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.

Indeed, what Scottywan said.

These are rumors, your being overpresumptuous, you ruin the game by saying "Don't play it, it sucks"

Butterfly Effect.

Having Flayed WHFB since the second ed., I for one will get 8th.

The rule that I hope they fix is that you can step forward and die but not swing back in melee. This is really the only problem I have with the game. After all if you are stepping forward into a gap in the ranks you are going to be swinging

Karon wrote:, you ruin the game by saying "Don't play it, it sucks"

Butterfly Effect.

OMG! If I stop playing I might cause a hurricane in Montevideo!!!
Quick where's the dice?!

Kirbinator wrote:Given that High Elves are highly rumored to be part of the starter kit, seems like they'd be pretty ahead in line for an 8th ed army book. If that is the case, pretty good chance at Swordmasters being altered.

Do you really want to charge into a unit of Deamonettes (the worst of the four core demon units) when they are going to be striking before the majority of the stuff in the game at I5 then hitting on 3+ with WS5 and 2 attacks in two ranks of models?

From the players around here, any of them who bothered to bring Daemonettes also had a Herald with them to grant ASF. Nothing new there, except the two ranks thing. It would certainly make Witch Elves much scarier, though!

Yeah, they become a pretty sick unit with the rumored changes though executioners become pretty useless based on the 8th edition rumors on great weapons so far. All the dark elf melee characters will be a lot better in combat now, especially Crone Hellebron

Now that I think about it, 'step up' would tend to discourage charging. I mean, the point of charging is to get that first swing and kill guys before they get the chance to strike. If you kill the front rank of Chaos Warriors now, they don't get to swing back and own you. If they got to step up and attack anyway, you're screwed no matter what.

wildger wrote:I don't believe a lot of these rumors despite how reliable other people claim. A unit or a figure that is considered broken is usually due to their low point cost. Having a percentage cap simply aggravate the problem rather than mixing it. This is supposed to be a massive battle not a skirmish. Having too many terrains is ridiculous. This is same with having random distance made in having a charge. These changes simple carry on the existing problems rather than mixing it. There are many game companies and GW is one of the very few if there are anyone who can go ahead to make all these major changes without consulting with the players. A smart consumer should sell their existing armies and play something else. The cost of upgrade to become tournament legal is enough to get you another nice game system. I have been tell any newbie to have interested in WHFB to stay away from it. It is simply not worth it.

Jeez, you have to be the worst kind of player in any type of game I've seen.

-Overly simplified view of unit balance
-Thinks he knows what the game is "supposed to be" better than the people whose careers are built on making the game
-Treats rumors as fact, general "sky is falling" attitude
-Discouraging others from playing the game based on his own skewed perspective of the game that's barely grounded in proto-reality

Cancer killing gaming, really. In all of its forms.

Grimaldus wrote:Yeah, they become a pretty sick unit with the rumored changes though executioners become pretty useless based on the 8th edition rumors on great weapons so far.

Oh, it isn't 8th ed rumored great weapons that make executioners pretty useless. They do that just fine in 7th and I don't really expect that to change.

If the current rumour is true that charging will not provide an initiative bonus, what bonus will it provide?

Extra attacks for the chargers (a la 40k) would make some units/matchups far too good.

Given that historically the purpose of a charge was to disrupt the opposition, maybe reduce the number of attacks from the defenders? Or make it harder for the defenders to hit on that first round?

There needs to be some point to charging beyond 'we're going to hit each other now'

If you really wanted charging to be realistic, you'd make the Chargers test on Ld (simulated via variable charge distance) and force a Ld test for defender's reaction...

Which would gimp all CC-related armies that have low LD (Orcs, Beastmen, etc.)

Orcs actually have an at least semi-decent leadership compared to Beastmen (Goblins, on the other hand...)

However, stepping up and initiative - combined - are big "Sod you" rulings for several armies. Now, if they fight each other, things will be slightly closer. However, the division between game tiers is going to become much more apparent if the rumors are factual. How many armies can you think of that'll be able to deal with Chaos Warriors post-change, due to the reduction in armor save modifiers as well as the fact that if they hit your line in anything more than six models they're going to make your unit quickly vanish before it can act (even if you charge).

