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.

Pretty similar to the stuff in the Genrals Handbook.

I am afraid that these advanced terrain rules will mainly contain tiresome stuff like adding bespoke special rules for every piece of terrain rather than some basic fixes like allowing intervening terrain to provide cover.

Allowing several metre tall monsters to attack above the ground level of a ruin would have been nice...

 xttz wrote:
Allowing several metre tall monsters to attack above the ground level of a ruin would have been nice...

Yeah, that too.

 Ghaz wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/11/23/get-ready-for-chapter-approved-battlezones-nov-23gw-homepage-post-3/

Battlezones

Complimenting both these game types is a range of datasheets and extra rulings for in-game terrain. You’ll find deeper rules for all your Sector Mechanicus buildings – plasma scenery, for example, offers cover to your units, but has a chance to discharge plasma when they come under fire. Meanwhile, Chapter Approved contains rules for a huge range of fortifications, so adding bunkers, defence towers and more to your army is easier than ever!... We’ll be covering these fortifications in more detail tomorrow when we round off our previews with a closer look at Stronghold Assault, Planetstrike and the handy campaign guidelines provided in Chapter Approved.

Based on that article, i am extremely disappointed. Looks like the only "terrain" changes coming through, are for pieces of terrain you have to pay points for to bring along as part of your army. The only hope here is that they do something decent with the datasheet changes they mentioned... I still prob won't ever pay the points for them in matched play though...

Rest of the article pretty much pointless for matched play. Will never use Empyric Storms in an event due to people forgetting and the added time constraint. The stratagems, again, unless the other stratagems are things like "1CP for an extra +1 cover" they will never get used as CP is more valuable on other things - and lets face it, that stratagem i suggested would be so broken it'd need to be removed anyway.

Reserving full judgement til i have the book and can read everything, but, i can see myself just ignoring all the stratagems, game types and updated fortification rules as i'll never use them in matched play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
I am afraid that these advanced terrain rules will mainly contain tiresome stuff like adding bespoke special rules for every piece of terrain rather than some basic fixes like allowing intervening terrain to provide cover.

My problem with the article is, that they don't mention standard terrain at all. They only mention updated rules for terrain you can pay points for in your army and has a datasheet.

Edit for last comment - Well, they kinda half mention it in the same sentence as datasheets and examples using the Plasma Scenery and Sector Mechanicus stuff... So, it's possible there will be updates, but i'm not hopeful.

Aren't there enough "Roll for random stuff happening every turn in this warzone" and "Roll for random stuff every time some unit enter this terrain" already? The things advertised feeled very... same-y to me.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Aren't there enough "Roll for random stuff happening every turn in this warzone" and "Roll for random stuff every time some unit enter this terrain" already? The things advertised feeled very... same-y to me.

Not really, it looks like they're bringing back old 7th ed rules. These things can be fun in a narrative game when agreed on before hand but should never come close to matched play.

 Imateria wrote:
it looks like they're bringing back old 7th ed rules.

I guess that's why they look same-y.

And now I know I will never use this battlefield ruleset for the empyric storm.

The idea that my entire harlequin army will be relegated to 6+ armor saves for my expensive clown bodies is a "never going to happen" scenario for me. It was bad enough whenever a psychic power did it to one unit.

7 Strategems exclusive to use on Industrial worlds e.g.

1cp Grappling hook, can climb structures even without walls or ladders in addition vertical distance climbed is not counted for movement distance.

Empyric Storms
each turn roll against a table of warp storm effects
e.g. Psychic Apotheosis, randomly select one character in your army that is not a psyker, for the rest of the battle they can cast smite however they will suffer perils of the warp if they do not pass the psychic test.
Null Tide, for the rest of the battle invulnerable saves cant be used.

Also seems like it will have the fortifications datasheets from Index 2 along with the newer plasma structures.

I think we'd all be better off if we returned to the topic at hand, rather than the previous tangent.

Ta.

Can't quite tell the difference between Instantaneous and Persistent.... Instantaneous is one turn only?

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Can't quite tell the difference between Instantaneous and Persistent.... Instantaneous is one turn only?

Instantaneous will be "happens straight away" then once resolved it ends. An example would be "Roll a D6 for every unit on a table. On a 4+ that unit suffers D3 mortal wounds." This would be an instant effect resolved once.

Persistent would be something that has an affect until either the game ends, or the next roll is made on the table. Their example being - No invulns can be taken. This would last the entire turn/battle round and would then stop being in affect the moment the next time you roll on the chart.

 reds8n wrote:
I think we'd all be better off if we returned to the topic at hand, rather than the previous tangent.

Ta.

I'm confused. Where some messages removed? Or is discussion of the new rules previewed considered a tangent because they are not point changes?

 pretre wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
So did anyone have a full run-up of the current known points changes, or is it still all rumors?

The only confirmed one is the Malefic.

Thanks. Well, guess it's time to keep waiting.

 Melissia wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
So did anyone have a full run-up of the current known points changes, or is it still all rumors?

The only confirmed one is the Malefic.

Thanks. Well, guess it's time to keep waiting.

To be fair, we should know everything this Saturday. All recent codexes have had reviews posted as soon as pre-orders went live.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Can't quite tell the difference between Instantaneous and Persistent.... Instantaneous is one turn only?

Ah I get it. It's just confusing because the Instantaneous card they previewed affects the model the rest of the battle... Normally Instantaneous would be for the turn, and Persistent would stay active.

Slightly disappointed with the terrain rules. Seems like they will only extend to Narrative Warzones, Planetstrike and Stronghold assault - rather than actual terrain mechanics that is part of the core rules.

