Switch Theme:

New Datasheet design  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in ca
Fully-charged Electropriest








Attacks, Strength, WS and BS are now apart of the weapon stats.

They have a new OC stat, which I think means something like Objective Control.

Assault likely still means that you can advance and shoot, pistol will likely still allow you to fire in combat. Not sure what Twin linked will be now.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/23 05:26:01


 
   
Made in dk
Loyal Necron Lychguard






I think I like it, I'm a bit concerned about what it will do to melee, if you're only able to make attacks in melee with one weapon then it seems like an improvement, having to divide attacks and bonus attacks among melee weapons (the basic one not being listed) makes things harder than they need to be. Worst case scenario I'm seeing is more draconian wargear selection or models with two power fists getting twice as many attacks.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I think it's interesting to give different weapons their own hit rate. There's potential there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I had made a suggestion on their surveys before that models should have their own value in terms of controlling objectives, so if that's what OC stands for I can't wait to see the impact.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/23 06:26:02


 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





Stream specifically called for "Objective Control"

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Interesting to note that weapons can be multiple types now, or no type at all. Seems a bit weird there's no column in the datasheet specifically for the weapon type. Putting the Strength, Attacks and hit roll on each melee weapon gives a bit more flexibility. Models with multiple weapons will presumably be given a number of attacks with each one, so we won't need the "you can make X number of extra attacks with this weapon" text any more.

Reduced AP on the Fleshborer is a good sign. Let's wait and see jhow long it takes for them to start increasing it again.
   
Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






London

Strange to see Twin-Linked coming back, that's a bit of a blast from the past.

Overall it looks ok to me, the loss of the innate strength and WS stats is odd, but I suppose it won't take so long to get used to. I do like the OC stat, makes sense. My main gripe though is are they going to keep cutting stuff out of the game to "speed it up"? Not needed in my opinion, there's already been too much cut under that premise.
   
Made in gb
Automated Rubric Marine of Tzeentch




dorset

 Valkyrie wrote:
Strange to see Twin-Linked coming back, that's a bit of a blast from the past.

Overall it looks ok to me, the loss of the innate strength and WS stats is odd, but I suppose it won't take so long to get used to. I do like the OC stat, makes sense. My main gripe though is are they going to keep cutting stuff out of the game to "speed it up"? Not needed in my opinion, there's already been too much cut under that premise.


maybe, but when a game takes 3-4 hours to play, thats a sign it needs improving.

To be a man in such times is to be one amongst untold billions. It is to live in the cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable. These are the tales of those times. Forget the power of technology and science, for so much has been forgotten, never to be relearned. Forget the promise of progress and understanding, for in the grim dark future there is only war. There is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter, and the laughter of thirsting gods.

Coven of XVth 2000pts
The Blades of Ruin 2,000pts Watch Company Rho 1650pts
 
   
Made in ua
Longtime Dakkanaut





It looks much more simple, I might be inclined to try and find a game
   
Made in gb
Bryan Ansell





Birmingham, UK

xerxeskingofking wrote:
 Valkyrie wrote:
Strange to see Twin-Linked coming back, that's a bit of a blast from the past.

Overall it looks ok to me, the loss of the innate strength and WS stats is odd, but I suppose it won't take so long to get used to. I do like the OC stat, makes sense. My main gripe though is are they going to keep cutting stuff out of the game to "speed it up"? Not needed in my opinion, there's already been too much cut under that premise.


maybe, but when a game takes 3-4 hours to play, thats a sign it needs improving.



This new (old) GW though. The rules could fit on 2 sides of A4 paper but GW would find some way of having the important rules on page 3....

I actually like the new layout and am very impressed that free downloads will be a thing. Speeded up gameplay will get get me more involved but I'm an old GW cynic.




   
Made in gb
Automated Rubric Marine of Tzeentch




dorset

 Mr. Burning wrote:



This new (old) GW though. The rules could fit on 2 sides of A4 paper but GW would find some way of having the important rules on page 3....

I actually like the new layout and am very impressed that free downloads will be a thing. Speeded up gameplay will get get me more involved but I'm an old GW cynic.



oh, agreed. I dont trust GW not to keep adding bloat on after trimming the core rules. the real test will be what happens when we see the new space marine codex. how much extra stuff will they add thier? will they be able to restrain themselves properly or just start adding stuff agian?

