10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels

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.

**kodos**

I haven't seen anyone here that really likes 10th for now
so 90% if the people here need to shut up as they talk bad about the thing people like

and saying "play OPR" the constructive and fixing the problem
as is "just buy new models"

and those 2 options are as far we can go here with problem solving as everything else depends on GW

and both options have been talked about, yet one is toxic and need to shut up while the other is a justified opinion

As it is I have no idea why I’d Want to try OPR if the player base is this toxic.

why are you playing 40k than?

**tneva82**

Yep. For once for gw rule is clear if you read it

**SarisKhan**

To be honest, I think that I actually like most of things about the 10th Edition. My primary concern is the "It's totally not Power Level!" approach to points costs.

IMHO, GW should:
1. Reinstate points costs for upgrades and especially additional equipment.
2. Revise bodyguard unit and wargear options so that they are more sensible and consistent (and preferably slightly more granular in certain cases).

These should be relatively easy fixes that would significantly improve gaming experience.

Nevertheless, I'm already having fun theorycrafting some army lists. Will need to test them on the field of battle soon.

**tneva82**

Charax wrote:

A lot of their abilities do still activate, although it will probably need an FAQ to see how many times Rites of Battle can be activated each turn (the army has 21 models with the ability, so you probably just won't need any CP, even though you'll get an additional one from Azreal)

Though not some. Some require unit to lead. And rites of war max 1 per battleround. # of captains irrelavant. Same as farseer ability or ork da jump.

**NinthMusketeer**

Still can't build a proper obliterator cult army T-T

**Charax**

Tsagualsa wrote:

Nah, Rites of Battle is pretty explicit about it:

Well, it's not like they've never FAQd something to mean the diametric opposite of what the rule actually says before, so maybe down the line the Free CP Conga can be a thing

**Tsagualsa**

Charax wrote:
Tsagualsa wrote:

Nah, Rites of Battle is pretty explicit about it:

Well, it's not like they've never FAQd something to mean the diametric opposite of what the rule actually says before, so maybe down the line the Free CP Conga can be a thing

That's possible, but at the moment the RAW is clear and seems to match RAI for once, so i don't see any immediate need for an FAQ for that problem specifically.

**MalusCalibur**

Platuan4th wrote:
As someone who monetarily supports OPR, shut the feth up.

No, I don't believe I will. I have no vested interest in 'converting' people to any particular other system, I just like to point out that GW will *never* do things any better if they are never given a reason to do so. Accepting a shoddy product like 10th, in which the sheer number of mistakes, inconsistencies, and outright logical failures (Leman Russ sponsons, for example) are indisputable, does not incentivise GW to improve. They are a massively profitable company who easily have the capacity, if not the drive, to do better than this. I mean really now, they consider players so stupid as to be unable to handle basic arithmetic, judging by the 'developer commentary'. Why would you want to continue supporting those who think so little of you?

If you like the models and/or lore of 40k, that's fine and entirely subjective. But there's tons of other games out there in which you could enjoy both without having to settle for mediocrity, for lazy and incompetent design. Grimdark Future happens to be my ruleset of choice, but I couldn't really care less if people read my post and decide they won't play it; I'm just pointing out that it's probably the closest approximation to 40k.

If all you (or anybody) has to say in response to all of that is 'shut up', then so be it - but it doesn't reflect well on the strength of your position.

**tneva82**

Charax wrote:
Tsagualsa wrote:

Nah, Rites of Battle is pretty explicit about it:

Well, it's not like they've never FAQd something to mean the diametric opposite of what the rule actually says before, so maybe down the line the Free CP Conga can be a thing

Or not. For once gw has done some balance checks. Imagine eldars with practically every fate dice as 6

**Galef**

SarisKhan wrote:
To be honest, I think that I actually like most of things about the 10th Edition. My primary concern is the "It's totally not Power Level!" approach to points costs.

IMHO, GW should:
1. Reinstate points costs for upgrades and especially additional equipment.
2. Revise bodyguard unit and wargear options so that they are more sensible and consistent (and preferably slightly more granular in certain cases).

These should be relatively easy fixes that would significantly improve gaming experience.

Nevertheless, I'm already having fun theorycrafting some army lists. Will need to test them on the field of battle soon.

I mostly agree, but I would be fine with MOST wargear being free (or rather assumed as part of the unit) with only some choices having extra cost.
Using Tactical Marines as an easy example, it should be assumed that the unit WILL have a Heavy weapon, Special weapon and some wargear on the Sgt, si those should be considered free. But certain choices, like a Lascannon or Power fist, should cost at least +5pts above.

