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.

 insaniak wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

You're assuming there won't be some protections for characters. We don't know that.

No, I'm assuming there will be some protection for characters, but that unless it's a flat 'You can't target characters' it is likely to be as ineffectual a protection as it was in 4th edition.

Okay, you've convince me, all is lost.

Can we have a dedicated thread for everyone to put videos of the burning armies.

 insaniak wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
My point was more about people getting upset about their characters not being in a unit, when for all intents and purposes, they are by walking next to them.

Which was missing the reason that people are complaining. The issue isn't that people are worried their characters will be lonely. The issue is that removing the ability to join units means characters die.

No, that was the issue you were complaining about. Look at who I replied to.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Sarigar wrote:
I remember playing against so many folks who forget which units suffered 25% casualties for morale purposes. Soon, we will need to track how many models were removed from a unit each turn for morale purposes. I am curious about how well this mechanic will play.

For AoS I simply lay the model down next to the unit. After battleshock is resolved I moved the dead to the dead pile. It works fine in actual play.

I'm sure someone will comment next how it is the stuff of nightmares.

Nah it works fine. Reminds me of games of FB where we actually left dead models for rest of game (albeit THAT only works due to nature of armies odds of anybody moving over dead models was pretty small).

Would be my solution anyway. More visual than dices which I might accidentally knock off etc, easier than keeping track out of table.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

UltraPrime wrote:
Surely you just put the models that died together, seperate from ones killed in previous turns? Seems straight forward enough.

Problem is separating "was this dead IG trooper from this unit or that unit?".

You either need some book keeping system out of board, dice or some other marker. Easiest solution is to have something near unit in question. Dice etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 privateer4hire wrote:
Clearly those folks haven't played much AoS, then. Characters usually have ample wounds, excellent saves AND benefit from special rules on top of that. They're not enough to base the whole army on, but you get your points worth from the games we've played and watched.

3-4 wounds might be good in AOS with little shooting with multiple d6. Lascannon meanwhile tosses d6 damage. Multi-melta will likely be around same. Those will munch 3-4 wound characters like chaplains, commanders, commisars, chaplains etc without issue(and dont' expect 6+ wounds for those...) if they can be pointed with weapons at all. Even "can't target outside X" range" is meagre save in a game with fast glasshammers like landspeeders, buggies, vypers etc.

I don't think there are any characters with less than 5 wounds in AoS. And there are warp lighting cannons in that game as well.

 jamopower wrote:
I don't think there are any characters with less than 5 wounds in AoS. And there are warp lighting cannons in that game as well.

Upper scale models have more wounds though. We know guillimann has 9, dreadnought 8. Unlikely something like basic librarian/chaplain is approaching those numbers...Nevermind commisars.

Ok.

I am in the process of painting my Wolf Lord and the fun squad of WG Terminators he will be deepstriking into battle with...or...you know, not.

I have been searching for the source of the info about IC's no longer being able to join units. Is this still a rumor or has this been spoken about by GW themselves? My eyes hurt from trying to find the original post myself.

Thanks.

M

It's just speculation. That rule has not been confirmed yet.

GW cannot possibly make characters weaker. Otherwise how'd they sell half sized sprues in a clampack for close to £20

tneva82 wrote:

 jamopower wrote:
I don't think there are any characters with less than 5 wounds in AoS. And there are warp lighting cannons in that game as well.

Upper scale models have more wounds though. We know guillimann has 9, dreadnought 8. Unlikely something like basic librarian/chaplain is approaching those numbers...Nevermind commisars.

So chaplains could well have 5 wounds, making them quite unlike to be killed with a single multimelta shot from a land speeder etc. It's good to remember that 40k will have also the toughness value. It has quite a difference if you have 9 wounds with toughness 7 or 5 wounds with toughness 4.

Little shooting with multiple wounds in AoS? Big lols.

Also worth mentioning there are things in AoS that stop multiple damage, reduce a weapons damage characteristic. Have we seen all weapons profiles, or is chicken licken getting bumps on the head after seeing the lascannon

Thebiggesthat wrote:
Little shooting with multiple wounds in AoS? Big lols.

Also worth mentioning there are things in AoS that stop multiple damage, reduce a weapons damage characteristic. Have we seen all weapons profiles, or is chicken licken getting bumps on the head after seeing the lascannon

The sky has been falling in some new way every time they release a new rule. Literally the only thing I've seen people not put up as prime evidence that the world is ending is 2 wound terminators.

