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.

As a company that makes rules to be used within games, Games Workshop should really be aware of exploitation possibilities and aim to prevent it IMHO.

They may want everyone to use rules in a non-competitive manner, but things don't work like that and nor - I imagine - are they under any illusion that they do.

Bottom-line, I think as the company that designs the rules, Games Workshop should try to prevent any potential for abuse.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Coming soon to a galaxy near you: Abaddon and his gretchin legions unleash their 14th black crusade. Space wolves and thousand sons unite, and Commissar Yarrick teams up with the orks....

I'm glad I turned my back on the mess that GW has become. Andy Chambers and Rick Priestly must be spinning in their graves!

I can buy CSM and Daemons. I can but IG and CSM as part of a planet rebelling, I could even buy Tau and Ultramarines against those walking soup tins, but everything else is getting silly.

A final note on terrain. Given how easy it is to make rock piles, rubble and small ruins, added to all the tutorials on the painting section of this site, then I will be very dissapointed if anybody forks out big bucks for GW terrain.

I need to go and read my FOW rulebook

Andy Chambers and Rick Priestley in the same sentence? Wtf? If anything Andy Chambers is the man responsible for the direction GW has gone in the last decade. Him and Priestley are complete opposite ends of the spectrum mate.

And for what it's worth, Priestley recently gave an interview with BOW where he basically said the reason he was unhappy with where 40k has ended up was because it was restrictive on what players can do. If anything I think allies would be a step in the direction of what Priestley would have wanted.

Yes, get back to FOW.

DarthDiggler wrote:

wyomingfox wrote:You mean like nids Darth....

No not Nids. They will do fine with things like Harpies, flying Tyrants and preferred enemy everywhere.

We will have to see about harpies and how awesome swoop attack is or if they make any changes to venom cannons or barbed stanglers...at W3 two attacks they are beyond horrible in CC and unlike flyers they only get a single blast shot....for nearly 160-200 points, making them poor at shooting for the point cost.

Zathras wrote:

Something else I thought of regarding Hull Points on vehicles is how Entropic Strike will work. Will it stay the same or will I have to chew through the armor and Hull Points before the vehicle is wrecked?

It'll stay the same, I'm guessing, I mean, no matter how tough your hull is, once you have no armour you are stuffed
but I'm just guessing

To get rid of any possibility at all of exploitation the rules would have to be so strict it would no longer be any fun. You need the freedom to do something crazy from time to time to shake things up, if people use that freedom to write an unbeatable list they are to blame, not gw. Just my opinion though. Like in the battle report in this months's WD i really think the allies bit added to the game, but that's because they did what would be cool, not what would be the strongest combination possible

So with all the talk of allies being basically a mirror of the allies system in 8th edition fantasy. How does that work? How does it play out balance-wise, and is it allowed in tournaments? There are obvious holes in what we have come to know as the races in 40k and how they are supposed to fight together under almost any circumstances but if GW has already introduced this to fantasy I was wondering how well it works for that system.

I guess that means that all the fluff in the Templar dex is pretty much useless now then since there were multiple references to them fighting along side the Sisters of Battle against Chaos. I do remember a story about a Cannoness, an Emperors Champ and someone else standing against a Bloodthirster in a volcano. Guess GW needs to just omit that from any further publications of the Templar dex until they get there new one where it is revealed that was all a hoax and the Cannoness was possessed by a rival Chaos God....

You take that back, damn your eyes!!

I've been with the hobby a long time, 20+ years, and I've seen a lot of strange things in that time. One thing that was mentioned earlier, and I will agree with, is this points creep thing. Game sizes seem to be getting bigger (once it was 1000 points, now it's 2000) and the cost of models is going up money wise, whilst the gaming cost of a model is going down.

