Switch Theme:

Chapter approved rumors  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut





Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
A points system can be created and useful when you account for the fact that the more points you spend on a unit the larger the target on it's back.

If it's fast, killy, and tough, there shouldn't be a lot of other stuff backing it up. If the ga.e is based around a decent amount of terrain, then range is a tactical advantage, not a statistical one.

Back to the topic at hand, I can't wait to see what they have for building your own characters! I already spend 2 command points upping my troupe master warlord and gave him a relic. Let me REALLY make him something special!


Basicaly you can take any non unique character in your army and give it between 4 to 8 special rules. They can only take the wargear options normaly open to them. Only pyskers can take the psychic boosts. You cant boost relics. Some bonuses effect wargear and some effect the model including stat buffs and some cool auras
   
Made in gb
Boom! Leman Russ Commander





The Shire(s)

tneva82 wrote:
Khahandran wrote:
You've said this before, and never actually explained why it's broken. You said +S, pay Y is broken by definition, and yet haven't said why that's broken. And yet again you ignore the simple principle in that a formula can produce an initial result which can then be manually adjusted.


Because it doesn't factor in COMPLETE package. How much value +1M is? It depends on everything else on the unit. THEN it depends on what opposing armies have. THEN it depends on missions. THEN it depends on terrain. There's no way you can even write down that in paper. The value of M, S, A, etc are not fixed. They are fluid depending on everything. You would need system that for example drops value of model the more and more h2h based unit with no guns. But then if it's long range gun low M is of lesser concern. And simultaneously ensure you can't game this by dropping useless stats(S1 for model that's long range gun platform) and get hefty point drops.

Oh and manually adjusted...ROFLMAO! Imagine chapter approved rules for "Matched play unit creator! Create your own units for matched play!" which then ends up "adjust manually as needed".

Yeah that's much different to simply agreeing with your opponents. ROFLMAO. It would be NO DIFFERENT TO NOW. The character creation rules wouldn't be any more usable in tournaments if it requires manual adjustement. If requires then it's no more usable outside either. Either way it's up to players to sort it out thus making it out of matched play.

ROFLMAO. What a suggestion. Manual adjustement for formula when point of formula would be to get theoretically balanced unit so that players could actually use it without talking to opponent. ROFLMAO ROFLMAO ROFLAMO.

Honestly, that just means the formula is not complicated enough. You can do all that kind of thing with statistical variable regression analyses, if you take the time to do the research and plot the impacts of variables. The problem is that this is a huge time and research investment outside of actual scientific research, so I highly doubt GW would ever do it. Within scientific research, it is a common way to control for variables in observational studies.

Also, the manual adjustment was clearly referring to tweaking the formula results by playtesting by GW, not to customers manually adjusting once they get their rulebook. The latter happens, but is obviously not the intent of the post.

 ChargerIIC wrote:
If algae farm paste with a little bit of your grandfather in it isn't Grimdark I don't know what is.
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




tneva82 wrote:
Khahandran wrote:
You've said this before, and never actually explained why it's broken. You said +S, pay Y is broken by definition, and yet haven't said why that's broken. And yet again you ignore the simple principle in that a formula can produce an initial result which can then be manually adjusted.


Because it doesn't factor in COMPLETE package. How much value +1M is? It depends on everything else on the unit. THEN it depends on what opposing armies have. THEN it depends on missions. THEN it depends on terrain. There's no way you can even write down that in paper. The value of M, S, A, etc are not fixed. They are fluid depending on everything. You would need system that for example drops value of model the more and more h2h based unit with no guns. But then if it's long range gun low M is of lesser concern. And simultaneously ensure you can't game this by dropping useless stats(S1 for model that's long range gun platform) and get hefty point drops.

Oh and manually adjusted...ROFLMAO! Imagine chapter approved rules for "Matched play unit creator! Create your own units for matched play!" which then ends up "adjust manually as needed".

Yeah that's much different to simply agreeing with your opponents. ROFLMAO. It would be NO DIFFERENT TO NOW. The character creation rules wouldn't be any more usable in tournaments if it requires manual adjustement. If requires then it's no more usable outside either. Either way it's up to players to sort it out thus making it out of matched play.

