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.
Dysartes wrote: I think I'm missing something in the paragraph where WarCom were talking about ingress moves.
If I can now Deep Strike to 8" away from enemy models, and engagement range is now 2", why would I need to roll a 9" charge? Surely 7" does the trick, at most?
Someone's going to ninja me.
But you no longer get into combat just by getting into engagement range (which was 1"). If you roll a 7 on the charge dice, you can only declare a charge if the unit is 7" away base to base.
This effectively reduces charges by 0.999~ inches. Which is why they've gone to 8" deep strike. But it wouldn't help people long bombing across the table conventionally - where they've effectively lost in inch.
So I'm a bit suspect on the claim we'll see fewer failed charges.
Equally however that "overrun fight" looks... obnoxiously powerful? If you can pile in 3" from a destroyed enemy, and only need to be in 2" engagement range - that effectively lets you tag units 5" away from the originally destroyed unit.
Your role must be larger than the distance to the charged unit. If you set up more than 8" your distance is over 8", so you just role a 9 or the unit is not a valid target to charge.
Dysartes wrote: I think I'm missing something in the paragraph where WarCom were talking about ingress moves.
If I can now Deep Strike to 8" away from enemy models, and engagement range is now 2", why would I need to roll a 9" charge? Surely 7" does the trick, at most?
Someone's going to ninja me.
But you no longer get into combat just by getting into engagement range (which was 1"). If you roll a 7 on the charge dice, you can only declare a charge if the unit is 7" away base to base.
This effectively reduces charges by 0.999~ inches. Which is why they've gone to 8" deep strike. But it wouldn't help people long bombing across the table conventionally - where they've effectively lost in inch.
So I'm a bit suspect on the claim we'll see fewer failed charges.
Equally however that "overrun fight" looks... obnoxiously powerful? If you can pile in 3" from a destroyed enemy, and only need to be in 2" engagement range - that effectively lets you tag units 5" away from the originally destroyed unit.
It's me who got Ninja'd
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2026/04/15 15:52:56
Dysartes wrote: I think I'm missing something in the paragraph where WarCom were talking about ingress moves.
If I can now Deep Strike to 8" away from enemy models, and engagement range is now 2", why would I need to roll a 9" charge? Surely 7" does the trick, at most?
House keeping changes.
Before:
*Have targets within 12"
*Declare a charge against a specific target within 12"
*Roll
*If you can get in engagement range you're good
After:
*Have targets within 12"
*Declare you intend to charge
*Roll
*Declare your targets, they must be within charge roll distance as the crow flies/base to base
*If you can get in engagement range you're good
The impacts seem to be:
*Charging in a straight line is slightly harder as you need to roll the base to base distance rather than engagement range distance. You can sometimes offset this risk by having a secondary closer target.
*Charging around corners is slightly easier as you get an extra inch of engagement range to land in.
*Hiding behind walls is harder, you would have to be 2.1" away, and crucially against an opponent that either cannot move through walls or has a base too big to deploy in the gap
*Deep strike charging is about the same as you can get an inch closer on set up but have to roll an inch further to make it.
TLDR:
*The charge roll now generates a random sized aura, your intended charge target must be in the aura to be selected.
Dysartes wrote: I think I'm missing something in the paragraph where WarCom were talking about ingress moves.
If I can now Deep Strike to 8" away from enemy models, and engagement range is now 2", why would I need to roll a 9" charge? Surely 7" does the trick, at most?
Someone's going to ninja me.
But you no longer get into combat just by getting into engagement range (which was 1"). If you roll a 7 on the charge dice, you can only declare a charge if the unit is 7" away base to base.
This effectively reduces charges by 0.999~ inches. Which is why they've gone to 8" deep strike. But it wouldn't help people long bombing across the table conventionally - where they've effectively lost in inch.
So I'm a bit suspect on the claim we'll see fewer failed charges.
Equally however that "overrun fight" looks... obnoxiously powerful? If you can pile in 3" from a destroyed enemy, and only need to be in 2" engagement range - that effectively lets you tag units 5" away from the originally destroyed unit.
Calling it now, World Eaters 11th meta. Easy access to 6" pile in moves + 2" engagement range.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2026/04/15 16:24:07
Dysartes wrote: I think I'm missing something in the paragraph where WarCom were talking about ingress moves.
If I can now Deep Strike to 8" away from enemy models, and engagement range is now 2", why would I need to roll a 9" charge? Surely 7" does the trick, at most?
You can only declare a unit to be a charge target if it is within your maximum distance charge move even though you don't actually need to touch bases in order to fight.
MAXIMUM DISTANCE: Charge roll.
BEFORE MOVING: Select one or more enemy units that are within 12" of your unit and within the maximum distance of your unit; until the end of this move, each of those enemy units is a charge target.
AFTER MOVING: Your unit cannot be engaged with one or more enemy units that are not charge targets.
