly have already been showcased), Halberds, Falchions and Hammers!
Like what I see overall though. Nice to see that there's no longer "One weapon to rule them all", now. Variety! Woohoo!
I assume from the mention of "equivilent power weapon" they'll follow the rules for their respective power weapon. Ie
Sword
Str User
AP -3
D D3
Halberd
Str +1 (like Axes which also encompasses halberds in 7th) or +2 (Axe rule plus the +1 it currently gives)
AP -2
D D3
Stave
Str +2
AP -1
D D3
Based on the stave, I'd say Halberds would just be a +1 Str, otherwise its a clear no-brainer. As of that theory, Swords, Halberds and Staves are just straight Force Weapon Ports of the power weapons.
Falchions (7th) are just a pair of (Nemesis) Force Swords. They have all the same rules but also +1 attack. I reckon their option will simply be replaced with a "a pair of Nemesis Force Swords" which is modelled as Falchions. Or else they'll be AP-2 and +1 attack.
Now, Daemonhammers.
Presuming Thunder Hammers are still the same as Powerfists, but with Concussive, we can expect that the Daemonhammer will look pretty similar to the power fist, but with a stun rule that forces a hit model to go last or something. Now, as for damage, I could see 2D3 or 2D3 pick the highest, or D6 as an option. I could even see a flat 3 similar to the flat 6 Reaper Chainswords get.
Pretty dull update to be honest. There were only really 3 things we didn't know: powerfists do D3 damage, chainswords give +1 attack (but only with the chainsword profile) and Reaper chainsword does 6 flat damage. Meh. It would have been nice to see something else we currently can't guess easily, such as lightning claws, scything talons, genestealer claws, the Callidus phase sword, etc. At least the article on knights is coming out later - it'll be interesting to see how the "super heavy" (or rather, no longer super heavy) rules have changed with regards to stomping, as well as ion shields for the knight.
Latro_ wrote: Interesting about the chainswords but if they have gotten rid of the second weapon CC attack which they look like they have ye average marine with BP and CS is actually worse off on the charge.
Shoot pistols
charge in two attacks
opposed to
Shoot pistols
charge in three attacks
further rounds of combat in the opponents turn they are the same
in you own turn ye better with a pistol shot and the two attacks
But you can shoot the pistols every round on combat right? So some of those lost attacks on the charge get clawed back that way. Also, I suppose we may see the base attacks on some models go up too, but probably not as many as people would like.
Latro_ wrote: Interesting about the chainswords but if they have gotten rid of the second weapon CC attack which they look like they have ye average marine with BP and CS is actually worse off on the charge.
Shoot pistols
charge in two attacks
opposed to
Shoot pistols
charge in three attacks
further rounds of combat in the opponents turn they are the same
in you own turn ye better with a pistol shot and the two attacks
But you can shoot the pistols every round on combat right? So some of those lost attacks on the charge get clawed back that way. Also, I suppose we may see the base attacks on some models go up too, but probably not as many as people would like.
In general I like the changes here.
nope:
'You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you. The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat! '
Eyjio wrote: Pretty dull update to be honest. There were only really 3 things we didn't know: powerfists do D3 damage, chainswords give +1 attack (but only with the chainsword profile) and Reaper chainsword does 6 flat damage. Meh. It would have been nice to see something else we currently can't guess easily, such as lightning claws, scything talons, genestealer claws, the Callidus phase sword, etc. At least the article on knights is coming out later - it'll be interesting to see how the "super heavy" (or rather, no longer super heavy) rules have changed with regards to stomping, as well as ion shields for the knight.
3 new things is about average for these articles and they tend topick from the most commonly seen things in the game for easy recognition/understanding.
docdoom77 wrote: Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
*fingers crossed*
Maybe they'll give Choppa Boyz (or is it Slugga Boyz..? Not much up to date on Ork unit nomenclature), an extra base attack as compensation. I seem to recall that Orks had more base attacks than most other models anyway, right? So maybe they'll keep that going. Otherwise, yeah, they're gonna be in trouble.
Vryce wrote: Gah! They mention the GK off-hand, but don't actually show any of the stats for their different weapons! I want to see what the differences between Swords (which admittedly have already been showcased), Halberds, Falchions and Hammers!
Like what I see overall though. Nice to see that there's no longer "One weapon to rule them all", now. Variety! Woohoo!
I assume from the mention of "equivilent power weapon" they'll follow the rules for their respective power weapon. Ie
Sword
Str User
AP -3
D D3
Halberd
Str +1 (like Axes which also encompasses halberds in 7th) or +2 (Axe rule plus the +1 it currently gives)
AP -2
D D3
Stave
Str +2
AP -1
D D3
Based on the stave, I'd say Halberds would just be a +1 Str, otherwise its a clear no-brainer. As of that theory, Swords, Halberds and Staves are just straight Force Weapon Ports of the power weapons.
