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.

Would be nice if they offered just the rulebooks (maybe with tokens). I already have more than enough dice, including d12s.

I'd imagine there will be a digital version soon enough even if there isn't a physical book only option

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I'd imagine there will be a digital version soon enough even if there isn't a physical book only option

But if the game mechanics are based on cards, is it worth picking up a digital copy?

Also, does everyone on a side need a deck, or just the overall warlord?

I see a lot of ground troops and transports. Not much in the way of aircraft... Any updates on those?

 Nevelon wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I'd imagine there will be a digital version soon enough even if there isn't a physical book only option

But if the game mechanics are based on cards, is it worth picking up a digital copy?

Also, does everyone on a side need a deck, or just the overall warlord?

The army Warmaster (one side’s overall commander) gets to draw cards equal to the number of Warlords (detachment commanders with the character trait) plus one. No mention of extra decks for anyone.

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I'd imagine there will be a digital version soon enough even if there isn't a physical book only option

But if the game mechanics are based on cards, is it worth picking up a digital copy?

Also, does everyone on a side need a deck, or just the overall warlord?

The army Warmaster (one side’s overall commander) gets to draw cards equal to the number of Warlords (detachment commanders with the character trait) plus one. No mention of extra decks for anyone.

To a Max of 10.

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I'd imagine there will be a digital version soon enough even if there isn't a physical book only option

But if the game mechanics are based on cards, is it worth picking up a digital copy?

Also, does everyone on a side need a deck, or just the overall warlord?

The army Warmaster (one side’s overall commander) gets to draw cards equal to the number of Warlords (detachment commanders with the character trait) plus one. No mention of extra decks for anyone.

So detachment spam is the preferred method in apoc also. Still boggles my mind that GW thinks that *more* commanders in a battle equals a higher degree of organization. They really need to hire some UK veterans :p

Oh look, more RNG idiocy to ruin the game. Just when I was thinking that the new Apocalypse looks like a good idea GW has to go and prove that it's the same old mindless exercise in "do some RNG for 9999 hours" masochism.

 Kirasu wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I'd imagine there will be a digital version soon enough even if there isn't a physical book only option

But if the game mechanics are based on cards, is it worth picking up a digital copy?

Also, does everyone on a side need a deck, or just the overall warlord?

The army Warmaster (one side’s overall commander) gets to draw cards equal to the number of Warlords (detachment commanders with the character trait) plus one. No mention of extra decks for anyone.

So detachment spam is the preferred method in apoc also. Still boggles my mind that GW thinks that *more* commanders in a battle equals a higher degree of organization. They really need to hire some UK veterans :p

Too many CO can be a problem. Just one on the other hand is a bigger one.

If that's how damage works it seems it's very easy to kill units (Guilliman has 2 wounds?).

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If that's how damage works it seems it's very easy to kill units (Guilliman has 2 wounds?).

But he does have a 2+ save on a d12 or d6. With AP seemingly not a thing. Dude should be able to take a fair bit of firepower. And we don't yet know if you can target characters and the like. He'll probably have some shenanigans.

Yay! Symbols on the 1s! No reason why we should pick one system and stick with it, especially when you roll boatloads of dice.

The price is going to kill it. I saw the scenery, and its looking good to be a Necromunda player...

catbarf wrote:
The idea with having small blasts (saved on D12) coalesce into large blasts (saved on D6) is interesting.

Thought experiment: Double the number of wounds on everything. Eliminate blasts as a concept, just track hits inflicted. Anything that says it causes a large blast instead causes two hits. Take all saves on a D6.

The result is statistically equivalent to the system GW just previewed- on a 3+ save, one D12 and one D6 averages exactly half as many failed saves (0.5) as just three D6s (1). What they've essentially done with this mechanic is halve the expected damage output for each unit, presumably either to reduce bookkeeping (number of wounds per unit), or to interact with some other mechanic they've yet to reveal.