So at the risk of overrun etc, if you had a squad lined up to block deepstrike/flank charges that ends up 8" away - and then a squad 1.1" behind them (measured from the front of the screen's base).
Sounds like you would need to roll a 10" charge to hit the front screen in base to base (and would also be engaged with the unit behind).
Dysartes wrote: I think I'm missing something in the paragraph where WarCom were talking about ingress moves.
If I can now Deep Strike to 8" away from enemy models, and engagement range is now 2", why would I need to roll a 9" charge? Surely 7" does the trick, at most?
House keeping changes.
Before:
*Have targets within 12"
*Declare a charge against a specific target within 12"
*Roll
*If you can get in engagement range you're good
After:
*Have targets within 12"
*Declare you intend to charge
*Roll
*Declare your targets, they must be within charge roll distance as the crow flies/base to base
*If you can get in engagement range you're good
The impacts seem to be:
*Charging in a straight line is slightly harder as you need to roll the base to base distance rather than engagement range distance. You can sometimes offset this risk by having a secondary closer target.
*Charging around corners is slightly easier as you get an extra inch of engagement range to land in.
*Hiding behind walls is harder, you would have to be 2.1" away, and crucially against an opponent that either cannot move through walls or has a base too big to deploy in the gap
*Deep strike charging is about the same as you can get an inch closer on set up but have to roll an inch further to make it.
TLDR:
*The charge roll now generates a random sized aura, your intended charge target must be in the aura to be selected.
Dysartes wrote: I think I'm missing something in the paragraph where WarCom were talking about ingress moves.
If I can now Deep Strike to 8" away from enemy models, and engagement range is now 2", why would I need to roll a 9" charge? Surely 7" does the trick, at most?
Someone's going to ninja me.
But you no longer get into combat just by getting into engagement range (which was 1"). If you roll a 7 on the charge dice, you can only declare a charge if the unit is 7" away base to base.
This effectively reduces charges by 0.999~ inches. Which is why they've gone to 8" deep strike. But it wouldn't help people long bombing across the table conventionally - where they've effectively lost in inch.
So I'm a bit suspect on the claim we'll see fewer failed charges.
Equally however that "overrun fight" looks... obnoxiously powerful? If you can pile in 3" from a destroyed enemy, and only need to be in 2" engagement range - that effectively lets you tag units 5" away from the originally destroyed unit.
Calling it now, World Eaters 11th meta. Easy access to 6" pile in moves + 2" engagement range.
Ok, this clicked it for me:
TLDR:
*The charge roll now generates a random sized aura, your intended charge target must be in the aura to be selected.
The article doesn't really go into enough depth to answer this, but it feels like 2" engagement range means the previous couple of editions versions of fighting in 2 ranks is going away for a standardised fighting range. That would be a considerable change for any army with big based squads.
Insularum wrote: The article doesn't really go into enough depth to answer this, but it feels like 2" engagement range means the previous couple of editions versions of fighting in 2 ranks is going away for a standardised fighting range. That would be a considerable change for any army with big based squads.
It should mostly restrict things to fighting in 2 ranks until you hit 50mm bases, where it’s only going to be the base to base guys. But individual model placement will restrict this. And if you are holding a 1” wide wall, only the guys who toe the line will get to fight.
It could be as simple as adding an “model must be in engagement range, or within engagement range of a model in it’s unit that is”. We’ll see when we get the full rules.
Interested to see the details and how they can be min/maxed tacticaly.
Insularum wrote: The article doesn't really go into enough depth to answer this, but it feels like 2" engagement range means the previous couple of editions versions of fighting in 2 ranks is going away for a standardised fighting range. That would be a considerable change for any army with big based squads.
Or anyone who can field massive squads. Sounds like World Eaters and Black Templars are going to be happy.
She/Her
"There are no problems that cannot be solved with cannons." - Chief Engineer Boris Krauss of Nuln
LatheBiosas wrote:I have such a difficult time hitting my opponents... setting them on fire seems so much simpler.
Kid_Kyoto wrote:"Don't be a dick" and "This is a family wargame" are good rules of thumb.
Looks like I actually made a good choice when deciding to play Custodes.
Just guessing, but I'm assuming that base to base includes vehicle hulls.
BorderCountess wrote: Just because you're doing something right doesn't necessarily mean you know what you're doing...
"Vulkan: There will be no Rad or Phosphex in my legion. We shall fight wars humanely. Some things should be left in the dark age." "Ferrus: Oh cool, when are you going to stop burning people to death?" "Vulkan: I do not understand the question."
– A conversation between the X and XVIII Primarchs
I really wish they'd just wholesale adopt AOS' charge style, where rolling snake eyes always fails. It looks like they still want to have that "You can automatically succeed on a charge" for some weird reason. Engagement range needs to just be 3".
Wayniac wrote: I really wish they'd just wholesale adopt AOS' charge style, where rolling snake eyes always fails. It looks like they still want to have that "You can automatically succeed on a charge" for some weird reason. Engagement range needs to just be 3".
