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.

Why do they continue to say Strength: User. Why not +0?

Send them a serious issue, complaint, or product query they're actually allowed to talk about and you'll get a sensible response, of course. Try and weedle info out of them or moan about how their little hype posts tend to favour details about the imperium, or how they should hold public consultations on their rules, and you'll get a tongue in cheek response, because they're not in a position to comment on that stuff and you're showing naivete by asking. This is a non-issue and not relevant to the topic. If you seriously feel you've been ridiculed, seriously, email customer support, I guarantee they'll take that seriously.

Oh god. Mixed speed units by default. And why wouldn't you just make Smite Lite a separate spell instead of saying "this works like X, except for Y and Z".

 Deadshot wrote:
DA have their own rule to boost power but the base stats of heavy bolters, bolters, autocannons, etc, are the same across all codexes. A HB isn't getting a different profile based on whether its Chaos or Loyalist.

Dark angel stormshield: 4++
Other stormshield: 3++

There was that at time. Same name, different rule. GW is GW and with stats on stat card danger of same syndrome happening again increases

 Ravajaxe wrote:
Today's page on rubric marines has been published and swiftly removed. But a fellow user from my French forum has taken a print screen.

Thanks for posting this. I'm really not happy to see that there are no points costs. If I have to buy piles of rule books to get points costs, I'm out. Realistically speaking, nobody in my area is going to play anything by Matched Play. Age of Sigmar was dead on arrival and only saw a resurgence when the General's Handbook released with Matched Play. If the 'rules are free', but you have to buy a rule book to get points costs... the rules aren't free.

I'm reserving judgment, but having to buy multiple army books to get points costs will be a deal breaker. There are just WAY too many cheaper options on the market right now. I have a small Skitarii force, a large Tau force and a small Iron Warriors force. It sounds like I'll have to buy the Chaos, Imperium and Xenos books just to get tables of point costs.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
Today's page on rubric marines has been published and swiftly removed. But a fellow user from my French forum has taken a print screen.

[img]https://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/12/49/83/25/rubric10.jpg[]

Thanks for posting this. I'm really not happy to see that there are no points costs. If I have to buy piles of rule books to get points costs, I'm out. Realistically speaking, nobody in my area is going to play anything by Matched Play. Age of Sigmar was dead on arrival and only saw a resurgence when the General's Handbook released with Matched Play. If the 'rules are free', but you have to buy a rule book to get points costs... the rules aren't free.

I'm reserving judgment, but having to buy multiple army books to get points costs will be a deal breaker. There are just WAY too many cheaper options on the market right now. I have a small Skitarii force, a large Tau force and a small Iron Warriors force. It sounds like I'll have to buy the Chaos, Imperium and Xenos books just to get tables of point costs.

No need to worry. Either

a) GW will release a free army builder app like Scrollbuilder.com for AoS, or
b) You can use Battlescribe or any of the other fan-made army builder apps.

I expect you will still have to pay for codices with army abilities, spells and special detachments though, just like in AoS. So to get the rules for your guys you will still have to buy books. I don't think they ever said that unit rules will be free, did they? Only the core rules.

You'd have needed like... Dozens of books to get that currently. It's a huge step forward. And yes, they specified that only the core rules would be free.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
Today's page on rubric marines has been published and swiftly removed. But a fellow user from my French forum has taken a print screen.

Thanks for posting this. I'm really not happy to see that there are no points costs. If I have to buy piles of rule books to get points costs, I'm out. Realistically speaking, nobody in my area is going to play anything by Matched Play. Age of Sigmar was dead on arrival and only saw a resurgence when the General's Handbook released with Matched Play. If the 'rules are free', but you have to buy a rule book to get points costs... the rules aren't free.

I'm reserving judgment, but having to buy multiple army books to get points costs will be a deal breaker. There are just WAY too many cheaper options on the market right now. I have a small Skitarii force, a large Tau force and a small Iron Warriors force. It sounds like I'll have to buy the Chaos, Imperium and Xenos books just to get tables of point costs.

AoS has all points in a £10 book and is the only thing you absolutely need to buy to play in a points environment, doesn't it?

