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.
If you think Monoliths will have loads of wounds imagine how many the Obelisk will have!. Also, I wounder how the obelisk/T-Vault will work now? Do ye think Skyfire and all that buzz will stay or will every model be killable e.g. A basic troop choice can shoot and wound a flyer as if it wa a ground model and vice-a-versa.
I would like to have a reason to use bigger models more often as well as some FW models that I havnt picked up yet.
If "open-topped" and "AV" go then I can only hope that the CCB,CAB And DA will all be better now and more playable/survivable and the GA might be more of a beast as well. However, all the templates are supposed to be dis-continued for 8th edition so a Large Blast wont exist anymore meaning the DA attack will do its damage differently. we could have a whole new way of playing them.
I am super excited though for 8th editions full release and I am ready to start the next chapter in the 40K universe!
Templates are meant to go? haven't heard that yet. Wonder what they are going to do instead? I liked the template mechanic, and didn't see it as a problem, strange they are going to get rid of it
I think it is because its very time consuming putting plates over models and rolling to see where the blast goes. If your army has blast weapons and 4 of them are small templates and 2 are big templates then it will take time to see where the blasts go, how many models they cover and how many models get injured. Also planning which weapon to use 1st and what unit to hit takes time as well.
Nothing worse then targeting the majority of a unit only for the dice to throw your blast way of course and making your weapon do zero damage.
If temps are to go then i imagine there will be a damage/range modifier based on the wounds of the model. Like how behemoths work in AoS. Say 8th edition DA has a wound-count of 12 wounds then this is how I would imagine it will work. E.g.
--Wounds 12-10 Range 72 inches Damage 10/6+d6 models--
--Wounds 9-7 Range 48 inches Damage 8/6+d3 models--
--Wounds 6-4 Range 36 inches Damage 6 models--
--Wounds 3-0 Range 24 inches Damage 6 models--
I think something like this would work in 8th edit instead of templates. At full HP its strength 10 weapon can damage a total of 10 models per unit while if it has 2 wounds left then it can only fire at 24 inches, damage only 6 models per unit due to it sustaining damage while keeping its guns strength so it can still be useful even if it has wound modifiers. Then if teamed up with a Canoptek Sypder it can gets it wounds healed and go back to better range and damage count. I hope something like this will happening in 8th edition.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/04/23 09:01:47
Sure enough, blast and templates can be solved by dice rolls, eg flamer could be 8" or 12" range, 3+d3 hits, ignores cover and Los-wounding
But hey are still a nice counter to grouping models closely together, ie area-of-effect weapons force models apart, while LOS and cover would group them closer, which is a nice balancing mechanic
Klowny wrote: Instead of recruiting two warriors, another way to do it is to do the same concept of just having two weaponless models for a game and then arm them next game, but recruit an immortal and warrior. thats 190 points, then next game deck them out. You get a better chassis and weaponry options instead of two warriors, so only losing 10 points instead of 40
This is something that crossed my mind as well, and I think it's a personal preference if you choose to do this. You'd have to be sure that no points are wasted when you go to Rearm, which I haven't done. Main reason I'm not looking at doing it is because unlike Warriors, Immortals don't need to have their recruit status removed, so it's not important if they're standing at the end of the game or not. For me, I'd rather have that Immortal participating rather than just hiding. That's my 2 bits worth so you can make up your own mind.
I think the tougher call is the question about size. Several armies don't have a min-max listed. While 3 min is covered in the book, it just seems odd that some armies would have a cap and others to not have a cap. Assuming we're stuck with the 3-10, then those Warrior slots might hurt you late campaign. I can't seem to find it in my book, so not sure if I'm genuinely missing it or it's not there. Just a thought.
You can't save points up (absent a house rule) from game to game. The only two ways to recruit Immortals mid-campaign is to either: (1) spend a cache, or (2) win and get lucky on the mission sub plot table.
