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.

Spoletta wrote:
If unbound armies are allowed in competitive play then the nids just jumped at the top of the food chain!

Want to play unbound? Meet my Endless swarm list of x-thousand non tablable objective securing MSU. Oh and a pair of Primes somewhere in there to secure synapse.

Yes you can put your models back in the case now.

You're forgetting that in unbound it doesn't matter if you have 2.2 million troops, they won't take the objectives from battle forged guys even if they're both in range. Also, from my perspective with Guard, Wyverns would barrage-snipe your Primes to death and then your gribblies will eat themselves for the rest of the game. I wouldn't get my hopes up quite that high just yet, and god forbid you end up with a kill-points game hahah.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
You're missing the part where FoC bound armies get advantages to capturing objectives. Which is a pretty nice tactical advantage over unbound armies.

By the reading of this, even Unfun armies are able to capture objectives unless Regular troops are at the very same objective?

That is the way I read it, however that allows regular Bound troops to do some awesome last minute land grabs by swooping into contesting distance in a transport and automatically controlling the objective against any Unbound units, with the Objective Secured rule that Unbound cannot have.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

darkcloak wrote:
Oh my god, with each passing day it gets worse! Don't have 10 marneus Calgar models? Oh well cool thing is now all your dopes will be really good-ish at holding objectives unless your opponent also doesn't have 10 Abbadons and he too is good0ish at holding objectives, then you both still suck at holding objectives!

Man! this all seems so hard! How do i write a decent list? Oh I know, I'll just forge a narrative :forgeforgeforgeforge: until GW just straight up writes a list for me!

ungh... all that forging! Excuse me I have to pawn my worthless crap models off on some unsuspecting dweeb.

"No FoC" does not mean "can take 10 copies of Special Characters".

Why not? Nothing to say otherwise just yet is there? Besides I wasn't being serious with my examples. See this is what I hate about the internet. Say your piece and someone always has to come along and go "hey, you forgot the comma in between..."

Anyways it doesn't matter. No matter what the deal is, this whole UB/BF is just dumb. So what? I call my buddy up for a game and he brings over 10 Turkies, how the hell are we supposed to remain friends after that? Thanks GW, you've just given TFGs everywhere the go-ahead.

Consolation prize if you already have an army that you spent a year building? Objectives Secured.

OTOH, £60 for a rulebook?!?!?

5th edition was £30 two years ago.

 streamdragon wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Well, that's reality. When you go to a store, you usually have two scenarios:

1) Everyone who is looking for a game is already playing. You wait until another person looking for a game comes in. You have the choice of their playing that person, or risking not playing at all because either there is no other person coming in, or the next person coming in is going to play him rather than you.

2) One or more people are waiting for a game, and aren't playing each other for some reason. Either you play one of those people or you are joining the crowd of people who jump everyone who comes in with an figure case.

Most of the time, you either play whoever wants to play and don't be picky about it, or you'll end up spectating games all afternoon.

'
I fail to see how either of those scenarios makes a 2 minute conversation about what you both want out of the game impossible. Surely you are capable of working something out with another human being, who is theoretically also there because they too want to get a game in?

What's the point of that discussion?

"Hey, I want to try my new counts-as-Imperial Knight, want to play?"
"Sorry, no Knights."
-> No game

"Hey, want to play a story scenario from that IA book I bought, want to play?"
"I'd rather play a regular game."
-> No game

"Would you mind not playing the dual turbo-laser warhound?"
"Sorry, didn't bring another army"
-> No game

"I'm a competitive player, is it ok for me to field my riptide/serpent/wraithknight list?"
"Uh, sorry I'd rather no be tabled by turn 3."
-> No game

"I'm playing a fluffy grot army, would you please play a weak army?"
"Sorry, I'm training for next weeks tournament."
-> No game

"Hey, I just bought my second Blood Angel rhino, wanna play?"
"I don't think that game would enjoyable for you, kid."
-> No game

"So, what are you playing?"
"Tau with eldar allies."
"Ugh, tough. How many points?"
"1750, want to play?"
"Sure, better than not playing"
-> Got a game

No matter what you talk about, you can chose between not playing the perfect game you imagined or not playing at all.

The only thing you can do is bring three or four army lists yourself and hope the people present are willing to play against at least one of those lists. An actual discussion to find a consensus about how to play the game happens very rarely, and usually only if the other person is a seasoned veteran with a vast collection of models.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

darkcloak wrote:
Oh my god, with each passing day it gets worse! Don't have 10 marneus Calgar models? Oh well cool thing is now all your dopes will be really good-ish at holding objectives unless your opponent also doesn't have 10 Abbadons and he too is good0ish at holding objectives, then you both still suck at holding objectives!

