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.

 Latro_ wrote:
to add to the calm

That kind of cretinous behavior is what turns companies off listening in the first place.

Looking forward to Morale. I'm guessing it will be similar to AOS, Although the LD 7 stat of the marines makes me doubt it a little.

Plumbumbarum wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
@Plumb...

I recommend 1page40k for a good rule set.
Also... I too took a year off. But if gave me more objectivity... not less

Thanks I'll check it, ussualy prefer making up my own rules though.

I am objective enough btw, I hate dumbing down of movement phase in all games, always praise the opposite and wouldn't say it's some extravagant, unfounded criticism.

Why are you still posting on a topic you do not care about and for a game you will not play?

Oh it's Morale today? Cool, even better! For me this will be a real test of how good the new system is, because morale needs to play a far more important part in the game than it does now.

I have a general question here, and I hope nobody objects to me bringing AOS into it, because it is relevant, but how will future rule changes work in 40k 8th, if as expected, it uses the AOS model?

For example, 40k players are unhappy with rule X. They give feedback to GW HQ, and GW says we'll fix it with new rule Y.

So how do rules changes come about in AOS? FAQ? New unit cards in the miniature boxes? A free download? A new book.?

I'm genuinely curious.

Thanks.

Random movement outside GW?

Stargrunt has random movement when you run (and IIRC charge)

Lots (and lots) of games have a random mechanism to see if you get to move at all (Lion Rampant and it's derivatives, for example), Hail Caesar/Blackpowder etc. (Warmaster derivatives, so slightly based off GW)

There are many, many games where you're not in complete control of the location of your troops.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I have a general question here, and I hope nobody objects to me bringing AOS into it, because it is relevant, but how will future rule changes work in 40k 8th, if as expected, it uses the AOS model?

For example, 40k players are unhappy with rule X. They give feedback to GW HQ, and GW says we'll fix it with new rule Y.

So how do rules changes come about in AOS? FAQ? New unit cards in the miniature boxes? A free download? A new book.?

I'm genuinely curious.

Thanks.

Judging from AoS, core rules fixes will be printed in an yearly balance book and presented as optional rules superimposed on the old or used instead of them (yada yada when playing a matched play scenario use this instead of this). Unit rules will first be updated online and then printed in the new codex. All of this is judging by how AoS does it and I can't see why GW won't follow with 40k aswell.

 matphat wrote:
As a dedicated Ork player I'm still unconvinced that my army won't still suck, but since it's sucked for so long, I'm not too worried about it. If it is suddenly viable? I'll be stoked. So far, nothing we've heard from the community site feels like it impacts me or Da Boyz very much. Once I see points costs and stat lines, I'll have something to consider.

I think boys are going to get a nice boost. Here are a few things I noticed
* You can assault from a Gorkanaut/Morkanaut.
* You can now put 30 boys in base to base without worrying about blast templates. This lets you use movement trays, and suddenly fielding 150 boys can be done easily
* Assault ranges were improved a little bit. Every inch counts.
* Nobs with PKs can be a thing again. Even big choppas might be useful.

Now with the bad news. Orks have been bottom tier for most of the existence of 40k. That's the harsh truth. Don't expect them to suddenly be top tier. At best they will be competitive.

Thanks CoreCommander

The idea of "tiers" should ideally be removed from matched play, but let's wait and see if the design studio has reinforced their views on challenging armies in the new edition. If all goes well, orks should be tip - top (yay, me orksies)

Or perhaps... dare I say it, the whole concept of "tiers" can do one, as the game will be fairly balanced, allowing all factions to compete with each other in different ways depending on their builds?

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Did they say what was going to be on show today? It's combat weapons isn't it? This should be good. I'm really keen to see if chainswords might get an AP value. I've always felt like they should.

I have been keeping the OP up to date with next expected news release (bottom of the post)

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Oh it's Morale today? Cool, even better! For me this will be a real test of how good the new system is, because morale needs to play a far more important part in the game than it does now.

