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.
2017/05/08 15:31:40
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
My intention was not to gripe about how awesome my Wraithlords were and how much it sucks to be me now they the playing field is level.
The fact of the matter is that the playing field was never level. Wraithlords (WL) and Dreadnaughts have never made for a solid apples-to-apples comparison since they are totally different. For starters, they have extremely different point values to reflect their disparate performance, and the fill different roles on the table. My WLs have always been great at grabbing enemy attention. They are big and scary-looking and can take some punishment, and they don't lay down the hurt like some of the other choices. What makes them unique IMO is that unlike tradition tarpit units that can lock up enemy squads (any dreadnaught, most MCs, and a handful of ICs) WLs can tarpit larger, more dangerous enemies. I am not limited to keeping one of my enemies squads occupied - instead I could keep his HQ busy for a few turns, or his larger, heavier MCs. This role just isn't filled by other models. With the new changes it is filled by almost all walkers.
Dreadnaughts are, by comparison, more specialized. They can be dedicate for melee with various close combat weapons, or they can be kitted for dakka and sport autocannons, plasma cannons, missile launchers, and so on. The WLs are sort less performant in either area but are competent at both. Sort of 'jack of all trades but master of none'.
Now, don't get me wrong. I still think this is a loss more than a victory for a few reasons. The most selfish reason is that I am an Eldar player of many years and as any Eldar player knows, there is already a huge problem with the FOC. Specifically the Heavy Support section and how saturated it is for my faction. Heavy support is already contentious and any time you chose to field a WL you're doing so knowing that you gave up a squad of War Walkers, a Fire Prism, or something else that would be super valuable - this is good, it means that each unit has a value. By removing the value of one unit you are giving it de-facto to another. If WLs become undesirable as I fear they will, all Eldar players will ultimately field less diverse forces. It hurts the game as a whole when fewer models are played. Perhaps a better way to say it - when more battlefield roles are performed by dedicated units.
It may be an extreme example, but think about what SM forces would play like if they just removed Dreadnaughts from the army list. How would you compensate for such a thing.
This all causes me to worry that GW may actually be telling the truth - they may actually be reducing the entire game to quick, more homogeneous matches. If 'everything can hurt everything' than the difference in value for any given part of that 'everything' is markedly reduced. the games will be shorter not because the rules were simplified, but because so much less of what you can do as a player matters. I am honestly worried that all units are just being reduced to 'versions' of their Space Marine counterparts. If Dire Avengers just become elfy-themed version of Space Marines, and WLs are just colorful iterations of dreadnaughts, what's to stop the same from happening to Chaos units, the Tau, or the Tyranids? What's the value in playing those forces?
Sorry - it's all pretty meta at this point since nothing is official until the rules are printed a published, but I think my worries are at the very least well founded.
Ahh but that's not what you said - at all. You most recently said:
Dreadnaughts are, by comparison, more specialized. They can be dedicate for melee with various close combat weapons, or they can be kitted for dakka and sport autocannons, plasma cannons, missile launchers, and so on. The WLs are sort less performant in either area but are competent at both. Sort of 'jack of all trades but master of none'
So then previously you said:
One of the primary reasons that Wraithlords (wraith-anything FTM) are so attractive in the current game is that by not having Armor Facing and instead having a very high toughness and a decent W count makes them vastly superior to other walkers. I'd had my Wraithlords go head-to-head with dreads & venerable dreads more times than I can count and I've never once come out on the losing side of that.
See the problem there?
Apparently the jack of all trades unit always wins against the specialist. So that can't be right?
makes them vastly superior to other walkers
Again - your words and one of the problems with 7th ed and 7.5 edition power dexes like Eldar
On the other concern - AOS units are all pretty different.....I am not that worried about that aspect
Point taken.
I'll ask that you forgive my not being a professional wordsmith.