Now, it's true that nobody is forced to play 2500 point games, but given that there are so many rival gaming systems, so many rival model makers, video game options etc etc it is criminal to be charging £20 for 10 plastic IG troopers and only getting 60 game points for them. On top of £45 for a rulebook etc etc

I'm going to keep banging the FOW drum, but for £60 I get a hardback rulebook and a 1500 point late war German Panther force, and a gaming experience/set of rules that is as good as anything. The GW equivalent is around the £200 mark for a similar sized force. Do the math

I'm going to keep ranting, but I suspect that the allies rule is part of a GW campaign to destroy the dakka dakka site. They know there will be endless nerd rage, they know the number of threads that will be created over the next few months will probably buckle this site, and they know the self loathing they will induce in people i.e 'Yeah I hate GW but I've just spent $300 on dice and models, will produce an almighty backlash!!
This could be the spark for WW3

And yes, I am drinking right now!!!

Don't drink and post, mods might pull you over!

Hey man no blaring typos for drunk posting. I applaud you good sir.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I'm going to keep banging the FOW drum, but for £60 I get a hardback rulebook and a 1500 point late war German Panther force, and a gaming experience/set of rules that is as good as anything. The GW equivalent is around the £200 mark for a similar sized force. Do the math

Keep banging that drum, buddy! I'll go and get my horn, and we'll make a merry little band!

I'll probably only use allies for fluffy lists, chaos cultists, Eclessiarchy army wth Fraeteris Militia, Tau, etc

I now need to get work on alllies using the IG codex, I'm so glad I picked it up ages ago...

wyomingfox wrote:

DarthDiggler wrote:

wyomingfox wrote:You mean like nids Darth....

No not Nids. They will do fine with things like Harpies, flying Tyrants and preferred enemy everywhere.

We will have to see about harpies and how awesome swoop attack is or if they make any changes to venom cannons or barbed stanglers...at W3 two attacks they are beyond horrible in CC and unlike flyers they only get a single blast shot....for nearly 160-200 points, making them poor at shooting for the point cost.

I agree we will have to see. The vectored strike rule is something like d3 hits on a unit it flies over. Can it fly over another flyer? The venom cannon is str 9 and flyers have big models which make it harder to scatter off. All you need to do it glance twice and the flyer is down. I'm not 100%, but I have reason to think I am close. As you say we will have to see.

I was using GK for an AdMech list, now I could go with a IG/GK allied list.

Yay for Hydra-spam!

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Coming soon to a galaxy near you: Abaddon and his gretchin legions unleash their 14th black crusade. Space wolves and thousand sons unite, and Commissar Yarrick teams up with the orks....

Abaddon leading a Green Crusade of Gretchin Legions is the best idea I've heard for an army yet. Thanks!

I don't know about the rest of the world but it's saturday night here in the UK and I need to blot out the Spain Vs France game!!
Let the drinks flow!!

Anyway, back on topic. The lack of info about the new rules seems disturbing, given that the rulebook is there in store for people to preview. The law of averages says that somebody should have had a good read by now, cover to cover. As for vehicles, I suspect that Leman Russes, and Land Raiders will be more durable than your standard ork truck. I can buy a load of glancing hits taking out a truck, especially if it's open topped (bursting tyres, lucky shot on driver etc etc) but a bunch of fire warriors or necron warriors shooting down a land raider. Hmm...

Just Dave wrote:As a company that makes rules to be used within games, Games Workshop should really be aware of exploitation possibilities and aim to prevent it IMHO.

Games Workshop has stated several times that they're first and foremost a miniatures company that has rules only so you can play with those miniatures. This is not meant to be sardonic or cynical in any way.

Plus, we don't know if Allies rules are 100% official rules meant to be used in all games of 40k. Many sources still point to it being a variant.

Regardless, what better way to sell miniatures to people that already have entire armies than to sell miniatures to them from OTHER armies?
Play Necrons? They're friends with Blood Angels now, don't you know?
Play Tau? They're cool with Chaos if you are!
Play Black Templar and hate everyone? Eldar want to be your friend and bring some Xenos Witches!

Of course Black Templars are okay with teaming up. More "friends" to be meat shields!

I'm not sure that any stores did actually have the rules, my store didnt (we did however have a MASSIVE tank battle, sort of a farewell and good riddance to 5th ed, one guy had over 100 tank I belive, enough to fill 2 realm of battle tiles, I digress) so i'd assume that no store (no GW's anyway) had the rulebook.