Maybe pinning and fear will actually do something, instead of rarely slightly inconveniencing your opponent.

I doubt the concept of tiers or power armies will go away, as I don't think I've ever seen a game where there's 100% perfect balance. I'm just hoping that it's far from the 7th edition tiering where the armies go from broken down to not even worth looking at; as long as every army can actually hope to win against any other army, I'll call that a success. I mean, I'm still expecting Eldar to be OP because they literally always are, but maybe I won't hate them so much that I want them to die in the setting any more.

Morale should be interesting. There's always been a slight issue with retreats in that they're A) hard to track and B) lead to weird situations of shepherding of units off board edges. We'll see how much is actually revealed, it might just be like the fight phase post and tell us next to nothing. I'm hoping transports are tomorrow.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I have a general question here, and I hope nobody objects to me bringing AOS into it, because it is relevant, but how will future rule changes work in 40k 8th, if as expected, it uses the AOS model?

For example, 40k players are unhappy with rule X. They give feedback to GW HQ, and GW says we'll fix it with new rule Y.

So how do rules changes come about in AOS? FAQ? New unit cards in the miniature boxes? A free download? A new book.?

I'm genuinely curious.

Thanks.

Strictly speaking we haven't actually seen a change to the core rules for Age of Sigmar yet as far as I know. Despite how some people are putting it, the Generals Handbook doesn't actually change the core rules of the game but layers on top the "3 Ways to Play" system of Open, Narative and Matched.

We have been told that the core rules of the game will be free, which I assume means it'll be the same as it is in Sigmar, a PDF on GW's website thats free to download and will get reprinted in just about every book they release. Being a PDF on their website means it can be pretty easy to update, preferably with a little warning for all of us, and means having those 12 pages at the front/back of the books you already own invalidated, but the rest of the book being good to carry on with.

We've also been told that there will be a Generals Hanbook style release for 40K as the 3 ways to play set up won't be included in the core rules. Just like with the GHB, we've been told this will get updated and reprinted on a yearly basis.

For the codexes I imagine errata's will be handled the same way they are now, PDF's uploaded to GW's website, but comprehensive changes will have to wait until a new edition of the codex comes along. My guess/hope is that points will be left to the 40K version of the Generals Hanbook (the Warlords Pamphlet?) as being updated on a yearly basis makes rebalancing existing and new armies easier but we'll see.

 Imateria wrote:
Strictly speaking we haven't actually seen a change to the core rules for Age of Sigmar yet as far as I know. Despite how some people are putting it, the Generals Handbook doesn't actually change the core rules of the game but layers on top the "3 Ways to Play" system of Open, Narative and Matched.

Rules of 1 could be considered one. Albeit those silly enough applies only to matched despite pretty much required to fix some of the worst oddities.

Maybe they will introduce measurement from base to base which is pretty essential if you want game to actually work with strangers. Otherwise by rules certain models can't even legally ATTACK other model without fudging it(okay he's close enough despite math saying it's impossible for him to be close enough ever) or putting model over base of other(which will understandably raise complains from those who have spent lots of time painting and basing models that could get damaged by that).

 labmouse42 wrote:
You can now put 30 boys in base to base without worrying about blast templates. This lets you use movement trays, and suddenly fielding 150 boys can be done easily

That's... genius. Awesome.

 Hollow wrote:
Or perhaps... dare I say it, the whole concept of "tiers" can do one, as the game will be fairly balanced, allowing all factions to compete with each other in different ways depending on their builds?

That's certainly my hope.

With rules for everything day one, it's about as solid an opportunity as they'll ever have to sort out balance issues - whether it's armies that got left behind, or units within armies which rarely see the field.

On the subject of morale, I'd like to see some sort of rule similar to what the Skyhammer formation has currently where you can have a unit supress another so that they can't fire back as efficiently. You could have weapons like mortars or heavy bolters be comparatively poor at actually killing things but really good at forcing people to hunker down, so you'd have a choice between support weapons and just blowing people up.

