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 think it is interesting that this year we see the resurrection of 2nd edition and the death of 3rd-7th editions.

Hmm, did I understand correctly that the unit rules won't be free? In the newly released FAQ they only say that the core rules will be free and in the stream they said that they're releasing the Grand Alliance equivalence for 40k which you can buy for less than a codex. It won't be a true "freemium" then ala AoS (bar points, detachments, artifacts, allegiance rules and warlord traits ) ?

New factions at launch? Calling it now: Guillimarines, Death Guard and Squatadron Overlords.

Rules free, initial multi-force Codex-compendiums 'cheap', full Codexes to buy later as moods and release schedules dictate.

Pythagoras wrote:
Another dumb reset button? That isn't what we needed. The current level of complexity wasn't complex. Just too many people who lack the will to put any effort into their hobby.

That's some solid gatekeeping. Grats.

 kronk wrote:

 rollawaythestone wrote:
Draigo and some paladins are an acceptable Death Star. It's the ridiculousness created by allied combos that they are talking about.

However, Draigo will no longer be protected "inside" the unit. He will be targetable in some way just like in AoS. It's possible he might get a look out sir or some such, though.

I think it's abominations like the Bark Bark Star that they're trying to curb.

Unfortunately you will probably never get away from such things completely. There will just be too many things to try and co-ordinate and gamers being gamers will find a way of finding that uber combination, it's just an iterative process. I've been playing since Rogue Trader i'm not sure there has ever been a version when something wasn't broken. I doubt this edition will be any different. It will just be something else that is broken. Maybe it will be Nids this time?

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Rules free, initial multi-force Codex-compendiums 'cheap', full Codexes to buy later as moods and release schedules dictate.

As in '4 pages AoS core rules" free right? Which are useless without the aforementioned books. So we're looking at about 20 quid to get into the game per faction (or just to have a look at the others' rules). Eh, could be worse, but could be better aswell.

 CoreCommander wrote:
Hmm, did I understand correctly that the unit rules won't be free? In the newly released FAQ they only say that the core rules will be free and in the stream they said that they're releasing the Grand Alliance equivalence for 40k which you can buy for less than a codex. It won't be a true "freemium" then ala AoS (bar points, detachments, artifacts, allegiance rules and warlord traits ) ?

Yeah seems like it. Feels weird to be disappointed that we don't get all the rules for free, I need to do something about that entitlement complex.

If they deviate from the free unit rule model in AoS much i'll be rather surprised.

I've come to accept that if a lasgun can harm a terminator, it can harm a land raider. Maybe they crank it up to full power? In either case, if it is anything like AoS, the chances of guardsmen killing a land raider will be very slight. You should see the effort I have to put into killing a lord celestiant on dracoth with basic troops.

Incidentally, I remember a bit in gaunts ghosts were one of gaunts old friends (before he took control of the ghosts) blew up a chaos dreadnaught by a lucky lasgun shot through its visor. It's probably not realistic but it's cinematic.

 jhnbrg wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 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.

I play AoS with my son and like the system plus I really think that 40k needs a complete makeover and have been very optimistic about everything i heard so far... but... the latest news all points at a number of factions will get the brettonia treatment to make room for all the new power armour.

I am convinced that since orks have been useless for so long the lack of sales will make them one of the first xenos to be silently swept under the carpet.
And I was really looking forwrd to getting back into 40k again.

Well, you're convincing yourself against all logic and evidence. Not only are they front and centre in Armageddon, but as Kan mentions above, they're talking about the Arsonist of Charon and the new galaxy map is covered in Ork Waaaagh icons. In fact, you clearly were not looking forward to getting back into 40k since your self-ork-pity and assumptions of them being squatted is based on them being ignored/mistreated in the past rather than all of the information about their part in the imminent 8th edition. So your mind was clearly already made up long ago.