To be a man in such times is to be one amongst untold billions. It is to live in the cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable. These are the tales of those times. Forget the power of technology and science, for so much has been forgotten, never to be relearned. Forget the promise of progress and understanding, for in the grim dark future there is only war. There is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter, and the laughter of thirsting gods.

Coven of XVth 2000pts
The Blades of Ruin 2,000pts Watch Company Rho 1650pts
 
   
Made in ua
Longtime Dakkanaut





I wonder if 9th saw a drop in people playing or perhaps didn’t generate the extra enthusiasm a new launch normally does.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

xerxeskingofking wrote:
 Mr. Burning wrote:



This new (old) GW though. The rules could fit on 2 sides of A4 paper but GW would find some way of having the important rules on page 3....

I actually like the new layout and am very impressed that free downloads will be a thing. Speeded up gameplay will get get me more involved but I'm an old GW cynic.



oh, agreed. I dont trust GW not to keep adding bloat on after trimming the core rules. the real test will be what happens when we see the new space marine codex. how much extra stuff will they add thier? will they be able to restrain themselves properly or just start adding stuff agian?
this will be the real test. If they quickly bloat the game again with extra crap in the codexes to sell them (see strategems) it won't matter as things will still end up terrible
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




xerxeskingofking wrote:
 Mr. Burning wrote:



This new (old) GW though. The rules could fit on 2 sides of A4 paper but GW would find some way of having the important rules on page 3....

I actually like the new layout and am very impressed that free downloads will be a thing. Speeded up gameplay will get get me more involved but I'm an old GW cynic.



oh, agreed. I dont trust GW not to keep adding bloat on after trimming the core rules. the real test will be what happens when we see the new space marine codex. how much extra stuff will they add thier? will they be able to restrain themselves properly or just start adding stuff agian?

For reference, GW have stated at the start of the last 2 editions that streamlining and simplification were big driving factors. That didn't turn out so well. GW's design process seems to generate extra complexity of its own accord, mainly because they don't seem capable of having a strict set of design rules at the start of an edition and sticking to them.

mrFickle wrote:I wonder if 9th saw a drop in people playing or perhaps didn’t generate the extra enthusiasm a new launch normally does.

9th was pretty successful for GW. We're just following the standard trend from them of a new edition every 3 years.
   
Made in us
Sure Space Wolves Land Raider Pilot




Somerdale, NJ, USA

 vict0988 wrote:
...Worst case scenario I'm seeing is more draconian wargear selection...


This.

How they've been moving towards homogenization of unit's choices (ex: Death Guard squad load outs) really worries me.

"The only problem with your genepool is that there wasn't a lifeguard on duty to prevent you from swimming."

"You either die a Morty, or you live long enough to see yourself become a Rick."

- 8k /// - 5k /// - 5k /// - 6k /// - 6k /// - 4k /// - 4k /// Cust - 3k 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






I think I like it.

There’s plenty space on them, and they seem easy enough to read. Certainly as someone mildly irritated by Heresy’s “hunt the rule” layout I like the theory.

However, we do have a very straight forward unit as the Only Example. So for now I’m withholding judgement until we have a better spread of examples.

If they’re all clear and concise? Thumbs up. But that’s an if.

   
Made in gb
Raging-on-the-Inside Blood Angel Sergeant





Luton, England

I like it alot, the choice of layout lets them have differences between different models holding the same weapon, lets them remove a load of extra rules (extra attack, -1 to hit, +3 Str, etc...).

It does heavily imply that there will be more restrictions on what units can be equipped with.
They show a simple datasheet -it'll be interesting to see all the different weapons listed for a space marine captain or hell even a tactical Srg.
Other than firstborn marines though its not a huge issue as other factions units and primaris have much more limited weapon options.

I wouldn't be shocked to see them roll power sword/axes/mauls back into a group of power weapons and similar with all the various bolters and flamers and plasma guns and such.

My favourite thing they mentioned was the reset of the lethality and durability in the game, also mentioned on the stream was a gamewide reduction in AP which should help make the base defensive stats have more impact and thus not requiring the arms race of offensive/defensive special rules that 9th has had.