For those talking about spending caches to recruit spec ops, remember that caches double as campaign points: you're literally putting yourself farther behind for a chance at getting ahead... again.
Klowny wrote: I really wish we could mix lychguard weaponry, having a couple of shields up front and a couple of warscythes would be awesome.
I've been wanting mixed wargear Lychguard ever since the models first came out.
...
Perhaps we could all make that suggestion on their FB page?
(they said to make suggestions there and they would consider them)
Shall we all list things we would like and suggest them to GW like skoffs said? If a few of us make the same suggestion GW might get intouch and let us know.
Spoiler:
I want the C'tan Shards to have better stats and to be somewhat decent.
Give the Canoptek Harvest the ability to have 2 sypders(Max) to spawn more scarabs.
Change the Decurion to have 2 units of Immortals and 1 Unit of Warriors to free up points.
Keep RP as 5+++ and can get better with certain HQs and Formations.
Swap the Cryptek's Chromothrons ability to have +1 RP to all models in the army to make it a better HQ choice.
Models in Units to have multi weapon choices e.g. 3 Immortals with Gauss Blaster and 2 with Tesla Carabines. 2 Lynch with sword/shield and 3 with scythes.
Deathmarks to have SW:A T2 deployment rule. That would make them great in 40K.
Give the HQs better Melee and Ranged weapons.
Give us a HQ that can use better Gauss and Tesla Guns (High-Ranked Immortals if at all possible).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/23 13:51:27
TBH, for the ctan, rolling the power first is a good enough step up to make them useable again. Or pick the power and randomise the squad.
Mixing squads across the board is a bit unlikely, were meant to be mindless robots to an extent. But it doesn't make sense having an overlord, who's meant to be an incredible tactician, not mix up the weaponry in his personal cohort.
The t'ctan from apocalypse was pretty broken, probably not going to get that back.
If the decurion was 5+++ and a cryptek gave a 4+++ army wife with a chronometeon no one would ever take a decurion, as there would be no advantage over a CAD.
They had their opportunity to add in more spyders with the FAQ, but stuck to only meaning one. Can't see them going about face that decision so soon.
Should we ask for Ghost Arks to be able to carry all infantry, not just Warriors?
Other things,
- Warriors: fine
- Immortals: fine
- Lychguard: needs mixed wargear option
- Deathmarks: fine
- Praetorians: fine
- Flayed Ones: fine, but would cool if they could charge after deep strike
- Stalker: give it option for CCW, please
- Tomb Blades: fine
- Wraiths: fine, but I can see them either bumping up their price or reducing their T back down to 4
- Scarabs: fine
- Destroyers: fine
- Monolith: so many issues
- Annihilation Barge: Skyfire option, please. HGC would be nice, too
- Doomsday Ark: I dunno
- Heavy Destroyers: fine
- Spyders: fine
- Death Scythe: I dunno
- Night Scythe: I dunno
- Ghost Ark: see top of post
- C'tan: roll for power, THEN choose target
- Tesseract Vault: see above
- Obelisk: dunno
- HQ: so many issues
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/23 22:19:32
skoffs wrote: Should we ask for Ghost Arks to be able to carry all infantry, not just Warriors?
Other things,
- Warriors: fine
- Immortals: fine
- Lychguard: needs mixed wargear option
- Deathmarks: fine
- Praetorians: fine
- Flayed Ones: fine, but would cool if they could charge after deep strike
- Stalker: give it option for CCW, please
- Tomb Blades: fine
- Wraiths: fine, but I can see them either bumping up their price or reducing their T back down to 4
- Scarabs: fine
- Destroyers: fine
- Monolith: so many issues
- Annihilation Barge: Skyfire option, please. HGC would be nice, too
- Doomsday Ark: I dunno
- Heavy Destroyers: fine
- Spyders: fine
- Death Scythe: I dunno
- Night Scythe: I dunno
- Ghost Ark: see top of post
- C'tan: roll for power, THEN choose target
- Tesseract Vault: see above
- Obelisk: dunno
- HQ: so many issues
I pinpointed the actual issues in my fixes for the game. However since they're doing this I might abandon the project. Shame as I got halfway through the Space Wolves codex.
