PDA

View Full Version : Warhammer 40k 8th Edition formally announced



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

WordBearer
22-04-2017, 13:15
Starting a new thread since the old one got closed.

Official FAQ here (https://warhammer40000.gw-hub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/04/New-Edition-of-40K-FAQ.pdf) on GW's site.

nagash66
22-04-2017, 13:32
FAQ makes me feel more optimistic then i did before hand, but untill FW tells me whats happening to 30k i withhold my judgement.

Denny
22-04-2017, 13:35
The FAQ is well written; old Skool tone, slightly self depreciating but still very positive and confident.

As it notes, how times change.

Free basic rules and annual updates are welcome and mean that, even if the game doesn't work out of the gate, it can be revised as required.

I would be excited if I weren't part of the MTV generation and therefore incapable of experiencing either highs or lows.

(. . . Is that the correct use of 'weren't', or should it be wasn't?)

Lars Porsenna
22-04-2017, 14:25
It's cool they are doing a free version of the rules. And it really sounds like they learned from some of the mistakes of AoS ("Are we blowing up the world?" as a FAQ question!). Not thrilled with the idea that the armies will be in books ("low-cost" books they say), rather than free dataslates to start off with. Of course that might change & we might not have the full picture. But I would have to replace (looks over to book shelf) 6 Codices to keep my armies "legal" (7 if you count Sisters & Imperial Agents). But they SAY they are keeping all armies legal, so I hope Sisters stays that way, & are not Bretonnian'ed...

Damon.

Kisanis
22-04-2017, 14:28
From the FAQ:

"Why should I trust you?"
"Come on! This is New Games Workshop™"

At least they have their sense of humour back.

I hated how AOS unfolded, and am neutral about its current state (an ok idea with terrible execution)

But it looks like they may have learned their lesson this time around.

Im exceptionally excited!

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Rogue Star
22-04-2017, 14:31
So... did everyone catch the sneak peek of the new Space Marines on GW's new 40K page? ;)

Archaon
22-04-2017, 14:38
Wow, color me impressed.

Things that stood out to me:

- learning from the AoS fiasco and including a points system for competitive play right from the start

- listening to community feedback and in the same way updating the rulebook on a yearly basis (i really(!) hope this extends to the Codices too as these tended to break the game sooner or later)

- the dig at "old" GW.. either a marketing ploy to placate disgruntled veterans or they are really turning over a leaf and starting all over

- Free rules - GW avoided this like the plague insisting that you pay them for all the work (understandable) but in recent years most gaming companies at least offered free or very heavily discounted main rules so people can start immediately this drawing more customers. GW finally understood the principle idea behind this and has jumped onboard.. good for them.

This sounds very good to me and shows that GW may have finally understood what went wrong all those years. They are now listening to their customers and using their experience to provide better products, the new games like Blood Bowl and Shadow War are extremely popular that they have problems having enough supply in the first run and it seems they are headed in a good direction.

Now i think it is still too early to pat GW on its back.. not until we have the final rulebook in hand and the community can weigh in with an informed opinion. Long term goal would be to provide balanced armybooks that don't penalize players for having an older armybook that can't compete with the newest army - if they can manage this then i am pretty sure they will rocket to the top again for many people, including me.

I will keep a close eye on news now and am starting to think about what my first 40K army in over 10 years will be (Marines unlikely.. i have been spoilt by Corvus Belli Powerarmor designs and can look at the outdated Marine designs ;) )

Little Joe
22-04-2017, 14:42
"Why should I trust you?
Come on! This is New Games Workshop™ "

:eyebrows: :p

Edit: Disclaimer: This is not bashing GW for crashing WHFB, they made fun of it themselves in the next paragraph.

Rogue Star
22-04-2017, 14:48
"Why should I trust you?
Come on! This is New Games Workshop™ "

:eyebrows: :p

Honestly, that bit made me genuinely smile, and shows how much they're aware of how the community have been talking about them, since Rountree took charge.

MohRokTah
22-04-2017, 17:27
I'm definitely impressed at the effort to communicate to their customers so far, but will reserve judgement until I see what they release.

theJ
22-04-2017, 19:49
...

So... hate to be the one(potentially?) bringing bad news, but being a rather smart cookie, I immediately started browsing through their fancy new site, landing in the "the game" section:
https://warhammer40000.com/the-game/

Scrolling down a bit, and reading the "matched play" bit, I noticed it saying;
"this is as simple as adding up the points costs of each model and weapon, and setting an upper limit that both players must adhere to."
...
Reading between the lines a bit perhaps, but they ARE saying points are the ONLY thing you need to worry about in matched play...?
..
No FoC? Consider me majorly bummed out :(

f2k
22-04-2017, 20:49
I'm pretty meeeh until I see the rules.

Left 40K several editions ago and is now quite happy playing other games. It's going to take a LOT to get me back.

Kisanis
22-04-2017, 22:21
...

So... hate to be the one(potentially?) bringing bad news, but being a rather smart cookie, I immediately started browsing through their fancy new site, landing in the "the game" section:
https://warhammer40000.com/the-game/

Scrolling down a bit, and reading the "matched play" bit, I noticed it saying;
"this is as simple as adding up the points costs of each model and weapon, and setting an upper limit that both players must adhere to."
...
Reading between the lines a bit perhaps, but they ARE saying points are the ONLY thing you need to worry about in matched play...?
..
No FoC? Consider me majorly bummed out :(
They may have dropped FOC,

But they may have locked out units, or 0-1 or 0-2 or percentage limits etc...

Kinda like whats in the AOS system now.

I think the FOC kinda died anyway when they brought out formations anyway...

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

WordBearer
22-04-2017, 22:30
From the earlier teaser they did, they've been discussing giving benefits to fluffily-constructed armies. So FOC might be optional, but you get goodies for building a certain way.

silverstu
22-04-2017, 23:35
Looking forward to it- seems like a really good move towards freshening things up, I'm starting to look into AoS and, in terms of access it seems great. The no FoC thing - that is where formations come in I think [which you pay for]- in AoS picking along those lines accesses buffs. I'm pretty optimistic as they seem to have learned and developed a lot over the last while- the FAQ is evidence of this. Should be good- I hope they get assault Nids working again.

Oh and the new starter set looks like Death Guard vs new marines [which seem to be taller, they look great actually- picks on War of Sigmar (https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com/bloggings/1909)]

Sildani
23-04-2017, 01:18
Wow. Are we sure Reinholt isn't working at GW now?

Inquisitor Engel
23-04-2017, 07:37
I think the FOC kinda died anyway when they brought out formations anyway...


Absolutely. No one in our area plays with a strict FOC anymore unless required by tournaments. It's either Apocalypse, Unbound 40k, or a collection of formations. FOC was always open to abuse, and in a way actively encouraged people to make unfluffy armies. Formations encourage it. I think this is a good step.

Rogue Star
23-04-2017, 10:19
Absolutely. No one in our area plays with a strict FOC anymore unless required by tournaments. It's either Apocalypse, Unbound 40k, or a collection of formations. FOC was always open to abuse, and in a way actively encouraged people to make unfluffy armies. Formations encourage it. I think this is a good step.

I think the AoS approach would be better. A minimum requirement to be met and a maximum allowance of characters and heavier warmachines, which scales with points. Age of Sigmar uses "Vanguard", 1,000pts which require 2+ "Battleline" (Troop) choices, next 2,000pt "Battlehost" (3+ Battleline) and finally 2,500pt "Warhost" (4+Battleline).

There are other conditions, a smaller game limits the amount of characters you can get (1 - 8) but it's much better than the static FOC, where you could decide on a 2,500pt - 3,000pt where one player took two minimum sized Scout squads or the like, then spent the greater amount of their points on the fun toys.

de Selby
23-04-2017, 20:33
Can anyone who plays Age of Sigmar tell me, do the special rules commonly include special deployment modes? I remember in old WFB they were quite uncommon, but in 40k many units in most armies have scout or infiltrate or deep strike or outflank options, and I've found it to be one of the more interesting areas of the game. Many other Sigmarisations I could handle, but I'd be sorry to see deployment simplified overmuch and I have no idea if that's likely to happen.

HsojVvad
23-04-2017, 20:41
...

So... hate to be the one(potentially?) bringing bad news, but being a rather smart cookie, I immediately started browsing through their fancy new site, landing in the "the game" section:
https://warhammer40000.com/the-game/

Scrolling down a bit, and reading the "matched play" bit, I noticed it saying;
"this is as simple as adding up the points costs of each model and weapon, and setting an upper limit that both players must adhere to."
...
Reading between the lines a bit perhaps, but they ARE saying points are the ONLY thing you need to worry about in matched play...?
..
No FoC? Consider me majorly bummed out :(

I was reading that as well but actually getting excited that there will be no FOC. I HATED it being a Nid player. I mean like come on. We are from a distant galaxy why do we have to follow the same formations as humans? As for someone who has been very cynical of GW over the last few years like a lot of people, I am actually getting excited over this when I thought I never would. I am still leery this can still be a mess, but at least the young kid in me has been rejuvenated again but wisdom tells me to be leery.

I tried reading the forums on another site, but can't get past page 8 with all the whining and crying going on over there. I thought I was bad at being juvenile adult but nice to see I have grown up a small bit and there are more juvenile people that me now. Nice to see the positivity here.

WordBearer
23-04-2017, 23:58
It's setting and not mechanics, but you guys might find this new map (https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/23/new-warhammer-40000-the-galaxy-map/) interesting.

Kisanis
24-04-2017, 01:52
It's setting and not mechanics, but you guys might find this new map (https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/23/new-warhammer-40000-the-galaxy-map/) interesting.
I like it. (The map)

It feels like the excitement i had at the start of End Times.

That was good.

Knowing they're not blowing up the universe? Even better

I feel like the Chaos vs Imperial aspect will remain centre stage but the Xenos faction will be a wildcard of interesting. Thats what I'm most looking forward to seeing unfold!

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Nkari
24-04-2017, 07:22
Mabye I can get back to playing 40k again if they dont screw up.. But GW in the past has killed my joy for their games, except their out of print games.. lets hope for a better tomorrow..

Spell_of_Destruction
24-04-2017, 07:24
One thing I am quite excited about is the prospect of MCs and vehicles being 'fixed' for good.

If I can make some educated speculations, I expect that GW will remove the vehicle system altogether and introduce degrading profiles for multi wound models as we have seen in AoS. If Shadow War is anything to go by we might see the reintroduction of the damage characteristic for heavy weapons. Again, this would solve an issue that has existed since 3rd ed which is that high RoF mid strength weapons are the preferred weapon of choice because they cater to a variety of situations. Assuming that we would see a significant increase in the number of wounds for vehicles and MCs, this would drastically decrease the effectiveness of high strength, low damage weapons. A welcome change.

perplexiti
24-04-2017, 07:41
I'm pretty excited about the rumours so far, I haven't really played since 4th edition regularly. But this news has me looking at new armies!

Also got into AoS more recently too after being a bit grumpy about the old world being destroyed, and am having a blast with that so bringing some of the ideas from there may not be bad at all.

Malagor
24-04-2017, 17:35
Well a Q&A was done, here are some info
-Armor value on vehicles are indeed gone, they are gonna have alot of wounds instead, same with monsters and they will get worse the more wounds they take.
-Everything can hurt everything so yes a bolter can hurt a land raider but will be difficult.
-2 types of points, one that is more like AoS where you buy a set unit and another point system that allows you to pay points for equipment and so on.
- Keywords from AoS is in as well, this will limit deathstars since allies won't share any special abilities or rules that the keyword covers.
- 1500pts will take about 90 minutes.
- Command points are a thing that you can use to turn things to your advantage and you can use 1 command points per phase.
- FoC is very much a thing and they gave an example of a small FoC giving no command points but a big FoC gave 9 command points, guessing that the fluffier FoC the more command points you get and also limits formation spamming since you won't get any command points from them.
-Everyone gets rules on day 1, the core rules will be free and digital and GW stores and a few independent ones will get limited printed copies as well. They also mentioned 5 books at launch that has rules for all the armies which will be cheaper then the codexes of today.
- The expansions (cities of death and so on) will be updated for this edition and forgeworld will also have rules day 1 for their units.
- Templates confirmed to be gone.
Probably missed something.

Lord Damocles
24-04-2017, 17:52
- FoC is very much a thing and they gave an example of a small FoC giving no command points but a big FoC gave 9 command points, guessing that the fluffier FoC the more command points you get and also limits formation spamming since you won't get any command points from them.
I suspect that's a correct assumption.

Which of course is absurd, because formations are inherently fluffy - so you'll be punished for taking certain fluffy choices over others!

f2k
24-04-2017, 17:53
I really didn't like what they said about books.

There'll be five different books on day one and then they started talking about annual updates like the Generals Handbook from Age of Sigmar.

Thanks, but no thanks... I don't feel like having to buy the rules again every year. They had a golden opportunity to changes to a living rulebook format, but they blew it...

Lars Porsenna
24-04-2017, 18:49
I really didn't like what they said about books.

There'll be five different books on day one and then they started talking about annual updates like the Generals Handbook from Age of Sigmar.

Thanks, but no thanks... I don't feel like having to buy the rules again every year. They had a golden opportunity to changes to a living rulebook format, but they blew it...

What if the annual updates are supplied bundled with the free rules on-line?

How is this handled with AoS?

Damon.

Rogue Star
24-04-2017, 19:06
How is this handled with AoS?

I'm not sure if we can apply the AoS model here, as it doesn't really have the same thing going on... in AoS, the General's Handbook first introduced Matched Play (presenting points at squad level, not for individual equipment, etc) providing a system for making roughly evenly effective forces, alongside open (playing with whatever you've got) and narrative (a slightly random story-driven version of Path to Glory). After this, points were provided in the army books.

Basically if 40K follows this formula, if you buy Codex: Space Marines, it will provide you with the points to play Space Marines, the same for Codex: Orks. However, the 40K version of the General's Handbook, which will be updated yearly, will contain the most up to date points values of all the units.

Really it depends on a lot of factors: will all the 40K units receive a free warscroll or 'Dataslate' on the website? If yes, then you only need the General's Handbook, it provides the three ways to play, all the points to build lists for all the armies, and you've got individual unit entries on the webpage. Will the core WH40K rules be free? If yes, then again, you don't need to buy a rulebook or starter set - if it's anything like AoS, your Codex will include your units, their points costs and a copy of the rule pages at the back, essentially meaning you need just that one book.

Basically it's options, letting you decide how much you want to spend, based on how you want to play. Using AoS as an example, you get the General's Handbook to play rough version of the armies: all Space Marines will share the same generic Chapter relics, same Warlord traits, etc. If you pick up Codex: Blood Angels, you can play the army, with Sanguinius' gene-seed themed Warlord Traits, Chapter Relics, with possibly a formation in the back that lets you play say, Flesh Tearers (take more Death Company, but all units in the formation get extra charge, etc).

Too early to say, with what we know so far...

WordBearer
24-04-2017, 20:08
I really didn't like what they said about books.

There'll be five different books on day one and then they started talking about annual updates like the Generals Handbook from Age of Sigmar.

Thanks, but no thanks... I don't feel like having to buy the rules again every year. They had a golden opportunity to changes to a living rulebook format, but they blew it...The General's Handbook is $25, half the price of a codex, and updates point values across the board. If you need a physical rulebook, that's great.

The "living" rulebook will be the 40k app, which can even be upgraded to an army composition tool for a couple bucks a month.

BramGaunt
24-04-2017, 20:43
I suspect that's a correct assumption.

Which of course is absurd, because formations are inherently fluffy - so you'll be punished for taking certain fluffy choices over others!

A Farseer, 9 jetbikes and 10 Wraithknights. So fluffy.

Also, I'd wager a guess that there won't be any more formations. If you want stuff in your army you foc it in. (That sounds amusingly wrong)

WordBearer
24-04-2017, 22:57
I gotta say, a 1000 point game wrapping up in 90 minutes is tremendously exciting for me.

CIRO
25-04-2017, 02:09
I'll stick with the old version.

Simple might make money, but I like complex.

CIRO
25-04-2017, 02:17
From the FAQ:

"Why should I trust you?"
"Come on! This is New Games Workshop™"

At least they have their sense of humour back.

I hated how AOS unfolded, and am neutral about its current state (an ok idea with terrible execution)

But it looks like they may have learned their lesson this time around.

Im exceptionally excited!

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

GW was the company that made me cynical.

Maybe we can trust them...

silentsmoke
25-04-2017, 08:35
I'm really looking forward to this. I have studied the map and it is about time things have moved along. It is nice that he fluff still cross references from 40k first edition (rogue trader). I hope the future codexes will return to the thick second editions, with plenty for everyone.