As someone mentioned above -laying out a decent overall design stratagy is all well and good, I like what they have outlined........ but! They have to stick to it for the whole edition, thats the whole reason for a design strategy in the first place.

We can but hope.

40,000pts
8,000pts
3,000pts
3,000pts
6,000pts
2,000pts
1,000pts
:deathwatch: 3,000pts
:Imperial Knights: 2,000pts
:Custodes: 4,000pts 
   
Made in us
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






mrFickle wrote:
I wonder if 9th saw a drop in people playing or perhaps didn’t generate the extra enthusiasm a new launch normally does.


Well OnePageRule's patreon saw MASSIVE growth this last year and a half, i think its no coincidence that they came out and said that we'd "only need ONE PAGE of RULES" to play the game now
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut



London

Be interested how something like a Tac squad layout looks now. Personally I wouldn't mind weapon profiles being amalgamated, but to some that is anathema.
   
Made in us
Most Glorious Grey Seer





Everett, WA

Generally, I like it and look forward to seeing how it plays out.

• Presentation is cleaner and better organized.

• Weapons having their own Attack and Strength instead of a + modifier reduces redundancy, as does removing the "Type" column. Do we really need the word "Melee" listed twice for each melee weapon?

• Moving the BS/WS to the weapon allows more flexibility in unit design. It's never made much sense to me that Space Marines have the same BS using assault weapons as they do with vehicle sponson weapons. I honestly don't expect a lot of change, there's only so much you can do with a game based around six-sided dice, but I do think this is an improvement.

• These changes also fix silliness like melee goddess Lelith Hesperax having a BS of 2+ when she doesn't have ranged weapons and can't be given any.

The only problem I see is the vast amount of wasted space in that datasheet. I hope they didn't implement a standard size requirement for datasheets. Sigh, who am I kidding? We know they did.


 
   
Made in gb
Raging-on-the-Inside Blood Angel Sergeant





Luton, England

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Be interested how something like a Tac squad layout looks now. Personally I wouldn't mind weapon profiles being amalgamated, but to some that is anathema.


I'm a very old school player and I really like to have choices when building a unit, a bit of planning and tactics in army building adds alot to the game.

That said we really don't need 15 types of slightly different bolter, 5 types of slightly different flamer and so on....... have a small medium and large of each and that should be plenty.

Hopefully with the complete re-stating of the game we can get away from the primaris having the same equipment as firstborn but slightly better mentality - just make it the same but looks slightly bigger.

40,000pts
8,000pts
3,000pts
3,000pts
6,000pts
2,000pts
1,000pts
:deathwatch: 3,000pts
:Imperial Knights: 2,000pts
:Custodes: 4,000pts 
   
Made in gb
Mighty Vampire Count






UK

 Breotan wrote:
Generally, I like it and look forward to seeing how it plays out.

• Presentation is cleaner and better organized.

• Weapons having their own Attack and Strength instead of a + modifier reduces redundancy, as does removing the "Type" column. Do we really need the word "Melee" listed twice for each melee weapon?

• Moving the BS/WS to the weapon allows more flexibility in unit design. It's never made much sense to me that Space Marines have the same BS using assault weapons as they do with vehicle sponson weapons. I honestly don't expect a lot of change, there's only so much you can do with a game based around six-sided dice, but I do think this is an improvement.

• These changes also fix silliness like melee goddess Lelith Hesperax having a BS of 2+ when she doesn't have ranged weapons and can't be given any.

The only problem I see is the vast amount of wasted space in that datasheet. I hope they didn't implement a standard size requirement for datasheets. Sigh, who am I kidding? We know they did.



Agreed completly with all points - if there are going to continue to waste huge amounts of blank space - at the very least put in some lore snippets or quotes etc

I also like the progression of the stats which seems to fit comabt so you look at Toughness, then Saves, then Wounds, then Leadership - almost intuative.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/23 13:49:24


I AM A MARINE PLAYER

"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos

"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001

www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/528517.page

A Bloody Road - my Warhammer Fantasy Fiction 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Annandale, VA

vict0988 wrote:I think I like it, I'm a bit concerned about what it will do to melee, if you're only able to make attacks in melee with one weapon then it seems like an improvement, having to divide attacks and bonus attacks among melee weapons (the basic one not being listed) makes things harder than they need to be. Worst case scenario I'm seeing is more draconian wargear selection or models with two power fists getting twice as many attacks.


