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.

Vorian wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 Malaur wrote:
Man, it looks like I sold my Daemon summon army at the right time!

I actually think summoning is going to be really, really good. It's like deepstrike, but you get to choose which you want at what time for what purpose. Need a heavy weapon? Get it. Need infantry to bog something down? get it instead. your opponent missing most of their heavy weaponry? Get that greater daemon out there.

This is very similar to Magic: The Gatherings Wish spells. They allow you to go to your sideboard and get the answer you need.

It's in built list tailoring, it's a very useful thing

Its also a gamble as you'll be that many points down on the board to start out with

feth summoning. Nerf that gak with a sledgehammer!

Points not being on the datasheet is an inconvenience for army building. In a physical book you'll need to flick back and forth repeatedly, whilst in a digital edition it's worse because of having to repeatedly find the two pages in question.

It also seems vaguely insulting that power levels -are- listed, like they're trying to push their new method harder.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 Malaur wrote:
Man, it looks like I sold my Daemon summon army at the right time!

I actually think summoning is going to be really, really good. It's like deepstrike, but you get to choose which you want at what time for what purpose. Need a heavy weapon? Get it. Need infantry to bog something down? get it instead. your opponent missing most of their heavy weaponry? Get that greater daemon out there.

This is very similar to Magic: The Gatherings Wish spells. They allow you to go to your sideboard and get the answer you need.

It's in built list tailoring, it's a very useful thing

Its also a gamble as you'll be that many points down on the board to start out with

So basically like deep strike is anyway?

theocracity wrote:

 docdoom77 wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 docdoom77 wrote:
This was one of the least informative previews to date. How about some printed examples?

I'd really like to see how they're going to put such a granular points system in a different part of the book without making it a nightmare to list build by hand.

It's overall a good plan. I like the ability to re-point down the line, but it sounds awfully clunky in practice.

27 points for a freaking multi-melta? o.O

With split fire, I expect special and Heavy weapons to increase in points cost. Not too different from 2nd edition, where a marine was 30 points and a lascannon was 60 points (so double the cost of the model carrying it).

It does seem like a pretty logical conclusion to have high point costs for powerful weapons, seeing as how many people are concerned about shooting being too powerful and that points cost is often brought up as the best balance for power.

This. +1 Well said.

changemod wrote:
Points not being on the datasheet is an inconvenience for army building. In a physical book you'll need to flick back and forth repeatedly, whilst in a digital edition it's worse because of having to repeatedly find the two pages in question.

It also seems vaguely insulting that power levels -are- listed, like they're trying to push their new method harder.

They're not pushing anything. Power level probably won't get updated and points will.

Making list in 8th will need a master degree. Have fun spending those last 23 points!

changemod wrote:
Points not being on the datasheet is an inconvenience for army building. In a physical book you'll need to flick back and forth repeatedly, whilst in a digital edition it's worse because of having to repeatedly find the two pages in question.

It also seems vaguely insulting that power levels -are- listed, like they're trying to push their new method harder.

I don't think anyone cares about what they are allegedly trying to push.

Vorian wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 Malaur wrote:
Man, it looks like I sold my Daemon summon army at the right time!

I actually think summoning is going to be really, really good. It's like deepstrike, but you get to choose which you want at what time for what purpose. Need a heavy weapon? Get it. Need infantry to bog something down? get it instead. your opponent missing most of their heavy weaponry? Get that greater daemon out there.

This is very similar to Magic: The Gatherings Wish spells. They allow you to go to your sideboard and get the answer you need.

It's in built list tailoring, it's a very useful thing

Its also a gamble as you'll be that many points down on the board to start out with

So basically like deep strike is anyway?

We have a winner!

Now I can kind of see what some people have been saying, about being worried that tournament gamers are helping so much to refine the rules. People always say that a tightly balanced set of tournament friendly rules benefits everyone, including the more narrative gamers. But now I'm thinking that's not really true.

I'm starting to suspect that a lot of the little details that don't make sense are in there for "balance" or tournament purposes. For example, someone probably noticed that the striking scorpions aren't good against space marines. Because most armies have space marines in them, they pointed out that nobody is going to take striking scorpions to a tournament unless they can do something in a game against a space marine army. So they make mandiblasters cause mortal wounds to make them a more attractive choice to the tournament gamer, while not making any sense and breaking a bit of the immersion for some of the more narrative gamers that play the game in order to experience the background on the tabletop.

I like a lot of the major changes to the rules, but whether or not I enjoy the game will probably come down to the missions and all the little details on the individual units. And I'm beginning to worry that they are going to get a lot of the details wrong in their willingness to sacrifice immersion for balance.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

 Nicorex wrote:
I am betting all heavy weapons have taken a good size jump up in points.