If the new rules do not float my boat,Cohen at least I got seven other editions we can choose from, exciting times!

silverstu
25-04-2017, 08:48
Really looking forward to seeing this new edition, sounds great and a very fresh approach. The video was great- you can really see the change in attitude of the company and how hard they are working to bring out a fun game. Hopefully with all the external play testing they did it should work well. Most of all I think on release many armies will feel fresh again- especially hoping that Tyranids get their play style back, with the horror of overwhelming their foes in close combat. The books - well the AOS books are relatively cheap for the handbook and the grand alliance books so not too worried by that, was mostly looking forward to a 40k app, glad its coming, shame its not available on release.

jamesvalentine
25-04-2017, 09:15
THE SKY IS FALLING OH GOD THINK OF THE CHILDREN GW HATES US!!!!

but yeah I'm looking forwards to 8th after the long running joke of 5th, 6th and 7th

Malagor
25-04-2017, 12:20
I gotta say, a 1000 point game wrapping up in 90 minutes is tremendously exciting for me.
Actually it was 1500pts in 90 minutes.

williamsond
25-04-2017, 13:14
My source seems to have been right about stuff after all, after getting the plastic thunderhawk wrong I was beginning to doubt but most of the list of stuff now seems to be proven right.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?422009-New-Marines/page3


he pretty much confirmed a lot of what's going around the rumour mill:

1, Codexs are done and will be replaced on launch day with war-scroll style release much in the vain that AoS was.
2, Gone are templates, weapons will instead do random numbers of wounds much like flamer do now in overwatch.
3, Vehicle armour values are gone, vehicles will instead get multiple wounds (expect even the most basic tank to have a lot of wounds double figures) heavier weapons will however do multiple wounds too.
4, Weapons will have a armour save modifier much like second edition rather than an ap value, so you have a save and this is reduced depending which weapon you're shot with, rather than getting full save until your ap value is beaten.
5, Early summer release date, I think he said June but it may have been July my memory isn't what it used to be :) .
6, Rules will be simplified but not to the extent of AoS like Aos there will be three ways to play open narrative and matched.
7, Charging from vehicles is back not just assault vehicles, expect to see rhinos full of assault marines as far as the eye can see...

Like I said a lot of this has been confirmed already to be true, so I expect all the other stuff will be true too. He was quite positive about the changes and others I have gained info from who are in the know "so to speak" say that the secret play testing they did with the wider community seems to have been time well spent. I know there's a lot of guys out there now who are sitting on NDAs who know a lot more but for obvious reasons are being very tight lipped.

just waiting out now to see about the charging from vehicles.

Still haven't heard from all the guys on face book(and the wider interwebs) who called me a lying wish listing idiot and worse, the apology cards must have been lost in the mail...

Felwether
25-04-2017, 13:46
Has anyone mentioned that GW are offering vouchers in exchange for recently purchased codexes (https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/24/just-bought-a-codex-dont-worry-weve-got-you-covered/)? Nice gesture on their part.

nagash66
25-04-2017, 14:50
Has anyone mentioned that GW are offering vouchers in exchange for recently purchased codexes (https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/24/just-bought-a-codex-dont-worry-weve-got-you-covered/)? Nice gesture on their part.

Wonder if this covers sisters of silence and custodian ones?

Lord Damocles
25-04-2017, 16:28
Wonder if this covers sisters of silence and custodian ones?
It should certainly cover the digital versions. I assume that the hardcopy versions from the Talons of the Emperor box would count too.
I'm certainly going to drop GW an email and see what they'll do - there's certainly not much in the way of non-rules content in them, so they're pretty thoroughly invalidated (which wasn't exactly surprising, but still... might have been better to not release codexes so close to the announcement, GW... They should probably have put the rules in White Dwarf - which might have made up for the failure to deliver on 30K Sisters of Silence rules previously!)

Rogue Star
25-04-2017, 16:55
Thanks, but no thanks... I don't feel like having to buy the rules again every year. They had a golden opportunity to changes to a living rulebook format, but they blew it...

What they have with AoS is pretty close, since the Warscroll army builder app is free, and contains all the Matched Play points of the units. The annual General's Handbook might be annoying if you must have a written copy of the latest rules at all times (but then you'd need to print out any Living Rulebook each update too) but the benefit it provides is a yearly review and hopeful balancing of anything released last year, by players and the GW community staff. It means no longer after a codex drop, will Tyranids suffer in mediocrity or worse for an an entire edition or until their next book, likewise with Tau Riptide domination.

Also worth pointing out, in AoS, the General's Handbook does not change or amend any rules. The 4-page "core" rules in there are the exact same as free on the website, as they have been since launch. What gets re-jiggled are points values (which are free to see on the Army Builder app) and the odd unit special rule (which are free to see on the GW website under a unit entry).

It's not a completely free (unless you just want Open Play) rule system, you do need to spend money yes, but it is the cheaper model compared to what we've got now.

http://www.scrollbuilder.com/ - this, but for 40K... use your imagination. :p

Reinholt
25-04-2017, 17:29
Wow. Are we sure Reinholt isn't working at GW now?

I am flattered, but no, I do not. They couldn't convince me to take that kind of pay cut!

:p

As an aside, I am in "wait and see" mode to see what the implementation is, but the noises are coming from the right direction. If GW can go through with this kind of model and balance the interests of competitive play, narrative gaming, and LRB-style constant updates, with a rules set that can be iteratively balanced over time?

That would be a best in class gaming model, and even better than what FFG currently achieves for much of their competitive play + community support prongs.

Let us see if they can execute, but the noises have turned from very negative to somewhat positive.

Rogue Star
25-04-2017, 18:55
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/25/warhammer-40000-unit-profiles/

New stat profile has dropped. I like. It's a hybrid between AoS and current 40K, with fixed To hit rolls for ranged and close combat (which they kinda were anyway) but still keeping the old Strength versus Toughness to determine successful wounds. The Movement stat along with assault "initiative" being decided by who charged will also mean maneuvering will become very important. No more sitting a unit between a bit of terrain with grenades and daring someone to try and charge you (which factored with randomly rolled charge distances killed any chance of assault being a viable strategy).

Malagor
25-04-2017, 19:56
I wonder tho, what happens in the next round of close combat ?
do you roll on who goes first ?
Is there even a second round of close combat ? Do you disengage after both players have rolled or does the losing player just straight up lose the models ?
Remember reading that a system like battleshock would be in so interesting to see how it all plays out.

Rogue Star
25-04-2017, 20:16
I wonder tho, what happens in the next round of close combat ?
do you roll on who goes first ?
Is there even a second round of close combat ? Do you disengage after both players have rolled or does the losing player just straight up lose the models ?
Remember reading that a system like battleshock would be in so interesting to see how it all plays out.

Alternate activation, if anything like AoS:


The player whose turn it is picks a unit to attack with, then the opposing player must attack with a unit, and so on until all eligible units on both sides have attacked once each. If one side completes all its attacks first, then the other side completes all of its remaining attacks, one unit after another. No unit can be selected to attack more than once in each combat phase. An attack is split into two steps: First the unit piles in, and then you make attacks with the models in the unit.

4 units are in a combat.
A, B, C, and D.

Units A and C belong to Player 1.
Unit B and D belong to Player 2.

Unit D is engaged with Unit A.
Unit C is fighting Unit B.

It's Player 2's turn, so they activate their unit first.
P2 activates Unit D.
P1 activates Unit C.

You don't resolve a combat at the same time. You resolve by units, activating them one at a time and resolving their attacks, until you run out of units.
Once one side runs out of units to activate, it then just goes to whoever has to finish activating units.

Essentially, charging provides a big bonus. Under no circumstances must you let those (likely Movement 8"!) Tyranid Hormagaunts charge you! :evilgrin:

Malagor
25-04-2017, 20:19
Well it's something to look forward to. Tomorrow it's weapon profiles which will be interesting but really interested in how the phases will play out.

Malagor
25-04-2017, 21:16
https://twitter.com/GeekJockPete/status/856833455568629761 Destroyer weapons are gone.

silverstu
25-04-2017, 21:49
Liking the sound of the new stats- especially the part about hormagaunts being fast.. might paint up a few this weekend, love the little blighters and the idea they might be useful is very appealing..

Pinched from Dakka which was gathered from twitter-

Pete Foley has been answering a lot of questions on Twitter.

-Combat will be Alternating Unit Activations after charges
-NO SCATTER DIE. Deep Strike will be quite different. In AoS there's no scatter for those abilities, but often they cannot come in within 9" of an enemy
-Guard still has Platoons, SM/CSM still have Chapter Tactics
-Flyers will have the same statlines as everything else but will have on-unit rules to represent flying.
-Cover adds to saving throw
-Maelstrom Missions will still be a thing
-No shooting into and out of combat
-NO DESTROYER WEAPONS.
-Free core rules ~12 pages
-No random turn mechanic.

and a little more from twitter via Bob on War of sigmar


Digital and phyisical book (A LOT are printed so no shortage)

-WW exclusive commands tanks are getting rules.

-Chaos and Imperium are similar to grand alliance book but xenos are more granular.

Malagor
25-04-2017, 23:42
Thank you for the not shooting into combat.
And like that cover adds to your armor save.

Wolf Lord Balrog
26-04-2017, 02:17
https://twitter.com/GeekJockPete/status/856833455568629761 Destroyer weapons are gone.

I gather, from the statline post, that that is because they will no longer be necessary. When Strength only went to 10, you needed "D" to connote something even stronger. With stats no longer limited to 10, and it clearly implied that multiple-Wound-causing weapons will be a thing again, you don't need Strength "D".

Kisanis
26-04-2017, 02:33
Im really happy with this direction so far.

Its looking to be a solid foundation to fix the game and a solid framework to keep the game improving and balanced.

(I say this while working on Bolt Action minis)

I just found the game... Annoying. And all of these changes will make for a great re-evaluation.

Cover being a save modifier is great news. As is the simplification of fliers.

I'm not sure about the lack of scatter die though... But I will not miss templates at all.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Malagor
26-04-2017, 10:00
Well without templates the scatter die is useless.

Wolf Lord Balrog
26-04-2017, 14:11
I kinda liked using blast templates, as long as they used the "if it touches the model, it is hit" version of the rules. That said, they are easily abstracted-out, and I don't think the game would be significantly poorer for their absence.

Malagor
26-04-2017, 14:49
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/26/warhammer-40000-weapons/ how weapons work

Rogue Star
26-04-2017, 15:25
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/26/warhammer-40000-weapons/ how weapons work

Again, pretty much what I expected, some I even mentioned when we were discussing the AOSification of 40K in another thread: I was expecting/hoping for a short/long range, but I understand that any potential data-slate the unit must be on will be crowded enough. In short I like the change, it's another solid improvement for diversity. People where worried ASM would make Space Marines cringe behind cover, and as AoS users said, the thing with them in that game is understanding how important a D6 system is. AP-3 is pretty huge in AoS, as it will likely be here, and suits a Lascannon. A Space Marine hit by one must roll a 6 to withstand it, the Str9 will trump his Toughness 4 easily, but the important change here is that Damage is D6. It means yes you can shoot a standard Tactical Marine with it and kill him, but since he has 1 Wound, the shot is being wasted on him, encouraging it's use on vehicles or more heavily armoured characters - as the background says.

All in all, makes me hopeful we'll see more than melta-spam across the board.

Kisanis
26-04-2017, 16:07
I think the big take away here was the auto-hit of the flamer - it makes me curious how other template weapons will translate over (mortars, battlecannons, etc ..) Will they also auto hit?

Overall it is a massive shake up of dogma and I'm excited for it.


Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Wolf Lord Balrog
26-04-2017, 16:50
The Flamer thing seems balanced, you lose the AP5 but gain D6 auto-hits anywhere within 8 inches, which makes them more powerful and more flexible than before. That new statline for the Bolter seems like a punch in the mouth for Tactical Marines though. No AP value at all? Not even a -1?

If the equation holds that Current AP2 = 8th AP-3, then AP3=-2, & AP4=-1, with AP5 & AP6 essentially disappearing. That's a boon for horde armies, who will actually get to roll their armor saves sometimes now. Could finally see a significant shift in the meta away from Space Marines Everywhere. Of course, there are many other factors yet to be revealed.

WordBearer
26-04-2017, 17:28
Since cover grants bonuses to armor saves now instead of a separate save, ducking behind cover just became a lot more important if you want to advance across the battlefield.

I like that. It's both realistic and tactical.

BramGaunt
26-04-2017, 19:15
I love to see that weapon types are still in. I was slightly dreading their absense.

Dwane Diblie
26-04-2017, 19:37
Yeah. Pretty much how I expected it to go. Will be interesting to see where plasma sits. I bet -2. As primarily a xenos player I am excited to maybe get a game agains a none marine player?

Asuming that the cover system is similar to AoS, has anyone else picked up on the fact that a Space Marine will have a 2+ save while atleast touching cover? What dose this mean for terminators? 1+ in cover? (Will 1s still auto-fail?)

BramGaunt
26-04-2017, 19:53
Yeah. Pretty much how I expected it to go. Will be interesting to see where plasma sits. I bet -2. As primarily a xenos player I am excited to maybe get a game agains a none marine player?

Asuming that the cover system is similar to AoS, has anyone else picked up on the fact that a Space Marine will have a 2+ save while atleast touching cover? What dose this mean for terminators? 1+ in cover? (Will 1s still auto-fail?)

I'd assume that it will be a little like it used to be in Warhammer Fantasy battles. You are not capped a 2+, but a 1 will still fail automatically. So, if a fortified position gave you +2 on your save, and you had a Terminator sitting in there being wounded by a lascannon, he'd still recieve a 3+ save.

This kind of leads me to believe that maybe, maybe, invulerable saves might be gone. More likely though I'd assume that they 'fix' your save at a certain point below which you cannot be reduced. Eg, a Terminator with a 5+ Invul save would always at least recieve a 5+ save, no matter the AP Value.

Lars Porsenna
26-04-2017, 20:10
This kind of leads me to believe that maybe, maybe, invulerable saves might be gone. More likely though I'd assume that they 'fix' your save at a certain point below which you cannot be reduced. Eg, a Terminator with a 5+ Invul save would always at least recieve a 5+ save, no matter the AP Value.

ISTR reading on the FB page that invulnerable saves are still in, though. So perhaps it is still take the best save out of the two situation...

Damon.

BramGaunt
26-04-2017, 20:21
Oh, I didn't notice that, thanks!

Senbei
26-04-2017, 21:08
I wonder tho, what happens in the next round of close combat ?
do you roll on who goes first ?
Is there even a second round of close combat ? Do you disengage after both players have rolled or does the losing player just straight up lose the models ?
Remember reading that a system like battleshock would be in so interesting to see how it all plays out.

In 1st Ed they had a thing called "Push Back", where winning a combat would move units about, causing losing units to be pushed back towards their board edge if they didn't route... Maybe the winning unit will strike first next turn, or the unit whose turn it is?

Voss
27-04-2017, 00:34
The Flamer thing seems balanced, you lose the AP5 but gain D6 auto-hits anywhere within 8 inches, which makes them more powerful and more flexible than before. That new statline for the Bolter seems like a punch in the mouth for Tactical Marines though. No AP value at all? Not even a -1?


Ap values for basic weapons couldn't come back. That's a serious break point for the system, and I'm very glad they recognized that.
Hmm. Wonder if shuriken catapults will get a usable range back?


D weapons, for example, are gone,
Changer of Ways be praised! Er. The Emperor protects, of course. Yeah. Meant that one.




I'm feeling... huh. Is that... optimism?

Spell_of_Destruction
27-04-2017, 00:41
My only concern here is that small arms fire is going to be even more ineffectual than it has been in 3rd to 7th. Bolters receiving a -1 save modifier would have seemed reasonable given that cover and saves now stack.


Ap values for basic weapons couldn't come back. That's a serious break point for the system, and I'm very glad they recognized that.

Why? Anyone who plays an army without majority 3+ save has been accustomed to losing their armour under the AP system for the best part of two decades now.

With cover and saves stacking, modifiers on basic weapons would increase the risk of suicide charges through open terrain. Plus we would likely only see modifiers on the basic weapons of elite/techy factions. One of the reasons why basic tactical marines are considered so underwhelming is that they simply don't have the numbers to make their small arms fire anything more than a strategic afterthought.


This kind of leads me to believe that maybe, maybe, invulerable saves might be gone. More likely though I'd assume that they 'fix' your save at a certain point below which you cannot be reduced. Eg, a Terminator with a 5+ Invul save would always at least recieve a 5+ save, no matter the AP Value.

Seems more likely to me that Inv saves will remain in the game and Terminators will simply lose their Inv save. They're getting an extra wound and if a lascannon 'only' has a -3 modifier then most of the time a 5+ save is going to be their worst save anyway.

herjan1987
27-04-2017, 03:29
I am looking on the weapon rules and thinking that GW want to pump up the sales for Sisters of Battle with those flamer rules.

Sureshot05
27-04-2017, 09:55
I am a little concerned that the modifier range goes from (-1) to (-3), possibly (-4) for melta. It strikes me as hard to differentiate between the following weapons with the pure system, and suspect that the key-words will be crucial to weapons.

Lascannon
Multimelta
Grav cannon
Bright Lance
Dark Lance
Krak Missile

And that is just the first few that popped into my head. I hope there are key words like "Anti Tank", which double the damage against Vehicles, but then we get back to the problem of what is a vehicle (Tau battlesuits, dreadknight, dreadnought - I am looking at all of you!).

However, it is in principle, looking much more tidy and easier to play, which of course results in a speed up.
I really liked the command point idea, except for the FoC being scalable. It works well for some armies, and others less so. For example, Guard armies tend to be more heavy support focused and Nid armies more Fast attack. I wonder if in the 14 or so charts mentioned, they have made charts to cover that. I wonder how far they will differentiate between armies. Chapter tactics? Night lords vs. T'sons, different guard doctrines? The potential range is huge, but very difficult to balance.

Melee rules look a bit more tactical, and it is certainly going to make the Powerfist make a massive comeback. "My turn, Terminators all punch the hell out of your unit" but I like that as it is an iconic 40k weapon (that and the chainsword). So far the leaks, the Q&A and general vibe looks for a fun edition rules wise. Question is how the storyline evolves, the new models, and whether they support existing armies or just introduce new ones. (By support I mean new releases).

