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.

Youn wrote:

 godardc wrote:
Thank you, Matt !
So, casualities aren't directionnal anymore ? Casualities are choosen by the owner ? It seems less tactical too, doesn't it ?

Actually, that is a huge advantage for the owning player. Remember overflow wounds just kills a model quicker it doesn't overflow to the next model.

Example:
Five man strike squad charge a pack of chaos terminators. They each swing twice and hit once each. A total of 4 wounds get through with a force weapons for 1, 1, 2, 2, wounds. Now, it's the chaos players turn to allocate out those wounds. The chaos player chooses to allocate out those wounds as 1,2,1,2. Then rolls the saves. If he fails all saves his 2 wound terminators take 1 wound then 2 wounds and dies, then the second one takes 1 wound and 2 wounds and dies.

The chaos player only loses two terminators instead of three on those wound because he gets to choose how those wounds are allocated.

Assuming they are porting over the wounding system like AOS

you have to kill of models that already have wounds on them first.

so you cant spread em around across your whole unit but instead need to kill off a full model until you use up all your unsaved wounds. no clue how this will work with units that may or may not have mixed stats if thats even going to happen.

I meant now you don't have to take care of positionning, where are your weapons and where is your sergeant, etc.
But you are right: the choice isn't reduced, indeed, it is different, but there is still some tactics here.

 Desubot wrote:

 gainsay wrote:
Anybody else really love the models but wtf with the fluff? I was ok with the primaris marine idea but when Phil confirmed that they can just "upgrade" existing marines to primaris I was really sad. Why not just make a new space marine kit and write something else for the story arc. It just seems really forced so it didnt seem like GW is going to phase out all your marines. Oh but wait they did anyways and really did a job on 20+ years of lore...

Really? i honestly feel the other way

if they were brand new marines out of the vat then it would horrifically cheapen old marines. by making it a progression it doesn't degrade how awesome (in lore) marines actually are.

Why not just make new marines on a larger scale tho? The justification they wrote is really stupid.

 Desubot wrote:

Youn wrote:

Spoiler:

 godardc wrote:
Thank you, Matt !
So, casualities aren't directionnal anymore ? Casualities are choosen by the owner ? It seems less tactical too, doesn't it ?

Actually, that is a huge advantage for the owning player. Remember overflow wounds just kills a model quicker it doesn't overflow to the next model.

Example:
Five man strike squad charge a pack of chaos terminators. They each swing twice and hit once each. A total of 4 wounds get through with a force weapons for 1, 1, 2, 2, wounds. Now, it's the chaos players turn to allocate out those wounds. The chaos player chooses to allocate out those wounds as 1,2,1,2. Then rolls the saves. If he fails all saves his 2 wound terminators take 1 wound then 2 wounds and dies, then the second one takes 1 wound and 2 wounds and dies.

The chaos player only loses two terminators instead of three on those wound because he gets to choose how those wounds are allocated.

Assuming they are porting over the wounding system like AOS

you have to kill of models that already have wounds on them first.

so you cant spread em around across your whole unit but instead need to kill off a full model until you use up all your unsaved wounds. no clue how this will work with units that may or may not have mixed stats if thats even going to happen.

Youn wrote:

I did allocate those wounds to one model at a time. Watch, I take 4 wounds of 1, 1, 2, 2.

My first terminator will take one of the 1s. Rolls dice and fails. I allocated 1 wound to that terminator. Now, I look at the 1,2,2 left over. If I do the other 1 I could lose 3 terminators but if I choose to roll the 2 next. Then if I fail the save my already wounded terminator takes 2 more wounds and dies. Now, I have a 1, 2 left over. I as the owning player can choose the 1 again and then the 2. Because, I as the owner get to choose. I can overkill 2 terminators instead of kill 3 of them.

hmm right no spill over from strong shots. did they show examples of doing this in the FAQ? i cant watch it. so they are saying the shots are being allocated or the wound? (meaning do you allocate before saves or after saves)

No, they stated the owner gets their choice how they allocate wounds to their unit.

 gainsay wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 gainsay wrote:
Anybody else really love the models but wtf with the fluff? I was ok with the primaris marine idea but when Phil confirmed that they can just "upgrade" existing marines to primaris I was really sad. Why not just make a new space marine kit and write something else for the story arc. It just seems really forced so it didnt seem like GW is going to phase out all your marines. Oh but wait they did anyways and really did a job on 20+ years of lore...

Really? i honestly feel the other way

if they were brand new marines out of the vat then it would horrifically cheapen old marines. by making it a progression it doesn't degrade how awesome (in lore) marines actually are.

