40k New Edition Summary - 14th June 17: Lord Duncan paints Primaris in Gravis/non-codex SM focus

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.

**Breng77**

Mezmerro wrote:
GW wrote:The points for units don’t appear on the datasheet but will be elsewhere in the same book. This is because you don’t need them to play if you don’t want

Really? I don't know anyone who's gonna play that "narrative" power-level mode.

As others have said I will sometimes

Apocalypse games
games with my wife
pick-up games with newer players if they want.

Depending on how good it is I might use it for any casual game (read against opponents that don't want top tier competitive), as it will just make things quicker.

**Thargrim**

Kriswall wrote:
This slow drip of information is infuriating. I'm actively looking forward to the release. I also find myself actively looking forward to these articles, which are almost always disappointing given how little information they present.

Today's article...

#1 - "Points are still a thing, but aren't on the datasheet anymore." Ugh. Nothing to see here. Show me what the page with the points looks like.

#2 - "No more free models. Summoning now works more like a sideboard you have to pay for." The second they said 'matched play', every AoS player assumed this would be true. No free models. Good to have a confirmation, but also sort of a piece of non-news.

Just give us a release date already and show us what the product is going to look like. How many books will there be? If I play Tau, Skitarii and Iron Warriors and want to play Matched Play, how much will I need to spend on day one? This is killing me.

I know right, I do enjoy seeing any kind of news every day. But they are only drip feeding rules. What about the models, fluff? As someone who is a hobbyist and painter and fan of the lore...I feel like this is a drag. I know they don't want to reveal too much too soon cause it may take away sales from the BB stuff and Kharadron Overlords...but i'm not spending a dime anyways until I know what the deal is with the new starter set. Even unveiling a 360 spin of a new model from the starter each week would be something. They could start with a 360 look at the basic tactical numarine, then the next week do one of a plaguemarine and so on. But getting a wall of text and numbers every day is getting old. And for any new players looking forward to the edition all of the drip feed rule changes don't mean anything anyways.

**Lockark**

The power level thing feels like a experiment to see if people like the tradtional detailed pointing system or something more like warmachine's.

Edit: @Thragrim

The rules come out in June, and the starter set usely comes out a month after.

I think Age of sigmar was the only time both came out at the same time. But that could of been because of the hard reset both the rules and setting had going from WHFB to AoS. That and AoS at the time did not have a physical rule book to release. So they put everything out in July.

40k 8th will have physical books being sold.

**puree**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Desubot wrote:

Ditto.

hopefully the power levels will roughly be balanced. even with equipment.

They will not be (unless you always take all available options on units...even then...). Equipment creates far too large of a disparity.

Disparity sure, but too large? too large for what? Both players will just take what is 'best' or what they want over a number of different units. It will likely be more than good enough. It hasn't been a problem having free 'upgrades' in AoS so far, so I'm not really expecting such a thing here.

**ClockworkZion**

Thargrim wrote:
But they are only drip feeding rules. What about the models, fluff?

The only new models that are coming with a new edition is the starter set, which doesn't always come out when the edition drops (there is usually a gap last I recall), as for fluff, what fluff? All the new fluff we have is either Gathering Storm or will be after the new edition launch when the Nu-Marines launch.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lockark wrote:
The power level thing feels like a experiment to see if people like the tradtional detailed pointing system or something more like warmachine's.

Or a way to try to approach casual and matched play and make them stand out from each other.

**Gamgee**

The Warzone Cadia article had some minor new tidbits didn't it? How Abbaddon sidestepped their planned defenses?

**Lord Kragan**

Kriswall wrote:
This slow drip of information is infuriating. I'm actively looking forward to the release. I also find myself actively looking forward to these articles, which are almost always disappointing given how little information they present.

Today's article...

#1 - "Points are still a thing, but aren't on the anymore." Ugh. Nothing to see here. Show me what the page with the points looks like.

#2 - "No more free models. Summoning now works more like a sideboard you have to pay for." The second they said 'matched play', every AoS player assumed this would be true. No free models. Good to have a confirmation, but also sort of a piece of non-news.

Just give us a release date already and show us what the product is going to look like. How many books will there be? If I play Tau, Skitarii and Iron Warriors and want to play Matched Play, how much will I need to spend on day one? This is killing me.

I'm going to disagree a bit with you: they've said more than that. With the example of the grav-gun they are showing that: A) the thing will be finally properly costed and that B) it is likely to see a nerf in power if it's worth that. and the MM points shows us that the heavy weapons will suffer a hike to compensate the extra manneuverability.

**Breng77**

puree wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
Desubot wrote:

Ditto.

hopefully the power levels will roughly be balanced. even with equipment.

They will not be (unless you always take all available options on units...even then...). Equipment creates far too large of a disparity.