Absolutionis wrote:

Just Dave wrote:As a company that makes rules to be used within games, Games Workshop should really be aware of exploitation possibilities and aim to prevent it IMHO.

Games Workshop has stated several times that they're first and foremost a miniatures company that has rules only so you can play with those miniatures. This is not meant to be sardonic or cynical in any way.

Oh I know this and understand it from GW's perspective. But my above point still stands.

So I guess I'm getting a Collectors Edition book.

Should be cool.

Have to agree with Just Dave... they make rules, they make 400+ page rulebooks, they push the game as an integral part of the experience... there is no excuse for making gak rules and saying 'well we don't really care'. If you are going to do it, do it right, especially when doing it half-assed still takes a ton of effort and expense and could hurt you, and doing it right takes not much more effort and expense and could benefit you significantly.

I mean c'mon. lol

If I want space marines in my force, I'll go space marines. If I want GK, I'll buy GK. If I want orks to command, I'll go orks. If I want IG to led into battle....I'll go Imperial guard

I can buy into the idea of Guard and Marines in Apoc games. I could even buy into Dark Angels and thousand sons teaming up to take out those bearded ginger gits on fenris (who can blame them ) but Abaddon and the gretchin legions!! WTF x 1000

Of course, when the rules are officially on the shelves, and something is revealed that makes all this 50+ pages of moaning redundant, I reserve the right to change my mind and declare 6th edition to be a work of genius and mat ward a living saint

Have to agree with Just Dave...

You're right of course, but remember that their rules are mostly good enough. I've been in the game for twenty years and I can't remember a time when something wasn't blatantly overpowered or easily abusable. We've always had a ton of fun nevertheless, and each time the problems have been possible to rectify with composition scoring or other restrictions. The players are already organised when they arrange tournaments and it takes little to no effort at all to add your house rules, fixes and tweaks to the mission pack. Of course we'd like things to be perfect straight out of the box but it's just a pipe dream.

Are the people that are so irate the same people who have not played any 2v2 games? The crazy combos is what makes it fun!

(Just trying to lighten the mood, don't lynch me)

DarthDiggler wrote:I'm pretty sure most major North American tournaments will allow allies as some army books are unplayable without them. It's really not that bad in practice.

As for the Necron Phalanx being back, I thought losing an assault and getting the whole unit run down killed that unit? Are negative modifiers to morale in a losing assault gone? Otherwise I don't see 12 warriors and a Phaeron being around very long on the tabletop.

But don't you see? They won't get into an assault. Charge distances are random, and the Necrons can manilpulate that distance; wound allocation starts with the closest models, and Snap Fire allows the Necrons to shoot in response to an assault. Not to mention the rumour that relentless adds 1 shot to RF. So think about this:

1x Overlord w/ Phaeron
20x Warriors
1x Harbinger of Transmogrification

If that unit is charged, then they will get to shoot potentially 60 Gauss shots, and the Harbinger of Transmogrification will also get to shoots his Voltaic Staff, which is a blast, and will decrease the charge distance by D3. Now, imagine what would happen if that assaulting unit had already been hit my the staff in the previous shooting phase: the unit would have its charge distance reduced by D3 already, and then another D3 from the defensive fire. That would very easily cause a failed charge.

Now, there are a few things that are unclear:

1) can you use defensive fire against a failed assault?
2) if your defensive fire mows down the front ranks so that no charging enemy models are within 1" of your Warriors, does the assault fail?
3) does defensive fire occur when the unit declares its charge, or does it occur when the two units collide? The example I gave with the Voltaic Staff means that the answer to this question will have a huge impact to the Necrons, as being able to fire off a blast that reduces charge distance is incredibly powerful during defensive fire.

Dantalian wrote:GW totally has been growing the size of the armies with every edition. This can be seen in tournament/open gaming events they have held of the last 10 years now, each consecutive one has been larger and larger. These "events" for some reason tend to become the new average point size since people tend to build their lists to match the events rules. I remember when the average game was about 1000pts.