Malagor
27-04-2017, 10:47
Well all vehicles should have the vehicle keyword.
And I'm pretty sure all armies will have access to those 3 FoC that they have shown, they didn't specify which army it belong to and their names had no flavor to them really so they felt like they were just generic FoCs.
So all armies I think will have access to the 9 command point FoC and smaller one.
Also they have stated that chapter tactics and legion rules are still in.

silverstu
27-04-2017, 11:21
I am a little concerned that the modifier range goes from (-1) to (-3), possibly (-4) for melta. It strikes me as hard to differentiate between the following weapons with the pure system, and suspect that the key-words will be crucial to weapons.

Lascannon
Multimelta
Grav cannon
Bright Lance
Dark Lance
Krak Missile

And that is just the first few that popped into my head. I hope there are key words like "Anti Tank", which double the damage against Vehicles, but then we get back to the problem of what is a vehicle (Tau battlesuits, dreadknight, dreadnought - I am looking at all of you!).

However, it is in principle, looking much more tidy and easier to play, which of course results in a speed up.
I really liked the command point idea, except for the FoC being scalable. It works well for some armies, and others less so. For example, Guard armies tend to be more heavy support focused and Nid armies more Fast attack. I wonder if in the 14 or so charts mentioned, they have made charts to cover that. I wonder how far they will differentiate between armies. Chapter tactics? Night lords vs. T'sons, different guard doctrines? The potential range is huge, but very difficult to balance.

Melee rules look a bit more tactical, and it is certainly going to make the Powerfist make a massive comeback. "My turn, Terminators all punch the hell out of your unit" but I like that as it is an iconic 40k weapon (that and the chainsword). So far the leaks, the Q&A and general vibe looks for a fun edition rules wise. Question is how the storyline evolves, the new models, and whether they support existing armies or just introduce new ones. (By support I mean new releases).

Each weapon can have specific rules beyond the armour modifier to give variation- I wouldn't worry about it.
I'm really looking forward to seeing ow the command points work- especially when they become army specific in the relevant codex as I reckon they could really enhance how army's play and reflect their character better on the battlefield. I think the FOCs will play towards different armies as well- I'm excited about seeing Nids as a refreshed army with a bit more for their horror from 2nd/3rd back [especially in CC].

The way they are building going the Q&A's etc is great, I'm fairly optimistic about the new rules. I'm expecting the rules to drop next month after the Kharadrons finish and the new Starter set to follow in June.

Sureshot05
27-04-2017, 11:51
Oh, I am very excited. I am just very curious to see how they will deal with certain weapons and units.

For me, the Vehicle keyword is what is problematic. Where does one draw the line? I sense that it is something that shouldn't be in 8th. But then how does the multimelta (more wounds?) get differentiated from the lascannon (higher strength?) and how do we cope with lance weapons (max toughness?). Going from Tau battlesuits, Riptide, dreadknight, dreadnought, knight all are very similar in appearance, but in 7th have very different statelines (with superheavy, vehicles, monstrous creatures, and normal infantry in that mix). Its been for me, the biggest issue in 5th going on to 7th, which is the monstrous creature/walker divide, but it extends neatly to vehicles as well (Heldrake for example). I also look forward to seeing how a vehicle can "run over" or "ram" another model, or whether it just gets a melee attack to represent this.

On FoC, what I am saying how the FoC suits some armies (quite often imperial, but also some others) much better than it does some others. The range of 14 sounds great, but an "Tyranid assault swarm" and "artillery regiment" have quite different FoC requirements. If to play theamatically with one of the forces, you are forced to have less Command points, then you run the risk of penalising playstyles. I am very hopeful with 14 FoC that they will be able to avoid this, but I am curious to see how they deal with this.

Overall, I am very excited for the new ruleset, it already addresses one of my biggest issues with 7th, and with the drop of formations it is sounding a bit better. Looking forward to seeing the rest of the rules (for free!!).

williamsond
27-04-2017, 12:32
there's been a lot highlighted so far that brings me back to 1st and 2nd edition and as such I like what I'm hearing, not sure about the loss of the ws table but if that's the worst that happens I can deal with it.

Sureshot05
27-04-2017, 14:21
Quite interested in the announced ability to withdraw from melee. Sounds quite an interesting and tactical option. Withdrawing unit cannot fire, but you can now fire on the attacker. Conversely, it also prevents tarpitting. On the otherhand, I think its going to be hard on lightly armoured melee troops, who will find themselves exposed to fire after the first round of combat. With charging out of vehicles, it appears to be big melee changes in general. We haven't heard anything about overwatch or stand and shoot responses yet.

Wolf Lord Balrog
27-04-2017, 14:23
Ap values for basic weapons couldn't come back. That's a serious break point for the system, and I'm very glad they recognized that.

I don't understand your reasoning here. How so? Especially given that we've been told that Cover will now be a stacking modifier to Armor Save? There are all kinds of shenanigans for giving a unit Cover in the current rules, I can't imagine more than half of those going away even in a significantly revised 8th Edition. And that's before you consider plain-old Cover from terrain, which has been pretty dense on the tables in the last two editions. How bad would it be that a Guard blob squad making a charge in the open against Space Marines would only get a 6+ Save? That's still better than the no-Save they get now.

That said, its possible there are other mechanics, as-yet-unrevealed, that make up for the lack of AP on the Bolter itself. Maybe SMs will get some new "Chapter Tactic"-like rule (like a "Bolter Drill") that makes Bolters more effective, who knows.


https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/27/new-warhammer-40000-movement/ movement phase for those that want the link

So no more tar-pitting. but also no more "hiding in assault". Overall this seems like it hurts melee units more than it helps them. But with the other changes like chargers-always-attack-first and assaulting out of vehicles, maybe this is a point of balance? Another situation where we really need to see more of the picture to make a good judgement.

Malagor
27-04-2017, 15:03
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/27/new-warhammer-40000-movement/ movement phase for those that want the link

Denny
27-04-2017, 15:13
I don't understand your reasoning here. How so?

The trouble with giving basic weapons an armour save modifier is you never actually get to use your basic armour.
Marines have a 3+?
Nope, they have a 4+ against the most ubiquitous weapon in the game.
You might as well just give them a 4+ save and remove the save modifier, rather than making the save modified against virtually every weapon in the game automatically.

EDIT: Also note a lascannon is -3 save . . . assuming this is balanced then you'd have a bolter at -1, a lascannon at -3, and all weapons between these two at -2? (Plasma, assault cannons, heavy bolters, autocannons, krak missiles etc?)

Malagor
27-04-2017, 15:19
EDIT: Also note a lascannon is -3 save . . . assuming this is balanced then you'd have a bolter at -1, a lascannon at -3, and all weapons between these two at -2? (Plasma, assault cannons, heavy bolters, autocannons, krak missiles etc?)
But bolters don't have any ap.

Wolf Lord Balrog
27-04-2017, 15:24
But bolters don't have any ap.

He was responding to my supposition that they should have a -1AP in the new system.


The trouble with giving basic weapons an armour save modifier is you never actually get to use your basic armour.
Marines have a 3+?
Nope, they have a 4+ against the most ubiquitous weapon in the game.
You might as well just give them a 4+ save and remove the save modifier, rather than making the save modified against virtually every weapon in the game automatically.

EDIT: Also note a lascannon is -3 save . . . assuming this is balanced then you'd have a bolter at -1, a lascannon at -3, and all weapons between these two at -2? (Plasma, assault cannons, heavy bolters, autocannons, krak missiles etc?)

That's really an argument for a wider range of modifiers, not that Bolters shouldn't have one. If GW wanted this edition to have better detail or granularity, I don't know what possessed them to replace a 7-point range of AP values ('-' to 6) with a 5-point range ('-' to -4). If anything, they should have expanded the range of values, not contracted it.

Bloodknight
27-04-2017, 16:16
How bad would it be that a Guard blob squad making a charge in the open against Space Marines would only get a 6+ Save?

IG aren't the problem. Space Marines are. IG basically pay for naked guys, SM for armored ones. If guns make you naked, there's no reason to pay for armor anyway.
In 2nd edition - where boltguns and lasguns already had a -1 - the power armored SM was probably the worst troop type you could buy. They never got what they paid for and armor that was worse than 2+ on 1d6 (like Khorne Berzerkers had due to the MoK) simply sucked. It was much better to have a naked guy with a gun and another naked buddy with a gun than anything in armor, unless it was a Berzerker, a Terminator or a Nob in Mega Armour. 3+ and 4+ were just bad. Effectively that meant that most SM armies you encountered didn't use tactical marines (they weren't mandatory), it was all about Terminators and long ranged Devastators that couldn't get shot at due to the rules that restricted shooting to the closest target of the given unit type, i.e. infantry or vehicle. The decision to give most basic weapons a modifier of zero in 8th is very good, IMO.

Denny
27-04-2017, 16:44
That's really an argument for a wider range of modifiers, not that Bolters shouldn't have one. If GW wanted this edition to have better detail or granularity, I don't know what possessed them to replace a 7-point range of AP values ('-' to 6) with a 5-point range ('-' to -4). If anything, they should have expanded the range of values, not contracted it.

Did they want this? The impression I've gotten is they want to speed up gameplay and simplify rules. Neither goal is really served by increasing detail or granularity.

Rogue Star
27-04-2017, 17:15
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/27/new-warhammer-40000-movement/ movement phase for those that want the link

Not a lot of change here, just a tidy up, keeping movement in the Movement phase, rather than letting you run instead of shooting, etc. Would have been nice to see what some of the varying unit speeds where, but eh...

The last bit on allowing a unit to Fall Back is a big change! Previously you could only choose to voluntarily fail a Leadership test (waiting to take the casualties to start it), with no guarantee you could pass it later, and then hoping no Sweeping Advance would destroy the unit, etc. Basically, why would you ever use that?

This new Fall Back? I can see that being used. I move a modest, expendable unit forwards to take the brunt of a charge, fall back in my following Movement Phase - sure, that unit can't shoot or charge, but any nearby supporting units can now freely fire into them, adding a risk. Lone super units won't want to charge into firebases and steadily chew through them, as unsupported with Fall Back, they'll be shot to pieces. Those Orks and Hormagaunts want to be sure they crash into the gunline alongside other units keeping their friends occupied.

I like. Tactical.

WeeDawgNYC
27-04-2017, 18:30
Reminds me of WHFB 5th ed. (falling back) it worked very well using skirmishers as bait.

Lord Blacksteel
27-04-2017, 21:41
Oh, I am very excited. I am just very curious to see how they will deal with certain weapons and units.

For me, the Vehicle keyword is what is problematic. Where does one draw the line? I sense that it is something that shouldn't be in 8th. But then how does the multimelta (more wounds?) get differentiated from the lascannon (higher strength?) and how do we cope with lance weapons (max toughness?). Going from Tau battlesuits, Riptide, dreadknight, dreadnought, knight all are very similar in appearance, but in 7th have very different statelines (with superheavy, vehicles, monstrous creatures, and normal infantry in that mix). Its been for me, the biggest issue in 5th going on to 7th, which is the monstrous creature/walker divide, but it extends neatly to vehicles as well (Heldrake for example).

Melta weapons have typically been short range high powered anti-vehicle weapons. I would guess this will continue and they will have a "melta" keyword and will interact with a "vehicle" keyword.

Lascannons were not specifically anti-vehicle in older editions - they were anti-everything with a long range, high strength, and a high armor modifier at the cost of being "heavy". I would guess they will not be tied to anti-vehicle use in any specific and they don't really need to be.

The Eldar just had straight-up lascannons in 1st-2nd editions. The max armor rule is probably gone and wouldn't make sense anyway with the new mechanics we've seen. Treat it like a lascannon and it will be fine. I'm sure there will be some kind of tweak to make it distinct but it doesn't have to be the same tweak.

R Man
27-04-2017, 21:51
Holy crap! My login still works! First time back on the site after it died that one time. Or was it that other time? Can't remember.

Anyway, I actually think that these changes will work with 40k in a way that they didn't for Fantasy, and it has reinvigorated by interest a bit. The biggest difference is that they are keeping the fluff, instead of blowing up the world, and that's a big difference there. Secondly, there is no change of base/movement systems, so AoS40k will be less of a shock. And the stat changes seem necessary this time. I'm taking credit for the AP changes, and it was a long time coming to. Furthermore, they are allowing for 'balanced' games between casual players, so people can still just play with friends.

And lest be honest, 40k is kind of a cluster**** atm (can I say that on Warseer? I don't remember the rules).

Lord Blacksteel
27-04-2017, 21:52
IG aren't the problem. Space Marines are. IG basically pay for naked guys, SM for armored ones. If guns make you naked, there's no reason to pay for armor anyway.
In 2nd edition - where boltguns and lasguns already had a -1 - the power armored SM was probably the worst troop type you could buy. They never got what they paid for and armor that was worse than 2+ on 1d6 (like Khorne Berzerkers had due to the MoK) simply sucked. It was much better to have a naked guy with a gun and another naked buddy with a gun than anything in armor, unless it was a Berzerker, a Terminator or a Nob in Mega Armour. 3+ and 4+ were just bad. Effectively that meant that most SM armies you encountered didn't use tactical marines (they weren't mandatory), it was all about Terminators and long ranged Devastators that couldn't get shot at due to the rules that restricted shooting to the closest target of the given unit type, i.e. infantry or vehicle. The decision to give most basic weapons a modifier of zero in 8th is very good, IMO.

I agree with your last sentence but your recollection of 2nd edition marine armies is very different from mine. Yes, terminators were good but they were expensive. Their save was 3+ on 2d6 BTW, not 2+. Berserkers had the 2+ on 1d6 because the mark of khorne gave them chaos armor, so they were exactly one armor save notch better than those tac marines. It's better, but not a game-changing difference.

The only terminator heavy armies I recall were Space Wolves and they're special rules made that a pretty obvious move. Characters were the decisive element of most 2E armies and yes, if they had an option for terminator armor they usually took it.

Spell_of_Destruction
28-04-2017, 06:46
It's important to bear in mind that while bolters may be the 'ubiquitous' weapon of 40k, more often than not it will carried by models wearing power armour or better so it's swings and roundabouts really.

It's somewhat hilarious that from 3rd onwards two tactical marine squads can face off in open terrain 12" apart and barely anyone dies. If both squads start with 10 standard tactical marines, after three whole turns of shooting a total of 5.65 marines will be dead. Reducing the save to 4+ only increases the number of dead marines to 7.51 which is hardly overpowered all things considered.

The main problem with tacticals in 2nd ed was that they were overcosted. They should have been somewhere in the region of 25-28ppm not 30ppm.

Eldar Guardians with shuricats were undercosted, Dire Avengers were about right. One Guardian cost less than half one tactical marine. With a superior weapon the fact you could bring double the bodies more than made up for the stat differences between a tactical marine and a Guardian. 14ppm vs 30ppm was definitely imbalanced. 16ppm vs 26ppm would be closer to the true balance although the shuriken catapult should probably never have had a -2 save modifier in the first place.

Late
28-04-2017, 08:36
It's important to bear in mind that while bolters may be the 'ubiquitous' weapon of 40k, more often than not it will carried by models wearing power armour or better so it's swings and roundabouts really.

It's somewhat hilarious that from 3rd onwards two tactical marine squads can face off in open terrain 12" apart and barely anyone dies. If both squads start with 10 standard tactical marines, after three whole turns of shooting a total of 5.65 marines will be dead. Reducing the save to 4+ only increases the number of dead marines to 7.51 which is hardly overpowered all things considered.

The main problem with tacticals in 2nd ed was that they were overcosted. They should have been somewhere in the region of 25-28ppm not 30ppm.

Eldar Guardians with shuricats were undercosted, Dire Avengers were about right. One Guardian cost less than half one tactical marine. With a superior weapon the fact you could bring double the bodies more than made up for the stat differences between a tactical marine and a Guardian. 14ppm vs 30ppm was definitely imbalanced. 16ppm vs 26ppm would be closer to the true balance although the shuriken catapult should probably never have had a -2 save modifier in the first place.

Aye aye, the Shuriken Catapult was probably the best basic weapon in 2nd ed.

Rogue Star
28-04-2017, 09:01
Aye aye, the Shuriken Catapult was probably the best basic weapon in 2nd ed.

Well it was essentially a Stormbolter with a -2 Save Modifier from what I recall.

silverstu
28-04-2017, 10:21
Well it was essentially a Stormbolter with a -2 Save Modifier from what I recall.

Ah- those where the days! 3rd ed and a 12" range was a shock to the system!

Thinking about the ability to withdraw from combat- i think its great and makes the cc phase much more dynamic. Gunline orientated armies will need to have units supporting each to cover withdrawals as the withdrawing unit will be vulnerable to a subsequent charge. CC armies will have to co-ordinate their attacks to mitigate this- engaging the support units, enveloping/wrapping round to prevent retreat or blocking retreat with other units. I also wonder if there might be special abilities in units or weapons to stop them retreating- thinking something like tyrnaid lash whips might entangle opponents. At any rate it makes CC more of a challenge rather than just a club-fest.

omegoku
28-04-2017, 13:59
I just hope they give genestealers and other no-gun assault specialists something to replace the round of shooting you get when your enemy falls back out of combat.
Even if it is just a free attack each or something.
I gave up playing 40k not long after the current edition dropped. Too many formations, super heavies and seemingly endless additional rules.. I was not fun.
Everything I have heard about this edition sounds great, I really hope it is as good as it sounds!


https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/28/new-warhammer-40000-psychic-phase/
Psychic phase update
Seems like a simple and easy fix.
Not sure I like Mortal Wounds punching through invulnerable saves. What is the point in inv saves if that is the case?

