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.

 flakpanzer wrote:

The rumor said Armor Values were gone, if they include variable Toughness based on facing, that would be great. We will just have to wait and see.

armour values are gone just means that everything will be wounded with the same mechanic, which is something the game needs after the chances of 6th.

if the skip the facings too, this would be stupid as there is no reason to do it (actually it would make the game better if this would expand to all big models in the game)
but this is still GW who just write rules because they look cool on paper

 Wingeds wrote:
So when can we expect this to drop? May or June/ July?

Mostly want to know when Death Guard are going to be released, I figure they'll most likely be the poster army for the new edition.

A Chaos faction as poster boy for 40k...?

 Verviedi wrote:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Random rolling to know how many dice you need to roll is far more devilish. We're supposed to be getting rid of that, not encouraging it.

I'm not being contrarian here, genuinely asking: why is the random roll of a D6 worse than the random rolling of a scattering template?

A scatter template makes sense, representing a shell possibly missing and hitting something else, in true "This is a giant explosive" fashion. If a Basilisk shell misses, it doesn't just disappear. Random rolls remove the interesting element from this, as the giant shell apparently just vanishes into the aether if it misses, rather than potentially hitting something else.

Now this I understand. I can also appreciate the added flavour and immersion in having a shot scatter onto another unit, but it gets pretty weird with non-barrage blasts that make casualties from different units still be taken from who is closest to the firing unit. I guess it just comes down to personal preference as to which abstractions you're fine with.

I'm for increasing depth, and removing randomness. In my eyes, scattering blasts does a good job of this. Random shots don't. Random shots make me think "GW, are you really telling me that my Stormsurge, connected to dozens of high-tech sensors, doesn't know how many cluster rockets it's firing per turn?"

Ok there I have to ask again, sorry if I'm getting hung up on semantics, but you say "removing randomness" but isn't it basically the exact same amount of randomness, one of them just has an extra die? (Now I'm not asking about 'depth', or the possibility of hitting other units).

Scattering blasts is a situation where removing randomness really can't be done without compromising the system. I can cut out random warlord traits, psychic powers, random stormsurge rockets, the Chaos Boon Table, etc, and replace them with fixed values, true player tactical choice, or in the case of the Chaos Boon Table, an actual useful rule.
Scattering blasts makes sense, as that Basilisk does not have the systems necessary to pinpoint a shell at a rapidly moving target. It is a case where randomness is good, in a sea of terrible randomness.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Random hits rather than templates and multi-wound vehicles.

I always thought 40K needed more dice rolling and record keeping. Bravo GW.

try running 3 thunderfire cannons and working that out. Talk about a template placing record keeping pain in the A$$ ! I would welcome this change

Warhams-77 wrote:
While I believe new sources may bring good info, this here doesnt sound like one which does.

These rumours popped up on Warseer by Williamsond (on the new marines thread) so it's not a complete unknown. I haven't checked to see if he has rumour accuracy though.

The removal of templates will also let us rethink unit spacing. No need to spend time and table space carefully spacing out your hoard units to minimize casualties. It should allow larger units so move around the table easier. To me it feels like 8th may be a faster paced game.

I'd rather keep templates, partly because I bought the apoc templates not to long ago to use them at some point . While I get it would be faster to just roll for hits, spacing out units or not and the ability to drift onto other targets is part of the strategic choices you have to make in using the templates and that is something that I'd rather not lose. Never really had many arguments about what was hit by them, but maybe thats because I dont play with TFG's , it usually just means 1 hit more or less so usually not that big of a deal.

I feel like getting rid of templates and scatter worked for the transition from fantasy to AoS because there were so few templates involves. The occasional breath weapon, mortar or catapult/ trebuchet were really all that came up, plus a few of the #6 spells in 8th which didn't scatter.

40K by contrast has a TON of template and scatter weapons. Shoot, one of the most basic Space Marine heavy weapons back to the beginning can scatter, and you basic 5th edition tactical squad could scatter with their rocket launcher before dropping their flamer template! Not to say that still couldn't happen now, but you get my point.

