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.

casvalremdeikun wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
ooooh characters tomorrow. Not gonna lie, this is the one that I think has the most chance of being...problematic.

Agreed. If Characters can't hitch a ride in a transport with a squad, they are going to spend the game stuck in the back unless they have an alternate movement mode like a jump pack or bike.

davou wrote:wait, arent some dreads characters?

I would assume character dreads would have 10+ wounds. Same with Bobby Gills. They should still be targetable.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


You people are acting like every time GW reveals something new with their rules that it's the One True Path™ without even considering that there might be simpler or more elegant solutions to the things they're trying to solve. If Deathstars are a problem, then resolve that in a way that isn't throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

You complain about removal of certain aspects of the game that make it more tactical and you're faced with this option which both solves a problem (more than one, actually) and adds something to the game, but it's automatically bad.

And you people are just lapping it up. Like any sense of critical thought went out the fething window after you got so suck of 7th Ed's unplayableness that you'll now readily accept anything as long as it's not 7th.

Crazy...

You didn't put any critical thought into your original post. "Can characters join units? No? Then this is bad".

Look in the mirror.

 EnTyme wrote:

casvalremdeikun wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
ooooh characters tomorrow. Not gonna lie, this is the one that I think has the most chance of being...problematic.

Agreed. If Characters can't hitch a ride in a transport with a squad, they are going to spend the game stuck in the back unless they have an alternate movement mode like a jump pack or bike.

davou wrote:wait, arent some dreads characters?

I would assume character dreads would have 10+ wounds. Same with Bobby Gills. They should still be targetable.

RG has 9

Frankly I have to say I like the character change. It's both what we were expecting based on what we know from AoS but at the same time was better than expected thanks to being able to park an IC in the middle of a horde to protect them frommbeing targetted easilly (perhaps sniper rifles will let you override that, giving you a chance to snipe important characters once more).

Commisars and Priests will likely not change as they're basically treated as unit upgrades bought in the HQ slot to attach to units, but I question what will happen with retinues like Grimaldus' servitors or a Wolf Lord's Ferensian Wolves. Do they basically form a unit anyways or will the models purchased to act seperately.

Also nice potshot by GW at the Barkstar and all it's dumbness.

Im not a fan of RG being able to hide... that makes no sense. And even if Magnus has over 12 wounds, he's now more fragile than RG just because RG can hide...

I love that instead of "Look Out, Sir!" we no have "Erm, A Little Help Here, Sir?"

:-D

 nintura wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:

casvalremdeikun wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
ooooh characters tomorrow. Not gonna lie, this is the one that I think has the most chance of being...problematic.

Agreed. If Characters can't hitch a ride in a transport with a squad, they are going to spend the game stuck in the back unless they have an alternate movement mode like a jump pack or bike.

davou wrote:wait, arent some dreads characters?

I would assume character dreads would have 10+ wounds. Same with Bobby Gills. They should still be targetable.

RG has 9

Really? Was his profile one of those previewed?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

I agree completely. Now this may turn out to be better than characters joining units done right because it is more elegant - no more majority toughness, save, target allocation issues. But the notion that the basic IC rules were responsible for " "stars, is silly.

Not surprising article and at least protection is decent so minor characters arent red shirts eating bullets in favour of bigger fish.

No more lead from front catching bullets when convenient. Instead lead from the midle with wall of bodies around

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Eyjio wrote:
Good grief, give HBMC $100 and he'll complain he's not got $1000, a basket of puppies and a bottle of champagne.

I don't like champagne.

Eyjio wrote:
You know what's a good way to solve the deathstar problem? Not allowing deathstars to form!

"A unit can only be joined by one character at a time."

Boom. Problems with multiple character Deathstars solved. No need to deny characters the opportunity lead units. Did it in one sentence.

You people are acting like every time GW reveals something new with their rules that it's the One True Path™ without even considering that there might be simpler or more elegant solutions to the things they're trying to solve. If Deathstars are a problem, then resolve that in a way that isn't throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

"Characters joining units is creating situations where you have hard-as-nails super squads filled with characters!"
"What if we limit the amount of..."
"Ban characters form joining units!"
"Bravo! Three hour lunches for everyone! And after lunch we'll ignore the fact that we're reintroducing movement values and make charge distances random! Then we'll make sure that every single big creature in the game has its own unique chart for damage rather than a central one that will speed up play!"

