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.

I'd like to see them implement a "blind" placement of units. I don't know how you'd make it work, but the basic idea is that you don't know what your opponent is placing until you're both done and lift the "fog of war".

Would be cool I think.

 AnonAmbientLight wrote:
I'd like to see them implement a "blind" placement of units. I don't know how you'd make it work, but the basic idea is that you don't know what your opponent is placing until you're both done and lift the "fog of war".

Would be cool I think.

Could always stick a giant slab of cardboard in the middle of the table...

 AnonAmbientLight wrote:
I'd like to see them implement a "blind" placement of units. I don't know how you'd make it work, but the basic idea is that you don't know what your opponent is placing until you're both done and lift the "fog of war".

Would be cool I think.

Place "blips" instead of units and then after all is deployed put models on the table.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 AnonAmbientLight wrote:
I'd like to see them implement a "blind" placement of units. I don't know how you'd make it work, but the basic idea is that you don't know what your opponent is placing until you're both done and lift the "fog of war".

Would be cool I think.

Could always stick a giant slab of cardboard in the middle of the table...

Yea, that was one thought. You could put a screen or something blocking vision on the other side of the table. One issue would be infiltration units, but I suppose that could also be a different kind of placement. Maybe make it so you can deploy 12" from their deployment zone or something.

 Kervin wrote:

 AnonAmbientLight wrote:
I'd like to see them implement a "blind" placement of units. I don't know how you'd make it work, but the basic idea is that you don't know what your opponent is placing until you're both done and lift the "fog of war".

Would be cool I think.

Place "blips" instead of units and then after all is deployed put models on the table.

Yea, you could do it that way. Place markers on the table and each one is an unknown unit. So Super heavy and heavy support could be the same sized "large" blip. Medium sized models could be a "medium" blip and small could be smaller models, etc. Then again, your opponent can probably see what you're taking and just guess.


Or even marking things down on a piece of paper so you have proof that this was how you wanted to deploy so you can point to that after you're set up.

Might be a fun house rule kind of thing.

We tried the you deploy everything then i deploy everything about 4 months ago in my flgs as a way to fix the player 1 wins because player 1 goes first crap. It actually does do a lot to help make going 2nd have its own advantages, and with the smoke screen strat (player 2 is in cover t1) its really looking good to me. Anything that helps speed up deployment in a tournament setting is also ok by me. Spending 20 minutes setting up and constantly trying to figure out whats left to deploy and what the opposition has left that needs to be counter deployed when it hits the table..... this will be quicker and less stressful for sure. Player 1 will get to set the tempo of the battle from their initial deployment and player 2 will get to decide how he wishes to respond.

Are base terminator without weapons at 23 points confirmed? That's actually quite reasonable. Chaos terminator with combi bolter and power axe would be 30 points. A squad of 5 terminators would only cost 150 points.

That's quite ok really. Having something like that which can shoot the turn it comes down in, and possibly make that 9 inch charge into something is nice. Even if it gets shot off the board the turn after, that's just 150 points. And not everyone runs 2 wound weapons like plasmas.

And godhammer land raider got a 60 points reduction (all in) ? That's pretty neat too. If you run three, that's 180 points cost reduction. You can buy more than 1 terminator squad with that.

The Land Raider reduction is welcome, but not sufficient to make them useful. Realistically the base chassis cost should be less than double that of a Rhino, because while you’re getting about double the durability, you’re getting the same transport capacity. You could the base cost say 125pts, which might sound like a bargain, but consider that it’s still a 242pt tank that’s going to die the moment any unit of note gives it a funny look. A better solution would be to give it a Steel Behemoth style rule that lets it shoot despite having a unit within 1” and park it at 140pts. It still wouldn’t solve the fact that assault transports don’t mechanically work this edition but it would at least be a respectable gunboat.

