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 wrote:
that is what he wrote, each card only having 1-2 unique rules is 0 bloat
that there is an unnecessary amount of almost identical units is not bloat but "flavour"

though I cannot understand how combining some options into one adds flavour because you can chose based on the look of it rather than rules, while at the same time unique special rules are needed to add flavour to chose from

Chaosistency!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
There is currently 0 Bloat.

Based on what metric? Someone could consider every sheet having its own unique rule 'bloat'.

Yeah that'd be me. I worried they'd do this when they started spoilering unit profiles and all of them appeared to have gained a bespoke rule. Stats and a handful of faction rules used to be enough to describe a basic chaff unit. Gw gonna gw I guess, but I expected they'd at least be able to keep it in their pants until the first codex.

shortymcnostrill wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
There is currently 0 Bloat.

Based on what metric? Someone could consider every sheet having its own unique rule 'bloat'.

Yeah that'd be me. I worried they'd do this when they started spoilering unit profiles and all of them appeared to have gained a bespoke rule. Stats and a handful of faction rules used to be enough to describe a basic chaff unit. Gw gonna gw I guess, but I expected they'd at least be able to keep it in their pants until the first codex.

At least you're all going to get used to each unit having a bespoke rule (or two, or three) from the get go.
Can you imagine the howls & outrage if these index rules were as bland & generic as many people thought they'd be - and then the Codexes began arriving with the "real rules"?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
My issue with Characters joining units is that they haven't given an alternative. Now most of these characters have to lead units otherwise:

1. One or more of their rules don't do anything (they have to be leading a unit for them to activate).
2. They will get shot off the board instantly as they cannot hide.

Lone Operative should have been the default for characters, and it is not in effect when characters are not leading units. Leader abilities might have a two-part effect for leading a unit/not leading a unit, but not an aura (as we want to avoid that), so "Pick a unit within 6 and it can re-roll 1's To Hit, but if leading a unit the unit may re-roll all failed To Hit rolls". Y'know, give us a bit of choice in how we use our characters besides "Join a unit, or die and do nothing".

That's... so much better than what we have.

Having characters default to Lone Operative rules when not in squads would be a massive improvement. I also agree with giving them more freedom to buff units they aren't attached to.

It's especially weird because some characters currently stop buffing themselves if their squad dies.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

I'm not sure this is quite as big a deal as you're making it. Pulling numbers out of thin air, say every Codex has 5 different detachments (it better be at least that... can you imagine if we get a Codex and there are like 2 or 3?), well that means 30 new strats! OMG!

But, also, not really, because you are only looking at 6 at a time. My 'Nids have 32 strats that can be variably played in 16 different 'phases' of the game. And that's before we add in the sub-faction strats or the universal strats. I'm far happier with only having to consider 6 for my army at any given point during the game, plus a simple suite of universal ones.

I take issue with it for two reasons:

1) There is simply no reason for them to exist. They add nothing to the game and are still completely disconnected from everything else.

2) Even if there aren't as many of them (at once) as there are currently, they still take up significant amounts of design space that could be much better spent on other, more tangible options. The detachment rules fit on 4 pages. But 2 entire pages are devoted exclusively to stratagems. So that's half the design space for every faction completely devoured by these detestable things.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Methinks that every Codex should have a set of core faction rules that includes, perhaps 2 strats and some relics that anyone can use, but I think that they've got this "One army rule/one detachment rule + 6 strats + 4 enhancements" brainbug stuck in their heads, so are sticking to that like the dogged "Rules must fit on 8 pages!" crap that we got at the start of AoS and 8th.

Whilst I still want strats to die a slow, painful death, I agree that this would be a much more sensible way of doing things.

 vipoid wrote:


I take issue with it for two reasons:

1) There is simply no reason for them to exist. They add nothing to the game and are still completely disconnected from everything else.

2) Even if there aren't as many of them (at once) as there are currently, they still take up significant amounts of design space that could be much better spent on other, more tangible options. The detachment rules fit on 4 pages. But 2 entire pages are devoted exclusively to stratagems. So that's half the design space for every faction completely devoured by these detestable things.