ROFLMAO. What a suggestion. Manual adjustement for formula when point of formula would be to get theoretically balanced unit so that players could actually use it without talking to opponent. ROFLMAO ROFLMAO ROFLAMO.

Your Captain, if a suicide missile, is gonna function the same if he had additional movement on top of his Jump Pack.

Obviously some HQ units will gain more benefit from different upgrades (obviously a Captain and Catachan Commander would benefit more from a +1S compared to a Farseer or Cadian Commander), but this is true for ALL upgrades. Power Fists are HOW cheap now for Imperial Guard and we still don't take them outside MAYBE Catachan.

That's just a poor excuse on your end and helps justify GW laziness for balance.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Auras are a terrible mechanic. They cannot be costed properly because you have no idea who/what they are buffing.

Guilliman is the perfect example. S5 buffed by gulliman is awesome, without him it's meh. So do you price Gman like he is always buffing the maximum amount of s5 guns in his aura? Do you price all s5 like it is in that guilliman bubble?

Now you have s5 that isn't eligible to be buffed by gulliman but since you call it the same thing it gets the same stupid price because of reasons.

Guard orders are a much better mechanic and should be what's used. Finite number of targets that can be restricted easier. Either that or the models wholly within vs any part of a unit that is touching the bubble.

The basic design of 8th edition really makes it an unbalanceable mess. The model guys -> business guys -> rules guys approach just doesn't create a game that has the basic frame work to be balanced.

Same with the Ynarii rules, or cross eldar doom. Some abilities just break any attempt at balance. I give the rules guys credit for trying but it's not going to happen with the emphasis on rule of cool, "simple" rules and keeping people spending money on the hobby.
   
Made in us
Awesome Autarch





Dallas area, TX

bananathug wrote:
Auras are a terrible mechanic. They cannot be costed properly because you have no idea who/what they are buffing.

Guilliman is the perfect example. S5 buffed by gulliman is awesome, without him it's meh. So do you price Gman like he is always buffing the maximum amount of s5 guns in his aura? Do you price all s5 like it is in that guilliman bubble?

Now you have s5 that isn't eligible to be buffed by gulliman but since you call it the same thing it gets the same stupid price because of reasons.

Guard orders are a much better mechanic and should be what's used. Finite number of targets that can be restricted easier. Either that or the models wholly within vs any part of a unit that is touching the bubble.

The basic design of 8th edition really makes it an unbalanceable mess. The model guys -> business guys -> rules guys approach just doesn't create a game that has the basic frame work to be balanced.

Same with the Ynarii rules, or cross eldar doom. Some abilities just break any attempt at balance. I give the rules guys credit for trying but it's not going to happen with the emphasis on rule of cool, "simple" rules and keeping people spending money on the hobby.
I actually like reroll 1 aura's, because they aren't too strong overall, especially since few things are actually hitting/wounding on 2+
But otherwise, I agree than auras are hard to balance

-

   
Made in us
Krazed Killa Kan





Denver, Colorado

 Galef wrote:
.I actually like reroll 1 aura's, because they aren't too strong overall, especially since few things are actually hitting/wounding on 2+
But otherwise, I agree than auras are hard to balance



I think that they'd easily balanced by instead of ALL units within X", auras get changed to, like 1-3 units within X". Basically work like IG orders - you command a unit to be better. Special characters like G-man would be able to buff multiple, but not ALL. All is bananas.

"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment." Words to live by. 
   
Made in fi
Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 Kap'n Krump wrote:
 Galef wrote:
.I actually like reroll 1 aura's, because they aren't too strong overall, especially since few things are actually hitting/wounding on 2+
But otherwise, I agree than auras are hard to balance

I think that they'd easily balanced by instead of ALL units within X", auras get changed to, like 1-3 units within X". Basically work like IG orders - you command a unit to be better. Special characters like G-man would be able to buff multiple, but not ALL. All is bananas.

Yep. The IG orders are way superior mechanic to the auras. They're far easier to balance and lead to more interesting game play as you actually need to decide which units to buff and with which order.