At this point whether the rule works or not isn't the issue. It's the lengths GW seem to be going to ignore the problems with the game by sweeping it under the rug and pretending it's not there, all whilst introducing entirely new systems that don't address the old problems, just ignore them. If anything this will just create all new problems.

And you people are just lapping it up. Like any sense of critical thought went out the fething window after you got so suck of 7th Ed's unplayableness that you'll now readily accept anything as long as it's not 7th.

Crazy...

"You people"ing rarely gets anyone to heed your POV. Jussayin.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This really does seem to be the "Too Hard Basket" edition of 40K.

"There was a problem with X, but rather than fixing X, we're just getting rid of out and instituting Y! Enjoy Y. Don't ever think about X again!"

Deathstars were bad, so let's completely remove the concept of characters joining/leading units rather than putting measures in place that solve the Deathstar problem.

Why does a character need to be in a unit. Let's start there.

Bodyguards.

They are doing that. Remember, you cannot shoot him unless he's at the spearhead, in which case bodyguards won't matter.

 EnTyme wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:

casvalremdeikun wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
ooooh characters tomorrow. Not gonna lie, this is the one that I think has the most chance of being...problematic.

Agreed. If Characters can't hitch a ride in a transport with a squad, they are going to spend the game stuck in the back unless they have an alternate movement mode like a jump pack or bike.

davou wrote:wait, arent some dreads characters?

I would assume character dreads would have 10+ wounds. Same with Bobby Gills. They should still be targetable.

RG has 9

Really? Was his profile one of those previewed?

They use him as an example in the article

For example, Roboute Guilliman, who has 9 Wounds, can now realistically advance in the centre of a disciplined Space Marines army, directing his troops while remaining relatively safe from incoming weapons fire. Really big heroes, like Magnus the Red, will still need to brave enemy fire, but with, in his case, over a dozen Wounds and a respectable invulnerable save, he holds his own just fine.

 EnTyme wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:

casvalremdeikun wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
ooooh characters tomorrow. Not gonna lie, this is the one that I think has the most chance of being...problematic.

Agreed. If Characters can't hitch a ride in a transport with a squad, they are going to spend the game stuck in the back unless they have an alternate movement mode like a jump pack or bike.

davou wrote:wait, arent some dreads characters?

I would assume character dreads would have 10+ wounds. Same with Bobby Gills. They should still be targetable.

RG has 9

Really? Was his profile one of those previewed?

Wound was mentioned quite early. Iirc profile article that showed dreads

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I don't like champagne.

Well frankly that's reason enough to not listen to your complaints then!

"A unit can only be joined by one character at a time."

Boom. Problems with multiple character Deathstars solved. No need to deny characters the opportunity lead units. Did it in one sentence.

You people are acting like every time GW reveals something new with their rules that it's the One True Path™ without even considering that there might be simpler or more elegant solutions to the things they're trying to solve. If Deathstars are a problem, then resolve that in a way that isn't throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

How is this not substantially worse?
"Hey Captain, can I join this unit?"
"Sorry man, I was here first. Get your own unit you filthy Chaplain"
How would leaving a unit work then? Could I just declare that, if 2 ICs were in coherency of a unit, that I'm just switching which one is "in" the unit? Why artificially restrict it like that anyway? What happens if I join the 2 ICs together? That doesn't really solve anything. The proposed solution is much more functionally similar to the old rules, has no random restrictions on what is and isn't "in" a unit, and yet prevents the rule exploits.

And I'm hardly lapping it all up. Go back two dozen pages and you'll find me being quite vocally against random running/charges, as well as hesitant about how useful command points actually will be. However, in this case, I see a neat and tidy solution where characters get the protection I want, and can't abuse the rules like they used to. So yeah, I'm happy with GW on this one. You, however, appear to be so jaded that you have to come out and be a contrarian with every blog post. Lighten up, it's a game.

RG hiding is weird, but likely one of those weirdnesses that come from not wanting to use TLOS to determine if you can see the IC to shoot them.

Isn't Magnus like twice to three times the size of RG to boot? Or are we not counting his wings as part of his model size?