Why not just make new marines on a larger scale tho? The justification they wrote is really stupid.

they would have to re do EVERYTHING characters every box, probably every vehicle and upgrade pack to match. thats a metric ass ton of injection moulding metal. and that is expensive. making nu marines make sense in that they dont actually have to invest nearlly as much in redoing the line. it leaves them with options.

Youn wrote:
No, they stated the owner gets their choice how they allocate wounds to their unit.

Hmmm gotta wait and see the whole wounding system. because if we are back to allocating one wound on one model at a time, terminators and numarines are going to be pretty strong with wound shenanigans. im hoping for some stipulations like allocate wounds on whatever model you want but you allocate all wounds to it till it dies then pick another one in some specific order (strongest to weakest) because no overkill spill over makes this complicated.

 Desubot wrote:

Youn wrote:

I did allocate those wounds to one model at a time. Watch, I take 4 wounds of 1, 1, 2, 2.

My first terminator will take one of the 1s. Rolls dice and fails. I allocated 1 wound to that terminator. Now, I look at the 1,2,2 left over. If I do the other 1 I could lose 3 terminators but if I choose to roll the 2 next. Then if I fail the save my already wounded terminator takes 2 more wounds and dies. Now, I have a 1, 2 left over. I as the owning player can choose the 1 again and then the 2. Because, I as the owner get to choose. I can overkill 2 terminators instead of kill 3 of them.

hmm right no spill over from strong shots. did they show examples of doing this in the FAQ? i cant watch it. so they are saying the shots are being allocated or the wound? (meaning do you allocate before saves or after saves)

Not sure if you played AOS or not but supposedly the wound system is identical.

Also, they may want to release models other than loyalist marines over the next couple of years.

 gainsay wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 gainsay wrote:
Anybody else really love the models but wtf with the fluff? I was ok with the primaris marine idea but when Phil confirmed that they can just "upgrade" existing marines to primaris I was really sad. Why not just make a new space marine kit and write something else for the story arc. It just seems really forced so it didnt seem like GW is going to phase out all your marines. Oh but wait they did anyways and really did a job on 20+ years of lore...

Really? i honestly feel the other way

if they were brand new marines out of the vat then it would horrifically cheapen old marines. by making it a progression it doesn't degrade how awesome (in lore) marines actually are.

Why not just make new marines on a larger scale tho? The justification they wrote is really stupid.

Since they've made a point several times to say that some chapters have issues with the new Marines, I'm thinking there could be narrative reasons going forward.

The wound system isn't identical as AoS as wounds in AoS roll over to the next model. They don't in 40k. If I shoot a lascannon at a guardsman it doesn't kill his 5 buddies also.

 Desubot wrote:

Youn wrote:

I did allocate those wounds to one model at a time. Watch, I take 4 wounds of 1, 1, 2, 2.

My first terminator will take one of the 1s. Rolls dice and fails. I allocated 1 wound to that terminator. Now, I look at the 1,2,2 left over. If I do the other 1 I could lose 3 terminators but if I choose to roll the 2 next. Then if I fail the save my already wounded terminator takes 2 more wounds and dies. Now, I have a 1, 2 left over. I as the owning player can choose the 1 again and then the 2. Because, I as the owner get to choose. I can overkill 2 terminators instead of kill 3 of them.

hmm right no spill over from strong shots. did they show examples of doing this in the FAQ? i cant watch it. so they are saying the shots are being allocated or the wound? (meaning do you allocate before saves or after saves)

It could just be that when shooting a unit with 2 wounds no attack and do more than that, which creates a wound pool. Then you just remove models by distributing the wounds from the pool.

Lascannon does 1 damage - 1 wound added to pool.
Lascannon does 3 damage - 2 wounds added to pool.

1 terminator dies and the unit has 1 wound on it.

 gainsay wrote:


Not sure if you played AOS or not but supposedly the wound system is identical.

i have and having played in a while (been on dystopian wars for a while)

but while its similar IIRC AOS has spill over damage meaning you cant pull off wound shenanigans like wasting overkill damage on single wound models.

Youn wrote:
The wound system isn't identical as AoS as wounds in AoS roll over to the next model. They don't in 40k. If I shoot a lascannon at a guardsman it doesn't kill his 5 buddies also.

this right. that was like the first thing they said and i forgot it

there needs to be more explanation on the wound system.

They have already said you don't do wounds that way. To directly quote them a lascannon really kills 1 guardsman, his other 5 buddies don't die from sympathy pains. You should use the right weapon on the right target.

