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.

They just suck design wise... I am sorry. The dread is halfway acceptable but the saturnine terminators... just no.

Oh they do fall a bit... short... in the front-to-back department huh.

I can't help but feel they'd look better with a whacking great power armour power back on there to adjust that silhouette.

I know Terminators don't usually get those, but I think it might work here. Maybe an upscaled Mk6 pack?

Not a fan of the sat termies at all. I'll be skipping the starter box and just going in on mk2 assault boxes I think

 Padre wrote:

I see what you did there, good Sir - an Alien reference should never go unrewarded or unrecognised.

Well played.

My work here is done!

But seriously, there's definitely some silliness at play with their business strategy when it comes to their "other games". Gave up on their highstreet stores a long time ago, and only pop in for something that only they can order in.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/ky4t9whx/rules-in-the-age-of-darkness-investigating-the-new-weapon-stats/

Damage (D): This is a new stat for Age of Darkness which should be familiar to players of other Warhammer systems. It shows how many Wounds or Hull Points it strips from its target

hull points are here to stay, so we can assume vehicles are more or less unchanged

The side view on the Saturnine Termies is certainly unflattering. We don’t really consider ballistic shape much when it comes to HH designs, but these things would be walking shot-traps.

And in other news, the revised weapon rules are out. I see a reference to hull points for vehicles, so I’m breathing easier on the vehicle rules remaining essentially the same.

Errr, increasing shots, fewer penalties, feels like 40k is having an impact

Yeah, can't say I'm keen on movement not appearing to prevent your Infantry from firing with Heavy weapons, nor reducing how effective the basic boltgun is.

Hm, a lot to take in there.

More maneuverability should be welcome, but of course it does diminish decision making when there's practically no tradeoff. And the tradeoff is clearly intended to be quite small as the Heavy rule only gives a flat +1 to a stat (could be on multiple stats, but the bonus can't get bigger). Would have preferred double shots if stationary for example (heavy bolter being 2 on move, 4 stationary...)

Expected nerf to Disintegrator, they're not even as good as classic plasma. Termies and vehicles straight up don't care about being Thanos snapped, which feels off. Could at least have Rending.

Moderately worried that AP3 will be everywhere and AP2 nowhere to push Termies this edition.

The extra nuance in melee is honestly nice, power axe feels in a good spot finally.

So if I've undserstood what they're saying about heavy weapons, we now have lascannon squads that can move AND shoot?

Interesting.

I note that a Meltagun, at D6, is described as being able to one shot a Predator. Or a Deredeo.

Which suggests Dreadnoughts in general have been toned down.

The rest I’m cautiously enthused by. A more mobile game might be fun. And I like at least the concept that different Heavy Weapons gain different benefits from remaining stationary.

"Firepower" instead of "Attacks" is a dumb change as is "Ranged Strength" instead of "Strength". It's a gun, why would anyone care what it's non-ranged Strength is?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The extra nuance in melee is honestly nice, power axe feels in a good spot finally.

Yeah it always struck me as stupid that power axes struck as slowly as power/chain fists. Unwieldy need and (X) stat.

Another thing I just picked up - there's no provisions in the weapon profiles for the interaction between shooting and charging. Should we assume you can always charge (except maybe if you stayed stationary to proc Heavy and similar bonuses)

 Snord wrote:
The side view on the Saturnine Termies is certainly unflattering. We don’t really consider ballistic shape much when it comes to HH designs, but these things would be walking shot-traps.

I'm assuming they're designed to stand side on to the enemy and only turn to face when they're ready to shoot, to minimize silhouette? JK they're just single pose flat like 2nd ed tactical marines and such

Billicus wrote:
"Firepower" instead of "Attacks" is a dumb change as is "Ranged Strength" instead of "Strength". It's a gun, why would anyone care what it's non-ranged Strength is?

The article explains RS being there for other rules interactions, to differentiate between shooting something and clobbering something.

I imagine a common one will be power shields and that, where it might reduce RS, but do nowt against Melee.

check back on Monday for one of the most fun rules revisions of the new edition – the Challenge step. You’ve never seen a more narratively satisfying addition to combat in Warhammer…

Doubt

Meh, not sold. As stated, D is just a replacement for brutal, for the most part. Its not a fix for dreadnoughts, because its also impacting vehicles who now need more hull to offset the inflation in lethality. Ive seen this movie before, lethality usually inflates faster than survivability, this will probably be an infantry edition.

I suspect the vehicle damage table might be gone. Note how the article points out that a D6 melta can pop a Predator in one shot through hull points. And note how the lascannon paragraph hints their optimal target are Termies and doesn't mention vehicles at all - possibly because a D2 hit is just a D2 hit with no possibility of causing a bigger effect.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

check back on Monday for one of the most fun rules revisions of the new edition – the Challenge step. You’ve never seen a more narratively satisfying addition to combat in Warhammer…

Doubt

Challenges were fun in WHFB, a way to accrue some extra combat res if you really battered the poor sap into the muck.

But…yeah. Will have to wait and see what’s in store here.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Billicus wrote:
"Firepower" instead of "Attacks" is a dumb change as is "Ranged Strength" instead of "Strength". It's a gun, why would anyone care what it's non-ranged Strength is?

The article explains RS being there for other rules interactions, to differentiate between shooting something and clobbering something.

I imagine a common one will be power shields and that, where it might reduce RS, but do nowt against Melee.

Which is sort of needless bloat, isn't it

Well…who knows? Were told the intent, but are yet to see the practice.

Also, please define bloat. As a lot of the time, it seems to be used when they mean “here’s a change I don’t like”.

Its an unnecessary distinction. The rukes already distinguished between melee and ranged strength by referencing whether or not a rule triggered off of a "melee attack" or a "ranged attack"

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Well…who knows? Were told the intent, but are yet to see the practice.

Also, please define bloat. As a lot of the time, it seems to be used when they mean “here’s a change I don’t like”.

Extra stuff invented for the sakes of inventing extra stuff. Most of what is changed so far is largely "for the sakes of it", which to some will be innovation, to others regression and other just bloat.

This shield provides a 4+ invulnerable save, except against melee attacks.

This shield provides a 4+ invulnerable save against RS attacks

Looks like a shorter wording to me.

As for the rest? Again, we don’t know a great deal about the overall implementation. It might be awful, it might be great. It might be merely acceptable.

So instead of learning lessons about just tweaking dreads, we're looking at them going straight back to "can get one shotted". Cool, awesome, love it. Definitely the fix that was needed and not at all an overblown reaction that makes them worthless again.

Well, all it really tells us is a Deredeo specifically has no more than W6 or HP6.

We don’t know what its Toughness is, we don’t know what its Save is. We don’t know what other damage mitigation rules it may or may not have.

And let’s not be daft. Any Dreadnought, left parked within 6” of a Melta squad was probably in for a bad day regardless of edition. 2nd Heresy was arguably the safest for such silly actions.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

As for the rest? Again, we don’t know a great deal about the overall implementation. It might be awful, it might be great. It might be merely acceptable.

A reasonable response?! Inconceivable in a Horus Heresy thread.

But seriously, I am with you. We have been drip fed very little so far. Folks should be a bit more patient before making sweeping assumptions.

I'm disappointed because having had a proper look, the weapon stuff is not bad rules.

I'm still not convinced on the whole "4 leaderships" thing mind.

But getting dragged back into the 3 year cycle is too much of a cross to carry.