My favorite so far is how the bandwagon has done a complete 180 on guardsmen and not one even notices the hypocrisy/irony:

"Oh lasguns can hurt landraiders?!?!?! WTFBBQOMGKOS!!! Blobs of 50 guardsmen are gonna wreck whole tables! 8th is the SUCKS!"

"Oh morale is based on number of models lost?!?!?!?! WTFBBQOMGKOS!!! What about my blobs of 50 guardsmen? I'm not gonna be able to do ANYTHING! 8TH IS THE SUCKS!"

Or maybe it's actually possible to deduct things from rumours...People noted problems with 6th ed and 7th ed rules long before release from leaks and those were less accurate than now.

100% perfect? No. But funny that things don't need to be known 100% to have idea of how things go.

People have been able to figure out optimal builds of armies based on leaks before and sure enough they were the broken combos.

All this "just wait for full rules" is just ostrich sticking head under sand syndrome.

And btw lasgun vs landraider is less about it being broken and more about it being silly, unrealistic and unneeded.

Question to all:

So now that GW is engaging with us and releasing hints, articles and the like - is it making things better or worse.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Question to all:

So now that GW is engaging with us and releasing hints, articles and the like - is it making things better or worse.

Better, the people that just want to moan and complain would be moaning and complaining no matter what.

tneva82 wrote:
Or maybe it's actually possible to deduct things from rumours...People noted problems with 6th ed and 7th ed rules long before release from leaks and those were less accurate than now.

100% perfect? No. But funny that things don't need to be known 100% to have idea of how things go.

People have been able to figure out optimal builds of armies based on leaks before and sure enough they were the broken combos.

All this "just wait for full rules" is just ostrich sticking head under sand syndrome.

And btw lasgun vs landraider is less about it being broken and more about it being silly, unrealistic and unneeded.

Do I think it's possible to deduct things accurately from rumors? Absolutely, throw enough scrabble tiles at a wall and it'll eventually spell something. (And no ones been able to get an 'optimal' build from rumors lol. You can can get good builds, even great builds from unit stats but people tweak lists for months after they come out even ignoring a constantly shifting meta.)

Do I think YOU can or have accurately deducted things from rumors? No. It's chicken little syndrome plain and simple(lots of poultry up in here)

And silly, unrealistic and unneeded is the best tagline for 40k I've ever heard. Doesn't mean it's not great.

tneva82 wrote:
Or maybe it's actually possible to deduct things from rumours...People noted problems with 6th ed and 7th ed rules long before release from leaks and those were less accurate than now.

100% perfect? No. But funny that things don't need to be known 100% to have idea of how things go.

People have been able to figure out optimal builds of armies based on leaks before and sure enough they were the broken combos.

All this "just wait for full rules" is just ostrich sticking head under sand syndrome.

And btw lasgun vs landraider is less about it being broken and more about it being silly, unrealistic and unneeded.

People were able to deduce things from 6e and 7e because there was complete information on all the codexes, plus the vast majority of core rules didn't change at all. Neither of those statements is true for 8th - we have no clue on points, unit special rules or whether rules for any given phase are close to what we have now. The contentions coming up thus far have largely been absurd. People argued vehicles would be too weak because of the lasgun thing, despite the maths showing that they'd be about as durable as they were in 5th. Then people complained that vehicles should be able to die in one hit, which we've had no confirmation of one way or the other, and it's a personal preference thing anyway (I personally hope instakills have disappeared).

Now we've got this, a situation where people are panicking about low leadership hordes dying to morale, despite not knowing ANY of the rules around unit sizes or what the rules for the units in question actually are, including whether they're totally fixed sizes, any Ld modifiers, how objectives are held, etc. I'm not going to say there's nothing to worry about, but the amount of people already calling for rules changes before even seeing the rules is ridiculous. For all we know, Orks gain 1 Ld per model in the unit, Tyranid monsters have 100 wounds each and guardsmen can have 1 special weapon per guy. We literally know almost nothing.

Eyjio wrote:
People were able to deduce things from 6e and 7e because there was complete information on all the codexes, plus the vast majority of core rules didn't change at all. Neither of those statements is true for 8th - we have no clue on points, unit special rules or whether rules for any given phase are close to what we have now. The contentions coming up thus far have largely been absurd. People argued vehicles would be too weak because of the lasgun thing, despite the maths showing that they'd be about as durable as they were in 5th. Then people complained that vehicles should be able to die in one hit, which we've had no confirmation of one way or the other, and it's a personal preference thing anyway (I personally hope instakills have disappeared).

