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.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

...Unless you're referring to the very recent fluff which portrays the Hive Mind as some weird anthropomorphic warp entity inexplicably separated from the Tyranid race . . .

Oh no. . . they didn't . . . did they?

It has high enough thoughts that it can decide it doesn't like Blood Angels, so I think it's pretty safe to say that, regardless of its physical presence, it has it's own thought process outside eating.

I'll wait for better info on that.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

...Unless you're referring to the very recent fluff which portrays the Hive Mind as some weird anthropomorphic warp entity inexplicably separated from the Tyranid race . . .

Oh no. . . they didn't . . . did they?

It has high enough thoughts that it can decide it doesn't like Blood Angels, so I think it's pretty safe to say that, regardless of its physical presence, it has it's own thought process outside eating.

I'll wait for better info on that.

Well, saying that it is an "anthropomorphic warp entity inexplicably separated from the Tyranid race" since in one of the books it has been said that it proved a desire to destroy Blood Angels, seems a bit far fetched. Even an hive mind can generate a sentiment of hostility toward something.

It is best to see the nids as a human body. We are an hive mind, composed of an untold number of lesser organisms all working toward a common purpose (surviving). There is a brain, but the brain is not an overlord, just a part of the whole. When i think, it's not my head or my arm of my feet that is thinking, it is the whole me. Yet, i can prove hate toward someone. The collected past experiences of my huge number of lesser organism analyzed through my analytical processes (which are another huge number of lesser organism) and my irrational processes (more lesser organisms), brought this collectivity that is my person to hate a certain something.


A sentiment of hate is not a flaw of an entity designed to be as ruthlessly efficient as possible in harvesting life, it is simply another one of its processes.

Going back to the discussion about melee - does anyone else see the implication of hordes/GEQ's becoming more expensive being that screening will be more difficult and thus melee gets an indirect buff?

sanguine40k wrote:
Going back to the discussion about melee - does anyone else see the implication of hordes/GEQ's becoming more expensive being that screening will be more difficult and thus melee gets an indirect buff?

Are you saying that making cheap screening units more expensive and thus less plentiful is a way that gw is trying to make melee better? Seems hamfisted and lazy. So, yup, sounds like something they'd do.

 Togusa wrote:


CC doesn't make sense in a game about shooting lasers with mile long ranges. Just get rid of CC entirely from the game.

Have you ever heard of Star Wars?

Try to get rid of CC from that saga, and imagine how it would work.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sanguine40k wrote:
Going back to the discussion about melee - does anyone else see the implication of hordes/GEQ's becoming more expensive being that screening will be more difficult and thus melee gets an indirect buff?

As long as only pure screeners go up in points I can accept that. Units like boyz, hormagaunts, etc aren't real screeners but typically are hordes units and if they went up in points (boyz are already overcosted) they might not see the game at all.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

sanguine40k wrote:
Going back to the discussion about melee - does anyone else see the implication of hordes/GEQ's becoming more expensive being that screening will be more difficult and thus melee gets an indirect buff?

Are you saying that making cheap screening units more expensive and thus less plentiful is a way that gw is trying to make melee better? Seems hamfisted and lazy. So, yup, sounds like something they'd do.

just bad for those melee units that are or were intended as hordes, because those can now take a hike off a cliff nude in a blizzard in the alps.

 Togusa wrote:


CC doesn't make sense in a game about shooting lasers with mile long ranges. Just get rid of CC entirely from the game.

It technically also doesn't make sense for there to be large, massed walker, tank and infantry battles as exist in a world where Orbital Bombardment exists--but that's how we actually get a game we can enjoy playing.

I don't play a CC army--it is not something I overly enjoy playing with--but I definitely see the value of having it in the narrative setting and the gameplay (it certainly gives me a foil to play against!).

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

sanguine40k wrote:
Going back to the discussion about melee - does anyone else see the implication of hordes/GEQ's becoming more expensive being that screening will be more difficult and thus melee gets an indirect buff?

Are you saying that making cheap screening units more expensive and thus less plentiful is a way that gw is trying to make melee better? Seems hamfisted and lazy. So, yup, sounds like something they'd do.

just bad for those melee units that are or were intended as hordes, because those can now take a hike off a cliff nude in a blizzard in the alps.

Yes, definitely. Thus why its hamfisted and lazy. Too much work to actually write good rules for cc. Just nerf hordes, and don't consider the collateral damage.

I just hope GW doesn't get a great idea to bring back GK unit point costs to above their codex cost. That would be crazy.

 Blackie wrote:

 Togusa wrote:


CC doesn't make sense in a game about shooting lasers with mile long ranges. Just get rid of CC entirely from the game.

Have you ever heard of Star Wars?

Try to get rid of CC from that saga, and imagine how it would work.

Hey now, the Jedi are the least interesting part of that setting. The chainsword doesn't deserve to be compared to the lightsaber.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

sanguine40k wrote:
Going back to the discussion about melee - does anyone else see the implication of hordes/GEQ's becoming more expensive being that screening will be more difficult and thus melee gets an indirect buff?

Are you saying that making cheap screening units more expensive and thus less plentiful is a way that gw is trying to make melee better? Seems hamfisted and lazy. So, yup, sounds like something they'd do.

Hahahah this and table size must be their "GREAT" solution.

Considering how many time jedi is in the title of SW stuff, that is like saying that warhammer or 40000 milenium are the least interesting things in w40k. What is next, space marines being boring ? And undead or elfs being non interesting in fantasy settings?

Engagement Range is defines as 1” in today’s reveal. Looks like Cut Them Down is pretty useless outside of edge cases.

It also ensures that some of those things you might want mortal wounds on, like a Leviathan, will TRULY not care since they can just fire their Heavy Flamers in melee if they wanted to.

Hm, no movement penalties for tanks firing on the move anymore. That's nice.

Edit: Non-infantry.

Aash wrote:
Engagement Range is defines as 1” in today’s reveal. Looks like Cut Them Down is pretty useless outside of edge cases.

That's a real kick in the teeth to melee in general, if that's the farthest out you can fight.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Aash wrote:
Engagement Range is defines as 1” in today’s reveal. Looks like Cut Them Down is pretty useless outside of edge cases.

That's a real kick in the teeth to melee in general, if that's the farthest out you can fight.

I’m still holding out hope that two ranks will still be able to fight, but it looks highly unlikely that more than that will be able to.

Engagement Range is 1” and that’s being used to determine who can use the “cut them down” strategem and if vehicles and MCs can shoot out of combat, but they haven’t yet said that only models in engagement range can fight in the melee phase.

Hopefully it’ll be something like this:

The first model you move in a unit in the charge phase must end its move in engagement range with the unit it declared a charge against.

Who can fight: any model in engagement range or within 1” of a model in engagement range can make melee attacks.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Aash wrote:
Engagement Range is defines as 1” in today’s reveal. Looks like Cut Them Down is pretty useless outside of edge cases.

That's a real kick in the teeth to melee in general, if that's the farthest out you can fight.

Or melee will get some buff that we're unaware of yet. Seems like there are a few changes which appear to nerf it so far, and I don't think this would go unanswered by some sort of boost we haven't' heard of.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Aash wrote:
Engagement Range is defines as 1” in today’s reveal. Looks like Cut Them Down is pretty useless outside of edge cases.

That's a real kick in the teeth to melee in general, if that's the farthest out you can fight.

Or melee will get some buff that we're unaware of yet. Seems like there are a few changes which appear to nerf it so far, and I don't think this would go unanswered by some sort of boost we haven't' heard of.

You have more confidence in GW than I do.

 Togusa wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
GW once again proved they don't understand problems with melee again with the release if this Stratagem. Nobody is going to think twice about falling back because of this Stratagem existing, simply because opening up that unit to be shot is always worth the 1-2 Mortal Wounds you MIGHT receive. The Stratagem could be free and people would still forget it exists.

CC doesn't make sense in a game about shooting lasers with mile long ranges. Just get rid of CC entirely from the game.

Gee, that sounds awfully a lot like the US declaring aircraft guns to be useless with the improvement of engagement range and air to air missiles. I seem to remember how that worked out.

Engagement range is 1"? Well then this stratagem is pretty useless.

Spoletta wrote:
Engagement range is 1"? Well then this stratagem is pretty useless.

If it's a flat 1" I think that'll be a slight buff to our gaunts as the second rank can squeeze into the 1" range, in comparison to the 32mm units that'll be stuck with a single rank. Have Stealers moved to 32m? (I only have old Genestealers)

 Brutallica wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

sanguine40k wrote:
Going back to the discussion about melee - does anyone else see the implication of hordes/GEQ's becoming more expensive being that screening will be more difficult and thus melee gets an indirect buff?

Are you saying that making cheap screening units more expensive and thus less plentiful is a way that gw is trying to make melee better? Seems hamfisted and lazy. So, yup, sounds like something they'd do.

Hahahah this and table size must be their "GREAT" solution.

Then we do we constantly hear the refrain about melee units having to fight trash units that pull back and then the enemy shoots them up? Surely Cultists going up 50% and Primaris going up 18% is some indication of that issue?

With vehicles able to shoot into combat you'll see people less inclined to need to screen them in the first place, which means strong melee units get to them more easily. Screening is harder so cheap troops server a different utility more than just being a wall.

That doesn't seem hamfisted to me.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Brutallica wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

sanguine40k wrote:
Going back to the discussion about melee - does anyone else see the implication of hordes/GEQ's becoming more expensive being that screening will be more difficult and thus melee gets an indirect buff?

Are you saying that making cheap screening units more expensive and thus less plentiful is a way that gw is trying to make melee better? Seems hamfisted and lazy. So, yup, sounds like something they'd do.

Hahahah this and table size must be their "GREAT" solution.

Then we do we constantly hear the refrain about melee units having to fight trash units that pull back and then the enemy shoots them up? Surely Cultists going up 50% and Primaris going up 18% is some indication of that issue?

With vehicles able to shoot into combat you'll see people less inclined to need to screen them in the first place, which means strong melee units get to them more easily. Screening is harder so cheap troops server a different utility more than just being a wall.

That doesn't seem hamfisted to me.

I absolutely would not mind 6ppm Genestealer Cultists and 9ppm Ork Boyz and 12ppm Dire Avengers if they also ensured that those units would actually be a worthwhile combat unit at those point values. I put a lot of love into my gribbly cultist bois and absolutely do not mind fielding like 1/3 less of them if it means I get to be more of a functional fighting force.

The lack of -1 to hit while moving is an enormous relief for me with that army (though boy do I hope they give my Rusted Claw cultists a new second half of their chapter tactic, lol) and I certainly don't mind bringing fewer models to the table.

I just want to know that those models won't be completely fething awful at doing anything. I want them to be able to stand a chance fighting more elite troops. I don't want them to be what they are in 8th (utterly disposable trash units) but just costing 50% more.

Hopefully the cover preview tomorrow shows off a system that greatly benefits lighter infantry units.

Heck for all we know it could be back to 'only remove models that can be seen'.

*gw designer fixes h2h once and for all*

2cp - Long arms of war - increase engagement range of any unit by 1”.

Any bets?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Brutallica wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

sanguine40k wrote:
Going back to the discussion about melee - does anyone else see the implication of hordes/GEQ's becoming more expensive being that screening will be more difficult and thus melee gets an indirect buff?

Are you saying that making cheap screening units more expensive and thus less plentiful is a way that gw is trying to make melee better? Seems hamfisted and lazy. So, yup, sounds like something they'd do.

Hahahah this and table size must be their "GREAT" solution.

Then we do we constantly hear the refrain about melee units having to fight trash units that pull back and then the enemy shoots them up? Surely Cultists going up 50% and Primaris going up 18% is some indication of that issue?

With vehicles able to shoot into combat you'll see people less inclined to need to screen them in the first place, which means strong melee units get to them more easily. Screening is harder so cheap troops server a different utility more than just being a wall.

That doesn't seem hamfisted to me.

My reply was based on the statement that the increase in price of cheap geq troops was an indirect method of buffing melee, instead of fixing things like easy no consequences fallback. It's quite possible that they have changed the fallback rules, or perhaps the new cover and terrain system benefits those cheap troops more than elite infantry, so that's why they had a price hike. But if the only reason for that price hike was to make elite infantry and melee better then it is hamfisted because it hits armies who rely on those cheap troops disproportionately hard. We don't know what the full picture is yet, so everyone is just spitballing.

And it was mostly just a joke anyway.

Aash wrote:
Engagement Range is defines as 1” in today’s reveal. Looks like Cut Them Down is pretty useless outside of edge cases.

1) Engagement was NOT define it was a quick hint of the rule, no rules were actually shown as written
2) B.c the real rule was not written we do not know if that means if a "unit" is in engaged if within 1" or if models within 1" are the only ones engaged

It would certainly be interesting if they just said that every model in a unit can fight if any model is within 1". It would explain why the cultists got a price hike, too.

But man, would it be a disaster from a gameplay point of view. You'd have models that are halfway across the board fighting stuff 30 inches away.

If you thought conga lines were lame in 8th....

Well it still could be the same and they actually gave "being lock in combat" has a name now like many other GW games has. And they can call to other rules easier with that new keyword.

Examples
"If you are Engaged then XYZ"
"You can only fallback if you are Engaged", etc...