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.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:

Spoiler:

 docdoom77 wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:
Size comparison - Source: Steppingbetweengames blog

Wow! That primaris is substantially larger than a standard Marine. I approve.

Huh, 10,000 years and all they could figure out was how to increase the tibia length? Working on cranial cavity size might have been more productive.

Cannot unsee, I think you nailed it, put longer shins on the old school marine and he looks spot on to the new one.

I love the new and better proportionated marines. They will look lovely marching as giant gods of war alongside my Tempestus Scions and other Inquisition troopers.

And, personally I prefer the look of Lord Kranon, the chaos lord of the Dark Vengeance set, bot oh my good the Death Guard Lord in Terminator Armour. Thats a big fella. Quite impresive.

Vovin wrote:
Do we know where we get the point costs (not the power level) yet?
1. in the rulebook
2. in the index books
3. in a General's Handbook publication later this year
4. in the app

Can someone provide a source please. I have followed the teaser campaign closeley and have double-checked the summary in this thread, but could'nt find the answer. It seems this hasn't beent answered explicitly yet (or I can't use the internet).

The Indexes will have the points.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:

Spoiler:

 docdoom77 wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:
Size comparison - Source: Steppingbetweengames blog

Wow! That primaris is substantially larger than a standard Marine. I approve.

Huh, 10,000 years and all they could figure out was how to increase the tibia length? Working on cranial cavity size might have been more productive.

Cannot unsee, I think you nailed it, put longer shins on the old school marine and he looks spot on to the new one.

Well, the new thighs are a bit thicker. Someone get Suzanne sommers one the case. Anybody?

 Gordon Shumway wrote:


Working on cranial cavity size might have been more productive.

"Blessed is the mind too small to doubt."

The Nids aren't complaining, thighs are the best eating anyway. I'm waiting for the Seven Secret Herbs and Spices Armour (with the extra crispy 5+ Inv), then I'd be set.

 daedalus wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:


Working on cranial cavity size might have been more productive.

"Blessed is the mind too small to doubt."

"Damned is the mind in too small of a box"

 Galas wrote:

 Powerfisting wrote:
so, to move the topic away from how free the rules will be, one thing I noticed in the release pic of starter set was that the Primaris Assault marines come in a base unit size of 3 and it appears that the standard bearer is in a 3 man unit also. This shows me that the primaris marines are going to have rules designed with base units of 3, or at least the more elite versions of primaris marines will. I've always thought one way to make marines feel more like the fluff is to allow supper MSUs to be more prevalent.

Minimal size of 5 for normal squads and minimal size of 3 for more elite units. Just like Stormcast Eternals.

Or Crisis Suits which share a lot of the same statline as the new Primaris....

 Desubot wrote:
Looks like numarines are taller than old heresy marines too.

i guess t sons are just naturally taller.

Well, they do come from the largest Primarch canonically.

So much anticipation!

How long has it been since the announcement? Less than 12 hours?

Vovin wrote:
Do we know where we get the point costs (not the power level) yet?
1. in the rulebook
2. in the index books
3. in a General's Handbook publication later this year
4. in the app

Can someone provide a source please. I have followed the teaser campaign closeley and have double-checked the summary in this thread, but could'nt find the answer. It seems this hasn't beent answered explicitly yet (or I can't use the internet).

In the index books. You'll have to wait for someone to link the source or just trust me.

Spoletta wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 rollawaythestone wrote:
The new FNP (disgustingly resilient) is powerful, but weaker than it used to be because now it allows you to ignore Damage instead of Wounds. So a Save is stronger because a Save ignores the whole Wound and all subsequent damage (d3, d6 etc) whereas the FNP allows you an extra save against each damage caused.

Well average wise it's same if you roll first DR and then d6 for damage or first d6 and then DR. Difference is bell curve. Less extreme results, more following average so this actually helps generally as you want steady results. However slower than first save, then damage.

