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.
2023/06/22 13:16:10
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Apparently there's a German TO who has a line to the rules team (claims to be the reason Deathwatch got nerfed) who is very against the armour-stripping power to the point where many of the early tournaments being ran in Germany are house-ruling it to only reduce armour by 2.
2023/06/22 13:25:07
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Apparently there's a German TO who has a line to the rules team (claims to be the reason Deathwatch got nerfed) who is very against the armour-stripping power to the point where many of the early tournaments being ran in Germany are house-ruling it to only reduce armour by 2.
Those german tournament changes are a bit extreme to me. At what point are you not even playing 10th edition anymore? Also I am very wary of anyone who says they influence the rules, when they could have just got some inside knowlege and then publish their "suggestions" before the official GWfaq, then claim credit.
Thought I would post the german TO change list here for info:
- [Towering] is changed to: A unit with the [Towering] keyword is considered to be wholly within a piece of terrain, even if it is only partially within it (intention is: "toeing in" for the benefit of seeing "through" ruins instead of natively seeing "through" it)
- Wraithknights Heavy Wraithcannons lose the [Devastating Wounds] ability
- Fatedice are limited to one dice per unit per phase
- [Indirect] fire suffers the same penalty as in 9th edition (-1BS and +1 to save) in addition to any other applicable rules like cover, [Stealth], etc. and cannot benefit from the +1 to hit for being [Heavy] when fired without line of sight (model wise)
- Thousand Sons “Twist of Fate” Cabal Ritual is modified to “any armour saving throws of the unit are modified by -2” instead
- The range of the “Fire Overwatch” stratagem is reduced to 12” and only visible units can be shot
- Mortal Wounds from a single unit are capped at 6 MW per unit per phase when targeted at a non-Monster or non-Vehicle unit, any additional wounds e.g. with Assault Canons are then handled as normal (saves can be made etc.)
- Models can move over and stay on objectives without limitations (as per 9th)
- Lone Operative and similar abilities are subject to investigation of how to fix them best (tbd.)
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/06/22 13:25:46
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Apparently there's a German TO who has a line to the rules team (claims to be the reason Deathwatch got nerfed) who is very against the armour-stripping power to the point where many of the early tournaments being ran in Germany are house-ruling it to only reduce armour by 2.
Those german tournament changes are a bit extreme to me. At what point are you not even playing 10th edition anymore? Also I am very wary of anyone who says they influence the rules, when they could have just got some inside knowlege and then publish their "suggestions" before the official GWfaq, then claim credit.
Thought I would post the german TO change list here for info:
- [Towering] is changed to: A unit with the [Towering] keyword is considered to be wholly within a piece of terrain, even if it is only partially within it (intention is: "toeing in" for the benefit of seeing "through" ruins instead of natively seeing "through" it)
- Wraithknights Heavy Wraithcannons lose the [Devastating Wounds] ability
- Fatedice are limited to one dice per unit per phase
- [Indirect] fire suffers the same penalty as in 9th edition (-1BS and +1 to save) in addition to any other applicable rules like cover, [Stealth], etc. and cannot benefit from the +1 to hit for being [Heavy] when fired without line of sight (model wise)
- Thousand Sons “Twist of Fate” Cabal Ritual is modified to “any armour saving throws of the unit are modified by -2” instead
- The range of the “Fire Overwatch” stratagem is reduced to 12” and only visible units can be shot
- Mortal Wounds from a single unit are capped at 6 MW per unit per phase when targeted at a non-Monster or non-Vehicle unit, any additional wounds e.g. with Assault Canons are then handled as normal (saves can be made etc.)
- Models can move over and stay on objectives without limitations (as per 9th)
- Lone Operative and similar abilities are subject to investigation of how to fix them best (tbd.)
Impressive, in such a short list they managed to both over-fix what is not broken in many cases as well as invalidating some core design tenets of 10th (e.g. modifications can only go +/- 1) and breaking a handful of basic rules with pointless exceptions. There are problems in 10th, but these 'solutions' are even worse in my opinion.