Falchions (7th) are just a pair of (Nemesis) Force Swords. They have all the same rules but also +1 attack. I reckon their option will simply be replaced with a "a pair of Nemesis Force Swords" which is modelled as Falchions. Or else they'll be AP-2 and +1 attack.
Now, Daemonhammers.
Presuming Thunder Hammers are still the same as Powerfists, but with Concussive, we can expect that the Daemonhammer will look pretty similar to the power fist, but with a stun rule that forces a hit model to go last or something. Now, as for damage, I could see 2D3 or 2D3 pick the highest, or D6 as an option. I could even see a flat 3 similar to the flat 6 Reaper Chainswords get.
That's probably pretty accurate. I was thinking to myself that Falchions likely were going to be treated as dual swords, but sometimes GW likes to throw curve balls. I think it's safe to say that my plan of using a 10 man squad of Interceptors w/ two Incinerators and Falchions is still alive and well!
docdoom77 wrote: Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
*fingers crossed*
Maybe they'll give Choppa Boyz (or is it Slugga Boyz..? Not much up to date on Ork unit nomenclature), an extra base attack as compensation. I seem to recall that Orks had more base attacks than most other models anyway, right? So maybe they'll keep that going. Otherwise, yeah, they're gonna be in trouble.
Or they can simply give Choppas their own rule...
Or both. It's not like they can't give Orks extra attacks AND give Choppas a special rule.
I wonder if they'll maintain a way to make them dangerous to their users as well as the enemy. If they do D3 damage, then they could import this mechanic from AoS. Roll a D6 for each force weapon before attacking. Roll a 1, you suffer a mortal wound (perils of the warp!). Roll a 4+, the force weapon does a full 3 damage rather than D3.
About Ork Choppas:
They could be chainswords with +1 strength and/or -1 AP.
docdoom77 wrote: Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
*fingers crossed*
Maybe they'll give Choppa Boyz (or is it Slugga Boyz..? Not much up to date on Ork unit nomenclature), an extra base attack as compensation. I seem to recall that Orks had more base attacks than most other models anyway, right? So maybe they'll keep that going. Otherwise, yeah, they're gonna be in trouble.
Or they can simply give Choppas their own rule...
Or both. It's not like they can't give Orks extra attacks AND give Choppas a special rule.
Balance-wise, making Choppas equivalent to chainswords would work, but it doesn't fit the fluff. they're big, unwieldy weapons. I imagine they figured something out that makes them work. I just wish we could get some Ork previews of some kind!
docdoom77 wrote: Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
*fingers crossed*
Maybe they'll give Choppa Boyz (or is it Slugga Boyz..? Not much up to date on Ork unit nomenclature), an extra base attack as compensation. I seem to recall that Orks had more base attacks than most other models anyway, right? So maybe they'll keep that going. Otherwise, yeah, they're gonna be in trouble.
Or they can simply give Choppas their own rule...
Or both. It's not like they can't give Orks extra attacks AND give Choppas a special rule.
Balance-wise, making Choppas equivalent to chainswords would work, but it doesn't fit the fluff. they're big, unwieldy weapons. I imagine they figured something out that makes them work. I just wish we could get some Ork previews of some kind!
-1Ap to represent their weight biting through armour?
The Change to chainswords is the one thing I'm kinda miffed about...
For years now (for CSM) our options have been for CCW. Now, our sprues contain chainswords and combat blades. Do we pay more for chainswords than combat blades? Or is it simply those WYSIWYG get a buff and those who have just a rinky dink Combat blade get left out?
That's they type of question people should ask the FB guys not "When is my faction gonna be shown?"
Nightlord1987 wrote: The Change to chainswords is the one thing I'm kinda miffed about...
For years now (for CSM) our options have been for CCW. Now, our sprues contain chainswords and combat blades. Do we pay more for chainswords than combat blades? Or is it simply those WYSIWYG get a buff and those who have just a rinky dink Combat blade get left out?
You'll almost certainly pay for them. They may also grant them to a unit universally so you can just say anyone with a sword is actually a chainsword.
Nightlord1987 wrote: The Change to chainswords is the one thing I'm kinda miffed about...
For years now (for CSM) our options have been for CCW. Now, our sprues contain chainswords and combat blades. Do we pay more for chainswords than combat blades? Or is it simply those WYSIWYG get a buff and those who have just a rinky dink Combat blade get left out?
I have never modelled a combat blade onto a CSM. It's been chainswords or weird mutations (tentacles, crab claws, ect) to be the CCW.
Somewhe I have a three armed CSM who has a bolter, bolt pistol and chainsword.
Latro_ wrote: Interesting about the chainswords but if they have gotten rid of the second weapon CC attack which they look like they have ye average marine with BP and CS is actually worse off on the charge.
Shoot pistols
charge in two attacks
opposed to
Shoot pistols
charge in three attacks
further rounds of combat in the opponents turn they are the same
in you own turn ye better with a pistol shot and the two attacks
But you can shoot the pistols every round on combat right? So some of those lost attacks on the charge get clawed back that way. Also, I suppose we may see the base attacks on some models go up too, but probably not as many as people would like.