Disparity sure, but too large? too large for what? Both players will just take what is 'best' or what they want over a number of different units. It will likely be more than good enough. It hasn't been a problem having free 'upgrades' in AoS so far, so I'm not really expecting such a thing here.

if as stated the power level assumes the best/maximum upgrades then taking other upgrades will start to skew the balance. If we assume wargear is pointed such that the most expensive upgrades are the best (absent paying for them), then losing those points obviously skews balance. Some units have way more upgrade options than others so if Eldar Jetbikes can still take scatter lasers on every bike, and power level assumes they do (assuming that is still optimal), then not taking them puts you behind on balance. So it really depends, I think they will be roughly balanced so long as one player isn't playing optimal upgrades while the other is running naked squads. AOS in my understanding has far fewer upgrades for each squad than 40k currently does. But it should hopefully put you in the ball park and I would not be at all surprised if it is at least as balanced as points are in 7th.

**Gamgee**

Deathwatch are going to be so expensive. :( They need something to push their competitiveness.

**Breng77**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Thargrim wrote:
But they are only drip feeding rules. What about the models, fluff?

The only new models that are coming with a new edition is the starter set, which doesn't always come out when the edition drops (there is usually a gap last I recall), as for fluff, what fluff? All the new fluff we have is either Gathering Storm or will be after the new edition launch when the Nu-Marines launch.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lockark wrote:
The power level thing feels like a experiment to see if people like the tradtional detailed pointing system or something more like warmachine's.

Or a way to try to approach casual and matched play and make them stand out from each other.

Yeah it does make a pre-game idea of how casual a game is a bit easier "hey you want a 100 power level game?" Puts forward some clear expectations about how hardcore the game might be. Now some TFG might still powergame, but at least the signal is there.

**Snake Tortoise**

A couple of years ago I would have been dismayed at all of these suggested changes, but I think this new 40k is going to be awesome. If we get the significant improvement in balance I'm hoping for (and half expecting) I'm thinking of starting an Iron Warriors army. A few dreads, a bunch of heavy bolters and plasma pistols, no bikes... please make this work GW!

**oldone**

Gamgee wrote:
Deathwatch are going to be so expensive. :( They need something to push their competitiveness.

A freind and me were looking at terminators and variants of veterans and thinking maybe 2 wounds crosses over, so deathwatch would all be 2 wounds same as grey knights to make them competitive.

**puree**

if as stated the power level assumes the best/maximum upgrades then taking other upgrades will start to skew the balance.

Only if your sensitivity to 'balance' is that fine. Note my reference to good enough. All balance only has to be good enough for the players involved, so unless you are highly sensitive to being a couple of weapons under powered it just isn't that big an issue.

**Breng77**

puree wrote:
if as stated the power level assumes the best/maximum upgrades then taking other upgrades will start to skew the balance.

Only if your sensitivity to 'balance' is that fine. Note my reference to good enough. All balance only has to be good enough for the players involved, so unless you are highly sensitive to being a couple of weapons under powered it just isn't that big an issue.

right if both players are fine, no problem. IF you are trying to use it like points as a fine balance mechanism then as I pointed out with things like eldar jetbikes it can make a pretty big difference. Like I said though that assumes one person fully kitted out the other not. We shall see how good it is after use.

**Youn**

The question comes in would you play in a tournament that had an army design document that said:

Armies must be Battle Forged for each scenario
Main Deployment: 150 Power Level
Reserve deployment: three 50 Power Level Sidebars.
--- One sidebar may be used per game.

With no points for building an army?

**MaxT**

puree wrote:
if as stated the power level assumes the best/maximum upgrades then taking other upgrades will start to skew the balance.

Only if your sensitivity to 'balance' is that fine. Note my reference to good enough. All balance only has to be good enough for the players involved, so unless you are highly sensitive to being a couple of weapons under powered it just isn't that big an issue.

Indeed, and for anyone who is concerned enough about that sort of thing can just use points!

**NinthMusketeer**

I read the article and came here to read epic rage over summoning costing full points. I am surprised and somewhat impressed.

**MaxT**

Youn wrote:
The question comes in would you play in a tournament that had an army design document that said:

Armies must be Battle Forged for each scenario
Main Deployment: 150 Power Level
Reserve deployment: three 50 Power Level Sidebars.
--- One sidebar may be used per game.

With no points for building an army?

Would you use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail? If you care about competitive balance for tournies, you use points!

**Albino Squirrel**

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Twoshoes23 wrote:
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...

..Why is balance bad again?

Because of that thing I just said. Which you even quoted. Just read the above posts you quoted.

**Galas**

People is looking with to much detail the Power Level, talking about "balance". It isn't meant to be totally balanced, is a rough estimation for open and narrative play.

They have said that they have give the Power Level with the unit fully upgraded in mind, so thats it.

**JimOnMars**

judgedoug wrote:
Mezmerro wrote:
GW wrote:The points for units don’t appear on the datasheet but will be elsewhere in the same book. This is because you don’t need them to play if you don’t want

Really? I don't know anyone who's gonna play that "narrative" power-level mode.

Literally everyone I know that is excited for 8th edition is going to use power levels, as scenario play is a hell of a lot more fun in our group than "competitive" "line up across the board and roll initiative" "gaming".

Power levels by themselves don't increase narrative play. You can have just as much narrative by saying "2 marines can take meltas, but not 3."

In some ways points increase the narrative play, because you have to make loadout choices which could reflect the shortages a unit might face after extended time in the field.

The only thing open play does is it gets the game started quicker. This is a good thing, but it isn't any more narrative. You can play every scenario in the book with points instead of power levels.

**theocracity**

MaxT wrote:
Youn wrote:
The question comes in would you play in a tournament that had an army design document that said:

Armies must be Battle Forged for each scenario
Main Deployment: 150 Power Level
Reserve deployment: three 50 Power Level Sidebars.
--- One sidebar may be used per game.

With no points for building an army?

Would you use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail? If you care about competitive balance for tournies, you use points!

Not all tournaments have to be competitively balanced, of course. You could probably get more people to come to a store's weekend 40k day if you make it easier for them to just bring what they have rather than having to pre-plan a detailed list and have it judged by refs.

That being said, actually competitive games and tournaments should certainly use points over power level.

**Youn**

Ah, so I am guessing you also would have an issue with the unknown of:

Armies must be Battle Forged for each scenario
Main Deployment: 1500 points
Reserve Deployment: three 500 point sidebars
-- One sidebar may be used per game.

Without having to tell your opponent which sidebar you were going to use in that game until the point you brought it onto the table.

**Lysenis**

Gamgee wrote:
Deathwatch are going to be so expensive. :( They need something to push their competitiveness.

But AMAZING!

As for the supposed disparity of points if you are playing games with Power Level you are playing narrative or for fun why would you be trying to just beat down people?

**Dakka Flakka Flame**

Galas wrote:
I think this edition will be the epitome of "boyz before toyz"

And in my opinion, grenades should behave like what they are... grenades. A very strong one-use trick to use against that specially hard oponent, etc... how they are now to me is totally unfluffy and just... plain boring.

Grenades have always seemed weird to me. Right now they feel like distraction devices, basically glorified shuriken, but I can see why under the 3rd-7th rules they might not have wanted to give most models a short range blast template weapon. It would have made pistols entirely irrelevant and slowed the game way down.

Now I think they have an opportunity to make grenades more interesting. The template problem no longer applies and pistols can be fired in melee so they still have a purpose.

I could also see them just ditching them entirely and treating them as decorations, though. They might them as extra reasoning for why grots/guardsmen can hurt tanks. The lasgun/grot blasta didn't get through the Land Raider's armor, it was a lucky hit with a grenade/stikkbomb.

**buddha**

I actually like a couple of things I'm hearing on the points side.

1) the average game now looks to be around 2,000 points.
2) no more free units including summoning.
3) "points" and "power levels" are separate. But you can use power levels to limit units when playing pointed games. This I think maybe one of the best changes to balance in the history of the game actually. So you can run 2000 Point tournament and limit the power level of any individual unit at the same time.

**Daedalus81**

Snake Tortoise wrote:
A couple of years ago I would have been dismayed at all of these suggested changes, but I think this new 40k is going to be awesome. If we get the significant improvement in balance I'm hoping for (and half expecting) I'm thinking of starting an Iron Warriors army. A few dreads, a bunch of heavy bolters and plasma pistols, no bikes... please make this work GW!

I already ordered two of these (as stand ins):

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/Thousand-Sons-Legion-Osiron-Pattern-Contemptor-Dreadnought-2017

with:

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/Contemptor-Pattern-Heavy-Bolter-Arm

Automatically Appended Next Post:

oldone wrote:
Gamgee wrote:
Deathwatch are going to be so expensive. :( They need something to push their competitiveness.

A freind and me were looking at terminators and variants of veterans and thinking maybe 2 wounds crosses over, so deathwatch would all be 2 wounds same as grey knights to make them competitive.

Space marine vets and others could easily pick up 2 wounds. Anything is possible.

**Formerly Wu**

JimOnMars wrote:

In some ways points increase the narrative play, because you have to make loadout choices which could reflect the shortages a unit might face after extended time in the field.

If you're modeling something like that, you're better off working up a system of points that reflect loadout availability and logistics. The Matched point system is designed to reflect balance, not narrative.

The point of power level is that narrative/open scenarios, played appropriately, are supposed to have native imbalances that can't be accounted for with points. It's pointless to account for every pistol when there's (say) warp lightning striking the board randomly and mutating what it hits.

**Daedalus81**

NinthMusketeer wrote:
I read the article and came here to read epic rage over summoning costing full points. I am surprised and somewhat impressed.

That's IT! I am "unsummoning" my army in a gas fire! THANKS A LOT GW!

**tneva82**

ClockworkZion wrote:

2 works with either points so not that

They mentioned in the article running Ambush with Power, so it's possible some mission types won't be balanced around points but power.