Ten wounds and down feels like a good cut off to me. It means that all but the beefiest of characters have some form of protection and we'll likely see the character keyword on models to create the opportunity for protecting them.

That said, I fully expect we'll see some ways to skirt around the "can't target" rule through specific weapons and possibly even units (Deathmarks).

I justs realized that with this change the loss of templates actually helps protect characters further as ydou can't indirectly target them by overlapping templates from nearby models in the target unit.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Eyjio wrote:
Good grief, give HBMC $100 and he'll complain he's not got $1000, a basket of puppies and a bottle of champagne.

I don't like champagne.

Eyjio wrote:
You know what's a good way to solve the deathstar problem? Not allowing deathstars to form!

"A unit can only be joined by one character at a time."

Boom. Problems with multiple character Deathstars solved. No need to deny characters the opportunity lead units. Did it in one sentence.

You people are acting like every time GW reveals something new with their rules that it's the One True Path™ without even considering that there might be simpler or more elegant solutions to the things they're trying to solve. If Deathstars are a problem, then resolve that in a way that isn't throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

"Characters joining units is creating situations where you have hard-as-nails super squads filled with characters!"
"What if we limit the amount of..."
"Ban characters form joining units!"
"Bravo! Three hour lunches for everyone! And after lunch we'll ignore the fact that we're reintroducing movement values and make charge distances random! Then we'll make sure that every single big creature in the game has its own unique chart for damage rather than a central one that will speed up play!"

At this point whether the rule works or not isn't the issue. It's the lengths GW seem to be going to ignore the problems with the game by sweeping it under the rug and pretending it's not there, all whilst introducing entirely new systems that don't address the old problems, just ignore them. If anything this will just create all new problems.

And you people are just lapping it up. Like any sense of critical thought went out the fething window after you got so suck of 7th Ed's unplayableness that you'll now readily accept anything as long as it's not 7th.

Crazy...

GW is only stopping one more character than you from joining the unit so is there really much difference?

The way I see it, both methods would work. GW has chosen this one. It really isn't a big deal. Characters aren't going to get sniped easily (I'm hoping sniping will be limited to, y'know, snipers) and will still be able to inspire units in a variety of different ways.

In summation, just because it's different doesn't make it bad.

Hrm, some good some bad here.

I like that they're seemingly cognizant of the absurdity, both thematically and from a balance perspective, of Deathstar units and are working to dismantle that. Great stuff.

I am not terribly thrilled about untargetable characters however. We had this in 3E and 4E, and it was rather open to abuse. My favorite example was Eldar players hiding Farseers between the frontal wings of Wave Serpents and Falcons, the character is clearly in the open and visible, but because the two tips of the wings were slightly closer, they became invisible to shooting. Not a fan of this mechanic, especially with something like a Primarch, who should not only be a huge and clearly distinct and visible item on a battlefield, but is also a CC beast who can become invulnerable to shooting with little or no real tactical ability on the part of tbe commander with a rules setup like this, and thus, with little or no real tactical ability be delivered into CC punchy kill death range.

This mechanic *will* see abuse.

That said, it will be interesting to see how they handle units like IG command squads.

Guess this makes techmarines able to do their job better

I like this latest change for the same reasom I enjoyed it in AoS (which would probably be gw's main reason too)-heroes now stand out better amidst the rest of the units.

I don't know that GW was ever going to find the perfect solution to the deathstar problem. Any solution would ultimately take away something.

These new changes do work, but I think the cost is a little high. I know I am probably the last remaining advocate for the fluffy bits of 40k but I think they matter an awful lot and these changes just make immersion in the setting that much less likely.

A huge part of the flavor of the game - any game depicting front line heroics - is that commanders (here; characters) actually lead from the front. The Chaplain should be leading the charge with his brothers, striking the first bloody blow and setting an example!

What we have now is that all characters that aren't played by blathering idiots will be leading from just behind the front. They'll let their buddies charge first and then pile in after the fact.

Think for a moment about the last scene from LOTR Return of the King (okay not the last scene but the last one people cared about). If Aragon hadn't lead that charge... if he waited until everyone else charged and then 'piled in'... wouldn't have had the same impact.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Hrm, some good some bad here.