Stratagems are bolted-on additions to simulate a tactical and strategic depth the basic rules are not able to actually depict and display on the table - your e.g. Leadership mechanics do not allow for representation of units that have a particularly dogged determination, or insane courage, or are raving lunatics only intent on careless slaughter, so you need your tacked-on bits to show that (and also to spell it out for the dum-dums). Similar for Ambushes, Flank moves, Good Logistics and so on. They 'need' Stratagems in the same amount that they dumbed down and simplified the actual rules, and they need it to placate people with no imagination that need everything spelled out and decorated with flashing lights.

 alextroy wrote:

And that is it. There is currently 0 Bloat. There is the promise that while they will add new detachments, they will appear much like the old ones having 1 Detachment Ability and 10 Stratagems/Enhancements. If they do that, then there will be no Bloat.

I think that's taking things a little far. Overall there has certainly been a huge reduction in what you need to know once you're actually at the table. The removal of dozens of strats, loads of WLT and relics, including subfaction ones, should hopefully simplify the experience at the table. I think the datacards will also help with that.

However, I do think the requirement for every unit to have some sort of special rule is stupid. I quite like the rules that make the basic units of each army better at holding or taking objectives, but I'm not convinced adding a whole bunch of different rules to every flavour of SM Captain, or having different ones for Assault or regular Terminator squads is really necessary or helpful. The Primaris tanks and speeders are a great example of where this is stupid, IMO. They all have some sort of unique weapon system and overall loadout to focus them on a specific task. To me, that should be enough to differentiate them. We don't also need a special rule on top of that.

My take is that "Simplified, not simple" was just another lie from the marketing dept, and 10th will end up being just as half arsed as the rest of em.

The beauty of the datacards crumbles the moment they contain incorrect/outdated info, and seems like they have achieved that even before the game's official launch

WEAK

On the other hand, this time around I don't actually have to buy any rulebooks to play, so admittedly, things could be worse

 tauist wrote:
My take is that "Simplified, not simple" was just another lie from the marketing dept

I mean, it is obvious corpospeak, so I don't think anyone should feel surprised over it turning out to be exactly that.

 AtoMaki wrote:

 tauist wrote:
My take is that "Simplified, not simple" was just another lie from the marketing dept

I mean, it is obvious corpospeak, so I don't think anyone should feel surprised over it turning out to be exactly that.

Every edition someone fails their save & takes the marketing buzzwords/phrases seriously....

 tauist wrote:
The beauty of the datacards crumbles the moment they contain incorrect/outdated info

Nah, you just re-print 'em.

If you bought physical stat cards for 40K of all things then use a Sharpie and learn your lesson, I guess.

 vipoid wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
My issue with Characters joining units is that they haven't given an alternative. Now most of these characters have to lead units otherwise:

1. One or more of their rules don't do anything (they have to be leading a unit for them to activate).
2. They will get shot off the board instantly as they cannot hide.

Lone Operative should have been the default for characters, and it is not in effect when characters are not leading units. Leader abilities might have a two-part effect for leading a unit/not leading a unit, but not an aura (as we want to avoid that), so "Pick a unit within 6 and it can re-roll 1's To Hit, but if leading a unit the unit may re-roll all failed To Hit rolls". Y'know, give us a bit of choice in how we use our characters besides "Join a unit, or die and do nothing".

That's... so much better than what we have.

I think it's a terrible idea.

For one it'd make picking them up with aircraft or flyers pretty easy, but makes sniper weapons completely irrelevant.

Then you have to track where buffs are applied and you can't govern where the buffs can go without overly elaborating on eligible units. In effect you just stripped their ability to adjust points based on a known effect. And then you have to rework all the abilities, because a Sorcerer making Rubrics untargetable outside 18" is a whoooole lot different on other units.

Same. I love restricting most character effects to a single unit.

It resolves a lot of layers of nonsense into something sensible.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
These indexes are pretty decent. They just have some really really bad oversights.