In general I like the changes here.
nope:
'You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you. The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat! '
That's sort of what I was getting at. You get to shoot the pistol more than just the turn of the charge. Better than a kick in the head with a wet boot.
Latro_ wrote: Interesting about the chainswords but if they have gotten rid of the second weapon CC attack which they look like they have ye average marine with BP and CS is actually worse off on the charge.
Shoot pistols
charge in two attacks
opposed to
Shoot pistols
charge in three attacks
further rounds of combat in the opponents turn they are the same
in you own turn ye better with a pistol shot and the two attacks
But you can shoot the pistols every round on combat right? So some of those lost attacks on the charge get clawed back that way. Also, I suppose we may see the base attacks on some models go up too, but probably not as many as people would like.
In general I like the changes here.
nope:
'You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you. The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat! '
That's sort of what I was getting at. You get to shoot the pistol more than just the turn of the charge. Better than a kick in the head with a wet boot.
eh? i read that as you can shoot at the enemy if you are locked in combat in your own shooting phase, not theirs...
I was planning to get Mark IV for Carcharodons and use the waist mounted blades as their extra close combat weapon. If it's now a chainsword that Carcharodons get, I'll need to either rethink my modelling or be prepared to constantly say "Yeah they mechanically have Chainswords represented by those knives."
leopard wrote: Would be happy with larger vehicles for the larger marines, If we finally get a consistent and fixed scale for models and not the slightly weird almost-sort-of situation we have now.
If they don't do them to actually look right in relation to the models (e.g. have a land raider a Terminator looks like it could get into and out of without a cutting torch) then just leave the models alone
Of course that would mean so big vehicles that board size would need to go up from 6x4...or game size go to 2nd ed style
nintura wrote: Striking Scorpion Exarch finally has a reason to take their two handed chainsword. Wow Scorpions got good.
We've yet to see any rules for the Biting Blade, but Scorpion Chainswords are different to Space Marine chainswords. Either way, you're still taking the claw because it's much cooler.
nintura wrote: Striking Scorpion Exarch finally has a reason to take their two handed chainsword. Wow Scorpions got good.
Scorpions are the new get funny looks for taking them unit apparently. For the ignoring invulnerable saves before standard hits if nothing else.
The mortal wounds on charge before attacking are going to be a common rule. Expect bloodcrushers and carnifex to have it.
I don't think they will. To me at least Mortal Wounds are those attacks so powerful or exotic that they ignore or overpower or bypass Force Fields. 3rd Ed Wraiths had this power IIRC. They phased through forcefield and ripped their opponent heart out while phased. Stuff like a Daemon Weapon or Xenophase blade sure, but why would a Carnifex ignore forcefield when its just a big hunk of muscle and chitin that doesn't alter the laws of physics in any way
nintura wrote: Striking Scorpion Exarch finally has a reason to take their two handed chainsword. Wow Scorpions got good.
Scorpions are the new get funny looks for taking them unit apparently. For the ignoring invulnerable saves before standard hits if nothing else.
The mortal wounds on charge before attacking are going to be a common rule. Expect bloodcrushers and carnifex to have it.
Mortal wounds strikes me as more of a rending replacement. With rending seeming to be an additional -1 to armor saves I am guessing some things will either do additional wounds on a 6 or will be mortal wounds on a 6.
I just realized that with the new system they can make the rules like Tesla just do more damage to a specific target rather than more hits.
Judging from the fact that so many models will have multiple wounds, combined with what we learned about the dark eldar special save being after a wound is multiplied I am guessing that the process will go something like this
Hit
Wound
Allocate Wound
Save
Multiply Wounds
Any Special Save
Allocate Next Wound(wounded models have to take wounds first)
.....
Rinse and repeat. I think it will be slow at the beginning as we get used to the process it is actually quite simple. Also from the defender chooses rules I am guessing that range banding is gone, so no more sniping models by only having it in range. However once again this makes flamers much more dangerous.
One thing I would like to highlight is that we did not see a special rule on flamers like Wall of Death. This leads me to believe that they will now be restricted by the overwatch range requirements. If the average flamer has range 8, an army can make the decision to risk a longer charge to avoid the flamer over watch or go in close and risk taking more casualties. Maybe they can try and charge from a different angle to limit the number of flamers that can hit them. I like that idea and the having to be over 9 away doesnt seem like as much of a penalty if this is the case. It already FEELs so much more tactical than 7th. So much more control over the outcomes and so much of the randomness is something in the hands of the players that can be accounted for and they can perform a risk analysis instead of it being ALL bad.
It will be interesting to see how the weapons like paired falchions and the like will hold up, same with lightning claws.
Youn wrote: The pistol rule will make Grey Knights odd. So, assuming a strike squad member stays at 1 attack.
Since, they don't actually have a pistol. We are going to have to rely on single hits to kill our enemies.
I imagine Grey Knights will have more attacks to compensate, or if Stormbolters are much improved as suggested in Terminator Squad discussions, it might not be as bad. Plus, Strike Squads will likely get a form of Deep Strike as they have that rule now.