Now we've got this, a situation where people are panicking about low leadership hordes dying to morale, despite not knowing ANY of the rules around unit sizes or what the rules for the units in question actually are, including whether they're totally fixed sizes, any Ld modifiers, how objectives are held, etc. I'm not going to say there's nothing to worry about, but the amount of people already calling for rules changes before even seeing the rules is ridiculous. For all we know, Orks gain 1 Ld per model in the unit, Tyranid monsters have 100 wounds each and guardsmen can have 1 special weapon per guy. We literally know almost nothing.

We know already quite a lot and can adjust conclusion as we learn more thus shortening time we need to learn if we had waited until it's released. You can easily build up tree-branch of what if's and with new information drop incorrect branches and create new ones as needed.

You don't need to know 100% to start preparing. My holiday would have been lot harder if I had approached with that attitude. Instead I made plans as well as I could and made alternative plans based on what-if's. Information proved incorrect? Scrap those what-if's and take the ones that went accurate. Less time spent figuring on the spot.

And btw we didn't have complete leaks...We didn't get complete 7th ed leaked up and yet people could know ahead what were problems and what were new to-go list.

So 40k is getting AOSed... we are getting something like an End Times, we just don't call it that way cause we will upset people... I really wanna see where the game is going but I can tell you right now I don't like the direction.

tneva82 wrote:
We know already quite a lot and can adjust conclusion as we learn more thus shortening time we need to learn if we had waited until it's released. You can easily build up tree-branch of what if's and with new information drop incorrect branches and create new ones as needed.

Do we? Okay, how is wound allocation actually resolved, including for multiwound models? How do vehicles degrade? Do monstrous creatures still have an inate save modifier? What's the points cost of a marine? How is night fighting handled, if it's still in? How are objectives controlled? What leadership modifiers are there in game? How do blast weapons work/ How do I deep strike? Is infiltration still in the game? How do reserves work? What's the profile of a plasma gun? Can you assault out of vehicles or is that a baseless rumour? How do I select psychic powers? What are the psychic powers for marines? How does terrain impact movement? What happens to units with BS currently above 5? How do characters work? How does a unit attack in combat, and from what distance? How are targets chosen for units in the shooting phase? How do thunder hammers work? How does melta work? Is summoning still in? Etc, etc.

How can you possibly say we know a lot when we can't even resolve a single phase of the game, don't know how to gain VP and have no idea what an army might look like? There's some total guesses at what we might see, but there's no evidence behind any of it.

You don't need to know 100% to start preparing. My holiday would have been lot harder if I had approached with that attitude. Instead I made plans as well as I could and made alternative plans based on what-if's. Information proved incorrect? Scrap those what-if's and take the ones that went accurate. Less time spent figuring on the spot.

And btw we didn't have complete leaks...We didn't get complete 7th ed leaked up and yet people could know ahead what were problems and what were new to-go list.

You don't need to know everything before you go on holiday, but knowing the destination, how to get there and how long you're staying would be good to know before anything else. Similarly, it might be a good idea to know how to play a single turn of the game from start to finish before panicking that X, Y and Z rules will cripple units A, B and C.

As for complete leaks, that's not what I said - I said that because not many of the rules changed, we knew the vast majority of the game so could judge the impact of the announced changes; that's not true for 8e. We DID, however, know ALL the rules for every unit in the game for 6e and 7e, because those were in codexes - we currently don't know those either.

Eyjio wrote:
You don't need to know everything before you go on holiday, but knowing the destination, how to get there and how long you're staying would be good to know before anything else.

Yes and those we now know plus lot more.

We DID, however, know ALL the rules for every unit in the game for 6e and 7e, because those were in codexes - we currently don't know those either.

Not for new codexes...Yet even with incomplete info you got broken combos known.

I think the IC thing is an extrapolation from AoS - which given other stuff has been ported over isn't what I'd consider an unfair or baseless assumption.

However, it's also not a sure-thing. Given 40k has way more shooting, and at a longer range than AoS (seriously, AoS ranges are defo on the short-medium scale) it could be Characters can still formally join units as they can now.