2023/06/22 13:37:18
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
As a Guard player, indirect seems to be one of the cornerstones of the list in 10th. Not that I was planning on pure arty spam, but it definitely will be doing some heavy lifting. Removing the heavy bonus just seems like an arbitarily lrge nerf, when Guard have bs5+ heavy units. Without a sentinel, squad mortars would be hitting on 6s.
kodos wrote: even as a free app it does not do its job as you need to remove wargear that is replaced manually and if you forget to unclick that
which is the minimum I expect from an army builder, to actually build a legal army for that game and not just being a calculator with text output
Tsagualsa wrote: It's some sort of logical fallacy, not bothering to look it up - there's not just 'broken' and 'perfect', there's a spectrum in between. People are not asking for perfection, they're asking for reasonable standards that are state-of-the-art elsewhere. And that's a reasonable thing to ask for.
as I learned today GW is neither a gaming nor a software company (and not a book writing company either) but just a miniature company
therefore expecting anything but miniatures from them as not reasonable at all, and we should be grateful that a miniature company at least try to make rules for a game with software support and no matter how well those work
so they should not be measured on standards from gaming companies but only miniature companies
hence if GW games and app workes better than the game and app from Wargames Atlantic, Victrix Limited or Perry Miniatures, it is already above the standard for miniature companies
/s
Sure hope you don't think highly of battlescribe then as it falls faaaaaar from your minimum standards desplte years and years of work on it.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2023/06/22 13:41:13
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Apparently there's a German TO who has a line to the rules team (claims to be the reason Deathwatch got nerfed) who is very against the armour-stripping power to the point where many of the early tournaments being ran in Germany are house-ruling it to only reduce armour by 2.
Those german tournament changes are a bit extreme to me. At what point are you not even playing 10th edition anymore? Also I am very wary of anyone who says they influence the rules, when they could have just got some inside knowlege and then publish their "suggestions" before the official GWfaq, then claim credit.
Thought I would post the german TO change list here for info:
- [Towering] is changed to: A unit with the [Towering] keyword is considered to be wholly within a piece of terrain, even if it is only partially within it (intention is: "toeing in" for the benefit of seeing "through" ruins instead of natively seeing "through" it) - Wraithknights Heavy Wraithcannons lose the [Devastating Wounds] ability - Fatedice are limited to one dice per unit per phase - [Indirect] fire suffers the same penalty as in 9th edition (-1BS and +1 to save) in addition to any other applicable rules like cover, [Stealth], etc. and cannot benefit from the +1 to hit for being [Heavy] when fired without line of sight (model wise) - Thousand Sons “Twist of Fate” Cabal Ritual is modified to “any armour saving throws of the unit are modified by -2” instead - The range of the “Fire Overwatch” stratagem is reduced to 12” and only visible units can be shot - Mortal Wounds from a single unit are capped at 6 MW per unit per phase when targeted at a non-Monster or non-Vehicle unit, any additional wounds e.g. with Assault Canons are then handled as normal (saves can be made etc.) - Models can move over and stay on objectives without limitations (as per 9th) - Lone Operative and similar abilities are subject to investigation of how to fix them best (tbd.)
Impressive, in such a short list they managed to both over-fix what is not broken in many cases as well as invalidating some core design tenets of 10th (e.g. modifications can only go +/- 1) and breaking a handful of basic rules with pointless exceptions. There are problems in 10th, but these 'solutions' are even worse in my opinion.
Not surprised about the place of implementation though/ where this is coming from. Restoring fun by decree
jokes and cultural observations aside. Some of these things are actually not half bad as ideas, but i agree with you that some of the things got overfixed. Indirect fire f.e. the first bit without the +1 to save would've suficed and if it wouldn't have then the next part could've been implemented. The objective marker thingy is a net positive aswell. Personally though i prefer if the objective marker is something that could actually be an object but i guess that's nowadays too simulationist.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Trickstick wrote: As a Guard player, indirect seems to be one of the cornerstones of the list in 10th. Not that I was planning on pure arty spam, but it definitely will be doing some heavy lifting. Removing the heavy bonus just seems like an arbitarily lrge nerf, when Guard have bs5+ heavy units. Without a sentinel, squad mortars would be hitting on 6s.
