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.
2020/05/24 14:53:46
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.
Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
I watched a video this morning where they described how deployment/missions works in AoS, in that no set table size is stated, just distance between deployment zone. So if the table was 2x2, 4x6 etc etc, the deployment zone size changes with the board size, but the distance between deployment zones does not.
so on a 3x2 board, a 24" gap between deployment will be stated where you get a very small deployment area, but the same mission on a larger board would give you a larger deployment zone. How it was sold to me then is, it allows for difference in table size, and even shape, you could play on a circular table then in theory as long as the set distance is able to be accounted for.
I use to live in a flat where there was absolutely no way we could have played a 6x4 game, ever, there wasn't the room unless we went to the trouble of buying a folding table, and that still was an issue for storage, set board sizes needs to disappear from the game rules, its only relevant/required for tournament play.
ClockworkZion wrote: I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.
Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
Kanluwen wrote: That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.
I have a sneaking suspicion, 9th edition may launch with Pariah, considering the main factions of Pariah are lining up with the start box and/or the trailer yesterday.
Illuminor could be a dual kit still, and the model above could just be the ETB version.
It may launch around the same time or later, but I don't know of any 40k character model that's a dual kit.
Excluding the Daemons, but that's more of an AoS thing.
There's loads, DA captain from psychic awakening is one just off the top of my head. Isn't the current necron C'tan monolith thing one as well?
The C'Tan isn't a named character.
And I'm pretty sure while you -can- use that Captain as a generic model, he's a named character.
No, he's a specific dual kit. he can be built as Master Lazarus with specific gear or as a Dark Angels Master with a powerfist instead. It's specific in the box that it builds both. Now, as a side note, it was stated that the designer was tasked with building a generic master with options, and GW decided to make one of those options a specific named character after the fact.
As for table size.....no, moving away from a standard 6x4 would be a very bad idea, and I don;t think the community would follow it either.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/24 14:54:23
2020/05/24 14:57:44
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.
Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
ClockworkZion wrote: I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.
Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
ClockworkZion wrote: I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.
Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
Not until they've perfected their Dynamically Updated Mission Based™ pricing system.
Under DUMB pricing, the cost of a boxed set will alter depending on your intended use. Building a Kill Team? DUMB automatically increases the price to compensate. Adding to an army for your next game of Apocalypse? Then DUMB revises the price down.
But don't let the Special High Intensity Tracking™ catch you using your models in the wrong system, or they'll be confiscated and destroyed!
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
ClockworkZion wrote: I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.
Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
They did that in 8th. Then players upped game size. And gw started dropping points while game size stayed
Wait, what? I had a bit of a hiatus from the end of 4th to a few months into 8th; when I stopped a Marine was 15 points, a Guardsman was 10, and a standard game was 2000 points.. Are you seriously saying 13 point Maines and 4 point Guardmen are a massive increase from 7th and games sizes were significantly lower?
I was actually going to add "ok sarcasm off, serious mode now: if the bit about the game being able to scale well to whatever size you want pans out instead of GW not being able to find their butt with both hands again, then that's exactly what GW has given you the ability to do. It won't matter whether or how they adjust points, you want a faster game on a smaller table you just lower the game size until you're getting the experience you want." but I got two replies before I had a chance to edit the original post.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/24 15:16:07
ClockworkZion wrote: I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.
Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
The game is getting a points readjustment. The best time to do a points hike would be at the launch of a new edition.
You're laughing, but GW has likely learned from WFB's death and knows they can't attract new players into a game where people play 100+ models at the normal game size.
2020/05/24 15:19:31
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
They could even make an announcement like, "we're increasing point values on June 1st" to give you a week to play with the old point values before you can only afford 25% less models in your army.
2020/05/24 15:19:50
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
They could even make an announcement like, "we're increasing point values on June 1st" to give you a week to play with the old point values before you can only afford 25% less models in your army.
Not likely, but they mentioned rather clearly that they're changing points costs in the reveal.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/24 15:21:21
2020/05/24 15:22:13
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
That doesn't seem to work since when's the last time you've seen people willingly take -less- of their toys?
I mean, it’s the same thing either way, whether GW up all the points costs of every unit, or change the “official” points for matched play. Just changing the match play points seems easier. And as someone else said, they seem to be allowing this with greater balance (hopefully).
2020/05/24 15:25:32
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
I don't think there is any evidence to suggest they will give things a points hike. General pattern of the game since year dot has been the reverse - because its the only way to get big centre piece models into regular armies.
I'd have thought its more "look at say a 750 point game, try and come up some system of rules to avoid the massive not-fun skews that are possible if you spend ten minutes thinking about it".
2020/05/24 15:30:42
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Kanluwen wrote: That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.
I have a sneaking suspicion, 9th edition may launch with Pariah, considering the main factions of Pariah are lining up with the start box and/or the trailer yesterday.
There's not supposed to be anything Marine related with Pariah--that book is Necrons, Sisters of Battle, and Inquisition.
Truthfully? The new edition launch is supposed to be July for its release. Even assuming that Pariah ends up getting the same amount of Psychic Awakening fiction as the others?
For a quick breakdown:
There were 6 PAs that received 4 pieces of fiction(Phoenix Rising, Faith and Fury, The Greater Good, Saga of the Beast, Engine War, and War of the Spider).
There was 1 PA that received 3 pieces of fiction(Blood of Baal) and 1 that received 5 pieces of fiction(Ritual of the Damned).
Pariah just received its first piece of fiction, meaning we have maybe 2-4 more weeks until they would have started preorders for it...unless it was meant to be getting just one piece of fiction and the trailer.
Illuminor could be a dual kit still, and the model above could just be the ETB version.
Ehhh...they would have shown off the alternate build by now or even have mentioned it as 'a new option coming with the book!'.
Pariah got 3x pieces of fiction already and we should see the 4th this next week so those dates may be shorter than you think.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/24 15:32:54
2020/05/24 15:30:58
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Also smaller games doesn't create any better balance. Broken units are broken at any game size. IGOUGO has always exacerbated that, much to the dismay of its defenders for whatever reason.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2020/05/24 15:34:02
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Also smaller games doesn't create any better balance. Broken units are broken at any game size. IGOUGO has always exacerbated that, much to the dismay of its defenders for whatever reason.
Eh, some units can be broken at smaller poitns values and okay at larger ones.
Think of it this way-if I take a GK force with a 500 points Paladin Squad and 250 points of buffing characters, then layer buff after buff on the Paladin Squad, that's 67% of my army getting buffed to high heaven-and since the remaining 33% are characters, you have to shoot the ludicrously hard to kill Paladins.
Scale up to 2,000 points, and only 25% of my army is getting buffed, and there's more targets to shoot, so you can more easily ignore the Paladin Squad and still do well.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2020/05/24 15:34:18
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Also smaller games doesn't create any better balance. Broken units are broken at any game size. IGOUGO has always exacerbated that, much to the dismay of its defenders for whatever reason.
They've claimed they've fixed the smaller game issue, but we'll see.
Who knows, maybe the game will work like Apoc and it'll be alternating activations with casualties only removed at the end of the game turn.
2020/05/24 15:36:49
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
But yeah--in any regards, the point is that "Pariah" was going to be out before the new edition. Szeras was going to be in our hands before the boxed set released.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/24 15:37:40
2020/05/24 15:37:02
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Wait, what? I had a bit of a hiatus from the end of 4th to a few months into 8th; when I stopped a Marine was 15 points, a Guardsman was 10, and a standard game was 2000 points.. Are you seriously saying 13 point Maines and 4 point Guardmen are a massive increase from 7th and games sizes were significantly lower?
.
7th ed 1750-1850 was fairly typical. Come the 8th indexes apart from bog standard infantry prices went up. Sure ig trooper didn't go up but leman russ did. Chimera went. Especially vehicles and monsters much to annoyance to players who struggled to fit existing armies to lists.
Surprise surprise tournaments started to use 2k which was ballbark many found their existing armies fall to(my orks went from 1750 to around 2100 for example).
Then codexes started to roll and not only units gots buff and new chapter/regiment/whatever bonuses for free but previous price hikes started to backpedal. Come several codexes and index armies still were shall we say screwed.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2020/05/24 15:39:44
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
[DCM]
Chief Deputy Sub Assistant Trainee Squig Handling Intern
Going back to Rogue Trader, the demo lists in the various books are all around 2,000. Yes they’re shown as built in 1000/500/500 blocks, but it still seems 2,000 has long been the preferred/recommended game size.
Certainly I’ve been mucking about with 40k since early 2nd Ed, and barring 8th Ed WHFB where I preferred 3,000, it’s always been 2,000 in my neck of the woods.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
ClockworkZion wrote: Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
They could even make an announcement like, "we're increasing point values on June 1st" to give you a week to play with the old point values before you can only afford 25% less models in your army.
Not likely, but they mentioned rather clearly that they're changing points costs in the reveal.
And if gw hikes points players will up game size to keep playing toys. Game size is controlled by players and not gw.
Good reason to up points would be significant one(like flat double everything) to give more granulatiny especially on cheaper models. 3 to 4 is bigger jump than 7 to 8.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2020/05/24 15:41:33
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.
They could even make an announcement like, "we're increasing point values on June 1st" to give you a week to play with the old point values before you can only afford 25% less models in your army.
Not likely, but they mentioned rather clearly that they're changing points costs in the reveal.
And if gw hikes points players will up game size to keep playing toys. Game size is controlled by players and not gw.
Good reason to up points would be significant one(like flat double everything) to give more granulatiny especially on cheaper models. 3 to 4 is bigger jump than 7 to 8.
This is true, and also why the game should possibly move up to d10’s/12’s.
2020/05/24 15:50:25
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
It won’t. So no point debating it in a News and Rumours thread, as it’s wishlisting and not N&R.
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
2020/05/24 16:03:17
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Also smaller games doesn't create any better balance. Broken units are broken at any game size. IGOUGO has always exacerbated that, much to the dismay of its defenders for whatever reason.
Eh, some units can be broken at smaller poitns values and okay at larger ones.
Think of it this way-if I take a GK force with a 500 points Paladin Squad and 250 points of buffing characters, then layer buff after buff on the Paladin Squad, that's 67% of my army getting buffed to high heaven-and since the remaining 33% are characters, you have to shoot the ludicrously hard to kill Paladins.
Scale up to 2,000 points, and only 25% of my army is getting buffed, and there's more targets to shoot, so you can more easily ignore the Paladin Squad and still do well.
Except that hasn't been what's happening with the Paladins based on the short lived competitive games before SIP happened to get stricter. The Paladins were still broken (debatable, of course) and being over the top. They were winning games from that.
So neither is okay, thus proving one part of my point. The other part would be said Paladins (sometimes it's two Squads after all) getting a round of shooting all the time no matter what. Tow squads, one using the Psilencer buffer and the other Storm Bolter buffer.
GW has to realize that, as long as they keep those two points, the game always ends up not working again.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2020/05/24 16:07:40
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
2020/05/24 16:18:00
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Kanluwen wrote: That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.
I have a sneaking suspicion, 9th edition may launch with Pariah, considering the main factions of Pariah are lining up with the start box and/or the trailer yesterday.
There's not supposed to be anything Marine related with Pariah--that book is Necrons, Sisters of Battle, and Inquisition.
Truthfully? The new edition launch is supposed to be July for its release. Even assuming that Pariah ends up getting the same amount of Psychic Awakening fiction as the others?
For a quick breakdown:
There were 6 PAs that received 4 pieces of fiction(Phoenix Rising, Faith and Fury, The Greater Good, Saga of the Beast, Engine War, and War of the Spider).
There was 1 PA that received 3 pieces of fiction(Blood of Baal) and 1 that received 5 pieces of fiction(Ritual of the Damned).
Pariah just received its first piece of fiction, meaning we have maybe 2-4 more weeks until they would have started preorders for it...unless it was meant to be getting just one piece of fiction and the trailer.
Illuminor could be a dual kit still, and the model above could just be the ETB version.
Ehhh...they would have shown off the alternate build by now or even have mentioned it as 'a new option coming with the book!'.
Ultramarines are in the story for Pariah (no new rules would be a safe assumption though) but they are in it story wise, go back and check the video they made for it on the last preview.
My hobby instagram account: @the_shroud_of_vigilance My Shroud of Vigilance Hobby update blog for me detailed updates and lore on the faction:
Blog
2020/05/24 16:20:13
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Can;t stop seeing the rear of that Destroyer as an Eldar piece of armor (similar to war walkers feet covers) may end converting one as a gravitic Wraithlord
2020/05/24 16:22:06
Subject: 40k preview, May 23-9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