Wolf Lord Balrog
28-04-2017, 14:38
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/28/new-warhammer-40000-psychic-phase/
Psychic phase update
Seems like a simple and easy fix.
Not sure I like Mortal Wounds punching through invulnerable saves. What is the point in inv saves if that is the case?

Dude, and what about Feel No Pain? Or worse, guys that have both an Invuln Save and Feel No Pain? Is the basic psychic power just going to make a total mockery of some of toughest models in the game?

Lord Damocles
28-04-2017, 14:41
Each time you pick a psyker, you can cast as many spells as their datasheet states (which would previously be the same as their Mastery Level)
But... that's not how Mastery Levels work(ed)..?

omegoku
28-04-2017, 14:50
I'd imagine that FnP is gone, and replaced by higher toughness, and or, better save, or invul save.
What if Death Guard had T 6, 2+ save?
Small arms fire would be meaningless against them, and they could survive even lascannon shots (-3 AP means 5+ save, just like current FNP)

Wolf Lord Balrog
28-04-2017, 15:18
I'd imagine that FnP is gone, and replaced by higher toughness, and or, better save, or invul save.
What if Death Guard had T 6, 2+ save?
Small arms fire would be meaningless against them, and they could survive even lascannon shots (-3 AP means 5+ save, just like current FNP)

In the post about new weapon statlines they said one of they guiding principles of the new edition would be "anything can hurt anything". That even small arms fire would have a chance, if very small, of hurting even Tanks and Monstrous Creatures. Though your point is taken that tweaking Saves and Toughness could give a similar effect, with the still-limited range of stat values, I think that would be a very simplistic way to represent all the various "toughness" special rules (Feel No Pain, Eternal Warrior, etc).

Azazyll
28-04-2017, 15:50
Yeah there's a lot less need for FNP now that armor saves are modified instead of negated. FNP was a bit of a crutch mechanic to be honest.

As long as there's some variety to psychic powers I really don't care. I just don't want a return to 3rd ed.

Sureshot05
28-04-2017, 15:52
Wow, what a scary prospect. As a Thousand son player I now can see an effective way of taking down anything with focused psychic smite. With 5 psychics (1/6 fail rate roughly, and average of 2 wounds per caster), I could reliably kill a dreadnought or most of a Termi unit in turn no sweat. A psychic heavy army could be quite lethal to anything and everything, with the need for a pysker of your own to block them. Ignoring all saves is a huge factor.

Rogue Star
28-04-2017, 15:58
What is the point in inv saves if that is the case?

To protect you against everything else. Don't want the enemy to start casting warp-powered psychic shenanigans around? Bring your own psyker to shut them down.

I'm just curious how Perils of the Warp works now...

Wolf Lord Balrog
28-04-2017, 16:06
To protect you against everything else. Don't want the enemy to start casting warp-powered psychic shenanigans around? Bring your own psyker to shut them down.

I'm just curious how Perils of the Warp works now...
Which turns the Psychic Phase into another Get Punched Phased for factions like the Tau.

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Captain Marius
28-04-2017, 16:19
Good, different armies should have different strengths and weaknesses, Tau's awesome shooting is balanced by their susceptibility to melee and psychic assault - nids are the opposite roughly.
Im glad to see mortal wounds make an appearance, in AoS they are a good solution to dealing with the best armoured units (eg a treelord can get a rerollable 2+ save ignoring rend -1). They also give magic a sting - Smite isnt going to worry a horde of gaunts, but their hive tyrant would be right to be wary!

Kisanis
28-04-2017, 17:08
Im hoping that the way it works out means that no one phase can dominate the game, shooting, pyschic, or assault, by one particular army.

Im hoping that they have figured out balance between the different styles better, and given the actual playtesting im hoping that it actually goes somewhere...



Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Wolf Lord Balrog
28-04-2017, 17:12
Good, different armies should have different strengths and weaknesses, Tau's awesome shooting is balanced by their susceptibility to melee and psychic assault - nids are the opposite roughly.

Except Tau shooting isn't *that* amazing. Eldar, Necrons, and IG (and even some builds of Space Marines) are all better. In exchange for the fourth-best shooting ability in the game, Tau are helpless in two whole phases of the game.

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Rogue Star
28-04-2017, 17:16
Which turns the Psychic Phase into another Get Punched Phased for factions like the Tau.

Hopefully GW will balance this, but every army has strengths and weaknesses.

My general point however is that Psyker powers are a gamble - devastating when done right, bypassing armour and shields, but inherently risky, with Perils of the Warp. It's worth pointing out for example, Smite! can't be aimed; it's D3/D6 unsaveable wounds against the closest target, meaning a Psyker needs to get all up in the enemies' face to use that, but we don't know if other powers can be aimed, etc.

I like that's its more of a gamble, which also adds a nice thematic feel of the best answer to a psyker, is another psyker (reinstating librarians when the Traitor Leguions brought forth daemonic allies in the Horus Heresy, example). Tau will just have to adapt and overcome... for the Greater Good. :p

Guildenstern
28-04-2017, 19:24
I'm hoping the new rules will give a boost to Orks. The new flamer rules sound like it might make my burna boyz worth taking again. I'm a little unsure about Vehicles though - especially the Gorkanaut. Also wondering about flyers, generally, but obviously as it affects ork flyers.

I'm relieved they do seem to be learning from previous mistakes. And don't get me wrong, AoS is a good game now, it's just how it launched that was a problem. Anyway, I'm waiting to see how 40k goes but I'm almost optimistic. I

Voss
28-04-2017, 20:28
My general point however is that Psyker powers are a gamble - devastating when done right, bypassing armour and shields, but inherently risky, with Perils of the Warp. It's worth pointing out for example, Smite! can't be aimed; it's D3/D6 unsaveable wounds against the closest target, meaning a Psyker needs to get all up in the enemies' face to use that, but we don't know if other powers can be aimed, etc.

Not much of a gamble though. Smite is 5+ on two dice, which isn't even vaguely hard. After that is merely a matter of positioning and, frankly, psyker spam armies. ~2 mortal wounds (auto hit, auto wound, no save of any kind) per psyker is pretty crazy on first principles when you know there are armies that can drop 20+ psykers on the table. At 20, that's about 16.6 auto-wounds/turn. Maybe take off 2 or 4 if you've got a reasonable number of psykers on your side and countering is just as easy as casting.

And thinking about it, it seems far less of a gamble when you're making one test which auto passes all the other tests you'd normally make (hit, wound, armor). And this is with the baseline power that everyone gets free with the psyker tag, not even the scary stuff.

CIRO
28-04-2017, 20:43
Except Tau shooting isn't *that* amazing. Eldar, Necrons, and IG (and even some builds of Space Marines) are all better. In exchange for the fourth-best shooting ability in the game, Tau are helpless in two whole phases of the game.

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Lies! Tau Get AP weapons, we don't, Eldar should't have shooting that good, when they have staby staby that good, like seriously tau are the Only living things we guardsmen can batter like a drunk red-neck after he finds his boyfriend in bed with his brother. (You thought it was gonna be all stereotypes didn't ya!" ;P) Whispers: Its the UDDERS!

We can stand toe to toe with eldar, necrons, and cultists, but yeah that's pretty even, but the problem is with Necrons and Eldar, OMG Eldar, Eldar Need to be frailer, like kill one kill the guy behind him frail to get that much damn power.

Dwane Diblie
29-04-2017, 01:18
This is looking more and more interesting every day. I feel that old BotPs will stay as acting as a single psyker. But, with them chopping and changing with the warlocks seer councle, I am wondering where they will end up going. It is looking like elday are going to very potent in every phase again. I am both excited and worried about where I am going to end up.

Regarding Mortal wound being a new and powerful way to kill things. They are nothing new. They exist now. There is just no name for them. Naming them just makes things easier and they stand out a bit more.

As for PotW, i think it will be either:
On a double 6 suffer PotW
OR
On any double suffer, pass test or suffer PotW.
I hope there isn't a table again though. Just want a simple effect even if it is as brutal as straightout lose the psyker.

Voss
29-04-2017, 02:44
Regarding Mortal wound being a new and powerful way to kill things. They are nothing new.
I skipped 7th. What are these? No hitting, no wound roll, no saves at all?

Dwane Diblie
29-04-2017, 04:17
There are little amounts of them everywhere, but I think they are most prevalent in Psychic powers and PotW. They are generally just worded as "suffers a wound with no saves of any kind allowed." or something similar. I am prety sure they have bern around for alot longer that 7th ed though, there just may have been more last ed. (Look at that, already calling 7th last ed.)

Spell_of_Destruction
29-04-2017, 05:29
Lies! Tau Get AP weapons, we don't, Eldar should't have shooting that good, when they have staby staby that good, like seriously tau are the Only living things we guardsmen can batter like a drunk red-neck after he finds his boyfriend in bed with his brother. (You thought it was gonna be all stereotypes didn't ya!" ;P) Whispers: Its the UDDERS!

We can stand toe to toe with eldar, necrons, and cultists, but yeah that's pretty even, but the problem is with Necrons and Eldar, OMG Eldar, Eldar Need to be frailer, like kill one kill the guy behind him frail to get that much damn power.

Eldar have great shooting in 7th because while the current codex was being written someone at GW opened a box of the new jetbike models and fatefully asked "You realise you put two heavy weapons on every individual jetbike sprue? What are are we going to do about that?".

Captain Marius
29-04-2017, 07:11
Except Tau shooting isn't *that* amazing. Eldar, Necrons, and IG (and even some builds of Space Marines) are all better. In exchange for the fourth-best shooting ability in the game, Tau are helpless in two whole phases of the game.

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Id bear in mind that every profile and points value has been changed, so how armies fare now will hopefully not reflect how they will be in 8th (ie I pray my orks and nids will be fun to play again!). Saying that, i would hope that Tau would get some kind of unbinding option, even if its just a wargear or command trait, so they at least have the option of participating in the psychic phase (a bit like necrons do currently).

nagash66
29-04-2017, 08:08
They way they lay out sounds better then now ( not that hard) but still doesnt in any way address mass psy spam. The fact that dispels are tied to having your own psy user also narrows down army choice and may very will mean they are a auto include in any list that can grab one. Which if is the case, would be very bad design from the get go.

Still much to see however, i am hoping for a truly brutal perils of the warp table ( the current one is beyond a joke) to both help balance the phase but also reflect the backround more.

jamesvalentine
29-04-2017, 08:12
Except Tau shooting isn't *that* amazing. Eldar, Necrons, and IG (and even some builds of Space Marines) are all better. In exchange for the fourth-best shooting ability in the game, Tau are helpless in two whole phases of the game.

Sent from my NOBODY GIVES A ****!!!
Not sure if trolling?...

still looking forwards to this myself. 40k has been a festering pile of waste for a long time now. it needed a shake up ages ago.
once we moved from 2nd we lost allot of fun. now 8th is going back in that direction and adding some things I love the sound of and just make things so mush easier to figure out.
it did wonders for fantasy. I played fantasy and the system just didn't work. but AoS after the games I played in store I think it works much better now and is allot more fun.

Rogue Star
30-04-2017, 14:41
Not much of a gamble though. Smite is 5+ on two dice, which isn't even vaguely hard. After that is merely a matter of positioning and, frankly, psyker spam armies.

And this is with the baseline power that everyone gets free with the psyker tag, not even the scary stuff.

We don't know what sort of limit GW might intend to put on psykers in the new game, is all I'm saying.

What if casting a psychic power works just like magic casters in AoS, like the psyker can only use the power once per turn (regardless if it was dispelled) and the "scary stuff" is toned down to a list of abilities on their datasheet, rather than a large pool of powers to draw from like currently?


CASTING SPELLS
All wizards can use the spells described below, as well as any spells listed on their warscroll. A wizard can only attempt to cast each spell once per turn. To cast a spell, roll two dice. If the total is equal to or greater than the casting value of the spell, the spell is successfully cast. If a spell is cast, the opposing player can choose any one of their wizards that is within 18" of the caster, and that can see them, and attempt to unbind the spell before its e¸ ects are applied. To unbind a spell, roll two dice. If the roll beats the roll
used to cast the spell, then the spell’s e¸ffects are negated. Only one attempt can be made to unbind a spell.

ARCANE BOLT
Arcane Bolt has a casting value of 5. If successfully cast, pick an enemy unit within 18" of the caster and which is visible to them. The unit you pick su¸ffers D3 mortal wounds.

Smite! isn't that too different from Arcane Bolt. Sure he can roll double the casting value and get a boost, but unlike AoS has perils, which we don't know if it's a double 1, or a double 6... GW might have even changed it to any result of a double!

I mean what if the sum total of a Space Marine Librarian-Epistolary's powers are basically Smite!, a "psychic Aegis" which lets him add +1 or +2 to a single friendly unit's Save rolls?

I mean these are magic users in AoS:
https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-Lord-Veritant-ENG.pdf
https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-orruk-weirdnob-shaman-en.pdf
https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-chaos-sorcerer-lord-en.pdf
https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls//aos-warscroll-branchwych-en.pdf

I don't know about you, but while they have some nice powers in there (Foot of Gork) they haven't broken AoS because of the other limits put upon them. Mostly because they can only cast a single spell/power per turn... I would be shocked if most Psykers get better...

silverstu
30-04-2017, 15:11
Well they did shooting today- modifiers of -1 if you move and shoot a heavy weapon[including vehicles], smoke launchers give a -1 to hit as well. Save is a +modifier on save- so a shot with a high AP modifier can punch right through cover [their example]- some weapons ignore this like Noise Marine weapons. Can't shoot into combat, can't shot if an enemy is within 1" unless you have pistols.
Interesting .. feels a lot like 2nd ed which is good. Combat is tomorrow- looking forward to that, hoping that CC Tyranids is a thing again [really hoping the haruspex is good in the new edition- love that model].

Rogue Star
30-04-2017, 15:27
Well they did shooting today- modifiers of -1 if you move and shoot a heavy weapon[including vehicles], smoke launchers give a -1 to hit as well. Save is a +modifier on save- so a shot with a high AP modifier can punch right through cover [their example]- some weapons ignore this like Noise Marine weapons. Can't shoot into combat, can't shot if an enemy is within 1" unless you have pistols.
Interesting .. feels a lot like 2nd ed which is good. Combat is tomorrow- looking forward to that, hoping that CC Tyranids is a thing again [really hoping the haruspex is good in the new edition- love that model].

Just read. Solid stuff there, pistols as both Ranged and Melee weapons (another idea I suggested in AoSification of 40K) makes them genuinely useful, rather than a Boltpistol being a poorer, discount bolter just to get an extra attack.

In regards to Tyranids Stu, I'm already considering screening with swarms of the smaller stuff, reaching them into close combat, then falling back - so stuff like Hive Tyrants, Zoanthropes and the like that waddled up behind can poor fire into them at close range before resuming a joint swarming. :evilgrin:



PS: To further add to my previous post. This is Nagash, Supreme Lord of the Undead: https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-deathlords-nagash-en.pdf

Nagash is a Primarch-level character in AoS, the Magnus the Red of spellcasters if you will, singular, described as unstoppable, etc. Now here's the relevant bit...


Nagash is a wizard. He can attempt to cast three different spells in each of your hero phases, and attempt to unbind three spells in each enemy hero phase. In addition, he can attempt to cast or unbind extra spells with the Nine Books of Nagash.

Nagash can cast three powers. Three. At full, unwounded strength you can double that to an amazing six.

Don't expect Space Marine Librarians to get more than two powers. Three might be pushing it, unless their Chief Librarians...

WordBearer
30-04-2017, 18:57
Well they did shooting today- modifiers of -1 if you move and shoot a heavy weapon[including vehicles], smoke launchers give a -1 to hit as well. Save is a +modifier on save- so a shot with a high AP modifier can punch right through cover [their example]- some weapons ignore this like Noise Marine weapons. Can't shoot into combat, can't shot if an enemy is within 1" unless you have pistols.
Interesting .. feels a lot like 2nd ed which is good. Combat is tomorrow- looking forward to that, hoping that CC Tyranids is a thing again [really hoping the haruspex is good in the new edition- love that model].Yeah, it's especially sounding very good how you can plan tactically to avoid enemy fire. Heavy weapons for example have trouble hitting moving targets. Lightly armored guys who keep moving and take advantage of cover stand a decent chance of making it across the battlefield if they're smart about it. I like that. Less hard counters for things, more encouraging you to use your noodle.

Lame Duck
30-04-2017, 19:43
8th is sounding better and better. Granted it sounds like a couple of things could be even better, but so far every single change they have talked about has been a step or five in the right direction, might finall be tempted back in.

The only thing I personally would have like woud be for leadership to be a seperate stat from bravery, but that's no biggie.

Archaon
01-05-2017, 01:12
Dude, and what about Feel No Pain? Or worse, guys that have both an Invuln Save and Feel No Pain? Is the basic psychic power just going to make a total mockery of some of toughest models in the game?

Welcome to modern game design.

This was something i always disliked in 40k.. the prevalence of invulnerable saves that often enough were easy to make (4+ and even better). It made for lazy game design by having units or characters who could basically move in front of an entire enemy army and take shots from lasguns up to anti tank shots and have good to very good chances to make it through so they could tear through enemy units.

Having some options to bypass invulnerable saves means there are no no-brainer units or combos because that simple low level psyker just might ruin your day. So they are forcing you to actually use tactics instead of rambo-ing your way across the table.

