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.

 axisofentropy wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 axisofentropy wrote:
I went back to Age of Sigmar release history. The release date was announced around June 3rd 2015, then pre-orders didn't happen until a month later: July 4th.

So I think we'll see 8th edition in late May, despite the rumors about vacation freeze in June.

Vacation freeze will be when the actual product is out so 2-3 weeks prior to that will be preorders. Late May seems feasible.

that's interesting. what are you basing this upon? Age of Sigmar arrived only a week after pre-orders.

40K is a bigger fish. Last I remember it was at least a 2 week pre-order period.

My guess for Melta is that it will do 1d6 Wounds and an extra d6 wounds at half range. Melta Bombs will likely just do 2d6 against stuff with the Vehicle or Monster keyword (they said keywords would matter).

Eyjio wrote:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
I'm very optimistic about all this news, quite exciting stuff.

I'm just wondering how Gauss will work, maybe a To Wound roll of 6 does D3 damage to vehicles?

Considering in the background gauss is meant to be good against all armour, my guess is a roll of six gives an additional AP -1 to the gun or something simple like that. It'd also go a way towards distinguishing heavy gauss cannons from lascannons too, and would be strong, yet reasonably fair for an entire army to have.

It's possible that it'll just add damage on 6's but I'd have thought that's a little too strong generally.

I'm still most interested in what happens to melta/armourbane weapons. I'm sort of hoping 2d6 penetration goes the way of the dodo, but I somehow doubt it...

I think that would be a better way to have it.

Daedalus81 wrote:
40K is a bigger fish. Last I remember it was at least a 2 week pre-order period.

Looking back at the old White Dwarf Weekly's, 7th edition was announced on 10 May 2014, went on preorder 17 May 2014 and was released 24 May 2014.

 Ghaz wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
40K is a bigger fish. Last I remember it was at least a 2 week pre-order period.

Looking back at the old White Dwarf Weekly's, 7th edition was announced on 10 May 2014, went on preorder 17 May 2014 and was released 24 May 2014.

good info thanks!

I do think a 2 week pre-order is possible, but a little less likely than one week. If I had to bet, I think we'll have the new books before June, maybe May 26th? No, I can't explain the GW vacation rumor so I could be wrong!

Everyone play this game! It's more fun than talking about lasgun physics! What date do you think the release will happen?

When it comes to Gauss weapons, could it be as simple as on a roll of 6 to wound, the gauss weapon does one more damage than normal? that would make them better against armor, but for basic infantry it wouldn't matter.

 cuda1179 wrote:
When it comes to Gauss weapons, could it be as simple as on a roll of 6 to wound, the gauss weapon does one more damage than normal? that would make them better against armor, but for basic infantry it wouldn't matter.

Works for me.

It has to be June at the latest. They're doing daily info dumps until release, which is going to be quite a bit if it's July...well over 60 days.

Well, they're giving the core rules away, so it's not like they need to hold anything back.

My money's on early June though.

I think it will be in the next 3 weeks, I have not studied GWs release patterns nor am I a pundit, but the cats out of the bag now and no one's buying anything untill we know what's going on with our armies.

I can't see GW taking this kind of for any extended period of time.

Daedalus81 wrote:
It has to be June at the latest. They're doing daily info dumps until release, which is going to be quite a bit if it's July...well over 60 days.

Have to agree, unless they decide to take itsy bitsy bits here and there and show us.

But as it is, they're revealing fairly large portions of the game in a way. Betting on Psychic stuff before the week is out.

 Megaknob wrote:
I think it will be in the next 3 weeks, I have not studied GWs release patterns nor am I a pundit, but the cats out of the bag now and no one's buying anything untill we know what's going on with our armies.

I can't see GW taking this kind of for any extended period of time.

I agree, everyone in my gaming group has put all new purchases and army planning on hold until we see where the rules are going.

If that's where everything is going writ large, that'll probably hurt sales a little.

Gets to Friday "oh well today's bit of information is pre orders go up tomorrow, enjoy!"

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:

 Megaknob wrote:
I think it will be in the next 3 weeks, I have not studied GWs release patterns nor am I a pundit, but the cats out of the bag now and no one's buying anything untill we know what's going on with our armies.

I can't see GW taking this kind of for any extended period of time.

I agree, everyone in my gaming group has put all new purchases and army planning on hold until we see where the rules are going.

If that's where everything is going writ large, that'll probably hurt sales a little.

this, sales are going to slump something fierce until the new edition drops...except for the big bump the announcement probably gave.

'Ooh new edition? Well I guess I can buy a toxicrene then, after all it might be good now...'

We may not be buying, but they have us thinking and chatting about it every single day until then.

The S&T table is bugging me, because if it exists it will be much bigger and have very little differentiation with the current logic. But I can't think of some other easily digested logic that would allow them to spread out and also does not result in obscene rolls. Maybe that isn't really necessary though...I want more info!

Daedalus81 wrote:
We may not be buying, but they have us thinking and chatting about it every single day until then.

The S&T table is bugging me, because if it exists it will be much bigger and have very little differentiation with the current logic. But I can't think of some other easily digested logic that would allow them to spread out and also does not result in obscene rolls. Maybe that isn't really necessary though...I want more info!