I think it will be:

1) Roll hit and wound
2) Roll saves for each wound
3) Roll damage and make a pool of wounds
4) Roll DR for each wound of the pool
5) Remove models. Cannot remove more models than hits received.

This is the faster way and gives more value to multi damage weapons against resilient targets. Yes, it has a bit of wounds spilling, but it still saves the "Use powerfull weapons on big guys and high ROF stuff on small guys" concept.

I'm extremely curious how this issue ends up being resolved because it has huge implications for units of multi wound models. For true no damage spill over to occur each damage roll will have to be worked out one at a time. As others have pointed out this seems cumbersome in an edition that is all about stream lining (though this is the method I would prefer).

If it is indeed a more streamlined version I could see the order of operations you posted being plausible. If that is the case though, I would like to see the maximum number of casualties be the number of failed armor saves. If it's equivalent to hits then that's two steps of the damage resolution process that would be subsequently reversed. ie 5 hits, 4 wounds, 3 failed saves but if using multiple damage weapons you can suddenly kill 5 models again. That seems like a lot of damage spill over. Where as using the failed saves as a cap the most you could kill was 3. I'm

DCannon4Life wrote:
I suppose, if you have a unit rolling 12+ LasCannon shots, it could slow the game down. I'm not familiar with any units that do that. And we're all already used to rolling results separately; when shooting LasCannons at a unit of War Walkers, for example, we roll the results one at a time to see if we get 'Explodes' results.

This will very much be like that: "Is he dead yet? No? Here's the next LasCannon's Damage roll." "Is he dead NOW? NO?! Good grief, here's the NEXT LasCannon's Damage roll...."

10 support marines from legions list says hi. Also predator annihilator has 4 lascannons so multiple wounds incoming, land raider likewise and spartan from FW will have whopping 8 lascannon shots.

And apart from who rolled vehicle damage separately that's still not same as that was 1 dice one at a time. Here it woudl be dice followed by multiple dice followed by same process set.

Don't see them going that way. Especially as there's perfectly working way to ensure no separate rolling. After rolling for damage trim excess damage to amount of wounds model has.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Powerfisting wrote:
so, to move the topic away from how free the rules will be, one thing I noticed in the release pic of starter set was that the Primaris Assault marines come in a base unit size of 3 and it appears that the standard bearer is in a 3 man unit also. This shows me that the primaris marines are going to have rules designed with base units of 3, or at least the more elite versions of primaris marines will. I've always thought one way to make marines feel more like the fluff is to allow supper MSUs to be more prevalent.

Minimal size of 5 for normal squads and minimal size of 3 for more elite units. Just like Stormcast Eternals.

Or Crisis Suits which share a lot of the same statline as the new Primaris....

Not sure if serious? XV8's hit worse on both stats, move faster, have more wounds and can take between 3-9...

NuMarines are basically terminators in worse armor. Not sure how well they will work since they aren't as curable (durable, left it because it's hilarious ) as a terminator and obviously more expensive then a marine. I am hoping they don't pull the old habit of making them WAY too cheap. I am a bit concerned seeing how a regular marine is now 13ppm. I'd guess to justify lower cost for the new guy.

tneva82 wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:
I suppose, if you have a unit rolling 12+ LasCannon shots, it could slow the game down. I'm not familiar with any units that do that. And we're all already used to rolling results separately; when shooting LasCannons at a unit of War Walkers, for example, we roll the results one at a time to see if we get 'Explodes' results.

This will very much be like that: "Is he dead yet? No? Here's the next LasCannon's Damage roll." "Is he dead NOW? NO?! Good grief, here's the NEXT LasCannon's Damage roll...."

10 support marines from legions list says hi. Also predator annihilator has 4 lascannons so multiple wounds incoming, land raider likewise and spartan from FW will have whopping 8 lascannon shots.

And apart from who rolled vehicle damage separately that's still not same as that was 1 dice one at a time. Here it woudl be dice followed by multiple dice followed by same process set.

Don't see them going that way. Especially as there's perfectly working way to ensure no separate rolling. After rolling for damage trim excess damage to amount of wounds model has.