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.
skoffs wrote: Should we ask for Ghost Arks to be able to carry all infantry, not just Warriors?
Other things,
- Warriors: fine
- Immortals: fine
- Lychguard: needs mixed wargear option
- Deathmarks: fine
- Praetorians: fine
I quite agree on these points.
- Flayed Ones: fine, but would cool if they could charge after deep strike
Yes... yes... whatever deepstrike comes to, give us some of this!
- Stalker: give it option for CCW, please
The problem comes in that there aren't and CCW's for the model. Adding them would require at least a recut of the model and $100,000's... and I don't see GW doing that in the near future.
- Tomb Blades: fine
- Wraiths: fine, but I can see them either bumping up their price or reducing their T back down to 4
- Scarabs: fine
- Destroyers: fine
Totally agree.
- Monolith: so many issues
So many of those problems would be fixed with a personalized damage table and... oh, say 20 wounds.
- Annihilation Barge: Skyfire option, please. HGC would be nice, too
Yeah... skyfire as an option or upgrade.
- Doomsday Ark: I dunno
This weapon would see a lot of use with save modifiers. Boy-howdy... 1 attacker (or 2 if stationary) with each hit causing d6 rend 2 wounds? Yes, please.
- Heavy Destroyers: fine
- Spyders: fine
Yep
- Death Scythe: I dunno
- Night Scythe: I dunno
It'll be interesting seeing how fliers operate. I don't see them working like flying in AoS.
- Ghost Ark: see top of post
- C'tan: roll for power, THEN choose target
- Tesseract Vault: see above
- Obelisk: dunno
- HQ: so many issues
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/24 03:24:17
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
Coupled with potentially tougher vehicles (due to wounds and not blowing up immediately due open topped and AP2/1 weapons) it will make GA's full of warriors truly scary.
Realise that gauss worked on big stuff, by fishing for 6's. This will probably still be the case on tough equipment, but if we have shred on gauss, everything else in the game that you point gauss at with normal T will just evaporate.
I'm just excited all around. I have an ork dread mob army that is waiting to be played... as well as several variations of Silver Tide that I want to try as well. Just waiting... waiting.
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
I hope the Command Barge is useful in 8th edition. Everytime I use it it is destroyed T1-2. Doomsday Ark should be better now due to it taking wounds and not using templates anymore. It will probably still need to be stationary to be used at full power though.
Welp, I guess that means Gauss will probably be like what it is in SW:A, then.
I could see Gauss work like it does now but with a bit of rule changing to fit the new edition.
I would like it if during wound rolls 6s makes the target take an auto-wound with no saves allowed. I think something like this would be good as universal Shread would be way OP.
Gauss might work like Shred but then units that have shred (Flayed Ones) will have to either have Gauss on their claws or will need a new rule because you can't have 2 different rules do the exact same thing...
Off-Topic
Are we able to use datacards in 8th edition? Or will they be useless like the codexs.
I watched the Q&A on the 40k facebook page. Super excited now. Seems like a radical change, and the guys from frontline gaming have playtested every. single. unit. in the game! Seems like it will be alot more balanced. Fingeres crossed!
Spoiler:
Odrankt wrote: I hope the Command Barge is useful in 8th edition. Everytime I use it it is destroyed T1-2. Doomsday Ark should be better now due to it taking wounds and not using templates anymore. It will probably still need to be stationary to be used at full power though.
Welp, I guess that means Gauss will probably be like what it is in SW:A, then.
I could see Gauss work like it does now but with a bit of rule changing to fit the new edition.