Youn wrote: The pistol rule will make Grey Knights odd. So, assuming a strike squad member stays at 1 attack.
Since, they don't actually have a pistol. We are going to have to rely on single hits to kill our enemies.
Well, they do have a melee weapon capable of doing D3 wounds on a successful hit. They were also always deficient in that category as they never got the bonus 1 attack anyway. So it's not like they really lost anything.
leopard wrote: Would be happy with larger vehicles for the larger marines, If we finally get a consistent and fixed scale for models and not the slightly weird almost-sort-of situation we have now.
If they don't do them to actually look right in relation to the models (e.g. have a land raider a Terminator looks like it could get into and out of without a cutting torch) then just leave the models alone
Of course that would mean so big vehicles that board size would need to go up from 6x4...or game size go to 2nd ed style
Yup, hence the second part of that though, leave the vehicles as they are.
8x4 as a board would work well, or 8x5, won't happen though
When did the 'standard size' drop from 8x4 anyway?
Latro_ wrote: Interesting about the chainswords but if they have gotten rid of the second weapon CC attack which they look like they have ye average marine with BP and CS is actually worse off on the charge.
Shoot pistols
charge in two attacks
opposed to
Shoot pistols
charge in three attacks
further rounds of combat in the opponents turn they are the same
in you own turn ye better with a pistol shot and the two attacks
But you can shoot the pistols every round on combat right? So some of those lost attacks on the charge get clawed back that way. Also, I suppose we may see the base attacks on some models go up too, but probably not as many as people would like.
In general I like the changes here.
nope:
'You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you. The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat! '
That's sort of what I was getting at. You get to shoot the pistol more than just the turn of the charge. Better than a kick in the head with a wet boot.
eh? i read that as you can shoot at the enemy if you are locked in combat in your own shooting phase, not theirs...
Yup. My point was that this represents more pistol shots than the current rules allow (just on the charge). I should have been more specific. Granted, this only helps in longer combats, so there will be times where it won't help much. Mostly I can see it being useful for units that were charged on the opponent's turn and manage to survive. In that case the a BP/CS marines would get one more attack than under the current rules. It's something anyway.
docdoom77 wrote: I wonder if Chainfist will be same as powerfist, but d6 damage?
wounding with it will probably be rolling an extra die per and dropping the lowest.
Currently chainfists are armor bane just like melta. Going by that I'd say you roll two d3 and drop the lowest for damage. Then again it has a chain blade on it now, so perhaps it adds an attack like the chainsword instead.
Youn wrote: The pistol rule will make Grey Knights odd. So, assuming a strike squad member stays at 1 attack.
Since, they don't actually have a pistol. We are going to have to rely on single hits to kill our enemies.
Well, they do have a melee weapon capable of doing D3 wounds on a successful hit. They were also always deficient in that category as they never got the bonus 1 attack anyway. So it's not like they really lost anything.
Don't forget that they might get a special kind of Storm Bolter that is classed as a Pistol instead of Assault, Rapid Fire, or whatever.
Same thing goes for the Sanguinary Guard and their similar wrist-mounted guns.
nintura wrote: Striking Scorpion Exarch finally has a reason to take their two handed chainsword. Wow Scorpions got good.
Scorpions are the new get funny looks for taking them unit apparently. For the ignoring invulnerable saves before standard hits if nothing else.
The mortal wounds on charge before attacking are going to be a common rule. Expect bloodcrushers and carnifex to have it.
Mortal wounds strikes me as more of a rending replacement. With rending seeming to be an additional -1 to armor saves I am guessing some things will either do additional wounds on a 6 or will be mortal wounds on a 6.
I just realized that with the new system they can make the rules like Tesla just do more damage to a specific target rather than more hits.
Judging from the fact that so many models will have multiple wounds, combined with what we learned about the dark eldar special save being after a wound is multiplied I am guessing that the process will go something like this
Hit
Wound
Allocate Wound
Save
Multiply Wounds
Any Special Save
Allocate Next Wound(wounded models have to take wounds first)
.....
Rinse and repeat. I think it will be slow at the beginning as we get used to the process it is actually quite simple. Also from the defender chooses rules I am guessing that range banding is gone, so no more sniping models by only having it in range. However once again this makes flamers much more dangerous.
One thing I would like to highlight is that we did not see a special rule on flamers like Wall of Death. This leads me to believe that they will now be restricted by the overwatch range requirements. If the average flamer has range 8, an army can make the decision to risk a longer charge to avoid the flamer over watch or go in close and risk taking more casualties. Maybe they can try and charge from a different angle to limit the number of flamers that can hit them. I like that idea and the having to be over 9 away doesnt seem like as much of a penalty if this is the case. It already FEELs so much more tactical than 7th. So much more control over the outcomes and so much of the randomness is something in the hands of the players that can be accounted for and they can perform a risk analysis instead of it being ALL bad.
