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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 17:59:11
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Roarin' Runtherd
|
Wakshaani wrote:Wonder what would happen if they put in some kind of diversity rule?
"Every time you choose a unit after the first in your Elite, Fast Attack, Heavy, or HQ, you lose 1 victory point if it replicates a previous pick. Thus, if you pick a unit of Fire Dragons, then pick another unit of Fire Dragons even if armed different, you suffer this point loss."
Then come out and say, "This is a harsh rule, but we have found over the years that playtesting balanced forces doesn't prepare the game for those who simply spam one thing over and over. To encourage diversity, we have enacted this penalty. We think your games will generally be more enjoyable."
So, you can gamble and still go for "Broken Thing Spam", but if you do, you suffer for it. Kind of a built-in handicap rule.
(Obviously, there are soem holes even in this, such as troops spam, but, you gotta start somewhere.)
I like that idea, on the face of it at least.
Could see some problems with it tho. Take Nobz. They can be built as Footsloggers, in a transport (Trukk or BW) or on Bikes. You can take another unit as a troop choice with a Warboss. How would you handle units like that? Allow multiples/different builds or force the penalty again?
Just concerned that it would perhaps have some unfortunate consequences in standardising army and unit builds to avoid the penalty. Encouraging diversity is good, just think you need to be careful re side-effects.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 18:03:12
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant
|
Or pay a points premium for duplicates.
+20pts for the 2nd choice, +40pts for a third within one organisation chart.
|
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 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 18:04:05
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body
|
Just look to Warmachine and their theme lists. They give you extra bonuses for selecting units that would commonly fight together for fluff reasons.
They don't break the game, in fact I believe most aren't as strong as lists with units selected solely on merit, but it is a nice way to encourage more diverse list building.
|
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 18:06:42
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant
|
I like that idea. If you want to play triptide, you can only play it in a certain formation that restricts, say crisis suits etc.
Want to play trip centurions, you can't take sternguard...
Want to play maxed serpents, you can't take jetbikes.
|
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 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 18:10:00
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Grim Rune Priest in the Eye of the Storm
|
AlexHolker wrote:Wakshaani wrote:Wonder what would happen if they put in some kind of diversity rule?
"Every time you choose a unit after the first in your Elite, Fast Attack, Heavy, or HQ, you lose 1 victory point if it replicates a previous pick. Thus, if you pick a unit of Fire Dragons, then pick another unit of Fire Dragons even if armed different, you suffer this point loss."
The most fluffy Space Marine army has two Assault Squads, two Devastator Squads and six Tactical Squads - that's the makeup of a Company after all, and arguably the basis for the entire Force Organisation Chart. A ruleset that punishes people for playing themed armies regardless of whether their choices are unbalanced would be rather poor.
But it is not the Rules Set that Punishes the Fluffy Players, it just allows it. I feel luck that my group is not in the so called “Competitive Environment”. As a group we encourage “Fluffy”, “Themed” and even “Silly” list.
One of our players chose to play Salamander because thought Vulcan was just a cool model. The rules neither encourage nor discourage how we play other than what we are required to take.
It has been this way for us since 1st edition and will be that way with the 101st Edition.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 18:16:40
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
AtoMaki wrote:And what if your opponent tells you to bring something that can beat his beatstick?
We will say no, and he will not get a game against us.
AtoMaki wrote:And remember, the "Please don't play this powerful unit because my army sucks even though it can be better." line is dangerously close to the so-called "victim card" that is easily one of the most d*ckish things you can have in an argument.
Uh ? How could my Sisters of Battle army get so much better ? By not being a Sisters of Battle army ?
Wakshaani wrote:Wonder what would happen if they put in some kind of diversity rule?
"Every time you choose a unit after the first in your Elite, Fast Attack, Heavy, or HQ, you lose 1 victory point if it replicates a previous pick. Thus, if you pick a unit of Fire Dragons, then pick another unit of Fire Dragons even if armed different, you suffer this point loss."
So, for taking a 4-melta dominion squad and a 4-flamers dominion squad, I loose 1 victory point, even though they fulfill a completely different role ? Not every codex got a huge unit diversity. And it will hit fluffy (non-optimized) theme list very strongly !
azreal13 wrote:Just look to Warmachine and their theme lists. They give you extra bonuses for selecting units that would commonly fight together for fluff reasons.
Warmachine has FA which prevents spamming, but will not work directly in 40k because 40k has units with many options, unlike Warmachine. And beside, Warmachine is not really focused on fluff…
|
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 18:20:33
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion
|
azreal13 wrote:Just look to Warmachine and their theme lists. They give you extra bonuses for selecting units that would commonly fight together for fluff reasons.
They don't break the game, in fact I believe most aren't as strong as lists with units selected solely on merit, but it is a nice way to encourage more diverse list building.
yeah, and 40K is actually moving in that direction with formations, now they just need to really bring them into play, and avoid the FOC breaking shinnagens. or maybe GW's thinking that breaking the FOC is part of the charm of fluffy formations
|
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 18:50:30
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot
|
Us? What is this royal plural?
And this how the sh*tty codex designs spoil the fun even in non-tourney games. Someone has to sacrifice his fun: your opponent BY not bringing his favorite army full with beatsticks or you by fielding your SoB army against overwhelming odds. And there is good no solution, because you both have the same right to bring whatever you want - beatstick or not - and none of you can tell the other what to take.
That's why the game should be balanced on a competitive level. The equality in power would eliminate pre-game disputes on army lists as well as encourage diversity as you could take whatever you want without the fear that your selection worth trash on the tabletop.
|
My armies:
14000 points |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 22:53:00
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot
Vior'la Sept
|
I'd bet you its just going to work out some of the bugs that are in 6th edition, along with add in the full Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules. IMO if GW is smart, they will release a small update for 6th edition that is what 7th edition would be fixing. This would then mean that players that already have Escalation and/or Stronghold Assault only have to buy this small upgrade to the rules instead of buy a like $75 book that just repeats what they already have. I would buy this small addition just because it would make it so I don't waste that much money, but knowing GW the're going to just want to rack up as much cash as possible. Also, I think it would be smart if some FW models were also added in. I'm not totally sure in what way, shape, or form, but its something that I think needs to and will happen. Especially since FW is already a fancy candy coated GW.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 23:03:20
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests
Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.
|
Maybe they'll change the rules for Skyshield Landing Pads so that: 1. They can be destroyed. 2. You can't start non-skimmer tanks and artillery on top of them, because that's simply idiotic.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/17 23:03:56
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 23:06:52
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Blood Angel Terminator with Lightning Claws
|
H.B.M.C. wrote:Maybe they'll change the rules for Skyshield Landing Pads so that:
1. They can be destroyed.
2. You can't start non-skimmer tanks and artillery on top of them, because that's simply idiotic.
Take your logic and get out!
|
GW: "We do no demographic research, we have no focus groups, we do not ask the market what it wants" |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/17 23:57:09
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot
Vior'la Sept
|
Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote: H.B.M.C. wrote:Maybe they'll change the rules for Skyshield Landing Pads so that:
1. They can be destroyed.
2. You can't start non-skimmer tanks and artillery on top of them, because that's simply idiotic.
Take your logic and get out!
Why?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 00:05:24
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests
Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.
|
He's kidding.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 00:11:30
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
I play a faction whose symbol is a fleur- de-lys, and I have a particle in my family name. Hence royal plural  .
AtoMaki wrote:And this how the sh*tty codex designs spoil the fun even in non-tourney games.
Yeah, that is obvious.
|
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 00:15:46
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
H.B.M.C. wrote:Maybe they'll change the rules for Skyshield Landing Pads so that:
1. They can be destroyed.
2. You can't start non-skimmer tanks and artillery on top of them, because that's simply idiotic.
Agreed on the first point. As for the second, it's not like there are aerial transports designed to carry vehicles that could easily drop them on a landing pad.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 00:21:48
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests
Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.
|
So they land their transport tank or battle tank on the landing pad, rather than on the ground where it can go on to move around? And this makes sense to you? No. (Non-skimmer) Tanks on Landing Pads is daft, and just because they can do something doesn't mean that they would.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/18 00:22:55
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 02:07:02
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Lord of the Fleet
|
H.B.M.C. wrote:
So they land their transport tank or battle tank on the landing pad, rather than on the ground where it can go on to move around?
I seem to recall a ramp off the pad, but I may be misremembering... and actually it makes a lot of sense. You don't drop a vehicle in a hot LZ if you can avoid it in real life. You land it someplace near by, preferably a landing area where it can be dropped off without testing to see how well the suspension works.
|
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 02:12:30
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
[MOD]
Making Stuff
|
You are. The only way on or off the Skyshield without flying is through the man-sized hatches and ladders on the legs.
You land it someplace near by, preferably a landing area where it can be dropped off without testing to see how well the suspension works.
...where it then sits for the duration of the battle due to not having any way off that landing zone... or drives off the edge of the pad and drops around 20 feet to the ground.
.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 02:16:18
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Grim Rune Priest in the Eye of the Storm
|
insaniak wrote:
You are. The only way on or off the Skyshield without flying is through the man-sized hatches and ladders on the legs.
You land it someplace near by, preferably a landing area where it can be dropped off without testing to see how well the suspension works.
...where it then sits for the duration of the battle due to not having any way off that landing zone... or drives off the edge of the pad and drops around 20 feet to the ground.
.
What about Blood Angels and thier Drop Raiders?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 02:24:28
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Aizuwakamatsu, Fukushima, Japan
|
No one ever accused the Blood Angels of being smart.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 02:59:05
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Anpu42 wrote: insaniak wrote:
You are. The only way on or off the Skyshield without flying is through the man-sized hatches and ladders on the legs.
You land it someplace near by, preferably a landing area where it can be dropped off without testing to see how well the suspension works.