Buying books for point costs. Truly, how horrendous of them. How could they. What callous, greedy behavior. Who could have thought. Paying money. Shocking. I am shocked. Shocked, I tell you. Shocked.



So, I'm not seeing any boost to the Pyschic test based on the Psyker's level (1, for the Aspiring Sorcerer).|

Interesting.

Also, Force Swords are the equivalent of AP 2. so THAT's how they're balancing it against the Axe without initiative.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Buying books for point costs. Truly, how horrendous of them. How could they. What callous, greedy behavior. Who could have thought. Paying money. Shocking. I am shocked. Shocked, I tell you. Shocked.



So, I'm not seeing any boost to the Pyschic test based on the Psyker's level (1, for the Aspiring Sorcerer).|

Interesting.

Also, Force Swords are the equivalent of AP 2. so THAT's how they're balancing it against the Axe without initiative.

And all the Force weapons are damage D3, looks like the replacement to the old force rule, simple and straightforward.

I'd also bet that Power Axe/Sword/Stave are the same S & AP as these weapons, but 1 Damage.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Buying books for point costs. Truly, how horrendous of them. How could they. What callous, greedy behavior. Who could have thought. Paying money. Shocking. I am shocked. Shocked, I tell you. Shocked.



So, I'm not seeing any boost to the Pyschic test based on the Psyker's level (1, for the Aspiring Sorcerer).|

Interesting.

Also, Force Swords are the equivalent of AP 2. so THAT's how they're balancing it against the Axe without initiative.

If it's like AoS then boosts to the psychic test will be on a per-model basis, not a blanket rule based on psyker level. For example, in AoS the Lord of Change can change the lowest dice score to match the highest when casting a spell (which means he basically never fails). The Gaunt Summoner has a familiar that gives him +1 to cast. Etc.

Also, the scroll does come with points. They're the lighter ones, sure, but no one that plays AoS matched play has any issues with them, right? And in AoS the points do come in a separate book.

Vorian wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:

MaxT wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
I just expect a customer service team to not jokingly respond to queries with vagueness. And a company that does such a serious upheaval, then go answer questions, but refuse to take criticism on the matter, is not a good company move. If you are going to put yourself out on the firing line, you have to ensure that everyone's happy. Why was there no Beta testing phase? Why no open beta? Why not even consultation from players and hobbyists on what the rules should look like, given the scope of what players want and ask for from the game?

I certain don't expect a company to write "tough love sweetheart, now hand me your wallet and bend over" when I say that I'm disappointed with their choice of direction on a public communication.

It's facebook, not a customer services ticket. I get that lightheartedness and comedy grates some people the wrong way (clearly you) but I personally like it. This is little plastic models we're discussing, not cancer treatment.

Its a facebook page for answer questions from customers about the product, that makes it customer service. And working for the last 5 years in recruitment, I've seen detailed specifications of every form of customer service under the sun. You speak to customers, its customer service, about a product. Its irrelevant what the product is, I don't expect the company to say "feth off, buy our gak" when I express dissappointment or disinterest. If a supermarket stopped selling vegetarian food, and a vegetarian complained, would you expect them to say "well, sorry love guess just have to eat meat now right?"

It's a lighthearted reply to an unbelievably pointless complaint about something minor.

You're being ridiculous.

As mentioned previously, this is a massive overhaul of the game, not something minor. I don't expect ridicule or "BUT ITS GREAT BUY IT" as a response to complaints.

Thebiggesthat wrote:

 Not-not-kenny wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Is this how AOS does it? 5 Rubrics are power 8. 6-10 rubrics are 8+6?

Was that how it was before the general's handbook? Would the general's handbook be more granular (i.e., each additional rubric is +1 power, each warpflamer is +1 power, etc)?

I'm just trying to distinguish between Matched Play and the other types.

Not quite, before the General's Handbook points didn't exist whatsoever. Matched play in AoS is basically this power lvl system. But they've said 8th will have a granular points system like in 7th as well.

Matched play in AoS is definitely not power level. It's points. Granular points.

If you mean the unit size thing, then you are right there but it's nothing like a 'rough guide' power level.

I wouldn't call the AoS points system granular since you pay for models in chunks and unit upgrades don't have points at all.