You've never really needed the S/T table, it's just that 7th didn't explain the logic behind it.

Equal is 4+, one higher is 5+ two higher 6+ same progression for lower.

I wouldn't be surprised if they changed the logic with the expansion and multiple damage though to be honest? There's potential for slightly more granularity here.

I guess it isn't impossible it could have a BS-style re-roll mechanic if the disparity is greater, e.g. 3x SvT then re-roll 1s and successfully wound on 6s or something.

The S&T table might not exist. It could just be spelled out. Toughness minus Strength, plus 4 equals the dice roll you need to wound. 1 always fails, 6 always succeeds.

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
When it comes to Gauss weapons, could it be as simple as on a roll of 6 to wound, the gauss weapon does one more damage than normal? that would make them better against armor, but for basic infantry it wouldn't matter.

Works for me.

Or cause its damage characteristic to be higher versus units with the 'vehicle' key-word.

Apologies if this has already been shared but Pete Foley has said on twitter that due to the large amount of questions, they will do a second live FAQ.

So far I'm liking many of the proposed rule changes. Streamlines the game without dumbing it down to much. I wonder what kind of over watch mechanic will get ported over, if any? I'm interested to see new melee weapon profiles too.

 cuda1179 wrote:
The S&T table might not exist. It could just be spelled out. Toughness minus Strength, plus 4 equals the dice roll you need to wound. 1 always fails, 6 always succeeds.

Possible, but as we could conceivably have a S15 weapon hitting a T3 target, making it no more effective than a S5 one seems lacking. Or even S15 vs S10 at T8 targets.

Chikout wrote:
Apologies if this has already been shared but Pete Foley has said on twitter that due to the large amount of questions, they will do a second live FAQ.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?

Haven't seen this!!!!

 Azreal13 wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
The S&T table might not exist. It could just be spelled out. Toughness minus Strength, plus 4 equals the dice roll you need to wound. 1 always fails, 6 always succeeds.

Possible, but as we could conceivably have a S15 weapon hitting a T3 target, making it no more effective than a S5 one seems lacking. Or even S15 vs S10 at T8 targets.

Well, taking a 12-gauge to my forehead won't make me any less dead than taking a tactical nuke to the forehead.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
The S&T table might not exist. It could just be spelled out. Toughness minus Strength, plus 4 equals the dice roll you need to wound. 1 always fails, 6 always succeeds.

Possible, but as we could conceivably have a S15 weapon hitting a T3 target, making it no more effective than a S5 one seems lacking. Or even S15 vs S10 at T8 targets.

Such weapons exist to fight big, tough things so I expect they'll rarely be directed at much weaker stuff.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
The S&T table might not exist. It could just be spelled out. Toughness minus Strength, plus 4 equals the dice roll you need to wound. 1 always fails, 6 always succeeds.

Possible, but as we could conceivably have a S15 weapon hitting a T3 target, making it no more effective than a S5 one seems lacking. Or even S15 vs S10 at T8 targets.

They could easily make weapons that beat your toughness by more then a set amount an autowound. But, really, dead is dead - there comes a point where any further increase in the strength of the attack is redundant.

While the S15 weapon isn't necessarily going to be any better at killing a T3 target than a S5 one, it is going to be substantially better at killing a T14 target.

For all that I don't like, it sounds better than 7th ed, and it is cheap/free. That is a win, just might not be as big a win for me as I'd hoped if they don't leave in many of the Quasi Realistic elements I liked about the game.

Faster play is almost certainly a win. Eliminating random powers and warlord traits would be a good start, though they don't seem to have reduced the number of dice rolls, so I'm not sure where the time savings are going to come from.

For Psychic/Magic I'd say the days of the strait Ld test for you one or two fixed powers were the most playable and is the most likely. One of Fantasy Battle's editions with dice pools worked pretty well if I remember correctly, although many of the dice pool rules sucked, and it eats a lot of time if you have to do it on both player's turns.

 cuda1179 wrote:
The S&T table might not exist. It could just be spelled out. Toughness minus Strength, plus 4 equals the dice roll you need to wound. 1 always fails, 6 always succeeds.

In all honesty, there are a lot of potential ways to do it. Most likely the one you proposed will be the one we see (I mean, it isn't like a S10 weapon is any more effective at killing a T3 target than a T4 target, so the bottom is already running on a flattened scale).

This will have some odd effects at the sub-Knight scale if it occurs (a lasgun is as effective at hurting a dread as a boltgun) but in the grand scheme of things it isn't a huge deal in terms of results (because both are equally ineffective at the task). But when you use d6's, abstraction of results is basically unavoidable.

That said, the 7+ mechanic from BS would work to widen the table a bit at the far end (though it is a wee-bit more complicated which is why I'm increasingly not expecting it).

But there are still a lot of unknowns here. Either way, I'm interested to see how the table has changed, it's probably one of the biggest shakeups to 40k since... well a long damn time.

It's funny how people bitched and moaned about the previous GW policy of keeping tight-lipped and then just dropping something out of the blue. Then commenting that they aren't dropping a dime because they have been told that a new release is coming out soon.