He Who Stood wrote:its certainly going to be interesting, thats for sure
depending on what happens, this might be the fix we need, or a massive hosing that calls for a total work around/revamp for the armies.

while % will certainly cut into the herohammer aspects, what about the older tomb kings? and high elves who are designed to play as an elite force?

its going to have to just sit and wait till the book comes out, see what happens adapt and move on

The percentages thingy is nothing new we had it before but as rumored (25% heroes) TK can´t be played as a legal army under 900pts (1 mummy + 1 priest 215pts), say goodbye to the Ark of the Covenant or Khalida under 2500pts (has somebody ever played Settra?).

But it´s because GWs is running away from herohammer people say, well as you pointed out if you take away the fear special rules, start fighting by I order regardless who charges first plus the above limits to characters one has to wonder what the hell are going to do the undead players without a crash revamp for Vampies and TK.

As usual the ASF change (again, if true...) will be another GW screw up, don´t misinterpreted me, ASF might be broken and needs to be fixed but a nerf all across the board and then a [Facepalm]"but what about HE? we need a new rule to make them viable we´ll call it FSA" will bring us back to square one when in a year time every armybook starts using the FSA rule [/Facepalm]

We´ll have to wait but strange enough although I started out as mainly a WHFB player I only played a 7th ED game so far and I´m not holding my breath on 8th.

M.

Am I the only one who is curious about how they could affect the "something to prevent spamming"? Are we talking something like:
1. No more than 2 of the same special choice
2. No double rare choices

If it ends up being something like this, my Skaven are soooooo screwed. Goodbye multiple PCBs and Doomwheels (which incidently would still be playable at 25% rare in a 2250 game - crossing fingers).

I can't see them doing something quite that arbitrary, purely because it would hurt sales.

They already have a maximum number of special/rare choices per points value and will add to this a maximum number of points that can be spent - this on its own will limit/eliminate spam as you won't be able to afford to do it in most cases. An extra restriction is unnecessary.

What exactly are these changes designed to improve? I don't get why adding a random factor to movement and magic will make those phases better. The percentage thing really bugs me, but apparently I'm a tool for fielding dude on dragon in my Wood Elf army. I'd be upset about fear and terro getting nerfed, but the fact that my Ogres are like I2 or so means they won't get to hit anything anyway so the fear never comes into play. As other have stated, I'll reserve my final judgement until the rules are actually released.

Sarge wrote:What exactly are these changes designed to improve? I don't get why adding a random factor to movement and magic will make those phases better. The percentage thing really bugs me, but apparently I'm a tool for fielding dude on dragon in my Wood Elf army. I'd be upset about fear and terro getting nerfed, but the fact that my Ogres are like I2 or so means they won't get to hit anything anyway so the fear never comes into play. As other have stated, I'll reserve my final judgement until the rules are actually released.

Terror i dont have problems with, the rule actually makes sense.

Fear on the other hand is dumb in some regards... Ok 5 ghouls charge my 25 spearmen and i have to take a fear test???
Pretty sure those 25 spearmen arent going to fear 5 ghouls. Unit strength should be a factor on fear tests.

I think the fear tests were originally designed to give relatively crappy units in HTH an edge over slightly better units, with an emphasis on "take more"!
VC are a perfect example of this - overrall, low WS, crappy stats, low init, but cheap enough to encourage large units that hope for the enemy to whiff a round of combat and go for the autobreak. With this supposedly changing, as well as combined with the "attack in 2 ranks" rule, your going to see alot more cheap fear causers lose their effectiveness.

Where it started to go wrong though was when army wide fear causing came into effect, as well as multiple terror causers being able to be fielded. Unless you had a LD9 or better general around, your looking at a 42% chance that units would flee from each terror causer being in proximity. Testing at the beginning of your own turn, it just became way too powerful of a game changer.

Sarge wrote:What exactly are these changes designed to improve?

Short-term quarterly profit margins.

@Mattbranb
Having a fixed limit for stopping spamming would not scale at all.

I don't know what the actual rules will be, but 2 things that could work imo:

..........................Special.............Rare
under 1000............1 of the same.....None of the same
1001-2000.............2 of the same.....1 of the same
2001-3000.............3 of the same.....2 of the same
every +1000..........+1 of the same...+1 of the same

Or alternatively

You cannot take more special choices than core. You cannot take more rare choices than special.

Both of these are quite restrictive though.

Didn't Medieval Total War do something like this?

You could take a certain amount of the same units, but then the cost of each identical unit after a certain amount became increasingly more expensive. It was a way of ensuring varied forces, or smaller forces made up of the same maxed unit.

I dont know why people keep saying VCs have crappy core troops.. Ghouls anyone? even without fear they're pretty damn good.. T4 with poison and a FREE march move before the game? Okay if you take all zombies and skeletons I agree, but why are you doing that?

ShivanAngel: Are you saying you think terror as it works now is fine?

As to fear, I think the mechanic works fine as well. In your example, the spearmen are likely Ld7 so they're as like to fail as not. If they do fail the, they don't break. They'll just have a hard time hitting the zombies. They'll still likely have a good showing through combat resolution. They'll have something like +5 (ranks, outnumber, standard). You also pay a premium for being able to cause fear in most cases. With the serious downgrade of +1 combat res, fear should basically be free.

Also if the rumor about victory conditions being determined by core units with banners is true, your points are going to be going towards skeletons and zombies with full commands so you might not have any points left for ghouls once you get your specials, rares and characters you'll need to offset the other unit's crappiness. Kinda sounds like we're being stuck into certain army builds which I don't much care for.

I wonder if the magic rumors harken back to the "winds of magic" days when you rolled a number of cards to deal out divided among the players (IIRC - I only played one or two games with borrowed armies that far back). You divide the pool in half for each player, add the extra dice your wizards generate, use them for dispelling or casting as you see fit. Some turns there is a huge amount of magic going around, some turns barely a trickle....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That would please me since I probably could get by without a scroll caddy in that case and have no other use for mages really. You would also have to choose between getting your own spells off and defending against the opponents, which is not so much of an issue in the current rules.

You cannot take more rare choices than special.

-----

No.

Karon wrote:You cannot take more rare choices than special.

-----

No.

And:

You cannot take more Special choices than Core.

It's obvious I know, but my suggestion would mean if you went MSU with core and special you could take lots of rare (within the % limits).

The option would be there.

And HE would be fethed.

Grimstonefire wrote:It's obvious I know, but my suggestion would mean if you went MSU with core and special you could take lots of rare (within the % limits).

The option would be there.

Maybe that's what they're trying to get rid of. GW have been trying to steer people towards collecting realistic/balanced armies (i.e. lots of grunts, not too many elite troops, superhuman characters or mega engines of destruction) for years in both Fantasy and 40K. The lastest effort in 40K was to make Troops crucial for 2/3 of the missions. It sounds like they're going to try something similar for Fantasy with this "Objectives can only be held by Core troops with Standards" malarkey.

It won't really affect me because I like games which revolve around low powered armies (the appearance of a Bloodthirster is always met by a weary sigh and roll of the eyes), but I think they should leave the door open to people who want to charge 6 Stegadons across the board. Not everybody enjoys painting rank after rank of grunts to get an army on the table. Come to think of it, I don't enjoy it much either. (20 skaven slaves left to paint... *sigh*).

Flashman wrote:GW have been trying to steer people towards ... not too many ... superhuman characters... The lastest effort in 40K was to make Troops crucial for 2/3 of the missions.

... and then triple the amount of Special Characters in each Codex, giving them army-altering rules that make some of them virtually mandatory.

Yeah, I think their only 'aim' is to sell models and to keep the sales cycle going. If troops aren't selling, they change the rules so people have to buy more of them. And when the sales go down from that, they'll change again.