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.

Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time. This is pretty much one of the worst decisions GW could have made both from lore and gameplay standpoint.
Simply striking first after charging as opposed to something like an initiative modifier also seems kinda broken. I mean its ok with something like ork boys vs tacticals but saying that a conscript would be able to hit a greater demon whose strenght and agility is pretty much infinitely better is rather ridiculous.
Also not a fan of templtes being gone but oh well.
Everything else seems ok tho. Especially MCs and GCs losing effectiveness as they take damage. That was long needed.

The guys from Frontline Gaming confirmed that they've been involved in the playtesting for 8th.

 kodos wrote:

 Mantle wrote:

Why are you seeing this change to flamers as bad?

templates in general were the only reason for units not to stick base to base together to get all in cover
not they are gone, just makes the game less tactical as you don't have to make the decision in game what formation you chose to to be less effected by the enemy weapon

but than, this is what GW calls "make it easier to get into the game", less decisions need to made during the game so it is easier to start

Avoiding template weapons is far from making the game more tactical. It is purely mechanical and thematical, and while I'll miss the thematical element I won't be sad to see it go.

whembly wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

SeanDrake wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Chargers strike first?

Holy balls... that's a yuuuuuuuuge boone for Orks!

Overwatch at full BS ohhhh thats going to leave a mark.


Only kidding they never mentioned Overwatch but just saying probably wait before you buy maore assault troops.

Overwatch doesn't really exist in AoS.

You can fire while in combat, but not necessarily into combat(I think GHB addresses this bit).

There's a few armies/units where they, effectively, get Overwatch. Wood Elves are a notable one where their Warscroll Battalion allows you to fire at a unit within a certain distance of your Nomad Prince, and Sisters of the Watch(the new name for the Sisters of Avelorn) get a special rule called "Loose Until the Last" where once per turn if an enemy unit ends its Charge within 1/2 an inch of the unit the Sisters of the Watch can immediately shoot as though it was their Shooting phase.

Even WITH the 7ed overwatch, if orks strikes first after charging, that's really brutal.

Of course, the problem then is delivering the damned greenskins is still going to be a challenge.

Haven't you heard? You can charge out of transports now! Time for that Mad Max-themed WAAAAGH! Boy list you always wanted. WITNESS ME!

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time.

Yeah, they could potentially down a landraider in like 97 game turns! what an outrage. /s

 kodos wrote:

 Mantle wrote:

Why are you seeing this change to flamers as bad?

templates in general were the only reason for units not to stick base to base together to get all in cover
not they are gone, just makes the game less tactical as you don't have to make the decision in game what formation you chose to to be less effected by the enemy weapon

but than, this is what GW calls "make it easier to get into the game", less decisions need to made during the game so it is easier to start

Since when was measuring out 2" between all your models every turn "tactical"? It was a no-brainer move that did nothing but waste time. Every game started with "any templates?" followed by a sigh if your opponent said yes, time to bring out the 2" tool... Very happy to see templates go away.

 Whirlwind wrote:

 DrNo172000 wrote:
I must be one of the rare individuals who keeps all of their receipts and really tight personal accounting books.

Also most modern businesses can email you a receipt from the register, no online ordering required. And nearly every single Point of Sale system can look up past transactions and reprint your receipt. If they can't then they are a gak run business and you should probably stop shopping there.

Does the offer apply to books you purchased from anywhere or just from GW directly?

I would assume direct.

Else a clever bugger goes, buys up a bunch of 7th ed codexes for cheap clearance from a FLGS or vendor and then cashes in credit.

Love it! Can't wait.

 EnTyme wrote:


Haven't you heard? You can charge out of transports now! Time for that Mad Max-themed WAAAAGH! Boy list you always wanted. WITNESS ME!

Wytch cults going to wreck yo face...and then wear it.

A while back I remember reading a report that said that an M1A1 Abrams got knocked out by small arms fire. Apparently rounds ricocheted into the turbines and caused a fire, knocking out the vehicle. It wasn't a total kill but small arms fire did manage a vehicle kill on a MBT. Rare sure but I bet a Guardsmen killing a Land Raider will happen 1 out of 1000 games.

There have been entire threads dedicated to 40k stories of the yumpastabowl that have defiled fluff conventions. I doubt vehicles not being immune to small arms in 40k is going to drastically change that.

 EnTyme wrote:

whembly wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

SeanDrake wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Chargers strike first?

Holy balls... that's a yuuuuuuuuge boone for Orks!

Overwatch at full BS ohhhh thats going to leave a mark.


Only kidding they never mentioned Overwatch but just saying probably wait before you buy maore assault troops.

Overwatch doesn't really exist in AoS.

You can fire while in combat, but not necessarily into combat(I think GHB addresses this bit).

