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:
In all the ways 40k can't be compared to the other games due to poor quality of rules, scale of the game and scope of the setting and now we want to compare how long the edition lasted?

*record scratch*

Wait... we can't compare 40K to other war games?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Like I said, if 2 years becomes the new norm but they're actively correcting things with each new ruleset, I'm okay with that.

Good for you. I'm not ok with buying a giant expensive hardback that will be obselete in two years time.

Wonder what the price point will be the objective cards

It feels like the concept of the two list strategies will just further divide the Warhammer 40k community. Or maybe they are specifically ignored along the lines of mysterious terrain (who uses that, show of hands?).

 ironicsilence wrote:
Wonder what the price point will be the objective cards

It depends if they retro or not. In 2nd you just got one.

 TheKbob wrote:
It feels like the concept of the two list strategies will just further divide the Warhammer 40k community. Or maybe they are specifically ignored along the lines of mysterious terrain (who uses that, show of hands?).

Divide the 40K community? But all 40K players get together with friends for a casual bout of narrative forging... don't they? Are you saying that not everyone plays the same way the GW design team does?

 Anpu42 wrote:

 ironicsilence wrote:
Wonder what the price point will be the objective cards

It depends if they retro or not. In 2nd you just got one.

Im fully expecting to have to buy the objective cards separately I also wouldnt be shocked if they changed the size and or shape of the standard templates. I assume the cards will likely come in the starter set, if there is a 7th starter set which I assume they will, but they will have to sell the cards separately for the people that dont buy the starter

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
In all the ways 40k can't be compared to the other games due to poor quality of rules, scale of the game and scope of the setting and now we want to compare how long the edition lasted?

*record scratch*

Wait... we can't compare 40K to other war games?

What's the point if every time it just ends up being highlighting what other companies are doing and how it's different? We already know GW does things differently, so I'm not sure what the point really is of going down that road about every single thing. It's like listing all the ways an orange is not an apple on an almost constant basis.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Like I said, if 2 years becomes the new norm but they're actively correcting things with each new ruleset, I'm okay with that.

Good for you. I'm not ok with buying a giant expensive hardback that will be obselete in two years time.

Never said I'd be buying the big, expensive hardbacks, just that I am not against a shorter turnover if it's making the game better.

It think it will break down like this:
>Those who hate taking “Mandatory Units” are going to play “Unbound”
>Those who love using their Troops will stay with “Battle-Forged” List
>Casual Players will probably stick with “Battle Forged List”
>Fluffily Players will end up going with “Unbound” most of the time.
>WAAC will Play “Unbound”.
>TFG will play what ever you don’t like.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
What's the point if every time it just ends up being highlighting what other companies are doing and how it's different? We already know GW does things differently, so I'm not sure what the point really is of going down that road about every single thing. It's like listing all the ways an orange is not an apple on an almost constant basis.

From my perspective, it's that this hobby isn't just Games Workshop. The notion that it is just them comes from us brought into war gaming because they were the biggest dog. Or for many moons ago, the only dog. When we compare the games, yes, apples to oranges in terms of design. Comparing the companies, however, war game company to war game company, we see the failings of the former versus the new breed of the latter.

Which realistically, it's just the new upstarts doing what Games Workshop did in the past to get them where they are today.

We might be a vocal lot of rabble rousers having our internet forum tussles, but this discussion of "what's coming?" will be on every gaming groups minds and discussions platforms for the coming few weeks. After seeing many groups disbanding or shifting elsewhere, I can only see this measure expediting more folks to do the same. And that's not healthy for the company or the community of 40k. You may be left with one type of customer and is that healthy from a business perspective? I'd wager not.

From my perspective, it's taking a game I enjoyed in 5E and further shifting it away from that image.

 Anpu42 wrote:
It think it will break down like this:
>Those who hate taking “Mandatory Units” are going to play “Unbound”
>Those who love using their Troops will stay with “Battle-Forged” List
>Casual Players will probably stick with “Battle Forged List”
>Fluffily Players will end up going with “Unbound” most of the time.
>WAAC will Play “Unbound”.
>TFG will play what ever you don’t like.

