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.

Well, to say something nice, Allies might be nicer under the new FOC

A single HQ will unlock a detachment of choice plus (burning the HQ's Prime slot power on Logistical Benefit) any 1 unit of any type. So that could be a White Scars bike boss and 3 Fast Attack units, for example, with no Troop tax.

The funny thing is it seems possible to just spam this endlessly without putting any units at all in your allegedly primary faction (as long as you're fine living with no Praetor or Primarch) and this will give you more non-HQ slots than a primary detachment would.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The last reply from the /tg/ thread with the leaks hits home

Hey I think this ruleset was generated by an AI. It's convoluted and complex for the sake of complexity. All the jargon trips over itself in a completely unintuitive way. The book-keeping needed to track all the detachments and bonuses also seem impractical to the point of being AI suggestions. Just look at the wording on the special rules - I don't think it's just me becoming spontaneously slowed, they're straight up hard to read

They’re not hard to read though?

The wording isn’t short, but that doesn’t mean it’s not clear or succinct, nor any longer than the wording absolutely needs to be to convey the rule and how it works.

EDIT. - Here's an Imgur folder with some of the leaks.

https://imgur.com/a/5U2Wkq8

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
They’re not hard to read though?

The wording isn’t short, but that doesn’t mean it’s not clear or succinct, nor any longer than the wording absolutely needs to be to convey the rule and how it works.

"There are no limits on which units can be in your army. Now here's a list of limits on the units on your army..."

And what’s the wider context?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I’ve read the images in the link Snrub provided, and I’m not seeing that wording.

You wouldn’t be cherry picking and deliberately paraphrasing into a misleading quote, would you?

Here's a direct quote

It may also include any number of Auxiliary Detachments or Apex Detachments - the number of Auxiliary Detachments or Apex Detachments available to a given Army is determined by...

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Also, I’ve read the images in the link Snrub provided, and I’m not seeing that wording.

That's not the full set of leaks, by the way. It hasn't been updated with some of the newer stuff yet.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/itpl4ywx/rules-in-the-age-of-darkness-how-to-build-an-army-in-the-new-edition/

And what is in that wording that’s unclear or misleading?

Your Army dictates the number of Aux/Apex detachments it can include. But there’s no minimum.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/itpl4ywx/rules-in-the-age-of-darkness-how-to-build-an-army-in-the-new-edition/

This is gak. They've just made the FOC more convoluted for... no reason at all? Was there anything actually wrong with the way it was?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And what is in that wording that’s unclear or misleading?

Your Army dictates the number of Aux/Apex detachments it can include. But there’s no minimum.

So it is any number or a number dictated by other factors?

Hahahaha no more Dreadnought Talons. Its literally 1 Dreadnought per HQ taken, and they can be one-shotted by a regular meltagun. I hope nobody bought a lot of Dreadnoughts last edition for some reason.

Not a fan of this new force org. It doesn't actually add anything of value and those "Prime" unit benefits are just needless rules bloat.

It's also not great that this is all being referred to under Legion terms which makes me suspicious that everything is going to be different for the likes of Mechanicum or Auxilia.
"Add more detachments by taking Consuls". Awesome, great, one small problem, no other faction has as many HQ options as the Legions.

Oh yea F in the chat for factions that will have to take massed do-nothing T3 officers to unlock anything worth having.

I hate the HQ tax but at least the Consuls are cool af.

Dudeface wrote:

Go look at the pictures, since you're subjectively skewed to think it's great in order to pointlessly argue as you note, you'll love it.

Again, just trouble-making. What you’re saying now is (1) incoherent, (2) not what you started out saying, and (3) demonstrably untrue if you look at what I’ve actually said previously about this new edition. But don’t let that stop you jumping on anyone who’s not immediately prejudging everything.

Leaker is back, same /tg/ thread, btw. Posting psychics now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Das_Ubermike wrote:
Then that seems even worse. It's an edge case, I know, but I can envision a world where you'd rather get a glancing hit to stun the vehicle until you can finish it off next turn in CC, rather than penning it and allowing it freedom of action with full firepower in the next turn. I get that they probably didn't want to make pens too strong, but yeesh.

This you?

>be a tank driver in 30k
>a burst of lascannon fire rips through the tank, killing the gunner and rips half the armor off.
>Blood rain patters off my helmet from newly exposed sky
Thats ok I'll drive with my foot and load myself.
>An autocannon richochets harmlessly off the angled armor
BROS??? WTF WAS THAT???? IM CLOSING MY EYES!!1
>Another autocannon shot bounces harmlessly off, not even scratching the paint
>I panic, draw my side arm and fire a few rounds into the engine block to calm my nerves

Like others have said, and where we've seen in other parts of the rules, the force org seems really complex, but only to add complexity. I don't see how it benefits anything to lock detachments behind low-tier HQ units. If you make a detachment type but only have 1 type of unit behind it, that's just a unit selection. I realize I'm viewing it through the Marine lens, but this is the Marine vs. Marine game.

