PDA

View Full Version : So Who's Played 7th?



Felwether
29-05-2014, 16:08
So have many people managed to get in games of 7th yet? Had my first game against a mate on Tuesday night and I have to say I enjoyed it. We decided to keep things small and quick so we stuck to 1000pts (well, 1050pts to be precise) a piece. I fielded a Battle Forged Marine army, largely unchanged from 6th, with plenty of guys in Rhinos and he fielded an Unbound Nidzilla list with lots of psykers. We played on our swanky new 4x4 desert board which features tonnes of LOS blocking terrain which really made things interesting and rolled scenario 2 on the Maelstrom Missions table (you get to draw one card for each objective you control on the table).

My marines got absolutely mulched left right and centre by Dakkafexes and Exocrines but because I had spread out in the early turns to claim as many objectives as possible I was able to maximise my chances of drawing good cards and actually managed to win 6-1 in the end.

It was a very fun game, although my rolling got pretty frustrating at times (I managed to immobilise two dozer blade Rhinos in 3 turns!), and it went pretty smoothly despite the small rules changes we had to remember.

The psychic phase was pretty uneventful due to some poor rolling and although when it did go off it was fairly killy (also, psykers being able to run/shoot after the psychic phase really changed up the dynamic of the game with regards to claiming objectives etc.). Initially I thought it might slow the game down considerably but after a few turns we were flying through it.

I can't really comment on vehicles being more survivable except that I expect my poor Landspeeders to suffer a bit due to the new jink rules until I get a few more games in.

Also being able to bring my Stormtalon on in hover mode was really handy in this game, which is funny because on reading the rule for the first time I remember thinking I'd never do that.

There were a few issues with cards and being unable to achieve the objectives ie. my opponent drew a Demolitions card but there were no buildings on the table and I drew a Recon card but we weren't playing Mysterious Objectives. I think in future a simple solution to this issue will be to simply allow a free discard if you can't fulfil the objective.

So, having played a game or two, what are your initial impressions?

HelloKitty
29-05-2014, 16:18
It wants to but its group says no.

hobojebus
29-05-2014, 17:15
This creature will never play 7th.

Mr.selfdestruct
29-05-2014, 17:23
I have my first game tomorrow night and I am sure there will be some awkward adjustment periods but overall I'm looking forward to it. I'll post my first thoughts on Saturday

Ghazbad_Facestompa
29-05-2014, 17:27
I have, 1 game last Saturday. I specifically put in a Grey Knight allied detachment to test out the psychic phase and Sanctic Daemonology. So far, I like it. Besides the psychic phase (which I need to play around with more to decide), I like all the changes from 6th that came up in the game. Haven't played around with Tactical Objectives yet, but I'm optimistic about them. In general, I'd say I like it about as much as I did 6th so far, but I get the feeling I'll warm up to it.

MordrekDaMean
29-05-2014, 17:44
I have two games under my belt. First was was Chaos Marines VS Necrons and the 2nd was Orks VS Blood Angels. Went psychic heavy in the first game to try out the Psychic phase, specifically summoning daemons. And took a Stompa in the 2nd game to see if it unbalanced things too much.

Thoughts from the first game... Flying Daemon Prince of Tzeencth, geared towards summoning. Summoned 40 daemons in 5 turns... but that is ALL he did. If you want to summon reliably you probably should throw lots of dice at it, and that left me none for anything else. almost every squad of the summoned daemons died to a man the turn after they were summoned. But they DID help me score tactical objectives (marked x where X is a number...) in my turn. So very useful.

In the 2nd game, my stopma wasnt exactly king, tho he did kill handfuls of marines. Got charged by an Imperial Knight... two rounds of combat later saw the knight explode and take my stompa with it! Would have been game changing if my opponent didnt have a super heavy as well.

The main thing tho, and I think this is the BEST change in the game, are the Tactical Objectives. They change the focus of the game so much. You dont play for the end of the game, you play for the end of the turn. I felt it kept me constantly engaged in the battle and was very fluid and dynamic. Sure there were some that didnt apply, or some I knew I'd never complete, but discarding, a lucky draw and a sweet tactical objective based Warlord Trait saw the Orks win the day! I cant rave over Tactical Objectives enough! Time may change that, but right now I feel its a fantastic new element to the game.

Felwether
29-05-2014, 17:54
The main thing tho, and I think this is the BEST change in the game, are the Tactical Objectives. They change the focus of the game so much. You dont play for the end of the game, you play for the end of the turn. I felt it kept me constantly engaged in the battle and was very fluid and dynamic. Sure there were some that didnt apply, or some I knew I'd never complete, but discarding, a lucky draw and a sweet tactical objective based Warlord Trait saw the Orks win the day! I cant rave over Tactical Objectives enough! Time may change that, but right now I feel its a fantastic new element to the game.

I agree. I'm hoping to see more mobile armies in response to the new scenarios. Hopefully people will become interested in capturing objectives rather than just blasting their opponent off the table.

I certainly found myself taking more risks to get points in the game I played. Can't wait to try out Cloak and Dagger(?) where you and your opponent keep you objectives secret.

fenrisbrit
29-05-2014, 18:19
A resounding thumbs up from me.

1 game on Tue small (2x Troops 1x FA 1xHQ) to allow us to work through the changes. Lots still to learn and try but it feels right. +1 to the previous comments about Tactical Objectives and the Psychic Phase works very nicely too.

HelloKitty
29-05-2014, 18:46
The creatures here all make it very jealous :( it needs to learn how to talk its not-friends into playing the new edition.

Liability
29-05-2014, 18:50
Played it last night as a 2v1 with 1000pts a side (No Unbound armies need I add!) Playing with the objective cards felt fresh and interesting, and the psychic phase required decision making on both sides (good), meant I didn't have to remember which type of power I could use when (excellent!) and felt easy to grasp (I am a fantasy player, which may have helped), but my Farseer did struggle to get off any powers at all. It's too early to judge whether psychers are now under/overpowered based on that one game though.

Overall I liked it.

Saunders
29-05-2014, 18:50
With some fiddling of the maelstrom scenarios, I played a 3-way game this past weekend. The psychic phase made psychic powers much more enjoyable, and tactical objectives were a fantastic way to play.

Hard to make any real judgements after one game, but I had fun.

the gribbly
29-05-2014, 19:18
I've played a handful of games, it's about the same as 6th except OS has seen people bringing more and more mech and more spam of powerful stuff. Psychic phase is completely busted as predicted from the start. Other than that yes I really enjoy it. This edition promotes player restraint while taking all the gloves offs if you want.. an environment beer and pretzel players like myself thrive in.

The Clairvoyant
29-05-2014, 19:34
Played 2 games so far, both maelstrom missions. Loved both games. First was against battle-forged eldar with Eldrad and a bunch of warlocks. He far outnumbered my magic dice (I had a l1 inq) but psychics didn't dominate the game. I only managed to cast 2spells all game though that was mostly down to my inability to roll a 4+
what I learnt from that first game was to shuffle my tactical objective cards more. I ended up with card 63,64,65 and 66 over two turns! :D
2nd game vs unbound marines with Tiggy and another L2. I stuck to my single L1. I like the fact my battle forged list was able to take the objectives away from the unbound player. I had a scout squad who spent the whole game sat on an objective waiting for the card to come up and just going to ground whenever anyone shot at them. The maelstrom objectives really keep you thinking and adapting throughout the game and I think they're a great counterbalance to just taking a stupid unbound list.
Haven't faced daemons yet, but I'm really looking forward to facing the killer daemon summoning army of death. That's the kind of game that tells a story-a glorious last stand vs the wave upon wave of daemons as the warp spills out into real space.

Horus38
29-05-2014, 19:44
Several people in my group have played and we've all enjoyed it a lot!

Losing Command
29-05-2014, 19:54
Played one game with Thousand sons vs codex marines. most things work the same as in 6th (like from 4th to 5th) but overall the rules seem better clarified. The psychic phase is a huge boost to Thousand sons, now your sorcerers can use spells to blow up a transport after which the marines can rapid-fire its contents to shreds. Succesfully casting powers became more difficult unless you spend lots of dice on it, which severely limits the amount of powers you can cast. It also became very clear that if you got one ML1 psyker against a lot of psykers, good luck casting anything (11 or more deny dice every time ...) Tried to summon daemons but all it did was summon one unit after losing 2 wounds and casting little else besides it.
Charging through terrain is less of a fuzz now. And it feels nice to know that anything below AP 2 won't blow up your vehicle in one shot :D

The only thing that can be abused is the options for how to build your army, but if people agree on that beforehand it is actually an improvement over 6th.

Tay051173096
29-05-2014, 20:04
Ahriman is now banned from the club if he enters with psy scream...

I second the change to thousand sons, just need to work on postions incase I get warp spray (so broken on a flying deamon prince)...

Killgore
29-05-2014, 20:12
I played a 2000 point game against some Chaos marines with my Eldar.

The Maelstrom of the War mission cards made the game much more intense. I was winning on VP's but got tabled on turn 5. You need to get the balance right between destroying your enemy and completing the objectives, I was focusing more on objectives and paid the price.

I used two Farseers and eight Warlocks (Ulthwe theme) giving me 14 Psychic dice. The Chaos player had a Nurgle Daemon Prince with wings (nasty 2+ jink save) who spent the game trying to summon Daemons, but only managed to conjure a single unit that died a turn latter. I had moderate success casting various Telepathy and Fate powers until the Farseers met their end at the hands of the Daemon Prince.

Both of us used battle forged lists, as the objective secured rule really helped both armies claim those all important Victory points. I feel that an Unbound list would really struggle in these games if the list is not built to table an opponent.



I recommend the new Tactical Objective games, as other posters have said it really adds to games of 40K.

Minsc
29-05-2014, 20:34
Several people in my group have played and we've all enjoyed it a lot!

This pretty much.

No one who's played a 7th Ed. game in my group have actually disliked it.

Maelstrom of war is totally unbalanced, but also great fun. I'll be sticking with it myself.

totgeboren
29-05-2014, 20:46
Played today, 1750 pts with me as CSM against my friends Nids. We wanted to take it in steps so just played one of the old scenarios, Big Guns Never Tire.

I really need to get used to the psychic phase, it made the game take a lot longer than usual. Walkers vs Monsters is a lot more fun in close combat now. I had one Helbrute actually surviving the charge from a Carnifex and then managing to kill it over three cc phases, while my other Helbrute assaulted a Swarmlord but getting smashed to bits before he even got to swing! It was pretty cool all in all. Challenges are much more fun now that they don't nullify the rest of the unit, and flying MCs feel a bit better balanced now that they can't assault on the turn they change flight mode.
Malefic was pretty powerful but boy did it eat up your warp charge, and Prescience from Divination was nerfed so it doesn't feel like an auto-include.

All in all, two thumbs up. Only really bad thing is that they kept barrage sniping, but we house-ruled that so I guess we will manage.

Amnar
29-05-2014, 21:16
Nice to hear that people are having positive experiences. On paper 7th edition looks pretty awful, but I'll be glad to be proved wrong on the tabletop!

lobbywatson
30-05-2014, 00:05
Played my first game last night. 1350 AM vs my Eldar. It seemed cleaner then 6th. Psychic phase was pretty equal. I had 5 ML to his 4ML. Vehicles are amazing now. Jink really UPS the survivability of my Wave Serpents while neutering their shooting. It actually seemed a fair trade off. I love the MoW missions. Tact cards do NEED shuffled well lol. I learned that too. Objective secured is my new favorite rule ever. I also loved how everything scored.
Psychic phase added about a hour to the game I felt. Overall I see zero issue with 7th. Glad I preordered it.
Personally I don't understand all the net rage.

Ozendorph
30-05-2014, 00:36
Psychic phase added about a hour to the game I felt.

Overall I see zero issue with 7th.

Personally I don't understand all the net rage.

That you stated the psychic phase added an hour to your game, and don't see that as an issue, might be why you don't understand criticisms directed at the game. Just sayin ;)

Just to clarify, I don't have any problem with the psychic phase (as I haven't been subjected to it), but tempo and game length have been at the core of my 40K complaints (or "net rage", if you must) for some time now.

lobbywatson
30-05-2014, 00:41
Well it was also the first time playing 7th. I doubt that continues to be that long for most my games. So zero issues there.