The entire CSM index is a floating dumpster fire, and whoever designed it was dropped on their head as a child

"lets take the index with the second most characters and make them all mostly useless! because they can only attach to chosen and legionnaires, never cult troops"
"here, your combi weapons you were using for anti-tank are now awful"
"hard limit on cult troops, because you WILL take gakky legionnaires and LIKE it"

>and more besides

 Daedalus81 wrote:
For one it'd make picking them up with aircraft or flyers pretty easy, but makes sniper weapons completely irrelevant.

These are good points. Doesn't make it a "terrible" idea though. Just means you have to find solutions to these issues.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Then you have to track where buffs are applied and you can't govern where the buffs can go without overly elaborating on eligible units. In effect you just stripped their ability to adjust points based on a known effect.

Why do you always present these problems like they're completely insurmountable?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
And then you have to rework all the abilities, because a Sorcerer making Rubrics untargetable outside 18" is a whoooole lot different on other units.

Why do you assume that the rule wouldn't change. And again, "This would be too powerful, so we can't possibly change it!" is not a counter-argument. I already said that the abilities would probably work differently, with a greater effect for units being led compared to lesser effects for abilities bestowed upon nearby units.

And you haven't addressed the main concern at all: That attaching characters to units isn't a choice anymore, because half their rules only work when they're leading units and having them not lead units means they just get picked out and killed.

There's no choice involved. The best you can muster is that it's a "terrible idea" because some of the rules as they exist right now in the Indices would be too powerful if they could just be placed on nearby units. Great. That was never the suggestion being made. Try again.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
My issue with Characters joining units is that they haven't given an alternative. Now most of these characters have to lead units otherwise:

1. One or more of their rules don't do anything (they have to be leading a unit for them to activate).
2. They will get shot off the board instantly as they cannot hide.

Lone Operative should have been the default for characters, and it is not in effect when characters are not leading units. Leader abilities might have a two-part effect for leading a unit/not leading a unit, but not an aura (as we want to avoid that), so "Pick a unit within 6 and it can re-roll 1's To Hit, but if leading a unit the unit may re-roll all failed To Hit rolls". Y'know, give us a bit of choice in how we use our characters besides "Join a unit, or die and do nothing".

That's... so much better than what we have.

I think it's a terrible idea.

For one it'd make picking them up with aircraft or flyers pretty easy, but makes sniper weapons completely irrelevant.

Then you have to track where buffs are applied and you can't govern where the buffs can go without overly elaborating on eligible units. In effect you just stripped their ability to adjust points based on a known effect. And then you have to rework all the abilities, because a Sorcerer making Rubrics untargetable outside 18" is a whoooole lot different on other units.

I'd like it if they split the difference. You have to join the squad to use the unit buffs, you can join and leave throughout the game. You're a Lone Operative when you aren't joined, Precision ignores/counters Lone Operative.

Voss wrote:
Same. I love restricting most character effects to a single unit.

I wasn't arguing for a return to auras. I even said as much.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
Same. I love restricting most character effects to a single unit.

I wasn't arguing for a return to auras. I even said as much.

Good? I didn't mention auras.

'Pick any unit to get [thing]' isn't much better, because [thing] can have radically different results on different units.

 WindstormSCR wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
These indexes are pretty decent. They just have some really really bad oversights.

The entire CSM index is a floating dumpster fire, and whoever designed it was dropped on their head as a child

"lets take the index with the second most characters and make them all mostly useless! because they can only attach to chosen and legionnaires, never cult troops"
"here, your combi weapons you were using for anti-tank are now awful"
"hard limit on cult troops, because you WILL take gakky legionnaires and LIKE it"

>and more besides

They're not useless - you just don't like Chosen / Legionaries, I guess? Some of them are quite fun barring the direct beat stick nature of the Lords. And the army building restrictions are pretty light.

Rubrics Marines that come in get the army rules so they can do the Pact, which gets then 5+ Lethal with their always on AP1 bolters. Abaddon can buff them. A Prince can give them cover. A Helbrute can give them Lethal and Sustained.

Combi-weapons got murdered all over the place so that's not new.

Voss wrote:
Same. I love restricting most character effects to a single unit.

It resolves a lot of layers of nonsense into something sensible.

Yeah, it's great that commanders no longer do anything to actually command their army

The Lord Discordan'ts Corrupt Machine Spirits still having an effect on a successful save is pretty nutty. This might be another edition where you want three of these things.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 WindstormSCR wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
These indexes are pretty decent. They just have some really really bad oversights.

The entire CSM index is a floating dumpster fire, and whoever designed it was dropped on their head as a child

"lets take the index with the second most characters and make them all mostly useless! because they can only attach to chosen and legionnaires, never cult troops"
"here, your combi weapons you were using for anti-tank are now awful"
"hard limit on cult troops, because you WILL take gakky legionnaires and LIKE it"

>and more besides

They're not useless - you just don't like Chosen / Legionaries, I guess? Some of them are quite fun

Yeah, Chosen having the choice of two Combi-Weapons and 1 Power Fist is FUN. Legionaries not being allowed to take more than one of anything is FUN.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Voss wrote:
Same. I love restricting most character effects to a single unit.

It resolves a lot of layers of nonsense into something sensible.

Yeah, it's great that commanders no longer do anything to actually command their army

I guess you loved the days of guilliman standing in the back yelling at razorbacks to shoot betterer then?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 WindstormSCR wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
These indexes are pretty decent. They just have some really really bad oversights.

The entire CSM index is a floating dumpster fire, and whoever designed it was dropped on their head as a child

"lets take the index with the second most characters and make them all mostly useless! because they can only attach to chosen and legionnaires, never cult troops"
"here, your combi weapons you were using for anti-tank are now awful"
"hard limit on cult troops, because you WILL take gakky legionnaires and LIKE it"

>and more besides

They're not useless - you just don't like Chosen / Legionaries, I guess? Some of them are quite fun

Yeah, Chosen having the choice of two Combi-Weapons and 1 Power Fist is FUN. Legionaries not being allowed to take more than one of anything is FUN.

I actually don't know what is fun by your standards, I've never once seen you say you enjoy anything.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Voss wrote:
Same. I love restricting most character effects to a single unit.

It resolves a lot of layers of nonsense into something sensible.

Yeah, it's great that commanders no longer do anything to actually command their army

I agree, remove HQs from the game entirely. Only characters that should be in are field supports.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 WindstormSCR wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
These indexes are pretty decent. They just have some really really bad oversights.

The entire CSM index is a floating dumpster fire, and whoever designed it was dropped on their head as a child

"lets take the index with the second most characters and make them all mostly useless! because they can only attach to chosen and legionnaires, never cult troops"
"here, your combi weapons you were using for anti-tank are now awful"
"hard limit on cult troops, because you WILL take gakky legionnaires and LIKE it"

>and more besides

They're not useless - you just don't like Chosen / Legionaries, I guess? Some of them are quite fun barring the direct beat stick nature of the Lords. And the army building restrictions are pretty light.

Rubrics Marines that come in get the army rules so they can do the Pact, which gets then 5+ Lethal with their always on AP1 bolters. Abaddon can buff them. A Prince can give them cover. A Helbrute can give them Lethal and Sustained.

Combi-weapons got murdered all over the place so that's not new.

I can't join anything that actually matters to havocs (exalted)
I can't join them to raptors, or possessed, I can't have a character be undivided and join a marked squad, I can't leave characters solo or they get shot off the board in the blink of an eye.

Terminators and chosen used to be flexible units that could do any particular job with the right setup, now they're a pile of melee with some mediocre anti-infantry only.

you only get abilities that used to be fundamentally basic unless you opt to risk mortal wounds.

I played mostly foot CSM with a heavy emphasis on terminators, cult troops, and traitor guard. at least a few things are now straight legends, despite being relatively new models.

I have played since 4th, and no previous change has gotten me quite this upset. it is a flaming pile of absolute garbage, and I'll probably end up quitting the hobby altogether and just doing something else that gives me more satisfaction than this useless excuse for a rules document.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
The Lord Discordan'ts Corrupt Machine Spirits still having an effect on a successful save is pretty nutty. This might be another edition where you want three of these things.

This is a common design for abilities like this. A "fail" is a lighter restriction than a "success". 12" is really close though.