It will be interesting to see how the weapons like paired falchions and the like will hold up, same with lightning claws.
In AoS mortal wounds are used in 2 occasions:
1) Exotic attacks
2) Damage from non attack sources. i.e. everything that inflicts damage without being part of an attack, will inflict mortal wounds. This means all psy powers, acid blood, hammer of wrath like rules, get's hot and so on.
Youn wrote: Don't Khorne Bezerkers use Chain Axes? In theory, those should be +1 Str -1 AP 1 Dam + 1 additional attack each.
There needs to be a trade off or why take the sword. My guess is you right except for the +1 attack. If the axe adds to strength and or ap while the sword adds to attacks, you have reason to field either.
Latro_ wrote: Interesting about the chainswords but if they have gotten rid of the second weapon CC attack which they look like they have ye average marine with BP and CS is actually worse off on the charge.
Shoot pistols
charge in two attacks
opposed to
Shoot pistols
charge in three attacks
further rounds of combat in the opponents turn they are the same
in you own turn ye better with a pistol shot and the two attacks
But you can shoot the pistols every round on combat right? So some of those lost attacks on the charge get clawed back that way. Also, I suppose we may see the base attacks on some models go up too, but probably not as many as people would like.
In general I like the changes here.
nope:
'You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you. The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat! '
That's sort of what I was getting at. You get to shoot the pistol more than just the turn of the charge. Better than a kick in the head with a wet boot.
eh? i read that as you can shoot at the enemy if you are locked in combat in your own shooting phase, not theirs...
Yup. My point was that this represents more pistol shots than the current rules allow (just on the charge). I should have been more specific. Granted, this only helps in longer combats, so there will be times where it won't help much. Mostly I can see it being useful for units that were charged on the opponent's turn and manage to survive. In that case the a BP/CS marines would get one more attack than under the current rules. It's something anyway.
Also dont forget the standard marine has a bolt pistol. So consider that in a second round of combat(assuming they were charged) they get to fire a bolt pistol shot. For the standard marine that might as well be an extra attack.
For orks it is slightly worse since their pistols will be hitting on 5s, however with the changes to how combat, morale, vehicles, and wound removal I get the feeling that orks will be alright. UNIT NOBS FRONT AND CENTER leading the charge and crump'in humies
nintura wrote: Striking Scorpion Exarch finally has a reason to take their two handed chainsword. Wow Scorpions got good.
Scorpions are the new get funny looks for taking them unit apparently. For the ignoring invulnerable saves before standard hits if nothing else.
The mortal wounds on charge before attacking are going to be a common rule. Expect bloodcrushers and carnifex to have it.
Mortal wounds strikes me as more of a rending replacement. With rending seeming to be an additional -1 to armor saves I am guessing some things will either do additional wounds on a 6 or will be mortal wounds on a 6.
I just realized that with the new system they can make the rules like Tesla just do more damage to a specific target rather than more hits.
Judging from the fact that so many models will have multiple wounds, combined with what we learned about the dark eldar special save being after a wound is multiplied I am guessing that the process will go something like this
Hit
Wound
Allocate Wound
Save
Multiply Wounds
Any Special Save
Allocate Next Wound(wounded models have to take wounds first)
.....
Rinse and repeat. I think it will be slow at the beginning as we get used to the process it is actually quite simple. Also from the defender chooses rules I am guessing that range banding is gone, so no more sniping models by only having it in range. However once again this makes flamers much more dangerous.
One thing I would like to highlight is that we did not see a special rule on flamers like Wall of Death. This leads me to believe that they will now be restricted by the overwatch range requirements. If the average flamer has range 8, an army can make the decision to risk a longer charge to avoid the flamer over watch or go in close and risk taking more casualties. Maybe they can try and charge from a different angle to limit the number of flamers that can hit them. I like that idea and the having to be over 9 away doesnt seem like as much of a penalty if this is the case. It already FEELs so much more tactical than 7th. So much more control over the outcomes and so much of the randomness is something in the hands of the players that can be accounted for and they can perform a risk analysis instead of it being ALL bad.
It will be interesting to see how the weapons like paired falchions and the like will hold up, same with lightning claws.
In AoS mortal wounds are used in 2 occasions:
1) Exotic attacks
2) Damage from non attack sources. i.e. everything that inflicts damage without being part of an attack, will inflict mortal wounds. This means all psy powers, acid blood, hammer of wrath like rules, get's hot and so on.
Yeah I'm thinking that mortal wounds were a major misstep here: Invulnerable saves represent the same kinds of save that can be taken against mortal wounds in AoS.
If you need to ignore invulnerable saves, for example because you're a Warlord Titan, then you could have had a specific rule for that.
nintura wrote: Striking Scorpion Exarch finally has a reason to take their two handed chainsword. Wow Scorpions got good.
Scorpions are the new get funny looks for taking them unit apparently. For the ignoring invulnerable saves before standard hits if nothing else.
The mortal wounds on charge before attacking are going to be a common rule. Expect bloodcrushers and carnifex to have it.