I'm definitely curious to see where this goes.

Assuming there are no 7+ saves which you can't save on d6 but can on d12. And weren't primaris marines(the ones sporting power armour) previewed to have 6+? Kinda indicates stuff like IG troopers, orks, gretchin etc are going to have worse than 6+ save don't you think?

Statistically 12 small blast markers vs 9+ save will result in 8 failures. 12 large 12 failures. Your idea would result in 12 failures from small blast markers and 24 from blast markers. I would say that's significant difference.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Messiah wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

 FEARtheMoose wrote:
Not sure im a fan of the randomness of having a card deck in that fashion [draw X amount etc]. I would rather the cards be used the same way as stradgems [can use whichever one whenever] and then maybe limit the amount you can use per turn / phase or similar.

Randomizing is probably the only way to avoid the problem stratagems have. There's a handful of good ones, and they have a strict hierarchy of use. Even if you limit it to one use only, you know exactly which one your opponent will play first, which one second, and so on. It gets dull with time.

Considering stratagems are meant as a way to mitigate randomness/bad luck, I dont agree.

So you can't tell exactly what stratagems your opponents in 40k will be doing? Go and read their codexes more then! As it is you can tell most of the stratagems they will be using just by checking their faction, rest by checking specific army list.

I kind of like l=what I see of the rules so far. That being said I don't understand using both d6s and d12s. You could just roll a d12 and cut the result in half.

Maybe they want to display things as easily as possible? If you have to roll 3 d6 and 7 d12 then it would be easier to have a handful of both. Not saying that's the reason just a possibility.

 Grot 6 wrote:
The price is going to kill it. I saw the scenery, and its looking good to be a Necromunda player...

Saw the scenery?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
With Primaris having a 6+ save, seems very likely anyone lighter will be blatted by large markers though.

This is where I think unit size will heavily decide matters. The preview says "when the number of damage markers equals the unit’s Wounds characteristic the unit is destroyed". That implies you don't remove models like in 40k, just the whole unit at a time. Horde units may well get a 7+ or 8+ save on a D12, but you can make up for it by taking 20-30 models for maximum number of wounds. I think we'll see something like:
10 Boyz = 2 wounds
20 Boyz = 4 wounds
30 Boyz = 6 wounds

So until you do 6 wounds, all 30 of those Boyz keep on fighting. It would be a nice trade-off against just going MSU for maximum detachments & warlords.

 McMagnus Mindbullets wrote:

 laam999 wrote:
Any info on the size of the Crusade Case XL that's in the price leaks? I'm curious as to how big this is as im running out of storage for my AdMech and have no room left for my Templars.

Haven't seen anything about this. What is it?

Remember that last Sunday's article was a 'pre-preview' as they're doing another two-week intro period like with Contrast. The full 'Coming Soon' article will be this Sunday and I expect will also include pictures of the new case and datasheet packs.

 Grot 6 wrote:
The price is going to kill it.

I was hesitant on the price at first, but then I realised that:
1) Thanks to the free datasheet downloads the box covers everything in a one-time purchase. Unlike 40k you don't need to pickup Index: Imperium or Codex: Titans to use each army you own, and if you do want more D12's you don't need to buy them from GW.
2) While the movement trays are optional, the new plastic GW ones are actually cheaper (and look better) than the MDF ones a lot of smaller hobby shops do. They're something I'd definitely use for 40k games too.

 Lance845 wrote:
I kind of like l=what I see of the rules so far. That being said I don't understand using both d6s and d12s. You could just roll a d12 and cut the result in half.

No you can't; see the discussion above about saves worse than 6+.

A 7+ save against a small blast marker succeeds 50% of the time. Against a large blast marker, it succeeds 0%. Light units under heavy fire will simply get eliminated. But at least they'll get to shoot back before they die.

It also means you have the choise to make; do you pull back that unit with a small blast marker before it suffers further hits, or leave them in place to draw fire while another detachment attacks?