Terminators at 23pts is almost ok, they’re just hurt by weapon costs. The variants that can take a Power Weapon and Storm Bolter are hurt less, but those compelled to take Fists/Claws aren’t happy. You could drop Power Swords/Mauls to 2pts, Axes to 3, Claws to 5 single/7pair, Fists to 8 and Thunder Hammers to 10 (maybe with a higher cost for the upper weapons for Characters) quite comfortably. Then you’d be looking at 27 for a Combi Bolter/Power Sword, 30 for twin Claws, 33 for Combi Bolter/Fist and 38 for TH/SS. That’d make them a reasonable throwaway tough-ish unit.

A better solution though would be just to keep their current point cost and to add the following rule to an errata:

Shock Troops: All units with the Terminator keyword halve damage inflicted upon them (rounding up) and when arriving from reserves may do so at least 6” away from enemy units rather than at least 9”.

In a stroke you’d make Terminators table-worthy again without bringing back Melta Termicide.

30 point axe chaos termis sound pretty reasonable to me. Like I said, not everyone runs plasma guns or 2 wound weapons. If someone shoots a lascannon at a 29 or 30 point terminator, as far as I am considered, that a win. A double win if he makes his invulnerable save.

And if they charge into a backline objective, likely they will be hard to dislodge from said objective. Any scout or small infantry unit will probably be destroyed by them. And shooting at termi armor in cover is tough. They will get a 3+ save even against AP -2 weapons.

Don't know if a 60 point reduction in Land raider is enough. But you have to consider that it comes with 4 lascannons and a twin heavy bolter (godhammer standard LR). A rhino doesn't have that kind of fire power.

3 LRs have 12 lascannons and 18 heavy bolter shots. (And thats not counting whatever nasty stuff you are going to pack into 3 land raiders lol). That alone is some pretty hefty shooting.

Lascannon predators got cheaper by 10 points too. But a godhammer LR is 300 points thereabouts, while a tri lascannon predator is 180 points. So, for 120 more points, you are getting 6 more heavy bolter shots, T8 over T7, and 5 more wounds. and a 2+ save over a 3+ save. The transport capacity is a bonus, but if you do have say berzerkers you want to pack into your Land raider, its pure icing on the cake.

3 Landraiders packed with 30 berzerkers are pretty scary. And the cost reduction means you have spare points to buy other threatening stuff too. Like maybe those Greater daemons that also got a point reduction, or just plain more shooting.

ERJAK wrote:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
Players getting to automatically go first depending on drops should never have been lost, IMO.

Those big models and transports helping you guarantee first turn helped against the power of spamming units for command points.

The fact people complained about transport costs, but also complained about this system always struck me as silly.

We still use it in my group, and bringing an extra transport to pile 6 characters in gives me a lot of security to make my harlies get first turn.

It doesn't work in competitive play. Too easy to build a sub 5 drop leafblower list that can wipe half your opponents army in one turn. The rule didn't come from nowhere. Bringing a transport in this situation is either how you guarantee going first or suicide. Nothing was actually 'transporting' anything during the time this rule was standard. If you did that with your harlequins in a real game, they'd pop the transport and get a free character kill. Tournaments were already instituting the current rule just to keep games from ending turn 1.

... If armies can still do that without going first then what is the point of changing this rule? My gaming group still uses the old rule, my army drops for around 2000 points is 7. I can't remember the last time someone got the drop on me, and my harlies are in their deployment zone turn one. People are talking about how strategically important it is to know if you're going second and deploying accordingly. That was already built in by means of your army construction.

I just think people overreacted to the rule as it was.

 Rydria wrote:
I'd like to see a points tweek on most of the Slaanesh daemons, I feel they are slightly over costed at the moment, at least compared to other daemon units that fulfil a similar or same niche.

The Keep of secrets going down to 150pts is a nice start though likely not enough for it to see play outside casual games.

My hope for Slaanesh daemons is for updated rules in Wrath and Rapture's 40K rules; and new KOS rules with the new model. As even at 150 pts the Keeper is still inferior to the a Daemon Prince.