Mortal wounds strikes me as more of a rending replacement. With rending seeming to be an additional -1 to armor saves I am guessing some things will either do additional wounds on a 6 or will be mortal wounds on a 6.
I just realized that with the new system they can make the rules like Tesla just do more damage to a specific target rather than more hits.
Judging from the fact that so many models will have multiple wounds, combined with what we learned about the dark eldar special save being after a wound is multiplied I am guessing that the process will go something like this
Hit
Wound
Allocate Wound
Save
Multiply Wounds
Any Special Save
Allocate Next Wound(wounded models have to take wounds first)
.....
Rinse and repeat. I think it will be slow at the beginning as we get used to the process it is actually quite simple. Also from the defender chooses rules I am guessing that range banding is gone, so no more sniping models by only having it in range. However once again this makes flamers much more dangerous.
One thing I would like to highlight is that we did not see a special rule on flamers like Wall of Death. This leads me to believe that they will now be restricted by the overwatch range requirements. If the average flamer has range 8, an army can make the decision to risk a longer charge to avoid the flamer over watch or go in close and risk taking more casualties. Maybe they can try and charge from a different angle to limit the number of flamers that can hit them. I like that idea and the having to be over 9 away doesnt seem like as much of a penalty if this is the case. It already FEELs so much more tactical than 7th. So much more control over the outcomes and so much of the randomness is something in the hands of the players that can be accounted for and they can perform a risk analysis instead of it being ALL bad.
It will be interesting to see how the weapons like paired falchions and the like will hold up, same with lightning claws.
In AoS mortal wounds are used in 2 occasions:
1) Exotic attacks
2) Damage from non attack sources. i.e. everything that inflicts damage without being part of an attack, will inflict mortal wounds. This means all psy powers, acid blood, hammer of wrath like rules, get's hot and so on.
Got ya and that is kinda what I meant. The ROLE rending played before will be replaced by mortal wounds. I get the feeling that outside of Psychic powers it will mostly be limited to Characters or CC attacks.
Anyone want to bet on the Vindicare Assassin FINALLY doing mortal wounds?
"Q - Do you still get a bonus Attack when wielding an extra close combat weapon? And if so, do Pistols still count as a CCW now that you can actually use them even when locked in CC?
A - It looks like you get an extra attack when using a chainsword, but doesn't mention it anywhere else...
Q- do pistols still give an extra attack for being an off-hand weapon, or are they now just getting the Shooting phase attacks? Still an extra attack in the turn that you charge, or does that go away, as well?
A - Well, we have shown a pistol stat line already in the Datasheet article (linked below). The pistol stat line does not say "you receive an extra attack in combat" like the chainsword does, so it is safe to assume that a bolt pistol does not give you +1 attack in combat."
So, thats settles the "did pistol still give +1 attack?"
Plus:
Just propaganda but... I'm curious to see Khorne Berzerker rules.
docdoom77 wrote: Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
*fingers crossed*
Maybe they'll give Choppa Boyz (or is it Slugga Boyz..? Not much up to date on Ork unit nomenclature), an extra base attack as compensation. I seem to recall that Orks had more base attacks than most other models anyway, right? So maybe they'll keep that going. Otherwise, yeah, they're gonna be in trouble.
Or they can simply give Choppas their own rule...
Or both. It's not like they can't give Orks extra attacks AND give Choppas a special rule.
Balance-wise, making Choppas equivalent to chainswords would work, but it doesn't fit the fluff. they're big, unwieldy weapons. I imagine they figured something out that makes them work. I just wish we could get some Ork previews of some kind!
-1Ap to represent their weight biting through armour?
This would be bad. It is the same effect as giving bolters rend, which is why they didn't. They tried giving choppas better AP in 3rd-4th and it was a mess. You guys are assuming everything needs to be better rather then cheaper. All they need do is make a slugga boy less expensive then a shoota boy and possibly give him them distinct special rules. I'd say giving slugga boys a rule like "Brutal like Mork" (add your benefit, maybe a bonus to charging) and shoota "cunning like Gork" (adda bonus to shooting) would work as well.
Youn wrote: The pistol rule will make Grey Knights odd. So, assuming a strike squad member stays at 1 attack.
Since, they don't actually have a pistol. We are going to have to rely on single hits to kill our enemies.
Well, they do have a melee weapon capable of doing D3 wounds on a successful hit. They were also always deficient in that category as they never got the bonus 1 attack anyway. So it's not like they really lost anything.
Don't forget that they might get a special kind of Storm Bolter that is classed as a Pistol instead of Assault, Rapid Fire, or whatever.
Same thing goes for the Sanguinary Guard and their similar wrist-mounted guns.
Yeah, something like the old 'True Grit' rule they used to have that allowed them to use their SB's in CC would go a long way here.
"Q - Do you still get a bonus Attack when wielding an extra close combat weapon? And if so, do Pistols still count as a CCW now that you can actually use them even when locked in CC?
A - It looks like you get an extra attack when using a chainsword, but doesn't mention it anywhere else...
Q- do pistols still give an extra attack for being an off-hand weapon, or are they now just getting the Shooting phase attacks? Still an extra attack in the turn that you charge, or does that go away, as well?
A - Well, we have shown a pistol stat line already in the Datasheet article (linked below). The pistol stat line does not say "you receive an extra attack in combat" like the chainsword does, so it is safe to assume that a bolt pistol does not give you +1 attack in combat."
So, thats settles the "did pistol still give +1 attack?"
Plus:
Just propaganda but... I'm curious to see Khorne Berzerker rules.
What a ridiculous assertion, they don't even have enhanced movement.
Honestly Khorne berzerkers should in effect be Ork boys with better armour, higher strength and -1 rend, and I can think of plenty of things scarier than that.
docdoom77 wrote: I wonder if Chainfist will be same as powerfist, but d6 damage?
wounding with it will probably be rolling an extra die per and dropping the lowest.
Currently chainfists are armor bane just like melta. Going by that I'd say you roll two d3 and drop the lowest for damage. Then again it has a chain blade on it now, so perhaps it adds an attack like the chainsword instead.
Why D3? Wounding doesn't use D3s and neither does the melta.
docdoom77 wrote: I wonder if Chainfist will be same as powerfist, but d6 damage?
wounding with it will probably be rolling an extra die per and dropping the lowest.
Currently chainfists are armor bane just like melta. Going by that I'd say you roll two d3 and drop the lowest for damage. Then again it has a chain blade on it now, so perhaps it adds an attack like the chainsword instead.
Why D3? Wounding doesn't use D3s and neither does the melta.
Melta now inflicts D6 wounds per failed armour save, and Powerfists inflict D3 wounds per failed armour save. If a melta weapon was within half its range, it rolled 2D6 for armour penetration, which has been restructed to say that it now rolls 2D6 per failed armour save, discarding the lowest result. Chainfists also rolled 2D6 armour penetration, so extrapolation would say that a Chainfist like rolls 2X for number of wounds per failed save inflicted, where X is the normal number of wounds. In this case, D3
docdoom77 wrote: I wonder if Chainfist will be same as powerfist, but d6 damage?
wounding with it will probably be rolling an extra die per and dropping the lowest.
Currently chainfists are armor bane just like melta. Going by that I'd say you roll two d3 and drop the lowest for damage. Then again it has a chain blade on it now, so perhaps it adds an attack like the chainsword instead.
Why D3? Wounding doesn't use D3s and neither does the melta.
docdoom77 wrote: Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
*fingers crossed*
Maybe they'll give Choppa Boyz (or is it Slugga Boyz..? Not much up to date on Ork unit nomenclature), an extra base attack as compensation. I seem to recall that Orks had more base attacks than most other models anyway, right? So maybe they'll keep that going. Otherwise, yeah, they're gonna be in trouble.
Or they can simply give Choppas their own rule...
Or both. It's not like they can't give Orks extra attacks AND give Choppas a special rule.
Balance-wise, making Choppas equivalent to chainswords would work, but it doesn't fit the fluff. they're big, unwieldy weapons. I imagine they figured something out that makes them work. I just wish we could get some Ork previews of some kind!
-1Ap to represent their weight biting through armour?
This would be bad. It is the same effect as giving bolters rend, which is why they didn't. They tried giving choppas better AP in 3rd-4th and it was a mess. You guys are assuming everything needs to be better rather then cheaper. All they need do is make a slugga boy less expensive then a shoota boy and possibly give him them distinct special rules. I'd say giving slugga boys a rule like "Brutal like Mork" (add your benefit, maybe a bonus to charging) and shoota "cunning like Gork" (adda bonus to shooting) would work as well.
My bet would on choppas inflicting 2 damage on a 6 to wound.
I'm wondering how multiple melee weapons will be handled. The chainsword rule makes it look like you won't be doing all of your attacks with one weapon anymore
docdoom77 wrote: Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
*fingers crossed*
Maybe they'll give Choppa Boyz (or is it Slugga Boyz..? Not much up to date on Ork unit nomenclature), an extra base attack as compensation. I seem to recall that Orks had more base attacks than most other models anyway, right? So maybe they'll keep that going. Otherwise, yeah, they're gonna be in trouble.
Or they can simply give Choppas their own rule...
Or both. It's not like they can't give Orks extra attacks AND give Choppas a special rule.
Balance-wise, making Choppas equivalent to chainswords would work, but it doesn't fit the fluff. they're big, unwieldy weapons. I imagine they figured something out that makes them work. I just wish we could get some Ork previews of some kind!
-1Ap to represent their weight biting through armour?
This would be bad. It is the same effect as giving bolters rend, which is why they didn't. They tried giving choppas better AP in 3rd-4th and it was a mess. You guys are assuming everything needs to be better rather then cheaper. All they need do is make a slugga boy less expensive then a shoota boy and possibly give him them distinct special rules. I'd say giving slugga boys a rule like "Brutal like Mork" (add your benefit, maybe a bonus to charging) and shoota "cunning like Gork" (adda bonus to shooting) would work as well.