I was away for a few days sooo...

Stupid fething 2d6 charge... still unreliable and frustrating
Multi-unit overwatch. Multiple times per phase no less... so ni more tactical overwatch-sponges, one more tactical level striped out of the game
Hard cover favoring highly armored units more than lightly armored, which is BS, no rules on visual cover
Marines firing heavy weapons on 4+

And they have the audacity to say they listened to us and didn't dumb down 40k

 Graphite wrote:

 labmouse42 wrote:
You can now put 30 boys in base to base without worrying about blast templates. This lets you use movement trays, and suddenly fielding 150 boys can be done easily

That's... genius. Awesome.

Movement trays terrain don't mix

Very curious if they'll touch on ATSKNF. Guessing it's still existing but who knows. Also guessing that if it's still the name of a rule... it's mechanicly a very different thing.

 Imateria wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I have a general question here, and I hope nobody objects to me bringing AOS into it, because it is relevant, but how will future rule changes work in 40k 8th, if as expected, it uses the AOS model?

For example, 40k players are unhappy with rule X. They give feedback to GW HQ, and GW says we'll fix it with new rule Y.

So how do rules changes come about in AOS? FAQ? New unit cards in the miniature boxes? A free download? A new book.?

I'm genuinely curious.

Thanks.

Strictly speaking we haven't actually seen a change to the core rules for Age of Sigmar yet as far as I know. Despite how some people are putting it, the Generals Handbook doesn't actually change the core rules of the game but layers on top the "3 Ways to Play" system of Open, Narative and Matched.

We have been told that the core rules of the game will be free, which I assume means it'll be the same as it is in Sigmar, a PDF on GW's website thats free to download and will get reprinted in just about every book they release. Being a PDF on their website means it can be pretty easy to update, preferably with a little warning for all of us, and means having those 12 pages at the front/back of the books you already own invalidated, but the rest of the book being good to carry on with.

We've also been told that there will be a Generals Hanbook style release for 40K as the 3 ways to play set up won't be included in the core rules. Just like with the GHB, we've been told this will get updated and reprinted on a yearly basis.

For the codexes I imagine errata's will be handled the same way they are now, PDF's uploaded to GW's website, but comprehensive changes will have to wait until a new edition of the codex comes along. My guess/hope is that points will be left to the 40K version of the Generals Hanbook (the Warlords Pamphlet?) as being updated on a yearly basis makes rebalancing existing and new armies easier but we'll see.

Not true, the general handbook already alters the core rules in matched play:

Monsters and cover: In matched play monsters cannot claim cover.

That looks like a change to the core rule, clearly meant to patch a balance issue.

 Hollow wrote:

 Latro_ wrote:
to add to the calm

That kind of cretinous behavior is what turns companies off listening in the first place.

Well, hopefully GW understands that naturally not everyone is gonna be on board right away. They're clearly trying to turn things around, and they're obviously listening more now than they probably ever have, but surely they realize that their actions and behavior for at least the past decade or more will have cultivated a lot of this kind of negativity in the community and that there will initially be some skepticism or push-back.

And, also, trolls are a thing.

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, anyway. The way I see it, after 7th it would be hard for GW to do any worse. I'm skeptical about some of this myself but I'm reserving judgment until we see the final product.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 matphat wrote:
As a dedicated Ork player I'm still unconvinced that my army won't still suck, but since it's sucked for so long, I'm not too worried about it. If it is suddenly viable? I'll be stoked. So far, nothing we've heard from the community site feels like it impacts me or Da Boyz very much. Once I see points costs and stat lines, I'll have something to consider.

I think boys are going to get a nice boost. Here are a few things I noticed
* You can assault from a Gorkanaut/Morkanaut.
* You can now put 30 boys in base to base without worrying about blast templates. This lets you use movement trays, and suddenly fielding 150 boys can be done easily
* Assault ranges were improved a little bit. Every inch counts.
* Nobs with PKs can be a thing again. Even big choppas might be useful.

