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.

I would be a lot happier with true line of sight if GW wasn't releasing books with things that they have no official models for. They need to at least give us their idea for what it will look like as an actual figure and base size.

I'm sure WFB will show an example of core & cover, as in Mordheim.

Leggy wrote:Secondly, even if you can see a model in a unit, you'll still have to deal with the to hit modifiers. It's still much better to shoot at a big juicy target unit in the open than the head of one model in the distance.

Unless that target has no value. There often times is a reason a target will sit in the dead open tempting shots.

Leggy wrote:Thirdly, in almost all instances, if you can see something, you yourself can be seen. In addition any to hit penalty you suffer when shooting at a target unit will in turn be suffered by the targeted enemy returning fire (barring good positioning and tactics). This makes it much harder to abuse, as shrinking you models means they can't see, and heightening them makes them much more difficult to hide.

Er, I have a question: Do you play WHFB?

I ask this because - whether intentionally or not - you imply a strong implication that shooting weapons are common - indeed, prevalent in the majority of units. That's not the case.

Leggy wrote:I have absolutely no problem with the new Tlos rules. Charging is gonna be hard to swallow, but Tlos is nothing.

If I was putting it off as a major thing, I apologize: There are much bigger fish to fry than that rule. However, those points I rose remained: Smaller profile conversions will be done, older small models (Old Bloodthirster, for instance) will be on the rise when attempting to avoid shooting, and so on.

Honestly the way that actual line of sight affected 40k was that now you can almost always see anything you want to shoot at, but it gets a 4+ cover save. So you are shooting more but a lot of the wounds you are doing are being reduced which actually works out. So in context of Fantasy this is really going to strengthen things that don't require ballistic skill in order to shoot and screw units that require terrain to protect themselves before attacking. So unless they include some kind of cover system things like Wood Elves will be facing stone thrower and organ shots shots while in the woods and have no way to stop it.

I've said this before but if there isn't some sort of army book errata the game will be totally unplayable under the current rumors for certain races. The one thing we really haven't seen is how you actually win the game so there could be some way this balances out but a lot of this stuff makes some severe changes to how things affect each other and the "6th/7th edition books will totally work so we aren't going to redo anything" mantra we've been hearing is utterly unbelievable at this point.

The biggest problem I have with TLOS involves woods. In order to make a wooded terrain piece which is a realistic barrier to visibility, you have to make it unit unfriendly. With the current visibility rules you can at least put a marker in the woods representing where the front rank is. How are you going to be able to do this with TLOS?
I'll say it again, Warhammer is NOT 40k. 99% of WFB models are not equipped with high tech vision enhancers, just the good old Mark I eyeball.

Yeah I am against true line of sight in general, especially when models often have no real size standard. The current system Fantasy has for targeting is generally good, although it actually IS true line of sight for certain things like large targets being seen over hills and such (most people don't realize this). I thought they would have just made everything an abstraction like Warmachince where base size determines what a model can see but they went in the other (in my opinion worse) direction...

from WS;

New artillery conversion for TLOS!

Excellent idea

Sounds like the same old whines about TLOS (which has been in 40k for 3 editions...) are hitting WHFB.

Relax. Modelling for advantage, such as has been shown, has often been proposed but in practice is not a problem. Kneeling wraithlords, ground up genestealers, and rhinos with a "sail" on them have all appeared as "OMG!!! look whats going to ruuuuuuin the game!" but, in *actual* reality are not a problem. If someone is modelling for advantage - call the TO. Usual remedy is a stark choice - say goodbye to the model, or play it as the "usual" model for every respect. OR, if tehyre being a complete idiot, sorry but pack your stuff and go.

The ire that modelling for advantage generates will ensure the people wont do it - a very small minority may, but meh. They can be dealt with.