 AnonAmbientLight wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 AnonAmbientLight wrote:
I'd like to see them implement a "blind" placement of units. I don't know how you'd make it work, but the basic idea is that you don't know what your opponent is placing until you're both done and lift the "fog of war".

Would be cool I think.

Could always stick a giant slab of cardboard in the middle of the table...

Yea, that was one thought. You could put a screen or something blocking vision on the other side of the table. One issue would be infiltration units, but I suppose that could also be a different kind of placement. Maybe make it so you can deploy 12" from their deployment zone or something.

 Kervin wrote:

 AnonAmbientLight wrote:
I'd like to see them implement a "blind" placement of units. I don't know how you'd make it work, but the basic idea is that you don't know what your opponent is placing until you're both done and lift the "fog of war".

Would be cool I think.

Place "blips" instead of units and then after all is deployed put models on the table.

Yea, you could do it that way. Place markers on the table and each one is an unknown unit. So Super heavy and heavy support could be the same sized "large" blip. Medium sized models could be a "medium" blip and small could be smaller models, etc. Then again, your opponent can probably see what you're taking and just guess.


Or even marking things down on a piece of paper so you have proof that this was how you wanted to deploy so you can point to that after you're set up.

Might be a fun house rule kind of thing.

There is actually at least one scenario that uses rules like that.

kombatwombat wrote:
The Land Raider reduction is welcome, but not sufficient to make them useful. Realistically the base chassis cost should be less than double that of a Rhino, because while you’re getting about double the durability, you’re getting the same transport capacity. You could the base cost say 125pts, which might sound like a bargain, but consider that it’s still a 242pt tank that’s going to die the moment any unit of note gives it a funny look. A better solution would be to give it a Steel Behemoth style rule that lets it shoot despite having a unit within 1” and park it at 140pts. It still wouldn’t solve the fact that assault transports don’t mechanically work this edition but it would at least be a respectable gunboat.

Terminators at 23pts is almost ok, they’re just hurt by weapon costs. The variants that can take a Power Weapon and Storm Bolter are hurt less, but those compelled to take Fists/Claws aren’t happy. You could drop Power Swords/Mauls to 2pts, Axes to 3, Claws to 5 single/7pair, Fists to 8 and Thunder Hammers to 10 (maybe with a higher cost for the upper weapons for Characters) quite comfortably. Then you’d be looking at 27 for a Combi Bolter/Power Sword, 30 for twin Claws, 33 for Combi Bolter/Fist and 38 for TH/SS. That’d make them a reasonable throwaway tough-ish unit.

A better solution though would be just to keep their current point cost and to add the following rule to an errata:

Shock Troops: All units with the Terminator keyword halve damage inflicted upon them (rounding up) and when arriving from reserves may do so at least 6” away from enemy units rather than at least 9”.

In a stroke you’d make Terminators table-worthy again without bringing back Melta Termicide.

Aaaand you just made hyper oppressive smash captains but way, way nastier.

Good job!

Yeah, nothing should ever get an exception from the 9" rule - that's one of greatest achievements of 8th.

Halving all damage - that I can get behind.

 Jidmah wrote:
Yeah, nothing should ever get an exception from the 9" rule - that's one of greatest achievements of 8th.

I can see some very special units getting exceptions, like Eversor assassins. You pretty much have the same thing with increased charge range though.

The thing that hurts the 8th edition assault phase (except for super boosted shooting phase) is that certain unit types (fly keyword) can fall back and shoot without penalty so entire "fly" armies have great advantage against assault units who struggle to reach the enemy in the first place. Also the fly keyword in assaults is so OP making all other types obsolete (cavalry, bikers etc). Thats why you only see jumpack type units as dedicated assault units and not bikers or cavalry.In the CA2018 they should bring the old wobly model syndrome back where anything can assault anything if it gets the distance wheather it fits or not wheather it is on a ruin or not (excluding flyers ). There will be less fighting for who fits and who doesnt, more variety of assault units and alittle boost for the assault phase in general.