Well, indirect fire is one of the few mechanics left from an bygone era, that not all factions have even possible access to, that it get's singled out is therefore unsurprising.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/06/22 13:42:43
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2023/06/22 13:42:24
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Tsagualsa wrote: It's some sort of logical fallacy, not bothering to look it up - there's not just 'broken' and 'perfect', there's a spectrum in between. People are not asking for perfection, they're asking for reasonable standards that are state-of-the-art elsewhere. And that's a reasonable thing to ask for.
False dichotomy/false dilemma/false binary
Yeah, that's the one. Nobody loses their mind over bugs/typos, but i think one can expect - from a release product that is not clearly marked as 'beta' or whatever, mind - that about 80% of the things that are advertised work as intended, and have minor issues at most. Nice-to-have stuff is another question, but an app that is intended as a gaming aid should be actually useable, and useful, to that purpose on release day.
So far building lists haven"t resulted in error or illegal list.
Took me less time to run into those on batlescribe
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AduroT wrote: TSons nerfs? I haven’t heard the complaining about them.
They do seem pretty strong. Ability to delete pretty much any unit(10 termies one shot with spare land raider with just bolters), extreme durability if opponent doesn't spam mw(magnus just laughs at 3 railgun as long as they don"t roll 6 to wound. 3 lancer oath of moment results nothing in average....
Army i would pay atttention. When you can deep strike 400 pts unit that deletes target with overkill it's pretty scary.
People complain about marines deleting specific unit with oath or wraithknight deleting with d-cannons and fate dice. This is about as reliable and doesn't require having 6's on fate dice. Okay at least you can fail but odds are small and loads of rolling involved reducing variance.
And can stack odds further if you want...
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/06/22 13:51:42
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2023/06/22 13:56:18
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
tneva82 wrote: [Sure hope you don't think highly of battlescribe then as it falls faaaaaar from your minimum standards desplte years and years of work on it.
really?
a multi million dollar company is not able to create the same standard as a guy in his basement 13 years ago, because it is not a software company
and cannot make a working app because they did not know the rules of their own game while a guy was able to predict the needs of 40k in 2019 and therefore should not be compared with the army builder supplied by other miniature gaming companies?
the minimum GW should to is what if not providing an army builder that actually builds a legal army with me needing to cross check with the datacards what is legal?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/06/22 14:01:51
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
2023/06/22 14:04:29
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
tauist wrote: It's not impossible that the codex will re-introduce some of the consolidated wargear options. In fact, I'd say its more than likely, with the indexes being free, the codexes need to have a bunch of new stuff to justify their purchase
Points are free if they're going to be tweaking them every 3 to 6 months.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote: In the assembly instructions for the Sternguard in the Leviathan box, the Combi-Plasma and Combi-Melta have different rules, the former being Anti-Monster/Hazardous, he latter being Anti-Vehicle/Melta. The Lieutenant's Combi-Flamer has Ignores Cover as well.
So it's literally just a bolter with various rules on it?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote: Imagine if all Melta-Weapons got Anti-Vehicle 4+ like these Combi-Meltas have. That'd certainly solve a few issues...
Not sure I'd go that far, but it'd certainly be popular.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/06/22 14:10:10
2023/06/22 14:15:47
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
leopard wrote: the tournament side have a remarkably simple solution open to them: for the next six months use 9th for tournaments and watch for actual issues with 10th before tryoing to fix it
We need games played to actually understand it. No one has played a single GT mission. Brutalizing the rules before we've even had a tournament is a bit nuts. I get dealing with Eldar in some fashion, but the rest should be left alone to play out.