 CoreCommander wrote:
Also, the scroll does come with points. They're the lighter ones, sure, but no one that plays AoS matched play has any issues with them, right? And in AoS the points do come in a separate book.

There are no 'light points' in AoS, let alone matched play.

It's definitely something that would be cool for AoS though, will have to see what comes up in GHB2.

You get points for everything in a separate book (GHB), and the battletomes (codex) have the points in them as well for the force the book is covering.

tneva82 wrote:

Thebiggesthat wrote:
Matched play in AoS is definitely not power level. It's points. Granular points.

If you mean the unit size thing, then you are right there but it's nothing like a 'rough guide' power level.

Not that granular when it has fixed points per X model. Want to have just 3 models? You still pay 5.

Yeah, also: You want this special weapon? Here, have it for free (atleast for now).
Super granular

 Deadshot wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:

MaxT wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
I just expect a customer service team to not jokingly respond to queries with vagueness. And a company that does such a serious upheaval, then go answer questions, but refuse to take criticism on the matter, is not a good company move. If you are going to put yourself out on the firing line, you have to ensure that everyone's happy. Why was there no Beta testing phase? Why no open beta? Why not even consultation from players and hobbyists on what the rules should look like, given the scope of what players want and ask for from the game?

I certain don't expect a company to write "tough love sweetheart, now hand me your wallet and bend over" when I say that I'm disappointed with their choice of direction on a public communication.

It's facebook, not a customer services ticket. I get that lightheartedness and comedy grates some people the wrong way (clearly you) but I personally like it. This is little plastic models we're discussing, not cancer treatment.

Its a facebook page for answer questions from customers about the product, that makes it customer service. And working for the last 5 years in recruitment, I've seen detailed specifications of every form of customer service under the sun. You speak to customers, its customer service, about a product. Its irrelevant what the product is, I don't expect the company to say "feth off, buy our gak" when I express dissappointment or disinterest. If a supermarket stopped selling vegetarian food, and a vegetarian complained, would you expect them to say "well, sorry love guess just have to eat meat now right?"

It's a lighthearted reply to an unbelievably pointless complaint about something minor.

You're being ridiculous.

As mentioned previously, this is a massive overhaul of the game, not something minor. I don't expect ridicule or "BUT ITS GREAT BUY IT" as a response to complaints.

You're only using imperial weapons in previews is unbelievably minor. I'm embarrassed for you that you keep going on this. Good god man, stop typing!

Good lord, those inferno boltguns are pretty scary, and the warpflamers are crazy if they get close to the enemy (if assault is good, they likely will). I guess that was expected with AP3 bolters at the moment though. Also, there's SO many rules to remember here, it's slightly concerning.

Interesting tidbits:
-Rend on Soulreaper cannon now just seems to be an additional AP-1. Likely Assault cannons will be S6 AP-2 then. Also, soulreaper cannons hitting on 3+ always are now strictly better than assault cannons vs T4 due to the new wound chart.
-Force weapons are much more interesting of a choice now that it's S vs rend, and the sword now has the highest rend of all. That said, I still expect axe to work out mathematically better most of the time - S5 v T4 with AP-2 is likely better than S4 v T4 with -3, and the S+2 seems almost pointless unless there's a lot of T5/6 around.
-There's no unwieldy replacement on ANY of the force weapons.
-10 marines for 1 heavy weapon, 5 marines (1 champ, 4 other) for 8 base "power", yet only +6 per 5 marines; expect this to be the reason not to go MSU.
-Inv saves look to be the same as ever, as otherwise All is Dust would likely be worded "+1 to inv save" or something. Remains to be seen if we can take both armour + inv now.
-Edit: Also, no force rule, just D3 damage. Can't believe I missed that but it makes sense and is probably more fun to play against (coughTyranidscough).

Looks cool. I wish it wasn't so grey though.

 Deadshot wrote:


As mentioned previously, this is a massive overhaul of the game, not something minor. I don't expect ridicule or "BUT ITS GREAT BUY IT" as a response to complaints.

You might expect ridicule if the person replying thinks your complaint is ridiculous. It's such a weird thing to get upset over. It's a joke comment over a really rather silly whinge.

If they had responded like that to something a little more serious, I would understand. And GW customer service is pretty awesome, so I know that happens.