1000points has never been the standard size for 40K.

GW has certainly been providing for larger games as time goes by... but that's not entirely being driven by GW. The change from 2nd edition's skirmish system to the more 'streamlined' 3rd edition was pushed just as much by the players as by GW. GW simply capitalised on the fact that during the lifespan of 2nd edition, players kept playing larger and larger games. By the end of 2nd edition, even with a ruleset that got ridiculously clunky over 3000 points or so, we were regularly playing 5-10000 point games... and my gaming group wasn't the only one doing that.

People kept playing bigger games, so GW gave them a ruleset that was better able to handle that. People then not only kept playing bigger games, but started asking for titans and thunderhawks and baneblades (oh my!)... and so GW gave them a ruleset to handle that.

The increase in tournament sizes has likewise not just been pushed by GW. From what I recall, it was the indies that started pushing the tournie points limit up... GW just followed suit.

Not arguing that larger games is good for GW, because it means more sales... just that it's not just GW saying that we should be playing bigger games.

Dantalian wrote:Also If you were even in the hobby around 2nd and 3rd, you would realize 1000pts was a HUGE game.

It really wasn't. 1000 points in 2nd edition was more or less the equivalent of Combat Patrol. 2000 points was the standard, and was equivalent to 1500 points in 3rd.

Happygrunt wrote:While everyone complains about the rules, I am sitting her wondering how I am supposed to justify a $75 game book. I mean, seriously.

You can buy a new video game, which these days generally seems to get you around 8 to 10 hours of play time... Or you can buy a rulebook that will get you how many times more than that?

azazel the cat wrote:Okay... so the Necrons can ally with the Black Templars... I understand that ally =/= BFF, but I'm pretty sure the Necron codex mentions that at some point, Imotekh cut off Helbrecht's arms. So one way or another, I just don't understand how those two races are gonna fist-bump.

As has been mentioned, that's covered quite well by the Allies of Convenience set-up. There are all sorts of scenarios possible where two forces can find themselves with similar objectives without being BFFs.

TBD wrote:And why would Sisters of Battle & Black Templars be an "unholy alliance" :question

It's possible that the BTs would take a dim view of ladies who sprout wings and flit around the battlefield waving flaming swords and throwing doves at people...

MajorTom11 wrote:Have to agree with Just Dave... they make rules, they make 400+ page rulebooks, they push the game as an integral part of the experience... there is no excuse for making gak rules and saying 'well we don't really care'. If you are going to do it, do it right, especially when doing it half-assed still takes a ton of effort and expense and could hurt you, and doing it right takes not much more effort and expense and could benefit you significantly.

I mean c'mon. lol

But, in reading JJ's Standard Bearer, he constantly makes reference to the narrative side of things and I get a distinct feeling that people who exploit the gaping flaws in the rules are viewed as 'bad folks you shouldn't play against', which doesn't even take pick up games into account, let alone tourneys.

Instead of seeking balance in the rules, I see an amount of nostalgia for Rogue Trader from the design team, coupled with a desire to sell models immediately regardless of playability from the corporate side.

Of course, I've yet to sit down and read these rules, but 'take what you want' unless your tyranids, seems very silly, as does buying buildings in a standard game.

Eldar Craft wrote:So with all the talk of allies being basically a mirror of the allies system in 8th edition fantasy. How does that work? How does it play out balance-wise, and is it allowed in tournaments? There are obvious holes in what we have come to know as the races in 40k and how they are supposed to fight together under almost any circumstances but if GW has already introduced this to fantasy I was wondering how well it works for that system.

Actually, once the WD came out, and then the glimpse of the allies rules in the video teaser, these comparisons more or less cease.

In WHFB the allies section is explicitly for the purpose of allowing two players with their own armies to team up. It makes no attempt at being balanced, and I assume it is completely ignored in single player tournaments (but adhered to in doubles tournaments).

These 40K ally rules are clearly meant for one player to combine units from different armies in a single list, so the comparison to the WHFB system doesn't work that well.