There's a few armies/units where they, effectively, get Overwatch. Wood Elves are a notable one where their Warscroll Battalion allows you to fire at a unit within a certain distance of your Nomad Prince, and Sisters of the Watch(the new name for the Sisters of Avelorn) get a special rule called "Loose Until the Last" where once per turn if an enemy unit ends its Charge within 1/2 an inch of the unit the Sisters of the Watch can immediately shoot as though it was their Shooting phase.

Even WITH the 7ed overwatch, if orks strikes first after charging, that's really brutal.

Of course, the problem then is delivering the damned greenskins is still going to be a challenge.

Haven't you heard? You can charge out of transports now! Time for that Mad Max-themed WAAAAGH! Boy list you always wanted. WITNESS ME!

I think we can count on the orks getting nerfed to oblivion, it will keep the theme of them going...

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time. This is pretty much one of the worst decisions GW could have made both from lore and gameplay standpoint.

i'd hold off on this sort of talk until more info comes out, for example they made a strong emphasis that stats are not capped at 10... lasguns wont be wounding your tank if its T6+ (assuming the to wound chart is the same)
I expect the way it will work is once a tank looses a few wounds it T might drop representing gaping holes in it which will then open up it being vulnerable to small arms which kinda makes sense and adds some crazy new tactics to the game

Tanks being immune to small arms is fine - but this is 40,000 years into the future. A bolter is a devastating weapon compared to modern weaponry. The logic could go either way.

 jhnbrg wrote:


I think we can count on the orks getting nerfed to oblivion, it will keep the theme of them going...

I wouldn't count on that.

The "Warzones" in the Galaxy section for the new website call out Armageddon as being a site where neither the Orks or Astra Militarum are "prepared for the escalation that the war is about to experience".
Same with the Arsonist of Charadon launching a Waagh! into Maccragge.

 ncshooter426 wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:


Haven't you heard? You can charge out of transports now! Time for that Mad Max-themed WAAAAGH! Boy list you always wanted. WITNESS ME!

Wytch cults going to wreck yo face...and then wear it.

....all those models can already charge out of their transports?

TBH the only people that care about this are the armies that can now use rhinos, rather than land raiders, to charge out. Small disposable assault units might be a thing for imperial armies again.

 Mymearan wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 Mantle wrote:

Why are you seeing this change to flamers as bad?

templates in general were the only reason for units not to stick base to base together to get all in cover
not they are gone, just makes the game less tactical as you don't have to make the decision in game what formation you chose to to be less effected by the enemy weapon

but than, this is what GW calls "make it easier to get into the game", less decisions need to made during the game so it is easier to start

Since when was measuring out 2" between all your models every turn "tactical"? It was a no-brainer move that did nothing but waste time. Every game started with "any templates?" followed by a sigh if your opponent said yes, time to bring out the 2" tool... Very happy to see templates go away.

Hear hear. If painstakingly spacing models to MAYBE get one less of them under the template is 'tactics' then I'm Sun freaking Tzu.

 Latro_ wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time. This is pretty much one of the worst decisions GW could have made both from lore and gameplay standpoint.

i'd hold off on this sort of talk until more info comes out, for example they made a strong emphasis that stats are not capped at 10... lasguns wont be wounding your tank if its T6+ (assuming the to wound chart is the same)

Good point. I surely do hope so, although I still see little need for throwing away the AV system.

 Mymearan wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 Mantle wrote:

Why are you seeing this change to flamers as bad?

templates in general were the only reason for units not to stick base to base together to get all in cover
not they are gone, just makes the game less tactical as you don't have to make the decision in game what formation you chose to to be less effected by the enemy weapon

but than, this is what GW calls "make it easier to get into the game", less decisions need to made during the game so it is easier to start

Since when was measuring out 2" between all your models every turn "tactical"? It was a no-brainer move that did nothing but waste time. Every game started with "any templates?" followed by a sigh if your opponent said yes, time to bring out the 2" tool... Very happy to see templates go away.

if you never had to made the decision "should I place my whole squad inside terrain to get cover against those plasma guns or spread them out to have less models below his templates, or maybe I spread them out a little bit and spread the other unit less so that he waste his templates on them" or anything similar
your game must have been very boring

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time.

Assume a blob squad of 50 guardsmen shooting at a Land Raider from within 12" with lasguns. Assume a Land Raider has 15 wounds and a 2+ save.

50 dudes = 100 shots
needing 4s to hit = 50 hits.
Needing 6's to glance = 8.33 wounds.
Needing 2's to save: 1.4 wounds.

You'll need 11 rounds to kill the land raider.

 Latro_ wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time. This is pretty much one of the worst decisions GW could have made both from lore and gameplay standpoint.

i'd hold off on this sort of talk until more info comes out, for example they made a strong emphasis that stats are not capped at 10... lasguns wont be wounding your tank if its T6+ (assuming the to wound chart is the same)

They said more than once that everything can hurt everything.

the_scotsman wrote:

 ncshooter426 wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:


Haven't you heard? You can charge out of transports now! Time for that Mad Max-themed WAAAAGH! Boy list you always wanted. WITNESS ME!