The reality will be in the details of course and we don't know them yet.. i like it a lot but it depends on the execution once the rules hit and people have some games under their belt to make an informed comment.

I left 40K sometime in 3.5 and i'm now calculating how much money i might invest in June when 40K rolls around.. isn't that strange? I never thought i'd see the day where i start playing a major GW game again and willingly sink hundreds of Euros into it.

Malagor
01-05-2017, 01:29
One thing I was thinking about when reading the Nids codex today was, will ID be removed ?
Just looking at units such as Warriors, Deathleaper and others, the existance of ID and plenty of S8 weapons around usually means that these multiwound models that has a fairly weak save(like Lictors) can be removed with such ease that they are better left on the shelf.
Hoping that ID turns into a D3 wounds thingy instead, atleast that way you got a chance to survive(even tho I'm guessing that Warriors and lictors will get a increase in wounds).

Dwane Diblie
01-05-2017, 05:56
I am almost 100% sure that Instant Death, Destroyer, Eternal Warrior and all other related USRs are gone from this eddition and are replaced with uncapped stats and Multipile Wounds stats on weapons and abilities.

Liking where the shooting is going. While there is a generic -1 for moving with a heave weapon, I bet there will be models that still ignore those penalties. Terminators, Tau Suites, LRBT and other dedicated weapon tanks and the such.

Did I miss where they said that pistols are still used in melee? Not saying thay are not, just that I don't recall it being confirmed. What if this ability to shoot in to combat replaces thier traditional melee bonus. This will make truly dedicated melee units more power full while leaving things like Assault units short on attacks during the opponents turn. I think I like that concept. Hopefuly tomorrow answers that (if it hasnt been answered already).

If we go back to the weapons profile, what are peoples thought on what Rapid Fire 1 could mean. At first I thought it was same as now times multiplier. Then I thought you can only shoot that many times unless you stay still, in which case you get a bonus. Was hoping they would cover with the shooting.

Malagor
01-05-2017, 14:18
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/01/new-warhammer-40000-charge-phasegw-homepage-post-4/ charge phase.

Kisanis
01-05-2017, 15:19
So ill just copy paste from my friends email thread in response to the charge phase:

The big change is that it is seperate from the assault phase. They broke assault up.


The other interesting thing someone pointed out on warseer:

Since pistols can shoot in CC, they may no longer get the attack bonus. So that may radically change some assault dynamics and make pistol troops a go between of shooty and assaulty troops.


I am happy overwatch still exists. Its an important mechanic for guard, tau, and other shooty armies.


Do you think abuse of multiple charges to wipe out multiple units with a single death star will stop?


I'm hoping pure assault units (hormogaunts et al) have a good payoff to being weak on shooting (my guess is they will emphasise the run into combat quickly (getting shot to pieces) but be vicious on the charge (striking first with many attacks) and just devestate that charge against equal quality standard units.


It really comes down to points values and stat lines i suppose.



Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Rogue Star
01-05-2017, 15:55
I'm hoping pure assault units (hormogaunts et al) have a good payoff to being weak on shooting (my guess is they will emphasise the run into combat quickly (getting shot to pieces) but be vicious on the charge (striking first with many attacks) and just devestate that charge against equal quality standard units.

On Hormagaunts, I'm expecting them to have a Movement Stat of something like 8" and a rule on their datasheet like...

Bounding Leap: When Hormagaunts Run or Charge they can make a leap of D6 in addition to their 16" move. The Leap can be up to 3" in height and allows the Hormagaunt to ignore movement penalties for the terrain its leaping over or onto. Note a Hormagaunt Charging into close combat must engage the closest enemy and may not Leap over Enemy models.

Allows them to get over barricades and up smaller structures like the background, but with a stipulation to stop certain kinds of players abusing it to leap-frog a unit to surround them (Hormagaunts aren't that smart, they tend to lunge at prey-species and stab, stab, stab...)

Just an idea from stuff I've seen in AoS, don't take as official... but it's fun to imagine. :D

Kisanis
01-05-2017, 16:41
On Hormagaunts, I'm expecting them to have a Movement Stat of something like 8" and a rule on their datasheet like...


Allows them to get over barricades and up smaller structures like the background, but with a stipulation to stop certain kinds of players abusing it to leap-frog a unit to surround them (Hormagaunts aren't that smart, they tend to lunge at prey-species and stab, stab, stab...)

Just an idea from stuff I've seen in AoS, don't take as official... but it's fun to imagine. :D
I think that sounds right. The game is leaning more towards shooty units. But i expect pure assault units (no pistols) to be fast into and deadly in combat.

They may even ignore difficult terrain altogether.



Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Dryaktylus
01-05-2017, 21:43
On Hormagaunts, I'm expecting them to have a Movement Stat of something like 8" and a rule on their datasheet like...

Bounding Leap: When Hormagaunts Run or Charge they can make a leap of D6 in addition to their 16" move. The Leap can be up to 3" in height and allows the Hormagaunt to ignore movement penalties for the terrain its leaping over or onto. Note a Hormagaunt Charging into close combat must engage the closest enemy and may not Leap over Enemy models.

Allows them to get over barricades and up smaller structures like the background, but with a stipulation to stop certain kinds of players abusing it to leap-frog a unit to surround them (Hormagaunts aren't that smart, they tend to lunge at prey-species and stab, stab, stab...)

Just an idea from stuff I've seen in AoS, don't take as official... but it's fun to imagine. :D

Mmh... sounds kinda familiar...


When Hormagaunts run or charge they can make a 6'' leap in addition to their 12'' move, for a total move distance of 18''. The Leap can be up to 3" in height and allows the Hormagaunt to ignore movement penalties for the terrain its leaping over or onto. Note that a Hormagaunt charging into hand-to-hand combat must engage the nearest enemy and may not leap over enemy models to attack models behind them.

I hope several Tyranids get a high Movement, especially those without shooting. Genestealers should have at least 8''; Hormagaunts more or a special rule like the above.

silverstu
01-05-2017, 22:50
2nd Ed definitely seems to be were they are going for the flavour of the armies so that hormagaunt rule would be about right. Raveners will be hellishly fast too I imagine but its really how hard they can hit in CC, hopefully they will be fearsome again - lictors popping tanks.. ah the memories... Tomorrow's "fight phase" will hopefully be enlightening but the special rules for each unit will really set the tone for an army.

Spell_of_Destruction
01-05-2017, 23:35
I am almost 100% sure that Instant Death, Destroyer, Eternal Warrior and all other related USRs are gone from this eddition and are replaced with uncapped stats and Multipile Wounds stats on weapons and abilities.

This change is to be welcomed - it's far more elegant to incorporate the range of attributes within the core system mechanics than it is to bolt on numerous USRs. Many USRs (Fleet, FNP, Eternal Warrior, Destroyer, Instant Death) are cumbersome appendices to the standard statline.

Malagor
02-05-2017, 14:08
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/02/new-warhammer-40000-fight-phase-may2gw-homepage-post-4/ fight phase.

WordBearer
02-05-2017, 20:06
No huge surprises here, as they'd confirmed most of this on Pete's Twitter so far. I don't hate it.

Wolf Lord Balrog
02-05-2017, 20:09
The devil is in the details. What we've seen so far looks good and reasonable, but you need the rest of the picture to know if it will work. Call me extremely cautiously optimistic.

Spell_of_Destruction
02-05-2017, 22:11
The mechanism for charging from vehicles hasn't been confirmed yet - that's going to have a major impact on the assault phase. Of charges are declared at the beginning of the movement phase that likely means that it will in effect be similar to the 4th/5th ed mechanic so no assaulting from a moving transport.

Voss
02-05-2017, 23:25
Charges are declared in the charge phase. I suspect the 4th/5th limitations are error/not/found.

I assume the phases go in the order presented
Move
Psychic
Shoot
Charge
Fight

williamsond
03-05-2017, 07:46
was there anything said about units moving in the fight phase being subject to over watch too or is this just as a response to charging? if not you could move units up to enemy but not assault and then move in in the fight phase allowing you to bypass overwatch.

Another thought is, potentially you could drive up in a rhino or drop in a drop pod, disembark then move into combat in the fight phase making many close combat units much more usefull .

BramGaunt
03-05-2017, 08:13
was there anything said about units moving in the fight phase being subject to over watch too or is this just as a response to charging? is not you could move units up to enemy but not assault and then move in in the fight phase allowing you to bypass overwatch.

Another thought is, potentially you could drive up in a rhino or drop in a drop pod, disembark then move into combat in the fight phase making many close combat units much more usefull .

To your first question: The excerpt specifically states that indeed you can use pile in to engage units you didn't charge, so yes, that is a way to circumvent overwatch.

To your other thought: I'd expect the Age of Sigmar rule that you have to stay away 3" in the movement phase would apply. Otherwise, potentially possible, but you wouldn't get the charge bonus, and striking first is going to be rather powerfull.

Wolf Lord Balrog
03-05-2017, 14:50
Morale section (https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/03/new-warhammer-40000-morale/) is up. Highly simplified, but applies to everybody equally (excepting special rules, if and where they exist). Hits horde armies pretty hard, but Space Marines will be feeling it too. Thoughts?

Edit: Horde armies generally have lower Leadership/whatever too. Imagine a round of anti-infantry fire that kills 6 Guardsmen that might only kill 2 Space Marines. Guardsmen take a test of d6+6 vs Ld7-8 compared to the Space Marines' d6+2 vs Ld8-10. So there's that.

BramGaunt
03-05-2017, 15:22
Morale section (https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/03/new-warhammer-40000-morale/) is up. Highly simplified, but applies to everybody equally (excepting special rules, if and where they exist). Hits horde armies pretty hard, but Space Marines will be feeling it too. Thoughts?

Edit: Horde armies generally have lower Leadership/whatever too. Imagine a round of anti-infantry fire that kills 6 Guardsmen that might only kill 2 Space Marines. Guardsmen take a test of d6+6 vs Ld7-8 compared to the Space Marines' d6+2 vs Ld8-10. So there's that.

The very first thing about 8th that I have nothing positive to say about. I think the system is overly simple and dumb in AoS and equally so in 40k. Since it's the only major turnoff so far, though, and most other things look promising, I think ill be able to live with it.

I also find the notion that morale bogged down the game ridiculous at best. Roll two dice and add them together. How does that bog anything down? All morale checks added together to do in a single 2000 pts game equaled what, 2 minutes? At best.

Ghal Maraz
03-05-2017, 15:35
Basic Marines will be at Ld 7, as it was shown in the first preview, so that's something. But I guess They Shall Know No Fear... so? Who knows.

Not excited about this part, but one could argue that Morale was already a really, really weak part of the game. Problem is, this one is part of the "dumb rules" area of AoS, for me. (The other being: shooting into melee, random turn alternation, measurement from any part of a model, close combat weapon ranges).

BramGaunt
03-05-2017, 15:40
Morale section (https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/03/new-warhammer-40000-morale/) is up. Highly simplified, but applies to everybody equally (excepting special rules, if and where they exist). Hits horde armies pretty hard, but Space Marines will be feeling it too. Thoughts?

Edit: Horde armies generally have lower Leadership/whatever too. Imagine a round of anti-infantry fire that kills 6 Guardsmen that might only kill 2 Space Marines. Guardsmen take a test of d6+6 vs Ld7-8 compared to the Space Marines' d6+2 vs Ld8-10. So there's that.


Basic Marines will be at Ld 7, as it was shown in the first preview, so that's something. But I guess They Shall Know No Fear... so? Who knows.

Not excited about this part, but one could argue that Morale was already a really, really weak part of the game. Problem is, this one is part of the "dumb rules" area of AoS, for me. (The other being: shooting into melee, random turn alternation, measurement from any part of a model, close combat weapon ranges).

Agree with everything except melee ranges, in a game with Lances and spears and polearms those make sense. But yeah.

I agree that morale was a lame part of 40k, but that is partially faulted to special rules bloat. Every army suddenly had a gimmick to overcome morale, or ignore parts of it. The only armies actually affected by morale are imp guard and Tau. Eldar if you are unlucky. (And Orks with their latest update.). But the majority of armies either saw morale as an inconveniance, or was immune to it alltogether. Fearless was nothing special anymore.

Wolf Lord Balrog
03-05-2017, 15:59
Basic Marines will be at Ld 7, as it was shown in the first preview, so that's something. But I guess They Shall Know No Fear... so? Who knows.

A basic Marine might be Ld7, but Sergeants/Vet Sergeants will almost certainly be a ubiquitous thing, making probably Ld8 the effective default. And then there's ICs, named ICs, ATSKNF, other special rules, etc.

Lord Damocles
03-05-2017, 16:59
They say that battles can be won or lost due to a few stubborn defenders, or the flight of key elements, but with no falling back, and no regrouping, neither of those is particularly represented (instead those 'stubborn defenders' can be *poofed* out of existence by killing their friends; and rather than 'panicked flight' units/models just magically disappear).

They claim that morale could bog down the game (with the absurd example of a single unit taking 7+ leadership test per turn), but then introduce a system where most units in an army could be testing every turn.

They claim that units ignoring morale was a problem with previous editions (which is true), and then go on to present single model units now being totally immune to morale as a positive!

Wolf Lord Balrog
03-05-2017, 17:05
They say that battles can be won or lost due to a few stubborn defenders, or the flight of key elements, but with no falling back, and no regrouping, neither of those is particularly represented (instead those 'stubborn defenders' can be *poofed* out of existence by killing their friends; and rather than 'panicked flight' units/models just magically disappear).

I grant you its an over-simplification, but if you think of it as unit members running off piecemeal rather than the whole unit running off the board at once, its tolerable.

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Lord Damocles
03-05-2017, 17:18
I grant you its an over-simplification, but if you think of it as unit members running off piecemeal rather than the whole unit running off the board at once, its tolerable.
There's simply no way I can envision my Necron Warriors breaking ranks from a phalanx to 'run off piecemeal'.

In fact I find it difficult to envisage the majority of troop types bust breaking ranks and fleeing into the wilderness when coming under fire.

ik0ner
03-05-2017, 18:02
There's simply no way I can envision my Necron Warriors breaking ranks from a phalanx to 'run off piecemeal'.

In fact I find it difficult to envisage the majority of troop types bust breaking ranks and fleeing into the wilderness when coming under fire.

I sincerely agree, and this news about morale makes me worried that just as in AoS all rules concerning psychology have been removed as well.

Voss
03-05-2017, 18:19
Hateful morale system, and it warps targeting preference in a weird way. Shoot for 7 kills and just found on the last three spontaneously exploding of their own accord.

But meanwhile, suppressing a unit isn't even vaguely a concept. Just go to 7 on each unit in turn, and then move on to the next until you've run out of shots.

Also, severely punishes fragile units (they're even easier to kill, don't even have to roll as much the second time)

Some armies will have to see a massive point reduction, a leadership buff or a pile of stupid exceptions to this nonsense.

Captain Marius
03-05-2017, 18:54
One of the very first heroes for AoS makes every friendly unit in a 24" diameter bubble immune to failing 'Morale' tests. There will be a ton of rules to mitigate this right from the get go. In AoS the battleshock rules work a treat - if a unit gets a kicking they are likely to lose a few more dudes. Players will rarely lose a whole unit due to a failed ld test in melee, and frikkin marines will no longer fail a test, flee out of range, then act normally next turn as if nothing happened! In conjunction with the Fall Back rule in the movement phase i think this is gonna make 40k way better!

BramGaunt
03-05-2017, 19:09
There's simply no way I can envision my Necron Warriors breaking ranks from a phalanx to 'run off piecemeal'.

In fact I find it difficult to envisage the majority of troop types bust breaking ranks and fleeing into the wilderness when coming under fire.

Units break ranks when in stressed situations, like casualties. For human (and similar) armies, this makes perfect sense. Where I start to find it hard to believe are Marines, Necrons, Nids. Especially "We walk through any gauntlet because we lnow no fear" Marines. Lets wait and see.


They say that battles can be won or lost due to a few stubborn defenders, or the flight of key elements, but with no falling back, and no regrouping, neither of those is particularly represented (instead those 'stubborn defenders' can be *poofed* out of existence by killing their friends; and rather than 'panicked flight' units/models just magically disappear).

They claim that morale could bog down the game (with the absurd example of a single unit taking 7+ leadership test per turn), but then introduce a system where most units in an army could be testing every turn.

They claim that units ignoring morale was a problem with previous editions (which is true), and then go on to present single model units now being totally immune to morale as a positive!

I agree with you on the contradictions.

Remember that you can deliberatly fall back now.

Lord Damocles
03-05-2017, 20:21
One of the very first heroes for AoS makes every friendly unit in a 24" diameter bubble immune to failing 'Morale' tests. There will be a ton of rules to mitigate this right from the get go.
Brilliant. Introduce new morale system; introduce bunch of ways to ignore new morale system.

That would be no better than the current problem (acknowledged by GW) of too many models having rules which make them all but immune to morale.

zenpotato
03-05-2017, 20:21
Units break ranks when in stressed situations, like casualties. For human (and similar) armies, this makes perfect sense. Where I start to find it hard to believe are Marines, Necrons, Nids. Especially "We walk through any gauntlet because we lnow no fear" Marines. Lets wait and see.


Think of is as a soldier who was hit earlier, but still alive, succumbing to wounds already received. They stuck around long enough to fight back, maybe even for a few turns, but at this point they've bled out, or their legs no longer function, or for those with minds, the psychic backlash of having your mate's head explode next to you has knocked you unconscious. It's a broadly representative thing, not a literal check of every single unit's morale. It just has the same game effect.