I feel like I clarified my stance is that last post though. Superior is subjective, and for my purposes, the WL represented a superior value for two reasons. On one hand it was sort of like a SM Dreadnaught in that it was a walker that came from the same FOC section of the two books. The premium I paid in point cost manifested on the table by greater performance when compared to the lower point value of the Dread. If anything, this is a ode to the value of the point system. At least in this case, what you paid for is what you got.
On the other hand, when fielding my Dreads in my SM force, I rarely if ever used them as melee units. I got the most mileage out of them as ranged units. (Granted, this may be a symptom of 40k's longstanding bias towards ranged combat, and seems to be subject to change in this forthcoming edition). Both filled different roles.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/08 15:33:17
2017/05/08 15:33:07
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
50 guard in a blob with the following configuration - 10 flamers - 4 lascannons - 4 MLs - 2 HBs - 30 lasguns
That squad is extremely terrifying. Up close it throws out 60 STR 3 shots and 10d6 STR 4 flamer hits. It has a variety of heavy weapons it can use to target different targets.
At first I was thinking about how much better Chimera's got due to the AV10 side armor no longer being a huge issue, but now I'm looking at blob squads as downright scary.
Morale would feth that over. You'd lose a lot of models due to focus fire and lose even more in the morale phase.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/08 16:11:34
2017/05/08 15:34:34
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
50 guard in a blob with the following configuration
- 10 flamers
- 4 lascannons
- 4 MLs - 2 HBs - 30 lasguns
That squad is extremely terrifying. Up close it throws out 60 STR 3 shots and 10d6 STR 4 flamer hits.
It has a variety of heavy weapons it can use to target different targets.
At first I was thinking about how much better Chimera's got due to the AV10 side armor no longer being a huge issue, but now I'm looking at blob squads as downright scary.
Morale would feth that over. You'd lose a lot of models due to focus fire and lose even more in the morale phase.
Yeah, I was about to say the same. A couple of whirwinds/battlecannons/flamer squads/anything blasty are going to whittle that unit out so fast it wouldn't be funny.
My hobby instagram account: @the_shroud_of_vigilance My Shroud of Vigilance Hobby update blog for me detailed updates and lore on the faction:
Blog
2017/05/08 15:36:49
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
50 guard in a blob with the following configuration
- 10 flamers
- 4 lascannons
- 4 MLs - 2 HBs - 30 lasguns
That squad is extremely terrifying. Up close it throws out 60 STR 3 shots and 10d6 STR 4 flamer hits.
It has a variety of heavy weapons it can use to target different targets.
At first I was thinking about how much better Chimera's got due to the AV10 side armor no longer being a huge issue, but now I'm looking at blob squads as downright scary.
Morale would feth that over. You'd lose a lot of models due to focus fire and lose even more in the morale phase.
That depends on the modifiers for morale. Without any modifiers, they can lose tons of guard. With commisars they might be harder to break. There might be bonus' for large groups.
We just don't know yet.
2017/05/08 15:37:01
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
50 guard in a blob with the following configuration
- 10 flamers
- 4 lascannons
- 4 MLs - 2 HBs - 30 lasguns
That squad is extremely terrifying. Up close it throws out 60 STR 3 shots and 10d6 STR 4 flamer hits.
It has a variety of heavy weapons it can use to target different targets.
At first I was thinking about how much better Chimera's got due to the AV10 side armor no longer being a huge issue, but now I'm looking at blob squads as downright scary.
The last part assumes rapid fire remains the same. We don't know that it has. Maybe it gives a +1 at short range or re-rolls? Who knows?
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Yeah, I was about to say the same. A couple of whirwinds/battlecannons/flamer squads/anything blasty are going to whittle that unit out so fast it wouldn't be funny.
And a squad of fire dragons will likely screw over a dreadnoughts day. We can use 'the counter' argument any day of the week. The unknowns are "How much would such a blob cost" and "how common such counters are". MCs might be all the rage, meaning we might not see any whirlwinds on the table, etc..
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/08 15:40:02
2017/05/08 15:43:19
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
Right now I'd assume the rles and points costs of a unit will change more than their wargear choices.