I like that they're seemingly cognizant of the absurdity, both thematically and from a balance perspective, of Deathstar units and are working to dismantle that. Great stuff.

I am not terribly thrilled about untargetable characters however. We had this in 3E and 4E, and it was rather open to abuse. My favorite example was Eldar players hiding Farseers between the frontal wings of Wave Serpents and Falcons, the character is clearly in the open and visible, but because the two tips of the wings were slightly closer, they became invisible to shooting. Not a fan of this mechanic, especially with something like a Primarch, who should not only be a huge and clearly distinct and visible item on a battlefield, but is also a CC beast who can become invulnerable to shooting with little or no real tactical ability on the part of tbe commander with a rules setup like this, and thus, with little or no real tactical ability be delivered into CC punchy kill death range.

This mechanic *will* see abuse.

That said, it will be interesting to see how they handle units like IG command squads.

In all likelihood, the Primarchs will all probably have more than 10 wounds and will thusly be exempt from this rule. You'll still be able to target them specifically. Magnus is not the strongest (physically) since he is a Pskyer and he has 12 wounds - the others will likely have many more.

RG is a Primarch and has 9. I feel this is done JUST SO he can hide. It could be my tin foil going on, but that feels like they are still trying to keep things in the Ultramarines favor. I was hoping they'd stop doing that.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Hrm, some good some bad here.

I like that they're seemingly cognizant of the absurdity, both thematically and from a balance perspective, of Deathstar units and are working to dismantle that. Great stuff.

I am not terribly thrilled about untargetable characters however. We had this in 3E and 4E, and it was rather open to abuse. My favorite example was Eldar players hiding Farseers between the frontal wings of Wave Serpents and Falcons, the character is clearly in the open and visible, but because the two tips of the wings were slightly closer, they became invisible to shooting. Not a fan of this mechanic, especially with something like a Primarch, who should not only be a huge and clearly distinct and visible item on a battlefield, but is also a CC beast who can become invulnerable to shooting with little or no real tactical ability on the part of tbe commander with a rules setup like this, and thus, with little or no real tactical ability be delivered into CC punchy kill death range.

This mechanic *will* see abuse.

That said, it will be interesting to see how they handle units like IG command squads.

I'm willing to be all of HMBC's money (I spent all of mine last week so his will have to do) that there will be a mechanic for ignoring those intervening models for sniping characters who hide like that.

Aside from that I feel it's probably safe to say that any problem we can see folks like Frankie and Reece probably saw and reported potential abuse issues. With how much GW has been talking about how balanced the new edition is I feel reasonably optimistic that they actually took measures to prevent exploits from getting into the final product.

Eyjio wrote:
It definitely fixes my worries about character sniping. I think this is an elegant solution. Also, the keyword bubbles, expected though they were, should hopefully make armies a little more fluffy than they used to be.

Characters can still be sniped, just through different methods.

If you are walking your IC 6" in front of the rest of your army, he can be targeted.
If someone drops a pod of marines right by your IC, he can be targeted.
Someone can move the skimmer right in front of your IC to target them.

The best way to protect your IC is to keep them in between two units.
X......X........X........X............................Y......Y........Y.......Y
X......X........X........X.............IC...........Y......Y........Y.......Y
X......X........X........X............................Y......Y........Y.......Y

Or embedded within a unit.
X......X........X...........X
X......X...IC.....X........X
X......X........X...........X

En exelsis said the worst part of new rule. Solves tons of problems and is tons better than aos one but still loses cinematics.

Ah well. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Maybe we go for cinematics with gentlemen agreement to snipe

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And you people are just lapping it up. Like any sense of critical thought went out the fething window after you got so suck of 7th Ed's unplayableness that you'll now readily accept anything as long as it's not 7th.

I don't see how this doesn't run afoul of Rule #1.

Kinda disappointed by your behavior in this thread, HBMC.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Hrm, some good some bad here.

I like that they're seemingly cognizant of the absurdity, both thematically and from a balance perspective, of Deathstar units and are working to dismantle that. Great stuff.