I think he killed it rather than blew it up?

here we go from the horses mouth

also related to the above post, I joke about "not enough orks" but that's because I believe the best summary of Ork territory is to mark it as "if you don't see another symbol, there's Orks here, and if you do, there's still probably Orks here". That likely just shows the most major remaining Ork kingdoms.

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:


Yeah 50 guardsmen won't do the job. But what if it was 100 or more? What if they had BS modifiers or rerolls? I mean yeah thats a ton of models, so thats not really a good example. Bet we've got things like skitarii vanguard that have great BS and they make 3 shots. Does that justify a ton of them killing a LR? Of course it doesn't it's still a freaking LR. Taping a ton of rifles together does not make them into an anti-tank cannon, that's not how this works.

No, but pour enough shots into it and eventually it might hit an exposed part or weaken an area enough to cause damage. Since Terminators are said to have armour like a tank should they also be completely immune to small-arms fire?

First of all armor like a tank is too broad of a term to have an argument about, especially considering the diversity of vehicles in 40k. Second, terminator armor being body armor is inevitably going to have weaker parts like visors or joints. It's juat that they are extremely hard to land s shot on.
An undamaged LR doesn't have that. Having a LR being damaged by some anti-tank weapon means there is such a weapon on the field and even still the whole shoot the damaged part thing is really fishy. But that's not my point.
Realistically the only thing a lot of autoguns would be able to achieve against and undamaged LR is to maybe damage it's visors.

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:


Does that justify a ton of them killing a LR? Of course it doesn't it's still a freaking LR. Taping a ton of rifles together does not make them into an anti-tank cannon, that's not how this works.

yes it does, yes it is, yes they do, thats how it works it was just confirmed.

Deal with it!

fixing balance is more important than fluff right now.

Jambles wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:

90% of the time the choice is obvious and what little tactics it adds doesn't come close to compensating for the drudgery of spacing your guys out every time you move them.

for a game that is all about the right placing of your models in the movement phase of course remove the importance of such things make it easier
never had a problem with moving my models fast around and place them

and I don't think I really would enjoy a game were I just push a blob straight forward because it doesn't matter

Because that's the only other option - it's either meticulous unit spacing to account for templates, or shoving models haphazardly across the table. There is, literally, no other opportunity for tactics in movement.

Other than positioning models in cover, maneuvering around terrain to block LoS, maneuvering to allow more models to be in range, moving to allow additional units to get involved in a charge, positioning the unit to take an objective next turn . . .

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:


Yeah 50 guardsmen won't do the job. But what if it was 100 or more? What if they had BS modifiers or rerolls? I mean yeah thats a ton of models, so thats not really a good example. Bet we've got things like skitarii vanguard that have great BS and they make 3 shots. Does that justify a ton of them killing a LR? Of course it doesn't it's still a freaking LR. Taping a ton of rifles together does not make them into an anti-tank cannon, that's not how this works.

No, but pour enough shots into it and eventually it might hit an exposed part or weaken an area enough to cause damage. Since Terminators are said to have armour like a tank should they also be completely immune to small-arms fire?

First of all armor like a tank is too broad of a term to have an argument about, especially considering the diversity of vehicles in 40k. Second, terminator armor being body armor is inevitably going to have weaker parts like visors or joints. It's juat that they are extremely hard to land s shot on.
An undamaged LR doesn't have that. Having a LR being damaged by some anti-tank weapon means there is such a weapon on the field and even still the whole shoot the damaged part thing is really fishy. But that's not my point.
Realistically the only thing a lot of autoguns would be able to achieve against and undamaged LR is to maybe damage it's visors.

Well lets see if guardsmen poured enough fire to track the Raider, blind the vision blocks, knock out the unarmored guns, blow out the unarmored machine spirit, kill the tank commander and rip up the exhaust ports.....is not the Land Raider dead? The hull remains undamaged.

Have you ever seen the design of a Land Raider (or a Leman Russ, since both are "LR"? Exposed tracks, shot traps galore, camera lenses left and right. The Russ is even worse with the mesh door "protecting" the engine and often entirely exposed track links. It goes on and on...