More people should read Wing's rant on Goonhammer:
Spoiler:
Last week was a big one, huh? The vast majority of the rules for 10th Edition are now out in the wild, along with the truly upsetting number of words we wrote about them, and players have started to really dig in and get some games under their belts. I think it’s fair to say that emotions have been running high among segments of the playerbase, and that reactions have been mixed at best among the competitive scene. Plenty of people have positive things to say about the game, but the Indexes and Munitorum Field Manual in particular have created quite a bit of blowback, with some extremely alarmist takes about the edition being dead on arrival or unfixable, and some serious grumbling about some factions, which our own team have not been immune from.
Bluntly, the net result of this is that last week sucked as a content creator, because everyone wanted to laser focus in on excuses to get big mad online, all competing to have the most doom-laden take about 40K or their army, often in our comments section. This does not make the absurd amount of hours it takes to produce that volume of material feel particularly rewarding, and I can only imagine what it’s like for the design team. I’m not looking for pity here – I’ve been in online ecosystems a long time, I know how this works – but I do think the extent to which the community seems determined to have the most hostile or negative take on anything that happens has been ballooning in the last year, and this feels like it’s coming to a head in an incredibly negative fashion.
Because here’s the thing: Tenth Edition is fun! It’s really good fun! I have been privileged enough to play quite a few games of it now, and I’ve enjoyed all of them, coming away each time with new aspects I want to tinker with or try out. I’m also not alone in this – the reaction I’ve seen to Tenth among casual players has been wildly more positive than in the competitive scene, and if you’re outside the competitive ecosystem, the vitriol must look completely baffling. Part of that is, of course, that in the information age the speed at which competitive players can identify and start pushing the extremes of a new set of rules is orders of magnitude faster than it used to be. I imagine that if every game of tenth you’ve played is against the most nightmarish Aeldari list you can concoct, it probably doesn’t seem that great, so here’s an idea: Maybe don’t?
No one is saying that there won’t need to be some balance changes – there obviously will, probably sooner rather than later. We have, as a community, pretty conclusively demonstrated that the Aeldari Index is busted in about three days. Go us, new record etc. Now get some new material, because there’s really only two outcomes here.
Either you think Games Workshop will make improvements or you don’t. If you do, there’s a whole bunch of stuff you can explore while you wait, a lot of it great. If you don’t, and you’re online screaming about how GW can’t or won’t fix this, and Tenth Edition is doomed, then I’ve got a couple of questions. One – which Games Workshop have you been looking at for the last six years? It’s clearly a different one than I have. Throughout 9th edition Games Workshop demonstrated a commitment to improving the game quality through balance dataslates, a new rules glossary, and the return of its own tournament circuit in the US and (more recently) in the UK. It’s not an organisation that strikes me as particularly likely to let these problems hang around if they are as bad as some people think. I understand that people want feedback and changes at the speed of a Discord ping, but also we have literally already had the first emergency balance tweak for this edition, and it’s not even out yet!
The second question is honestly the more important one: What’s your endgame? Let’s say you’re right, and that for some reason Games Workshop is locked in to not course correcting this for six months or whatever. What is blasting out hyperbole after wildly incorrect hyperbole about how this is the worst that things have ever been and that the game sucks now going to accomplish? Make you look smart and sophisticated? Convince people that this community is not worth their time? Somehow get them to adopt your personal dream comp pack that definitely, 100% fixes every faction except the one you play?
Take an honest step back and listen to yourselves, because what you’re really pushing for is driving this community into total irrelevance. Competitive 40k has grown spectacularly over the last few years, but it’s still dwarfed by the greater 40k hobby, and if all the vocal parts of our community spend their time doing is screaming about how terrible everything is, that growth can reverse fast. That goes double if all the casual players are having the time of their lives, because why on earth would anyone choose to get involved in a toxic, seething mass of furious Reddit/Facebook/Twitter/Discord posts?
Either way, play games, get some practice in, and then when the hammer drops on Aeldari/Towering/Indirect fire (delete as applicable), your experience will still matter and the meta-chasers’ will be out of date. To be clear, I’m 100% putting my money (quite a bit of it, US hotel prices are wild) where my mouth is on both fronts on this one. I’m flying over to the US Open Tacoma in July and I’m bringing my Necrons rather than my beloved Wraithknight, because I’m vastly more interested in playing them than an Aeldari list that’ll be legal for months at most. Are some games at events going to suck? Yeah, but that’s always a risk if you attend an event however good the balance is – bad dice or bad opponents can still ruin a game for you. My least enjoyable tournament game ever was one that I won by a healthy margin, but it was still such a soul-destroying experience that I was angry for days afterwards. 40K is an imperfect game played by imperfect people. Sometimes it is good, and sometimes it is bad, and that’s life. If the competitive community means anything to you, focus on finding the bits that are good, and trust that the game’s designers want to do that as well.
My assumption is that this intro is going to make people a lot of people very mad and get me called a GW shill or whatever and sure, go nuts, there’s a queue. To be very clear, no one at GW has asked me to write this, and no one told us what to put in our Index reviews. People seem to think that the only possible reason we would choose to say anything nice about the Indexes is because Big GW is breathing down our necks, and that just bluntly isn’t true – we look for the positives because we all like this game and want it to be good! Pointing at something and saying it’s bad is much easier than digging into what’s good, and the latter is much more useful in the long run for building up the game. Also, plenty of our readers are never going to go anywhere near a tournament, and I guarantee you that the majority of them are going to find that their Indexes are just fine, and we’re writing for them as well.
This column, however, remains aimed firmly at the competitive community, and the driving purpose of it has always been to build positivity. If people go looking for competitive 40K content, I want them to find something focused on the creativeness and ingenuity that underpins so much of it, to see players from their local scene get a moment in the sun when they have a breakout performance, and to see their pet unit show up in the finals of a supermajor. I don’t want them to find a giant screed about the latest community drama, the latest prediction of the game’s death or people getting furiously angry that anyone would consider playing a non-optimal list.
Tenth Edition has the potential to be a great time for the game – so let’s focus on that, and not the teething issues. We know they’re there, I’ll wager the design team knows about them too, and shouting won’t get them fixed faster. I’m a software architect in my day job, and I know full well that launching a complex, technical project into the wild can sometimes be a bumpy ride, no matter how hard the team has worked, and that figuring out the causes of problems generally happens very quickly, but properly resolving them can, with the best will in the world, take a bit of time. Also, unlike a software project, you cannot simply roll back a release involving shipping spectacular numbers of physical boxes across the entire globe.
I’ll be at the Bristol GT playing pickup games of 10th this weekend (9th has exited my brain at this point), so if there’s something you like about the new edition, or even some constructive thoughts you have about what could be improved, do come and say hi and let me know. Or eradicate my Necrons with a Wraithknight to teach me a lesson, I guess. I technically cannot stop you doing that. I can even provide the Wraithknight, but as above I will be shaking my head in disapproval the whole time.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AduroT wrote: TSons nerfs? I haven’t heard the complaining about them.
They're pretty strong when they get the DW rolling via psychic.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/06/22 14:18:16
Daedalus81 wrote: So it's literally just a bolter with various rules on it?
Various rules that reflect the type of combi-weapon it is. Some could say it is a consolidation of a Bolter and Meltagun, Bolter and Plasma Gun and Bolter and Flamer rather than a consolidation of a Bolter, Flamer, Melta and Plasma Gun all in one.
If it were literally just a bolter, it wouldn't have those extra rules.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/06/22 14:25:21
absurd amount of hours it takes to produce that volume of material
That's a pretty wild assumption. I feel like the 'amount of hours' it took 'to produce that volume of material' was closer to "arbitrarily low" rather than "absurdly high".
My armies:
14000 points
2023/06/22 14:38:45
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
That Wings editorial is so rich. "GW totally didn't tell us to write this puff piece, srsly guise!" Fine, maybe I believe that. But the "reviews" of the indices that GH wrote were so incredibly slanted (especially the Admech, Sisters, and DG ones) that all credibility was lost for me.