But at the very least, GW needs to add back points for individual models between the min and max unit sizes.
That alone would add back some granularity and make it possible to more effectively use Transport capabilities with Characters.

-

**Gadzilla666**

Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

**Grimtuff**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

"yOu CaN't TeLl Me WhAt To Do!"

Famous last words of many a person...

**chaos0xomega**

I'm fine with 10th edition, there's like 95 things which are great and 5 things which are less than ideal. Overall a good direction for the game.

I've tried OPR/GDF, it's mid. If I'm going to jump through the hoops needed to play a game that isn't 40k, there's lots of other games I'd rather be playing.

**Dudeface**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

Dear God, "have you hear about this game, its awesome because XYZ and you can use your 40k minis!" Is good. "Stop being such a corporate shill and forking out cash for big cropos you sucker, have some self respect and play XYZ" is definitely toxic.

**Grimtuff**

Dudeface wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

Dear God, "have you hear about this game, its awesome because XYZ and you can use your 40k minis!" Is good. "Stop being such a corporate shill and forking out cash for big cropos you sucker, have some self respect and play XYZ" is definitely toxic.

No. Go play GDF. You can't tell me what to do.

The irony as well of replying to, of all people Gadzilla, who continually plugs HH, a Games Workshop produced game.

**Tsagualsa**

Dudeface wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

Dear God, "have you hear about this game, its awesome because XYZ and you can use your 40k minis!" Is good. "Stop being such a corporate shill and forking out cash for big cropos you sucker, have some self respect and play XYZ" is definitely toxic.

It's double fun if the alternate game is... Horus Heresy.

**vipoid**

chaos0xomega wrote:
I'm fine with 10th edition, there's like 95 things which are great

I challenge you to name them.

**AduroT**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

Did ya miss the part where I said it was fine to suggest people to try it out, but prefacing it with the game you like is garbage is probably a bad selling point?

**Grimtuff**

AduroT wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

Did ya miss the part where I said it was fine to suggest people to try it out, but prefacing it with the game you like is garbage is probably a bad selling point?

You can't tell me what to do.

**Gadzilla666**

Dudeface wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

Dear God, "have you hear about this game, its awesome because XYZ and you can use your 40k minis!" Is good. "Stop being such a corporate shill and forking out cash for big cropos you sucker, have some self respect and play XYZ" is definitely toxic.

Nah. It's good advice. Especially considering the mess that we're witnessing. Maybe it could have been better worded, but it's still good advice. Especially considering that it isn't a "GW problem", but a "40k problem", as other GW rules writers seem to get the concept.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

AduroT wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

Did ya miss the part where I said it was fine to suggest people to try it out, but prefacing it with the game you like is garbage is probably a bad selling point?

The truth hurts? Sorry?

Edit: And no one has played 10th edition yet. So, how can it be "the game you like'?

**tneva82**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

It's not what but how.

But ok. I'll go to every opr thread advertize aos, warmachine and infinity and trash opr. Is that good idea for you?

Hopefully you say yes or you publicly admit having double standards.

**Tsagualsa**

AduroT wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

Did ya miss the part where I said it was fine to suggest people to try it out, but prefacing it with the game you like is garbage is probably a bad selling point?

Meanwhile, in the 'Other Sci-Fi Games' section of this very forum, where these apparently totally awesome games are at home:

**Gadzilla666**

tneva82 wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Please, please everyone. Don't offer alternatives to 10th edition 40k. It's, apparently, "toxic". How dare anyone to even suggest that alternative rulesets exist for using your 40k miniatures.

It's not what but how.

But ok. I'll go to every opr thread advertize aos, warmachine and infinity and trash opr. Is that good idea for you?

Hopefully you say yes or you publicly admit having double standards.

Knock yourself out, Tneva.

**Gert**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Nah. It's good advice. Especially considering the mess that we're witnessing. Maybe it could have been better worded, but it's still good advice. Especially considering that it isn't a "GW problem", but a "40k problem", as other GW rules writers seem to get the concept.

But the wording is the whole issue people are having. If the only thing an individual can say is "40k is trash, GW is trash, if you like 40k you're a shill, you should play X instead", then the message coming across is that the community of X is full of bitter ex-GW game players who will do nothing but complain about how bad GW is.
I considered 9th Age before checking various forums and seeing nothing but AoS/GW rage posts and no actual discussion about how the game was better or even good.