The prevalent theme is away from autohit stuff - I believe Dwarves have the last book with an autohitting shooting attack. That will be gone, g'teed, in the next update. The equivalent to a 4+ cover save in 40k would be a -2 penalty to BS - meaning you're generally hitting them on 6s. Better for the warmachine that now, but still not great.

Odominus wrote:from WS;

New artillery conversion for TLOS!

If its going to be similar to 40k tlos will be taken from the weapon on ordanance (shooting from vehicles is from the actual weapon), all that would happen with that conversion is that the crew member would be exposed to normal unit shooting...

I think I must be one of the minority that is actually looking forward to this new edition. I've been playing WHFB since the 1st edition and I really dislike the current edition as there are to many ways to interpret rules due them not being explained properly or conflicting with army books which cause unneccersary arguments for something we are meant to be doing for fun and enjoyment.

Mick

Mick A wrote:

Odominus wrote:from WS;

New artillery conversion for TLOS!

If its going to be similar to 40k tlos will be taken from the weapon on ordanance (shooting from vehicles is from the actual weapon), all that would happen with that conversion is that the crew member would be exposed to normal unit shooting...

I think I must be one of the minority that is actually looking forward to this new edition. I've been playing WHFB since the 1st edition and I really dislike the current edition as there are to many ways to interpret rules due them not being explained properly or conflicting with army books which cause unneccersary arguments for something we are meant to be doing for fun and enjoyment.

Mick

Lol, bet you a million internet dollars (actual value = $0.0000001) that 8th will open up a whole new can of worms in this respect. You don’t honestly believe that GW has suddenly developed the ability to write rules in a manner that defies misinterpretation?

No, however the quality of the rules in the 5th ed rulebook is leagues ahead of 7th ed fantasy and 4th ed 40k.

whoopsie

Flashman- I agree the next edition won't be the 'Holy Grail' of WHFB in regards to rules, and there will be some disagreements, its just that, having played every edition, the current ones seem to cause the most arguements among players (possibly because they are just an update of an update...).

Mick

The biggest problems with true LoS in whfb would be non-bs weapons such as cannons and stone throwers which have long range and could snipe enemy large targets no matter where they are at the table (as average whfb terrain rarely fully obscures anything dragon/stegadon/etc-sized). If monsters get a combat boost, which would be in many cases pretty stupid anyways, they would surely need an additional foil, but just blasting them with cannons/stone throwers regardless where they are seems very lame.

One easy solution would be to change the basic rules of non bs warmachines to take into account possible cover. We shall see...

Chaoslord wrote:The biggest problems with true LoS in whfb would be non-bs weapons such as cannons and stone throwers which have long range and could snipe enemy large targets no matter where they are at the table (as average whfb terrain rarely fully obscures anything dragon/stegadon/etc-sized). If monsters get a combat boost, which would be in many cases pretty stupid anyways, they would surely need an additional foil, but just blasting them with cannons/stone throwers regardless where they are seems very lame.

One easy solution would be to change the basic rules of non bs warmachines to take into account possible cover. We shall see...

Under the current rumors an Empire gunline (three morters, three cannons, two rocket batteries, then a bunch of riflemen) with some units to run out and grab objectives would be almost unstoppable unless you played in some crazy place with access to huge solid terrain pieces.

Minsc wrote: Er, I have a question: Do you play WHFB?

I ask this because - whether intentionally or not - you imply a strong implication that shooting weapons are common - indeed, prevalent in the majority of units. That's not the case.

Yes i do (not as much as i'd like, but who does?). I put emphasis on the shooting aspect because this seemed to be a bigger cause of worry to people in numerou threads. Indeed with the rumoured new salvo rumours i expect shooty armies to be on the increase this edition.

Tlos combined with charging is even less of a worry, as just because you can see something in no way means you'll succeed in charging it, especially with random charge distances. This leaves magic, which no-one can comment on as no-one knows enough about how it's changing and what spells will be available.