But then, to come back and start throwing your community under the bus because there was some pushback to this absurdly rosy B.S. narrative? Feth off dude. The way the game plays/doesn't play is not the root cause of people's anger; it's the fact that GW has yet again sold us a bill of goods and completely under-delivered on their promises. In some places, that means stupid streamlining. In other places, that means wildly imbalanced rules. In other places, that means soulless, boring army design even if the army isn't completely terrible (I'm looking at you, Drukhari).
Anyway, it's not at all surprising to see toxic positivity from Goonhammer. Reddit lapped it up of course; oh well.
NB: I guess I should add that Wings' list was pretty stupid too. I am so tired of seeing people praising that designer commentary. 80% of that stuff belonged in the core rules, that material isn't "commentary" at all, it's fundamental. And battleshock? Gimme a break. You can already see rumblings in the community about how battleshock/morale still doesn't matter much.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/06/22 14:41:32
2023/06/22 14:42:13
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Gene St. Ealer wrote: That Wings editorial is so rich. "GW totally didn't tell us to write this puff piece, srsly guise!" Fine, maybe I believe that. But the "reviews" of the indices that GH wrote were so incredibly slanted (especially the Admech, Sisters, and DG ones) that all credibility was lost for me.
But then, to come back and start throwing your community under the bus because there was some pushback to this absurdly rosy B.S. narrative? Feth off dude. The way the game plays/doesn't play is not the root cause of people's anger; it's the fact that GW has yet again sold us a bill of goods and completely under-delivered on their promises. In some places, that means stupid streamlining. In other places, that means wildly imbalanced rules. In other places, that means soulless, boring army design (I'm looking at you, Drukhari).
Anyway, it's not at all surprising to see toxic positivity from Goonhammer. Reddit lapped it up of course; oh well.
NB: I guess I should add that Wings' list was pretty stupid too. I am so tired of seeing people praising that designer commentary. 80% of that stuff belonged in the core rules, that material isn't "commentary" at all, it's fundamental. And battleshock? Gimme a break. You can already see rumblings in the community about how battleshock/morale still doesn't matter much.
It's the same 'My pet-peeves are a well-reasoned, nuanced critique rooted in impartial analysis, your pet-peeves are entitled whining rendering the community toxic' spiel corporate spokespeople or 'professional critics' often fall back on if they can't defend something on the ground level - instead of refuting the actual critical arguments, attack the tone of them, fall back on 'don't rock the boat' type paroles, and accuse critics of putting the community in a negative light.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/06/22 14:42:22
2023/06/22 14:47:56
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Yeah, that's, like, the perfect example. They literally published a "review" and basically retracted it 2 days later. WTF? Like, all that shows me is that they knew there are big issues with the rules, but papered over all the issues in the initial review. Then, because Pendulin has some integrity, he went back and had to post something a little more even-handed.
Third parties should not write GW propaganda, which is what those index reviews were. That's the job of Warhammer Community.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/06/22 14:59:30
2023/06/22 15:33:49
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Trickstick wrote: As a Guard player, indirect seems to be one of the cornerstones of the list in 10th. Not that I was planning on pure arty spam, but it definitely will be doing some heavy lifting. Removing the heavy bonus just seems like an arbitarily lrge nerf, when Guard have bs5+ heavy units. Without a sentinel, squad mortars would be hitting on 6s.
As you said at 70pts the Earthshaker is the way to go. I'm going to get myself one of the really huge 3d printed Big Berthas from Battleforge (I think it's Battleforge)
M.
Jenkins: You don't have jurisdiction here!
Smith Jamison: We aren't here, which means when we open up on you and shred your bodies with automatic fire then this will never have happened.
About the Clans: "Those brief outbursts of sense can't hold back the wave of sibko bred, over hormoned sociopaths that they crank out though."