Only the insane have strength enough to prosper. Only those who prosper may truly judge what is sane. 
   
Made in se
Lead-Footed Trukkboy Driver





Stockholm, Sweden

Yeah, I would love to have my Necron Overlord to give MWBD to every unit within his aura. Alas, I can only select one.

Seems like most abilities in the more recent codexes only target one unit within a certain distance - maybe this "buffs for everyone" thing from Space Marines and Chaos codexes will be rolled back when they are rereleased, one can hope.

Oguhmek paints Orks (and Necrons): 'Ere we go!
 
   
Made in de
Witch Hunter in the Shadows



Aachen

 Crimson wrote:
 Kap'n Krump wrote:
 Galef wrote:
.I actually like reroll 1 aura's, because they aren't too strong overall, especially since few things are actually hitting/wounding on 2+
But otherwise, I agree than auras are hard to balance

I think that they'd easily balanced by instead of ALL units within X", auras get changed to, like 1-3 units within X". Basically work like IG orders - you command a unit to be better. Special characters like G-man would be able to buff multiple, but not ALL. All is bananas.

Yep. The IG orders are way superior mechanic to the auras. They're far easier to balance and lead to more interesting game play as you actually need to decide which units to buff and with which order.


as an IG player I'd never bring all three Company Commanders needed to order the 6 Infantry squads around.

Spoiler:
Yes.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Cutting stuff up and bunging it back together in new and interesting ways.






Under the couch

 Elbows wrote:
I think people are absolutely missing the point of the character creation rules, and why they're listed as Open Play only.

If you attend a tournament, do you think any TO is going to take the time to verify your bespoke made-up gak? No.

The Vehicle Design Rules weren't generally allowed in tournaments, but still had points costs...


Tournament organisers are always free to allow or disallow whatever they choose. That's not a reason to make it harder for people to use stuff in casual play.


The thing is, the lack of points values is only half of the problem. The bigger issue is the same as we faced with the VDR - you can use these rules to create awesome, characterful pieces for your army... that most likely won't be valid for use next edition, when these creation rules are completely forgotten about. There's been a long history of GW creating rules for creating awesome custom stuff and then forgetting all about it five minutes later (Cursed Foundings, anyone?), which is painful when you've gone and built a bunch of models based around those rules.

Even if they're going to be Open play only, it would be nice to have these sorts of unit creation rules bundled into a proper standalone supplement that gets updated each edition.

   
Made in gb
Boom! Leman Russ Commander




Manchester, UK

 insaniak wrote:
There's been a long history of GW creating rules for creating awesome custom stuff and then forgetting all about it five minutes later (Cursed Foundings, anyone?), which is painful when you've gone and built a bunch of models based around those rules.


I always think of how horrible it would have been to have a 100% pistol+ccw Guard army in 3rd, just to have had it wiped away. Hell, I used to have lasgun sergeants and that was bad enough to lose on only 1 in 10 minis.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 20:59:19


The Tvashtan 422nd "Fire Leopards" - Updated 19/03/11

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor 
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




tneva82 wrote:
Khahandran wrote:
You've said this before, and never actually explained why it's broken. You said +S, pay Y is broken by definition, and yet haven't said why that's broken. And yet again you ignore the simple principle in that a formula can produce an initial result which can then be manually adjusted.


Because it doesn't factor in COMPLETE package. How much value +1M is? It depends on everything else on the unit. THEN it depends on what opposing armies have. THEN it depends on missions. THEN it depends on terrain. There's no way you can even write down that in paper. The value of M, S, A, etc are not fixed. They are fluid depending on everything. You would need system that for example drops value of model the more and more h2h based unit with no guns. But then if it's long range gun low M is of lesser concern. And simultaneously ensure you can't game this by dropping useless stats(S1 for model that's long range gun platform) and get hefty point drops.

Oh and manually adjusted...ROFLMAO! Imagine chapter approved rules for "Matched play unit creator! Create your own units for matched play!" which then ends up "adjust manually as needed".

Yeah that's much different to simply agreeing with your opponents. ROFLMAO. It would be NO DIFFERENT TO NOW. The character creation rules wouldn't be any more usable in tournaments if it requires manual adjustement. If requires then it's no more usable outside either. Either way it's up to players to sort it out thus making it out of matched play.

ROFLMAO. What a suggestion. Manual adjustement for formula when point of formula would be to get theoretically balanced unit so that players could actually use it without talking to opponent. ROFLMAO ROFLMAO ROFLAMO.

The vast majority of the things you have just said are literally irrelevant to assigning points, nor could they be taken into account by your nebulous 'feels' ekither. Doesn't matter what army you're facing, it has no basis on changing the points of THIS model. You can't account for terrain in points. A +1M always has a value. What the unit has does not matter to that.

You clearly don't understand what I mean by manual adjustments. We're talking about using the formula to decide points. You put the points through the formula, then you playtest and make those 'feel' adjustments you seem to think should be the basis from the start.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Cutting stuff up and bunging it back together in new and interesting ways.






Under the couch

Khahandran wrote:
A +1M always has a value. What the unit has does not matter to that..

This is not at all true.

An extra inch of movement is significantly more useful (and therefore should be worth more points-wise) to a unit that is designed to charge across the battlefield than it would be to a unit that is designed to hang about at the back of the battlefield.

It gets even more complicated when you look at what the army that model is designed to fit into is supposed to do. A fast moving unit in an assault oriented army is considerably more useful than a fast moving unit in a stationary gunline army.


It's not as simple as 'this stat = this many points'. Not if you actually want anything remotely balanced.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/14 22:08:11


   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




darthryan wrote:
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
A points system can be created and useful when you account for the fact that the more points you spend on a unit the larger the target on it's back.

If it's fast, killy, and tough, there shouldn't be a lot of other stuff backing it up. If the ga.e is based around a decent amount of terrain, then range is a tactical advantage, not a statistical one.

Back to the topic at hand, I can't wait to see what they have for building your own characters! I already spend 2 command points upping my troupe master warlord and gave him a relic. Let me REALLY make him something special!


Basicaly you can take any non unique character in your army and give it between 4 to 8 special rules. They can only take the wargear options normaly open to them. Only pyskers can take the psychic boosts. You cant boost relics. Some bonuses effect wargear and some effect the model including stat buffs and some cool auras


That rules! My troupe master being S4 with a powersword that does 2 damage would be fantastic!

He's already a great harlequin troupmaster of twilight (has been since last edition) with a powersword and the starmist raiment (again, same as last edition) but a couple little buffs to his statline would really make him something to write home about.

He and my solitaire can go hunting together, and he wouldn't look like a backup dancer...

   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Crimson wrote:
 Kap'n Krump wrote:
 Galef wrote:
.I actually like reroll 1 aura's, because they aren't too strong overall, especially since few things are actually hitting/wounding on 2+
But otherwise, I agree than auras are hard to balance

I think that they'd easily balanced by instead of ALL units within X", auras get changed to, like 1-3 units within X". Basically work like IG orders - you command a unit to be better. Special characters like G-man would be able to buff multiple, but not ALL. All is bananas.

Yep. The IG orders are way superior mechanic to the auras. They're far easier to balance and lead to more interesting game play as you actually need to decide which units to buff and with which order.

Making everything bland and samey is more interesting?

I actually like auras, they are both different mechanic and fluffy in the factor that they don't buff individual SM units as much as IG officers do theirs (because SM already work on much higher level) but the Captain can split his attention much more efficiently and juggle multiple facets at once unlike normal humans. If SM actually do get "orders" it should be in addition to auras, not as replacement, IMO...

Khahandran wrote:
A +1M always has a value. What the unit has does not matter to that.

No. Just no. +1M on devastators or another unit that wants to stand and shoot is worth very little. +1M on assault terminators or vanguard is gold. Always, you say?

Or even better example, +1 BS. Seems valuable, no? Wrong. On Genestealers or TH/SS marine units, it's completely worthless. Put the same +1 BS on dakkafex or sternguard veterans then somehow argue with straight face there is a formula that allows you to balance these 4 units after plugging in something simple like "+1 BS" then we can talk.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Well you're not paying for +1BS on a TH/SS Terminator. We are talking about HQ units. If you don't want them shooting, don't buy the BS+1 upgrade. If you want them to simply camp, dont buy the M+1 upgrade.

There IS a universal value. It just needs to be found.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord






Using math to multiply out different values into a point cost works great to get a base value. The next step is to have a few people with strong rules knowledge and experience to look at it and adjust accordingly. Then playtest it and adjust to get a final value.

That is just my personal take though.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/15 06:54:36


"Putting a statement in quotations makes it seem more legitimate."
--Bette R. Withname

Imagine three people with the same set of values but radically different emotional states, each of them believes their position is more valid than the other two, they all post using the same account, and your job is to make it coherent. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






We released the big update to Battlescribe catalog files this morning, so update and enjoy your (mostly) cheaper units!

Battlescribe Catalog Editor - Please report bugs here http://battlescribedata.appspot.com/#/repo/wh40k 
   
Made in us
Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Sioux Falls, SD

 axisofentropy wrote:
We released the big update to Battlescribe catalog files this morning, so update and enjoy your (mostly) cheaper units!
I have noticed a few mistakes in the C:SM codex (Power Fists are still 12 pts instead of 9 pts, Auxillary Grenade Launcher is 1 pt instead of 0 pts), where do I submit errors to?

5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts 
   
Made in us
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine




 casvalremdeikun wrote:
 axisofentropy wrote:
We released the big update to Battlescribe catalog files this morning, so update and enjoy your (mostly) cheaper units!
I have noticed a few mistakes in the C:SM codex (Power Fists are still 12 pts instead of 9 pts, Auxillary Grenade Launcher is 1 pt instead of 0 pts), where do I submit errors to?



Well, the most commonly used method is to start a new thread here and decry the designers as incompetence and questioning their ethics. Make sure there is lots of shouting and rendering of garments. And make sure to point out how Battlescribe killed your childhood.

How that helps.
   
Made in us
Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Sioux Falls, SD

 Crimson Devil wrote:
 casvalremdeikun wrote:
 axisofentropy wrote:
We released the big update to Battlescribe catalog files this morning, so update and enjoy your (mostly) cheaper units!
I have noticed a few mistakes in the C:SM codex (Power Fists are still 12 pts instead of 9 pts, Auxillary Grenade Launcher is 1 pt instead of 0 pts), where do I submit errors to?



Well, the most commonly used method is to start a new thread here and decry the designers as incompetence and questioning their ethics. Make sure there is lots of shouting and rendering of garments. And make sure to point out how Battlescribe killed your childhood.

How that helps.
But how does someone who isn't an emotionally-stunted manchild submit errors?

5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Heroic Senior Officer





Murray, Kentucky

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well you're not paying for +1BS on a TH/SS Terminator. We are talking about HQ units. If you don't want them shooting, don't buy the BS+1 upgrade. If you want them to simply camp, dont buy the M+1 upgrade.

There IS a universal value. It just needs to be found.

The problem is +1 BS is worth very different amounts for different units. If you're trying to give it a set value and keep it balanced, you'd have to price it fairly for the most powerful units that can use it, which often will price it out of the range of most average units. Which means if say an Ork player wants to give his warboss +1 BS, it's probably not going to be as fairly priced for him when you need to account that the same cost would be used for an IG tank commander.

Trying to make it a formula is way more complicated if it scales based on certain factors, but would be more balanced. Problem is I don't see gw bothering with something that complicated.

There really isn't any set amount any stat in the game is worth, there are so many factors at play that you really do need to go with a general feel approach and tweak from there. Believing a hard and fast formula works is why tac marines suck so much. Mathematically I'm sure they made sense to the writers but when you factor in the environment they have to exist in, they're not worth it in the slightest. How their abilities are worded, how they're armed, what they're expected to fight, how missions are designed, what else exists in their codex, what strategems they have access to all have real values but are not something you can just punch into a calculator

'I've played Guard for years, and the best piece of advice is to always utilize the Guard's best special rule: "we roll more dice than you" ' - stormleader

"Sector Imperialis: 25mm and 40mm Round Bases (40+20) 26€ (Including 32 skulls for basing) " GW design philosophy in a nutshell  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






 casvalremdeikun wrote:
 axisofentropy wrote:
We released the big update to Battlescribe catalog files this morning, so update and enjoy your (mostly) cheaper units!
I have noticed a few mistakes in the C:SM codex (Power Fists are still 12 pts instead of 9 pts, Auxillary Grenade Launcher is 1 pt instead of 0 pts), where do I submit errors to?
Please report bugs here http://battlescribedata.appspot.com/#/repo/wh40k

Battlescribe Catalog Editor - Please report bugs here http://battlescribedata.appspot.com/#/repo/wh40k 
   
Made in us
Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Sioux Falls, SD

 axisofentropy wrote:
 casvalremdeikun wrote:
 axisofentropy wrote:
We released the big update to Battlescribe catalog files this morning, so update and enjoy your (mostly) cheaper units!
I have noticed a few mistakes in the C:SM codex (Power Fists are still 12 pts instead of 9 pts, Auxillary Grenade Launcher is 1 pt instead of 0 pts), where do I submit errors to?
Please report bugs here http://battlescribedata.appspot.com/#/repo/wh40k
Awesome, I submitted those for review.

5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




A model doesn't have a value added based on the stat itself, the value is in the weapon based on the stat.

A bolter is priced differently depending on the ballistic skill of the user. It just so happens that most things using them are guaranteed to have them. So the point cost is lumped into the unit itself. Then, that point cost is subtracted from any weapons that could be swapped out for the baseline weapon option.

So a ballistic skill of 2+ on a model with no ranged weapons means nothing, and therefore doesn't cost any points. Which is why stormshields saw the point reduction they did. It lost the benefit of ballistic skill on the model and was therefore wasting points.

The expensive bit is weapon skill. Everything can make a weapon attack at baseline strength and no ap. This means that a marine pays the same for melee combat abilities as a +1 str weapon on things like eldar or guard.

Also of note, most units don't pay points for things based on a "per model" basis, but on a unit wide basis.

A group of tactical marines doesn't buy bolter, bolt pistol, and frag/krack grenades at say a point each per model. The base unit of 5 pays around 8 points for the suite of weapons they start with that is then divided among the models rounded to the nearest whole number.

(I spent way too long trying to get into the minds of the gw design team...)

   
Made in us
Revenant Pirate Crew






I hate the constant rerolls just for how much time they add to a game.

 
   
Made in pl
Regular Dakkanaut




Will point changes be uploaded to official GW FAQs page?
   
Made in de
Chalice-Wielding Sanguinary High Priest






Germany

I dont think so. Didnt happen with CA 2017, why should it with CA 2018 ?
   
Made in si
Steady Stonecleaver







I'm impressed at how lazy the much advertized Looted Vehicles rules are. They're literally just Rhino (which can add enough small arms to be a Chimera), Russ and Baneblade with imperial guns swapped out for Ork guns and one random D3 table. They even go as far as typing out the entirety of the Dakka! Dakka! Dakka! rule in full on each of the 3 datasheets just to fill up white space.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/16 11:31:27


Posters on ignore list: 33

40k Potica Edition - 40k patch with reactions, suppression and all that good stuff. Feedback thread here.

Gangs of Nu Ork - Necromunda / Gorkamorka expansion supporting all faction. Feedback thread here
   
Made in fi
Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 lord_blackfang wrote:
I'm impressed at how lazy the much advertized Looted Vehicles rules are. They're literally just Rhino (which can add enough small arms to be a Chimera), Russ and Baneblade with imperial guns swapped out for Ork guns and one random D3 table. They even go as far as typing out the entirety of the Dakka! Dakka! Dakka! rule in full on each of the 3 datasheets just to fill up white space.


What should they have done instead? Sounds perfectly fine approach to me. Looted Russ has rules resembling Russ, makes perfect sense to me. Anyway, it shouldn't be too hard to use these in matched if people are willing to be flexible; you only need to come up with point cost for the chassis.

Only the insane have strength enough to prosper. Only those who prosper may truly judge what is sane. 
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: