Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I make lists in Excel and printouts in Word.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Always pen and paper for me.

OLD FARTS UNITE!

Well, this old fart generally makes a spreadsheet and prints them onto 8"x5" index cards.

 Prometheum5 wrote:
Does everyone not just use a list builder like New Recruit and print out your army sheets at this point? I'm currently focusing on TOW and looking back at HH, I'd never play either out of the army books on the table.

I don't. I absolutely despise Battlescribes layout and the way they form their army lists. Whenever I see people checking it for rules/stat queries it always takes far, far longer for them to find it, then it does for me to look it up in a book. Not sure about the other programs though, as I'm not sure if people use them.

The Libers/rulebook are a mess, no argument there. But once you know them, it is fairly simple to find what you're looking for. Way easier to book mark stuff too.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I make lists in Excel and printouts in Word.

Me too! Excel is great for army lists. I generally don't print my army lists out, I just cut and paste them from Excel into a private Discord server I made. But I do print off army lists/cheatsheets for events.

 Tyran wrote:
There is always Wahapedia.

Wahapedia is out of date and incomplete on Heresy. Lots of stuff missing.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
There is always Wahapedia.

Wahapedia is out of date and incomplete on Heresy. Lots of stuff missing.

...and piracy.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Always pen and paper for me.

OLD FARTS UNITE!

*raises hand*

My army lists are all scribbled out by hand in a notebook that's also full of notes on colour schemes, conversion ideas and pointless doodles.

Back on topic, I am intrigued by the Tactical Statuses rules. A rather clumsy name, but it might add some nuance to the game.

...so, after doing Jenetia Krole dirty during the Siege of Terra, GW think a background piece on her makes sense? This company, I swear...

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I make lists in Excel and printouts in Word.

I use Excel as well.

My hope for the new edition is as follows:

List Building - I'm hoping it is like Old World. I've always wanted to run a Techmarine and a Heavy Bolter Support Platform unit. However that is two Elite slots and I'd rather take Contemptors, Apothecaries, and 2 Terminator Squads. If we get X points for the various unit types and a ROW augmented the unit allocation, I would think this would be a good thing. If you were required to spend a minimum of 25% of your army on troops, that would be 500 points for a 2,000 army or 2-3 units. This would scale up as well as it would require more foot troops for mega battles. That is just my thought - of course over time, the community would end up tweaking or restricting specific units based on game size.

Rules for smaller games - I find that its harder to sell other players on Heresy when they hear a 10 man tactical squad is only 100 points base and about 150 points kitted out and then the average game size is 2,500 - 3,500 points. I'd love to see smaller games like Zone Mortalis included as part of the base rules vs buy yet another book so you can play the game at 1,000 points! Though ZM is still pricey to play since you need the terrain. However, if you do play ZM, it is a lot of fun and there are multiple places that sell mdf ZM terrain much cheaper than GW, well at least for about half the price for 25% more.

New stats - I'm OK with having more ways to interact with units on the table but I'm hoping it doesn't bog down the game play. I liked the thought of the Tactical Support Units but never thought they were useful in larger games unless you were using plasma or meltas because the other weapons really didn't have much punch. The flamers were entirely situational as they were decent in ZM but not in a pitched battle. If these weapons can force pinning, can cause a unit to route, etc., then it should add more variety for list building.

Reasons to take other units - playing ZM, is the only time I've taken certain units like Destroyers or Moritats. These units can really shine when not fighting in a pitched battle. Destroyers are amazing when dismantling dreadnoughts in confined hallways and Moritats are great at providing covering fire and clearing a path for them. I've tried using them in two pitched battles with little success.

If these things end up happening, I will be a happy Heresy player.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dysartes wrote:
...so, after doing Jenetia Krole dirty during the Siege of Terra, GW think a background piece on her makes sense? This company, I swear...

Wasn't she killed by Kharn at the Lions Gate Space Port? Its been a while, but if I recall correctly

I do hope this won't be a month's worth of only waffling on about Saturnine, and they have something to announce for Legions Imperalis in the meantime.

Just filler lore today

Weapons tomorrow, which we already know how they work. Maybe we see a contentious profile reworked (gravis power fist?) and a trait or two?

My hope for the new edition is as follows:

List Building - I'm hoping it is like Old World.

What are you even talking about
OW list building is even more restrictive as FOC. Wanna take something cool at lower points? Nah-ah, you can't, because the model is 265-300 points. Wanna take more cool/good stuff in 2k? Nah-ah, because it's only 500 points. Try allocating 500 points to 3 units, that each cost 200+ points.
And then you are forced into picking the least gak units from Core/Troops.
Even if the base games are 3k, you are still limited to 750, which is way less than being able to take 0-3 x3.

Personally I always liked the FOC

Actually reflects real battlefield roles ("Rare" isn't a tactical role)

Pretty flexible but prevents most weird spam

Of course there was always room for more nuance (like extra slots at higher points levels)

And maybe a % minimum for Troops wouldn't be amiss as some units are so cheap it makes the "tax" negligible.

I also always liked the FOC - it did need updating and honestly, esp for 40K, it likely needed tailoring to specific armies a bit.

I know that near the end of the lifespan of the FOC Tyranids had problems because all their specialist mid-level monsters were "elites" which meant you were really restricted on what you could take.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Personally I always liked the FOC

Actually reflects real battlefield roles ("Rare" isn't a tactical role)

Pretty flexible but prevents most weird spam

Of course there was always room for more nuance (like extra slots at higher points levels)

And maybe a % minimum for Troops wouldn't be amiss as some units are so cheap it makes the "tax" negligible.

