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.

 bullyboy wrote:
Got halfway through the article and lost interest. Might have to come back to it at a later date.

Lol, same... i sometimes read boring technical documentation, about some legalese definition mumbo-jumbo and statistical definitions for my job and have no problem with it, but somehow GW's brand of legalese-with-insincere-marketing-drivel mix just makes my eyes glance right off

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
And, of course they had to confused the melee weapon selection debate with that void dragon pic, lol.

Honestly, i'm pretty sure its gonna become like AoS where you attack with every melee weapon you have. Makes it consistent with shooting, plays into the "glorious melee combat" trope and well... its been tested with AoS

That seems somewhat absurd for more than a few scenarios though. It automatically makes Bobby way way way better than Swamlord. He should be better, but not by that much.

Necron rules seem pretty reasonable. Reanimation Protocols as their army trait makes sense. Certainly more than Oaths of Moment.

I guess Command Protocols can be a heavy emphasis as it'll apply to Crypteks (I assume), of which you could conceivably take quite a few given there's no FOC and there are 4 types of Cryptek.

OC of 8 is interesting for the Monolith. It seems fitting. And hey, it can fly again. 'Bout time. DOOOOOMsday Cannon feels like less of a pop-gun, so that's nice.

Surprised that Necron Warriors still have two different guns. Not sure how we're supposed to deal with that level of bloat. Probably would've been better to put them as a single weapon. There just isn't enough difference between two very similar Gauss weapons to have them be separate guns, just like a giant chainaxe and a massive energy fist are too similar to warrant having different profiles.

Voss wrote:
Is anyone missing a wound? Heal a wound (use a charge of your die roll).
Repeat until no one is missing a wound or you've used up the die roll (STOP).

Which would imply that you can have more than one wounded model in a unit. That's a recipie for... Biker Nobz and GK Paladins.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
And, of course they had to confused the melee weapon selection debate with that void dragon pic, lol.

Honestly, i'm pretty sure its gonna become like AoS where you attack with every melee weapon you have. Makes it consistent with shooting, plays into the "glorious melee combat" trope and well... its been tested with AoS

That seems somewhat absurd for more than a few scenarios though. It automatically makes Bobby way way way better than Swamlord. He should be better, but not by that much.

Point cost can fix that.

Not feeling super jazzed about these Necrons rules.

They are kind of boring. Reanimation may be stronger with multi-wound models, but it's way less interesting, and with it only happening in the command phase, opponents can work around it much more easily.

Warriors don't need to get weaker and cheaper.

Sustained hits on the Death Ray (i.e. a one-shot weapon) is, like, my least favorite GW mechanic. Definitely a "variance? What's that mean" kind of thing. Sure, the Monolith has 4 Death Rays, but it's just flukey and lame. Like somebody already said, it's annoying how Marines seem to have picked up more consistency with weapon damage, but factions like Crons and Nids are losing it again. More indication to me that GW isn't actually very good at learning from mistakes.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
Is anyone missing a wound? Heal a wound (use a charge of your die roll).
Repeat until no one is missing a wound or you've used up the die roll (STOP).

Which would imply that you can have more than one wounded model in a unit. That's a recipie for... Biker Nobz and GK Paladins.

No it does not imply that at all?

Skorpekh destroyer with 2 wounds taken and a dead model
Reanimation rolls a 3

Heal 1
Heal 1
Bring back one model with 1 HP

Tsagualsa wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
Got halfway through the article and lost interest. Might have to come back to it at a later date.

Lol, same... i sometimes read boring technical documentation, about some legalese definition mumbo-jumbo and statistical definitions for my job and have no problem with it, but somehow GW's brand of legalese-with-insincere-marketing-drivel mix just makes my eyes glance right off

I'm the same. The concept seems pretty simple in practice, but the way they write it is so long-winded and difficult to follow. It also doesn't help that they've got symbols on the back of the cards to represent the different types: primary; secondary; deployment etc, but they're abstract symbols that aren't immediately recognisable.

I really hope tournaments don't just default to one approach to this, though I'm not hopeful!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
Is anyone missing a wound? Heal a wound (use a charge of your die roll).
Repeat until no one is missing a wound or you've used up the die roll (STOP).

Which would imply that you can have more than one wounded model in a unit. That's a recipie for... Biker Nobz and GK Paladins.