Missing competitive players who will likely opt for battle-forged as it is likely what the comeptitive environment will use. And no, WAAC =/= competitive

I'm trying to decide if I love or hate this...I love Monster Mash with Demons, and that sounds awesome, being able to take all princes and greater demons. But having no rules feels a bit odd. I guess I'll give it a try. I'll try any game once.

My answer for almost everyones broken list is this:

500 conscripts
Characters/upgrades to taste.

Probably yarrick as one for the leadership tests/CC ability and then commissars to make sure they dont run. Maybe raven guard characters to give you outflank.

Good times

I am going to remain causciously optimistic until we see more rumors and it starts to fill out. I am really intrigued to see how the psychic phase is going to fill out. If there is a dispel pool that is going to be pretty significant

At this point it feels like the unbound vs. battle forged argument wont be settled until we see more and everyone seems to have their side.

I'm really curious to see how/if the ally matrix is overhauled. Also to see these "battle-forged buffs" that are supposedly tailored to each army.

In my heart-of-hearts I'm hoping for something more significant than a warlord trait or scout move. I'd love to see meaningful things that add to the fluff and experience. Off the top of my head I'm thinking discounts to tanks for AM, assault squads for BA etc. Maybe giving DE better poison when their adhere to the force org, or demons getting a free gift or two.

 Leth wrote:
My answer for almost everyones broken list is this:

500 conscripts
Characters/upgrades to taste.

Probably yarrick as one for the leadership tests/CC ability and then commissars to make sure they dont run. Maybe raven guard characters to give you outflank.

Good times

I am going to remain causciously optimistic until we see more rumors and it starts to fill out. I am really intrigued to see how the psychic phase is going to fill out. If there is a dispel pool that is going to be pretty significant

It makes me wonder if they are removing psyker hoods and deny the witch or editing them into the new rules.

I love the uninformed who think the competitive players will be the ones who want to play unbound 40k.

Reality check: competitive players want a balanced game, as it will benefit both those of us who want to have fun at events and those who play pickup games exclusively. You won't see unbound in reputable events.

Also, I can't help but laugh at those who feat an army of unbuffed Riptides. It is a nice way to identify those who have no idea of what they are talking about.

 Leth wrote:
My answer for almost everyones broken list is this:

500 conscripts
Characters/upgrades to taste.

Probably yarrick as one for the leadership tests/CC ability and then commissars to make sure they dont run. Maybe raven guard characters to give you outflank.

Good times

I am going to remain causciously optimistic until we see more rumors and it starts to fill out. I am really intrigued to see how the psychic phase is going to fill out. If there is a dispel pool that is going to be pretty significant

And how are you taking 500 Conscripts when they're a part of the Infantry Platoon? You still have to follow unit rules from what we can tell and Conscripts are a part of the Infantry Platoon, not accessible by other means.

Dropping the FOC doesn't change how a legal unit is built. I mean you can't just run 500 conscripts by themselves in Apoc without the rest of the party, so why claim it in Unbound?

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Leth wrote:
My answer for almost everyones broken list is this:

500 conscripts
Characters/upgrades to taste.

Probably yarrick as one for the leadership tests/CC ability and then commissars to make sure they dont run. Maybe raven guard characters to give you outflank.

Good times

I am going to remain causciously optimistic until we see more rumors and it starts to fill out. I am really intrigued to see how the psychic phase is going to fill out. If there is a dispel pool that is going to be pretty significant

It makes me wonder if they are removing psyker hoods and deny the witch or editing them into the new rules.

Psychic Hoods, Adamantium will, talisman of moloch etc will probably add additional dice to your pool/additional dice to an attempt targeting the bearer.

@TTW watch out with that last sentence, or it may be your last! (Russian roulette )

I'll let you guys try this out and I'll digest the findings to see if my marines get unboxed or if their box gets a nice little shipping label instead.

You are correct my mistake

so 30 points per command squad
100 for the two infantry squads
150 for the conscripts

So that is 280 per 75 models

times 5 is 1400 with 450 points to work with, my bad

375 models

I see two problems with the new "dynamic gameflow":
1st Lot's of strategic options do not speed up things for people who like to think a little longer and strategic cards throwing in new objectives make the struggle to make a decision even worse.
2nd with the option of additional objectives I see players already dominating a game just stalling the game until they draw the right card to gain even more victory points.

Usually I am the optimist, but the "unbound" stuff sounds like complete bollocks.

No matter what benefits the restricted force would get, playing against unbound internet lists will be a miserable experience. I think people were mostly hoping for reigning in Deathstars. They are only getting worse it seems. Now we can also enjoy all wraith knight armies vs all conscript armies and everything in between...

Here's hoping I'm totally wrong.

Just refuse to play "Unbound" games. There probably will be plenty of people with the same opinion.

 Leth wrote:
You are correct my mistake

so 30 points per command squad
100 for the two infantry squads
150 for the conscripts

So that is 280 per 75 models

times 5 is 1400 with 450 points to work with, my bad

375 models

No problem, it's just the second time I've seen this claim (/tg/ tried pulling the same thing about an hour ago).

 Symbio Joe wrote:
I see two problems with the new "dynamic gameflow":
1st Lot's of strategic options do not speed up things for people who like to think a little longer and strategic cards throwing in new objectives make the struggle to make a decision even worse.
2nd with the option of additional objectives I see players already dominating a game just stalling the game until they draw the right card to gain even more victory points.

I could see this, though the risk in stalling is that if your opponent is drawing and completing their turn-based objectives quickly, which might dig you into too greater a hole to work out of. The devil is in the details, but it could be a really neat wrinkle added to the game that forces people out of their play style by necessity -- or it could be a complete mess.

Where exactly does it say in that article does it say that Unbound armies will be fighting Battle Forge armies?

The wording is that,

There's another way to use your miniatures

Can someone please explain to me where is says that this is going to happen?

 Leth wrote:
You are correct my mistake

so 30 points per command squad
100 for the two infantry squads
150 for the conscripts

So that is 280 per 75 models

times 5 is 1400 with 450 points to work with, my bad

375 models

Nothing stops you from doing that currently. It fits the FoC.

I mean it is entirely possible that they will be meant to fight each other, but the overreaction to these 2 pages is staggering.

We have no idea how these two army types will interact if at all.

I do not see them allowing you to take 8 Riptides against a normal list. There is no way to balance that short of some horrendous negatives to running a single model army.

As victory points can be earned each turn based on the new mission cards, I highly doubt tabling your opponent is an autowin anymore.

We all heard that Escalation and such was being rolled into regular 40k. I don't really know how that ruleset works, or Apocalypse, but I believe they are very open to taking almost anything?

Could Unbound be the Apocalypse version that we've been hearing about?

valace2 wrote:
Where exactly does it say in that article does it say that Unbound armies will be fighting Battle Forge armies?

It doesn't list them as separate game types, just two different ways to build your army.

That makes it a fairly safe assumption that they're just two different ways to build your army, rather than two separate game types.

I dotn see why everyone ia freaking out. I dont believe that the whole unbound and battlw forged lists are rhe real rules for normal 40k games. 40k codexs are designed around a FoC, it makes no sense and would destroy the game. Think about it, no one would bring unita everything would be singles or min. Example, you could take 10 individual Obliterators, or a ton of aingle tanks, artillery and that is so stupid. Think about the number of units of min termagants you could bring.... it becomes obviously too ridiculous to believe they will destroy the entire sixth edition, which is a few tweaks from being the best weve had for a take whatever you want and break the game edition. Nope not believing it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stop crying a.d worrying, unbound will not be in the same category as realy 40k.
6th edition is too close to being a great balanced edition for them to allow soemone to bring 10 single obliterators.
They had to something big to tbe book to sell it, so this is it. Calm down peope, GW isnt that dumb.