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.

I don't mind the idea of hull points and glancing damage. However, I'd prefer to see it as once the hull points have been removed, any further glancing hits now roll on the penetration table instead.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Only one army has access to grav-cannons. Necrons have power fist equivelents, plasma does not reliably kill AV13+, Lascannons do not reliably kill AV13+

Very few armies can "reliably" kill AV13+. Necrons aren't unique in this, and no, as 5th edition showed us, they don't need the ability to glance vehicles to death with their troops choices in order to handle armor.

 azreal13 wrote:
So, we've had, what, three pages of discussion about how one army will theoretically cope with something that very likely doesn't exist?

Well, your entire argument with me hinged on the idea that Deathstars would be balanced or not played with. Not too different, really.

Not quite, the discussion was over whether consolidation into a combat, at the time an apparently legitimate rumour, was something that could be implemented successfully. You threw deathstars into the mix, and I said they were something that also needed fixing, so was taking the position that they would be.

Quite a lot different from discussing how one faction would deal with something that wasn't even a rumour!

 whembly wrote:

 Thud wrote:
"8. Battle brothers can ride in each others transports now. I forsee much shenanigans here. "

They made it worse?

Jesus.

Eh... not that much worst.

Really depends on who are Battle Brothers though...

I can't remember if it was in this thread or on Warseer but I've seen someone claim a rep told them that BB are now only Eldar/ Deldar, Chaos Marines/ Daemons and Imperials. So no Tau/ Eldar or Tau/Marines any more.

 whembly wrote:

 Thud wrote:
"8. Battle brothers can ride in each others transports now. I forsee much shenanigans here. "

They made it worse?

Jesus.

Eh... not that much worst.

Really depends on who are Battle Brothers though...

We did talk about this. Got nothing solid but it sounded like it was as stated earlier -- Imps are BB with each other. LIke even Grey Knights by the sounds of it. But a lot less alien on imperial lovins.

Now how about eldar assaulting out of de tanks? I wanna do it just cause I can now.

 Thud wrote:
Has the latest natfka stuff been mentioned? That there's supposed to be an "organized play" supplement coming out this autumn?

Natfka accuracy checklist:

Did Natfka break it from an anonymous source that has no corroboration from a known reliable source like 40k Radio?

If he broke it himself, is the rumored product more than two weeks away such that nobody would yet have the product in hand or a White Dwarf talking about it?


If the answer to both questions is yes, the odds are incredibly high that the rumor is total garbage.

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

Pictures?

 undertow wrote:

 warboss wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I'm fine with tank kills being somewhat "random", that's really how they should be, it either penetrates the armor and does something critical, or it doesn't. HP's are really what I don't like, tank's don't just stop working or die after X number of hits, if it doesn't hit something critical it keeps going.

As long as the same is done for multiwound models then I'd support it. As it stands, somehow every wound but the last on non vehicles only apparently shoots pinkie toes and earlobes. If vehicles can be one shorted by a melts, so should a riptide.

Riptides should have been walkers.

Or a new Type of unit, Monstrous Walker, its acts like a classique MC but for each 2 Wounds lost by a MW, throw a dice on the MW damage chart and apply the result, results may vary from " can only snapshot this turn" to " get a random weapon unable to be used till the end of game" and" always counts as moving in difficult and dangerous terrain"...

Represents perfectly the lose of limbs, concussions to the head or simply the lose of the weapon(dropped in the heat of battle or destroyed).

As for vehicles, simply modify the line that says " a vehicle with 0HP is auto destroyed" with " a vehicle with 0HP isn't destroyed, but he must roll on the damage chart if he gets hit by Glancing , just the same way a Penetrating hit makes a roll on the chart".

There vehicle isn't auto gibbed by glancing anymore and can continue, but the fact that the armor as enough holes in it, increase the risks of ot to be damaged for good.

 Thud wrote:
Has the latest natfka stuff been mentioned? That there's supposed to be an "organized play" supplement coming out this autumn?

Yes, over in the "lets all make up random nonesense to justify that my earlier rumours were a load of tosh in order to get hits" thread.

GW and organized play is like kittens and napalm, they don't go together.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

Pictures?

[img]https://www.dropbox.com/s/h85dfaqrfrjqe9p/Photo%20May%2013%2C%204%2051%2053%20PM.jpg

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

Wasn't that always the case? I've never heard of 24" range flamers.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

Pictures?

Wait, I'm confused, what does this mean exactly? How was anyone applying the wounds of a flamer on anything outside of the template range before?

undertow wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:
So, what are we looking at gameplay wise?

To start, A player will either need a pack mule or an android device.
Why?

Because We are looking at the average game requiring:
A) The Core Rule book
B) Primary detatchment codex
C)Allied detatchment Codex
D)Psychic card deck
E) Mission Card Deck
F) possibly chaos codex for demon rules
And finally
G) Army, Dice, Measuring tool,, Templates, Markers and counters.