Voss
03-05-2017, 20:59
It's really dumb. The brave soldiers advance, fire, charge and fight their way through the enemy, and having won, have reasonably good odds of running off.

Wounds already received makes no sense at all. The game already has two resistance rolls for wounds, and presumably, some form of wound allocation. Dropping over dead later means toughness, armor saves and actually being hit doesn't mean squat.

For light troops, combats are going to be massacres, with both sides often randomly wiped out after the fighting is over for no apparent reason. The morale system plus cover adds to armor saves makes me think this is going to be terminator edition. Or, alternately, dirt cheap hordes where you just dont care about ridiculous losses, which means grotz over orks.

The only good thing is, as written, I don't think it's possible to for a lot of dead grotz to cause MANz elsewhere in the same fight to fall over dead.

Lord Damocles
03-05-2017, 21:43
It's really dumb. The brave soldiers advance, fire, charge and fight their way through the enemy, and having won, have reasonably good odds of running off.
Realism, innit.

Just like the Normandy landings - the Allies sailed across the Channel, stormed the beaches and established a foothold in northern France, only for half of them to just vanish into thin air.

Wait, no...

WordBearer
03-05-2017, 23:08
There's simply no way I can envision my Necron Warriors breaking ranks from a phalanx to 'run off piecemeal'.

In fact I find it difficult to envisage the majority of troop types bust breaking ranks and fleeing into the wilderness when coming under fire.Envision them phasing out. You know, the actual in-universe thing they've been subject to for ages.
Brilliant. Introduce new morale system; introduce bunch of ways to ignore new morale system.

That would be no better than the current problem (acknowledged by GW) of too many models having rules which make them all but immune to morale.Except in Age of Sigmar you can account for that in tactics, and it's a single model that's really good at keeping its subordinates' heads in the game, not a unit that goes "What's Morale?" The Age of Sigmar player has to weigh where he wants to risk his big hero character going, and whether it's worth the danger.

I mean really guys, there's a game that already uses these exact mechanics that has a few years of not only playtesting but tournament play under its belt. We know it works.

Spell_of_Destruction
03-05-2017, 23:44
I don't mind the mechanic in theory but I don't play AoS so I can't comment on how it works in that system. It seems to pose a problem for hordes mostly and would apparently discourage taking larger squads. It feel that the mechanic is missing an element which takes into account the number of remaining models in the squad...something like a 'mob check'. I don't have difficulty envisaging that a 10 man squad which has suffered 7 casualties in a single turn had been devastated and is unable to participate in the battle any further but this is less clear in the case of a 20 man squad.

As an Eldar player it doesn't really bother me too much because with low numbers and high Ld, any squad that has taken significant casualties is screwed anyway.

WordBearer
03-05-2017, 23:58
Except if it's like Age of Sigmar, larger squads are incentivized by getting a +1 Bravery (their leadership equivalent) per 10 guys. It makes sense, because a larger unit is feeling a bit more confident than a smaller one of same-statline guys. I could easily see that carrying over, and for stuff like Orks and Tyranids, it means their horde units would eat face.

Voss
04-05-2017, 00:56
As an Eldar player it doesn't really bother me too much because with low numbers and high Ld, any squad that has taken significant casualties is screwed anyway.
What sucks for eldar is they don't have to take really significant casualties. I'd expect their leadership to drop like marines, so even losing 2 or 3 models can spawn extra losses.
This will really hurt squads like dark reapers or shining spears, where a lucky volley can turn extra lucky: a 6 turns up on the morale check and the whole squad goes poof.

Howling Banshees are at the other end, where they're fragile enough that they could end up being wiped out while winning fights on a regular basis.

Spell_of_Destruction
04-05-2017, 01:23
What sucks for eldar is they don't have to take really significant casualties. I'd expect their leadership to drop like marines, so even losing 2 or 3 models can spawn extra losses.
This will really hurt squads like dark reapers or shining spears, where a lucky volley can turn extra lucky: a 6 turns up on the morale check and the whole squad goes poof.

Howling Banshees are at the other end, where they're fragile enough that they could end up being wiped out while winning fights on a regular basis.

Well, even with a reduction Aspect Warriors are likely to be Ld 8 (unless GW decide to wield the nerf bat). So Aspect Warrior squads can lose 2 models before you have to worry about losing models to a morale check. If a smaller squad loses 3 models it has lost 50%+ of its members anyway. I remember losing entire squads to failed Ld tests when units couldn't regroup below 50% original strength.

R Man
04-05-2017, 06:02
Well, even with a reduction Aspect Warriors are likely to be Ld 8 (unless GW decide to wield the nerf bat). So Aspect Warrior squads can lose 2 models before you have to worry about losing models to a morale check. If a smaller squad loses 3 models it has lost 50%+ of its members anyway. I remember losing entire squads to failed Ld tests when units couldn't regroup below 50% original strength.

Remember also that AP is going and ASM values look like they are going to be quite conservative, so unlike before Aspect Warriors are likely to get an actual save for once. Guardsmen also benefit from this, as they might actually get a few saves vs. basic fire, or even lighter heavy weapons. Of course Space Marines will also benefit, though I'm not sure who the change really helps the most.

Spell_of_Destruction
04-05-2017, 06:47
Remember also that AP is going and ASM values look like they are going to be quite conservative, so unlike before Aspect Warriors are likely to get an actual save for once. Guardsmen also benefit from this, as they might actually get a few saves vs. basic fire, or even lighter heavy weapons. Of course Space Marines will also benefit, though I'm not sure who the change really helps the most.

I was actually thinking that this might mitigate an overall reduction in the effectiveness of shooting given that saves are going to stack with cover and AP modifiers seem to be limited to heavier high strength weaponry. The reversion back to an ASM and damage roll system seems to be aiming more at evening out the heavy weapon choices rather than making shooting deadlier as it was in 2nd.

On the other hand, the morale system seems to heavily punish actions which result in a heavy number of casualties so it can be seen as a suppression mechanic of sorts. Overcommit your forces and your attack will quickly peter out. It's slightly crude but there is a logic to it in an abstract system.

I reckon this will work Ok provided that there is sufficient mitigation for armies that rely on numbers and attrition - Orks for example could have a 'mob check' rule which allows them to use the higher of their Ld value and the number of models in the squad.

williamsond
04-05-2017, 06:59
while obviously contentious I'm going to wait until I see the rules in completion and how it works in practice before making up my mind.

WordBearer
04-05-2017, 07:02
Viewing this from the perspective of my chosen army, it makes a lot of playstyle sense. My biggest units will doubtless be cultists, and they specifically call out Dark Apostles as having rules to help weather battleshock tests. So I have my fiery orator in there to assure my squishy humans that the Dark Gods have their backs, and thus they don't freak out and accidentally stampede each other to death before they make the necessary sacrifice for their unholy masters. I then use my cultists to gum up gun lines (believe they confirmed that firing through enemy units counts as cover) and my faithful Bearers of the Word march to victory over the corpses of those who gave their all for the ruinous powers. It makes tactical sense and fluff sense.

silverstu
04-05-2017, 09:45
I'm ok with it- 40k never really seemed to be affected by morale to me- my Nids were generally held in place with synapse and where fighting marines and I don't remember it affecting my eldar much either [mind you its been a while- last played in 5th]. Its a pretty big abstraction of a unit losing effectiveness as they take casualties - its a bit brutal but really I think it will be fine as both armies on the table will be affected. It will lead to significantly more casualties and unit destruction. From my brief investigations into AoS there seems to be various mechanics for mitigating its effects for various armies so it might not be as drastic.
Its quite a change but I'm looking forward to seeing how the system works as whole with all the unit rules as well. it will definitely speed up games, less time on routing units, following up etc and more gunning/clawing each other to bits.

Kirby
04-05-2017, 10:14
Bunch of rumors dropped today from Faeit - be curious to see how right they are but very similar to AoS.

Can see here with comments (http://www.3plusplus.net/2017/05/40k-8th-edition-rumors/).

Captain Marius
04-05-2017, 12:03
I think we can make some assumptions about how certain armies will mitigate Morale - how armies interact with this simple rule will give them lots of flavour. I can see daemons all having ld10 like in AoS, Orks getting +2ld for being in combat, nid synapse creatures having bubbles of higher ld, marine and guard heroes doing similar, eldar rerolling because nothing says elite like a reroll, and the various banners that have been popping up everywherealso having an effect. All these different approaches should make for great variety between factions!

silverstu
04-05-2017, 21:55
I'm really hoping the do an article on each of the factions giving just an overarching feel for how they work in the new system.
I was also struck by something regarding the new map - someone commented that Fenris is pretty much on top of it- is Russ not lost in the warp? I also think Angron will appear on Armageddon [Hasting said ages ago that he was expecting Magnus, Mortarion, Gulliman, Angron and Russ to return- 2 down and one on the way!].

R Man
04-05-2017, 21:59
I think we can make some assumptions about how certain armies will mitigate Morale - how armies interact with this simple rule will give them lots of flavour. I can see daemons all having ld10 like in AoS, Orks getting +2ld for being in combat, nid synapse creatures having bubbles of higher ld, marine and guard heroes doing similar, eldar rerolling because nothing says elite like a reroll, and the various banners that have been popping up everywherealso having an effect. All these different approaches should make for great variety between factions!

Ideally, it should prove very interesting, by giving players different ways to interact with both armies. The danger is that GW, and they've done this sort of thing before, will overdo and stack some form of moral mitigation onto everything, and otherwise make it insanely easy to get, thereby rendering it mostly pointless. But if they don't, and are fairly restrained, then I think it should create an engaging dynamic.

Kisanis
05-05-2017, 12:33
Ideally, it should prove very interesting, by giving players different ways to interact with both armies. The danger is that GW, and they've done this sort of thing before, will overdo and stack some form of moral mitigation onto everything, and otherwise make it insanely easy to get, thereby rendering it mostly pointless. But if they don't, and are fairly restrained, then I think it should create an engaging dynamic.
I really think they are getting away from this. It makes no sense in longterms sales.

By playing favourites with lists and units they end up having a bad return on investment for non-competitive armies.

The old theory of churn and burn and new is always better is a very short sighted tactic that drives return spenders away.

You want even balance across lists so that when players are bored they dont leave the game, they start a new army - because all armies are competitive and the game is still fun. (In theory at least). This is the point of a generals compendium.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

R Man
05-05-2017, 13:34
I really think they are getting away from this. It makes no sense in longterms sales.

By playing favourites with lists and units they end up having a bad return on investment for non-competitive armies.

The old theory of churn and burn and new is always better is a very short sighted tactic that drives return spenders away.

You want even balance across lists so that when players are bored they dont leave the game, they start a new army - because all armies are competitive and the game is still fun. (In theory at least). This is the point of a generals compendium.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Ideally, yes. But GW does have a history of doing this exact thing. Sometimes their core rulesets are fine, but then they break it by bolting a bunch of special rules onto different units, breaking the game. Other-times, rather than fix problem they resort to sticking a bunch of special rules onto units, usually Space Marines. Movement rules are a good example of this last one.

Hopefully though the newer rules will be ... harder to break.

Kisanis
05-05-2017, 13:37
Ideally, yes. But GW does have a history of doing this exact thing. Sometimes their core rulesets are fine, but then they break it by bolting a bunch of special rules onto different units, breaking the game. Other-times, rather than fix problem they resort to sticking a bunch of special rules onto units, usually Space Marines. Movement rules are a good example of this last one.

Hopefully though the newer rules will be ... harder to break.
I seriously doubt they will do that again.

Churn and burn was the old way of thinking. I think Rountree is looking at this from a sales perspective. Every army has to have sales. And good sales. Every unit has to have sales, and good sales. Otherwise the product rots on the shelf.

Unbalanced rules is bad for inventory turnover. It may help sell specific items very well, but the overall picture can be poor.

I think the new sales philosphy is less pendulum swing between armies/updates. Balanced games is balanced sales.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Malagor
05-05-2017, 14:20
Battleforged armies https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/05/new-warhammer-40000-battle-forged-armiesgw-homepage-post-4/
And pleased be to Slaanesh, formations are gone.

Wolf Lord Balrog
05-05-2017, 14:54
Battleforged armies https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/05/new-warhammer-40000-battle-forged-armiesgw-homepage-post-4/
And pleased be to Slaanesh, formations are gone.
Just saw that, Praise the Allfather! And Flyers are their own FOC slot now! That was a long time coming. And a dozen standard Detachment types, instead of everybody getting something more or less special than the next.

clodax
05-05-2017, 15:44
battle forged are just like the old FOC except for more elites. Now we need to find out what command points do.

Kisanis
05-05-2017, 17:04
This alone is the biggest cleanup needed for 40k.

I have a feeling you can use command points to affect die rolls - so it can be a huge impact but it has to be used at the correct time - but dont quote me on that.

Standard FOC's that every list can gain access to is great. Im still curious as to how multiple armies and multiple FOC's interact with each other. Will we still see major superfriends?

What about min/maxing imperial forces? Thats another issue this doesnt exactly deal with.

I imagine marines, guard, sisters, knights, mechanicum all will have the "imperial" key... That can still lead to broken allied lists...

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Voss
05-05-2017, 17:48
No clue what patrols are for. I can see why you wouldn't be able to fit brigades, but patrols are just worse than battalions.

Malagor
05-05-2017, 17:51
Well I think that you will want those Command Points and that they have designed it so that they will be very important.
So in a standard match I can imagine that you will only have enough points to fill that middle one in the examples.
And they have already said that while you can ally, you won't be sharing any rules or abilities unless stated in the keywords.
So while SM, IG, Knights and so on might have the Imperium keyword, this is only so that you can ally them in but if you got a IG HQ and you got a few space marines units in there as well, the IG HQ will have the IG keyword that ensure that any ability that he has only goes to those that have the IG keyword.
So you might mix but it will not be as good as if you just went straight IG or SM or whatever.

No clue what patrols are for. I can see why you wouldn't be able to fit brigades, but patrols are just worse than battalions.
They mentioned allies in the Q&A they did and pointed at the patrols FoC.

Voss
05-05-2017, 18:12
Right, but if CP are so very important, why wouldn't you add the extra troops and HQ?

Rogue Star
05-05-2017, 18:51
Right, but if CP are so very important, why wouldn't you add the extra troops and HQ?

I imagine it's related to game size you choose with your opponent. Age of Sigmar uses "Vanguard", 1,000pts which require 2+ "Battleline" (Troop) choices, next after that is 2,000pt "Battlehost" (3+ Battleline) and finally 2,500pt "Warhost" (4+Battleline).

Patrol might be 500pt games, or 1,000pts at most, and so on and up. I don't think it's a case of I put together a Patrol, versus your Battalion.

Kisanis
05-05-2017, 19:44
I imagine it's related to game size you choose with your opponent. Age of Sigmar uses "Vanguard", 1,000pts which require 2+ "Battleline" (Troop) choices, next after that is 2,000pt "Battlehost" (3+ Battleline) and finally 2,500pt "Warhost" (4+Battleline).

Patrol might be 500pt games, or 1,000pts at most, and so on and up. I don't think it's a case of I put together a Patrol, versus your Battalion.
I think this is true.

Some FOC may be better for different points values, or for "allying" different armies together.

But this is a major change... Allies and formations are just so broken right now.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

barrangas
05-05-2017, 19:54
I'm still worried about the focus on CC in this system in regards to the armies that are primarily not so hot at it. I started off with Tau but have grown less attached to them with each new thing they add to them (I still hurt over the new stealth suits). It will be interesting to see how these armies will be developed in a game where rhino rushes and 1st turn charges are a thing.

Rogue Star
05-05-2017, 20:17
I'm still worried about the focus on CC in this system in regards to the armies that are primarily not so hot at it.

Actually shooting is looking pretty solid. Overwatch is still a thing, the option to block with 'buffer' units then Fall Back allows you to blunt an assault if your opponent hasn't concentrated several units (remember, no Sweeping Advances this edition... those Hormagaunts crash into your Crisis Team, suffer flamer hits, then the battlesuits scoot back, leaving your nearby Fire Warriors free to blast away, is entirely on the 'Nid player).

Basically there are several buffs for shooting, but close combat became a viable again because assault units will tend to be pretty fast (movement stat), Charges getting first hit (don't get charged) and set Weapon Skill values means numbers can trump quality (expect hordes of infantry).

We won't really know how much better close combat is compared to shooting or vice versa, unless we get the complete picture. A Hormagaunt that moves 6" is much less threatening than a Hormagaunt which moves 8", for example...

Voss
05-05-2017, 20:35
I'm still worried about the focus on CC in this system in regards to the armies that are primarily not so hot at it. I started off with Tau but have grown less attached to them with each new thing they add to them (I still hurt over the new stealth suits). It will be interesting to see how these armies will be developed in a game where rhino rushes and 1st turn charges are a thing.
One of the catches of 8th seems to be you want cover, because it adds to the armor save. But between fast CC units and assault moves and the 1" engagement... If you stick to cover and shoot at advancing enemies, they're going to be on you next turn, and attack first regardless of cover, apparently (I'd love to know what things like assault grenades and banshee masks actually do at this point).

So really, basic shooting units (24" range) have one turn of fire to wipe out potential attackers.

Wolf Lord Balrog
05-05-2017, 20:39
(I'd love to know what things like assault grenades and banshee masks actually do at this point).