As I understand it, rolling two will now always fail. You must stay outside the engagement distance normally, so you are always more than two inches away from the enemy you're not already engaged with.
Wayniac wrote: I really wish they'd just wholesale adopt AOS' charge style, where rolling snake eyes always fails. It looks like they still want to have that "You can automatically succeed on a charge" for some weird reason. Engagement range needs to just be 3".
Snake eyes does always fail under the show rules unless you have a charge range bonus.
You cannot end a move within 2" of an enemy unit, so you always are further than 2" away when you roll charges. In order to succeed the charge the first model needs to touch the other there unit, which is impossible if your roll a .
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
Insularum wrote: The article doesn't really go into enough depth to answer this, but it feels like 2" engagement range means the previous couple of editions versions of fighting in 2 ranks is going away for a standardised fighting range. That would be a considerable change for any army with big based squads.
It should mostly restrict things to fighting in 2 ranks until you hit 50mm bases, where it’s only going to be the base to base guys. But individual model placement will restrict this. And if you are holding a 1” wide wall, only the guys who toe the line will get to fight.
It could be as simple as adding an “model must be in engagement range, or within engagement range of a model in it’s unit that is”. We’ll see when we get the full rules.
Interested to see the details and how they can be min/maxed tacticaly.
3 ranks on 25mm. Maybe even 4, I'm not sure how they pack in offset rows..
The only real use I can see for the Hippogriff is for cheap very mobile las/melta cannon platforms if you've used your Hellhound slots for anti infantry, they seem like they could easily outperform an armoured sentinel in the role, unless they're much for highly costed.
warl0rdb0b wrote: The only real use I can see for the Hippogriff is for cheap very mobile las/melta cannon platforms if you've used your Hellhound slots for anti infantry, they seem like they could easily outperform an armoured sentinel in the role, unless they're much for highly costed.
Seems like a good harasser with the move D6" and the lascannon imo.
The thing about Warhammer is that no one person can grasp the fullness of it.
[DCM]
Chief Deputy Sub Assistant Trainee Squig Handling Intern
The exact size is going to matter, but the Hippogriff being to move at least a little bit after shooting, for free? Could make it a bit of a pain. Not just for Tau style “blast and bye” type attacks. But, in case you fail to kill something, driving it into a better blocking position?
Likely a sacrificial move, and probably not inherently advisable. But if you keep it for last in your shooting phase, it could be used to mitigate any dice related blunders?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2026/04/16 17:44:29
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
BorderCountess wrote: Just because you're doing something right doesn't necessarily mean you know what you're doing...
"Vulkan: There will be no Rad or Phosphex in my legion. We shall fight wars humanely. Some things should be left in the dark age." "Ferrus: Oh cool, when are you going to stop burning people to death?" "Vulkan: I do not understand the question."
– A conversation between the X and XVIII Primarchs
I'm 100% taking two hippogriffs with lascanon/ melta for the anti vehicle fun. Points dependent though. I can see these as being in the "too powerful to ignore, but need to devote too much to take them out" category.
Ashiraya wrote: Remember to make ninja/kung fu movie sound effects when you use the inbuilt Fire and Fade that your AFV has for some reason.
Yep. Apparently Imperial Guard vehicles are more mobile and agile that Tau jet packs or even their skimmers.
I'm definitely not bitter.
Yeah. Jump-Shoot-Jump is not classically a guard trick, and there are factions who’ve had it in the past that don’t get it easily anymore.
I get that they want to make the new things stand out a bit, and not just be the same old stuff with a new hat. But It would have been nice to not use this trick here.
They might be even more upgraded than the preview hints at. The heavy lascannon is S14 and 2 shots on the Field Ordnance team - a bit weird that it just has a regular lascannon profile on the Hippogriff. Same goes for the melta cannon, it just has a regular multi melta profile here, and not the better profile the Hellhound/Devil Dog uses. If those are typos that get corrected then these could be nice little tank destroyers.
BorderCountess wrote: I'm just super glad that Commissar Graves gets to do the meme!
She is a cool model.
BorderCountess wrote: Just because you're doing something right doesn't necessarily mean you know what you're doing...
"Vulkan: There will be no Rad or Phosphex in my legion. We shall fight wars humanely. Some things should be left in the dark age." "Ferrus: Oh cool, when are you going to stop burning people to death?" "Vulkan: I do not understand the question."
– A conversation between the X and XVIII Primarchs
BorderCountess wrote: I'm just super glad that Commissar Graves gets to do the meme!
She is a cool model.
I'm kind of impressed how her half track seems completely unique. I thought it was just a Centaur with a new ram, but the sides and hood are also different. I know she'll cost like $100 but I do want one. And 3 of the half tracks.
Ultramarines, 3rd Co. and friends, 16k+ 
4k 
4k Points
Competition Index
