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.

Good. More of this.

Sadly we're cursed to get the same sky is falling crap until 8th drops, then 2 months later it begins again for 9th.

So I thought shooting was going to be the end all be all in AoS as well. (Similar to thoughts about the upcoming 40k), but it didn't happen, because they drastically changed the range of shooting weapon except warmachines which are rather limited. Ex. My Wood Elf Glade Guard (Archers) went from 30" range to 20" range. Even basic humans who move 5" can potentially cover 5-11" in one turn then next turn move 5" and charge 2d6". Sometimes I only get one turn of shooting an enemy unit before they charge me due to reduced shooting ranges.

I wouldn't mind a simplification, but I hope they don't take it very far.

I don't want a movement stat, it isn't needed.
I wish charging gave +1 initiative, including to unwieldy weapons.
I wish they tweaked leadership, but the way in the OP is a stupid way.
I'd like AP modifers instead, I hate the all or nothing system. Why does slashing a Terminator with a power sword only hurt as much as pistol whipping him?
I'd like a new 'evasion' stat, which would be to BS what WS is to WS or T to S.
I'd like a new psychic system, I much preferred the 5th ed system.
I'd like less random, I have no idea who my warlord or psykers are until I roll dice, it's silly.
I'd like vehicles and/or MCs changed, especially walkers.The base rules significantly favour MCs over walkers.

As for fluff... I hate where gathering storms are taking us, they may not be invalidating the old fluff but they're spinning aroun, turning upside and shaking well.

AoS lol, It brings me back to 5h edition wfb not AoS!
I liked it a lot but I played an all cav army then and there where reasons for it.

Movement values are great if they remove most of the movement related rules. Most of you will not believe it but it actually streamlines the game a lot. If they keep al the silly diskstrider like rules then meh.
However it is also dooms all non fast melee armies into being defenders. And being melee defenders sucks in a game with guns. So this is a huge boon for fast / bike armies.

Assault = strike first
I loved this in 5th wfb it brings back some tactics in the form of screening units etc. However I can easily see some nasty eldar consolidate way too far trickery ruin it all. It also is a huge boon for fast / bike armies.
Also yay for deepstrike reservers, genestealers and wulfy shenanigans ... :\

Morale is gone everybody crumbles undead style. BOOO! I do not like this at all. I love moral, crumble is a dull mechanic that never felt right. Just look at how much ork players love their 40k equivalent of it ; )
Who knows, I do not expect it but it might just be enough to bring blob boyz back since who knows perhaps its better than the current mob rule, however it will create some new dull tapit deathstars.

Save modifiers :\
Blegh Terminators and tactical marines where already bad, no need t punish them any further. Also in 5th edition wfb it just resulted in every one taking the highest str weapn.... Hate to imagine what this does to high str high volume weapon spam :\

Swamping each unit in their own "special rules" ....
This gives me the AoS shivers, and really reminds me not to spend too much on 40k in the upcoming months.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I wouldn't mind a simplification, but I hope they don't take it very far.

I don't want a movement stat, it isn't needed. Maybe not but it's a heck of a lot simpler than all the movement rules they've had to use to simulate it (Dunestrider/Battle focus etc.)
I wish charging gave +1 initiative, including to unwieldy weapons. That' would range from Ok to completely useless though (Marines charging marines= good. Orks charging Marines= useless) Hurts the MOS but having a rule that does nothing just because of who you're facing just sucks (Fear vs marines for example)
I wish they tweaked leadership, but the way in the OP is a stupid way. Better in some ways- sweeping advance sucks on the receiving end. Worse in others
I'd like AP modifers instead, I hate the all or nothing system. Why does slashing a Terminator with a power sword only hurt as much as pistol whipping him? Agreed
I'd like a new 'evasion' stat, which would be to BS what WS is to WS or T to S.
I'd like a new psychic system, I much preferred the 5th ed system. 5th Edition Psychics were so... meh. Something between then and now would be best IMO
I'd like less random, I have no idea who my warlord or psykers are until I roll dice, it's silly.
I'd like vehicles and/or MCs changed, especially walkers.The base rules significantly favour MCs over walkers.

As for fluff... I hate where gathering storms are taking us, they may not be invalidating the old fluff but they're spinning around, turning upside and shaking well.

Commissar Benny wrote:

Jbz` wrote:

Commissar Benny wrote:
Morale

"Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties."

So lets say I have a squad of 50 conscripts with a Commissar, lose 25 of them to enemy shooting and make a leadership test. Roll a 1 + 25 (-9 from Commissar), so I take an additional 17 casualties? hahaha NO. Lets hope its a little more complicated than that, otherwise Orks/Nids/Guard can just sit out 8th edition.