But guyz haven't ye herd that shooting will be dohmineting dis edition becuz split-fire n' shootn'scoot hevy wepunz

And that MSU (well, not entirely).

A multi-melta dev squad is 178 points.
Lascannons were previously twice as expensive as multi-meltas. Even if they only go to 40 points that's a 270 point squad...

My reading of what they wrote is that Multi-meltas are now the most expensive option on tactical squads. That could be inferring too much. If so Lascannons will be cheaper than multi-meltas. In general Multi-meltas benefit more from the new rules than lascannons do.

 Galas wrote:
Making list in 8th will need a master degree. Have fun spending those last 23 points!

Or a friendly environment where it's ok that you go 3 points over the given army size to fit an upgrade in.

Daedalus81 wrote:

changemod wrote:
Points not being on the datasheet is an inconvenience for army building. In a physical book you'll need to flick back and forth repeatedly, whilst in a digital edition it's worse because of having to repeatedly find the two pages in question.

It also seems vaguely insulting that power levels -are- listed, like they're trying to push their new method harder.

They're not pushing anything. Power level probably won't get updated and points will.

Power level can be referenced instantly, points needs to be looked up. That's a push favouring power level even if they did it entirely by accident.

changemod wrote:
Points not being on the datasheet is an inconvenience for army building. In a physical book you'll need to flick back and forth repeatedly, whilst in a digital edition it's worse because of having to repeatedly find the two pages in question.

It also seems vaguely insulting that power levels -are- listed, like they're trying to push their new method harder.

That's only inconvenient if you're completely unfamiliar with the army, otherwise there isn't a whole lot of reason to flip back to the datasheets. It'll be better than the current system of 30 pages of unit entries each with points costs, and an armory page with more point costs, then all the special rules and weapons on a dozen other pages.

changemod wrote:
Points not being on the datasheet is an inconvenience for army building. In a physical book you'll need to flick back and forth repeatedly, whilst in a digital edition it's worse because of having to repeatedly find the two pages in question.

It also seems vaguely insulting that power levels -are- listed, like they're trying to push their new method harder.

I think it's more of an attempt to attract newer players who are less familiar with the game.

Or put another way, more directly supporting two out of the three new game types.

Besides, when was the last time you sat down and put together a list on paper? That's what the apps are for!

Yeah, convenience with regards to page flipping seems really trivial to me.

 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Now I can kind of see what some people have been saying, about being worried that tournament gamers are helping so much to refine the rules. People always say that a tightly balanced set of tournament friendly rules benefits everyone, including the more narrative gamers. But now I'm thinking that's not really true.

I'm starting to suspect that a lot of the little details that don't make sense are in there for "balance" or tournament purposes. For example, someone probably noticed that the striking scorpions aren't good against space marines. Because most armies have space marines in them, they pointed out that nobody is going to take striking scorpions to a tournament unless they can do something in a game against a space marine army. So they make mandiblasters cause mortal wounds to make them a more attractive choice to the tournament gamer, while not making any sense and breaking a bit of the immersion for some of the more narrative gamers that play the game in order to experience the background on the tabletop.

I like a lot of the major changes to the rules, but whether or not I enjoy the game will probably come down to the missions and all the little details on the individual units. And I'm beginning to worry that they are going to get a lot of the details wrong in their willingness to sacrifice immersion for balance.

Aaaand this is why we can't have nice things.

changemod wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

changemod wrote:
Points not being on the datasheet is an inconvenience for army building. In a physical book you'll need to flick back and forth repeatedly, whilst in a digital edition it's worse because of having to repeatedly find the two pages in question.

It also seems vaguely insulting that power levels -are- listed, like they're trying to push their new method harder.

They're not pushing anything. Power level probably won't get updated and points will.

Power level can be referenced instantly, points needs to be looked up. That's a push favouring power level even if they did it entirely by accident.

I mean not to be overly literal, but you're still flipping to a page of a book. It's not that strenuous.

changemod wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

changemod wrote:
Points not being on the datasheet is an inconvenience for army building. In a physical book you'll need to flick back and forth repeatedly, whilst in a digital edition it's worse because of having to repeatedly find the two pages in question.

It also seems vaguely insulting that power levels -are- listed, like they're trying to push their new method harder.

They're not pushing anything. Power level probably won't get updated and points will.

Power level can be referenced instantly, points needs to be looked up. That's a push favouring power level even if they did it entirely by accident.

Or you build your rough list using power level and then finish the list off using points. I don't see that favoring power levels in the least.

changemod wrote:


Power level can be referenced instantly, points needs to be looked up. That's a push favouring power level even if they did it entirely by accident.

And on day 1 almost everyone will be using points. In fact you'll have a hard time finding people discussing power level lists on this forum - guaranteed.

My plan is to print out all of the Datasheets that are relevant to the models I currently own. Then Laminate each of those with a thick plastic. Probably 7mm. This should make solid cards for the table.

At that point, having the points in an APP or in a book means you can simply open up to that section and build your army.

During play you will have the cards with rules in front of you and I like to use WYSIWYG for my models.

changemod wrote:Points not being on the datasheet is an inconvenience for army building. In a physical book you'll need to flick back and forth repeatedly, whilst in a digital edition it's worse because of having to repeatedly find the two pages in question.

It also seems vaguely insulting that power levels -are- listed, like they're trying to push their new method harder.

They're pushing Power Levels because those are more conducive to Narrative/Open play, which is how you get people into the game. You don't draw in a crowd by throwing a spreadsheet at them and telling them to do math right off the bat.

It'll be super easy to get a random person in when they just have to add up units to 100 rather than flip through each upgrade for a few hours.

Galas wrote:Making list in 8th will need a master degree. Have fun spending those last 23 points!

You mean... exactly the way it has been in 40k for years?

 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Now I can kind of see what some people have been saying, about being worried that tournament gamers are helping so much to refine the rules. People always say that a tightly balanced set of tournament friendly rules benefits everyone, including the more narrative gamers. But now I'm thinking that's not really true.

I'm starting to suspect that a lot of the little details that don't make sense are in there for "balance" or tournament purposes. For example, someone probably noticed that the striking scorpions aren't good against space marines. Because most armies have space marines in them, they pointed out that nobody is going to take striking scorpions to a tournament unless they can do something in a game against a space marine army. So they make mandiblasters cause mortal wounds to make them a more attractive choice to the tournament gamer, while not making any sense and breaking a bit of the immersion for some of the more narrative gamers that play the game in order to experience the background on the tabletop.

I like a lot of the major changes to the rules, but whether or not I enjoy the game will probably come down to the missions and all the little details on the individual units. And I'm beginning to worry that they are going to get a lot of the details wrong in their willingness to sacrifice immersion for balance.

+1

I hope you are wrong, but I also have picked up on this when they said orders are automatic for Guard. I know they are trying to streamline but still...

 nintura wrote:

 Malaur wrote:
Man, it looks like I sold my Daemon summon army at the right time!

I actually think summoning is going to be really, really good. It's like deepstrike, but you get to choose which you want at what time for what purpose. Need a heavy weapon? Get it. Need infantry to bog something down? get it instead. your opponent missing most of their heavy weaponry? Get that greater daemon out there.

This is very similar to Magic: The Gatherings Wish spells. They allow you to go to your sideboard and get the answer you need.

It's like deepstrike except:

It requires a model who can summon them to do so.
It requires that model be in a position on the board where it is useful to summon.
It requires you pass a psychic test to access some of your army.
It requires you spend more points than what the unit you summon is worth (unless you're a real life wizard who can set aside a number of points that is perfect for every unit configuration)

Most if this is also true of the old summoning rules, but the models were free, so it didn't put you at a large disadvantage like this does.

But free models really wasn't fair too. So basically what I'm saying is that summoning NEEDED a nerf, but let's not pretend that these summoning rules are in anyway really good.

Daedalus81 wrote:

changemod wrote:


Power level can be referenced instantly, points needs to be looked up. That's a push favouring power level even if they did it entirely by accident.

And on day 1 almost everyone will be using points. In fact you'll have a hard time finding people discussing power level lists on this forum - guaranteed.

Exactly, that's why it's vaguely insulting even if entirely accidentally so.

We've seen what General's handbook points do: Everyone takes models in round-numbered increments with all no-brainer if it's free upgrades taken.

For a really extreme example, see those Tzaangor Enlightened models who can take 10 inches of extra speed, an extra wound and some extra close combat attacks... For 0 points. You'd be hard pressed to see a gamer take unmounted ones no matter how narrative-minded he is.

 oni wrote:

 kestral wrote:
Random thought - if, as I suspect, Vehicles literally have no special rules beyond what is on their data sheet, then a vehicle, when assaulted, will have to either stay and fight or withdraw normally and lose a round of shooting. That's interesting and kind of makes up for increased durability in assault.

This had occurred to me as well, but I was thinking specifically along the lines of Imperial Knight Titans. They no longer have to worry about getting bogged down in combat and effectively removed from play.

My last game where I took an IK was against Tyanids. My IK got to shoot once before being tied up with an endless swam of termagants. I would have loved the ability to just walk away. The potential issue would then become... They'll just follow and chase my IK around the table in a game of Cat & Mouse.

IIRC in 7th Ed Walkers had the "Our Weapons Our Useless" rule where they could simply walk away if the enemy unit couldn't hurt them? So your knight could have easily just stepping throught the bugs and carried on, with the Termagants literally unable to affect it at all

 Grinshanks wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 Malaur wrote:
Man, it looks like I sold my Daemon summon army at the right time!

I actually think summoning is going to be really, really good. It's like deepstrike, but you get to choose which you want at what time for what purpose. Need a heavy weapon? Get it. Need infantry to bog something down? get it instead. your opponent missing most of their heavy weaponry? Get that greater daemon out there.

This is very similar to Magic: The Gatherings Wish spells. They allow you to go to your sideboard and get the answer you need.

It's like deepstrike except:

It requires a model who can summon them to do so.
It requires that model be in a position on the board where it is useful to summon.
It requires you pass a psychic test to access some of your army.
It requires you spend more points than what the unit you summon is worth (unless you're a real life wizard who can set aside a number of points that is perfect for every unit configuration)

Most if this is also true of the old summoning rules, but the models were free, so it didn't put you at a large disadvantage like this does.

But free models really wasn't fair too. So basically what I'm saying is that summoning NEEDED a nerf, but let's not pretend that these summoning rules are in anyway really good.

And you get to change what you deliver, where you want to deliver to exactly what you need at that time.

It's also not like the psyker is completely wasted points.

Sorry, your argument doesn't add up.

Does anyone really use books these days to build an army?
Ive been using armybuilder and battlescribe for years and cant imagine going back to books.
Build your army and print it with the associated costs/stats/rules.
Simples.

 Ratius wrote:
Does anyone really use books these days to build an army?
Ive been using armybuilder and battlescribe for years and cant imagine going back to books.
Build your army and print it with the associated costs/stats/rules.
Simples.

I've been forced to use pen and paper for months after Battlescribe crashed, I couldn't get it going again and couldn't find another ipad list builder.

Dr Mathias wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:

Maybe they shouldn't have hired Nathan Explosion to head the model naming team.

Too funny.

Just yesterday I was setting up my Dark Eldar 3D 'Arena of Blood' for a photo shoot, and my seven year old kid approached and asked "What are those?" (pointing at the spiky obstacles).

Me: "Those are 'murder stakes' "

Him: Looks over the arena and the Wyches. "Oh. There's a lot of murder things in there... 'murder knife', she's got a 'murder net', he's got a 'murder whip'... "



On a thread related note, I haven't played 40K using 40K rules for about 14 years. I'll be picking this up for sure. Overall the changes sound great.

That is some grade "A" parenting right there. Keep it up.

Matt.Kingsley wrote:So Tactical Marines have had yet another points decrease. I wonder if GW has finally found the right value after all this time?

Also it seems GW may have not learnt from the mistakes they made by over-nerfing summoning in AoS matched play... because unless Summoning Powers have absurdly low Cast values Summoning will probably be more dead than it is currently in Matched AoS, especially with Deep Strike existing in 40k.

Indeed. It looks like they went with the same overcorrection they used in AoS.

Eyjio wrote:

Youn wrote:
It did point out something odd. Though, I don't really know how this will work out for the Tournament circuit.


Example:
Game points 1500 points
Deployed Force: 1000 points
- 1 marine captain
- 2 Tactical squads with heavy bolter
- 2 Assault squads
- 1 Devastator squad with plasma cannons

Reserve force: 500 points
Reserve force 1 (500pts)
-- 2 Terminator squads
Reserve force 2 (500pts)
-- 2 Storm talons
-- 1 Assault squad
-- 1 Vanguard squad with Jump pack


So, in a 1500 pt game you deploy the 1000 pt unit and then can choose midway through the game to bring on either of the two reserve units. You won't have to tell your opponent at the beginning what the reserve component of your army is?

It doesn't say that - it's ONLY talking about summoning there.

As for the people saying summoning is dead, if you think the ability to tailor your list to your opponents on the fly is too weak, with respect, you are almost certainly wrong.

Can't remember the last time I saw a summoning army on a tournament standings list for AoS.

Vorian wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 Malaur wrote:
Man, it looks like I sold my Daemon summon army at the right time!

I actually think summoning is going to be really, really good. It's like deepstrike, but you get to choose which you want at what time for what purpose. Need a heavy weapon? Get it. Need infantry to bog something down? get it instead. your opponent missing most of their heavy weaponry? Get that greater daemon out there.

This is very similar to Magic: The Gatherings Wish spells. They allow you to go to your sideboard and get the answer you need.

It's in built list tailoring, it's a very useful thing

Its also a gamble as you'll be that many points down on the board to start out with

So basically like deep strike is anyway?

With the added benefit of that last Psyker your enemy just killed being worth his points plus whatever reserve points you have left over. Free summoning is bad design. So is full-cost summoning.