Now with the bad news. Orks have been bottom tier for most of the existence of 40k. That's the harsh truth. Don't expect them to suddenly be top tier. At best they will be competitive.

All I want is for orks to be balanced, both internally and agains other factions. Having half to two thirds of the codex being completely trash is so boring. I want to be able to let my flashgits drive around in a battlewagon without being a complete push over or fielding killa kans...

 Mezmerro wrote:
I was away for a few days sooo...

Stupid fething 2d6 charge... still unreliable and frustrating
Multi-unit overwatch. Multiple times per phase no less... so ni more tactical overwatch-sponges, one more tactical level striped out of the game
Hard cover favoring highly armored units more than lightly armored, which is BS, no rules on visual cover
Marines firing heavy weapons on 4+

And they have the audacity to say they listened to us and didn't dumb down 40k

Really happy that the have kept 2D6 charges. Everything being reliable tends to make for a boring game.
Overwatch is still on the cards giving shooty units a chance to cause a little damage before being squashed by hard-assault units.
I'm glad that cover doesn't favour any particular unit. A clean, clear and concise bonus across the board is great news.
Really happy that a simple modifier for heavy weapons has been employed, allowing for a lot more movement and therefore creating a more dynamic gaming experience.

I'm glad GW have listened to us and haven't dumbed it down.

 Hollow wrote:
Really happy that the have kept 2D6 charges. Everything being reliable tends to make for a boring game.
[...]

I'm glad GW have listened to us and kept it dumbed down.

Fixed that for you

For real though, other than charge disagreements, you're right; GW seems to have done a great job this time around. We'll see how the points shake out to see if it's balanced, but the core rules look both simpler and more fastidious.

I'm excited to see Ork vehicles again! The first WD I ever got had a battle with Killa Kans and I've always loved them, but they're not been good since... were they ever good? All the Ork walkers are really good models, but never see any play - I'm hoping that changes.

Why people think that in 8th more than one unit can overwatch against a charging unit at any time? It only happens if they are charged too (as it already is in 7th).
Only Tau can (for now) help others with overwatch.

 Kirasu wrote:

Except infantry etc don't really have weaker side armour like vehicles have...

And no facing leads to the stupid visualities like side moving predators etc.

Is that so? What about the stupid visual of monstrous creatures walking backwards? or soldiers with shields having them facing the wrong way? There are MANY examples of non-vehicle units which should also have weaker flanks to attack as to think that infantry don't have stronger armor in certain areas is a bit silly. You armor the area you most anticipate the bulk of an attack to come from.

I rather have faster gameplay than deal with ideas of "correct visuals" when the person clearly doesn't care about consistency, ONLY what they consider "correct"

If I want a fast, unambigious gameplay, I would not play miniature wargames at all. I would play a hex game, or some totally abstract game like Chess. Miniature wargames are for me a visual experience, to simulate visual of battle being fought. This is why we have terrain, miniatures etc. in the first place. If vehicles no longer have facings, then not only we remove one of the last flanking aspect of the game, the game also becomes visually silly when tanks are put sideways to the enemy etc. And no, I would not play that edition.

 Hollow wrote:
I'm glad that cover doesn't favour any particular unit. A clean, clear and concise bonus across the board is great news.

Actually the new system does favour particular unit(or rather unit type). The higher the armour the better the bonus.

 Vector Strike wrote:
Why people think that in 8th more than one unit can overwatch against a charging unit at any time? It only happens if they are charged too (as it already is in 7th).
Only Tau can (for now) help others with overwatch.

Because GW clearly said that.
That being said only the units that were charged can overwatch, so basically it would only work with multui-charges (currently only one unit can overwatch against multi-charge).
Tau shtick is being able to overwatch even if they were not charged at all.