It makes perfect sense that a high-powered lasgun shot or a bolter round could damage something as badly designed as a Land Raider or Russ.

I think this is great as this seems like a whole reset of 40K and in a good way. No formations (for now), every unit gets a new profile (good chance to rebalance everything), and everything can hurt everything means no useless choices. Sounds like win all around!

 Latro_ wrote:
here we go from the horses mouth

Guard clearly need a "Light it up!" rule.

 EnTyme wrote:

Jambles wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:

90% of the time the choice is obvious and what little tactics it adds doesn't come close to compensating for the drudgery of spacing your guys out every time you move them.

for a game that is all about the right placing of your models in the movement phase of course remove the importance of such things make it easier
never had a problem with moving my models fast around and place them

and I don't think I really would enjoy a game were I just push a blob straight forward because it doesn't matter

Because that's the only other option - it's either meticulous unit spacing to account for templates, or shoving models haphazardly across the table. There is, literally, no other opportunity for tactics in movement.

Other than positioning models in cover, maneuvering around terrain to block LoS, maneuvering to allow more models to be in range, moving to allow additional units to get involved in a charge, positioning the unit to take an objective next turn . . .

The /s was implied, I should have been more obvious...

Well I'll be fethed.

I'm cautiously optimistic. I may disagree with some specific design choices, but the level of self awareness, community interaction, and general back to roots coming from GW these days actually leads me to believe there are some people who actually care about the game and the community.

If they can nail the balance for match play (or at least not be worse than 7th), I'll be pleasantly surprised. If the narrative play has a campaign bolt on I can use for matched play (for a tighter campaign than I imagine the base narrative game will allow for) I'll be doubly sold. If the prices for codices are sensible and updated/FAQ'd in a timely manner, well, that's the big picture stuff taken care of for me.

I just hope that someone in the head office gets interested in Orks again. Not at a fluff level - I mean at a technical play them all the time level.

Way back in 2nd I think Orks were the 2nd most popular army. This was probably due to being in the box and having a good range of plastic models when say Chaos was mostly expensive metal but still.

In White Dwarf it was Orks all the time. At some point though this went away. Since late 4th they have been in deep freeze. I guess they are not unique in this (Tyranids had a similar wave of obsession followed by disavowal) but still.

I am so stoked for a from-the-ground-up redesign of all the units and their stats. Here's hoping that Tyranids, Orks, and other forgotten armies get their long-needed adjustments to keep all the armies in line with each other. Very optimistic.

 Blacksails wrote:
Well I'll be fethed.

I'm cautiously optimistic. I may disagree with some specific design choices, but the level of self awareness, community interaction, and general back to roots coming from GW these days actually leads me to believe there are some people who actually care about the game and the community.

If they can nail the balance for match play (or at least not be worse than 7th), I'll be pleasantly surprised. If the narrative play has a campaign bolt on I can use for matched play (for a tighter campaign than I imagine the base narrative game will allow for) I'll be doubly sold. If the prices for codices are sensible and updated/FAQ'd in a timely manner, well, that's the big picture stuff taken care of for me.

pretty much my thoughts exactly. Very surprised at the U-turn from GW, in a good way, cautiously optimistic. Ready for disappointment but not counting on it this time

I havent seen anything thatll be a deal breaker thus far. Not psyched on lasguns hurting Leman Russ tanks, but if it's balanced well enough I can live with that bit of disbelief suspension

We always explained a Terminator dying to a Lasgun shot as the Imperial Guardsmen tripped over a rock and fired his Lasgun which glanced off the armor of the Terminator standing next to the other and it blasts through his glass eye!

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Well I'll be fethed.

I'm cautiously optimistic. I may disagree with some specific design choices, but the level of self awareness, community interaction, and general back to roots coming from GW these days actually leads me to believe there are some people who actually care about the game and the community.