Man! this all seems so hard! How do i write a decent list? Oh I know, I'll just forge a narrative :forgeforgeforgeforge: until GW just straight up writes a list for me!

ungh... all that forging! Excuse me I have to pawn my worthless crap models off on some unsuspecting dweeb.

"No FoC" does not mean "can take 10 copies of Special Characters".

Shame not everyone shares this common sense...

Well, won't he autolose from taking 10 turkies, since he has hardly anything on the board?
I mean, he could take a single small squad of cultists, but then they'll probably die.

Besides, Special Characters have the Unique rule, iirc. Which basically means "no duplicates"

 rabidguineapig wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
If unbound armies are allowed in competitive play then the nids just jumped at the top of the food chain!

Want to play unbound? Meet my Endless swarm list of x-thousand non tablable objective securing MSU. Oh and a pair of Primes somewhere in there to secure synapse.

Yes you can put your models back in the case now.

You're forgetting that in unbound it doesn't matter if you have 2.2 million troops, they won't take the objectives from battle forged guys even if they're both in range. Also, from my perspective with Guard, Wyverns would barrage-snipe your Primes to death and then your gribblies will eat themselves for the rest of the game. I wouldn't get my hopes up quite that high just yet, and god forbid you end up with a kill-points game hahah.

Except that the list i mentioned is battle forged.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
You're missing the part where FoC bound armies get advantages to capturing objectives. Which is a pretty nice tactical advantage over unbound armies.

By the reading of this, even Unfun armies are able to capture objectives unless Regular troops are at the very same objective?

That is the way I read it, however that allows regular Bound troops to do some awesome last minute land grabs by swooping into contesting distance in a transport and automatically controlling the objective against any Unbound units, with the Objective Secured rule that Unbound cannot have.

Which means an Unfun army gets to spam easy objective holders that sit on an objective while blasting the enemy with far superior models, giving him no chance but to stay in cover and out of LoS for the entire game. How would a Regular Space Marine army be able to properly hold objectives vs the combined fire of an Unfun army? Physically blocking an objective isn't as hard as it might first appear to be, especially when you can spam cheap regular troops. Try to get up to 3'' to an objective with a huge Ork / IG blob sitting on it while you drown in bullets.

There needs to be a massive advantage for Regular vs. Unfun armies, e.g. considerably higher points allowance or additional VP, e.g. doubling VP for kills vs. an Unfun list, else you're better off choosing to play either system instead of combining the two.

But again: let's wait for the entire set of rules. It looks like the worst modern 40k rules system so far, but it might have some saving graces.

I'm intrigued by the new rules in the video. Hopefully the new book isn't going to cost an arm and a leg (directly converting Aussie pricing isn't a good gauge due to their markup).

Combined Arms Detachment, with it's special rules, seems pretty neat. I get the feeling there will be many other detachment types, with appropriate FOC requirements and conferred bonuses.

And I do like the sound of the new Mission Objectives, Psychic Phase and Daemonology lores.

Unbound, still not decided on. No idea where people are getting the idea of ignoring unit composition rules or special character limits, because unbound only affects the FOC...

If GW was a smart company, it could use Unbound armies as FAQ /Errata laboratory. Listening, viewing and reading to opinions/battle reports about Unbound games would let it know why unit X is OP and everyone is using, and why unit Y is terrible and noone is using. Based on such reports, GW could analyze and fix such units - helping Battle-forged games as well!

Again, if GW was a smart company...

The cost of living is entirely different in Australia. No point in comparing the prices. Wages are often twice as high, as are the prices

darkcloak wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

darkcloak wrote:
Oh my god, with each passing day it gets worse! Don't have 10 marneus Calgar models? Oh well cool thing is now all your dopes will be really good-ish at holding objectives unless your opponent also doesn't have 10 Abbadons and he too is good0ish at holding objectives, then you both still suck at holding objectives!

Man! this all seems so hard! How do i write a decent list? Oh I know, I'll just forge a narrative :forgeforgeforgeforge: until GW just straight up writes a list for me!

ungh... all that forging! Excuse me I have to pawn my worthless crap models off on some unsuspecting dweeb.

"No FoC" does not mean "can take 10 copies of Special Characters".

Why not? Nothing to say otherwise just yet is there?