EviscerationPlague wrote:I think it's interesting to give different weapons their own hit rate. There's potential there.


These are both things that have already existed more or less; they've just cleaned up the implementation. Instead of some weapons giving you 2x attacks and others giving you bonus attacks in addition to your normal wargear, they'll just each have a set number of attacks. Instead of saying a model hits at its WS but gets a -1 for a powerfist or whatever, they'll just roll that into the profile.

I think it's safe to assume they're going to re-work how wargear is allocated accordingly. Expect a model with two powerfists to have a single 'twin powerfist' profile, not two identical weapons.

So instead of needing to flip between the codex entry for the model's stats and the wargear entry for its weapons in the back of the book and then combine them to figure out what you're doing, you just read the weapon statline left to right off the card. Simple.

I like what I'm hearing so far, and so does my group. The overt emphasis on dramatically reducing how much cross-referencing you have to do is exactly what we've been hoping for. All your faction/subfaction abilities and strats fitting on two pages sounds perfect. The question will be how long it is before they screw it up again.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/23 13:48:21


   
Made in dk
Loyal Necron Lychguard






 catbarf wrote:
vict0988 wrote:I think I like it, I'm a bit concerned about what it will do to melee, if you're only able to make attacks in melee with one weapon then it seems like an improvement, having to divide attacks and bonus attacks among melee weapons (the basic one not being listed) makes things harder than they need to be. Worst case scenario I'm seeing is more draconian wargear selection or models with two power fists getting twice as many attacks.


EviscerationPlague wrote:I think it's interesting to give different weapons their own hit rate. There's potential there.


These are both things that have already existed more or less; they've just cleaned up the implementation. Instead of some weapons giving you 2x attacks and others giving you bonus attacks in addition to your normal wargear, they'll just each have a set number of attacks. Instead of saying a model hits at its WS but gets a -1 for a powerfist or whatever, they'll just roll that into the profile.

I think it's safe to assume they're going to re-work how wargear is allocated accordingly. Expect a model with two powerfists to have a single 'twin powerfist' profile, not two identical weapons.

So instead of needing to flip between the codex entry for the model's stats and the wargear entry for its weapons in the back of the book and then combine them to figure out what you're doing, you just read the weapon statline left to right off the card. Simple.

I like what I'm hearing so far, and so does my group. The overt emphasis on dramatically reducing how much cross-referencing you have to do is exactly what we've been hoping for. All your faction/subfaction abilities and strats fitting on two pages sounds perfect. The question will be how long it is before they screw it up again.

How are you going to fit every Tactical Squad weapon on a single physical datasheet?
   
Made in gb
Automated Rubric Marine of Tzeentch




dorset

 Breotan wrote:

The only problem I see is the vast amount of wasted space in that datasheet. I hope they didn't implement a standard size requirement for datasheets. Sigh, who am I kidding? We know they did.



well, they outright said they plan to sell unit datacard sets as a accessory (instead of/in additon to codexes.....my money is on the latter), so standardised card sizes are something of a necessity.

To be a man in such times is to be one amongst untold billions. It is to live in the cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable. These are the tales of those times. Forget the power of technology and science, for so much has been forgotten, never to be relearned. Forget the promise of progress and understanding, for in the grim dark future there is only war. There is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter, and the laughter of thirsting gods.

Coven of XVth 2000pts
The Blades of Ruin 2,000pts Watch Company Rho 1650pts
 
   
Made in de
Servoarm Flailing Magos




Germany

 vict0988 wrote:
 catbarf wrote:
vict0988 wrote:I think I like it, I'm a bit concerned about what it will do to melee, if you're only able to make attacks in melee with one weapon then it seems like an improvement, having to divide attacks and bonus attacks among melee weapons (the basic one not being listed) makes things harder than they need to be. Worst case scenario I'm seeing is more draconian wargear selection or models with two power fists getting twice as many attacks.