Edit - On cannons and other war machines:

I hate cannons. Truly madly and deeply HATE THEM. Overpowered, underpriced F&%$ing cannons! However the current rules suggest that ALL guessing ranges are gone. Indeed you can actually measure anything at any time. To me this suggests that cannons have had a massive overhaul and will no longer work as they currently do.. Therefore i reserve my judgement until i find out what's gonna become of them

Odominus wrote:New artillery conversion for TLOS!

TLOS goes both ways, you know...

And the enemy has a 66% chance of hitting the cannon with each shot, and can use the terrain for the modifiers Leggy mentioned. -2 to hit for Hard Cover, 66% of the shots are pretty much going to bounce off the unit, and so on.

Pre-measuring whenever you like. Wow! My fantasy general now has a laser range finder added to his helicopter with the massive communication suite. Who needs tactics when you got dice and GW?

Then the cannon's effectiveness will likewise drop by 66% due to the modifiers mentioned. Modifiers, like LOS, can be expected to be symmetrical.

Mick A wrote:Flashman- I agree the next edition won't be the 'Holy Grail' of WHFB in regards to rules, and there will be some disagreements, its just that, having played every edition, the current ones seem to cause the most arguements among players (possibly because they are just an update of an update...).

I've never had an argument in my years of playing fantasy - though I have sent people to the BRB and been sent to the BRB, and had it end there - yet had scores of them whilst playing 40k, editions 3 through 5. Go fig.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Then the cannon's effectiveness will likewise drop by 66% due to the modifiers mentioned. Modifiers, like LOS, can be expected to be symmetrical.

Not all of us play armies with access to cannons or mass infantry shooting, or have chosen not to abuse those options ... So I could care less if TLOS works both ways. I suppose harpies or other flying war machine killers could zip in and kill the aforementioned TLOS-pushing cannons, but again, my ogres and my warriors of chaos and my skaven seem to be suspiciously out of these handy troops.

- Salvage

From W-E:

You like this better?

-Somehow I think it'd look better on a dwarf.

Whilst driving home from grocery shopping today it suddenly struck me that almost all the movement rules, TLOS and some of the combat rules are designed to let 8 year olds and Jervis's dimwit son more easily play the game, rather than do crazy stuff like acctually learn how to think ahead.

What kid doesn't like to roll a bucket load of dice in combat?

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:almost all the movement rules, TLOS and some of the combat rules are designed to let 20-something nerds and hobbyists more easily play the game without argument,

FYP.

Pretty hypocritical of you, John, eh?

Though I assume you were joking, I agree with gonads, but this is hardly a realization. GW always does this, the more simple it is, the larger the age group it attracts, and generally invites less-intelligent people to play. And, its easier to play, easier to start on plasticrack.

Hard times coming for WHFB.

I don't know about the rest of you, but Fantasy 8th is going to be much, much stranger than 7th.

Which is sad, because I REALLY like this edition...

A lot of this seems really unnecessary though... The changes to charging and magic are particularly troubling...

Well, looking forward to picking up the new rulebook though. General's edition FTW!

Cryonicleech wrote:I don't know about the rest of you, but Fantasy 8th is going to be much, much stranger than 7th.

Which is sad, because I REALLY like this edition...

A lot of this seems really unnecessary though... The changes to charging and magic are particularly troubling...

Well, looking forward to picking up the new rulebook though. General's edition FTW!

QFT, I really like this edition. It sounds insane, but I would rather 8th edition come out next year LOL.

Maybe that's just because I barely have tasted 7th edition yet. No, that's not it.

It's because 7th really defined the difference between 40k and fantasy.

8th looks like 40k, but with shittier weapons and magic.

Karon wrote:Pretty hypocritical of you, John, eh?

GW always does this, the more simple it is, the larger the age group it attracts, and generally invites less-intelligent people to play.

No, not really.

The clearer the rules are, the fewer ahole & dhead stuff goes on, letting people actually play vs argue.