That said we already know the rules and points costs for wargear will be changing too so even if certain selections aren't illegal in the new edition depending on what you want a unit to do (even if it's to be a generalist TAC unit) the best options for those roles may change.
I'm kind of hoping that melta turns into an inverse-conversion beam in that the closer it is the stronger it is but at the same time the more likely you are to be charged. Say 12", 9", 6", and 3" distances with the multi-melta having a similar profile but double the ranges (24", 18", 12", 6") and a slightly better rend value.
Twin-linking will be interesting. Are we going to just get double shots now, or will they deal double damage, or are they keeping their flat re-rolls?
Plasma and grav both will be made or forgotten by their rules so the sooner we know how they look the better imo.
2017/05/08 15:46:55
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
Zach wrote: And you thought Tau shooting phases were long now...
If split-fire works like it did for Long Fangs in 5th edition then it won't, as you'll have to decide on which models shoot which targets/units before rolling the dice.
Sure, some thinking time might be involved, but e.g. taking a squad of fire warriors with a fictional heavy weapon, deciding on the heavy weapon and 4 pulse rifles shooting that rhino and the other 5 pulse rifles shooting at that infantry squad won't take long in practice.
If you so completely over-saturate the other player with different targets that he/she can't decide what to shoot then chances are pretty good you're going to win and that's worth the extra seconds of waiting I'd say ;-).
Morale would feth that over. You'd lose a lot of models due to focus fire and lose even more in the morale phase.
It won't if commissars have a rule along the lines of "rolled a morale test that results in multiple guys running away? Execute just one of them an the rest stays!", which sounds pretty plausible (they have to include the execution part after all, otherwise it wouldn't be a commissar, and that's the soundest way to do it IMO).
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Yeah, I was about to say the same. A couple of whirwinds/battlecannons/flamer squads/anything blasty are going to whittle that unit out so fast it wouldn't be funny.
And a squad of fire dragons will likely screw over a dreadnoughts day. We can use 'the counter' argument any day of the week. The unknowns are "How much would such a blob cost" and "how common such counters are". MCs might be all the rage, meaning we might not see any whirlwinds on the table, etc..
Also this. Blobs are always a paper-scissors kinda choice, which makes them strong in all-comers environments where people usually can't tailor their list against them.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/05/08 15:50:40
Dark it was, and dire of form
the beast that laid them low
Hrothgar's sharpened frost-forged blade
to deal a fatal blow
he stalked and hunted day and night
and came upon it's lair
With sword and shield Hrothgar fought
and earned the name of slayer
- The saga of Hrothgar the Beastslayer
2017/05/08 15:49:34
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
Imateria wrote: Really happy to see split fire for everyone is a thing, this will make none specialised units far more valuable.
Even specialist units could see more use. Fire dragons split firing at two tanks instead of super murdering one for example. It adds tactics to the shooting phase and how you choose your targets. Since any weapon has a chance of hurting anything it may be better to fire those 18 Bolters in a Sisters blob at the Looted Wagon your melta is shooting at, or you may feel there is s better choice by trying to also hit the mob of Boyz next to said Looted Wagon.
2017/05/08 15:49:59
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
Clearly Commisars will be replacing the execution rule wi the power hug rule to make the game more kid friendly.
seriously thoug, I assume mitigation of battleshock will be common. It's strong when you can't mitigate losses but things like the Mob Rule, Commisars, and Synapse will likely keep things from getting out of hand.
As long as the mitigation can also be mitigated I'll be happy. Less "completely ignore morale rules" in the game the better.
2017/05/08 15:54:33
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 6th May 17 - War Zone: Cadia / FB Updates
As an Eldar player I am deeply concerned by the whole shift from Armor Facing. One of the primary reasons that Wraithlords (wraith-anything FTM) are so attractive in the current game is that by not having Armor Facing and instead having a very high toughness and a decent W count makes them vastly superior to other walkers. I'd had my Wraithlords go head-to-head with dreads & venerable dreads more times than I can count and I've never once come out on the losing side of that.
And you've now quite clearly explained exactly why this change is both good and necessary...
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2017/05/08 15:57:03
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
Ragnar Blackmane wrote: Also this. Blobs are always a paper-scissors kinda choice, which makes them strong in all-comers environments where people usually can't tailor their list against them.
We also don't play in a vacuum. If one blob costs you 400 points, that leaves you 1100 points for the rest of your army. In addition to that blob you might have 3 LRBTs, 2 Vendettas, and more. It's all just guessing at this point.
There are some pretty good guesses we can make about IG though, based on how the army has been played for the past few decades.
1) They will have special rules to help LD (Commissars)
2) They will be able to form large units.
3) They will have access to lots of tanks.
.
We can make reasonable guesses that they will have the following
1) They will have access to orders (maybe through the use of command points)
2) They will not have great 'elite' units like terminators. (The concept of elite unit, not the force org slot)
3) The will have access to strong flyers (based on the model. All flyers being troop transports, and having lots of LCs)
2017/05/08 15:57:34
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
50 guard in a blob with the following configuration
- 10 flamers
- 4 lascannons
- 4 MLs - 2 HBs - 30 lasguns
That squad is extremely terrifying. Up close it throws out 60 STR 3 shots and 10d6 STR 4 flamer hits.
It has a variety of heavy weapons it can use to target different targets.
At first I was thinking about how much better Chimera's got due to the AV10 side armor no longer being a huge issue, but now I'm looking at blob squads as downright scary.
Morale would feth that over. You'd lose a lot of models due to focus fire and lose even more in the morale phase.
I'm starting to see how 8th will be the "Balanced Edition". With split fire pulling away from the old unit tailoring to a balanced approach. With Monstrous Creatures and vehicles losing combat effectiveness as they lose wounds. With all armies getting released at the same time (not to mention formations being gone) the playing field becomes more even than ever before. Balance seems to be a core mechanic in 8th edition 40K.
2017/05/08 15:58:14
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
ClockworkZion wrote: Clearly Commisars will be replacing the execution rule wi the power hug rule to make the game more kid friendly. seriously though, I assume mitigation of battleshock will be common. It's strong when you can't mitigate losses but things like the Mob Rule, Commisars, and Synapse will likely keep things from getting out of hand.
As long as the mitigation can also be mitigated I'll be happy. Less "completely ignore morale rules" in the game the better.
Honestly?
I hope that Commissars just let you get a reroll.
OFFICERS should be the ones letting you ignore Battleshock.
2017/05/08 15:59:30
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
v0iddrgn wrote: I'm starting to see how 8th will be the "Balanced Edition". With split fire pulling away from the old unit tailoring to a balanced approach. With Monstrous Creatures and vehicles losing combat effectiveness as they lose wounds. With all armies getting released at the same time (not to mention formations being gone) the playing field becomes more even than ever before. Balance seems to be a core mechanic in 8th edition 40K.
A few people on this forum have used the derogatory term of 'tournament edition' as this edition was heavily playtested with many tournament groups.
I don't see that as a bad thing, in fact quite the opposite. A more balanced game means people can play more of what they want and still be at least partially competitive.
2017/05/08 16:02:48
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
Loving this latest update. Simple, elegant, and reflects how you want to use your squads! Simplified table is fine by me.
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
2017/05/08 16:03:02
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
The big weakness of guard that I always noticed (exploited) was the long AV 10 sides on chimeras. Chimera's were great, but they were very static. It made it hard for them to move up to grab objectives.
The new vehicle rules mean that those long sides are not as much of a weakness as they were. Even if the Chimera is T7 with 6 wounds, it's much tougher than it was before.
This means that armored company IG might be effective again. It will depend on the fire points (if that's still at thing), etc... However, it's a definite possibility that the armored company may become a thing again.
Edit : Not as a leafblower list, but instead as guard moving up in tanks and securing objectives.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/08 16:04:36
2017/05/08 16:06:15
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
50 guard in a blob with the following configuration
- 10 flamers
- 4 lascannons
- 4 MLs - 2 HBs - 30 lasguns
That squad is extremely terrifying. Up close it throws out 60 STR 3 shots and 10d6 STR 4 flamer hits.
It has a variety of heavy weapons it can use to target different targets.
At first I was thinking about how much better Chimera's got due to the AV10 side armor no longer being a huge issue, but now I'm looking at blob squads as downright scary.
Morale would feth that over. You'd lose a lot of models due to focus fire and lose even more in the morale phase.
I'm starting to see how 8th will be the "Balanced Edition". With split fire pulling away from the old unit tailoring to a balanced approach. With Monstrous Creatures and vehicles losing combat effectiveness as they lose wounds. With all armies getting released at the same time (not to mention formations being gone) the playing field becomes more even than ever before. Balance seems to be a core mechanic in 8th edition 40K.
Let's hope that it is the case. But this is the company that gave us scatter laser bikes at a ridiculous low prices, even thought any college kid with even the slightest notions of statistics could realise how op they were
lost and damned log
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/519978.page#6525039
2017/05/08 16:06:43
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 6th May 17 - War Zone: Cadia / FB Updates
As an Eldar player I am deeply concerned by the whole shift from Armor Facing. One of the primary reasons that Wraithlords (wraith-anything FTM) are so attractive in the current game is that by not having Armor Facing and instead having a very high toughness and a decent W count makes them vastly superior to other walkers. I'd had my Wraithlords go head-to-head with dreads & venerable dreads more times than I can count and I've never once come out on the losing side of that.
And you've now quite clearly explained exactly why this change is both good and necessary...
Apart from your apparent fondness for the changes I fail to see even a single gain.
For the sake of argument let's say that the folks at GW are already ahead of me on this and they've come up with a clever way to make WLs worth their point cost after the changes (Higher W count, shiny new weapon, some newfangled bespoke rule).
That still doesn't change that fact that by increasing the value of one unit you decrease the value of another. This isn't up for debate, it's simple fact.
What makes (made) super-tough units so super-tough? In most cases it was because they either had high values in defensive stats, or because only certain weapons were effective against them. If you take those two things away, they cease to be super-tough right?
So what happens when 'everything than hurt everything'. If bolters can take down LRs, than the value of the bolter went up (way up) and the value of the LR went down. The example most relevant to me was simply the WL because I have a long history with them, but apparently they are not well liked so people are happy to see them get nerfed - which is fine, but it still fails to provide a single positive gain to all this other than GW's claim that 'matches will be shorter'.
2017/05/08 16:08:35
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
ClockworkZion wrote: Clearly Commisars will be replacing the execution rule wi the power hug rule to make the game more kid friendly. seriously though, I assume mitigation of battleshock will be common. It's strong when you can't mitigate losses but things like the Mob Rule, Commisars, and Synapse will likely keep things from getting out of hand.
As long as the mitigation can also be mitigated I'll be happy. Less "completely ignore morale rules" in the game the better.
Honestly?
I hope that Commissars just let you get a reroll.
OFFICERS should be the ones letting you ignore Battleshock.
Commisars exist to keep people from running away in fear. Mostly by shooting someone. I rather like the current method, you fail your test and can opt to use the Commisar. Roll a D6 and you choose who dies, on a 1 the opposing player chooses. Hope you didn't need that Lascannon team in your blob.
As an Eldar player I am deeply concerned by the whole shift from Armor Facing. One of the primary reasons that Wraithlords (wraith-anything FTM) are so attractive in the current game is that by not having Armor Facing and instead having a very high toughness and a decent W count makes them vastly superior to other walkers. I'd had my Wraithlords go head-to-head with dreads & venerable dreads more times than I can count and I've never once come out on the losing side of that.
And you've now quite clearly explained exactly why this change is both good and necessary...
Apart from your apparent fondness for the changes I fail to see even a single gain.
For the sake of argument let's say that the folks at GW are already ahead of me on this and they've come up with a clever way to make WLs worth their point cost after the changes (Higher W count, shiny new weapon, some newfangled bespoke rule).