I don't think making Orks cheaper is the answer. They're already dirt cheap and slugga boyz are already cheaper than shoota boys. I don't think it would help. Besides that, people don't want Orks to suck but be super cheap (at least I don't). Their points cost in context to other armies is already fine, but they need to excel in close combat.
Zustiur wrote: I'm wondering how multiple melee weapons will be handled. The chainsword rule makes it look like you won't be doing all of your attacks with one weapon anymore
I'm guessing you choose a weapon to make your attacks with and then make all of your attacks, and if you have a weapon that gives bonus attacks like a chainsword you can use those in addition to anything you already have with the primary weapon.
No idea if paired weapons will still give bonus attacks though. If they do then a SGT with two chainswords would be pretty good. 2 attacks base, +1 for 2 ccws, + 2 bonus attacks from the chainswords themselves = 5 attacks on what is basically a regular model. He,d be like a tiny blender if tossed into a horde.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Razdalan wrote: Finally we'll get to see chain swords do what we've always imagined they would!
RIP AND TEAR,
*ahem*
Yes, I agree, they're a lot closer to what they should be, though they're supposed to chew into things as well so they should be -1 Ap and doing like D3 damage to match the lore. But for balance this is good.
The thunderstrike gauntlet also has the ability to chuck a destroyed Monster or Vehicle at another enemy unit within 9″ to do D3 mortal wounds on a 4+. Splat!
I love it. I-LOVE-IT
And the Titanic Feet appears to be just a weapon like in AoS dragons and all have the "Clans and tail" or those kind of things. No more special rules for giant beasts/Robots.
The thunderstrike gauntlet also has the ability to chuck a destroyed Monster or Vehicle at another enemy unit within 9″ to do D3 mortal wounds on a 4+. Splat!
I love it. I-LOVE-IT
I'm glad corpse chukkin, is still an option!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bull0 wrote: It's fairly clear +1a for 2 ccws is gone, going by the Q and A
Still 4 attacks on a sergent for very few points is still good. Cheap as chips is always handy.
docdoom77 wrote: Choppas need to be REALLY good. It seems pretty obvious that the extra attack for 2 weapons has been replaced by shooting with a pistol in the shooting phase, which is bad for Orks.
*fingers crossed*
Maybe they'll give Choppa Boyz (or is it Slugga Boyz..? Not much up to date on Ork unit nomenclature), an extra base attack as compensation. I seem to recall that Orks had more base attacks than most other models anyway, right? So maybe they'll keep that going. Otherwise, yeah, they're gonna be in trouble.
Or they can simply give Choppas their own rule...
Or both. It's not like they can't give Orks extra attacks AND give Choppas a special rule.
Balance-wise, making Choppas equivalent to chainswords would work, but it doesn't fit the fluff. they're big, unwieldy weapons. I imagine they figured something out that makes them work. I just wish we could get some Ork previews of some kind!
-1Ap to represent their weight biting through armour?
This would be bad. It is the same effect as giving bolters rend, which is why they didn't. They tried giving choppas better AP in 3rd-4th and it was a mess. You guys are assuming everything needs to be better rather then cheaper. All they need do is make a slugga boy less expensive then a shoota boy and possibly give him them distinct special rules. I'd say giving slugga boys a rule like "Brutal like Mork" (add your benefit, maybe a bonus to charging) and shoota "cunning like Gork" (adda bonus to shooting) would work as well.
I don't think making Orks cheaper is the answer. They're already dirt cheap and slugga boyz are already cheaper than shoota boys. I don't think it would help. Besides that, people don't want Orks to suck but be super cheap (at least I don't). Their points cost in context to other armies is already fine, but they need to excel in close combat.
I'd rather see combat orks get a Mork related rule while shooting orks get a Gork special rule. I am not a fan of EVERY weapon needing a unique ability. A choppa is literally junk metal tied to a pole, if monomolecular (their word lol) edged combat blades that your standard marine carries are bog standard gear I don't like giving trash on a stick a special rule. So I would push for a difference in rule between the two ork troop choices but I would take cheaper combat then shooty before hamfisted gear rules any day.
The thunderstrike gauntlet also has the ability to chuck a destroyed Monster or Vehicle at another enemy unit within 9″ to do D3 mortal wounds on a 4+. Splat!
I love it. I-LOVE-IT
I'm glad corpse chukkin, is still an option!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bull0 wrote: It's fairly clear +1a for 2 ccws is gone, going by the Q and A
Still 4 attacks on a sergent for very few points is still good. Cheap as chips is always handy.
No idea how wargear works now, but in 7e for a sergeant to have two chainswords you'd have to give up his bolter and his bolt pistol, which would be a bit... Limiting
opponents are causing 
I'm okay with the new rules and the idea isn't really that new - Jervis published something like that in the Citadel Journal for 2nd edition.