1) Thanks to the free datasheet downloads the box covers everything in a one-time purchase. Unlike 40k you don't need to pickup Index: Imperium or Codex: Titans to use each army you own, and if you do want more D12's you don't need to buy them from GW.

Is that definitely confirmed? (If it is, thats good news ).

 Ratius wrote:

1) Thanks to the free datasheet downloads the box covers everything in a one-time purchase. Unlike 40k you don't need to pickup Index: Imperium or Codex: Titans to use each army you own, and if you do want more D12's you don't need to buy them from GW.

Is that definitely confirmed? (If it is, thats good news ).

they've confirmed free datasheets yes, although IIRC they'll sell books of the more popular stuff for those who like dead tree format.

There is a secondary deck of cards which adds new stuff - but the way its billed, it's not a necessary purchase.

Though of course, depending on what the cards actually are and do? Subject to popular opinion


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 xttz wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
With Primaris having a 6+ save, seems very likely anyone lighter will be blatted by large markers though.

This is where I think unit size will heavily decide matters. The preview says "when the number of damage markers equals the unit’s Wounds characteristic the unit is destroyed". That implies you don't remove models like in 40k, just the whole unit at a time. Horde units may well get a 7+ or 8+ save on a D12, but you can make up for it by taking 20-30 models for maximum number of wounds. I think we'll see something like:
10 Boyz = 2 wounds
20 Boyz = 4 wounds
30 Boyz = 6 wounds

So until you do 6 wounds, all 30 of those Boyz keep on fighting. It would be a nice trade-off against just going MSU for maximum detachments & warlords.

I'm thinking it may be Groups Of Five. But I'm saying that on admittedly limited evidence.

That evidence? The movement trays group them into 5s. And the Primaris Datasheet?



Unit Size 5. Wounds 2.

So here, we can confidentally say a unit of 5 Primaris can be a single target. Two failed saves, and those 5 are removed.

Now, how that works when dealing with larger formations? It could be a you suggest, and you simply bump up the number of wounds every time you add another grouping of 5. (So 10 Intercessors would need 4 unsaved wounds, and you remove them all. Only 3, both Groups of 5 remain)

Or, it could be that you just add Groups of 5, and remove one group each time the formation suffers the requisite number of wounds. (So 10 Intercessors suffer 3 unsaved wounds. 1 Group of 5 is removed, the other remains with 1 damage marker).

The way you described does strike as more 'fun' - I really need to pour on the firepower to remove Hordes, and that to makes for a good laugh. But, it's not particularly cinematic. So who knows!

Just wonder how different weapons per squad are going to work. Obviously there's a lot of abstraction, but that talk about a CSM squad with Chainswords or Bolters makes me wonder: What about the special/heavy weapons/squad leader upgrades?

These rules look pretty nice up until now.
Hopefully it will work well at 2000pts too. Normal 40K involves too many dice rolls and overall game time for me at that point limit.

Obviously there's a lot of abstraction, but that talk about a CSM squad with Chainswords or Bolters makes me wonder: What about the special/heavy weapons/squad leader upgrades?

I'd be surprised if they went that granular tbh.
A point extra in SAT or SAP maybe but thats it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Just wonder how different weapons per squad are going to work. Obviously there's a lot of abstraction, but that talk about a CSM squad with Chainswords or Bolters makes me wonder: What about the special/heavy weapons/squad leader upgrades?

The Killa Kan preview in the Ork article showed multiple weapons options, but then the entire squadron could take the same option.

The article does say it is a good idea to load up on rokkits for the 4+ BS, which hints at being able to choose individual loadouts for each Kan.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

I'm thinking it may be Groups Of Five. But I'm saying that on admittedly limited evidence.

That evidence? The movement trays group them into 5s. And the Primaris Datasheet?

My assumption (although again with little evidence) is that they'll base unit sizes on the current power level options in 40k:

"This unit contains 1 Intercessor Sergeant and 4 Intercessors. It can include up to 5 additional Intercessors (Power Rating +5)" would translate to two profiles in Apoc:

Intercessor Squad (5 models) 2 wounds 1 attack
Intercessor Squad (10 models) 4 wounds 2 attacks

Then this entry from 40k: "This unit contains 10 Ork Boyz. It can include up to 10 additional Ork Boyz (Power Rating +3) or up to 20 additional Ork Boyz (Power Rating +7)." Would become three profiles:

Ork Boyz (10 models) 2 wounds X attacks
Ork Boyz (20 models) 4 wounds Y attacks
Ork Boyz (30 models) 6 wounds Z attacks

These bundle boxes have come at bad time for me. I still have stacks of plastic from the Christmas battleforces. I might have to just give these a miss and wait for Christmas again to load up on the battleforces. Some of them are so tempting though!

Assumptions are all good, as they're all we've got at the moment!

However, I am somewhat intrigued by the following from the Orky preview....

Orky Preview wrote:How do you get a Snotling to kill a Titan? Simple – it’s all a matter of the force with which you throw it. Big Meks with Shokk Attack Guns are among Apocalypse’s deadliest shooting units, capable of dropping two shots with Destroyer (causing two blast markers on a successful roll to wound) up to 60” away!



That’s enough to nearly scrap an Imperial Knight! What’s more, Big Meks will help keep your vehicles up and running with their Big Mekaniak rule.

Emphasis is mine. So here, we can see the Shokk Attak Gun can lay down up to 4 blast markers. And from the other articles, it seems that would be 4 smol blast markers, swapped out for 2 large blast markers.

And that is seemingly enough to nearly kill an Imperial Knight model.

Does that mean Vehicles are going to have fewer wounds, but a better save?

 xttz wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

I'm thinking it may be Groups Of Five. But I'm saying that on admittedly limited evidence.

That evidence? The movement trays group them into 5s. And the Primaris Datasheet?

My assumption (although again with little evidence) is that they'll base unit sizes on the current power level options in 40k:

"This unit contains 1 Intercessor Sergeant and 4 Intercessors. It can include up to 5 additional Intercessors (Power Rating +5)" would translate to two profiles in Apoc:

Intercessor Squad (5 models) 2 wounds 1 attack
Intercessor Squad (10 models) 4 wounds 2 attacks

Then this entry from 40k: "This unit contains 10 Ork Boyz. It can include up to 10 additional Ork Boyz (Power Rating +3) or up to 20 additional Ork Boyz (Power Rating +7)." Would become three profiles:

Ork Boyz (10 models) 2 wounds X attacks
Ork Boyz (20 models) 4 wounds Y attacks
Ork Boyz (30 models) 6 wounds Z attacks

Or each movement tray(5 models) is 1 unit. I find it unlikely unit w and attack stats will change.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Assumptions are all good, as they're all we've got at the moment!

However, I am somewhat intrigued by the following from the Orky preview....

Orky Preview wrote:How do you get a Snotling to kill a Titan? Simple – it’s all a matter of the force with which you throw it. Big Meks with Shokk Attack Guns are among Apocalypse’s deadliest shooting units, capable of dropping two shots with Destroyer (causing two blast markers on a successful roll to wound) up to 60” away!



That’s enough to nearly scrap an Imperial Knight! What’s more, Big Meks will help keep your vehicles up and running with their Big Mekaniak rule.

Emphasis is mine. So here, we can see the Shokk Attak Gun can lay down up to 4 blast markers. And from the other articles, it seems that would be 4 smol blast markers, swapped out for 2 large blast markers.

And that is seemingly enough to nearly kill an Imperial Knight model.

Does that mean Vehicles are going to have fewer wounds, but a better save?

Well in last epic main defences vehicles had were generally better saves and needing at weapns. At4+ was less common as ap4+.