I had the impression that there will be a penalty of some sort still for assaulting an opponent in cover, and assault grenades will mitigate or remove that penalty.

My guess is that the defender might otherwise get a cover bonus to their armor save, but assault grenades will prevent that.

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Malagor
05-05-2017, 20:53
I got a feeling that the shooty armies will still be very shooty.
The thing is that in 7e, that's all there was since CC was so weak. Can only look at Tyranids with their severe lack of assault grenades forcing even CC-monsters to strike last which was just silly.
To me it seems like they are trying to balance it by buffing CC as they should but shooting hasn't been nerfed either, even looks stronger I would say.
But still, if Tau gets into CC then they should lose, easily. Would predict that they require a 5+ to hit in CC.

barrangas
05-05-2017, 21:03
One of the catches of 8th seems to be you want cover, because it adds to the armor save. But between fast CC units and assault moves and the 1" engagement... If you stick to cover and shoot at advancing enemies, they're going to be on you next turn, and attack first regardless of cover, apparently (I'd love to know what things like assault grenades and banshee masks actually do at this point).

So really, basic shooting units (24" range) have one turn of fire to wipe out potential attackers.

My guess is that Banshees will always go first, which I'd be fine with considering it's one unit and one HQ with access to the masks. A lot of what I've seen and rumors I've read makes me wonder how other armies will be effected. Termies get 2 wounds, does that mean crisis suits will get 3 or will they get larger squads? If splitting fire is a thing that is open to everyone, what becomes of target locks? This also kind of kicks sand in the face of armies that don't really get special and heavy weapons in their base squads.

While IG and Necrons are also potentially in trouble, I remember how badly the Tau could fold under CC in 3rd and I'm worried it will be the same; especially if one rumor I read had Fire Warriors with a 4" move. At least Kroot will be more popular.

barrangas
05-05-2017, 21:18
But still, if Tau gets into CC then they should lose, easily. Would predict that they require a 5+ to hit in CC.

No, they should be at a disadvantage, the biggest in the game, but not automatic. Weak in one edition doesn't mean it should overpower in the next. Rhino rushes, the new morale, first turn charges, and whatever else they have could be very damaging to shooty armies. The only upside is you go first if you decide to charge with units with pulse carbines, finally CC Tau lol.

Malagor
05-05-2017, 21:29
Yes but now the game has changed the way it does things.
Do you want Tau to hit on 4+ ? 3+ ? No of course not, this is a army that is terrible at CC but powerful when it comes to shooting and a general cover-hugger.
You can't change the initiative since that's gone so how do you show that Tau is terrible in CC except swamping them in special rules ? Since the "to hit" is now set number, you change that.
5+ to hit in close combat is the simplest way of showing this and makes sense while still keeping their powerful shooting and that's where Tau's power will lie.
Rhino rushes won't matter if you can blow them away easily enough and overwatch will be pain for whomever charges you.
But asking for Tau to stand a chance against whomever gets into CC with you just takes away the feel of the army. Even Guardsmen should take on Fire warriors quite easily in CC.

Rogue Star
05-05-2017, 21:45
So really, basic shooting units (24" range) have one turn of fire to wipe out potential attackers.

And the attacking unit has a turn of fire to slog through to get a chance at killing those basic units up close. Or do you think after a round of Space Marine Tactical Squad firepower (bolters, that new flamer, etc) that say, a unit of Hormagaunts reach them and said Space Marine just put up their hands and say "okay, you reached us, you win". I seem to recall Power Armour not being shredded like wet paper against 'gaunt claws...

Heaven forfend a dedicated assault unit gets to kill something after having run across the table under fire for it... y'know, not having access to dedicated transports, assault grenades, etc.

silverstu
05-05-2017, 21:53
No, they should be at a disadvantage, the biggest in the game, but not automatic. Weak in one edition doesn't mean it should overpower in the next. Rhino rushes, the new morale, first turn charges, and whatever else they have could be very damaging to shooty armies. The only upside is you go first if you decide to charge with units with pulse carbines, finally CC Tau lol.

I think Tau probably will still be very shoot-y and weak in assault but will have mitigating play styles- use of their fortifications to reduce their vulnerability to combat, mobility to avoid combat, support units to cover squads when they retreat from combat and also assault specialists like Kroot.
I really hope they do a brief overview of each of the factions in the run up to the release to give a feel for each of them- to ease everyone's concerns as much as anything else. I'm really hoping Tyranids get their assault feel back with useable hordes and some movement/deployment tricks. I think everyone wants their faction to have a strong play style and feel and some have really lost that over the last while.

Voss
06-05-2017, 00:32
And the attacking unit has a turn of fire to slog through to get a chance at killing those basic units up close. Or do you think after a round of Space Marine Tactical Squad firepower (bolters, that new flamer, etc) that say, a unit of Hormagaunts reach them and said Space Marine just put up their hands and say "okay, you reached us, you win". I seem to recall Power Armour not being shredded like wet paper against 'gaunt claws...

Heaven forfend a dedicated assault unit gets to kill something after having run across the table under fire for it... y'know, not having access to dedicated transports, assault grenades, etc.

I think you misinterpreted my point. I'm not making grand sweeping judgements against hormagaunts or whatever conclusion you're skydiving to here.
I'm just pointing out that the movement+charge+engagement range means that, in general, dedicated assault moves from 'outside firing range' to 'in your lines, eating your dudes' in two turns. If you're going to kill them with a unit-based gunline, you must do it in a single turn, or move back to your own table edge, likely out of cover.

barrangas
06-05-2017, 00:56
Yes but now the game has changed the way it does things.
Do you want Tau to hit on 4+ ? 3+ ? No of course not, this is a army that is terrible at CC but powerful when it comes to shooting and a general cover-hugger.
You can't change the initiative since that's gone so how do you show that Tau is terrible in CC except swamping them in special rules ? Since the "to hit" is now set number, you change that.
5+ to hit in close combat is the simplest way of showing this and makes sense while still keeping their powerful shooting and that's where Tau's power will lie.
Rhino rushes won't matter if you can blow them away easily enough and overwatch will be pain for whomever charges you.
But asking for Tau to stand a chance against whomever gets into CC with you just takes away the feel of the army. Even Guardsmen should take on Fire warriors quite easily in CC.

I definitely did not ask for Tau to be anything but the weakest in CC. Guardsmen easily beating fire warriors shouldn't be a thing. Sure the guard get more hits and all, but fw have better armor. The odds are slightly slanted in the guards favor and really only tipped a decent amount if they have a leader with a power whatever to negate the armor. Not that this matters in the slightest, it's just reminder that the Tau aren't that much worse than the IG in CC.

The basic combat mechanics have never been the problem, though I still find the loss of initiative a bit of an odd choice, it's the rules surrounding them that determine how balanced it will be. 3rd ed heavily favored CC and some of the things being thrown out as part of 8th ed are concerning. It was the rhino rushes, 2d6 wipe out moves, dedicated assault units that could charge you in the first turn before you got a chance to shoot, and the like that made CC better than shooting. It was the rules surounding CC that nerfed it in 7th. Fleet is one that is often brought up as a gut punch to the Nids. While clever movement should always be a major factor in a tactical game, there are ways that the rules can make one side favored over the other. Not that GW has had a history of unbalanced rules or anything, so I guess there is no cause for concern.

Sorry that was probably very snarky sounding.

R Man
06-05-2017, 01:16
I think you misinterpreted my point. I'm not making grand sweeping judgements against hormagaunts or whatever conclusion you're skydiving to here.
I'm just pointing out that the movement+charge+engagement range means that, in general, dedicated assault moves from 'outside firing range' to 'in your lines, eating your dudes' in two turns. If you're going to kill them with a unit-based gunline, you must do it in a single turn, or move back to your own table edge, likely out of cover.

Not necessarily. Terrain may have a big role to play. Besides, at this point we don't know what movement statistics different units will have. While hormagaunts may move very quickly and be able to do this, other units may not have that capacity. Nevertheless, this does create opportunities for longer ranged heavy weapons to have a place, putting pressure out to a much greater distance.

clodax
06-05-2017, 05:21
I was looking over the new rules and was wondering how hand flamers would work. They are pistols and flamers. That means they can fire in close combat and get several automatic hits. I don't know if SOB Seraphins still have hand flamers. If they do that would make them real good close combat.

Spell_of_Destruction
06-05-2017, 05:37
(I'd love to know what things like assault grenades and banshee masks actually do at this point).


Grenades and Banshee Masks had rules before they affected Initiative sequence in CC and I'm sure they'll have rules in 8th notwithstanding that GW have thrown out the Initiative stat for determining CC sequence.

Assault grenades could provide an additional HoW style CC attack. My best guess for the Banshee Mask is that it would take inspiration from its 2nd ed version and somehow affect your opponent's ability to hit (e.g. models in BTB hit on 5s or 6s). All speculation of course but my point is that it isn't hard to come up with ideas for alternative uses for equipment that previously affected CC turn sequence.

Geep
06-05-2017, 05:53
I think the reintroduction of the movement stat is severely overrated, particularly because it doesn't look like it has any affect at all on running or assaulting. For the example of 8" Hormagaunts given above (I assume this is a guess, but regardless) they'll now actually be slower most of the time. Previously they moved 6", had +3" to their run and Fleet, for re-rolls. If they're now simply 8" +D6" run or +2D6" assault (no re-rolls) that's pretty poor. The same appears likely to be true for most units- movement will be faster to do and more simple, but there's no guarantee of any actual on-board speed boost for models.
This speed bonus seems like it may easily be offset by the bonus to mobile shooting- with a heavy weapon able to move and shoot while only suffering a -1 to-hit penalty, I imagine Rapid Fire weapons will be able to move almost freely. It'd be easy to walk backwards while shooting, possibly throwing an expendable squad forward if the enemy is somehow still alive, only to have that squad retreat and allow you even more shooting later on.

I'm not a fan of the AoS style combat choosing either- it seems likely to go hand-in-hand with horribly fiddly fine movement mechanics and 'who can hit' rules.

R Man
06-05-2017, 06:23
I think the reintroduction of the movement stat is severely overrated, particularly because it doesn't look like it has any affect at all on running or assaulting. For the example of 8" Hormagaunts given above (I assume this is a guess, but regardless) they'll now actually be slower most of the time. Previously they moved 6", had +3" to their run and Fleet, for re-rolls. If they're now simply 8" +D6" run or +2D6" assault (no re-rolls) that's pretty poor. The same appears likely to be true for most units- movement will be faster to do and more simple, but there's no guarantee of any actual on-board speed boost for models.
This speed bonus seems like it may easily be offset by the bonus to mobile shooting- with a heavy weapon able to move and shoot while only suffering a -1 to-hit penalty, I imagine Rapid Fire weapons will be able to move almost freely. It'd be easy to walk backwards while shooting, possibly throwing an expendable squad forward if the enemy is somehow still alive, only to have that squad retreat and allow you even more shooting later on.

I'm not a fan of the AoS style combat choosing either- it seems likely to go hand-in-hand with horribly fiddly fine movement mechanics and 'who can hit' rules.

I don't think speeding up units is the point. I think the point is to differentiate different units, without needing too many special rules.

silverstu
06-05-2017, 11:47
I think you misinterpreted my point. I'm not making grand sweeping judgements against hormagaunts or whatever conclusion you're skydiving to here.
I'm just pointing out that the movement+charge+engagement range means that, in general, dedicated assault moves from 'outside firing range' to 'in your lines, eating your dudes' in two turns. If you're going to kill them with a unit-based gunline, you must do it in a single turn, or move back to your own table edge, likely out of cover.

I think overall this edition looks to be very dynamic- gun lines need to be fluid to withdraw from combat and be covered by supporting units. Similarly assault oriented forces need to soak up enemy fire, over watch and try and trap the unit in combat and/or neutralise the covering unit. So neither side can think I just pile in and assault or I just sit back and shoot. Redeploying will be important as well.
It looks like there will be carnage on both sides as i get the feeling that assault, shooting, psychic phase along with battle shock will be wiping out units much quicker than before.

BramGaunt
06-05-2017, 12:39
I think overall this edition looks to be very dynamic- gun lines need to be fluid to withdraw from combat and be covered by supporting units. Similarly assault oriented forces need to soak up enemy fire, over watch and try and trap the unit in combat and/or neutralise the covering unit. So neither side can think I just pile in and assault or I just sit back and shoot. Redeploying will be important as well.
It looks like there will be carnage on both sides as i get the feeling that assault, shooting, psychic phase along with battle shock will be wiping out units much quicker than before.

I think the only current fear I have for 8th is that armies that can perform well in any phase will be at a slight advantage, especially Marines, I feel, will benefit greatly of the new rules. They now greatly profit from cover, got a buff to their melee abilities. But lets see.

Overall, except for Morale, I am rather pleased. Funnily enough it looks as if they just made a decent version of AoS. If they changed the morale system and got rid of fixed to hit rolls... ah well. Maybe next time. Of course, it will all live and die with balance, and how strongly they are going to stick with 'no exceptions to...'.

barrangas
06-05-2017, 13:04
It looks like there will be carnage on both sides as i get the feeling that assault, shooting, psychic phase along with battle shock will be wiping out units much quicker than before.

I wonder if a more lethal game will make it more fun though. Faster, yes, but it always sucks to loose units before they get to do something other than draw fire. I personally feel bad when I table another player, it's not fun for me. One of my earliest games I was playing against a kid with Blood Angels who made the poor choice of dropping his squad with Dante in front of my broadsides. He nearly cried when he learned Dante was insta-killed by the rail guns. What should have been a feather in my cap made me just feel like a dick. So the potential lethality is another aspect that concerns me but hopefully ASM will actually make for more survivable units instead.

MasterCrafted
06-05-2017, 14:40
Might have missed it but are invulnerable saves still going to be a thing? One thing i'm hoping from the new edition is an end to 2++ or 3++ all over the place. Although it sounds like mortal wounds might be the answer?

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

Poncho160
06-05-2017, 20:49
Just randomly found this on the GW website...

230077

Could it be an accidental release of a vehicle data's late for 8th?

Kisanis
06-05-2017, 21:00
I wonder if a more lethal game will make it more fun though. Faster, yes, but it always sucks to loose units before they get to do something other than draw fire. I personally feel bad when I table another player, it's not fun for me. One of my earliest games I was playing against a kid with Blood Angels who made the poor choice of dropping his squad with Dante in front of my broadsides. He nearly cried when he learned Dante was insta-killed by the rail guns. What should have been a feather in my cap made me just feel like a dick. So the potential lethality is another aspect that concerns me but hopefully ASM will actually make for more survivable units instead.
Right,

But if there is "carnage on both sides" then 1 sided tabling shouldnt happen as much.

The rules seem to be rewarding tactics and in game actions much more than before.

Many games right now are decided by the time army lists are written. I feel like 75% of the 'tactics' is in picking an army and writing a list.

I also feel like the new AP rules nerf marines. Before marines barely care about cover, but now Heavy Bolters will affect marines. Now marines may end up pinned in cover.

The game is looking to be more fluid, more tactical, less predetermined, all while being simpler.

These are all good things. I was a major AoS skeptic (and still have my issues) but this all feels like they are making more improvements.

Also, we don't know the points.

I've lived through the 5th-6th edition WHFB change. The 2nd-3rd 40k change. And WHFB to AoS change. You have to through conventional thinking out. This is a whole new game essentially. Tactics and convention of current game has 0 bearing now. Its a clean slate.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

Malagor
06-05-2017, 21:05
Just randomly found this on the GW website...

230077

Could it be an accidental release of a vehicle data's late for 8th?
Doubt it since the whole point of this edition is to simplify and make things alike so I doubt they would add completely new stuff just for flyers.
And pretty sure they have mentioned that flyers will have wounds and armor saves as well, just like everything else.

Poncho160
06-05-2017, 21:09
Don't know what else it could be.

Here is the link

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/deathwatch-corvus-blackstar

Wolf Lord Balrog
06-05-2017, 21:09
Just randomly found this on the GW website...

230077

Could it be an accidental release of a vehicle data's late for 8th?
Those are just the Stormcloud Attack game rules for the Corvus Blackstar. Probably doesn't have much to do with 8th Edition except some general design principles.

R Man
06-05-2017, 21:35
Right,

But if there is "carnage on both sides" then 1 sided tabling shouldnt happen as much.

The rules seem to be rewarding tactics and in game actions much more than before.

Many games right now are decided by the time army lists are written. I feel like 75% of the 'tactics' is in picking an army and writing a list.

I also feel like the new AP rules nerf marines. Before marines barely care about cover, but now Heavy Bolters will affect marines. Now marines may end up pinned in cover.

The game is looking to be more fluid, more tactical, less predetermined, all while being simpler.

These are all good things. I was a major AoS skeptic (and still have my issues) but this all feels like they are making more improvements.

Also, we don't know the points.

I've lived through the 5th-6th edition WHFB change. The 2nd-3rd 40k change. And WHFB to AoS change. You have to through conventional thinking out. This is a whole new game essentially. Tactics and convention of current game has 0 bearing now. Its a clean slate.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

It doesn't seem more lethal to me. Sure, battleshock can make shooting actions more powerful, but armour seems to count for more this edition. Most units actually get a save for once. Plus terrain increases armour saves, and this may make units more resilient to shooting overall. That said, we need to see the rules and play a few games first.

I do think that the rules will be much more tactically rewarding though, largely thanks to their fluidity.

WordBearer
07-05-2017, 03:09
Those are just the Stormcloud Attack game rules for the Corvus Blackstar. Probably doesn't have much to do with 8th Edition except some general design principles.Besides, they're doing a vehicle/monster profile tomorrow. Just be patient.