I am not terribly thrilled about untargetable characters however. We had this in 3E and 4E, and it was rather open to abuse. My favorite example was Eldar players hiding Farseers between the frontal wings of Wave Serpents and Falcons, the character is clearly in the open and visible, but because the two tips of the wings were slightly closer, they became invisible to shooting. Not a fan of this mechanic, especially with something like a Primarch, who should not only be a huge and clearly distinct and visible item on a battlefield, but is also a CC beast who can become invulnerable to shooting with little or no real tactical ability on the part of tbe commander with a rules setup like this, and thus, with little or no real tactical ability be delivered into CC punchy kill death range.

This mechanic *will* see abuse.

That said, it will be interesting to see how they handle units like IG command squads.

Pretty good point, but a wave serpent might be easier to clear than a bunch of infantry. You'll also want the character near a unit that it is going to buff. I don't foresee a lot of them hanging back behind a tank and getting their full use.

 En Excelsis wrote:


In all likelihood, the Primarchs will all probably have more than 10 wounds and will thusly be exempt from this rule. You'll still be able to target them specifically. Magnus is not the strongest (physically) since he is a Pskyer and he has 12 wounds - the others will likely have many more.

Magnus is a daemonically ascended Primarch, even more powerful in such a form, RG was called out specifically in GW's article today as having 9 wounds and being able to hide as a result

 nintura wrote:
Im not a fan of RG being able to hide... that makes no sense. And even if Magnus has over 12 wounds, he's now more fragile than RG just because RG can hide...

Can we please stop comparing units that we don't have the stats to? They point out he has more wounds and an invul save mechanic we know nothing about not to mention the possibility that he could have negative to hit modifiers for being a flyer.

 nintura wrote:
RG is a Primarch and has 9. I feel this is done JUST SO he can hide. It could be my tin foil going on, but that feels like they are still trying to keep things in the Ultramarines favor. I was hoping they'd stop doing that.

It's your tin foil hat going on.

Roboute Guilliman is about the same size as Bellisarius Cawl. Cawl is, currently, "Infantry" and thus can join units with no issue.
Guilliman is, currently, a Monstrous Creature and cannot join units. They made a special formation(Victrix Guard) that requires ridiculous stuff and granted Guilliman a "Look Out, Sir!" save though.

Both of those models, however, are quite a bit smaller than Magnus--even discounting the size of his wings.

 labmouse42 wrote:

Eyjio wrote:
It definitely fixes my worries about character sniping. I think this is an elegant solution. Also, the keyword bubbles, expected though they were, should hopefully make armies a little more fluffy than they used to be.

Characters can still be sniped, just through different methods.

If you are walking your IC 6" in front of the rest of your army, he can be targeted.
If someone drops a pod of marines right by your IC, he can be targeted.
Someone can move the skimmer right in front of your IC to target them.

The best way to protect your IC is to keep them in between two units.
X......X........X........X............................Y......Y........Y.......Y
X......X........X........X.............IC...........Y......Y........Y.......Y
X......X........X........X............................Y......Y........Y.......Y

Or embedded within a unit.
X......X........X...........X
X......X...IC.....X........X
X......X........X...........X

You won't likely be able to do the second one. In AoS, you have to maintain a certain amount of unit coherency and there is no mechanic allowing you to be "within" another unit's coherency, friendly or otherwise.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

I'm willing to be all of HMBC's money (I spent all of mine last week so his will have to do) that there will be a mechanic for ignoring those intervening models for sniping characters who hide like that.

Aside from that I feel it's probably safe to say that any problem we can see folks like Frankie and Reece probably saw and reported potential abuse issues. With how much GW has been talking about how balanced the new edition is I feel reasonably optimistic that they actually took measures to prevent exploits from getting into the final product.

There will be kinks. No doubt about it. I just don't expect them to be game breaking things and if it is I expect GW will jump on it.

AoS suffers from strong shooting armies right now so we're awaiting a point readjustment with GHB2.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lessthanjeff wrote:

 nintura wrote:
Im not a fan of RG being able to hide... that makes no sense. And even if Magnus has over 12 wounds, he's now more fragile than RG just because RG can hide...

Can we please stop comparing units that we don't have the stats to? They point out he has more wounds and an invul save mechanic we know nothing about not to mention the possibility that he could have negative to hit modifiers for being a flyer.

Or that RG might have nothing beyond a normal armor save now.