 Desubot wrote:


they would have to re do EVERYTHING characters every box, probably every vehicle and upgrade pack to match. thats a metric ass ton of injection moulding metal. and that is expensive. making nu marines make sense in that they dont actually have to invest nearlly as much in redoing the line. it leaves them with options.

this was my thinking until pete said on the stream that the other chapter guys can be juiced up to a primis marine. So its obvious they will be updating everything over time. All I am saying if you're going to do it anyways just do it and dont mess with the lore just because you're trying to cover up upsetting customers.

 Souleater wrote:
Also, they may want to release models other than loyalist marines over the next couple of years.

Unlike Forge World....

 gainsay wrote:

 Desubot wrote:


they would have to re do EVERYTHING characters every box, probably every vehicle and upgrade pack to match. thats a metric ass ton of injection moulding metal. and that is expensive. making nu marines make sense in that they dont actually have to invest nearlly as much in redoing the line. it leaves them with options.

this was my thinking until pete said on the stream that the other chapter guys can be juiced up to a primis marine. So its obvious they will be updating everything over time. All I am saying if you're going to do it anyways just do it and dont mess with the lore just because you're trying to cover up upsetting customers.

i dont think you understand just how hard it is to "just do it"

I did allocate those wounds to one model at a time. Watch, I take 4 wounds of 1, 1, 2, 2.

My first terminator will take one of the 1s. Rolls dice and fails. I allocated 1 wound to that terminator. Now, I look at the 1,2,2 left over. If I do the other 1 I could lose 3 terminators but if I choose to roll the 2 next. Then if I fail the save my already wounded terminator takes 2 more wounds and dies. Now, I have a 1, 2 left over. I as the owning player can choose the 1 again and then the 2. Because, I as the owner get to choose. I can overkill 2 terminators instead of kill 3 of them.

I think you roll the damage after the save is failed. Let's say you failed 4 saves and one terminator is already wounded, so he is removed without needing to roll for damage. That leaves 3 more damage rolls, lets say the results are 2,2,1. How are those assigned? Will it result in 2 more dead and 1 wounded or can you first assign 1 wound to a model and another another 2 son one is overkill?

 gainsay wrote:

 Desubot wrote:


they would have to re do EVERYTHING characters every box, probably every vehicle and upgrade pack to match. thats a metric ass ton of injection moulding metal. and that is expensive. making nu marines make sense in that they dont actually have to invest nearlly as much in redoing the line. it leaves them with options.

this was my thinking until pete said on the stream that the other chapter guys can be juiced up to a primis marine. So its obvious they will be updating everything over time. All I am saying if you're going to do it anyways just do it and dont mess with the lore just because you're trying to cover up upsetting customers.

Did they mean that in the fluff sense or the tabletop sense?

 Desubot wrote:

 gainsay wrote:

 Desubot wrote:


they would have to re do EVERYTHING characters every box, probably every vehicle and upgrade pack to match. thats a metric ass ton of injection moulding metal. and that is expensive. making nu marines make sense in that they dont actually have to invest nearlly as much in redoing the line. it leaves them with options.

this was my thinking until pete said on the stream that the other chapter guys can be juiced up to a primis marine. So its obvious they will be updating everything over time. All I am saying if you're going to do it anyways just do it and dont mess with the lore just because you're trying to cover up upsetting customers.

i dont think you understand just how hard it is to "just do it"

I sure do. GW has been updating kits since I started playing in 1998 without having to justify. Never did I say update everything at once so I really do not understand anything you're pointing out.

Ragnar69 wrote:

I did allocate those wounds to one model at a time. Watch, I take 4 wounds of 1, 1, 2, 2.

My first terminator will take one of the 1s. Rolls dice and fails. I allocated 1 wound to that terminator. Now, I look at the 1,2,2 left over. If I do the other 1 I could lose 3 terminators but if I choose to roll the 2 next. Then if I fail the save my already wounded terminator takes 2 more wounds and dies. Now, I have a 1, 2 left over. I as the owning player can choose the 1 again and then the 2. Because, I as the owner get to choose. I can overkill 2 terminators instead of kill 3 of them.

I think you roll the damage after the save is failed. Let's say you failed 4 saves and one terminator is already wounded, so he is removed without needing to roll for damage. That leaves 3 more damage rolls, lets say the results are 2,2,1. How are those assigned? Will it result in 2 more dead and 1 wounded or can you first assign 1 wound to a model and another another 2 son one is overkill?