I would like it if during wound rolls 6s makes the target take an auto-wound with no saves allowed. I think something like this would be good as universal Shread would be way OP.
Gauss might work like Shred but then units that have shred (Flayed Ones) will have to either have Gauss on their claws or will need a new rule because you can't have 2 different rules do the exact same thing...
Off-Topic
Are we able to use datacards in 8th edition? Or will they be useless like the codexs.
Armywide rending on rapid fire weapons is way more OP than army wide shred.
And theres many different rules that work very similar to others, just with different caveats. Hell our own RP is just a really good FNP....
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/25 13:03:24
On the topic of datacards/sheets, we've been told that there will be faction books at the start. They have said that 5 additional rulebooks will be released with the Generals Handbook. There will be an app eventually that contains the datasheets as well as the datasheets on the website. I've played around with the AoS app, and it really does let you play a game right from your phone or ipad.
They haven't released any more detail on the faction books, but I expect:
Imperium (may be split into 2 books, but honestly could go into three.)
Chaos
Eldar
Order Xenos (Necrons and Tau)
Destruction Xenos (Xenos may be combined into one book) Orks and Tyranids
Which means that I'm on the line for at least 2 books, maybe as many as three.
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
Armywide rending on rapid fire weapons is way more OP than army wide shred.
in the 7th edition yes, rending on 6s is more OP then shred. But if 8th edition is going to be game changing with no more AV and everything having Wounds then army wide shred can be OP.
Imagine 20 warriors rapid firing on a Rhino that is Wound based and every to-wound roll that misses can be re-rolled. That sounds pretty OP to me. Fair enough they can roll to-save but if we have a -1/-2 save modifier then nearly every unit we shoot against will go down unless they have an invul save.
I guess we will have to wait and see what happens.
And theres many different rules that work very similar to others, just with different caveats. Hell our own RP is just a really good FNP....
6th edition RP was different to 7th edition RP. I agree that our rule acting like a really good FNP is amazing but it is a little broken especially when its gets buffed to 4+++. I just want every unit to have an actual purpose and to make the game as balanced as possible. Having an army that shoots with shred-like-rules and CC with shred-like-rules would be a nightmare to go against
Rerolling Wounds on everything Guass would be dope in my book. As would something like 6s to wound are Rend -1/-2.
I just hope I can still use my Renegade Knight alongside the Necrons. I put a lot of effort into that conversion...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Actually the only 1 thing I REALLY REALLY want is for C'tan to be good. Just... make them good. I own one of each and would run an army with three at the drop of a hat.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/25 19:38:56
Interesting to see the Sautekh dynasty getting some significant prominence on the galactic map. Wonder if that's any indicator of whether we'll have more of a role in the main narrative this time instead of being relegated to background threat (Trazyn making an appearance in Gathering Storm has my hopes up).
skoffs wrote: Interesting to see the Sautekh dynasty getting some significant prominence on the galactic map. Wonder if that's any indicator of whether we'll have more of a role in the main narrative this time instead of being relegated to background threat (Trazyn making an appearance in Gathering Storm has my hopes up).
Yea both of these give me hope that we will feature more in the future.
What doesn't bode well for us is their statements that Chaos are the front and center bad guys again, and most of the xenos are being lumped together in one(or two) books, while CSM and the IOM get their own
skoffs wrote: Praetorians finally get to shine!
(I'm sure Wraiths will be fine, too)
And sytheguard! Finally have an excuse to run them!
But yes I hope Praets are going to be very good in this edition. I'd imagine they will have a high movement stat, and so long as the weapon statlines dont change too much, they will be able to position for charges alot better than the rest of our army.
skoffs wrote: Praetorians finally get to shine!
(I'm sure Wraiths will be fine, too)
And sytheguard! Finally have an excuse to run them!
Issue with those guys is, they'll probably still be pretty slow.
With no way to get them up the table AND charge in the same turn, they're almost always going to be receiving.
12,000 
10,000+ 
