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.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Or Kroot could just be going off on GW again.

Is it a day that ends in "y"?

You realise that Kroot is German and all his days end in "g"

Cheers

Andrew

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Also the new rulebook is going to have revised rules for
Interceptor, sky fire, fortifications, lords of war, allies and data slates.

Keep swinging!

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
The revised rules is that everyone is battle brothers with everyone else. So now there's nothing to get in the way of you forging that narrative

Except for Tyranids, obviously.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
The revised rules is that everyone is battle brothers with everyone else. So now there's nothing to get in the way of you forging that narrative

Except for Tyranids, obviously.

Well that goes without saying. I didn't think I needed to tell everyone that the Tyranid codex is so strong that it just wouldn't be fair if they could take allies.

 AndrewC wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Or Kroot could just be going off on GW again.

Is it a day that ends in "y"?

You realise that Kroot is German and all his days end in "g"

Cheers

Andrew

Odd, from my time in Germany I could have sworn their days ended with beer.

I'm pretty sure that GW books (and other companies' books in a similar format) always have a multiple of 16 for their page count. That just seems to be how their printers work.

I wonder if it's possible that they will split the rules away from the background and hobby material? I've heard that in the past the GW management were very reluctant to publish pure rules books because (a) rules need a lot more work to produce than background and (b) they didn't like the idea of catering to 'people who only care about the rules'. On the other hand, they have to grasp that making the established player base pay for the same old material as they got in the last book after only two years is cheeky even by their standards.

Also the new rulebook is going to have revised rules for
Interceptor, sky fire, fortifications, lords of war, allies and data slates.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes. You must be a Sith.

Guess it makes me one as well though. Hmm...

I wonder if it's possible that they will split the rules away from the background and hobby material? I've heard that in the past the GW management were very reluctant to publish pure rules books because (a) rules need a lot more work to produce than background and (b) they didn't like the idea of catering to 'people who only care about the rules'. On the other hand, they have to grasp that making the established player base pay for the same old material as they got in the last book after only two years is cheeky even by their standards

This is what the digital rulebook is... just rules.

Regardless of anything this is going to be one of the longest months ever.

I have a GT that weekend with another one a month later. I am guessing it will be old rules for the first GT then the next GT will use the new rules.....It is going to be SUPER hard to not read the new rules during the first GT

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I have to admit, I have got to the point where I would like the community to greet this new book with a collective technicolour yawn.

I don't know what that means!

Vomit. He means vomit.

 AndrewC wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Or Kroot could just be going off on GW again.

Is it a day that ends in "y"?

You realise that Kroot is German and all his days end in "g"

Cheers

Andrew

What about Mittwoch?

From BoLS:

First up - Percentage FOC limits (like in Warhammer Fantasy):

40%+ Troops

10%-30% HQ (single character HQ Warlords can break this limit)

<20% Elite

<25% Fast

<25% Heavy

<25% Lords of War

<20% Fortifications...can take multiple fortifications

<25% Allies, Secondary Detachments, or Allied Army Formations

<50% Primary Army Formations

+++We consider this set average reliability+++

The HQ and Troops breakdowns going that way are new. Rest sounds about the same as expected/wishlisted.

I highly doubt percentages, that would be too restrictive on what you can take and do. They have been going out of their way to prevent limitations on what you can take.

It has been all about giving you the options and I like it more that way.

A friend of mine that is a friend of the second cousin of Kirby's next door neighbour's gardener sent me a leak of the Forge The Narrative rules

Forge the Narrative(TM) wrote:Tournaments(TM) are banned. If you are a True HHHobbyist(TM) and attend one, return your army to the nearest Hobby Center(TM) for destruction. Go to GW's webpage and order every army available and then start playing by yourself, that way you will never lose and your Narratives(TM) will be more epic-grimdark(TM)

See! Pure genious, with a rule like this all complains about balance will be over. Who needs gaming with other people to enjoy the HHHobby.

M.

 Leth wrote:
I highly doubt percentages, that would be too restrictive on what you can take and do. They have been going out of their way to prevent limitations on what you can take.

It has been all about giving you the options and I like it more that way.

I'm completely new, and i don't know gak. Im only working on the old cadian battle force i got off ebay right now.
I want to make my army only use valkyries/vendettas, veterans, heavy weapons teams, and sentinals. Would that means that i now am almost required to get tanks even if they go against my fluff and what i want to do with my army?

 Sledgehammer wrote:

 Leth wrote:
I highly doubt percentages, that would be too restrictive on what you can take and do. They have been going out of their way to prevent limitations on what you can take.

It has been all about giving you the options and I like it more that way.

I'm completely new, and i don't know gak. Im only working on the old cadian battle force i got off ebay right now.
I want to make my army only use valkyries/vendettas, veterans, heavy weapons teams, and sentinals. Would that means that i now am almost required to get tanks even if they go against my fluff and what i want to do with my army?

No. The percentage system means you have a min and max ammount of points and can spend in each unit.

So no more then 25% of your army can be heavy support units. So at 2000 points you can't buy more then 500 points of heavy support for example.

