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.

By the way, am i correct in my understanding that tanks and monsters now care about leadership? So i can take out a leman russ with a single small blast on it followed by a 7+ on the armor and a 5+ on ld?

Spoletta wrote:
By the way, am i correct in my understanding that tanks and monsters now care about leadership? So i can take out a leman russ with a single small blast on it followed by a 7+ on the armor and a 5+ on ld?

Ha! You're right. If the LRBT fails its save on the small blast marker and then rolls a 5+ on its morale check, it's gone. Also, if you pile on more blast markers and the tank actually makes its saves even against a large and a small, for example, a 4+ on morale will damage it.

It works the other way around, doesn't it? Morale test for the markers on it. Then resolve damage.

Otherwise you're always making morale tests against no markers, and morale damage wouldn't be resolved until the following round

Voss wrote:
It works the other way around, doesn't it? Morale test for the markers on it. Then resolve damage.

Otherwise you're always making morale tests against no markers, and morale damage wouldn't be resolved until the following round

In the video, they roll saves and apply damage before moving on to morale checks. There's also no mention anywhere of blast markers being removed... But they must be removed at some point, surely? Or did I miss it?

Have the prices of the movement trays been leaked yet?

 Alex_H wrote:
Have the prices of the movement trays been leaked yet?

£25

32,5 euros for 18 trays (small). Not cheap but not even usual GW level.

At the store I normally use it would cost £28.80 for 18 small MDF trays. They'll be selling the GW set after discount for £20, so I'm happy with that.

 xttz wrote:
At the store I normally use it would cost £28.80 for 18 small MDF trays. They'll be selling the GW set after discount for £20, so I'm happy with that.

Yeah the GW trays are honestly solidly cheaper than all the alternatives I can easily find online. I'm mildly impressed - every once in a while they come out with some random doodad that is reasonably priced.

Removed - BrookM

T'au Faction Focus up:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/06/27/apocalypse-faction-focus-tau-empiregw-homepage-post-4/

Hm, so that resolves the question of whether Age of Sigmar "shoot while in melee" is accompanying the evident removal of overwatch - it is not. Also, firing into melee appears to be similarly not a thing (I really hope there's an exception for some of the sillier instances, like "but sir, we can't fire on that warlord titan, we might hit our friend the grots!")

It really seems like, at the scale of the game, you should be able to use at least small arms fire against an opponent in base contact. But I guess their melee stats could just take that into account too.

the_scotsman wrote:
Hm, so that resolves the question of whether Age of Sigmar "shoot while in melee" is accompanying the evident removal of overwatch - it is not. Also, firing into melee appears to be similarly not a thing (I really hope there's an exception for some of the sillier instances, like "but sir, we can't fire on that warlord titan, we might hit our friend the grots!")

Just took another look at the video. Seems to me that units that get charged before it was their turn don't get to shoot. Instead they're allowed to use melee weapons for a fight action and, if they were on Aimed Fire orders, they suffer a to-hit penalty (that's what I got mixed before).
My guess is that units whose detachment has an Advance or Charge order but who got caught by enemies who moved before them can use their own move to fall back (perhaps without getting to shoot or with a penalty?).

But yeah, hopefully titanic units will always be eligible targets, no matter what. I'd even advocate firing into melee of any kind and just dishing out any blast markers to all parties involved. Hey, it's Apocalypse! Just kill them all and let the Emperor sort them

Yeah I'd totally expect super-heavy / titanic units to have exceptions like they have previously.

More generally, not being able to shoot when charged adds to the value of choosing activation order carefully. If there wasn't a drawback here then player decisions would matter less.

Doesn't Apoc have a alternate activation? if so then being able to mess a shooting unit up with melee is good design as it makes chosing which unit you activate and when and where you move it important

Alternative activation by detachment, but no casualty removal until damage is resolved at the end of the turn, so for example you can't clear a screen and charge stuff behind it in one turn.

pgmason wrote:
Alternative activation by detachment, but no casualty removal until damage is resolved at the end of the turn, so for example you can't clear a screen and charge stuff behind it in one turn.

Could be, however, that charging said screen and landing enough blast markers to wipe it in the damage phase keeps your melee-focused units safe from being targeted by the rest of the opponent's army until the damage phase has been resolved. The chaff dies in the damage phase and, if you get initiative the following turn, you're then free to charge the juicier targets next.

Snugiraffe wrote:

pgmason wrote:
Alternative activation by detachment, but no casualty removal until damage is resolved at the end of the turn, so for example you can't clear a screen and charge stuff behind it in one turn.

Could be, however, that charging said screen and landing enough blast markers to wipe it in the damage phase keeps your melee-focused units safe from being targeted by the rest of the opponent's army until the damage phase has been resolved. The chaff dies in the damage phase and, if you get initiative the following turn, you're then free to charge the juicier targets next.

Unless it is tau, cause apparently GW can't help but give Tau the "feth everyone not playing shooting armies" rules every game system

Hoping for a stratagem that lets you apply damage immediately. Only once per round, and perhaps if you’ve done twice as much damage or more to destroy it (Overkill? Wipe Them Out? Annihilate?)

stratigo wrote:

Snugiraffe wrote:

pgmason wrote:
Alternative activation by detachment, but no casualty removal until damage is resolved at the end of the turn, so for example you can't clear a screen and charge stuff behind it in one turn.

Could be, however, that charging said screen and landing enough blast markers to wipe it in the damage phase keeps your melee-focused units safe from being targeted by the rest of the opponent's army until the damage phase has been resolved. The chaff dies in the damage phase and, if you get initiative the following turn, you're then free to charge the juicier targets next.

Unless it is tau, cause apparently GW can't help but give Tau the "feth everyone not playing shooting armies" rules every game system

You do understand how the T'au work as an army right?

It's like saying, "cause apparently GW can't help but give Demons the "F every Tau player" rules every game system

I just wish they would have thought outside the box a bit more to speed up the game. When using D12s they could have simply multiplied the fractions for hit / wound to come up with a SINGLE D12 roll required and then made “reroll 1s” into +1 to the D12. Pretty much the exact same result but 3x less rolls.

Oh well, maybe next edition.

 Kirasu wrote:
I just wish they would have thought outside the box a bit more to speed up the game. When using D12s they could have simply multiplied the fractions for hit / wound to come up with a SINGLE D12 roll required and then made “reroll 1s” into +1 to the D12. Pretty much the exact same result but 3x less rolls.

Oh well, maybe next edition.

Having multiple rolls allows more design space for various modifiers, so there is a difference between say a +1 to hit vs reroll 1s to hit vs bonuses to wound. People already complain that so many special abilities 40k are just +/- 1 to hit, reroll 1s, or deal mortal wounds with different names.

 Da-Rock wrote:

stratigo wrote:

Snugiraffe wrote:

pgmason wrote:
Alternative activation by detachment, but no casualty removal until damage is resolved at the end of the turn, so for example you can't clear a screen and charge stuff behind it in one turn.

Could be, however, that charging said screen and landing enough blast markers to wipe it in the damage phase keeps your melee-focused units safe from being targeted by the rest of the opponent's army until the damage phase has been resolved. The chaff dies in the damage phase and, if you get initiative the following turn, you're then free to charge the juicier targets next.

Unless it is tau, cause apparently GW can't help but give Tau the "feth everyone not playing shooting armies" rules every game system

You do understand how the T'au work as an army right?

It's like saying, "cause apparently GW can't help but give Demons the "F every Tau player" rules every game system

Demons into tau is a real REAL bad matchup for demons. Shooting is, generally, easier in this game and a lot of armies that go shooting are weak on melee. Tau are the only ones that get to really feth over melee armies especially. The competitive tau is, indeed, actively the least fun army to play against in the game. Way worse than any ynnari cheese or guard plus castellan. It just shoots and refuses to let you shoot it. And that all sort of sucks to play against. I'm tired of GW's way of making tau is to go "Well you should do more gunlines. And more gunlines. And then just no sell all the damage you take". You don't have to design tau to be just a boring as gak gunline. Tau aren't even thematically supposed to play like they're straight from WW1, but man do they ever. So, yeah, no I'm not gonna be happy that GW's thing seems to be "Yeah, just ignore being charged and shoot. It's not like you care if you're in combat or not."

Any word on what the minimum recommended power rating is for an apocalypse game? I'd guess a minimum of 200 or 300 PR but I really have no idea.

Also wondering how lenient army selection is going to be. Will it be as 40K or will it be like 8th with an ally sheet? Am pretty curious.

 slave.entity wrote:
Any word on what the minimum recommended power rating is for an apocalypse game? I'd guess a minimum of 200 or 300 PR but I really have no idea.

My buddies 2000pt list came out to around 88pl in apocalypse based on the datasheets. so I'm thinking 150-200 is probably a good start.

Recommended PL is also going to depend a lot on how much space you have to play with. Fitting 2-300PL of marines onto a 6x4 table is going to be easier than 2-300PL of Orks or Tyranids.

balmong7 wrote:

 slave.entity wrote:
Any word on what the minimum recommended power rating is for an apocalypse game? I'd guess a minimum of 200 or 300 PR but I really have no idea.

My buddies 2000pt list came out to around 88pl in apocalypse based on the datasheets. so I'm thinking 150-200 is probably a good start.

I just picked an old 2000-pt list from my (insanely huge collection of) lists and it adds up to 107 power rating. It comprises three detachments (battalion, outrider, aux. super-heavy). To actually use it an apoc game, I'd likely add around 20 more PR to bump up the infantry units from their minimum size (who wants a 1-wound unit?).
I'm guessing it would actually make for an entertaining and quick game, don't think it would feel too small, really. I'm so itching to try out something like it, just to see what a "small" apoc game would be like.
Maybe I'll be able to get in some solopocalypse (aka sadhammer) this weekend...

I suspect 100 will be common for a lot of folks, up to 150. Your collection starts to get unwieldy if you start adding units too far beyond this, so that'll be a more limited set of players.

stratigo wrote:
I suspect 100 will be common for a lot of folks, up to 150. Your collection starts to get unwieldy if you start adding units too far beyond this, so that'll be a more limited set of players.

I think you'll find entirely the opposite, anyone thats been collecting an army for more than a couple years will easily have more than 3000pts worth of models.