Senechal
30-05-2014, 02:22
Threw down for a 2000 point 7th MoW game between my Orks and a friend's Necrons. The game benefits so much from the Tactical Objectives, it makes each turn so much more meaningful and really messes with the traditional late game swarming of objectives that dominates the more traditional missions. No psykers on the table so we skipped the psychic phase but otherwise it was a really clean, enjoyable experience. A lot of minor 6th quibbles, notably the way strength D is resolved, got taken care of in a most satisfactory manner. My group has got a tournament tomorrow and then we're running 50,000 to 60,000 points of Apocalypse this Sunday. Really looking forward to seeing 7th at work in a large scale throwdown.

Madcapmushroom
30-05-2014, 03:11
Hi Guys

Got to try out 7th in my gaming group today. Have to say we are all very happy with it. We all agreed that the Tactical Objectives are probably the best thing to have happened to the game in a LOOOONNNGGGG while. They added an extra level of strategy to the game and defiantly created a few "epic-story" moments for us in our games as players would pull of tricky gambits that they would ordinary never consider in order to score an objective.

So from all the gamers in the Squig Cave its a big thumbs up :)

GrandmasterWang
30-05-2014, 05:23
Wow... so much positivity on Warseer....

Must be Tzeentch

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Akhrin
30-05-2014, 10:58
Got in a game on Wednesday, my Ulthwe Eldar took on Grey Knights. With all the Warp Charge floating about the psychic phase turn one was a standoff, I got off a few powers and he countered a few, then he got off some powers while I countered others. After his Dreadknight charged, defeated, chased down and wiped out my Seer Council at the end of turn one I was expecting to lose, but by keeping an eye on the Tactical Objectives still managed to scrape out a close win. Even missing my Seer Council against a warp-heavy Grey Knights list I still didn't feel the psychic phase was one-sided. With the standard D6 plus a small number of Warlocks leading squads I still was able to throw dice at denying key powers.

I wouldn't say the psychic phase slows things down at all. If anything it speeds up the casting of psychic powers as there's less messing about with people trying to remember when they cast each of their powers (as long as you remember that there is a psychic phase and don't jump straight to shooting like I did at one point).

Tactical Objectives seem a great addition so far. The game's a lot less static and requires planning on-the-fly instead of just gun-lines and last turn objective grabs. Looking forward to getting more in, I'd say 7th is off to a great start.

Zombie P
30-05-2014, 11:50
I had 2 games of 1000pts on monday, and guided 3 other games last night, they were all great. Really caught people off guard who had thought their old lists would work in MoW. The psychic phase was a little lame in games where the opponent didn't have any psykers, like Iron Warriors VS Necrons and IG vs Tau but it didn't really affect much, just made matters one sided, although with the difficulty of actually casting being considerably higher it didn't unbalance the game, just made the phase for people without psykers something they wanted over with so they could move on. The rapid charging and capture of objectives from the enemy was beautiful to watch and take part in, and the actual rules changes from 6th-7th are all an improvement. It is definitely a good thing, the new edition, may it have a LONG and prosperous reign.

ZP

Dr Morbius
30-05-2014, 12:36
l also had the pleasure to give the new edition a try the other day, but contrary to the rest we did not like the tactical objectives in the way they are implemented.

We had no card deck and therefore rolled all our missions. What happened was that my opponent started with a mission that gave him D3 victory points for having 3 scoring units in his deployment zone, while I had 3 missions that would give me 1 VP each for the objective furthest away (I rolled 16, 26, 36). After gaining the VPs for completing the mission in turn one, my opponent got assassinate on top of witch hunter and Kingslayer. Concentrating all his fire on my lord of change, he got a total of 7 VPs out of that kill.

In another game we witnessed the armies running around the field and trying to catch the VPs while mostly ignoring each other (as everybody chased the easy ones)

So, while I understand what they wanted to do with these, I don't think the work fine as they are now. We want to try to use a stripped down deck to use as secondary objectives in classical missions. Gaining here and there 1 extra VP that can't be taken away again, sounds very promising to me.

When I discarded one of my missions to get an easier one, I rolled 46 and would have got D3+3 VPs for holding ALL objectives by the end of a turn.

SideshowLucifer
30-05-2014, 15:04
That was pretty much the impression here. 40K felt more like a rugby game than a battle with everyone just chasing the silly random missions. Not a fan at all of this random "chase the bunny" mission style of game.

itcamefromthedeep
30-05-2014, 15:13
Being screwed by the draw seems to be a common theme.

I'd recommend giving people access to the whole deck from turn 1, but allow players to claim points for an objective marker once per turn each, so that you need to sit on a marker for at least 4 turns to get the full points.

Royals
30-05-2014, 15:24
I am so glad that people are having fun with 7th! This is really making my want to finish painting up my models so I can play larger games!

itcamefromthedeep
30-05-2014, 17:03
Played a game. Contact Lost.

My list was so incredibly aggressive that my opponent didn't get an opportunity to capture points and pick up new cards, which led to a blowout.

The bookkeeping gets rough without a deck, and looking stuff up is inconvenient.

Going for objectives every turn is healthy, as is the opportunity to claim points early in a way that can't be taken from you.

The game favors MSU and shooting, because there is very little to discourage someone from taking many elements of maneuver and a lot of reasons why having many units with a lot of reach is handy. Windriders weren't good enough before, amirite?

skorczeny
30-05-2014, 17:53
Question for people who have played 7th - What has changed from 6th edition that made the game better?

Psychic phase is obviously way different, but only for those armies that take psykers.
New mission/objectives sound interesting, but people seem to have mixed feelings re: if it's better or not.

What of the core rules changes (besides psychic phase and missions) made 7th edition better? Did changing the way resolve shooting improve the game? What else? I'm genuinely curious. If the game really is better now, I'll consider making the switch.

Zombie P
30-05-2014, 18:02
I really like that:

Focus fire has gone, and now its whoever is in front takes it.
Precision shot is gone unless you specifically get it, making the shooting phase with built in characters (like sergeants) considerably faster.
The way shooting is done now (completely resolve one weapon, repeat)
The Psychic phase (as long as everyone has about the same static Warp Charges)
Maelstrom of War missions and strategic objectives.
Unique items and unit rules that now work as they were intended (Bones of Osrak)
Vehicle damage chart
Vehicles moving at combat speed not cruising speed when deep striking
The removal of a reserves cap (no models on the board at the end of game turn still auto lose)
Time limit as genuine end game reason
New, and improved psychic trees
Changes to poisoned, snipers, zealot, ATSKNF and all the other very minor special rules tweaks.
FMC cant charge the turn they change flight mode AND the changes to smash (now 1 attack at S10, not 1/2 original attacks)

There are more but thats all I can think of at the moment.

ZP

insectum7
30-05-2014, 18:14
Played my first 7th ed game last night. It was a great game. Maelstrom of War missoins were pretty cool, but honestly our forces were so busy trying to blaze each-other away that most of our tactical objectives were ignored until the late stages of the game. My opponent was Guard with a Stormlord and a couple Leman Russ tanks, so from the start I had to land my Drop Pods up in his grill and get my Rhinos forward as fast as possible, because otherwise I think he would have just taken me to pieces at range.

There are subtle differences between the editions which make more difference than one would think. My Rhinos (and his Stormlord) proved a little tougher to take down, and were more likely wrecks remaining on the table. This meant that I could "build" a wall on his side of the board that could barricade my reinforcements from being blasted apart too early. Since my Sternguard with meltas arrived very late (turn 4), I had to essentially drop the offensive and tuck guys behind the wrecks of vehicles (his and mine) until I had the capacity to deal with the Stormlord. Drop Pods can fire Deathwind Missile Launchers on the turn they come in, which was a lot of fun. My Drop Pods and Devastators could score objectives later in the game.

Overall I have to say that the new Rulebook is cleaner and clearer than the last one. Looking up a rule was easy, and finding the answer to more subtle questions about interactions was also easy. It's generally more readable, I find.

mughi3
01-06-2014, 10:54
I've played 2 games of 7th so far, the first I lost against an unbound elder warlock biker list by objective points (he had 2 I had 1)

I just got done playing the demon spam list......and I won on kill points but just barely because he was having real trouble cracking my land raiders. it was a very tough army to put down with that many psyker dice buffing the invul saves without a D weapon.....which is the easiest counter to that kind of thing.

My army was also an unbound dark angel/imperial guard list. the games were at 2k points.

Spiney Norman
01-06-2014, 14:30
Played my first game yesterday, and it might well be my last. Took my Necrons with 0 Mastery levels against a daemon army with (I think) 18. The psychic phase was just one (very) long round of my opponent rolling dice and shoving models on to the table.

It was nice being able to bring my tesseract vault without needing permission, but it seems to me that the game is virtually unplayable for the four armies out there that have no psyker access unless you somehow persuade your opponent not to bring any either. On the other hand I didn't think about half way through the summon-fest on Turn three that next time I might bring my dark Eldar instead and pop the crucible of malediction on a haemy riding in a venom with torment grenades and see if I could drop a few of them.

Jason Triffitt
01-06-2014, 14:57
Played first game today 3000 pts chaos vs guard. Not sold on the tactical objectives yet. Seems that victory points were awarded a lot more on luck than tactics or even dice rolls, but it's only one game so will reserve my opinion. One thing is, I would just like someone independant to confirm my opinion that there is 'no such thing as an unbound detachment'. In other words if there is a even a single miniature in your army that is not bound by a force organisation chart or a specific written formation eg. Murder pack of helbrutes then the entire army is unbound and none of it benefits from the battle forged advantages.

Fox Of 9
01-06-2014, 15:02
Played first game today 3000 pts chaos vs guard. Not sold on the tactical objectives yet. Seems that victory points were awarded a lot more on luck than tactics or even dice rolls, but it's only one game so will reserve my opinion. One thing is, I would just like someone independant to confirm my opinion that there is 'no such thing as an unbound detachment'. In other words if there is a even a single miniature in your army that is not bound by a force organisation chart or a specific written formation eg. Murder pack of helbrutes then the entire army is unbound and none of it benefits from the battle forged advantages.

That's how I read it as.

David.

Doomseer
01-06-2014, 15:41
I've played one game, Eldar Vs Daemons and I'll admit I enjoyed it. The Psychic phase was hit and miss but worked out ok but the Tactical objectives were a bit wonky, with me racing ahead early due to how easy it was for Eldar to grab objectives with their speed.

All in all, good changes and better than 6th, mostly due to my regular gaming group being on the same page regarding army building and game experience. :)

lethlis
02-06-2014, 05:56
Played my first game yesterday, and it might well be my last. Took my Necrons with 0 Mastery levels against a daemon army with (I think) 18. The psychic phase was just one (very) long round of my opponent rolling dice and shoving models on to the table.

It was nice being able to bring my tesseract vault without needing permission, but it seems to me that the game is virtually unplayable for the four armies out there that have no psyker access unless you somehow persuade your opponent not to bring any either. On the other hand I didn't think about half way through the summon-fest on Turn three that next time I might bring my dark Eldar instead and pop the crucible of malediction on a haemy riding in a venom with torment grenades and see if I could drop a few of them.

Just out of curiosity outside of being able to summon models, how is this any different from last edition? Also necrons have no shortage of shooting so I dont see how you would not be able to kill more quickly than he was putting down. Also 18 points should only get 1-2 summons a turn at most.

Wolf Lord Balrog
02-06-2014, 06:41
Just out of curiosity outside of being able to summon models, how is this any different from last edition? Also necrons have no shortage of shooting so I dont see how you would not be able to kill more quickly than he was putting down. Also 18 points should only get 1-2 summons a turn at most.

18 Mastery Levels + D6 extra = 21+ Warp Charge dice 2/3 of the time. That's easily enough to get off 3 summons per turn, you only need 7 dice to have a very good chance of succeeding. That's 12-18 units summoned over the course of a game. Most armies don't have 12 units to start with at 1700-1850 points, let alone the ability to summon that many more. And how the heck was he supposed to wipe out three whole units of summoned demons per turn and still have enough firepower to make any serious progress on the army his opponent started with? All while his opponent is using the non-summoning portion of his army to stomp him a new orifice? Your expectations are just totally unrealistic.

And then what about these Maelstrom of War missions where you have to zoom all over the board completing random objectives, instead of blasting away at your opponent? That's that many more summoned demons surviving. And he didn't even go up against the most broke version of the Tzeentch Clown Car, I've seen lists that can generate 30 MLs. Totally broken.

TremendousZ
02-06-2014, 06:54
I played a 1500 pt game today of Chaos(CSM and Daemon allies) vs Necrons. I had 2 ML3 psykers plus my daemon troop characters.

This gave me +8 in my psychic phase and I ended up summoning 2 units (pink horrors and bloodletters) during the first 2 turns. Only perils once and rolled a 5 so no biggie. In the end the summoned units were what my opponent focused on and it allowed the rest of my army to go relatively untouched.

I was also able to enjoy only being stopped once in the psychic phase by deny the witch with a luck 3 6s. So if have 0 psykers(tau and necrons) vs a hvy psyker list(chaos, eldar, grey knights) u will feel the pain.

I welcome this change because it strengthens psyker hvy arrmies and enables a major changes in list building.

innerwolf
02-06-2014, 06:55
In the grimm darkness of 7th edition there is only summoning spam

No seriously, it's refreshing to see so many positive comments and so few complaints about said abominations.

tneva82
02-06-2014, 07:30
That you stated the psychic phase added an hour to your game, and don't see that as an issue, might be why you don't understand criticisms directed at the game. Just sayin ;)

Just to clarify, I don't have any problem with the psychic phase (as I haven't been subjected to it), but tempo and game length have been at the core of my 40K complaints (or "net rage", if you must) for some time now.

Well it gets easier when you learn it.

Remember same spells would still be cast, just in number of different phases. Actually you could roll LESS dices(at least number of times you roll. At least for me it's faster to roll 3x6 than 9x2 dice even though dice # stays same!) and if you have lots of powers you no longer need to remember to cast them in proper phase. Especially for somebody bound to forget stuff(and ergo take extra time to not forget them) this could mean significant REDUCTION to the playing time.

tneva82
02-06-2014, 07:37
Got to try out 7th in my gaming group today. Have to say we are all very happy with it. We all agreed that the Tactical Objectives are probably the best thing to have happened to the game in a LOOOONNNGGGG while. They added an extra level of strategy to the game and defiantly created a few "epic-story" moments for us in our games as players would pull of tricky gambits that they would ordinary never consider in order to score an objective.

We are already planning to expand them :D More missions and we are toying with idea of being able to use card for in game benefit instead. So you would be trading possibility of scoring victory points for some nice effect. Obviously the more powerful effect the easier to archieve/more valuable mission points it would be.

If done right this adds another layer of decision making to the process. We'll have to see if we can invent sufficiently useful but not too good in sufficient numbers.

Or we'll just stick with adding new goals.

But by far it's the mission cards that had biggest impact to us. Next psychic phase, then all the minor rule changes and clarifications. Unbound barely registered since all it gave is idea of bonus for opposing army though the way our unbound armies have been even in 6th ed not required(actually the way army building was revamped unbounded itself became obsolete for us)

NazaryleLordofFate
02-06-2014, 09:07
Ive found 7th to be very fun I just started a daemon army (currently have 1 tzeench herald on foot 24 horrors burning chariot 3 flamers and 7 hounds) i dont plan summon spam ive had games with them 1 allied to my csms which was a draw and 1 solo game which was a win. Im loving them. tbh i dont think summon spam will really take off its not very reliable and while true you can summon alot of points in one turn potentially those daemons are not doing anything

mongoosedog300
02-06-2014, 09:22
Absolutely love the new rules. I've played 4 games so far (I play eldar) Vs Deldar x 2, chaos marines and deamons and the tactical objectives have kept the games fun and dynamic, even when the deamon guy was trying deamon spamming (We wanted to see what it was like, and we countered with our own psyker spam a little bit, still got off a lot of powers). You can't play like you did in 6th, which I think is a good thing (Sit in your corner most of the game blasting away at your opponent, then move at the end), and any of the objectives we can't get have been mixed in with ones we can, so we've just been able to discard them. I feel like the "broken" cries are from people not wanting to change their armies and tactics and the tournament players bitching about randomness, which is ironic because they also bitch about the lack of "tactics" in the game, even though now we have to make choices like taking a jink save or shooting next turn, or going for the objective or destroying an enemy unit.

NazaryleLordofFate
02-06-2014, 09:52
Absolutely love the new rules. I've played 4 games so far (I play eldar) Vs Deldar x 2, chaos marines and deamons and the tactical objectives have kept the games fun and dynamic, even when the deamon guy was trying deamon spamming (We wanted to see what it was like, and we countered with our own psyker spam a little bit, still got off a lot of powers). You can't play like you did in 6th, which I think is a good thing (Sit in your corner most of the game blasting away at your opponent, then move at the end), and any of the objectives we can't get have been mixed in with ones we can, so we've just been able to discard them. I feel like the "broken" cries are from people not wanting to change their armies and tactics and the tournament players bitching about randomness, which is ironic because they also bitch about the lack of "tactics" in the game, even though now we have to make choices like taking a jink save or shooting next turn, or going for the objective or destroying an enemy unit.

I agree so much with this post shame there isn't a like button LoL. I can honestly say yes I take one roll on maleific with each of my 3 psykers but I only do that to try and get cursed earth haha

Zombie P
02-06-2014, 10:42
Played first game today 3000 pts chaos vs guard. Not sold on the tactical objectives yet. Seems that victory points were awarded a lot more on luck than tactics or even dice rolls, but it's only one game so will reserve my opinion. One thing is, I would just like someone independant to confirm my opinion that there is 'no such thing as an unbound detachment'. In other words if there is a even a single miniature in your army that is not bound by a force organisation chart or a specific written formation eg. Murder pack of helbrutes then the entire army is unbound and none of it benefits from the battle forged advantages.

Somewhere in the first pages of choosing forces, there is a black box on the left hand page, describing formations, and how they count as a special form of detachement, which can be taken in a battle forged army. The book is at home, but I will give you a page number tonight.


We are already planning to expand them :D More missions and we are toying with idea of being able to use card for in game benefit instead. So you would be trading possibility of scoring victory points for some nice effect. Obviously the more powerful effect the easier to archieve/more valuable mission points it would be.

If done right this adds another layer of decision making to the process. We'll have to see if we can invent sufficiently useful but not too good in sufficient numbers.

Or we'll just stick with adding new goals.

But by far it's the mission cards that had biggest impact to us. Next psychic phase, then all the minor rule changes and clarifications. Unbound barely registered since all it gave is idea of bonus for opposing army though the way our unbound armies have been even in 6th ed not required(actually the way army building was revamped unbounded itself became obsolete for us)

So, you mean like in apocalypse where some of the strategic cards cost VP's to use? If you are looking for inspiration for that, I would look in the apoc books (BRB and supplements) and just tone down the ideas in there to start with. There is pleanty of catalytic material for getting ideas going. Good luck!

On topic: Got my next 2 games of the edition tonight, going to be SM against SW, and probably guard Vs Necrons. I will let you know how it goes, as there will be an example of a psykerless army for me to see first hand what its like.

ZP

tneva82
02-06-2014, 10:51
So, you mean like in apocalypse where some of the strategic cards cost VP's to use? If you are looking for inspiration for that, I would look in the apoc books (BRB and supplements) and just tone down the ideas in there to start with. There is pleanty of catalytic material for getting ideas going. Good luck!

Seeing I have not READ apocalypse rules no idea. We haven't had models for good apoc sized game and even less of a BOARD(6'x4' would be way too cramped on apoc games) so getting those books has never been much of an interest for us.

Though our idea is sorta reverse. Instead of sacrificing VP's you trade off ability to score vp's via missions you are holding(drawing cards to replace at the start of your next turn).

This is still on theoryhammer level though as we are hammering suitable objectives and bonuses. And need to figure out way to get these to cards. We not fan of rolling on tables and refering to those(also makes it harder to do hidden objectives if we so choose. Pain to roll dice in secret. Not because of lack of trust but simply bummer for other to have to turn around, other rolls and records dice roll. Bleargh. Card drawing is much more elegant but we are still thinking how to do the custom cards. Maybe we can write all the stuff on basic decks with full text on separate pages if need be).

ihavetoomuchminis
02-06-2014, 15:00
As a daemon player myself since 5th ed book...i find the idea of reading the words "allied daemons" or "starting daemons" in 2/3 of posts...disturbing.

NazaryleLordofFate
02-06-2014, 15:41
As a daemon player myself since 5th ed book...i find the idea of reading the words "allied daemons" or "starting daemons" in 2/3 of posts...disturbing.

To be fair in my case I started a daemon army in 6th before they got their 6th ed codex. However I then lost most of the army so I'm now rebuilding said army

mughi3
02-06-2014, 15:56
Played my first game yesterday, and it might well be my last. Took my Necrons with 0 Mastery levels against a daemon army with (I think) 18. The psychic phase was just one (very) long round of my opponent rolling dice and shoving models on to the table.

It was nice being able to bring my tesseract vault without needing permission, but it seems to me that the game is virtually unplayable for the four armies out there that have no psyker access unless you somehow persuade your opponent not to bring any either. On the other hand I didn't think about half way through the summon-fest on Turn three that next time I might bring my dark Eldar instead and pop the crucible of malediction on a haemy riding in a venom with torment grenades and see if I could drop a few of them.

I've already figured out how to kill the spam. the big thing is they have that darn stacking invul save buff if they stay within 12" of each others unit(which is only a mastery level 1 ability )
GW already gave us the tools and even though there was lots of bitching about it the solution is D weapons......oh look you got a bunch of summoned demons with 2++ saves OOPS my D weapon says it don't care, you summon a bunch of free blood thirsters, my D weapon can put that spam down as well.

Everything in the game has a counter, it always has, no matter the best meta list of the edition.

Losing Command
02-06-2014, 15:56
This talk about that daemon summon spam army reminds me a little of a Necron army I once had. It had lots of warriors and ghost arks, which people on teh internet said were garbage during 5th. Between reanimation protocols and the ghost arks the warrior squads kept on getting any casualties back. It even wiped out a Draigowing army when that was still considered one of the broken builds I sold off the army because after going on a winning streak against all the people with internetlist tournament armies, no body wanted to play against it anymore :(

But against that you couldn't even roll denies or anything, so I wonder what makes daemon summoning worse.

Killgore
02-06-2014, 19:51
I've already figured out how to kill the spam. the big thing is they have that darn stacking invul save buff if they stay within 12" of each others unit(which is only a mastery level 1 ability )
GW already gave us the tools and even though there was lots of bitching about it the solution is D weapons......oh look you got a bunch of summoned demons with 2++ saves OOPS my D weapon says it don't care, you summon a bunch of free blood thirsters, my D weapon can put that spam down as well.

Everything in the game has a counter, it always has, no matter the best meta list of the edition.


Nah, D-weapons are not the solution, not with their 1 in 6 chance of ignoring invulnerable saves.

Minsc
02-06-2014, 20:34
Nah, D-weapons are not the solution, not with their 1 in 6 chance of ignoring invulnerable saves.

Not to hordes, but Greater Daemons are scared of D-weapons alright. Even with their IV they will on average die after 2 hits.

Spiney Norman
02-06-2014, 20:42
Not to hordes, but Greater Daemons are scared of D-weapons alright. Even with their IV they will on average die after 2 hits.

Hmmm, that might actually be worth considering, my Tess vault might get its D mega-Flamer back to nuke the clown car's LoC

thanoson
02-06-2014, 21:02
Battleforged Daemon list vs unbound eldar Wraith list; 2000 points in Big Guns never tire. He had a Avatar, 4 wraithlords, wraith knight, 2 Wraithseers, 1 ten man ccw wraithguard and 3 Spiritseers. I ran GUO, 2 Heralds, DP, soulgrinder, 2 13 man plaguebearer squads, 6 beast of nurgles and 6 plague drones. Highlights were Wraithseer assaulting the beast in cover and killing one beast. I rolled boxcars and lost the entire squad. Rolled nurgle on warp storm table and killed that wraithseer and did 5 wounds on the wraithknight. Barnacus my nurgle herald (he's Barney the Dinosaur w/ a chainsaw) killed an avatar and a wraithlord in cc. DP killing a wraithlord and then holding up the wraithblade squad up for 3 turns.He was also killed by the Wraithlord. Not many psi powers being denied. I left him with a wraithseer. Overall, it was a pretty fun game. The change to poison kinda sucks.

lethlis
02-06-2014, 21:02
18 Mastery Levels + D6 extra = 21+ Warp Charge dice 2/3 of the time. That's easily enough to get off 3 summons per turn, you only need 7 dice to have a very good chance of succeeding. That's 12-18 units summoned over the course of a game. Most armies don't have 12 units to start with at 1700-1850 points, let alone the ability to summon that many more. And how the heck was he supposed to wipe out three whole units of summoned demons per turn and still have enough firepower to make any serious progress on the army his opponent started with? All while his opponent is using the non-summoning portion of his army to stomp him a new orifice? Your expectations are just totally unrealistic.

And then what about these Maelstrom of War missions where you have to zoom all over the board completing random objectives, instead of blasting away at your opponent? That's that many more summoned demons surviving. And he didn't even go up against the most broke version of the Tzeentch Clown Car, I've seen lists that can generate 30 MLs. Totally broken.

The part you are leaving off is how easy it is to reduce those mastery levels. Units of 16 heralds, I kill 6 and now they are down two mastery levels. Each summoning is going to get 1 back. So if I can get 5 casualties off on 3-4 units I just dropped him by 6 master levels per turn. Now add on the fact that they are putting ALL their points into summoning and are going to have little to no offense the entire time they are summoning it means that you are getting all of the points in your army every turn that can still cause damage. Two-three wyverns(which should be standard in any guard book) or 1-2 thunderfires, venom spam, tau, etc. EVERY army has some means of damaging these units that dont take a lot of their resources. If you don't then it is a deficiancy of list design. The trap is targetting the spawned units. Target the mastery levels, instead of finishing off units, find the way to reduce mastery levels for the least devotion of resources. Herald gets spawned? He is on his own for a turn, unit of 10 horrors gets spawned? Its only 1 warp charge, it is not going to be useful for much else all game. It needs about 6 warp charges to have a decent chance to get it on the table. Which means that for it to be worth it, it has to earn 6 warp charges worth of stuff over the course of the game. Remember summoned units are not objective secured.

Personally if someone is playing there army doing one thing, they better be damn good at it.

Now I have not played against it yet so I cant say for sure(and I wouldnt feel comfortable making any assessments off of one game), and I am open to the idea of it being broken, but innocent until proven guilty as it were. Personally the list has so many hard counters, is very random, and relies on so many things going right to work that I am not really worried about it.

Zombie P
02-06-2014, 21:21
Played first game today 3000 pts chaos vs guard. Not sold on the tactical objectives yet. Seems that victory points were awarded a lot more on luck than tactics or even dice rolls, but it's only one game so will reserve my opinion. One thing is, I would just like someone independant to confirm my opinion that there is 'no such thing as an unbound detachment'. In other words if there is a even a single miniature in your army that is not bound by a force organisation chart or a specific written formation eg. Murder pack of helbrutes then the entire army is unbound and none of it benefits from the battle forged advantages.

Its contained in a black box on the right hand side of page 121. Formations out of the dataslates are legal and do not make your army unbound/fall out of being battle forged.

Sorry to labour the point guys.

ZP

tiger g
02-06-2014, 23:17
Its contained in a black box on the right hand side of page 121. Formations out of the dataslates are legal and do not make your army unbound/fall out of being battle forged.

Sorry to labour the point guys.

ZP

Still not what the op asked. He stated formations are okay. He wants to know if you can have one detachment unbound with the others still getting formation, data slate and foc benefits. The answer is no one unbound detachment and the entire force is unbound. That is why imperial forces which meets all of the requirements cannot add a single assassin without becoming unbound

mughi3
03-06-2014, 00:37
Nah, D-weapons are not the solution, not with their 1 in 6 chance of ignoring invulnerable saves.
Ok you lost me. the demon spam works because the heralds provide overlapping invulnerable save buffs.

D weapons wound on a 2+ ignoring all saves including cover and invulnerable. against a demon spamming army your taking out big chunks of his dicepool with every hit

Ssilmath
03-06-2014, 00:39
Ok you lost me. the demon spam works because the heralds provide overlapping invulnerable save buffs.

D weapons wound on a 2+ ignoring all saves including cover and invulnerable. against a demon spamming army your taking out big chunks of his dicepool with every hit

Check your rules for Str D again.

mughi3
03-06-2014, 00:41
Check your rules for Str D again.
Has it changed? escalation says . no save of any kind, no regen or fnp.

tiger g
03-06-2014, 00:43
Escalation overruled by new rule book for d weapons

hobojebus
03-06-2014, 01:34
Has it changed? escalation says . no save of any kind, no regen or fnp.

You need to roll a 6 for it to ignore invulnerable saves now, you can give them to roll saves but your not going to be clearing whole squads with each shot unless your very lucky.

Jason Triffitt
03-06-2014, 03:10
Still not what the op asked. He stated formations are okay. He wants to know if you can have one detachment unbound with the others still getting formation, data slate and foc benefits. The answer is no one unbound detachment and the entire force is unbound. That is why imperial forces which meets all of the requirements cannot add a single assassin without becoming unbound

Yes that was the question and that was the answer that confirms my interp too. Cheers

Spiney Norman
03-06-2014, 07:07
Just out of curiosity outside of being able to summon models, how is this any different from last edition? Also necrons have no shortage of shooting so I dont see how you would not be able to kill more quickly than he was putting down. Also 18 points should only get 1-2 summons a turn at most.

Aside from the psychic phase, its not very different at all, by and large they made the right tweaks everywhere else to make a much more playable version of 6th edition. The problem is that Malefic daemonology is so game breaking (and so obviously superior to every other psychic discipline) that it eclipses all the good stuff they did. I think the psychic phase might actually work as it was intended, and in a fairly balanced way, if it wasn't totally overshadowed by the clown car.

Ghazbad_Facestompa
03-06-2014, 07:49
I wouldn't say that Malefic Daemonology is really all that superior unless you can get psykers with the Daemon rule, or maybe if you can get lots and lots of psykers like Guard. Even then, every time I've seen summonspam, the daemons didn't win, so I'm currently reserving judgement until I get more information. If I get a librarian for my Fists, even if I were to ignore fluff entirely I probably wouldn't take it. Perils gets a lot more likely, and all the good spells require lots of dice, which increases the risk further. Besides, a single caster can only pull up a gaggle of lesser daemons and a herald per turn if I want him to stick around; that's pretty easy to get rid of. Biomancy and Telepathy seem far better suited to his abilities and my army than unreliably summoning up a Daemonic Swiss army knife and bringing up the risk of losing the librarian. Daemonology is only "obviously superior" to all other disciplines in certain lists in certain armies. For most, other disciplines overshadow it handily.

mongoosedog300
03-06-2014, 09:04
Aside from the psychic phase, its not very different at all, by and large they made the right tweaks everywhere else to make a much more playable version of 6th edition. The problem is that Malefic daemonology is so game breaking (and so obviously superior to every other psychic discipline) that it eclipses all the good stuff they did. I think the psychic phase might actually work as it was intended, and in a fairly balanced way, if it wasn't totally overshadowed by the clown car.

Have you actually played against a deamon spamming army? You can say how game breaking it is all you want, but in my experience it's not. You get a free turn of shooting at them (deepstrike, so they can't move or assault, and deamons don't have very good shooting), and their spammed psykers are pretty squishy (Toughness 3, 5++ isn't very hard to kill). Couple of decent strength pie plates or weight of fire get's rid of them.

Spider-pope
03-06-2014, 09:09
Played one game so far, a thousand points of White Scars against my opponents Grey Knights. Went pretty well. The biggest difference for us was the changes to vehicle damage. Usually my Rhinos get detonated within the first two turns, even against opponents without dedicated anti-tank. This time they made it across the board and fulfilled their purpose for once.

Zombie P
03-06-2014, 09:26
Had my third game of 7th. 1000pts of guard vs necrons.

Due to the MoW objectives, all my units ended up charging the necrons instead of FRFSRFing them into the ground. It was highly entertaining watching guardsmen drown these immortal warriors in human flesh and triumphing. Led to some fun stories, meant that both of us enjoyed the game considerably more than if I had just shot them all dead. Another big win for 7th over 6th I think. He was also winning the game up until it all came together for me on the 5th turn, with several D3 objectives coming in to play and allowing me to win the game 11-10.

ZP

tneva82
03-06-2014, 09:42
Played one game so far, a thousand points of White Scars against my opponents Grey Knights. Went pretty well. The biggest difference for us was the changes to vehicle damage. Usually my Rhinos get detonated within the first two turns, even against opponents without dedicated anti-tank. This time they made it across the board and fulfilled their purpose for once.

Well I have my rhino's HP0'ed in one turn generally!

Spiney Norman
03-06-2014, 12:13
Have you actually played against a deamon spamming army? You can say how game breaking it is all you want, but in my experience it's not. You get a free turn of shooting at them (deepstrike, so they can't move or assault, and deamons don't have very good shooting), and their spammed psykers are pretty squishy (Toughness 3, 5++ isn't very hard to kill). Couple of decent strength pie plates or weight of fire get's rid of them.

Yes I have, my Necrons were able to kill the daemons at roughly the same pace as they were being summoned (averaged three units a turn) which meant I made no inroads to his army at all. When one of the heralds turned into a bloodthirster on T4 and I had that coming at me from one side, the trio of DPs from the other and the screamerstar tying up my warriors to stop them shooting I basically just got run over with bodies and Necrons in combat are not pretty.

An army with a lot of templates or higher rates of fire might have a better time of it, the best thing I have access to is the tesla destructor and with only 4 shots they just can't kill them fast enough.

SideshowLucifer
03-06-2014, 13:34
The worst part of the damn daemon summoning is when they summon more on top of objectives. It's already a pain to get ride of them with objective secure, but now two units make me have to put in more units to stop them from scoring while the rest of their army just runs rampant. It's the same problem Fantasy had many years ago when evil armies could take necromancy.

Itsacon
03-06-2014, 13:52
Had my first game this weekend, small 750 points game.

One thing to remember when people summon daemons, is that they follow the complete Deep-Strike rules when deploying. Meaning they scatter, and have to be deployed in concentric circles, in base contact with each other. Each circle must be complete before you start the next. If just one model can't be placed, they suffer a deep-strike mishap.

So unless you're in the habit of placing objectives out in the open, there's a good chance they're boned, since if even one model can't be placed because there's a wall or model in the way: poof, mishap.

Since no conjuration power has a range of more than 12", there's actually a decent chance of the psyker himself blocking the appearance by being in the way.

gwarsh41
03-06-2014, 17:16
Had my first game this weekend, small 750 points game.

One thing to remember when people summon daemons, is that they follow the complete Deep-Strike rules when deploying. Meaning they scatter, and have to be deployed in concentric circles, in base contact with each other. Each circle must be complete before you start the next. If just one model can't be placed, they suffer a deep-strike mishap.

So unless you're in the habit of placing objectives out in the open, there's a good chance they're boned, since if even one model can't be placed because there's a wall or model in the way: poof, mishap.

Since no conjuration power has a range of more than 12", there's actually a decent chance of the psyker himself blocking the appearance by being in the way.

Every daemon troop choice can take a 10pt icon that prevents deep strike scatter in a 12" bubble if it is the same god. If it is a different god, they only scatter D6. Then there is the #1 power on daemonology that acts as an icon and gives +1 invul.

rmeister0
03-06-2014, 17:36
For those of you who have played, broadly, how does the game work at 1,000 points on a 4x4 board with Unbounded armies?

For our friendly games with my group that's probably our sweet spot, but we haven't played 40K in years so I'm curious how it holds up at that size.