Apoc doesn't allow multiples of Special Characters and it doesn't use FOC.

 ascended_mike wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

darkcloak wrote:
Oh my god, with each passing day it gets worse! Don't have 10 marneus Calgar models? Oh well cool thing is now all your dopes will be really good-ish at holding objectives unless your opponent also doesn't have 10 Abbadons and he too is good0ish at holding objectives, then you both still suck at holding objectives!

Man! this all seems so hard! How do i write a decent list? Oh I know, I'll just forge a narrative :forgeforgeforgeforge: until GW just straight up writes a list for me!

ungh... all that forging! Excuse me I have to pawn my worthless crap models off on some unsuspecting dweeb.

"No FoC" does not mean "can take 10 copies of Special Characters".

Shame not everyone shares this common sense...

Surely the whole point of No FoC is to be able to take 10 Special Characters if you want.

Just think what an awesome scenario it would be if the Orks surprised the conclave of 10 Space Popes with their honour guards, but then 12 Riptides arrived to save the day.

That is exactly the kind of narrative scenario people would love to play

Why is it GW fault? Is it the fault of gun manufacturers that people murder? Can't people take responsibly for their own actions?

So instead of blaming the person for being TFG or a person who must win with plastic toy soldiers, it's GW fault?

Maybe what we need to do, is get our governments making it illegal to be TFG and then we can throw them in jail because they shouldn't be able to abuse what is written and then have it on record why they abuse a system so they can win with plastic toy soldiers.

I think people are getting upset over nothing. It's a game. If people want to abuse the system, then the problem is with the person not GW.

 ascended_mike wrote:
The cost of living is entirely different in Australia. No point in comparing the prices. Wages are often twice as high, as are the prices

The underlined hasn't been true for quite a while.
But yes, prices are higher there.

rigeld2 wrote:

 ascended_mike wrote:
The cost of living is entirely different in Australia. No point in comparing the prices. Wages are often twice as high, as are the prices

The underlined hasn't been true for quite a while.
But yes, prices are higher there.

Maybe not always, but everyone I know in Australia on the same job as me is being paid atleast (or almost) twice as much as I am. But then again, I'm sure it's different in different parts of Australia. And in different working environments.
Sorry for the generalisation, but the point remains. Cost of living is higher in general.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Well, won't he autolose from taking 10 turkies, since he has hardly anything on the board?
I mean, he could take a single small squad of cultists, but then they'll probably die.

Besides, Special Characters have the Unique rule, iirc. Which basically means "no duplicates"

Who needs duplicates?

Llysander (230)
Tigurius (230)
Marenus Calgar (285)
Azreal (215)
Coteaz (100)
Logan Grimnar (275)
Corbulo (105)
Yarrik (145)
St.Celestine (135)
Total: 1720

Just LoS! all wounds with Yarrik and St.Celestine, have them pop up again when they die. For the Emprah!

Well that video has done nothing to remove my fears of the upcoming insanity.
The benefits for using FOC are pretty lame. Re-roll warlord trait - whatever
Troops holding objectives better - not going to stop you from getting tabled.
The page they show you even confirms you can field an army of all flyers - helldrake super spam is on people.

It's nice to see GW doing design videos like this, but Jervis seems a little awkward to me, could have done with a re-take or two. Compare this to the vids Alan Blyth does for FW for instance?

Good Lord would some of you just stop already?

As a Tau player I can tell you point blank that Riptides without signature system and markerlight support are gak.

Want to run 6 riptides against my flying circus be my guest, Be'Lakor and any greater daemons I run will eat them one by one . I will keep my horrors in reserve until the last minute and take objective which you can't do.

Want to run 6 heldrakes be my guest my my Imperial Fist centurions and storm ravens will shoot them down.

We do not know what other changes are coming, give it a rest. I for one am excited.

Still think Unbound is an awful idea.

All this edition will do is further compartmentalize the player base.

 Jidmah wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Well, won't he autolose from taking 10 turkies, since he has hardly anything on the board?
I mean, he could take a single small squad of cultists, but then they'll probably die.

Besides, Special Characters have the Unique rule, iirc. Which basically means "no duplicates"

Who needs duplicates?

Llysander (230)
Tigurius (230)
Marenus Calgar (285)
Azreal (215)
Coteaz (100)
Logan Grimnar (275)
Corbulo (105)
Yarrik (145)
St.Celestine (135)
Total: 1720

Just LoS! all wounds with Yarrik and St.Celestine, have them pop up again when they die. For the Emprah!

Well, we still don't really know what the allies restrictions are.
However, that does not stop one from taking every special character in a codex.

So yeah, Yarrick, Pask, Creed and Straken walk onto a battlefield, and run into Abbadon, Huron Ahriman and Typhus.
They then have a picnic, for reasons.

 Jidmah wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Well, won't he autolose from taking 10 turkies, since he has hardly anything on the board?
I mean, he could take a single small squad of cultists, but then they'll probably die.

Besides, Special Characters have the Unique rule, iirc. Which basically means "no duplicates"

Who needs duplicates?

Llysander (230)
Tigurius (230)
Marenus Calgar (285)
Azreal (215)
Coteaz (100)
Logan Grimnar (275)
Corbulo (105)
Yarrik (145)
St.Celestine (135)
Total: 1720

Just LoS! all wounds with Yarrik and St.Celestine, have them pop up again when they die. For the Emprah!

A fun, but horrible list. Guardian spam alone would roll that up.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
OTOH, £60 for a rulebook?!?!?

5th edition was £30 two years ago.

Cheese isn't free. Figuring out how to give players the opposite of what they want costs money that needs to be recouped.

GW underling: Sir! We gave players what we thought they wanted (the ability to buy everything!)... but profits are down. People don't seem to take kindly to us giving up any semblance of balance with all the detachments, dataslates, and odd couple allies matrix. They've seen through the sham and realize it was just a crass ploy to buy MOAR. What should we do???

GW bossman: Hrmm... that's a pickle... I got it! We'll make the army construction rules even more loosey goosey! That'll fix it! And we'll make it standard in the rules instead of as a separate resource. Just make sure to increase the price on the book as well.

Originally I was against 7th, im still on the fence but my outlook is more positive, please have the book be sub 99 usd, I have only had 6th for what 2 years? Gw should have a book trade in deal kinda like textbooks rules updates wouldn't seem AS bad.

 zammerak wrote:
Originally I was against 7th, im still on the fence but my outlook is more positive, please have the book be sub 99 usd, I have only had 6th for what 2 years? Gw should have a book trade in deal kinda like textbooks rules updates wouldn't seem AS bad.

Yeah, I'm gonna wait for the "rules only" book on this one.

 Jidmah wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Well, won't he autolose from taking 10 turkies, since he has hardly anything on the board?
I mean, he could take a single small squad of cultists, but then they'll probably die.

Besides, Special Characters have the Unique rule, iirc. Which basically means "no duplicates"

Who needs duplicates?

Llysander (230)
Tigurius (230)
Marenus Calgar (285)
Azreal (215)
Coteaz (100)
Logan Grimnar (275)
Corbulo (105)
Yarrik (145)
St.Celestine (135)
Total: 1720

Just LoS! all wounds with Yarrik and St.Celestine, have them pop up again when they die. For the Emprah!

Celestine got needed to only getting to do that once in the current rulebook.

 Jidmah wrote:
Just LoS! all wounds with Yarrik and St.Celestine, have them pop up again when they die. For the Emprah!

Do you miss the memo ? GW could not have a SoB character even remotely useful, so they nerfed Celestine. She can still come back… once per game, maybe, if she can succeed a Ld test. She still insta-dies to S6+, though. And still no better invulnerable than 4+.

Davor wrote:
Why is it GW fault? Is it the fault of gun manufacturers that people murder? Can't people take responsibly for their own actions?

So instead of blaming the person for being TFG or a person who must win with plastic toy soldiers, it's GW fault?

Maybe what we need to do, is get our governments making it illegal to be TFG and then we can throw them in jail because they shouldn't be able to abuse what is written and then have it on record why they abuse a system so they can win with plastic toy soldiers.

I think people are getting upset over nothing. It's a game. If people want to abuse the system, then the problem is with the person not GW.

To torture your metaphor still further.

With a game like 40K, GW 'the gun manufacturer" has the ability to fit all it's "guns" with a feature which could significantly decrease the number of "murders" they are responsible for, but chooses not to.

It is, of course, a fething stupid analogy to draw in the first place, but that's where it falls over.

 zammerak wrote:
Originally I was against 7th, im still on the fence but my outlook is more positive, please have the book be sub 99 usd, I have only had 6th for what 2 years? Gw should have a book trade in deal kinda like textbooks rules updates wouldn't seem AS bad.

Hate to say it but Games Workshop has stock holders to answer to. Take a look at the $£¥ that Magic players put down each expansion and it won't be so bad.

It had seemed like the mood was shifting away from the "sky is falling" but it would appear we are in "Revenge of the Haters" mode again.

If you are worried about facing 100000 heldrakes/tanks/riptides maybe it's time to find a different gaming scene.

No one in my area is that TFG. Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should.