The FOC helped me make viable armies when shifting to 3rd Ed 40K. It completely changed how the game for me.

I'm also sad it was removed from Warhammer/TOW.

I liked the idea of the FOC as it helped new players build semi balanced armies.

If you wanted to allow players to use it, maybe give them a bonus to leadership (call it 'the chain of command') for filling out all the slots appropriately.

From what I remember from the stream, I expect 8th edition style list building - take what you want, but if you fall into one of a number of predetermined FOCs you get a bonus.

 Overread wrote:

The big risk with the HH is if it ends up relying on you checking multiple pages to make these new systems work. Or worse if they end up being scattershot over several books.
If its something that can be referenced quickly and easily that makes a massive difference.

The #1 issue I have with HH 2.0 is that the special rules are spread out all over the place. Some special rules are in the main rule book, some are in the equipment description sections for that faction, some are in the legion description, and still others are in the faction special rule section that comes before the equipment special rules section. I'm hoping for, but not holding my breath for, a lot more compiling of special rules in the main rule book so that i don't have to go on a scavenger hunt. In every game, it seemed like there was always one unit that had a special or unique rule that took forever to look up.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I make lists in Excel and printouts in Word.

I make excel lists and print them in excel.

Do you think all those special rules were a part of what turned off new players from buying in to Horus Heresy?

When I started to get back into the hobby, the GW employees even waved me away HH and over to regular 40k.

When I asked about the game I was told the game is fun, but a b**** to play as the books are poorly laid out and every unit has its own special rules.

 Quixote wrote:

When I asked about the game I was told the game is fun, but a b**** to play as the books are poorly laid out and every unit has its own special rules.

I mean that's how AoS and 40K have been for a good while now.



More likely is that GW store staff don't get commission for Forgeworld models and HH was historically almost entirely FW production. So your local GW manager wouldn't "want" to encourage HH players because they basically couldn't profit off them for the store metrics even if you bought a LOT through the store.

With HH now rolled into GW central its way better for your local manage to encourage sales; by which point some might discourage it now just because of stock issues. At least for newbies steering them into 40K and AoS which have more plentiful stock is a way better engagement than encouraging new people into HH where they might have to wait weeks/months for some models to come back into stock.

GW Store Staff just…..don’t get commission.

Ever.

What Forgeworld didn’t do was contribute to Store Takings, as to the best of my knowledge, you only ever paid FW directly through the website. Whereas for GW Website? You used the terminal to place your order, and paid at the till. The whole Virutal Warehouse thing.

If I played HH, I'd use Battlescribe like always. iPad in split screen mode, with scribe on the right side of the screen and whatever I might happen to need to reference next at the left side, while Tidal plays a downloaded 40K music playlist in the background for atmospherics

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
GW Store Staff just…..don’t get commission.

Ever.

What Forgeworld didn’t do was contribute to Store Takings, as to the best of my knowledge, you only ever paid FW directly through the website. Whereas for GW Website? You used the terminal to place your order, and paid at the till. The whole Virutal Warehouse thing.

Ahh sorry yes I meant Takings/target sales and such not commission.

 Quixote wrote:
Do you think all those special rules were a part of what turned off new players from buying in to Horus Heresy?

When I started to get back into the hobby, the GW employees even waved me away HH and over to regular 40k.

When I asked about the game I was told the game is fun, but a b**** to play as the books are poorly laid out and every unit has its own special rules.

Priority One
Insure customer interest in Warhammer 40,000, Warhammer Age of Sigmar and our Citadel Paint Range.
All other considerations secondary.
Specialist games expendable.

 Quixote wrote:
Do you think all those special rules were a part of what turned off new players from buying in to Horus Heresy?

I wouldn't think so. I think if you're into the HH, you wouldn't let that be your barrier IMHO. The cost of entry, maybe.

I probably should have asked this question a couple weeks ago, but how do the Saturnine Terminators scale with 40k firstborn Dreadnoughts? Looking like they are about as tall, but maybe not as wide or long?

 cuda1179 wrote:
I probably should have asked this question a couple weeks ago, but how do the Saturnine Terminators scale with 40k firstborn Dreadnoughts? Looking like they are about as tall, but maybe not as wide or long?

Nobody knows, obviously, but this guy did some pixel counting and has a (theoretical) picture of what you're asking

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIBe7op-Ic8

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
I probably should have asked this question a couple weeks ago, but how do the Saturnine Terminators scale with 40k firstborn Dreadnoughts? Looking like they are about as tall, but maybe not as wide or long?

Nobody knows, obviously, but this guy did some pixel counting and has a (theoretical) picture of what you're asking

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIBe7op-Ic8

DAMN!!!! and darn it. While those honking big terminators are neat, my plan was to get a single one and convert it into a Dark Angel character, because they have all the "good stuff" from the past. However, that looks a tad too large for the 40k setting. Guess I'm ordering one from Pop Goes the Monkey.

Priority One
Insure customer interest in Warhammer 40,000, Warhammer Age of Sigmar and our Citadel Paint Range.
All other considerations secondary.
Specialist games expendable.

I see what you did there, good Sir - an Alien reference should never go unrewarded or unrecognised.

Well played.

 Padre wrote:
I see what you did there, good Sir - an Alien reference should never go unrewarded or unrecognised.

Well played.

Damn, I missed that. Well played indeed...

The side view silhouette of those Saturnine termies looks hella derp though! Cracked me up when I saw it in the most recent HH rules article about the supression/etc effects