And in case of units with multiple wound values?

tneva82 wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:
I suppose, if you have a unit rolling 12+ LasCannon shots, it could slow the game down. I'm not familiar with any units that do that. And we're all already used to rolling results separately; when shooting LasCannons at a unit of War Walkers, for example, we roll the results one at a time to see if we get 'Explodes' results.

This will very much be like that: "Is he dead yet? No? Here's the next LasCannon's Damage roll." "Is he dead NOW? NO?! Good grief, here's the NEXT LasCannon's Damage roll...."

10 support marines from legions list says hi. Also predator annihilator has 4 lascannons so multiple wounds incoming, land raider likewise and spartan from FW will have whopping 8 lascannon shots.

And apart from who rolled vehicle damage separately that's still not same as that was 1 dice one at a time. Here it woudl be dice followed by multiple dice followed by same process set.

Don't see them going that way. Especially as there's perfectly working way to ensure no separate rolling. After rolling for damage trim excess damage to amount of wounds model has.

Pred Annihilator's TL Lascannon is now 2x Lascannon?????? That seems.. are you sure?

 astro_nomicon wrote:

If it is indeed a more streamlined version I could see the order of operations you posted being plausible. If that is the case though, I would like to see the maximum number of casualties be the number of failed armor saves. If it's equivalent to hits then that's two steps of the damage resolution process that would be subsequently reversed. ie 5 hits, 4 wounds, 3 failed saves but if using multiple damage weapons you can suddenly kill 5 models again. That seems like a lot of damage spill over. Where as using the failed saves as a cap the most you could kill was 3. I'm

Or against W3 models with lascannon doing 2, 6 and 5 wounds you turn that into 2, 3 and 3 wounds=8 wounds to be saved.

No damage spilling, no damage rolling one by one.

I love the size of the pimaris, they're perfect!

But whoa, that captain is bigger than I though. I assumed that this was some sort of an artificer armour rather than a terminator equivalent, but now I'm not so sure any more... I hope this is not the design for the primaris termies, it is not terminatory enough for my liking...

 MLaw wrote:
Pred Annihilator's TL Lascannon is now 2x Lascannon?????? That seems.. are you sure?

Twin linked is now 2x shots. So 2 shots from turret, 2 from sponsons.

tneva82 wrote:

 MLaw wrote:
Pred Annihilator's TL Lascannon is now 2x Lascannon?????? That seems.. are you sure?

Twin linked is now 2x shots. So 2 shots from turret, 2 from sponsons.

Wow.. that's crazy! Looks like I need to clear out some time to read as the changes seem far more sweeping than I first thought..

 Crimson wrote:
I love the size of the pimaris, they're perfect!

But whoa, that captain is bigger than I though. I assumed that this was some sort of an artificer armour rather than a terminator equivalent, but now I'm not so sure any more... I hope this is not the design for the primaris termies, it is not terminatory enough for my liking...

The captain is huge. Absolutely huge.

Here's hoping I get a version of one with the Jetpack.

Not sure if this was already posted, but just in case it hasnt been:

http://www.miniwars.eu/2017/05/reglamento-warhammer-40000.html


I am slightly confused by the movement rule.

Currently the movement rules for tanks were FAQ'ed to prevent people from deploying sideways on their 12 inches line, pivoting turn 1 and moving up 12 inches, effectively gaining 0.5 to 1 inche depending on the model size. Basically no parts of your vehicules could finish at more than 12 inches from it's original spot, no matter the facing / pivot.


Those new rules seem to indicate that if you move 12 inches forward, stop and then pivot slightly to get a different angle on your target for LOS purposes you would end up moving the back of your hull more than 12 inches and as such would be illegal.

This seems like it would slow down the current process of measure a spot 6 or 12 inches away from your tank, picking it up and putting it down however you want as long as it's not outside of that original mark. Now if you don't keep the exact same positioning, parts of your hull are bound to have moved more than 12 inches.


