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.

 Hellebore wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
They should have made the melee and ranged Knights different units - not sure why they did not....

Then you could take 6 of them rather than 3.

Which doesn't really seem like and issue - there's two whole knight army lists you can take more than 6 in after all.

Other knights have very limited options to take along side them. Wraithknights have the entire Eldar range to build around. Personally, I've always considered that a problem with the way Imperial Knights were awkwardly forced into their own codex, but that ship sailed long long ago.

 Lord Clinto wrote:


/Ugly-crying in GK Purgation squad

Now 2 ppm less than SM Desolators for a max squad loadout of 4 24" range HW, 6 S.Bolters & 6 NFWeapons...and they can only "Indirect Fire" if the target unit is visible to another GK unit...smh.

Don't forget the fact that GK aren't attaching a librarian or apothecary with bolter discipline to their purgation squad, to make the unit even more powerful. But that is what happens when in order to do fixes you do the formula of "mark all units with indirect" and "add X% point cost", without reading what the thing does.

 LunarSol wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
They should have made the melee and ranged Knights different units - not sure why they did not....

Then you could take 6 of them rather than 3.

Which doesn't really seem like and issue - there's two whole knight army lists you can take more than 6 in after all.

Other knights have very limited options to take along side them. Wraithknights have the entire Eldar range to build around. Personally, I've always considered that a problem with the way Imperial Knights were awkwardly forced into their own codex, but that ship sailed long long ago.

Those knights have access to a wider range of weapons than the wraithknight and more diverse platforms.

With this new points cost there is really 3 types of wraithknight now:

sword and shield - worth the original cost
Gun and shield - worth about halfway between the others
dual gun - worth the new expensive cost

In the knight codex they would be different named units, here they're mushed into a single unit. Call them bladewind, defender and hunter or something

If people are super uptight at having an all wraithknight army despite there being all knight armies already, you can give it a rule that means you can only take a max of 3 - walker between worlds - you can't take more than 3 total of the bladewind, defender or hunter wraithknights.




THis is working within the current paradigm knowing that they aren't going to reintroduce upgrade costs. Otherwise I'd just say do that.

Or just fix Towering. Y'know...

 Hellebore wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
They should have made the melee and ranged Knights different units - not sure why they did not....

Then you could take 6 of them rather than 3.

Which doesn't really seem like and issue - there's two whole knight army lists you can take more than 6 in after all.

Other knights have very limited options to take along side them. Wraithknights have the entire Eldar range to build around. Personally, I've always considered that a problem with the way Imperial Knights were awkwardly forced into their own codex, but that ship sailed long long ago.

Those knights have access to a wider range of weapons than the wraithknight and more diverse platforms.

With this new points cost there is really 3 types of wraithknight now:

sword and shield - worth the original cost
Gun and shield - worth about halfway between the others
dual gun - worth the new expensive cost

Things like this. Is absolutely how it should be done.

Or just have points costs for weapons, and you don't need to do it that way...

but than you don't have a reason to reset the rules and start a new game from scratch

 kodos wrote:
but than you don't have a reason to reset the rules and start a new game from scratch

Wargear being included in costs is far from being the main reason why they did an edition reset (even when not taking into account that they have to please the shareholders)

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 kodos wrote:
but than you don't have a reason to reset the rules and start a new game from scratch

Wargear being included in costs is far from being the main reason why they did an edition reset (even when not taking into account that they have to please the shareholders)

I think he means them using it as the reason to go to 11th in a few years. “We listened to you guys and decided to bring back wargear points in the new edition” yeah….””listened”.

Don't be silly. They know that we know they can roll out wargear points in any of the quarterly MFM if they feel it is necessary to satisfy the player base.

of course they can
same as they could have added all the changes from 6th to 7th with a simple Errata pdf
or the changes from 8th to 9th

we know it, they know it and people still happily celebrate a new Edition and come back because "this time" GW really tried and solved all the problems
and if there are still problems, you cannot expect a new game to be perfect at launch

knowing does not help much here, and GW is doing it anyway and people will praise them for listening

The edition changes have never been simple errata changed. Points changes and whether or not to charge for upgrades are much simpler than that, as we saw during 9th Edition.

Will there be an 11th Edition. 99.9% chance with 99% chance in 2026. That has nothing to do with wargear points.

 alextroy wrote:
The edition changes have never been simple errata changed.

Well you refuse to iterate, how can they be?