Templates can be replaced by dice rolls (d3, d6, 2d6 for example) very nicely. First edition Bolt Action did it and it was a big plus IMHO.

Roll to hit using the unit BS and then, if a hit occurs, roll appropriate dice for damage. Perhaps a to-hit modifier for trying to artillery a facing other than the closest one.

 Verviedi wrote:
Random shots make me think "GW, are you really telling me that my Stormsurge, connected to dozens of high-tech sensors, doesn't know how many cluster rockets it's firing per turn?"

 Verviedi wrote:

Scattering blasts makes sense, as that Basilisk does not have the systems necessary to pinpoint a shell at a rapidly moving target. It is a case where randomness is good, in a sea of terrible randomness.

What are you saying here, that your stormsurge should keep templates but they don't scatter? I don't get it.


Situation A: with templates.
You place a blast template on the head of one model, and decide with your opponent that it touches 5 models. You roll to hit and scatter the blast a bit and it ends up hitting only 2 models. You inflict 2 wounds.

Situation B: without templates.
You fire at a unit and hit, it does d6 wounds. You roll a 2.

Really more complicated? Really?


The only downside I see is that sometimes with blasts you scatter onto different models - nearby vehicles or friendlies even - which is pretty fun. Removing templates might - for example - make Vindicators better as they might be more reliable at shooting near your own forces.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 FrothingMuppet wrote:
So did anyone think to ask about the Nu-Marine that popped up the other month?

Any news about that?

I thought it turned out to be an April Fools hoax.

Did it? Is there more info on that? I was expecting to see them in the 8th edition starter box.

Lord Kragan wrote:

timd wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Bryz™?

AOS Orkses are all called Brian?

GWish corruption of "bros"?

T

Which doesn't make sense since they use the term boyz all the same in AoS. But you know, the horse isn't dead yet.

It never will be, the horse is immortal and unfeeling of mortal pain, because it's going to take years for the present crop of designers to cycle out and the naming conventions to drift back towards something vaguely recognisable.

 SickSix wrote:
All sounds good to me!

They say it isn't as simple as AoS so I imagine we get to keep our to-wound charts.

I am liking just about everything except I will miss the trusty flamer template.

Honestly I'd have been happy to see the charts go, they're a needlessly complex way to add depth. There's nothing wrong with the AoS approach of rolling against a value per se, it just needs them to bump the basic dice for the game up to a D10 or D12 so that a switch from "to-hit table/to-wound-table/armour save" to "roll against X to hit/roll against Y to save" still has sufficient range to preserve variety, although of course they'd also probably have to add roll modifiers back in instead of the current AP/cover mechanics and for some baffling reason GW's design team still seem to think memorising a set of unique tables or constantly looking them up in game is more difficult than basic addition & subtraction.

 Silentz wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Random shots make me think "GW, are you really telling me that my Stormsurge, connected to dozens of high-tech sensors, doesn't know how many cluster rockets it's firing per turn?"

 Verviedi wrote:

Scattering blasts makes sense, as that Basilisk does not have the systems necessary to pinpoint a shell at a rapidly moving target. It is a case where randomness is good, in a sea of terrible randomness.

What are you saying here, that your stormsurge should keep templates but they don't scatter? I don't get it.


Situation A: with templates.
You place a blast template on the head of one model, and decide with your opponent that it touches 5 models. You roll to hit and scatter the blast a bit and it ends up hitting only 2 models. You inflict 2 wounds.

Situation B: without templates.
You fire at a unit and hit, it does d6 wounds. You roll a 2.

Really more complicated? Really?


The only downside I see is that sometimes with blasts you scatter onto different models - nearby vehicles or friendlies even - which is pretty fun. Removing templates might - for example - make Vindicators better as they might be more reliable at shooting near your own forces.

Templates scattering and not knowing how many rockets you're firing are entirely different things. Ballistic Skill represents the systems a model has that can actually pinpoint blasts. Complex physics, trajectory calculations, detonation heights, etc are far more complex than counting rockets. A Stormsurge, being ballistic skill three despite its many advanced systems (don't ask why), does not have the ability to pinpoint a blast over a rapidly-changing battlefield at a moving target through whatever clouds of smoke are in the way, while being shot with a variety of small arms and moving itself. It can, however, count rockets.

Your not rolling how many rockets you fired, your rolling to see how many guys were caught in the blast. No different then the randomness of scattering a templet to hit random number of guys. Just random in a different way.

Tbh their isn't that much of a difference.

The cluster rocket system is not a blast weapon. It's a Heavy 4D6 weapon that fires independently targeting rockets, with little to no blast radius. You are, indeed, rolling to see how many rockets the weapon fired.
I need to roll shots, then roll hits, then roll wounds. If it was truly "how many guys were in the blast", I wouldn't have to roll To Hit.

Then why are you talking about them in a template discussion?

That is how the new template weapons are rumored to work. template on the weapon profile gets replaced with Assault d6 or whatever...

 Yodhrin wrote:
(snip)

it just needs them to bump the basic dice for the game up to a D10 or D12 /quote]



Not ever, ever, ever going to happen ever in a million (well, 40,000) years.

 Forcast wrote:
Then why are you talking about them in a template discussion?

That is how the new template weapons are rumored to work. template on the weapon profile gets replaced with Assault d6 or whatever...

I was using that abominable thing as an example of how random shots are idiotic by principle (unless it's Orks, in which case I can *twitch* tolerate it).

Here's a few more things, I suppose.

• Templates being Assault D6 removes the need for tactical unit spacing, to defend against templates.

• Templates being Assault D6 instead of scatter completely removes the feeling of an enormous artillery shell slamming into the earth and hitting a unit, everything around the unit, and occassionally teamkilling.

• Templates being Assault D6 instead of scatter, again, creates the logical failure of a shell vanishing into the aether if its shots miss. Say I fired at an enormous blob of bunched up Guard, surrounded by other blobs. If the shell missed, nothing would happen, instead of the shell scattering and causing collateral damage. Where's the flavor in that?

I like getting rid of templates. I played Warhammer Fantasy and now AOS. The games play much faster without having to place and deviate templates. I suspect the same will happen with 40 k. If it is like AOS, hits will be determined by size of template. 1-3 for small, 1-6 for large, I assume more for apoc blasts. Also, if they are getting rid of armor values then I hope each vehicle will get a table (like lagre monsters do in AOS) that shows the effect of increasing damage. That would be pretty cool!

Each vehicle getting its own table would not be fun for anyone. Think of how annoying it would be to memorize. That'd cause time-consumption by needing to check its datasheet every time it gets damaged.

 Verviedi wrote:
The cluster rocket system is not a blast weapon. It's a Heavy 4D6 weapon that fires independently targeting rockets, with little to no blast radius. You are, indeed, rolling to see how many rockets the weapon fired.
I need to roll shots, then roll hits, then roll wounds. If it was truly "how many guys were in the blast", I wouldn't have to roll To Hit.

So..... then this has nothing to do with the topic. You just don't like the storm surge's rules, nothing about the core rules change that.

=/

 Breotan wrote:

Gaz Taylor wrote:
Not sure how rumourish this is or somebody just making assumptions that the next edition of 40K will be a version of Age of Sigmar, as those rumours sound just like Age of Sigmar.

Given how 7th adopted things from WHFB, such assumptions probably aren't unreasonable.

Not at all now but it does make you wonder if these are actual rumours or somebody making assumptions. I'll be honest, I would make the same assumptions and I'm really hoping this is the way it goes. AOS is my favourite ruleset now as it's easy to pick up, the rules also don't get in the way of playing the game and it's fun.

On the subject of templates, if it follows the AOS design, then I would expect a Flamer to do say D3 damage. So a Bolter would do 2 Damage for example but a Flamer would do random. It really does work really well once you get used to it.

 Lockark wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
The cluster rocket system is not a blast weapon. It's a Heavy 4D6 weapon that fires independently targeting rockets, with little to no blast radius. You are, indeed, rolling to see how many rockets the weapon fired.
I need to roll shots, then roll hits, then roll wounds. If it was truly "how many guys were in the blast", I wouldn't have to roll To Hit.

So..... then this has nothing to do with the topic. You just don't like the storm surge's rules, nothing about the core rules change that.

=/

No, it's absolutely relevant, as a display of how too much randomness exists in game, and what constitutes "constructive randomness" and "randumb". I'm for removing randomness in all forms that aren't necessary and don't enrich the game. Replacing templates with MOAR RANDOM does not enrich the game, for the reasons I posted.

random for randoms sake = bad. Random with a mechanic to make the game faster = good. Templates add other slow game factors. including template placement argument as well as model spacing, scatter dice rolls and template walking are time consumers... plus if I don't have to gather my dice and templates and walk to my opponents other side of the table.. that speeds things up.

Verviedi wrote:Each vehicle getting its own table would not be fun for anyone. Think of how annoying it would be to memorize. That'd cause time-consumption by needing to check its datasheet every time it gets damaged.

How many times do you need to check wargear to see what it is?

You don't "memorize" these things anyways. Or I guess I should say most people don't.

Verviedi wrote:

 Lockark wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
The cluster rocket system is not a blast weapon. It's a Heavy 4D6 weapon that fires independently targeting rockets, with little to no blast radius. You are, indeed, rolling to see how many rockets the weapon fired.
I need to roll shots, then roll hits, then roll wounds. If it was truly "how many guys were in the blast", I wouldn't have to roll To Hit.

So..... then this has nothing to do with the topic. You just don't like the storm surge's rules, nothing about the core rules change that.

=/

No, it's absolutely relevant, as a display of how too much randomness exists in game, and what constitutes "constructive randomness" and "randumb". I'm for removing randomness in all forms that aren't necessary and don't enrich the game. Replacing templates with MOAR RANDOM does not enrich the game, for the reasons I posted.

Except what you posted really had nothing to do with templates. You just used the templates being moved to random as an excuse to springboard into a complaint about the CRS.

The shift from templates->"randumb" as you call it in AoS is actually a bit better.
You pick a point either on the board or in an enemy unit or an enemy unit itself. You then roll to see what gets Hit/Wounded. Some of these have chain attacks, essentially, where it expands outward.

As someone said, no need for finger-twister. No arguments about "Oh the template wasn't really touching him" or "He's on a different level!" or any of that crap.

I'm sorry but I have to chime in here. You could just as easily say of the six rockets you fired, some missed, or they hit close but did no damage, or whatever forge the narrative bs answer you want to makeup. Your argument that this is radically different than what is currently happening is ludicrous, you're just looking for a reason not to like a potential change. You have not presented a real argument against the change beyond "muh physics" and you also made an argument AGAINST yourself by saying the way it currently is is more complex then just counting how many rockets hit the target.

What's what? The Stormsurge can't pinpoint the blast over a target in the heat of battle due to numerous factors? Well, now some of those missiles just miss instead of scattering off the target and missing. Your argument is invalid and I'm starting to wonder if you're just trolling everyone at this point.

I'm assuming the weapons randomness will reflect shadow war. Weapons have a sustained fire rate, and damage from 1-d3. Makes sense as you could clip someone with a plasma gun, or hammer them in the chest.

Everything looks good so far, except for no codex books. Codex books are great for old and new fluff, art, paint scheme ideas, and of course rules. They have been a staple of 40k since... practically forever. I like aos rules being free in an app, and would only like the 40k codex-less rules if they follow suit in a free app and printable formats.

I can see this as what aos has become, where the app is becoming a money drain if you want multiple armies.

 Verviedi wrote:
Each vehicle getting its own table would not be fun for anyone. Think of how annoying it would be to memorize. That'd cause time-consumption by needing to check its datasheet every time it gets damaged.

If the general rules get chopped down and the tables are fairly small like they are in AoS, the time saved vs time lost will pretty much even out and be gone over time as you memorize your own unit rules.

The way AoS does "template" weapons is the one good thing about that system, I definitely hope it gets ported to 40k.