If it's true troops will be a mandatory 40% of your points, that means at 2000 points ATLEAST 800 points of your army must be invested in troops for example.

I hope to God the Prescience rumor is true, not just for balance but to see all the butthurt "I'm quitting 40k FOREVA!" reactions it would get here.

Man, I'm praying that this percentages system rumor is false. I know people keep saying it would kill the deathstar meta, but I hate that system.

As ridiculously imperfect as GWs point system is, it's still a points system based on general utility/power. Things that aren't very useful or powerful cost fewer points, things that are more useful/powerful cost more. It's NOT a rarity system. Units that might be very rare according to the background aren't more expensive, unless they are more useful/powerful.

Then, this percentage system comes along and knocks that out of whack. Orks, for example, have very inexpensive common troops. There shouldn't be any need to force the ork player to overequip them, or take nobs as troops, or field craptons of them, so that he can field some elites, heavy support, and fast attack.

The 'rarity' of units in 40K was represented by the force org chart, with a limited number of elite/heavy/fast attack choices available and a more generous allowance of troops. There wasn't (and doesn't need to be) any presupposition that the troops composed the majority of the heavy lifting of the army, but mandating them to compose 40%+ of the points means just that. Same with Imperial Guard. I don't see a problem with a guard army of two troops slots and a bunch of tanks. It seems fluffy and appropriate, but it gets killed just like some Eldar/Dark Eldar deathstar with this percentage system.

In addition, though the math is trivially easy to do, it's another damn step. The force org chart is simple to follow and simple to verify. Can you easily eyeball somebody's composition percentage? Probably not. Can you count and make sure they have two troops and no more than 3 heavy slots? Bet so.

I know that the deathstar/riptide/revenant problems are real and need addressing, but I think they need addressing in a more intelligent, creative way than percentage allowances. A more nuanced allies chart, better rules for allied forces, and clearer ways to coordinate and communicate Escalation/Apocalypse games would all help.

IMO a percentage based system is better, but a good % base system will NOT be more restrictive and NOT stop deathstars. The way to kill deathstars is to not make them in the first place, lol.

The sort of % system I'm thinking of isn't there to restrict armies so much as it's to allow armies that have cheaper FA/Elites/HS to take more of their special and rare things as they are cheaper and more plentiful.

I spent way too much money on my astra army (2 Hq & 2 troops (400 pts), 3 elite, 2 heavy, 1 fast). A % system would cause me to quit. I'm at 2k, and not buying any more minis. GW better not do the whf % system. That'd do it for me... (Btw, all dkok & fw model army)

My issue with the % system is it does nothing about Deathstars, just look at WHF.

 Anpu42 wrote:
My issue with the % system is it does nothing about Deathstars, just look at WHF.

It also disproportionately affects different armies. Say a minimum 40% troops, or 800 points for a 2K list. A Grey Knight Draigo+Paladinstar would fit that easily, and be 11 models. Orks would need 8 trukk boy squads, or 4 full mobs of 30 boys to meet the requirement.

 Anpu42 wrote:
My issue with the % system is it does nothing about Deathstars, just look at WHF.

The thing that strike sme about the percentage system in that rumor is that it doesn't fit logically.

Escalation exists for a single reason, to enable the big models in a standard game of 40K. That is what escalation is.

25% on lords of war means a normal game of 40K below 2000 or so points wont fit the majority of the lords of war in it.

Therefore, its wishlisting rubbish, or GW are abandoning Escalation, whilst 'rolling escalation into the main book'.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
From BoLS:

First up - Percentage FOC limits (like in Warhammer Fantasy):

40%+ Troops

10%-30% HQ (single character HQ Warlords can break this limit)

<20% Elite

<25% Fast

<25% Heavy

<25% Lords of War

<20% Fortifications...can take multiple fortifications

<25% Allies, Secondary Detachments, or Allied Army Formations

<50% Primary Army Formations

+++We consider this set average reliability+++

The HQ and Troops breakdowns going that way are new. Rest sounds about the same as expected/wishlisted.

My guess is that the Troops percentage is actually 20%+, and 40% is a typo.

I'm also dubious about Lords of War and fortifications having a specific FOC slot, because, based on the chatlogs, they do not occupy a FOC, and instead count as part of the Secondary Detachments. Here is the specific quote:

Secondary units count towards the sec percentage AND the FoC %. Sec units that are not part of a FoC like fortifications, lord of wars , formations and knights only count against the secondary percentage. You can take allies only from one regular list. There are no other limitations.

The Primary Army Formations section, though could be legit without contradicting anything in the logs. I hope it isn't the case, because blowing up Deamon Flying Circus while still allowing Tyranids to run 7-9 FMCs via skyblight at 1850 seems wrong.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
My issue with the % system is it does nothing about Deathstars, just look at WHF.

It also disproportionately affects different armies. Say a minimum 40% troops, or 800 points for a 2K list. A Grey Knight Draigo+Paladinstar would fit that easily, and be 11 models. Orks would need 8 trukk boy squads, or 4 full mobs of 30 boys to meet the requirement.

To say nothing of how many gaunts Nid players would need...