No it doesn't. Its simply solves the problem of models with 3+ wounds, which last edition's RP made a complete hash of.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
Is anyone missing a wound? Heal a wound (use a charge of your die roll).
Repeat until no one is missing a wound or you've used up the die roll (STOP).

Which would imply that you can have more than one wounded model in a unit. That's a recipie for... Biker Nobz and GK Paladins.

No it does not imply that at all?

Skorpekh destroyer with 2 wounds taken and a dead model
Reanimation rolls a 3

Heal 1
Heal 1
Bring back one model with 1 HP

The first clause under the first bulletpoint implies that there can be more than one model missing a wound in a unit at the same time.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Surprised that Necron Warriors still have two different guns. Not sure how we're supposed to deal with that level of bloat. Probably would've been better to put them as a single weapon. There just isn't enough difference between two very similar Gauss weapons to have them be separate guns, just like a giant chainaxe and a massive energy fist are too similar to warrant having different profiles.

Except, unlike the two Legionnaire weapons, both Necron weapons are significantly different with different range, strength, special rules and AP that actually make the unit function differently depending on which one you choose. The same can't be said of the heavy chainaxe versus the powerfist, but you keep on swinging at that strawman, I guess.

Tsagualsa wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
Is anyone missing a wound? Heal a wound (use a charge of your die roll).
Repeat until no one is missing a wound or you've used up the die roll (STOP).

Which would imply that you can have more than one wounded model in a unit. That's a recipie for... Biker Nobz and GK Paladins.

No it does not imply that at all?

Skorpekh destroyer with 2 wounds taken and a dead model
Reanimation rolls a 3

Heal 1
Heal 1
Bring back one model with 1 HP

The first clause under the first bulletpoint implies that there can be more than one model missing a wound in a unit at the same time.

This pretty much confirms that precise allows you to target the character inside the unit.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Which would imply that you can have more than one wounded model in a unit. That's a recipie for... Biker Nobz and GK Paladins.

A character can presumably joint a unit while wounded?

Slipspace wrote:
Except, unlike the two Legionnaire weapons, both Necron weapons are significantly different with different range, strength, special rules and AP that actually make the unit function differently depending on which one you choose. The same can't be said of the heavy chainaxe versus the powerfist, but you keep on swinging at that strawman, I guess.

Combi-Weapons.

Since characters can join units, and models can hit them with precision, it seems quite possible you'll be able to get multiple models missing wounds.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
Except, unlike the two Legionnaire weapons, both Necron weapons are significantly different with different range, strength, special rules and AP that actually make the unit function differently depending on which one you choose. The same can't be said of the heavy chainaxe versus the powerfist, but you keep on swinging at that strawman, I guess.

Combi-Weapons.

If all combi-weapons have the same profile as the one we saw for Librarians, that would be a step backwards. There's a difference between a nuanced, considered position and your "all consolidation bad!" kneejerk reactions to every single WHC article though.

 His Master's Voice wrote:
A character can presumably joint a unit while wounded?

Ah, yes, I hadn't thought of that. Thanks for coming up with a reason for why this might be possible, unlike some others...

I suppose they have to allow for it because of the Precision Hits/Shots/whatever thing, as mentioned above. Hell, it might even be possible that the Precision rule could conceivably allow you to wound multiple models across an entire unit of multi-wound models. Not exactly efficient and I can't imagine why you would do that, but it could be something that's within the scope of the rules.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
Not feeling super jazzed about these Necrons rules.

They are kind of boring. Reanimation may be stronger with multi-wound models, but it's way less interesting, and with it only happening in the command phase, opponents can work around it much more easily.

Warriors don't need to get weaker and cheaper.

Sustained hits on the Death Ray (i.e. a one-shot weapon) is, like, my least favorite GW mechanic. Definitely a "variance? What's that mean" kind of thing. Sure, the Monolith has 4 Death Rays, but it's just flukey and lame. Like somebody already said, it's annoying how Marines seem to have picked up more consistency with weapon damage, but factions like Crons and Nids are losing it again. More indication to me that GW isn't actually very good at learning from mistakes.

Yea I can see making sure to plink a wound or two off a unit just to make sure the reanimate doesn't bring a full model back, but that is also an interesting choice to keep in one's pocket.

What makes you feel like Warriors are weaker?

I just don't like that Sustained is D3 - a minor annoyance with extra rolls. I don't have a problem with inconsistent damage if it's a straight upgrade from prior. A monolith spiking a couple 6s on death rays is pretty scary. Everything comes down to points, eventually.

