40k 7th Edition release 24th may - All info in 1st post, psychic power cards added (5/21)

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**

StarTrotter wrote:
Everybody gets unlimited waves! Oh gosh imagine that with daemon summoning or just a listt of tervigons. UNLIMITED ADDITIONAL SPAWNING!

Everyone, as in only the Battle-Forge armies if I'm correct, and it was just speculation on how the game could be balanced between the Unbound and Battle-Forged armies.

**vadersson**

Ya know, I keep thinking that GW really needs some PR people to help out here. Then I look at 99 pages of discussion regarding mostly rumors of a new version of the game and I realize that they don't need them.

I guess that maybe GW believes that bad publicity is better than no publicity.

Resume discussions...

**StarTrotter**

ClockworkZion wrote:
StarTrotter wrote:
Everybody gets unlimited waves! Oh gosh imagine that with daemon summoning or just a listt of tervigons. UNLIMITED ADDITIONAL SPAWNING!

Everyone, as in only the Battle-Forge armies if I'm correct, and it was just speculation on how the game could be balanced between the Unbound and Battle-Forged armies.

Ah whoops. Still, I guess it could be a partial solution to Nid problems with leadership

and might even make Tervigons a bit more worth it to boot!

**Saldiven**

DarthDiggler wrote:
You are assuming unbound becomes a pistol shot in the face. You have no proof of that at all. You are taking a snippet of a part of a 7th edition rule and applying it to the full context of 6th edition rules. That's crazy. Go take a loof at some of the Apoc special rules an army can get for playing down in points. Battle forged armies are getting some stuff to. Look there.

An unbound army the way it is portrayed in this thread will have NO CHANCE of winning. I haven't seen a hypothetical unbound list with scoring units yet presented. Take a few of those Riptides away and put in some kroot. The Blood Angels can, RIGHT NOW, put together a legal FOC lists with zero scoring units. That's right now in this game right here. So yes GW can easily make it so 10 Riptides have no chance of winning the game.

Tabling is not winning. Every major tourney requires an army to complete the mission even if a tabling occurs.

Have we seen anything that indicates what, exactly, a "scoring unit" is?

It's not that long ago that pretty much everything could claim objectives (any squad above half it's starting size, undamaged vehicles, etc.).

**ClockworkZion**

StarTrotter wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
StarTrotter wrote:
Everybody gets unlimited waves! Oh gosh imagine that with daemon summoning or just a listt of tervigons. UNLIMITED ADDITIONAL SPAWNING!

Everyone, as in only the Battle-Forge armies if I'm correct, and it was just speculation on how the game could be balanced between the Unbound and Battle-Forged armies.

Ah whoops. Still, I guess it could be a partial solution to Nid problems with leadership and might even make Tervigons a bit more worth it to boot!

The other thing I could think of is Battle-Forged armies would get free USRs (like the veteran things in Kill Teams) so you could designate, say 1 unit for every 1k to have a free rule like Monster Hunters or Tank Hunters or something along those lines.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Saldiven wrote:
Have we seen anything that indicates what, exactly, a "scoring unit" is?

It's not that long ago that pretty much everything could claim objectives (any squad above half it's starting size, undamaged vehicles, etc.).

I don't see the rules for scoring units changing honestly.

**gorgon**

streamdragon wrote:
I know that feel, given that Genestealer Cult was my dreams being crushed :(

There are other ways of doing it, you know. I've run mine as Orks. Sixth edition brought new possibilities, such as IG-Orks and IG-Daemons. The former does a good job repping the Patriarch (warboss) and hybrids (boyz), while the latter works well for the Purestrains (daemonettes). I tweaked mine to run as Orks-IG, but right now I really like the IG-Daemon combo and might re-orient them around that.

**Samurai_Eduh**

Shouldn't we be seeing more info from this weeks White Dwarf by now?

**StarTrotter**

ClockworkZion wrote:
StarTrotter wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
StarTrotter wrote:
Everybody gets unlimited waves! Oh gosh imagine that with daemon summoning or just a listt of tervigons. UNLIMITED ADDITIONAL SPAWNING!

Everyone, as in only the Battle-Forge armies if I'm correct, and it was just speculation on how the game could be balanced between the Unbound and Battle-Forged armies.

Ah whoops. Still, I guess it could be a partial solution to Nid problems with leadership and might even make Tervigons a bit more worth it to boot!

The other thing I could think of is Battle-Forged armies would get free USRs (like the veteran things in Kill Teams) so you could designate, say 1 unit for every 1k to have a free rule like Monster Hunters or Tank Hunters or something along those lines.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Saldiven wrote:
Have we seen anything that indicates what, exactly, a "scoring unit" is?

It's not that long ago that pretty much everything could claim objectives (any squad above half it's starting size, undamaged vehicles, etc.).

I don't see the rules for scoring units changing honestly.

I dunno, all this new stuff makes me want to flip open a Fantasy Battle rulebook, the 3.5 edition codex, and the 2nd edition 40k rulebook as that seems to be where many of their ideas are returning from.

**easysauce**

why do people think battle forged and unbound are meant to play against each other...

they are not, and wont, its like normal 40k vs apoc, it will never happen unless you and your opponent want it to happen.

to the guy claiming no tournament lets you win via tabling:

WTF.... everysingle tournament I have seen lets you do this.. every.
single.
one.

**StarTrotter**

Samurai_Eduh wrote:
Shouldn't we be seeing more info from this weeks White Dwarf by now?

Not quite. It's very possible it's almost entirely dedicated to Wood Elves and the only real things of merit were these two pages.

**ClockworkZion**

Samurai_Eduh wrote:
Shouldn't we be seeing more info from this weeks White Dwarf by now?

The three images we've just got in the past two days are from the next WD. We need next week's WD to know more from the looks of things.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

StarTrotter wrote:
Samurai_Eduh wrote:
Shouldn't we be seeing more info from this weeks White Dwarf by now?

Not quite. It's very possible it's almost entirely dedicated to Wood Elves and the only real things of merit were these two pages.

Especially since the pages end with saying to look at next week's WD.

**Saldiven**

ClockworkZion wrote:
I don't see the rules for scoring units changing honestly.

So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?

**ClockworkZion**

Saldiven wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
I don't see the rules for scoring units changing honestly.

So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?

Scoring units work the same in Apoc as regular 40k so, yeah, I don't see it changing because dropping FOC doesn't mean that scoring units have to change.

**streamdragon**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Saldiven wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
I don't see the rules for scoring units changing honestly.

So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?

Scoring units work the same in Apoc as regular 40k so, yeah, I don't see it changing because dropping FOC doesn't mean that scoring units have to change.

Dropping FOC has nothing to do with missions though.

The old set of missions remains; presumably scoring units for those missions will be unchanged. (Troops only; FA and HS in their respective missions)
The new set of missions uses objective cards; we don't know whether troops will be the only units capable of completing these missions. Entirely possible they focus on the general, not the unit, and so Unbound armies can still complete these missions.

**Saldiven**

streamdragon wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
Saldiven wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
I don't see the rules for scoring units changing honestly.

So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?

Scoring units work the same in Apoc as regular 40k so, yeah, I don't see it changing because dropping FOC doesn't mean that scoring units have to change.

Dropping FOC has nothing to do with missions though.

The old set of missions remains; presumably scoring units for those missions will be unchanged. (Troops only; FA and HS in their respective missions)
The new set of missions uses objective cards; we don't know whether troops will be the only units capable of completing these missions. Entirely possible they focus on the general, not the unit, and so Unbound armies can still complete these missions.

That being my entire point. My original post was that the assertion that Unbound armies couldn't win because they didn't have scoring units was silly because we don't know what scoring units are going to be. Then the response came in that this particulay person didn't think scoring units would change. My sarcastic response indicated that with all the other changes, why shouldn't scoring units change, too?

**streamdragon**

Saldiven wrote:
streamdragon wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
Saldiven wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
I don't see the rules for scoring units changing honestly.

So, FOC radically changing, the addition of a psychic phase, Deathwing armies summoning Daemons makes sense, but changing scoring units is the rule that seems unlikely to you?

Scoring units work the same in Apoc as regular 40k so, yeah, I don't see it changing because dropping FOC doesn't mean that scoring units have to change.

Dropping FOC has nothing to do with missions though.

The old set of missions remains; presumably scoring units for those missions will be unchanged. (Troops only; FA and HS in their respective missions)
The new set of missions uses objective cards; we don't know whether troops will be the only units capable of completing these missions. Entirely possible they focus on the general, not the unit, and so Unbound armies can still complete these missions.

That being my entire point. My original post was that the assertion that Unbound armies couldn't win because they didn't have scoring units was silly because we don't know what scoring units are going to be. Then the response came in that this particulay person didn't think scoring units would change. My sarcastic response indicated that with all the other changes, why shouldn't scoring units change, too?

I was agreeing with you!

My suspicion is that the new missions won't be scored using the same "whoever holds the most at the end" method we see in the current missions. From the sound of "drawing new cards as you complete missions" and being able to "discard missions you don't want/like", it sounds like you build points as you go, rather than things being "all-or-nothing" like current objectives/relics.

**ClockworkZion**

The cards doesn't change what is a scoring unit but instead adds objectives that can be completed outside of units being scoring.

I concede that there look to be ways to get more VP, but I still don't think that changes which units count as "scoring".

**Puscifer**

I just thought.

In 2nd ed couldn't you take practically anything from your codex within the agreed points and percentage limits?

Pretty much what we're getting now.

I call dibs in turning this into 2nd ed Redux.

**Eldarain**

On the positive side of things I like the sounds of the deck of mission objectives. Playing musical chairs always seemed an odd win condition.

**ClockworkZion**

Puscifer wrote:
I just thought.

In 2nd ed couldn't you take practically anything from your codex within the agreed points and percentage limits?

Pretty much what we're getting now.

I call dibs in turning this into 2nd ed Redux.

2nd Ed had a basic % based force org system though.

**StarTrotter**

Puscifer wrote:
I just thought.

In 2nd ed couldn't you take practically anything from your codex within the agreed points and percentage limits?

Pretty much what we're getting now.

I call dibs in turning this into 2nd ed Redux.

I was almost tempted to say something like that. The circle is being made! The cycle has begun!

**Grunt_For_Christ**

So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?

On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.

How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.

**Eldarain**

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:
So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?

On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.

How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.

I could be wrong but the only new development is a passage in the WD describing Ezekiel of the DA summoning a Bloodthirster to win a close game at the end.

**StarTrotter**

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:
So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?

On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.

How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.

The only real new thing is the part mentioning daemons on the right corner was revealed (it's on the op now) describing how they decided to play a game where Ezekiel became a Bloodthirster and slaughtered a Hive Tyrant.

**Hollismason**

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Dark Eldar and Eldar were made Allies of Convenience.

**Ulcis**

Given the what the new card-based objective system sounds like at the moment, it wouldn't be hard to make any unit a scoring unit & ensure Unbound can win without relying on tabling.

Card 1: Troops choice holds an objective. 1 VP.
Card 2: Destroy any enemy FA choice. 1 VP.
Card 3: Use a HS unit to destroy an enemy HS unit. 1 VP.
etc.

If you can discard duff choices, shouldn't be too hard to let an Unbound army gather VPs when there are 36 objectives to choose from.

Preemptive disclaimer: not saying the above is how it will work, just how it could.

**techsoldaten**

StarTrotter wrote:
Grunt_For_Christ wrote:
So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?

On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.

How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.

The only real new thing is the part mentioning daemons on the right corner was revealed (it's on the op now) describing how they decided to play a game where Ezekiel became a Bloodthirster and slaughtered a Hive Tyrant.

A Dark Angel Master Librarian choosing to summon a Greater Daemon of Khorne. So Chaos is literally becoming an accessory to other armies in order to sell new models. Great, just great.

**clively**

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:
So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?

On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.

How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.

If you read the sidebar that was posted about Ezekiel you might have noticed that they were saying that supposedly this edition was play tested. However, the real question then is: does "play tested" mean the same thing to them as it does most of the rest of the gaming world? Only time will tell.

**StarTrotter**

techsoldaten wrote:
StarTrotter wrote:
Grunt_For_Christ wrote:
So this thread adds at least another 5 pages every day. Is there anything substantive or is this spiral into madness still grounded in the 1 'article' on page one?

On a side note, GW's rules design is just a decades-long circlejerk. More elements of Fantasy in 40k, 3rd ed. rules morphed into 5th (and then got completely screwed up), recurrent themes in codexes from editions are surfacing again... It's all just variations on a theme.

How about some real playtesting, new releases of all codexes more than 2 years old with the new rules, some old fashioned support of the product? That's change I can believe in.

The only real new thing is the part mentioning daemons on the right corner was revealed (it's on the op now) describing how they decided to play a game where Ezekiel became a Bloodthirster and slaughtered a Hive Tyrant.

A Dark Angel Master Librarian choosing to summon a Greater Daemon of Khorne. So Chaos is literally becoming an accessory to other armies in order to sell new models. Great, just great.

It's not confirmed that everybody will get to summon. As others have mentioned, WD isn't exactly known for being loyal. I do have my hunch that they weren't breaking rules for this though but until it's confirmed... And to be realistic Chaos has always been an accessory. Chaos guard, CSM, chaos orks. Heck, there used to be chaos genestealers.

**PipeAlley**

Sir Arun wrote:
PipeAlley wrote:
So I have just a few points to make:

1. Didn't we all just pay $60 for a new rule book just last summer?

2. Are they releasing 7th before Orks which is still technically (by a month) a 4th edition Codex?

3. Unbound may still require Troops to hold objective even with the 36 new objectives. Still may need them for something

4. If not, I'd better get started on my dream army: nothing but Ork Kannonz: Str 8 AP 3 T7 4W, you can get 100 in a 2000 point list.

1. two years ago.

2. yes, sadly. i wanted orks to get a 6th ed dex

3. why bother with objectives if you can table your enemy?

4. pretty much, but like your example, i think monetary issues will prevent people coming with such broken armies that everyone fears unbound will yield.

2 summers ago, you're right, I was training a lot that summer/fall so I didn't get to play much :(

As far as the 100 Kannonz go, Orks have a loooooong tradition of kustom built models and I'd go the 51% GW model route.

As for the 200 grots, I admit I'd have to buy/proxy some of them, don't quite have that many

So many Kannonz! Hell, throw some Lobbas and Zzap guns around just for flavor.