If they can nail the balance for match play (or at least not be worse than 7th), I'll be pleasantly surprised. If the narrative play has a campaign bolt on I can use for matched play (for a tighter campaign than I imagine the base narrative game will allow for) I'll be doubly sold. If the prices for codices are sensible and updated/FAQ'd in a timely manner, well, that's the big picture stuff taken care of for me.

pretty much my thoughts exactly. Very surprised at the you turn from GW, in a good way, cautiously optimistic. Ready for disappointment but not counting on it this time

I havent seen anything thatll be a deal breaker thus far. Not psyched on lasguns hurting Leman Russ tanks, but if it's balanced well enough I can live with that bit of disbelief suspension

My feelings exactly. I've seen Sigmar played next to me during a game of BFG I was running, and while it seemed okay, it also seemed pretty simple, even compared to 40k (shoot the choppy ones/chop the shooty ones!). Sigmar also left just about the worst first impression you could manage, and I'd be lying if I said I still don't reserve some judgement on how absolutely piss poor it's intro was handled.

That said, they seem to have learned, and at least 40k will launch with matched play. The specifics (like how factions are handled) I'll hold judgement on until the rules are in my hand, and I'm wary at some of them, but I don't think there are any deal breakers for me as a Guardsmen. The lasgun killing tanks is a stretch even for my abstraction oriented mind, but we'll see if it even matters in common play. With the way 40k has gone, I'm almost looking forward to a streamlined, slimmed down version that focuses on good missions to give the game some semblance of tactical thought. Ditching templates and going to multiple wounds, or making special/heavy weapons an attachment to a squad are all nice ways to streamline without losing much on the tactics side, especially for a game as large as 40k has gotten.

I'm sure I'll find things to bitch about, as I expect all good forum going 40k players to do, but the new GW is genuinely turning me back around.

Now to fix the prices...

 Azazelx wrote:
Have you ever seen the design of a Land Raider (or a Leman Russ, since both are "LR"? Exposed tracks, shot traps galore, camera lenses left and right. The Russ is even worse with the mesh door "protecting" the engine and often entirely exposed track links. It goes on and on...

It makes perfect sense that a high-powered lasgun shot or a bolter round could damage something as badly designed as a Land Raider or Russ.

Its funny because the Land Raider makes the worst case for vehicle immunity. Its front has no reason to be 14. It has a rear hatch on its frontal armor, there is no way that ramp is ever going to be as armored as the rest of the vehicle's armor. Further more any front penetration would be catastrophic for the Raider as what ever penetrates the ramp is going straight into the engine unobstructed. Even worse if the ramp is down during an assault (which should lower the front armor to like AV9) and have any penetrating hit immediately cause a vehicle kill.

 jhnbrg wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 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.

I play AoS with my son and like the system plus I really think that 40k needs a complete makeover and have been very optimistic about everything i heard so far... but... the latest news all points at a number of factions will get the brettonia treatment to make room for all the new power armour.

I am convinced that since orks have been useless for so long the lack of sales will make them one of the first xenos to be silently swept under the carpet.

And I was really looking forwrd to getting back into 40k again.

They've already stated that no factions are going away (and Orks were literally the second thing the game had after Space Marines and it's entirely nonsensical that you assume they would just go away based on... nothing at all, it seems.)
Like someone else mentioned, you REALLY don't seem like you actually were looking forward to getting back into 40k and i feel like all of the arguments you made in this post are in willfully bad faith.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:

 kronk wrote:


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.

And in return I would suspect lascannons will do multiple wounds that scythe through Guard and he'll be removing most of a unit a turn.

I'm OK with that.

It's probably not likely to be viable though and that isolated. The real question is whether you take those guardsmen now and aim at the LR with only one wound left (and how many) or the Marines that are 'softer'.

And this, right here, is why it sounds like the game might actually be fun, again, for anyone not fielding MEQs.