As for it making characters more vulnerable? Yeah can't say I've got a lot of sympathy for that one. They're often the key to deathstar units (which are super dull), so knowing they risk being picked off with greater reliability is welcome in my book.

Regarding the Warzone Armageddon news posted on WarCom a few days ago

Since the warp rift tore through the heart of the galaxy, Armageddon has found itself directly in the path of The Blood Crusade, a vast legion of Khorne’s Daemons pouring into realspace.

The world looks set for one of the greatest wars in Imperial history. Greenskin, human and followers of the Blood God – all have unfinished business on the ash wastes of Armageddon, and only time will tell which force will triumph…

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/29/new-warhammer-40000-war-zone-armageddon/


I scanned the story of the 1st Battle for Armageddon in Codex: Chaos (2nd Edition) and if they will go a similiar route like with Magnus and his revenge there is definitely a good chance Angron will return to Armageddon in that upcoming campaign

Angry Ron! Angry Ron! Angry Ron! Angry Ron!

HE IS THE ANGRIEST OF ALL RONALDS!

Frankly I've found the attempts to shut down all negativity far more unpleasant to read than any ammount of the negativity itself.

-This is a discussion board, positive and negative views are all part of the discussion.
-It is not unreasonable to comment on rules as they come out, or speculate on how they fit together. We'll get a fuller picture as we go, but there's no crime on commenting on the current picture.
-The idea that one must have perfect information to have an informed view is -sometimes- correct, but is being overused here. To use a fairly non-inflammatory analogy: You need to have a lot of information about Indiana Jones 4 to definitively comment on it's quality, but hearing without seeing it that it uses aliens is enough to comment on the idea of introducing aliens to a franchise without them, and how you think that could impact things.
-A lot is changing, and certain patterns are emerging. These are things which will inevitably cause a lot of negative feeling amongst many, and someone who lashes out at every detail has every bit as much right to discuss the new edition as someone who is hyped up to the point where they'll defend every single aspect of it.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Angry Ron! Angry Ron! Angry Ron! Angry Ron!

HE IS THE ANGRIEST OF ALL RONALDS!

Seems they may be the inadvertent salvation of the Imperium at that point.

Orks will go for the Daemons, as the promise da bestest fightin'. Allows The Imperium to regroup somewhat by going on the defensive - let the two invaders beat each other silly, then once supplies and troops are better organised, start strategic strikes.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
GW cannot possibly make characters weaker. Otherwise how'd they sell half sized sprues in a clampack for close to £20

Half sized is being generous. Realy it's more like 1/4 if we're being honest. lol

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Hopefully GW releases a combat gauge for 40K. It seems like something that is going to come in handy.

They are handy haveing used a friend's, but not $40 handy.
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-CA/Combat-Gauge

I don't realy need one that "can be worn away from the gaming table as a unique accessory."

You could prob find someone to laser cut one cheaper.

Warhams-77 wrote:
I scanned the story of the 1st Battle for Armageddon in Codex: Chaos (2nd Edition) and if they will go a similiar route like with Magnus and his revenge there is definitely a good chance Angron will return to Armageddon in that upcoming campaign

Which seeing Hastings said Mortarion&Angron as next 2 chaos primarch to come out isn't that surprising.

Mortarion with death guard, Angron with armageddon. Fits. Remains to be seen when Russ comes out.

tneva82 wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:
I scanned the story of the 1st Battle for Armageddon in Codex: Chaos (2nd Edition) and if they will go a similiar route like with Magnus and his revenge there is definitely a good chance Angron will return to Armageddon in that upcoming campaign

Which seeing Hastings said Mortarion&Angron as next 2 chaos primarch to come out isn't that surprising.

Mortarion with death guard, Angron with armageddon. Fits. Remains to be seen when Russ comes out.

Fulgrim had a role in the gathering storm after the return of gullieman, and implies we will see him agien. So realy looking foreword to the revel for what he has been planing.

tneva82 wrote:

Yes and those we now know plus lot more.

Again, how can you say this when we can't resolve a single phase of the game? We don't even know how units work, including coherency and composition. If you want to go with the holiday analogy, it's like we've been told that there's sun, sand and sea, so you've come to the conclusion we're going to Yemen.

Not for new codexes...Yet even with incomplete info you got broken combos known.

Because we knew how the rest of the game worked. It turns out that it's easier to judge the power level of units when you actually know their rules, as well as the rules for literally everything else. You cannot be serious right now.