I am happy that I'd no longer lose an entire massive squad when 1 dude that they failed to hurt sweeping advances the entire squad after killing one of my guys and them bolting.

That is an improvement I agree, but the way the new morale is suggested is concerning to say the least. At a glance, it appears to be designed with smaller more elite forces in mind (space marines) and ignores how absolutely devastating this would be to horde armies. Again, perhaps there is more to it than what we are seeing here but if this is what goes live it will basically shut out Orks, Nids & Guard for another edition "again".

The horde armies in AoS do well because every 10 models in a unit adds +1 to Battleshock, so Ork armies would get +3 for being in a 30+ horde.. And maybe would finally be a reason to stuff that Mob Rule behind a shelf. Though they'd probably have alot more then just shoving those rules onto the current ruleset considering how big some of them are.

Remember that guy who melted down his army to protest AoS?

I hope we see more amazing freakouts. People have strong feelings on this subject!

Didn't that guy buy a Stormcast Army later?

Commissar Benny wrote:
Morale

"Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties."

So lets say I have a squad of 50 conscripts with a Commissar, lose 25 of them to enemy shooting and make a leadership test. Roll a 1 + 25 (-9 from Commissar), so I take an additional 17 casualties? hahaha NO. Lets hope its a little more complicated than that, otherwise Orks/Nids/Guard can just sit out 8th edition.

I'd also like to note that single models (COUGH COUGH, Monstrous Creatures, HACK WHEEZE) will essentially be fearless in CC, so even ones that are not very good at CC like Tau's will be pseudo fearless, as D6 - 8 < 0. It's a poorly thought out rule

WarhammerWorld wrote:Armour save modifiers. This topic comes up almost as often as Sisters of Battle… so we’re going to bring them back. Every weapon will have its place in your army and better represent how you imagine them working in your head.

Wait, so Sisters are finally co-- Oh. Crap.

Jbz` wrote:

kirotheavenger 721440 9268849 7bcdbca0f55855f1c70 wrote:
1. I don't want a movement stat, it isn't needed. Maybe not but it's a heck of a lot simpler than all the movement rules they've had to use to simulate it (Dunestrider/Battle focus etc.)

2. I wish charging gave +1 initiative, including to unwieldy weapons. That' would range from Ok to completely useless though (Marines charging marines= good. Orks charging Marines= useless) Hurts the MOS but having a rule that does nothing just because of who you're facing just sucks (Fear vs marines for example)

3. I wish they tweaked leadership, but the way in the OP is a stupid way. Better in some ways- sweeping advance sucks on the receiving end. Worse in others

4. I'd like AP modifers instead, I hate the all or nothing system. Why does slashing a Terminator with a power sword only hurt as much as pistol whipping him? Agreed

5. I'd like a new 'evasion' stat, which would be to BS what WS is to WS or T to S.

6. I'd like a new psychic system, I much preferred the 5th ed system. 5th Edition Psychics were so... meh. Something between then and now would be best IMO

7. I'd like less random, I have no idea who my warlord or psykers are until I roll dice, it's silly.

8. I'd like vehicles and/or MCs changed, especially walkers.The base rules significantly favour MCs over walkers.

9. As for fluff... I hate where gathering storms are taking us, they may not be invalidating the old fluff but they're spinning around, turning upside and shaking well.

1. Maybe, but honestly battle focus is bollocks anyway.
It'd need to be small diffences, 9'' move for infantry would be huge compared 6'', and if jump packs grant x2 movement 18'' for Spiders or Hawks is a major boon.

2. True, but it puts a middle ground between slow models first because of charging (which makes less sense), and equal models attacking first due to charging (which makes more sense).

3. Sweeping advances could be tweaked, but not like this. Elite units give zero feths and horde armies are annilated in droves under this system.
I'd like a system that means both units are subject to leadership tests though.Perhaps after combat both sides roll leadership (- casualties taken), any that fail flee and if both flee no sweeps can be had. Subject to sweeping changes.

6. Maybe, I preferred the less random and simpler casting system of 5th, and it wasn't the end of the world if you no psykers and your opponent did.

Wait do you guys reckon that this could be a lead up to an April fool's reveal?

Commissar Benny wrote:
Morale

"Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties."

So lets say I have a squad of 50 conscripts with a Commissar, lose 25 of them to enemy shooting and make a leadership test. Roll a 1 + 25 (-9 from Commissar), so I take an additional 17 casualties? hahaha NO. Lets hope its a little more complicated than that, otherwise Orks/Nids/Guard can just sit out 8th edition.

Or make it like the empire: rolls of 1 (or 2 in a formation) ignore battleshock, have commissars adjust the dice roll by, say, -1 or -2 to units within 6'' in exchange to d3 wounds... or something along the lines of mitigating casualties. Or just cast inspiring presence to ignore that unit's battleshock. Yeah, that could work. Ogre Tyrants inflict d3 unsavable wounds to units, those unit then don't suffer battleshock. AoS is more complicated than that, the thing is that it will go on the units unique abilities.

Commissar Benny wrote:
Morale

"Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties."

So lets say I have a squad of 50 conscripts with a Commissar, lose 25 of them to enemy shooting and make a leadership test. Roll a 1 + 25 (-9 from Commissar), so I take an additional 17 casualties? hahaha NO. Lets hope its a little more complicated than that, otherwise Orks/Nids/Guard can just sit out 8th edition.

Heh, this is why we used to take Commissars (Well, I still do) instead of priests. Under at least one previous set of rules, a Fearless units took additional wounds based on how much it lost by (same for ATSKNF if they didn't escape). So Stubborn was BETTER than Fearless. Nids hated it tho, you could assault a large unit of Gaunts and secondary assault a Carnifex or other MC, kill bunches of Gaunts and the every unit on the losing side took however many wounds their side lost the combat by. They got armor saves but it was an easy way to put a lot of wounds on a big ugly.

Wouldn't mind seeing AP modifiers come back. Bolters -1, Heavy Bolters -3, I think lascannons were -6. But the issue is the easy availability of Invul saves, which the modifiers would not affect.

Movement stats, meh, they might shake things up. Let's see, used to be Squats 3", humans 4", Eldar either 5" or 6", don't recall any others. Coure, back then you either moved (base movement) or you ran (double move) or you charged (double move). There was no move, shoot, charge. Took a little more planning to get it all to work together.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Remember that guy who melted down his army to protest AoS?

I hope we see more amazing freakouts. People have strong feelings on this subject!

Lol, for me, this could be the only positive about 8th ed.

 don_mondo wrote:
Wouldn't mind seeing AP modifiers come back. Bolters -1, Heavy Bolters -3, I think lascannons were -6. But the issue is the easy availability of Invul saves, which the modifiers would not affect.

Might just as well forget all power armour and terminator armour would be joke as well. Heavy bolter reducing terminator to 5+? Gee. Plasma would be pretty useless weapon also.

Well guess if everybody hates anything with better than 5+ armour...

The sky is falling the sky is falling!!!!


Did I do it right?

Armor save mods are a dumpster fire. But whatever gw wants.

As someone who played Warhammer fantasy and plays AOS, armour save mods weren't that big a deal. They worked just fine.

Martel732 wrote:
Armor save mods are a dumpster fire. But whatever gw wants.

It's funny how much I disagree. I hate the all-or-nothing of saves at the moment. AP4? Might as well be AP-, have fun with that. Ap3, ALRIGHT NOW WE'RE COOKING! The difference between something that's supposed to be half decent and something that's decent at going through armour is just waaaaaay too big.

Oh but when I told you about it I was crazy, guys I warned you about this a year ago.

X-wing will get another big in flux of bitter ex gw customers.

They haven't been such a big deal in wfb due to low amounts of high str both in close combat and in shooting. But just imagine the effects of the current high volume high str shooting on termites.
And what this does to the meta. It isn't that I fear for termies being shot down it is the rise of more easy to get by "kill all guns" that mow down all infantry with ease.

hobojebus wrote:
Oh but when I told you about it I was crazy, guys I warned you about this a year ago.

X-wing will get another big in flux of bitter ex gw customers.

You're not Nostradamus. Everyone has been expecting some sort of AoS'ing for a year at least. The question hasn't been "if," it has been "how much." And it still is.

 Kain wrote:
As someone who played Warhammer fantasy and plays AOS, armour save mods weren't that big a deal. They worked just fine.

did you play 40k 2nd ed? You know 40k with ASM. If your save wasn't unmodifiedable or terminator you pretty much never used it. Certainly not often enough to make you go "oh boy I'm glad I have armour!". Power armour was worth maybe like one point if that. For tactical marine that's 30pts base.

Only total idiot would PAY for power armour if there was chance. Anything lesser than that and...well would make one doubt whether you are even alive if you paid for it unless you enjoy paying for useless things. Guess one way to boost up army size if you insist on playing within x% of agreed point value(ie not bringing 1500 pts to 2000 pts game) by spending points to what amounts to might just as well not have paid for it.

Worked barely in FB because modifiers were smaller in general especially for shooting. But in 40k with all the guns armour saves just got wiped. 6+ or 7+ for power armour was standard result. 6+ is not enough to justify price, 7+ you can't even roll without being terminator.

Grimlineman wrote:
The sky is falling the sky is falling!!!!


Did I do it right?

No, you still need to say "GW destroyed my childhood"

tneva82 wrote:

 Kain wrote:
As someone who played Warhammer fantasy and plays AOS, armour save mods weren't that big a deal. They worked just fine.

did you play 40k 2nd ed? You know 40k with ASM. If your save wasn't unmodifiedable or terminator you pretty much never used it. Certainly not often enough to make you go "oh boy I'm glad I have armour!". Power armour was worth maybe like one point if that. For tactical marine that's 30pts base.

Only total idiot would PAY for power armour if there was chance. Anything lesser than that and...well would make one doubt whether you are even alive if you paid for it unless you enjoy paying for useless things. Guess one way to boost up army size if you insist on playing within x% of agreed point value(ie not bringing 1500 pts to 2000 pts game) by spending points to what amounts to might just as well not have paid for it.

Worked barely in FB because modifiers were smaller in general especially for shooting. But in 40k with all the guns armour saves just got wiped. 6+ or 7+ for power armour was standard result. 6+ is not enough to justify price, 7+ you can't even roll without being terminator.

This do we really want to live in a meta where those easy to spam S5+ Ap4 guns are good against GEQ ( no save ), MEQ (6+sv ) and TEQ (5+sv) ?
For I am not looking forward to a game where tau / eldar / necron / space marine anti marines guns are the same as anti ork boy and anti termi guns.

Don't really see how some rules adjustments mean the game is "AoS'd" but I guess some wanna believe.

 oldzoggy wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Kain wrote:
As someone who played Warhammer fantasy and plays AOS, armour save mods weren't that big a deal. They worked just fine.

did you play 40k 2nd ed? You know 40k with ASM. If your save wasn't unmodifiedable or terminator you pretty much never used it. Certainly not often enough to make you go "oh boy I'm glad I have armour!". Power armour was worth maybe like one point if that. For tactical marine that's 30pts base.

Only total idiot would PAY for power armour if there was chance. Anything lesser than that and...well would make one doubt whether you are even alive if you paid for it unless you enjoy paying for useless things. Guess one way to boost up army size if you insist on playing within x% of agreed point value(ie not bringing 1500 pts to 2000 pts game) by spending points to what amounts to might just as well not have paid for it.

Worked barely in FB because modifiers were smaller in general especially for shooting. But in 40k with all the guns armour saves just got wiped. 6+ or 7+ for power armour was standard result. 6+ is not enough to justify price, 7+ you can't even roll without being terminator.

This do we really want to live in a meta where those easy to spam S5+ Ap4 guns are good against GEQ ( no save ), MEQ (6+sv ) and TEQ (5+sv) ?

I don't know why you all assume all the rules and stats are just gonna be the same, just with modifiable armour saves tagged on. I'm hoping the shake-up is gonna be considerably larger than that.

 Purifier wrote:


I don't know why you all assume all the rules and stats are just gonna be the same, just with modifiable armour saves tagged on. I'm hoping the shake-up is gonna be considerably larger than that.

The level of assuming is mindstaggering. I see people knowing the rules before anyone has even seen a glimpse of them, even the ones that haven't been teased.

Can't argue with those. They just plain know.

 captain bloody fists wrote:
Wait do you guys reckon that this could be a lead up to an April fool's reveal?

Possible, but the reception is quite good. If they really pay attention, some of it may even show up in the real 8th.

Because it seems to be more in line with them releasing more and more high rate of fire high str type of weapons in the past few years. I do not expect them to suddenly invalidate nearly all heavy guns of the popular armies.
Sure there are going to be some changes to compensate things, but I can imagine non of them who are in line with GW's recent publications that would prevent the rise of mid-high str ap mid high kill all guns.

Soooo wait...

Armor save modifiers are a terrible idea because the weapon stats were imbalanced in 2nd edition?

That's your argument? Seriously? Give me a break, this is an excellent idea that will make a ton of currently useless weapons playable again, while presenting a great opportunity to rebalance Grav and Scatterlasers. Even Heavy Bolters will have a place with Rend -1
If they take it even further, they might even reduce the range on some of the annoying guns, just imagine.