EviscerationPlague wrote:I think it's interesting to give different weapons their own hit rate. There's potential there.


These are both things that have already existed more or less; they've just cleaned up the implementation. Instead of some weapons giving you 2x attacks and others giving you bonus attacks in addition to your normal wargear, they'll just each have a set number of attacks. Instead of saying a model hits at its WS but gets a -1 for a powerfist or whatever, they'll just roll that into the profile.

I think it's safe to assume they're going to re-work how wargear is allocated accordingly. Expect a model with two powerfists to have a single 'twin powerfist' profile, not two identical weapons.

So instead of needing to flip between the codex entry for the model's stats and the wargear entry for its weapons in the back of the book and then combine them to figure out what you're doing, you just read the weapon statline left to right off the card. Simple.

I like what I'm hearing so far, and so does my group. The overt emphasis on dramatically reducing how much cross-referencing you have to do is exactly what we've been hoping for. All your faction/subfaction abilities and strats fitting on two pages sounds perfect. The question will be how long it is before they screw it up again.

How are you going to fit every Tactical Squad weapon on a single physical datasheet?


Who knows, there may be stuff like smaller cards to put on the empty spaces of the large card, like they do with wepaon cards in Adeptus Titanicus, or something like that. The 50-page-document mentioned something like that.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

xerxeskingofking wrote:
 Breotan wrote:

The only problem I see is the vast amount of wasted space in that datasheet. I hope they didn't implement a standard size requirement for datasheets. Sigh, who am I kidding? We know they did.



well, they outright said they plan to sell unit datacard sets as a accessory (instead of/in additon to codexes.....my money is on the latter), so standardised card sizes are something of a necessity.


For Sigmar there are some 2 page data cards. Front is the unit picture, then the other 3 sides have data.
   
Made in us
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






 Mr Morden wrote:


Agreed completly with all points - if there are going to continue to waste huge amounts of blank space - at the very least put in some lore snippets or quotes etc


disagree, the datasheet should be as clean as possible, with only rules.

them being a standardized size is because they'll sell physical cards as game aids, so it makes sense for all of them to be the same size
   
Made in us
Krazed Killa Kan






They need to fix the core rules to have mechanical depth built into the foundation of the game or else it will become another bloat fest like 8th/9th became. If the core rules are basically just move, shoot, stab, die again then the cycle will continue.

That said seeing "Twin Linked" in the unit card without a wall of "bespoked" text next to it makes me almost have hope that USRs will be something that makes a return. Game becomes WAAAAAAY more accessible when you need to learn a couple of game mechanics and rules that are found in every army instead of trying to remember dozens if not hundreds of unique yet similar functioning rules for every codex in the game plus all the idiotic stratagems.

"Hold my shoota, I'm goin in"
Armies (7th edition points)
7000+ Points Death Skullz
4000 Points
+ + 3000 Points "The Fiery Heart of the Emperor"
3500 Points "Void Kraken" Space Marines
3000 Points "Bard's Booze Cruise" 
   
Made in us
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






 vict0988 wrote:

How are you going to fit every Tactical Squad weapon on a single physical datasheet?


by consolidating some weapons (power stuff) and making combi weapons just Boltgun + special weapon

OR by making these extra large datasheet twice the size that can fold into a regular sized one(like they did for lords of change in AoS for example)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/03/23 15:49:49


 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







 Breotan wrote:
• Weapons having their own Attack and Strength instead of a + modifier reduces redundancy, as does removing the "Type" column. Do we really need the word "Melee" listed twice for each melee weapon?

I'm going to disagree on you - sort of - with the Type column. While there's possibly not a need for a Type column now, are you really going to claim that "Things in brackets after the weapon name" is better presentation than repurposing the Type column into a Keyword column for weapons? Looking at you (sigh) Termagant Spinefists and Fleshborer.

Assault and Pistol on the Spinefists row is interesting, now I think about it - which are they today?

2021-4 Plog - Here we go again... - my fifth attempt at a Dakka PLOG

My Pile of Potential - updates ongoing...

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.


 Kanluwen wrote:
This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.

Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...

tneva82 wrote:
You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something... 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: