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.
2023/04/21 12:04:49
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
The Red Hobbit wrote: The plunging fire effect is nice, finally a reward for being on high ground.
From a hit or miss perspective this is the first miss for me on the 10th previews. Not sure how I feel about mixed armor saves. Also it looks like -1 to hit from certain terrain types is gone? I don't mind personally but I'd like to confirm if I missed it.
Well how did you feel about it in 9e? Good way to begin.
And yes. No -1 to hit. Terrain now phyisically blocks los, is ruins and blocks los via it or is bonus to save.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/21 12:06:09
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2023/04/21 12:46:58
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
The Red Hobbit wrote: The plunging fire effect is nice, finally a reward for being on high ground.
From a hit or miss perspective this is the first miss for me on the 10th previews. Not sure how I feel about mixed armor saves. Also it looks like -1 to hit from certain terrain types is gone? I don't mind personally but I'd like to confirm if I missed it.
-1 to hit is gone from the general cover rules, but i suspect it's a prime candidate for unit-specific rules for dedicated infiltrators with cameleonine cloaks etc.
2023/04/21 12:52:30
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
I don't mind the terrain rules from 9th but I didn't care for LOS obstructing terrain becoming a requirement because everything was lethal, and its easy to alpha strike when the board size gets smaller.
I'm leaning towards being for the mixed armor saves, it makes sense even if it is can be a pain gameplay wise. Otherwise, the only terrain previews that looked exciting for 10th are the scatter terrain and the woods, but I was hoping they'd be a LOS of blocker, so there'd be more terrain diversity than ruins, ruins and ruins.
It makes sense we'll get -1 Hit off camo cloaks, but I'm surprised they didn't let a terrain type retain this advantage as well.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/21 12:58:32
2023/04/21 13:05:27
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Tyel wrote: Tend to agree that cover probably should give -1 to hit and the game then be balanced around that. After all - I've already "hit you", so clearly I got through the fence, concrete barrier, whatever. But widespread -1 to hit is crippling for BS5+, and not exactly great for BS4+. Creating a rule that you then need to create lots of work-arounds so the game works doesn't really make much sense.
As have been mentioned, an additional save would be better than either a hit or save modifier, but it is an additional layer of book keeping and dice rolling that GW probably doesn't want.
2023/04/21 14:11:10
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Tyel wrote: I think cover being a 5++ in the old days made more sense when a lot of basic guns (i.e. bolters) were not giving your 6+ and 5+ save guys a save.
In a world where GW is reducing AP (allegedly, we wait and see etc) its unclear how often it would come up. A Marine not getting any benefit from hiding behind a fence when faced with a boltgun seems more reasonable to me than say a Guardsman not getting any benefit.
Tend to agree that cover probably should give -1 to hit and the game then be balanced around that. After all - I've already "hit you", so clearly I got through the fence, concrete barrier, whatever. But widespread -1 to hit is crippling for BS5+, and not exactly great for BS4+. Creating a rule that you then need to create lots of work-arounds so the game works doesn't really make much sense.
I'm just thinking of it like this : a model with significant armor likely doesn't view the smaller weapons as a credible threat and so doesn't take cover. If they're facing something stronger they'll take cover as appropriate.
And this is the last time I will ever concern myself about this for the rest of my life, literally.
2023/04/21 16:12:13
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Lord Damocles wrote: Also, how come plunging fire only works if the attacking unit is in a ruin, and the target is at ground level?
Does the fire plunge less from a cliff, or from the 3rd floor of building A to the 1st floor of building B?
I think that buildings that you can enter would just be ruins. I mean there would be no real difference under these rules. However I do agree about hills, and would probably just apply that rule to a hill that was that tall, although honestly I don't see many tables with hills over 6" in height all that often (maybe more now that hills actually can be used for cover).
2023/04/21 17:30:02
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Lord Damocles wrote: Also, how come plunging fire only works if the attacking unit is in a ruin, and the target is at ground level?
Does the fire plunge less from a cliff, or from the 3rd floor of building A to the 1st floor of building B?
6" is a lot. Only ruins realistically can reach that height, but if you've got a hill that high in your map, discuss with your opponent if you should get a bonus from up there.
2023/04/21 17:40:39
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Lord Damocles wrote: Also, how come plunging fire only works if the attacking unit is in a ruin, and the target is at ground level?
Does the fire plunge less from a cliff, or from the 3rd floor of building A to the 1st floor of building B?
Because they decided to attach terrain rules to really specific features rather than writing general terrain rules. Presumably to sell kits for, hence 'barricades and pipes' as a terrain category.
So its several pages of terrain rules restating 'benefit of cover' when that should just be a universal 'when partially obscured, models gain benefit of cover' (with maybe an exemption for other models of their own unit, and/or friendly models). 'Visibility' can just be a general rule for any type of obscuring terrain, not just woods, and plunging fire (if really necessary, imo its a terrible idea) should apply to any major height advantage.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/04/21 17:41:04
Efficiency is the highest virtue.
2023/04/21 18:19:33
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
2023/04/21 18:46:55
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Lord Damocles wrote: Also, how come plunging fire only works if the attacking unit is in a ruin, and the target is at ground level?
Does the fire plunge less from a cliff, or from the 3rd floor of building A to the 1st floor of building B?
Because they decided to attach terrain rules to really specific features rather than writing general terrain rules. Presumably to sell kits for, hence 'barricades and pipes' as a terrain category.
So its several pages of terrain rules restating 'benefit of cover' when that should just be a universal 'when partially obscured, models gain benefit of cover' (with maybe an exemption for other models of their own unit, and/or friendly models). 'Visibility' can just be a general rule for any type of obscuring terrain, not just woods, and plunging fire (if really necessary, imo its a terrible idea) should apply to any major height advantage.
Nope, your version doesn't work with area terrain and with the concept of "within" vs "wholly within".
2023/04/21 21:13:37
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
TedNugent wrote: Flat out cover saves (e.g. 5+) worked better anyway. It was one or the other, no modifier.
Not sure why they can't just go back to that, but whatever.
Because it was a very bad solution that removed the concept of cover from whole factions since they had better base saves.
It also didn't take in account which weapon was the victim defending against. A wall would protect you in the same way against a bullet and against a volcano cannon.
A good cover system should take into the account the weapon being used, and the natural defenses on the target. This system does that. Does it do it in the best way? Probably no, but at least it ticks the fundamentals. The other system didn't.
It kinda made sense to me, a brick wall isn't going to provide a meaningful amount of protection against a direct shot if you're already covered in slabs of ceramite, but it provides protection against things that would otherwise go through your armor by providing a degree of concealment (e.g. it would provide protection against AP3/AP2 of yesteryear).
Also, here's the thing - modifiers don't work too well, and create a lot of gameplay and balance issues, whether it's a hit modifier or an armor save modifier, because it affects different models differently. A -1 to hit against an ork boy cuts your hits in half. A +1 armor save to a muhreen cuts in half your unsaved wounds. The old cover save system actually made a lot more gameplay sense, and it encouraged the walking tanks in bright red power armor to play midfield instead of hugging a wall, while penalizing a lightly armored squishy for moving into the open.
Fang, son of Great Fang, the traitor we seek, The laws of the brethren say this: That only the king sees the crown of the gods, And he, the usurper, must die.
Mother earth is pregnant for the third time, for y'all have knocked her up. I have tasted the maggots in the mind of the universe, but I was not offended. For I knew I had to rise above it all, or drown in my own gak.
2023/04/21 23:07:14
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Tyran wrote: Shouldn't a Tyranid swarm or an Ork horde also be encouraged to play midfield? After all they are short ranged infantry.
Orks used to be able to claim cover saves if they had a grot unit in front of them, which allowed them to move up while only taking insignificant losses, killing a grot every time an ork made a save. Of course, targeting rules were different back then.
New Career Time?
2023/04/22 02:10:03
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
TedNugent wrote: Flat out cover saves (e.g. 5+) worked better anyway. It was one or the other, no modifier.
Not sure why they can't just go back to that, but whatever.
Because it was a very bad solution that removed the concept of cover from whole factions since they had better base saves.
It also didn't take in account which weapon was the victim defending against. A wall would protect you in the same way against a bullet and against a volcano cannon.
A good cover system should take into the account the weapon being used, and the natural defenses on the target. This system does that. Does it do it in the best way? Probably no, but at least it ticks the fundamentals. The other system didn't.
It kinda made sense to me, a brick wall isn't going to provide a meaningful amount of protection against a direct shot if you're already covered in slabs of ceramite, but it provides protection against things that would otherwise go through your armor by providing a degree of concealment (e.g. it would provide protection against AP3/AP2 of yesteryear).
Also, here's the thing - modifiers don't work too well, and create a lot of gameplay and balance issues, whether it's a hit modifier or an armor save modifier, because it affects different models differently. A -1 to hit against an ork boy cuts your hits in half. A +1 armor save to a muhreen cuts in half your unsaved wounds. The old cover save system actually made a lot more gameplay sense, and it encouraged the walking tanks in bright red power armor to play midfield instead of hugging a wall, while penalizing a lightly armored squishy for moving into the open.
The old cover system was terrible, became completely abused, and also affected 'different models differently.'
2023/04/22 04:08:29
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
It affected different models in ways you would expect-Marines don’t need it, but Guardsmen do, until the heavy weapons come out and then even Marines need it.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2023/04/22 05:53:14
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
It was also at a time where 90+% of weapons in the game were AP5 or better, denying Guard/Orks/Eldar/Nids/etc their armour entirely. With how AP works now & GW supposedly reducing the amount of AP in the game in 10th, the old cover system wouldn't really work.
2023/04/22 06:01:56
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
JNAProductions wrote: It affected different models in ways you would expect-Marines don’t need it, but Guardsmen do, until the heavy weapons come out and then even Marines need it.
It's not how I would expect cover to work.
It's also ironic considering certain marine units with combos had some of the most abusable cover saves prior to 8th edition.
It's strangely amusing to me that some people think it was a good system simply because they believed it didn't benefit space marines 'as much.'
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/22 06:58:04
2023/04/22 07:22:17
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
MajorWesJanson wrote: If they said 6" higher than the target, then you get into issues with the heights of models.
If only the models were on some kind of easily definable 2D markers which are used for measuring distances between models in other instances...
Land raider, stompa, soul grinder.
Yeah. And the rules for plunging fire from 20 years ago dealt with vehicles.
IIRC it was 'if firing from above, use the weakest armour facing on target vehicles' which at least was 'realistic' in that many modern-era vehicles having weaker spots on top, and also meant that extremely durable boxes like the Landr Raider or Monolith did not care because they had the same AV all around.
2023/04/22 08:00:07
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
It's remarkable to read that the old cover saves were terrible because they affected different factions differently and the new system is realistic because it affects different factions differently.
The old meta is dead and the new meta struggles to be born. Now is the time of munchkins.
2023/04/22 08:04:36
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - Tl;dr: June 24th is the best estimate for a release date.
Fang, son of Great Fang, the traitor we seek, The laws of the brethren say this: That only the king sees the crown of the gods, And he, the usurper, must die.