Wytch cults going to wreck yo face...and then wear it.

....all those models can already charge out of their transports?

TBH the only people that care about this are the armies that can now use rhinos, rather than land raiders, to charge out. Small disposable assault units might be a thing for imperial armies again.

Charging out of Gorka/orka naughts! or out of a stompa!

 kronk wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time.

Assume a blob squad of 50 guardsmen shooting at a Land Raider from within 12" with lasguns. Assume a Land Raider has 15 wounds and a 2+ save.

50 dudes = 100 shots
needing 4s to hit = 50 hits.
Needing 6's to glance = 8.33 wounds.
Needing 2's to save: 1.4 wounds.

You'll need 11 rounds to kill the land raider.

this is a great illustration thank you

 davou wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 ncshooter426 wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:


Haven't you heard? You can charge out of transports now! Time for that Mad Max-themed WAAAAGH! Boy list you always wanted. WITNESS ME!

Wytch cults going to wreck yo face...and then wear it.

....all those models can already charge out of their transports?

TBH the only people that care about this are the armies that can now use rhinos, rather than land raiders, to charge out. Small disposable assault units might be a thing for imperial armies again.

Charging out of Gorka/orka naughts! or out of a stompa!

It's about time! Why they weren't assault vehicles to begin with, I have no idea...

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Latro_ wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time. This is pretty much one of the worst decisions GW could have made both from lore and gameplay standpoint.

i'd hold off on this sort of talk until more info comes out, for example they made a strong emphasis that stats are not capped at 10... lasguns wont be wounding your tank if its T6+ (assuming the to wound chart is the same)

They said more than once that everything can hurt everything.

COULD is the operative word! It doesn't say how likely, though. I COULD have a date with Fiona Apple tomorrow just by emailing her!

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Latro_ wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time. This is pretty much one of the worst decisions GW could have made both from lore and gameplay standpoint.

i'd hold off on this sort of talk until more info comes out, for example they made a strong emphasis that stats are not capped at 10... lasguns wont be wounding your tank if its T6+ (assuming the to wound chart is the same)

They said more than once that everything can hurt everything.

They did, but they didn't say 'When' everything can hurt everything.

Huh. Well, pleasantly surprised, and cautiously optimistic (emphasis on the caution).

I totally get the fluff problems of bolters and lasguns having a chance of plinking a tank, but I think that's a great move, since it'll finally mean that your squad with a heavy weapon won't be categorically wasting all its small arms fire.

 Latro_ wrote:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 Latro_ wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time. This is pretty much one of the worst decisions GW could have made both from lore and gameplay standpoint.

i'd hold off on this sort of talk until more info comes out, for example they made a strong emphasis that stats are not capped at 10... lasguns wont be wounding your tank if its T6+ (assuming the to wound chart is the same)

They said more than once that everything can hurt everything.

They did, but they didn't say 'When' everything can hurt everything.

What do you mean?

If we take a clue from Shadow War Armageddon, you can end up having to hit on more than a 6 roll.

I could very well see this translated to 40k wounds where you might need to wound with a 6 and then re-roll and get a 4+ on the second roll to wound in the first place.

That is also assuming we stay with the d6 system and don't move to a new system.

Don't forget they have d10s out there now and they've been testing new dices in the prospero boxes.

 rollawaythestone wrote:
Tanks being immune to small arms is fine - but this is 40,000 years into the future. A bolter is a devastating weapon compared to modern weaponry. The logic could go either way.

As much as I actually hate admitting it but vehicles being able to he damaged by any weapon is probably closer to the fluff than now. Last time I looked at Imperial Armor and other official sources on 40k tank armor, most of them are rocking cutting edge WW2 armor lol. I think the Land Raider has like the equivalent of a foot of hardened steel for its armor lol.

 kronk wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Wow. Removing armor values from vehicles is dumb. Like, insanely dumb. Tanks being immune to small arms fire was the whole bloody point for having it. Now a bunch of guardsmen with lasguns will potentially be able to take down a land raider given enough time.

Assume a blob squad of 50 guardsmen shooting at a Land Raider from within 12" with lasguns. Assume a Land Raider has 15 wounds and a 2+ save.

50 dudes = 100 shots
needing 4s to hit = 50 hits.
Needing 6's to glance = 8.33 wounds.
Needing 2's to save: 1.4 wounds.

You'll need 11 rounds to kill the land raider.

the question than is just why to add it in the first place?

so they ad the possibility for T >10
add wound at least at 6 to compensate that
add more Wounds to compensate low strength spam

so why just do it in the first place
a Land Raider being T10 with 2+ save that cannot be wounded by anything below S8 with ~6 Wounds gives the same result as the one that needed 15 wounds to compensate the can be wounded with a 6 rule

adding more rules than necessary to get the same result got us the bloated 7th edi in the first place