Am I understanding this correctly?

Sweet Nurgle Jesus.

I would have liked the grenade dude DNA to be stronger in the other DGs instead of big horns and maws, but those cultists. The grins. The weapons! The gas masks!! The everything!!! And the "lab coat" making the doctors-turned-Nurgle astronauts easier to do.

The set ia damn expensive, though, so no doubling up at first.i hope that the other kits drop aoon after.

Rough, estimate of points in that starter set for marines:


Assuming Primaris Marines are 20pts per model
Plasma guns are +7 pts per model.
Jump packs are probaby 15pts per model.

10 Primaris Marines ≈ 200 pts
5 Hellblaster Marines ≈ 135 pts
3 Inceptor Marines ≈ 105pts
1 Lieutenant with power sword ≈ 80 pts
1 Lieutenant with Bolt rifle ≈ 80 pts
1 Primaris Ancient ≈ 100pts
1 Captian in Gravis armor ≈ 150pts

Approximately, 950 to 1000 pts?

Voldrak wrote:
Not sure if this was already posted, but just in case it hasnt been:

http://www.miniwars.eu/2017/05/reglamento-warhammer-40000.html


I am slightly confused by the movement rule.

Currently the movement rules for tanks were FAQ'ed to prevent people from deploying sideways on their 12 inches line, pivoting turn 1 and moving up 12 inches, effectively gaining 0.5 to 1 inche depending on the model size. Basically no parts of your vehicules could finish at more than 12 inches from it's original spot, no matter the facing / pivot.


Those new rules seem to indicate that if you move 12 inches forward, stop and then pivot slightly to get a different angle on your target for LOS purposes you would end up moving the back of your hull more than 12 inches and as such would be illegal.

This seems like it would slow down the current process of measure a spot 6 or 12 inches away from your tank, picking it up and putting it down however you want as long as it's not outside of that original mark. Now if you don't keep the exact same positioning, parts of your hull are bound to have moved more than 12 inches.


Am I understanding this correctly?

Measure from the back and you're good.

The new models all look amazing.

That said, to me, the scale between Primaris and bog standard Marines is too far off for them to look good side by side.

It always used to bother me when toy companies did this with action figures when I was growing up, still does with these big-boy toys.

Oh I forgot to mention. I just seen the answer that existing marines can be upgraded into nu-marines. So I'm calming down about them now. I just hope they are balanced is all.

We are assuming that is what the Ancient is in those photos.

Voldrak wrote:
Not sure if this was already posted, but just in case it hasnt been:

http://www.miniwars.eu/2017/05/reglamento-warhammer-40000.html


I am slightly confused by the movement rule.

Currently the movement rules for tanks were FAQ'ed to prevent people from deploying sideways on their 12 inches line, pivoting turn 1 and moving up 12 inches, effectively gaining 0.5 to 1 inche depending on the model size. Basically no parts of your vehicules could finish at more than 12 inches from it's original spot, no matter the facing / pivot.


Those new rules seem to indicate that if you move 12 inches forward, stop and then pivot slightly to get a different angle on your target for LOS purposes you would end up moving the back of your hull more than 12 inches and as such would be illegal.

This seems like it would slow down the current process of measure a spot 6 or 12 inches away from your tank, picking it up and putting it down however you want as long as it's not outside of that original mark. Now if you don't keep the exact same positioning, parts of your hull are bound to have moved more than 12 inches.


Am I understanding this correctly?

This is mostly just to combat all the vehicles deploying sideways on the deployment line and pivoting in the first turn to gain a couple inches of movement. As long as you're not doing something like that I can't imagine people will be too anal, especially with armor facings being tossed out.

That's also how the rule works in 7th after the FAQs, and I've not heard too much trouble with it.

Youn wrote:
We are assuming that is what the Ancient is in those photos.

Ancient is what they call Standard Bearers. It's a revered title.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lieutenants make sense with the new patrol detachment. You can't always have a Captain to lead 10 guys.