None of what you've listed here (with the possible exception of the Daemons codex) is new. All of it would be required to play a game of 6th Ed using allies. And the card decks are far from required.

Point is that 6th had already driven away much of the playerbase and that 7th looks to be only making things worse. BTW, Love how you aspiring paladins edit out the part about how much longer each game is gonna take between psychic phase, objective phase and the add demons phase.

BlaxicanX wrote:Considering thecrazy things that have been discussed in this thread, it's honestly almost insulting that people took issue with this dicussion...

"Ermagawd Unbound =sky is falling worse 40K evur omgomgomgomg Games Workshop = satan rabblerabble!!!111!!!111oneone!!

Is that better?

Yes, admitting that there is a probllem is the first step to awareness.

That's just an example. Wound allocation is currently done using the longest range weapon in a unit. Now shooting is done on a weapon by weapon basis.

 tetrisphreak wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

Pictures?

[img]https://www.dropbox.com/s/h85dfaqrfrjqe9p/Photo%20May%2013%2C%204%2051%2053%20PM.jpg

I meant of the page, but that works too.

 Thud wrote:
Has the latest natfka stuff been mentioned? That there's supposed to be an "organized play" supplement coming out this autumn?

Faeit's starter set rumours just got debunked and you're asking if people believe the latest junk he just posted?

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

I like that change. Will certainly make shooting more tactical as you'd have to think about which weapons to fire first. Will depend if removing casualties changes or not though I gues.

 Accolade wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

Pictures?

Wait, I'm confused, what does this mean exactly? How was anyone applying the wounds of a flamer on anything outside of the template range before?

Yes, because the rulebook faq said that if at least one weapon in the squad had the range to hit the back of the unit, then any wounds caused could be allocated to the entire unit, including wounds from flamers.

 tetrisphreak wrote:
That's just an example. Wound allocation is currently done using the longest range weapon in a unit. Now shooting is done on a weapon by weapon basis.

Ah right. Yeah that is silly.
I am more interested about wound allocation. Any news if they are streamlining it? The current version isn't great.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

Wasn't that always the case? I've never heard of 24" range flamers.

He's talking about wound allocation. Yes you most certainly could end up allocating flamer wounds outside of the range of a flamer as long as something with a longer range in the same unit had also fired.

Now it sounds like you resolve each weapon type seperately as a group instead of wound pools and whatnot. Way more time consuming but removes oddities.

 Samurai_Eduh wrote:

 Accolade wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

Pictures?

Wait, I'm confused, what does this mean exactly? How was anyone applying the wounds of a flamer on anything outside of the template range before?

Yes, because the rulebook faq said that if at least one weapon in the squad had the range to hit the back of the unit, then any wounds caused could be allocated to the entire unit, including wounds from flamers.

Wow, I didn't realize that. Well I'm glad it's getting fixed then!

 winterman wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:

Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.

No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.

Wasn't that always the case? I've never heard of 24" range flamers.

He's talking about wound allocation. Yes you most certainly could end up allocating flamer wounds outside of the range of a flamer as long as something with a longer range in the same unit had also fired.

Now it sounds like you resolve each weapon type seperately as a group instead of wound pools and whatnot. Way more time consuming but removes oddities.

I mean when it comes to saves. Like, now you can tank everything on 1 guy and roll each die separately to see if he dies first. Or fails LoS.

Winners don't use Dropbox.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
quote=Captain Avatar 592379 6824321 0b04422499fa034eed54ea2b172f1f17.jpg]So, what are we looking at gameplay wise?

Point is that 6th had already driven away much of the playerbase and that 7th looks to be only making things worse. BTW, Love how you aspiring paladins edit out the part about how much longer each game is gonna take between psychic phase, objective phase and the add demons phase.

This just means tournaments will have to either play smaller games (yes, please) or make games longer (god, no!).

But it's May 13...where did that copy of May 17 come from?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
But it's May 13...where did that copy of May 17 come from?

Hes from the future obviously

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
But it's May 13...where did that copy of May 17 come from?

Stores usually get copies early so they can be ready to go on sale on Saturday.

You know that's the second time Nurgle has been featured regarding the new edition. Kind of ironic for a god of stagnation being plastered on something "new".

Psychic phase is after movement.

2 or more 6's on a psychic test cause perils.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ew0121d55922zy1/Photo%20May%2013%2C%205%2002%2040%20PM.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bzm6tre3v9hi8cc/Photo%20May%2013%2C%205%2002%2048%20PM.jpg

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
But it's May 13...where did that copy of May 17 come from?

The only possible explanation is that he time travelled.

I'm on my phone and Dropbox is all I got.