2023/06/22 15:38:16
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Trickstick wrote: As a Guard player, indirect seems to be one of the cornerstones of the list in 10th. Not that I was planning on pure arty spam, but it definitely will be doing some heavy lifting. Removing the heavy bonus just seems like an arbitarily lrge nerf, when Guard have bs5+ heavy units. Without a sentinel, squad mortars would be hitting on 6s.
As you said at 70pts the Earthshaker is the way to go. I'm going to get myself one of the really huge 3d printed Big Berthas from Battleforge (I think it's Battleforge)
M.
I'd advise caution until the sheet is seen. Never know what will change your perception of a unit.
Trickstick wrote: As a Guard player, indirect seems to be one of the cornerstones of the list in 10th. Not that I was planning on pure arty spam, but it definitely will be doing some heavy lifting. Removing the heavy bonus just seems like an arbitarily lrge nerf, when Guard have bs5+ heavy units. Without a sentinel, squad mortars would be hitting on 6s.
As you said at 70pts the Earthshaker is the way to go. I'm going to get myself one of the really huge 3d printed Big Berthas from Battleforge (I think it's Battleforge)
M.
From datamining, the platforms are apparently BS 5+, so you may want to wait on that.
EDIT: Already covered, I think.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/06/22 15:48:10
2023/06/22 15:50:13
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Laughing Man wrote: From datamining, the platforms are apparently BS 5+, so you may want to wait on that.
I would bet on heavy, move -, and maybe even regiment. Which made me check if you can bring move - stuff on from reserve (for 2cp guard reasons...). I think you can.
On one hand, nice that they are printing new ones at all, on the other why not delay the release at this point since they already limited them and people will complain that they get cards with errors
2023/06/22 15:55:49
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
On the other other hand, we’ve got digital ones, why worry about the print ones - especially given we know each set will be defunct as their Codex rolls out.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
On one hand, nice that they are printing new ones at all, on the other why not delay the release at this point since they already limited them and people will complain that they get cards with errors
They could do free swaps of cards with errors for the correct ones in-store, but that would be pretty expensive and a huge logistics burden.
2023/06/22 16:04:00
Subject: Re:10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Anyway, it's not at all surprising to see toxic positivity from Goonhammer. Reddit lapped it up of course; oh well.
He has actually a point. Competitive scene has already a bad reputation enough, it will only get worse when all these so called "elite players" spend their time about bitching and moaning about hypothetical cases like they would happen all the time. It's actually pointless.
Meanwhile, normal players (also called "casual" for some reason) have fun with the game. Because they treat it as what it is : a game.
Is it perfect ? Hell no, never was never will. Will GW do something about fixing datasheets / points ? Of course they'll do, just see at the litteral history of 9th. Just with time (they especially like data from tournaments to back them up, after all).
Better not to take it too seriously, in the end. And leave that ultra-competitive mindset in the dumpster where it should belong, IMHO.
2023/06/22 16:09:24
Subject: 10th Edition Rumour Roundup - in the grim darkness of the far future, there are only power levels
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: On the other other hand, we’ve got digital ones, why worry about the print ones - especially given we know each set will be defunct as their Codex rolls out.
My army codex isn't due out for over a year. And since scrolling through the digital takes FOREVER (surely, the pages are sloooow to load) and printing is a hassle, I still intend on getting the physical cards to use.
I can also use a sharpie on the cards if something changes
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: On the other other hand, we’ve got digital ones, why worry about the print ones - especially given we know each set will be defunct as their Codex rolls out.
My army codex isn't due out for over a year. And since scrolling through the digital takes FOREVER (surely, the pages are sloooow to load) and printing is a hassle, I still intend on getting the physical cards to use.
I can also use a sharpie on the cards if something changes
-
If the PDFs are 1:1 scale you can print out any updated cards and cut out the just area that's changed to stick on the physical cards
14000 points 
[1,800] Chaos Knights | 
[1,250] Thousand Sons | 
[1,000] Grey Knights | 40K editions: RT, 8, 9, 10 |