They both iterate and innovate at the same time. This does lead to lots of churn rather than a march towards a more prefect rules set.

There is a lot of 8th/9th in 10th Edition. There are a lot of issues that directly address issues of 8th & 9th. Then there are a lot of innovations, like the changes to unit datasheets around weapons. Like the tentative move towards sidegrades over upgrades.

I see a lot to like and a lot that needs much more work to reach a good level of implementation.

They pendulum swing and throw out entire mechanics and replace them with entirely new untested mechanics in a hamfisted attempt to "fix" problems that they themselves created all the while ignoring the community and even their play testers.

That's not innovation and iteration. That's confusion and desperation.

 alextroy wrote:
Like the tentative move towards sidegrades over upgrades.

They have 100% not done that. The game is full of upgrades, and all of them are free.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Like the tentative move towards sidegrades over upgrades.

They have 100% not done that. The game is full of upgrades, and all of them are free.

And upgrades not matching at that. I'm not running AdMech as long as GW gives the gak limitation of "one of each gun" in Rangers and Vanguard, but I know the fanboys ate that up as brilliant.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Like the tentative move towards sidegrades over upgrades.

They have 100% not done that. The game is full of upgrades, and all of them are free.

Towards and To are not the same. Towards is in progress, to is finished. They should have been relatively finished but they're not. They're still moving towards.

Breton wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Like the tentative move towards sidegrades over upgrades.

They have 100% not done that. The game is full of upgrades, and all of them are free.

Towards and To are not the same. Towards is in progress, to is finished. They should have been relatively finished but they're not. They're still moving towards.

And when did they start, 1987?

How long will it bloody take?

Or maybe they do randomly change gak for no reason and haven't been iterating. Hmmm.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Breton wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Like the tentative move towards sidegrades over upgrades.

They have 100% not done that. The game is full of upgrades, and all of them are free.

Towards and To are not the same. Towards is in progress, to is finished. They should have been relatively finished but they're not. They're still moving towards.

And when did they start, 1987?

Pretty much with that last MFM of 9th.

How long will it bloody take?

Or maybe they do randomly change gak for no reason and haven't been iterating. Hmmm.

Breton wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Breton wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Like the tentative move towards sidegrades over upgrades.

They have 100% not done that. The game is full of upgrades, and all of them are free.

Towards and To are not the same. Towards is in progress, to is finished. They should have been relatively finished but they're not. They're still moving towards.

And when did they start, 1987?

Pretty much with that last MFM of 9th.

If your three data points look like :. , you can't even draw a line, not to mention define directional progress...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
They pendulum swing and throw out entire mechanics and replace them with entirely new untested mechanics in a hamfisted attempt to "fix" problems that they themselves created all the while ignoring the community and even their play testers.

That's not innovation and iteration. That's confusion and desperation.

 alextroy wrote:
Like the tentative move towards sidegrades over upgrades.

They have 100% not done that. The game is full of upgrades, and all of them are free.

There are 2 types of upgrades. Those you are supposed to take and those that really need some type of compensation (like points). GW is pricing units assuming you actually take those you are supposed to take. 40 Points of Heavy Weapons is why 5 Devastators are 120 points while 10 are 200.

Your Tactical Squad is supposed to take 2 the two weapon upgrades (Special & Heavy/Special). Ideally, the weapons would be side grades to each other. Unfortunately, GW missed many obvious things like how a the Heavy Bolter is obviously inferior to a Grav-Cannon even against a Heavy Bolter's best targets.

On the other hand, the Sergeant has so many options, almost all that are better than Boltgun and Bolt Pistol. Some are comically better, like Combi-Weapon and Plasma Pistol.

So please, stop belaboring the obvious fact that wargear option have no additional cost for taking them. Most are already paid for in the price of admission.

 alextroy wrote:


So please, stop belaboring the obvious fact that wargear option have no additional cost for taking them. Most are already paid for in the price of admission.

I'm still enjoying the people who didn't get the point about not wanting to back to paying PPM for grenades, and people demanding grenade upgrades - that are on basically everything - must cost points for their upgrade value. Even though they're on basically everything and thus almost as built into each unit as S1, T1.

*checks into thread*

Yep. People still claiming that a Grav Gun + Grav Cannon and a Flamer + Heavy Bolter are 'sidegrades'.

Back in another couple of days!