Warhammer Community wrote:Complimenting both these game types is a range of datasheets and extra rulings for in-game terrain.

Still a glimmer of hope though!

I'd be pretty happy to see some Fortification rules reprinted so I didn't have to get Imperium 2.

Aegis Defense Lines were a key part of my Ork lists when going to ground gave a 2+ save. Lootaz!

 Jidmah wrote:

Yes, and I said that an army of imperial super-heavies facing off against a tyranid horde can be totally balanced as well. If you claim that games cannot be truly balanced unless everyone has the same game pieces and there are games that are balanced despite players not having the same game pieces, you are wrong.
Many people used to have the opinion that the earth is flat despite there being proof otherwise. Those people were wrong. Opinions can be wrong.

You still haven't explained how GW can balance stuff THEY HAVE NO CONTROL OF!

You use RTS games in computers as arqument but hey here's newsflash: It's DIFFERENT TYPE OF GAME!

In PC game games developers have complete control over game parameters.

In miniature games they don't.

Apples and oranges. That's like saying bikes can be as fast as formula 1 cars. Just because one type of game can be balanced(which btw it still isn't fully) doesn't mean different type of game can be.

For 40k to have even chance of being balanced akin to RTS GW would need to sell pre-assembled(to ensure model assembly doesn't alter balance) units(of which only specificly those are allowed. No mixing&matching models) in pre-made terrain boards in pre-made scenario. I truly hope you don't want that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghaz wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/11/23/get-ready-for-chapter-approved-battlezones-nov-23gw-homepage-post-3/

Battlezones

Complimenting both these game types is a range of datasheets and extra rulings for in-game terrain. You’ll find deeper rules for all your Sector Mechanicus buildings – plasma scenery, for example, offers cover to your units, but has a chance to discharge plasma when they come under fire. Meanwhile, Chapter Approved contains rules for a huge range of fortifications, so adding bunkers, defence towers and more to your army is easier than ever!... We’ll be covering these fortifications in more detail tomorrow when we round off our previews with a closer look at Stronghold Assault, Planetstrike and the handy campaign guidelines provided in Chapter Approved.

Sigh so rather than truly good terrain system we get...Bespoke rules working in their terrain pieces only.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WatcherZero wrote:
7 Strategems exclusive to use on Industrial worlds e.g.

1cp Grappling hook, can climb structures even without walls or ladders in addition vertical distance climbed is not counted for movement distance..

Note however rather funnily it refers sector mechanicus structures. So by RAW it's only usable on GW's own terrain pieces. Not on any random custom made industrial terrain piece.

(and why it would only be usable on such terrain? Can't use grabling hooks to climb a cliff?)

tneva82 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Yes, and I said that an army of imperial super-heavies facing off against a tyranid horde can be totally balanced as well. If you claim that games cannot be truly balanced unless everyone has the same game pieces and there are games that are balanced despite players not having the same game pieces, you are wrong.
Many people used to have the opinion that the earth is flat despite there being proof otherwise. Those people were wrong. Opinions can be wrong.

You still haven't explained how GW can balance stuff THEY HAVE NO CONTROL OF!

You use RTS games in computers as arqument but hey here's newsflash: It's DIFFERENT TYPE OF GAME!

In PC game games developers have complete control over game parameters.

In miniature games they don't.

Apples and oranges. That's like saying bikes can be as fast as formula 1 cars. Just because one type of game can be balanced(which btw it still isn't fully) doesn't mean different type of game can be.

For 40k to have even chance of being balanced akin to RTS GW would need to sell pre-assembled(to ensure model assembly doesn't alter balance) units(of which only specificly those are allowed. No mixing&matching models) in pre-made terrain boards in pre-made scenario. I truly hope you don't want that.

I did respond to that, and a mod told us to stop this discussion.

WH40k is nothing but a turn based strategy game simplified enough to enable playing it without the help of a computer. Real time strategy is nothing but a turn based game with millions of turns.

Think we will be getting a Winter SEO style flip through of the book soon? Only after Saturday?

 ph34r wrote:
Think we will be getting a Winter SEO style flip through of the book soon? Only after Saturday?

He's not allowed to post them before Saturday when it goes up for pre order.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/11/24/get-ready-chapter-approved-campaigns/

Campaigns

On the Warhammer Friday stream, it was mentioned that malanthropes would be going up to 145 points. Unfortunately I do not have a timestamp for when it was mentioned, had a friend text me and immediately jumped into the stream to see if any other points changes were discussed -- none, so far.

Plague Marines are going down to 17. Also a few relics and stratagems they talked about were the same as the rumours adding a LOT of credibility to them.

On the one hand, the Malanthrope is untargetable synapse and should be high priced for that alone, on the other with cheaper untargetable synapse the cat is kinda out of the bag there, and a unit that does nothing of value other than buff nearby units probably shouldn't be too agressively priced.

Honestly the best solution is probably to keep it at 90 but give it a 10th wound.

Yeah but targeting and killing Synapse creatures isn't really so much of a advantage after the changes in the Tyranid codex.

 Melissia wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
So did anyone have a full run-up of the current known points changes, or is it still all rumors?

The only confirmed one is the Malefic.

Thanks. Well, guess it's time to keep waiting.

It's all accurate. I flipped through the book myself.

 theharrower wrote:

It's all accurate. I flipped through the book myself.

Are you able to say which armies had units amended and which didn't? I'm curious if the newest books (Craftworlds & Nids) had any points changes outside IA units. Also if any GSC point costs were changed.