We so far have no instructions as to the order of removing different number of damage wounds.

do you use up all the single damage wounds then the d3 then d6? the other way around? or defender gets to chose, because the latter opens up some silly shenanigans like youn pointed out so until they fully explain it we dont know.

 gainsay wrote:

I sure do. GW has been updating kits since I started playing in 1998 without having to justify. Never did I say update everything at once so I really do not understand anything you're pointing out.

was thinking you were saying "at once" my bad. but ether way. personally dont see them messing with the lore at all. just progressing it.

Ragnar69 wrote:

I did allocate those wounds to one model at a time. Watch, I take 4 wounds of 1, 1, 2, 2.

My first terminator will take one of the 1s. Rolls dice and fails. I allocated 1 wound to that terminator. Now, I look at the 1,2,2 left over. If I do the other 1 I could lose 3 terminators but if I choose to roll the 2 next. Then if I fail the save my already wounded terminator takes 2 more wounds and dies. Now, I have a 1, 2 left over. I as the owning player can choose the 1 again and then the 2. Because, I as the owner get to choose. I can overkill 2 terminators instead of kill 3 of them.

I think you roll the damage after the save is failed. Let's say you failed 4 saves and one terminator is already wounded, so he is removed without needing to roll for damage. That leaves 3 more damage rolls, lets say the results are 2,2,1. How are those assigned? Will it result in 2 more dead and 1 wounded or can you first assign 1 wound to a model and another another 2 son one is overkill?

Damage doesn't overflow.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Ragnar69 wrote:

I did allocate those wounds to one model at a time. Watch, I take 4 wounds of 1, 1, 2, 2.

My first terminator will take one of the 1s. Rolls dice and fails. I allocated 1 wound to that terminator. Now, I look at the 1,2,2 left over. If I do the other 1 I could lose 3 terminators but if I choose to roll the 2 next. Then if I fail the save my already wounded terminator takes 2 more wounds and dies. Now, I have a 1, 2 left over. I as the owning player can choose the 1 again and then the 2. Because, I as the owner get to choose. I can overkill 2 terminators instead of kill 3 of them.

I think you roll the damage after the save is failed. Let's say you failed 4 saves and one terminator is already wounded, so he is removed without needing to roll for damage. That leaves 3 more damage rolls, lets say the results are 2,2,1. How are those assigned? Will it result in 2 more dead and 1 wounded or can you first assign 1 wound to a model and another another 2 son one is overkill?

Damage doesn't overflow.

Yes, but there is no overflow. Either you start allocating the 1 wound hit and end up with 2 dead and 0 wounded, or you start with the 2 wound hits with 2 dead and 1 wounded.

OP is up to date.
Big thank you to Matt.Kingsley for the QA Summary
Another big thank you to ClockworkZion for Facebook Round-up #11!
And a final big thank you to GW for the vehicles article


The fact we have so much "assault is OP, no shooting is OP" is actually making this edition seem very balanced, very excited.

I am glad that vehicles can hurt people in combat, one of my favorite scenes in the books is when Kharne is impaled on a tank during istvaan 3, still roaring while being so injured. I would love a mechanic where the tank could move during combat, and the units in CC could roll a strength test to stay engaged (IE hold on while it moves! ) and follow it up the field.

Glad to see that the QA answered a few concerns about transports and characters as well. My chaos Spartan assault tank is looking good, 25 model limit!

Thanks to the community for the continued support in keeping the OP alive with fresh information.

Thunderhawk with 30 troop capacity may make sense now.

 Rippy wrote:
OP is up to date.
Big thank you to Matt.Kingsley for the QA Summary
Another big thank you to ClockworkZion for Facebook Round-up #11!
And a final big thank you to GW for the vehicles article [/quote
#11?

I should probably not think of how many individual topics that was for because I may lament my lack of a life.

 Dryaktylus wrote:

 MLaw wrote:

You do know that most of the stuff that has armor values now would've had a toughness value in 2nd edition instead right?

Wasn't it vice versa? Bikes, Wraithguard and even Cyborks had armour values.

I am actually at a loss. I am looking in my copy of Freebooterz, which I have thought for the longest time was 2nd ed.. and that's how the Dreadnought on p46 is listed. It has a toughness of 5. However, I am seeing for 2nd ed datacards and they are showing armor values per limb. I came in after 2nd ed (late in 3rd) and got into 2nd later.. so this is a bit of a puzzle for me.
...which.. actually illustrates my point a bit I think. I'm pretty sure the people who were, at some point use to Dreadnoughts having a T value.. were as miffed about the transition to AVs as I was about vehicles getting Hull Points. Ultimately, IMO.. it's a game.. if the rules are consistent then who cares what you call the number that tells you how hard the armor is to crack?