Edit: And no one has played 10th edition yet. So, how can it be "the game you like'?

The points came out yesterday, it's entirely reasonable for people to have played 10th by now.

**Daedalus81**

Rihgu wrote:
Arkanaut Company with nothing but pistols is literally the wrong choice every single time. Light Skyhook, skypike, volley pistol, and volleygun are the same cost (because everything is) and is better in every way. There is no trade-off. If you choose the former you're just wrong. There is literally zero reason not to take it, so why is it even an option in the first place?

And again, there are many such units with these sorts of options in Age of Sigmar. The community at-large is perfectly a-okay with this, it's fine, because you're going to be picking the best options any ways. The bad options are for people who are fine with picking bad options.

You could make an aethermatic volley-gun 10 points and a light skyhook 15 points and in 90% of cases people would still pay the points for them because they're vital for the unit's role in-game.

AoS's sidegrades are like when you can pick between a spear or a sword for a unit - an option that's becoming increasingly rare as time goes on as the weapon gets rolled into "spears and swords" with one profile, because people always pick the optimal profile anyways. And even with the minor side-grade differences, there is always an optimal choice. This weapon is 2" range 4+ to hit, 3+ to wound and the other is 1" range, 3+ to hit, and 4+ to wound? Okay, I have easy access to +1 to hit, so spear is always correct. Oh, it's the season where models in base-to-base can fight over each other anyways, the sword is better now. etc etc etc

I sympathize with the people who picked options that were once good and are now bad. That sucks when that happens. But to suggest this new system is impossible to work with is just useless gnashing of teeth. The system works perfectly fine, as long as you work within it. People can make bad choices with their units even within a hyper-modular points system, let's not pretend AoS style/PL style points are uniquely terrible in any way.

There are units like this in 40K now, yes.

And there are others that are not by way of characters or other reasons. I played a game last night and found the flamers to feel a bit softer than they were in 9th, because I didn't have an Infernal Master and VotLW.

Rubric Marines w/ Warpflamers also can't benefit from Ensorcelled Infusion which chains with he detachment rule nor can they benefit from Sustained or Lethal instead. So in this scenario is seems appropriate for the cost to be equal. Yet at the same time Ahriman with +1 to wound on weapons that auto-hit and an overwatch that can affect the movement phase can be quite useful so there is choice to be had. You won't likely take multiple units -- unless you want to lean into using Cabal points for extra overwatch.

**Gadzilla666**

Gert wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Nah. It's good advice. Especially considering the mess that we're witnessing. Maybe it could have been better worded, but it's still good advice. Especially considering that it isn't a "GW problem", but a "40k problem", as other GW rules writers seem to get the concept.

But the wording is the whole issue people are having. If the only thing an individual can say is "40k is trash, GW is trash, if you like 40k you're a shill, you should play X instead", then the message coming across is that the community of X is full of bitter ex-GW game players who will do nothing but complain about how bad GW is.
I considered 9th Age before checking various forums and seeing nothing but AoS/GW rage posts and no actual discussion about how the game was better or even good.

Edit: And no one has played 10th edition yet. So, how can it be "the game you like'?

The points came out yesterday, it's entirely reasonable for people to have played 10th by now.

Cool. Has anyone? Serious question.

And if the "tone" of the statement is the problem, then we're just splitting hairs. Welcome to the internet, I guess.

**H.B.M.C.**

vipoid wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
I'm fine with 10th edition, there's like 95 things which are great
I challenge you to name them.

He can only name 50, or 100, as anything in between isn't allowed.

**Shadow Walker**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
vipoid wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
I'm fine with 10th edition, there's like 95 things which are great
I challenge you to name them.
He can only name 50, or 100, as anything in between isn't allowed.

Unless Custodes

**dreadblade**

Well I've put together lists for my three armies now, and whilst at first I was concerned by the fixed unit sizes and lack of wargear costs, I think it might actually work just fine. I tend to go for min or max unit sizes with the best options anyway. I'll be playing a few games before I come to any final conclusions though.

It is a shame you can't have a psychic Chaos Knight other than an Abominant now, and it's also a shame the Stormraven doesn't have the assault ramp rule like the Land Raider. Still, I actually quite like the consolidation of Nemesis Force Weapons for GK. It means you can model what you want without it affecting the rules - I've always thought swords look cooler than hammers...

**vipoid**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
vipoid wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
I'm fine with 10th edition, there's like 95 things which are great
I challenge you to name them.
He can only name 50, or 100, as anything in between isn't allowed.