And jeez, did they add a (X) to everything? But the number in the parenthesis isn't always formatted the same way. Again, complexity for complexity's sake.

 Snord wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Go look at the pictures, since you're subjectively skewed to think it's great in order to pointlessly argue as you note, you'll love it.

Again, just trouble-making. What you’re saying now is (1) incoherent, (2) not what you started out saying, and (3) demonstrably untrue if you look at what I’ve actually said previously about this new edition. But don’t let that stop you jumping on anyone who’s not immediately prejudging everything.

Go argue with everyone else saying the same things we did then. I'm not special, stop treating me like I am.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Leaker is back, same /tg/ thread, btw. Posting psychics now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Das_Ubermike wrote:
Then that seems even worse. It's an edge case, I know, but I can envision a world where you'd rather get a glancing hit to stun the vehicle until you can finish it off next turn in CC, rather than penning it and allowing it freedom of action with full firepower in the next turn. I get that they probably didn't want to make pens too strong, but yeesh.

This you?

>be a tank driver in 30k
>a burst of lascannon fire rips through the tank, killing the gunner and rips half the armor off.
>Blood rain patters off my helmet from newly exposed sky
Thats ok I'll drive with my foot and load myself.
>An autocannon richochets harmlessly off the angled armor
BROS??? WTF WAS THAT???? IM CLOSING MY EYES!!1
>Another autocannon shot bounces harmlessly off, not even scratching the paint
>I panic, draw my side arm and fire a few rounds into the engine block to calm my nerves

Nar boss. Though I did see that post and laugh. If it's bad enough that me and an anon arrived at the same conclusion, I really wonder how that rule change wasn't smothered in the crib.

It is a bit funny that a lascannon will pray for a glance and the 1/3 chance to halve firepower probably for the rest of the game, rather than taking off 1 or 2 hp with zero consequence.

Realistically, tho... Deep Strike is 1" from enemy, no scatter. Melta one-shots Predators at 6"... 3.0 is not going to be fun for tank companies.

Reddit is a no-go at work.

Can someone tell me when they post reliable intelligence on the status of Knights in 30k, so I can join the fun and be depressed too?

No info on Knights yet or any other units. The leakeranon only has the rulebook.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Oh yea F in the chat for factions that will have to take massed do-nothing T3 officers to unlock anything worth having.

I hate the HQ tax but at least the Consuls are cool af.

Atleast my enforcers now come in handy since i can just uplift them to HQ..... in order to allow my list to still be fething legal.....

It takes real skill to make the FOC more handicapped than 8th edition onwards, and yet GW managed it to do so, but he , we can now facilitate duels in 4 diffrent ways.,,,

Challenge rules are 6 pages of glorified rock paper scissors lizard spock where one player has to declare first and the other one probably wins. And the last page deals entirely with how to redeploy the winner back into his unit... clear and concise system indeed.

Again, concise doesn’t mean short. It just means in the clearest way using the fewest words.

Work wise, I can break down sometimes complex rules and considerations into a clear conclusion. But that can still take a page or two of a letter, depending on complexity and importance of given information, and how many things I need to cover, or say aren’t in fact relevant, especially when one party thinks such a thing is a slam dunk.

People really need to be realistic when it comes to such things. If you get bored and wander off after the first three lines? Perhaps wargaming isn’t for you.

That FOC is just the return of 7th ed Decurion type detachments.

It was not the visions of future that drove Konrad mad, it was reading too much doomposting here.


Well anyway, Auxilia and Mech have their own FoC to use and rules regarding that so leaks and article only cover the marine specific one as an example. And Legions are getting their own things regarding force building.

 Snrub wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/itpl4ywx/rules-in-the-age-of-darkness-how-to-build-an-army-in-the-new-edition/

This is gak. They've just made the FOC more convoluted for... no reason at all? Was there anything actually wrong with the way it was?

You already owned the rules for how it already was.

BUY IT AGAIN!

Charges are now a 3 page process

There's a step up move which is optional of move + initiative, then optional firing assault weapons at each other, then charge 2d6 pick highest.

It simply doesn't require 3 pages of pure text.

Oh there's also an end of the phases phase.

There's definitely some things in the new rules I like, but that force org doesn't work at all and I don't really know what they were thinking.

 Tyran wrote:
That FOC is just the return of 7th ed Decurion type detachments.

I had the same PTSD flashback, especially with the thing at the bottom of the page that states that every Detachment has its own Special Rules for that Detachment.