But then, if this means that people must make troops the back bone of their armies instead of just meatshields/ a points tax / FoC bare minimum requirement (looking at you SM Tacticals) then I'm all for it.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I hope to God the Prescience rumor is true, not just for balance but to see all the butthurt "I'm quitting 40k FOREVA!" reactions it would get here.

I really agree, Prescience is way too good to be a primaris power. The only reason you take Divination is to get it and everyone who takes Divination does. It makes armies that can take it way too powerful.

40%+ Troops
10%-30% HQ (single character HQ Warlords can break this limit)
<20% Elite
<25% Fast
<25% Heavy
<25% Lords of War
<20% Fortifications...can take multiple fortifications
<25% Allies, Secondary Detachments, or Allied Army Formations
<50% Primary Army Formations

At 2000pts this would mean:
HQ: 200-600pts
Troops: 800 pts
Elite: 400pts
Fast: 500pts
Heavy: 500pts
Lords of War: 500pts
Fortifications: 400pts
Allies, 2nd Detachment or Allied Formations: 500pts
Primary Army Formation: 1000pts

This seem a bit restrictive but it would limit spam then again I'm one of those people who liked themed armies and this really limits that.
I love walkers, my favourite unit type in the game and as a collector of Orks (amongst all other armies) I really love the Killa-Kan and Deff dreads. Sure walkers suck but I love the idea of them.
15 Killa-Kans walking against you is both funny and fluffy in an all grot army with grot tanks and megatanks. I don't think that's possible with this percentage system.
Then again what a percentage system does it invalidate any vehicle squadron as there'd be no reason to put units in squadrons (there are no benefits to squadrons, only negatives).
For 500pts you could get 10 Killa-Kans at 2k pts, all solo walkers. Might not be so bad and they'd be more survivable than 3 squadrons of 3.


So if a percentage system makes vehicle squadrons useless (unless they add some squadron rules that make them good) you better hope for some good formations as that seems to be replacing squadrons.
Lets hope for some really good Killa-Kan formations

 MadCowCrazy wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I hope to God the Prescience rumor is true, not just for balance but to see all the butthurt "I'm quitting 40k FOREVA!" reactions it would get here.

I really agree, Prescience is way too good to be a primaris power. The only reason you take Divination is to get it and everyone who takes Divination does. It makes armies that can take it way too powerful.

40%+ Troops
10%-30% HQ (single character HQ Warlords can break this limit)
<20% Elite
<25% Fast
<25% Heavy
<25% Lords of War
<20% Fortifications...can take multiple fortifications
<25% Allies, Secondary Detachments, or Allied Army Formations
<50% Primary Army Formations

At 2000pts this would mean:
HQ: 200-600pts
Troops: 800 pts
Elite: 400pts
Fast: 500pts
Heavy: 500pts
Lords of War: 500pts
Fortifications: 400pts
Allies, 2nd Detachment or Allied Formations: 500pts
Primary Army Formation: 1000pts

This seem a bit restrictive but it would limit spam then again I'm one of those people who liked themed armies and this really limits that.
I love walkers, my favourite unit type in the game and as a collector of Orks (amongst all other armies) I really love the Killa-Kan and Deff dreads. Sure walkers suck but I love the idea of them.
15 Killa-Kans walking against you is both funny and fluffy in an all grot army with grot tanks and megatanks. I don't think that's possible with this percentage system.
Then again what a percentage system does it invalidate any vehicle squadron as there'd be no reason to put units in squadrons (there are no benefits to squadrons, only negatives).
For 500pts you could get 10 Killa-Kans at 2k pts, all solo walkers. Might not be so bad and they'd be more survivable than 3 squadrons of 3.


So if a percentage system makes vehicle squadrons useless (unless they add some squadron rules that make them good) you better hope for some good formations as that seems to be replacing squadrons.
Lets hope for some really good Killa-Kan formations

Looking at GW's recent dataslates and other codex formations that may be their point entirely: To limit unit spam by forcing those that want to do so (either for a themed list of for tourney play) only able to do so with a very specific formations.

But then, I think I'm giving them far too much credit...

I guess squadrons could be good if each vehicle got like +1 hull point for being in a squadron or if you could distribute the damage to any model of your choice but the latter seems less likely as that would mess with how wounds are allocated.
There are many ways to make squadrons worth taking but with the current rules in a % based system they wouldn't be.

Didn't squadrons ignore shaken and stunned in some edition or am I thinking of something else?


On a % based system they could make themed HQs. Like Big Mek allows you to take +20% Heavy support as long as it's vehicles or walkers.

 MadCowCrazy wrote:
I guess squadrons could be good if each vehicle got like +1 hull point for being in a squadron or if you could distribute the damage to any model of your choice but the latter seems less likely as that would mess with how wounds are allocated.
There are many ways to make squadrons worth taking but with the current rules in a % based system they wouldn't be.

Didn't squadrons ignore shaken and stunned in some edition or am I thinking of something else?

Fifth was ignore shaken and stunned but immobilised becomes destroyed.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The point was that if a troll avatar "speaks for itself" it's not going to get a lot of positive associations, that's all.

Well, then I guess my signature, with Sisters of Bitter, does not carry positive associations either, then .