Thebiggesthat wrote:

 CoreCommander wrote:
Also, the scroll does come with points. They're the lighter ones, sure, but no one that plays AoS matched play has any issues with them, right? And in AoS the points do come in a separate book.

There are no 'light points' in AoS, let alone matched play.

It's definitely something that would be cool for AoS though, will have to see what comes up in GHB2.

You get points for everything in a separate book (GHB), and the battletomes (codex) have the points in them as well for the force the book is covering.

The points in AoS are already "light" to the point of breaking. I never said anything about AoS having the same two-point structure, only that it does have the "light" points version and everyone's playing it without objections because it is official. GW probably know that a more descriptive point system would be a better officially recognized system hence they'll publish it in a paid book. We can have the AoS-like points for free 'cause we'll be buying the other book all the same.

Eyjio wrote:

-There's no unwieldy replacement on ANY of the force weapons.

Yeah! Assaulting is going to let me attack with power fists first! Cannot wait to see what they do.

Bonesaw's Pedro's Ready!

Rar!!

 CoreCommander wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Thebiggesthat wrote:
Matched play in AoS is definitely not power level. It's points. Granular points.

If you mean the unit size thing, then you are right there but it's nothing like a 'rough guide' power level.

Not that granular when it has fixed points per X model. Want to have just 3 models? You still pay 5.

Yeah, also: You want this special weapon? Here, have it for free (atleast for now).
Super granular

A quick read of your post history reveals that we aren't going to agree with anything regarding AoS. So I'm out, this isn't the place.

Eyjio wrote:
Good lord, those inferno boltguns are pretty scary, and the warpflamers are crazy if they get close to the enemy (if assault is good, they likely will). I guess that was expected with AP3 bolters at the moment though. Also, there's SO many rules to remember here, it's slightly concerning.

Interesting tidbits:
-Rend on Soulreaper cannon now just seems to be an additional AP-1. Likely Assault cannons will be S6 AP-2 then. Also, soulreaper cannons hitting on 3+ always are now strictly better than assault cannons vs T4 due ot the new wound chart.
-Force weapons are much more interesting of a choice now that it's S vs rend, and the sword now has the highest rend of all. That said, I still expect axe to work out mathematically better most of the time - S5 v T4 with AP-2 is likely better than S4 v T4 with -3, and the S+2 seems almost pointless unless there's a lot of T5/6 around.
-There's no unwieldy replacement on ANY of the force weapons.
-10 marines for 1 heavy weapon and 8 base "power", yet only +6 per 5 marines; expect this to be the reason not to go MSU.
-Inv saves look to be the same as ever, as otherwise All is Dust would likely be worded "+1 to inv save" or something. Remains to be seen if we can take both armour + inv now.

Looks cool. I wish it wasn't so grey though.

I fully expect Gullimarines to get Gulibolters and Ultracannons with these stats reducing minimarines down to mook status.

Power = Points? Why would they have two systems?

Eyjio wrote:
Good lord, those inferno boltguns are pretty scary, and the warpflamers are crazy if they get close to the enemy (if assault is good, they likely will). I guess that was expected with AP3 bolters at the moment though. Also, there's SO many rules to remember here, it's slightly concerning.

Interesting tidbits:
-Rend on Soulreaper cannon now just seems to be an additional AP-1. Likely Assault cannons will be S6 AP-2 then. Also, soulreaper cannons hitting on 3+ always are now strictly better than assault cannons vs T4 due to the new wound chart.
-Force weapons are much more interesting of a choice now that it's S vs rend, and the sword now has the highest rend of all. That said, I still expect axe to work out mathematically better most of the time - S5 v T4 with AP-2 is likely better than S4 v T4 with -3, and the S+2 seems almost pointless unless there's a lot of T5/6 around.
-There's no unwieldy replacement on ANY of the force weapons.
-10 marines for 1 heavy weapon and 8 base "power", yet only +6 per 5 marines; expect this to be the reason not to go MSU.
-Inv saves look to be the same as ever, as otherwise All is Dust would likely be worded "+1 to inv save" or something. Remains to be seen if we can take both armour + inv now.
-Edit: Also, no force rule, just D3 damage. Can't believe I missed that but it makes sense and is probably more fun to play against (coughTyranidscough).

Looks cool. I wish it wasn't so grey though.

You seem to be reading the base squad number wrong. I'm seeing 4 rubrics and 1 Aspiring Sorc for 8, +6 per 5 rubrics added.

Thebiggesthat wrote:

 CoreCommander wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Thebiggesthat wrote:
Matched play in AoS is definitely not power level. It's points. Granular points.

If you mean the unit size thing, then you are right there but it's nothing like a 'rough guide' power level.

Not that granular when it has fixed points per X model. Want to have just 3 models? You still pay 5.

Yeah, also: You want this special weapon? Here, have it for free (atleast for now).
Super granular

A quick read of your post history reveals that we aren't going to agree with anything regarding AoS. So I'm out, this isn't the place.

Yes, most probably we aren't going to agree on anything factual.

I love the power level costing. No more counting on multiples of 3 because you took the ccw option etc. other rubbish. Just take some units on the table, check what they got with them, don't be an ass and roll some dice. It has been one of the great things in AoS that I have liked, and it's pleasant to see in 40k as I don't have time to waste calculating army lists. And it's good that there will be the "decimal" system for those that do have.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
You seem to be reading the base squad number wrong. I'm seeing 4 rubrics and 1 Aspiring Sorc for 8, +6 per 5 rubrics added.

No, just worded poorly, I'll go back and edit it. What I mean is that you need 10 marines for 1 soulreaper cannon, and on top of that the base squad of 5 costs 8 power, but it's only +6 per extra 5 marines.

Eyjio wrote:
Good lord, those inferno boltguns are pretty scary, and the warpflamers are crazy if they get close to the enemy (if assault is good, they likely will). I guess that was expected with AP3 bolters at the moment though. Also, there's SO many rules to remember here, it's slightly concerning.

Interesting tidbits:
-Rend on Soulreaper cannon now just seems to be an additional AP-1. Likely Assault cannons will be S6 AP-2 then. Also, soulreaper cannons hitting on 3+ always are now strictly better than assault cannons vs T4 due to the new wound chart.
-Force weapons are much more interesting of a choice now that it's S vs rend, and the sword now has the highest rend of all. That said, I still expect axe to work out mathematically better most of the time - S5 v T4 with AP-2 is likely better than S4 v T4 with -3, and the S+2 seems almost pointless unless there's a lot of T5/6 around.
-There's no unwieldy replacement on ANY of the force weapons.
-10 marines for 1 heavy weapon, 5 marines (1 champ, 4 other) for 8 base "power", yet only +6 per 5 marines; expect this to be the reason not to go MSU.
-Inv saves look to be the same as ever, as otherwise All is Dust would likely be worded "+1 to inv save" or something. Remains to be seen if we can take both armour + inv now.
-Edit: Also, no force rule, just D3 damage. Can't believe I missed that but it makes sense and is probably more fun to play against (coughTyranidscough).

Looks cool. I wish it wasn't so grey though.

I am soooo happy for my Rubrics. Good times ahead. All is Dust is back, baby!

 Not-not-kenny wrote:


I wouldn't call the AoS points system granular since you pay for models in chunks and unit upgrades don't have points at all.

 kestral wrote:
Power = Points? Why would they have two systems?

Going back to the FAQ:

What do you mean “3 ways to play”?
We realise that people like to play Warhammer 40,000 in different ways. 3 broad systems are covered in the new edition: 1) Open play is the most flexible, and easiest to get started with, allowing you to use any miniatures you like. 2) Narrative play is where you can refight the iconic battles of the 41st Millennium, or create your own campaigns and sagas. 3) Matched play is designed for more balanced and competitive games, ideal for gaming clubs, leagues and tournaments. However you want to enjoy playing Warhammer 40,000, there will be rules for that.

As I am coming to understand:

Open and Narrative play will use the Powers listed on that Rubric datasheet.
Narrative may also be something like "Let's play 'Rynn's World!' You bring a fortress and a bunch of marines, I'll bring all my orks. See if you can last 5 turns!"
Matched play will be points that we're used to, perhaps in a different format, included in the General's Handbooks or whatever replaces codecies.