The Doomsday also became more consistent and gets some healthy bonuses if you're unlucky enough to have to walk into it's line of fire.

Tyel wrote:
Since characters can join units, and models can hit them with precision, it seems quite possible you'll be able to get multiple models missing wounds.

I was thinking of the same. We need clarification on how much exactly characters are part of units once they join them, it's unclear for other abilites already, for example the Librarians psy-defense etc.

Slipspace wrote:
If all combi-weapons have the same profile as the one we saw for Librarians, that would be a step backwards. There's a difference between a nuanced, considered position and your "all consolidation bad!" kneejerk reactions to every single WHC article though.

Except it's not kneejerk. I've explained my reasons why. You just refuse to listen.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
If all combi-weapons have the same profile as the one we saw for Librarians, that would be a step backwards. There's a difference between a nuanced, considered position and your "all consolidation bad!" kneejerk reactions to every single WHC article though.

Except it's not kneejerk. I've explained my reasons why. You just refuse to listen.

I think most people agree that combi consolidation isn't great.

Power axe / sword / maul has way less impact than reaper / flayer. Same with a heavy chainaxe and powerfist. Yet you made that argument and stripped any nuance out of it that others will grant for combis.

Tyel wrote:
Since characters can join units, and models can hit them with precision, it seems quite possible you'll be able to get multiple models missing wounds.

Has there been anything to indicate characters can join units after the game starts? I thought they just became single-model units once their escorts died.

However between precision shots and hazardous weapons then you could easily have multiple injured models inside a squad.

 xttz wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Since characters can join units, and models can hit them with precision, it seems quite possible you'll be able to get multiple models missing wounds.

Has there been anything to indicate characters can join units after the game starts? I thought they just became single-model units once their escorts died.

However between precision shots and hazardous weapons then you could easily have multiple injured models inside a squad.

From earlier articles I got that impression that once you're out then you're out. Perhaps there's a strat to rejoin. Really difficult to say, but given that characters can only join certain units will be very difficult to achieve anyway.

Ew.

Reanimation Protocols doesn't scale at all with damage taken; and a 'main focus' of the detachment is characters.

The Gambit Article does seem to be doubling down on "games will come down to a low probability dice roll". But I guess we'll have to see what the details of Emergency Evacuation and Delaying Tactics are.

To edit - I don't think there's been any suggestion characters can join or leave units in game. It sounds like you decide at the outset and that's it.

But its unclear we are in "you snipe a wound off a character. That's it, all subsequent wounds into the unit now go into that character". Because that would seem a bit bonkers.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
If all combi-weapons have the same profile as the one we saw for Librarians, that would be a step backwards. There's a difference between a nuanced, considered position and your "all consolidation bad!" kneejerk reactions to every single WHC article though.

Except it's not kneejerk. I've explained my reasons why. You just refuse to listen.

The thing is that you've spent the whole week slinging gak and doomposting, we get it (and we agree, combi weapon consolidation sucks if thats not just a librarian thing).

If you want people to take you seriously, maybe stop gaking on every posts with "muh combi weapons"

Is it possible that the combiweapon consolidation is for the combat patrol level rules?

 xttz wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Since characters can join units, and models can hit them with precision, it seems quite possible you'll be able to get multiple models missing wounds.

Has there been anything to indicate characters can join units after the game starts? I thought they just became single-model units once their escorts died.

However between precision shots and hazardous weapons then you could easily have multiple injured models inside a squad.

It might also just be future-proofing or edge-case-proofing the rule.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Is it possible that the combiweapon consolidation is for the combat patrol level rules?

maybe, who knows but GW right now. Still no point in getting their panties in a twist until we know for sure its a game-wide thing. Lets not forget the new datasheet design means not every loadout profile has to be the same across every unit now

Tyel wrote:
But its unclear we are in "you snipe a wound off a character. That's it, all subsequent wounds into the unit now go into that character". Because that would seem a bit bonkers.

I think wounds can ONLY get assigned to characters when it's a precision hit. Controlling player probably decides.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Is it possible that the combiweapon consolidation is for the combat patrol level rules?

I don't think so. I think GW have shown us one CP card and the rest are the full cards. It's still possible that the combi-weapon on the Librarian profile is a specific one that only applies to that model. We just don't know, which is one reason why certain posters constantly complaining is so frustrating and pointless.