That still doesn't change that fact that by increasing the value of one unit you decrease the value of another. This isn't up for debate, it's simple fact.
What makes (made) super-tough units so super-tough? In most cases it was because they either had high values in defensive stats, or because only certain weapons were effective against them. If you take those two things away, they cease to be super-tough right?
So what happens when 'everything than hurt everything'. If bolters can take down LRs, than the value of the bolter went up (way up) and the value of the LR went down. The example most relevant to me was simply the WL because I have a long history with them, but apparently they are not well liked so people are happy to see them get nerfed - which is fine, but it still fails to provide a single positive gain to all this other than GW's claim that 'matches will be shorter'.
Oh no, to balance the game some units had to get relatively weaker while others got relatively stronger. It's almost like to balance the game changes had to be made in both directions.
Sarcasm aside, this is something we're going to run across in every army: some units will feel weaker while others feel stronger. This is not a bad thing as long as the game is ultimately more balanced as a result.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/08 16:10:53
2017/05/08 16:11:24
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
For those that are obsessed about the speed of play, what's your opinion about the rule that everything can wound anything? Won't that make the game longer in most cases?
lost and damned log
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/519978.page#6525039
2017/05/08 16:12:11
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
Ragnar Blackmane wrote: Also this. Blobs are always a paper-scissors kinda choice, which makes them strong in all-comers environments where people usually can't tailor their list against them.
We also don't play in a vacuum. If one blob costs you 400 points, that leaves you 1100 points for the rest of your army. In addition to that blob you might have 3 LRBTs, 2 Vendettas, and more. It's all just guessing at this point.
There are some pretty good guesses we can make about IG though, based on how the army has been played for the past few decades.
1) They will have special rules to help LD (Commissars)
2) They will be able to form large units.
3) They will have access to lots of tanks.
.
We can make reasonable guesses that they will have the following
1) They will have access to orders (maybe through the use of command points)
2) They will not have great 'elite' units like terminators. (The concept of elite unit, not the force org slot)
3) The will have access to strong flyers (based on the model. All flyers being troop transports, and having lots of LCs)
A minor point but forming large units isn't a decades old thing, it's relatively new in the grand scheme of things. (2 codexes ago I think?) but I agree with your comments.
2017/05/08 16:14:39
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
streetsamurai wrote: For those that are obsessed about the speed of play, what's your opinion about the rule that everything can wound anything? Won't that make the game longer in most cases?
Remember, these rules are the ones that were tested and used to determine that on average a 1.5k game takes 90 minutes under, which means that they won't make games longer in the long run. Once we get a hang of the rules and start building up our own tactics on when to split fire and when not to against targets any long games we have now will inevitably get faster as a result.
Easy to learn, hard to master seems to be the motto of this edition and that's fine by me.
2017/05/08 16:15:11
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 7th May 17 - Large Model's / CSM Faction focus
Let's hope that it is the case. But this is the company that gave us scatter laser bikes at a ridiculous low prices, even thought any college kid with even the slightest notions of statistics could realise how op they were
Again though, we have been notified that ALL of the armies are being reworked at the same time. That in conjunction with the changes to the core rules that we have seen lead me to believe abominations like 7th edition Scatbikes will no longer exist.
2017/05/08 16:15:27
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 6th May 17 - War Zone: Cadia / FB Updates
En Excelsis wrote: So what happens when 'everything than hurt everything'. If bolters can take down LRs, than the value of the bolter went up (way up) and the value of the LR went down.
Just because you can do something does not mean it's an effective way to do something.
A bolter shot has a 1/27 of wounding a Morkanaut. It would take ~486 bolter shots to kill it.
That's 97 shots every turn over the course of 5 turns! Even if rapid fire still gives double shots within 12", that's 49 marines every turn shooting. It's just not going to happen. You might see a bolter get off a lucky shot, but they are the wrong tools for the job.
Likewise, an army of bright lance vypers will lose horribly to 150 orks. Bright lances are just the wrong tool for the job to kill cheap infantry.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/08 16:15:51