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Voss wrote:
Same. I love restricting most character effects to a single unit.

It resolves a lot of layers of nonsense into something sensible.

Yeah, it's great that commanders no longer do anything to actually command their army

I guess you loved the days of guilliman standing in the back yelling at razorbacks to shoot betterer then?

What makes more sense, Roboute yelling at 1 Razorback to fire harder, or all the ones around him?

Roboute was busted from the get-go due his price, not necessarily what he had for effect. While it's a BORING aura it makes sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Voss wrote:
Same. I love restricting most character effects to a single unit.

It resolves a lot of layers of nonsense into something sensible.

Yeah, it's great that commanders no longer do anything to actually command their army

I agree, remove HQs from the game entirely. Only characters that should be in are field supports.

You played Skitarii didn't you LOL

Yep. I've never made a secret about that.

But you are the one posting about "commanders no longer doing anything to actually command their army", which hasn't really been a thing for basically any army but Guard as long as I've been playing?

 WindstormSCR wrote:

I can't join anything that actually matters to havocs (exalted)
I can't join them to raptors, or possessed, I can't have a character be undivided and join a marked squad, I can't leave characters solo or they get shot off the board in the blink of an eye.

Terminators and chosen used to be flexible units that could do any particular job with the right setup, now they're a pile of melee with some mediocre anti-infantry only.

you only get abilities that used to be fundamentally basic unless you opt to risk mortal wounds.

I played mostly foot CSM with a heavy emphasis on terminators, cult troops, and traitor guard. at least a few things are now straight legends, despite being relatively new models.

I have played since 4th, and no previous change has gotten me quite this upset. it is a flaming pile of absolute garbage, and I'll probably end up quitting the hobby altogether and just doing something else that gives me more satisfaction than this useless excuse for a rules document.

Ok let's make part of a list. You want termies to be able to tackle a wide range of targets So we'll make one Tzeentch and one Khorne.

In a Tzeentch block we'll put a Termie Sorc and the Eye for some CP gain. The unit can deepstrike and apply an army-wide AP increase to the target with Death Hex. We'll bring in a couple squads of Rubric Marines which will now automatically wound on 5s to hit with AP2.

In the other we'll put a Termie Lord and the Talisman. The Lord can grant an AP reduction to the unit every round making them pretty durable. You can support either of these with a Helbrute, which will double up the pacts. Havocs will have a great time standing next to a LC/ML Helbrute that gives their weapons Lethal and Sustained.

A bunch of traitor guard with a seemingly lax special weapon selection ( could get FAQ'd ) can be dangerous and also a little more durable on objectives - especially now that we have ones that move.

Imagine for a moment - you drop in the Tzeentch terminators and Death Hex a knight. Then you push Tzeentch Havocs with 4 Chaincannons into range while supported by a Helbrute.

The Havocs then pact getting both abilities, but no rerolls:

40 * 167 * .167 * .5 = 0.6 // Sustained
40 * 333 * .167 * .5 = 1.1 // Regular
40 * .333 * .5 = 6.6 // Lethal Hits

Then the Tzeentch termies pact and for doing so get full reroll to hit:

40 * .555 * .5 = 11 wounds to a knight before we get to non-Lethal Hits

A simple block of Rubrics with no rerolls will do ...

20 * .333 * .666 = 4.4

There's no lack of ability to tackle problems despite the loss of Combi-Weapons.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yep. I've never made a secret about that.

But you are the one posting about "commanders no longer doing anything to actually command their army", which hasn't really been a thing for basically any army but Guard as long as I've been playing?

Hence why I'm saying it was the main positive change that 8th brought in outside the AP system.

 Kanluwen wrote:
But you are the one posting about "commanders no longer doing anything to actually command their army", which hasn't really been a thing for basically any army but Guard as long as I've been playing?

Yeah, 're-roll 1s to hit within 6 inches' is such a boringly shallow concept of command/leadership that absolutely nothing of value is lost in ditching it.

If people want commanders to command, maybe there should be stratagems tied to characters (on the character's datasheet), so you only have access to the strat if the relevant character is on the field. Heck, it's already called command points.