Ragnar69 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Ragnar69 wrote:

I did allocate those wounds to one model at a time. Watch, I take 4 wounds of 1, 1, 2, 2.

My first terminator will take one of the 1s. Rolls dice and fails. I allocated 1 wound to that terminator. Now, I look at the 1,2,2 left over. If I do the other 1 I could lose 3 terminators but if I choose to roll the 2 next. Then if I fail the save my already wounded terminator takes 2 more wounds and dies. Now, I have a 1, 2 left over. I as the owning player can choose the 1 again and then the 2. Because, I as the owner get to choose. I can overkill 2 terminators instead of kill 3 of them.

I think you roll the damage after the save is failed. Let's say you failed 4 saves and one terminator is already wounded, so he is removed without needing to roll for damage. That leaves 3 more damage rolls, lets say the results are 2,2,1. How are those assigned? Will it result in 2 more dead and 1 wounded or can you first assign 1 wound to a model and another another 2 son one is overkill?

Damage doesn't overflow.

Yes, but there is no overflow. Either you start allocating the 1 wound hit and end up with 2 dead and 0 wounded, or you start with the 2 wound hits with 2 dead and 1 wounded.

thats assuming that is the order you have to go in. if he allocated the 1 first then the 2 means you lose 1 damage on a 2 wound model. (allocation order 1,2,1,2 = 2 dead. vs 1,1,2,2 = 3 dead or 2,2,1,1 same thing) that is what youn was pointing out i think,

 Desubot wrote:

Ragnar69 wrote:

I did allocate those wounds to one model at a time. Watch, I take 4 wounds of 1, 1, 2, 2.

My first terminator will take one of the 1s. Rolls dice and fails. I allocated 1 wound to that terminator. Now, I look at the 1,2,2 left over. If I do the other 1 I could lose 3 terminators but if I choose to roll the 2 next. Then if I fail the save my already wounded terminator takes 2 more wounds and dies. Now, I have a 1, 2 left over. I as the owning player can choose the 1 again and then the 2. Because, I as the owner get to choose. I can overkill 2 terminators instead of kill 3 of them.

I think you roll the damage after the save is failed. Let's say you failed 4 saves and one terminator is already wounded, so he is removed without needing to roll for damage. That leaves 3 more damage rolls, lets say the results are 2,2,1. How are those assigned? Will it result in 2 more dead and 1 wounded or can you first assign 1 wound to a model and another another 2 son one is overkill?

We so far have no instructions as to the order of removing different number of damage wounds.

do you use up all the single damage wounds then the d3 then d6? the other way around? or defender gets to chose, because the latter opens up some silly shenanigans like youn pointed out so until they fully explain it we dont know.

 gainsay wrote:

I sure do. GW has been updating kits since I started playing in 1998 without having to justify. Never did I say update everything at once so I really do not understand anything you're pointing out.

was thinking you were saying "at once" my bad. but ether way. personally dont see them messing with the lore at all. just progressing it.

wounds work just like AOS I thought in one of the community articles this was stated. Its a very common sense way to do it. I pick the model but he will get the next wound until dead etc. Its very good very simple.

 Desubot wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:

opponents are causing bs arguments, that's not the system's fault.
Extra charts, really? Is memorising that armor goes from 10 to 14 is difficult for somebody? Is the game supposed to be by infants with no mental capacity?
Excludigng the point of how dumb having no armor values is, they could have still done facings using toughness with like a penalty if you are shooting from the side or rear. But nope, let's just throw the system out of the window, because less tactics is more fun!

You really think thats what im saying?

it is the systems fault for being loosy goosy with the concept allowing the gak situations to happen. same deal with all the abuse cases
Im not saying memorizing charts is hard. its not. but it IS having 2 different systems in a game and trying to balance both properly is a lot of extra work for basically no reward.

they decided the bloat was not worth trying to sift through so they rebuilt EVERYTHING from the ground up gak had to go and im glad they went that route.

Every system is gonna allow gak to happen. Sure, some situations a bit of clarification would have been nice but that is not justifying destroying the whole thing.
Oh, wow. More than 1 system is hard. So having psychic phase, saves, to wound, to hit charts, charging and overwatch is fine, but having armor suddenly makes it a broken bloated mess? Yeah sure.

I fail to see how removing one of the few things that forced tactical desicions and actual flanking in a game where 90% of the time units move toward/away of an enemy or objective is somehow a good thing.
Believing that every moronic decision on GW's part is a part of a great master plan to magically fix everything and therefore justified is a wishful thinking at best. GW in no way deserves the benefit of the doubt, not with their reputation.