The problem with the assault phase isn't the fly keyword, it is every unit being able to leave an assault with only the most minor of penalties.

If you turn tail and run in middle of a melee, you should pay for it. Should be a roll off for mortal wounds from the attacker. (or something to that effect). As it is right now, it's basically "oh you assaulted me, aww shucks, guess I'll just pull back and have my army obliterate you"

As it is right now, the whole trick to melee is surrounding a member of an enemy unit and boxing them in, and not killing them, so you can't just get shot up the next round after you kill everything in melee.

 Jidmah wrote:
Yeah, nothing should ever get an exception from the 9" rule - that's one of greatest achievements of 8th.

Halving all damage - that I can get behind.

How is it really different from deploying 9" but getting enough modifiers that odds are same as charging normally but deploying closer? As it is we have stuff doing the 9" charges with 74% odds without even factorin rerolls. About same as rolling 6" on 2d6(bit better actually)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 greggles wrote:
The problem with the assault phase isn't the fly keyword, it is every unit being able to leave an assault with only the most minor of penalties.

If you turn tail and run in middle of a melee, you should pay for it. Should be a roll off for mortal wounds from the attacker. (or something to that effect). As it is right now, it's basically "oh you assaulted me, aww shucks, guess I'll just pull back and have my army obliterate you"

As it is right now, the whole trick to melee is surrounding a member of an enemy unit and boxing them in, and not killing them, so you can't just get shot up the next round after you kill everything in melee.

Of course the units that don't get bothered by the penalties are cheap chaff designed to stop attack. At which point few mortal wounds aren't going to worry. I don't expect them to survive long enough to fall back anyway

At least those units get the penalty that they cannot shoot the following turn which is something . I agree with you there must also be a mechanic that leaves a chance for the melee to continue and not just be an automatic fall back move

Oooo I lose bunch of lasgun/grot blasta/whatever shots. I'm so heartbroken! Especially with 1-3 survivors that might actually make it!

 lonewolf81 wrote:
At least those units get the penalty that they cannot shoot the following turn which is something . I agree with you there must also be a mechanic that leaves a chance for the melee to continue and not just be an automatic fall back move

Yeah, I understand the immersion break that fall back is supposed to prevent - the old "no, we can't shoot them sir, we might hit our one guardsman!!!"

but if I implemented it, it'd just be "when you declare a fall back, any units you're within 1" of can immediately attack you (but not pile in)" then just totally remove the "no shooting" stipulation.

Your couple guardsmen falling back from a squad of khorne bezerkers? They should get utterly cut down. But that's OK, it was still a tactical choice, and now your army can shoot them.

Your three gretchin engaged with a leman russ tank? They'll just plink off the hull as it trundles by and keeps shooting.

Do GK finally become playable with pt reductions for GM in NDK, Purifiers, and Paladins, and the introduction of normal SMITE for GK.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Do GK finally become playable with pt reductions for GM in NDK, Purifiers, and Paladins, and the introduction of normal SMITE for GK.

Do we have rumors of exactly what their pts changes are? I heard 26ppm termies, 16ppm strikes, 32ppm paladins and a,couple other odds and ends like Crowe but no numbers on other stuff.

I suspect well need a bigger picture particularly because a big question remains in how they can deal with tanks.

 lonewolf81 wrote:
The thing that hurts the 8th edition assault phase (except for super boosted shooting phase) is that certain unit types (fly keyword) can fall back and shoot without penalty so entire "fly" armies have great advantage against assault units who struggle to reach the enemy in the first place. Also the fly keyword in assaults is so OP making all other types obsolete (cavalry, bikers etc). Thats why you only see jumpack type units as dedicated assault units and not bikers or cavalry.In the CA2018 they should bring the old wobly model syndrome back where anything can assault anything if it gets the distance wheather it fits or not wheather it is on a ruin or not (excluding flyers ). There will be less fighting for who fits and who doesnt, more variety of assault units and alittle boost for the assault phase in general.

Just a straight up NOOOOOOO to your total butchering of the wobbly model rule.
Wobbly model rule is still in 8th edition what your describing is a balanket ignore terrain rule becasue I want to be able to assualt things with cart blanch.
Wobbly model is to protect your model from falling and being damaged should the table/terrain be bumped, not to allow your models to spontaneously levitate.

terrain is still there for cover saves, line of sight blocking and vertical movement
Assault phase and units like dreadnoughts,cavalry, bikers and monsters (without fly) need all the help they can get.
Otherwise all you see will be castles shooting each other and fly units alround.
Why should anyone pay a load of points for an assault unit that can be so easily denied its assault . So many units are made obsolete because the opponent knows you cant fit or you cant climb a terrain piece right from the start, after an already superbuffed shooting phase.

 lonewolf81 wrote:
terrain is still there for cover saves, line of sight blocking and vertical movement
Assault phase and units like dreadnoughts,cavalry, bikers and monsters (without fly) need all the help they can get.
Otherwise all you see will be castles shooting each other and fly units alround.
Why should anyone pay a load of points for an assault unit that can be so easily denied its assault . So many units are made obsolete because the opponent knows you cant fit or you cant climb a terrain piece right from the start, after an already superbuffed shooting phase.

Check FAQ2 Fly nolonger allows you to ignore terrain or enemy models outside the movement phase.

Infantry can assualt through ruins as if they weren't there anywah you just need to make sure and clear some space for a model to end it's charge in.

What you propose just oppens the door for people to abuse wobbly model to magically be able tlto break the rules.

 Jidmah wrote:
Yeah, nothing should ever get an exception from the 9" rule - that's one of greatest achievements of 8th.

Halving all damage - that I can get behind.

Except we already have it in the Callidus assassin

I feel they need to use model height for melee combat in 40k.

The idea that my melee wraithknight cannot hurt a model on the first floor of a ruin because he can't reach them is pretty ridiculous.

Ice_can wrote:

 lonewolf81 wrote:
terrain is still there for cover saves, line of sight blocking and vertical movement
Assault phase and units like dreadnoughts,cavalry, bikers and monsters (without fly) need all the help they can get.
Otherwise all you see will be castles shooting each other and fly units alround.
Why should anyone pay a load of points for an assault unit that can be so easily denied its assault . So many units are made obsolete because the opponent knows you cant fit or you cant climb a terrain piece right from the start, after an already superbuffed shooting phase.

Check FAQ2 Fly nolonger allows you to ignore terrain or enemy models outside the movement phase.

Infantry can assualt through ruins as if they weren't there anywah you just need to make sure and clear some space for a model to end it's charge in.

What you propose just oppens the door for people to abuse wobbly model to magically be able tlto break the rules.

I have read the FAQ, it doesnt change the fact that fly units can reach anything/anywhere in assault, why should anyone pay for any other unit type.
If realism is your problem, imagine that cavalry and bikes assault like infantry through rubble and stairs and dreads or monsters grab infantry from the balconies or something.
My point is that you loose variety from the table. No one plays those units (just for fun maybe) because of those restrictions. A change like this wont brake the game because shooting phase and smite spam psychic phase are already superior to assault
phase
Also you still have to roll the distance to reach the enemy like you do with the infantry how can someone abuse that. The abusement happens now, where everyone plays flyrants, jetbike custodes captains, flying demon princes and slam lords and not melee dreads, characters on thunderwolves, juggernaut chaos lords, monsters on foot etc

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
I feel they need to use model height for melee combat in 40k.

The idea that my melee wraithknight cannot hurt a model on the first floor of a ruin because he can't reach them is pretty ridiculous.

It should just be a simple rule if your models melee weapons are level with the model in the ruins you can attack it. As it stands now my 60 foot tall chaos knight with a 15 long sword cant hit a man standing on top of a 3ft wall

Open play preview is up:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/12/04/4th-dec-chapter-approved-2018-open-playgw-homepage-post-1/