 Lord Damocles wrote:
*checks into thread*

Yep. People still claiming that a Grav Gun + Grav Cannon and a Flamer + Heavy Bolter are 'sidegrades'.

Back in another couple of days!

*checks into thread*

Yep. People I made up are still claiming things I also made up like the idea that a Grav Gun + Grav Cannon and a Flamer + Heavy Bolter are 'sidegrades' even though about 4 posts up someone literally points out they dropped the ball on the Grav Cannon vs Heavy Bolter.

Back in another couple of days!

 alextroy wrote:

Your Tactical Squad is supposed to take 2 the two weapon upgrades (Special & Heavy/Special). Ideally, the weapons would be side grades to each other. Unfortunately, GW missed many obvious things like how a the Heavy Bolter is obviously inferior to a Grav-Cannon even against a Heavy Bolter's best targets.

 alextroy wrote:
There are 2 types of upgrades. Those you are supposed to take and those that really need some type of compensation (like points). GW is pricing units assuming you actually take those you are supposed to take. 40 Points of Heavy Weapons is why 5 Devastators are 120 points while 10 are 200.

Which is stupid, as not all heavy weapons are equal, and pricing them as such is why this new system is bad.

 alextroy wrote:
Your Tactical Squad is supposed to take 2 the two weapon upgrades (Special & Heavy/Special). Ideally, the weapons would be side grades to each other. Unfortunately, GW missed many obvious things like how a the Heavy Bolter is obviously inferior to a Grav-Cannon even against a Heavy Bolter's best targets.

"Supposed to take" doesn't cut it. There have been plenty of times when I've taken just a Heavy Weapon or just a special weapon. I shouldn't have to pay for things I'm not taking.

 alextroy wrote:
Most are already paid for in the price of admission.

Which, as has been stated (and proven, time and time again) is a God-awful system and they need to change it.

Breton wrote:
Towards and To are not the same. Towards is in progress, to is finished. They should have been relatively finished but they're not. They're still moving towards.

there is no sidegrade that was not there before and is still just there for "historical" reasons

look at Landspeeder and Crisis, you get the Sidegrade LS because have always been that, and no multiple Crisis Datacards also because they have always been that way
there is no move towards anything but just "happy accidents"

Going to get in a few games today with the new changes.

Played nine games with my Aeldari prior to the changes and went 5-4 (three of the losses were to Necrons). I'm interested seeing how things fare today at a local one day event.

List definitely changed but did retain one Wraithknight to see if it is remotely worth a premium 475 points. I am pretty sure the event will use a house rule that LOS is blocked on the first floor of windows which will further impact the value of models with the Towering keyword.

1070 days til 11th.

"How is GW going to fix Eldar?"

Badly.

 alextroy wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
They pendulum swing and throw out entire mechanics and replace them with entirely new untested mechanics in a hamfisted attempt to "fix" problems that they themselves created all the while ignoring the community and even their play testers.

That's not innovation and iteration. That's confusion and desperation.

 alextroy wrote:
Like the tentative move towards sidegrades over upgrades.

They have 100% not done that. The game is full of upgrades, and all of them are free.

There are 2 types of upgrades. Those you are supposed to take and those that really need some type of compensation (like points). GW is pricing units assuming you actually take those you are supposed to take. 40 Points of Heavy Weapons is why 5 Devastators are 120 points while 10 are 200.

Your Tactical Squad is supposed to take 2 the two weapon upgrades (Special & Heavy/Special). Ideally, the weapons would be side grades to each other. Unfortunately, GW missed many obvious things like how a the Heavy Bolter is obviously inferior to a Grav-Cannon even against a Heavy Bolter's best targets.

On the other hand, the Sergeant has so many options, almost all that are better than Boltgun and Bolt Pistol. Some are comically better, like Combi-Weapon and Plasma Pistol.

So please, stop belaboring the obvious fact that wargear option have no additional cost for taking them. Most are already paid for in the price of admission.

If I'm supposed to take upgrades then those upgrades should not be upgrades but should be included in the unit's base stats/gear. The fact that they aren't leads to trap choices. Trap choices lead to mismatched games, which can screw over filthy casuals like myself (or even just make you feel like you're getting screwed for having a bolt pistol instead of a plasma pistol, despite not firing it the entire game either way). This "supposed to take" argument means they deliberately implemented trap choices.

This also goes against at least the past 7 editions, meaning anyone who didn't fully bling out their models back then probably needs to buy new kits to get their missing gear/weapo... ah, I see.