...where it then sits for the duration of the battle due to not having any way off that landing zone... or drives off the edge of the pad and drops around 20 feet to the ground.
.
What about Blood Angels and thier Drop Raiders?
Fluffwise, Deepstriking Land Raiders are supposed to have been dropped off by a thunderhawk like that scene in Attack of the Clones. Not kicked out of a ship in orbit (though GIJoe did that once, and it was awesome!)
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 03:02:06
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Haemonculi Flesh Apprentice
|
insaniak wrote:
You are. The only way on or off the Skyshield without flying is through the man-sized hatches and ladders on the legs.
You land it someplace near by, preferably a landing area where it can be dropped off without testing to see how well the suspension works.
...where it then sits for the duration of the battle due to not having any way off that landing zone... or drives off the edge of the pad and drops around 20 feet to the ground.
.
Just model dirt ramps on one side and paint general lee on the side of that Baal predator... Yeeeeehaaaaw!
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/18 03:02:20
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 08:22:16
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant
|
If my landing pad was in the middle of a hotly contested area, and it is possible that I could lose the area and the landing pad, I'd drop a tank on top of it, firstly for elevated fire support, secondly so it is harder for the enemy to take out in CQC and thirdly, it is asset denial, the enemy can't use the pad themselves if there is a tank in the way, they also would have to clear the wreck if they destroyed the tank on top of it, giving the original owners time to stage a counter attack before the enemy reinforces the position more.
|
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 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 08:39:00
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
[MOD]
Decrepit Dakkanaut
Cozy cockpit of an Archer ARC-5S
|
On the subject of landing pads, I'd love to see a clarification that clearly states that only models standing on the pad gain the ++ save, not units with only one or two models on it, while the rest is conga-lining towards you.
Unless this has been fixed in the meantime, in which case, /ignore.
|
Fatum Iustum Stultorum
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 08:39:45
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Tzeentch Veteran Marine with Psychic Potential
|
endlesswaltz123 wrote:If my landing pad was in the middle of a hotly contested area, and it is possible that I could lose the area and the landing pad, I'd drop a tank on top of it, firstly for elevated fire support, secondly so it is harder for the enemy to take out in CQC and thirdly, it is asset denial, the enemy can't use the pad themselves if there is a tank in the way, they also would have to clear the wreck if they destroyed the tank on top of it, giving the original owners time to stage a counter attack before the enemy reinforces the position more.
Sorry, what?
You would drop the tank beside it so that it can retreat if needed. And you would rig the platform to explode if you were to lose the area. In no reality would you drop one of your own tank in a trap.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 09:09:36
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Kelne
|
endlesswaltz123 wrote:If my landing pad was in the middle of a hotly contested area, and it is possible that I could lose the area and the landing pad, I'd drop a tank on top of it, firstly for elevated fire support, secondly so it is harder for the enemy to take out in CQC and thirdly, it is asset denial, the enemy can't use the pad themselves if there is a tank in the way, they also would have to clear the wreck if they destroyed the tank on top of it, giving the original owners time to stage a counter attack before the enemy reinforces the position more.
Are you seriously using (flawed) logic to win an argument in a tabletop game such as WH40K?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 09:24:10
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant
|
It totally depends on the platform and the tank. If it's a lemun russ you can just throw them away. Also, if the landing platform is the only one in the area, and you know that your tactics hinge on having it available, you aren't going to blow it up.
It's 40k, you can use mental, wasteful throwaway tactics, the general doesn't care about the crew, or the tank if the landing platform is the important asset.
|
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 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 09:37:46
Subject: Re:W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
[MOD]
Making Stuff
|
Seb wrote:endlesswaltz123 wrote:If my landing pad was in the middle of a hotly contested area, and it is possible that I could lose the area and the landing pad, I'd drop a tank on top of it, firstly for elevated fire support, secondly so it is harder for the enemy to take out in CQC and thirdly, it is asset denial, the enemy can't use the pad themselves if there is a tank in the way, they also would have to clear the wreck if they destroyed the tank on top of it, giving the original owners time to stage a counter attack before the enemy reinforces the position more.
Sorry, what?
You would drop the tank beside it so that it can retreat if needed. And you would rig the platform to explode if you were to lose the area. In no reality would you drop one of your own tank in a trap. 
To be fair, in 'reality' there would be some way on and off the pad other than the ladders... otherwise it would be useless for anything other than passenger transport.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 12:46:35
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Lord of the Fleet
|
insaniak wrote:
You are. The only way on or off the Skyshield without flying is through the man-sized hatches and ladders on the legs.
Was confusing it with this:
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/18 12:46:51
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/02/18 13:14:41
Subject: W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.16*
|
 |
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests
Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.
|
What about them?
Their Deep Strike rule represents something like a Thunderhawk Lander swooping in, letting go, and blasting away again. The Thunderhawk wouldn't land a tank - especially a transport vehicle - on top of a landing pad that it can't get down from!
|
|
|
 |
 |
|