Rogue Star
07-05-2017, 06:31
Don't know what else it could be.

Here is the link

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/deathwatch-corvus-blackstar

It says right above the link...


Rules Downloads
For all the rules you need to field this miniature in games of Stormcloud Attack, download the free datasheet at the link below.

Malagor
07-05-2017, 14:44
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/07/new-warhammer-40000-big-stuff-may7gw-homepage-post-4/ Large monsters and damage table.

clodax
07-05-2017, 14:46
I wonder if damage reducing stats will apply to all vehicles and monstrous creatures or just the real big ones.

Malagor
07-05-2017, 14:48
I think it will apply to all old MCs and vehicles.

MagicHat
07-05-2017, 15:59
The dreadnought profile had no * in the statline, so it might really only be the bigger stuff.

Malagor
07-05-2017, 16:17
That is true. Wondering where they draw the limit then because you can easily see a dread getting worse as he is getting beaten up.

Rogue Star
07-05-2017, 16:28
I really hope they do a brief overview of each of the factions in the run up to the release to give a feel for each of them- to ease everyone's concerns as much as anything else.

As like magic...
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/07/faction-focus-chaos-space-marines/

clodax
07-05-2017, 17:47
it's nice that they are talking about chaos marines, but they are real vague. All he says is that they will be real cool and be feared. I am real excited about 8ed and like what I have seen so far, but I am a bit cynical about their vagueness.

Archaon
07-05-2017, 20:21
I really like the approach with diminishing effectiveness of large models as they take damage, that always bugged me in wargames that up to the last wound they were as if they started well rested before the battle.

I also like that you are basically forced to take heavy weapons in case some large monster appears because standard infantry weapons will do squat against them, that is very good for listbuilding and counterbalances the point that the new 40K will increase the close combat appeal. It seems that you will need a far more balanced army list building which i always prefer because i hate having models at home that never get to see play because they are really useless.

FarseerUshanti
07-05-2017, 21:08
I really like the approach with diminishing effectiveness of large models as they take damage, that always bugged me in wargames that up to the last wound they were as if they started well rested before the battle.

I also like that you are basically forced to take heavy weapons in case some large monster appears because standard infantry weapons will do squat against them, that is very good for listbuilding and counterbalances the point that the new 40K will increase the close combat appeal. It seems that you will need a far more balanced army list building which i always prefer because i hate having models at home that never get to see play because they are really useless.

Also worth pointing out that with the new shooting rules having that heavy weapon, "Just in case," isn't a complete points sink because the -1 to hit means you can at least roll when moving the unit.

Voss
07-05-2017, 21:32
it's nice that they are talking about chaos marines, but they are real vague. All he says is that they will be real cool and be feared. I am real excited about 8ed and like what I have seen so far, but I am a bit cynical about their vagueness.

yeah, I get why they were vague but... that was both poorly written and deeply uninformative. It was a name drop, mostly of what the current codex does wrong (in the opinion of the author).




Also worth pointing out that with the new shooting rules having that heavy weapon, "Just in case," isn't a complete points sink because the -1 to hit means you can at least roll when moving the unit.
Also worthwhile for pushing wounds to or (preferably) past the point that a unit will lose models on a morale check. Yes, sometimes you really will want to blast a guardsman in the face with a lascannon.



I really like the approach with diminishing effectiveness of large models as they take damage, that always bugged me in wargames that up to the last wound they were as if they started well rested before the battle.
Yeah... but they picked a poor example model. They mention the gorkanaut is supposed to start out as a CC monster and gradually degrades into a gun-fortress. Except, well, it has to get into CC, and gets weaker at that job as it gets there. So why not use it as a gun tower from the beginning?.

And while they trumpet about it not being vulnerable to a single meltagun, it still dies pretty horribly to chaos terminator/sternguard melta drops. So, unless those things aren't doable now...


I also like that you are basically forced to take heavy weapons in case some large monster appears because standard infantry weapons will do squat against them, that is very good for listbuilding and counterbalances the point that the new 40K will increase the close combat appeal.
I don't see this as a difference. Were there many people who didn't take heavy weapons in 7th?


It seems that you will need a far more balanced army list building which i always prefer because i hate having models at home that never get to see play because they are really useless.
Don't get too happy about this yet. Nothing really indicates that there won't be useless units. They might be different ones, but 'Can I get away with not taking tactical squads?' still seems a legitimate question (tac on tac fights look like they'll take forever)

Archaon
07-05-2017, 22:27
And while they trumpet about it not being vulnerable to a single meltagun, it still dies pretty horribly to chaos terminator/sternguard melta drops. So, unless those things aren't doable now...


I don't see this as a difference. Were there many people who didn't take heavy weapons in 7th?


Don't get too happy about this yet. Nothing really indicates that there won't be useless units. They might be different ones, but 'Can I get away with not taking tactical squads?' still seems a legitimate question (tac on tac fights look like they'll take forever)

Sure but then again these Terminators/Sternguards are Elite Troopers and you pay the points for them so they should be able to dish out damage (and you still have to roll to hit and then how many wounds you make potentially screwing you over by only inflicting 1 wound instead of a possible 6 or so). Also there's the rest of the army knowing that these are high threat units to your big guy so they might try to take them out first before they do real damage and then we're off into battle tactics which i like.

I can't speak for 7th since i stopped playing with 3.5 but it was my impression that Heavy Weapon teams were not the preferred choice but going for the huge models like Knights and such to be the prime heavy weapons platforms, can be wrong though but i guess such Heavy Weapon teams might become really important with 8th edition so people might veer away from those huge centerpieces and go different ways.. then again we don't know yet so anything is possible.

As to useless units.. maybe the command points system is good enough to actually increase the number of basic infantry units so the army actually looks like an army instead of a collection of superunits.. it depends on how many bonuses yiu can get and what they actually do but i agree that in most games there will still be units that are considered subpar for competitive play. It would be so awesome if GW actually followed trends and feedback from players and maybe did small updates on a yearly bases to rebalance some issues.. that would go a long way to make the game viable and keep older armies on the same level.

Spell_of_Destruction
08-05-2017, 02:41
I'm actually interested to see how melta will work in the new edition. It could be a simple S8 D6 wounds although I would prefer to see D3 wounds at over 6" and D6 wounds at 6" and under. I like simple mechanics which balance risk and reward.

Geep
08-05-2017, 07:15
Yeah... but they picked a poor example model. They mention the gorkanaut is supposed to start out as a CC monster and gradually degrades into a gun-fortress. Except, well, it has to get into CC, and gets weaker at that job as it gets there. So why not use it as a gun tower from the beginning?.

Agreed. The Gorkanaut is hardly a CC monster when it has 4 attacks at 3+ to hit AT BEST. Either that thing is going to get bogged down by swarms, or it's going to have a big pile of 'stomp' type attacks that are clearly not affected by the damage table, and which render the paltry number of attacks as pretty meaningless. Yes, those attacks probably are powerful, but even so- that's only useful against very specific targets (targets that the stomps are then unlikely to hurt much)- so I really wouldn't care about that loss.


and counterbalances the point that the new 40K will increase the close combat appeal.
Where is this belief coming from?
We've already addressed that close combat troops probably won't manage to cross the board any faster (regardless of the movement stat), the fixed to-hit rolls are probably mildly beneficial at best (most units already hit at 4's, many better quality ones already hit at 3's), and you can't lock the enemy in combat anymore to avoid being shot in the face. The new fallback rule basically replicates the current scenario well known to many combat armies, where you wipe out the target unit in the turn of the assault only to get shot by all of that unit's friends in the following player turn. The only difference is that now the assaulted unit doesn't have to be wiped out to a man to do that trick (they lose one turn of activity, rather than being dead for the whole game)- it's a pure bonus FOR shooting armies.

The only sort-of combat bonus I can see is that I can have clumped up swarms of hormagaunts that won't get utterly annihilated by templates. The same boost holds true to shooting forces though.

There's a fair bit of concept talk that I'm liking the sound of, but so far the execution being paraded out is looking pretty lacklustre.

Lord Damocles
08-05-2017, 07:51
I don't like that the problem of dedicated anti-tank weapons being unable (even if unlikely) to one-shot most vehicles (eg. krak missile vs. Rhino) appears to have just been increased to the point where even melta weapons will be unable to kill vehicles unless there are loads of them.

That will just further encourage the spamming of special/heavy weapons.

BramGaunt
08-05-2017, 10:54
I don't like that the problem of dedicated anti-tank weapons being unable (even if unlikely) to one-shot most vehicles (eg. krak missile vs. Rhino) appears to have just been increased to the point where even melta weapons will be unable to kill vehicles unless there are loads of them.

That will just further encourage the spamming of special/heavy weapons.

While I agree with you, I always thought it strange that, while tanks could be oneshotted (with a certain amount of luck), the same was not possible for Monstrous Creatures. Why can't a lucky LasCan shot pop the head off of a Hive Tyrant? Or detonate a Riptides Ammo supply? Shatter a Wraith Lords Whatever Matrix?

It has always been a game with abstract rules. This change is one I actually welcome. It gives your Big Vehicles a little more heroic survivability and brings them en par with MCs. I think that is ultimatly a good thing. Always hated how a Land Raider was incredibly more fragile than a Riptide.

R Man
08-05-2017, 12:31
Where is this belief coming from?
We've already addressed that close combat troops probably won't manage to cross the board any faster (regardless of the movement stat), the fixed to-hit rolls are probably mildly beneficial at best (most units already hit at 4's, many better quality ones already hit at 3's), and you can't lock the enemy in combat anymore to avoid being shot in the face. The new fallback rule basically replicates the current scenario well known to many combat armies, where you wipe out the target unit in the turn of the assault only to get shot by all of that unit's friends in the following player turn. The only difference is that now the assaulted unit doesn't have to be wiped out to a man to do that trick (they lose one turn of activity, rather than being dead for the whole game)- it's a pure bonus FOR shooting armies.

The only sort-of combat bonus I can see is that I can have clumped up swarms of hormagaunts that won't get utterly annihilated by templates. The same boost holds true to shooting forces though.

There's a fair bit of concept talk that I'm liking the sound of, but so far the execution being paraded out is looking pretty lacklustre.

Remember though that combat units are likely to be tougher, thanks to the fact that most will probably get some kind of armour save. Not sure if it will be enough.

In any case, perhaps the point of combat units will not be to destroy units so much as force them to stop shooting. What I mean is this: a shooting unit in cover may be difficult to kill with ranged weapons. But a close combat unit can either A: pin it down and stop it from shooting, or B: force it to retreat out of terrain. Thus, the effect of combat units is less their ability to kill the enemy, and more about hindering your opponents movements.

Also they may be able to Rhino rush.

williamsond
08-05-2017, 13:01
I think the 3 inch fight phase move into combat with no overwatch will be a boon to close combat with lots of this fight phase combat taking place and while I'm sure the fall back may produce some issues with unit stranded and getting shot there will be a lot more close combat in general.

clodax
08-05-2017, 14:19
rules for infantry are up along with wounding chart. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/08/17794gw-homepage-post-4/

Looks like infantry will be able to split fire. This means the heavy weapons in a tactical squad will be useful. Looks like marines will be able to would a dreadnought on 5+.
Mass basic weapon shots will be effective.

Wolf Lord Balrog
08-05-2017, 14:33
rules for infantry are up along with wounding chart. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/08/17794gw-homepage-post-4/

Looks like infantry will be able to split fire. This means the heavy weapons in a tactical squad will be useful. Looks like marines will be able to would a dreadnought on 5+.
Mass basic weapon shots will be effective.
Vehicles better all have both high Toughness and at least twice as many Wounds as they currently have Hull Points, or this system just makes them more fragile.

If a bolter can Wound a Dreadnought on a 5+, and assuming the Dread has Sv3+, then it would take 13.5 bolter shots to put one Wound on. That's a whole round of rapid-fire from a full tac squad, not counting their Heavy or Special weapons. If the Dread has 6+ Wounds, that's not a big deal.

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Voss
08-05-2017, 14:53
Marine Dreads have 8. But it doesn't really matter, with split fire there isn't much reason to throw bolter shots away, just toss krak and lascannon shots from around the map.

It strikes me that the big loser in the weapon realm is plasma, wounding less often and allowing more saves. Hope the cost drops...

Rogue Star
08-05-2017, 15:52
If the Dread has 6+ Wounds, that's not a big deal.

It was revealed in the article on profiles they've got 8 Wounds, at least the standard.


That will just further encourage the spamming of special/heavy weapons.


Looks like infantry will be able to split fire. This means the heavy weapons in a tactical squad will be useful. Looks like marines will be able to would a dreadnought on 5+.
Mass basic weapon shots will be effective.

But as covered, even bolters can wound Dreadnoughts and the like, so it's not like you need to rely on spamming special/heavy weapons to take them out anymore.

Malagor
08-05-2017, 15:55
Yep, 8 wounds,3+ armor save and T7 so he is a bit of a tough nut to crack.

Captain Marius
08-05-2017, 16:14
Love the new wounding mechanic, the possibilities that opens up are enormous!

I think plasma will have a place as something to reliably kill marines by scoring multiple high AP hits either thru rapid fire or blasts.

And splitting fire is a dream come true for this game.

Next thing you know theyll be making twin linked guns score double hits (personal bugbear since 3rd ed)!

Voss
08-05-2017, 16:49
The trouble with plasma as a reliable marine killer is its worse at it. 16% less wounds and at least 16% (if -3), maybe 33% (-2) more saves, and that's before cover modifiers.

Its place seems more likely to be anti-eldar, good against aspect warriors and light vehicles.

Wolf Lord Balrog
08-05-2017, 16:57
And splitting fire is a dream come true for this game.

Next thing you know theyll be making twin linked guns score double hits (personal bugbear since 3rd ed)!

What about units that already have Split Fire as a special rule? Hopefully they will get something else to represent their precision/coordination.

I would also like to see twin-linked go back to being double-hits. Its always bothered me a little that two guns firing together can never get more hits than one gun firing alone.



Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Captain Marius
08-05-2017, 17:04
@Voss I dont think its accurate to say that anything will be better or worse than it is now as we dont know the whole picture - plasma could do mortal wounds instead of normal damage for all i know! I'm looking forward to seeing how they distinguish the classic special weapons!

MagicHat
08-05-2017, 17:20
Yep, 8 wounds,3+ armor save and T7 so he is a bit of a tough nut to crack.

Is he though?
SM tactical shooting at SM: 3+ to hit, 4+ to wound and 3+ save.
SM tactical shooting at dread: 3+ to hit 5+ to wound and 3+ save.
Some weapons can take a chunk of wounds as well, but only kill 1 marine.
Comes down to the cost in the end I guess. If the dread is cheaper then a 10 man squad, he can still be worth it.

Voss
08-05-2017, 17:32
We know a lot of the picture. Plasma guns being more deadly than lascannons isn't in it.

Lord Damocles
08-05-2017, 17:39
But as covered, even bolters can wound Dreadnoughts and the like, so it's not like you need to rely on spamming special/heavy weapons to take them out anymore.
You'll still need to rely on special/heavy weapons if you want to half way reliably kill vehicles.

It's going to take a bajillion (rounded up for simplicity) bolter rounds to down a Dreadnought. Much like you can use bolters to take out Carnifexes now, you don't see many people sending Tactical Squads on monstrous creature hunting duty (or if they do, they're relying on the special/combi- weapons to do the work).

Wolf Lord Balrog
08-05-2017, 17:43
Is he though?
SM tactical shooting at SM: 3+ to hit, 4+ to wound and 3+ save.
SM tactical shooting at dread: 3+ to hit 5+ to wound and 3+ save.
Some weapons can take a chunk of wounds as well, but only kill 1 marine.
Comes down to the cost in the end I guess. If the dread is cheaper then a 10 man squad, he can still be worth it.
As we saw back on page 6 of this thread, the new Lascannon is AP-3 and d6 Damage, so it would take an average of 5-6 Lascannon shots to take down a Dread in 8th. Where it could take anywhere between 1 and 10 lascannon shots in 7th. You end up with roughly the same durability on average, but with much less variability. The Dread becomes a more reliable threat, especially as a gun platform, in 8th Edition.

Edit: On further reflection, while this is undoubtedly a good thing from a game-design perspective, it lacks a certain verisimilitude. IRL, the entire point of anti-armor weapons is that they have at least some chance of disabling an armored target in a single shot. Before, any particular Lascannon hit had a 1-in-6 chance of killing a Dreadnought in one shot. Under the 8th Edition system, it appears there is *no chance* of this happening.

Archaon
08-05-2017, 19:51
Well, not every shot hits the reactor, head or ammo supply, some might just punch through a less important part or take off a couple of inches of armor plating.

There is still the chance that 2 Lascannon shots might be enough to take down a Dread.. 2xD6 wounds might be enough with slightly above average dice rolls and bad armor saving from the Dread (and then there's still that Missile Launcher from the Tac Squad as backup for the last 1-2 wounds).

Now i'm curious if vehicle rushing really gets to be a thing since disembarking troops can immediately engage in close combat, i hope the designers saw this potential problem and either have rules for shooters to mitigate it (or playtesting has shown that transports have a good chance of blowing up if they rush straight into an enemy gun line firing overwatch) or make the transports soft enough so they won't be able to deal well with dedicated AT weapons.

I'd hate for the game to cause this loophole and really wish for it to succeed in a balanced matter.

Wolf Lord Balrog
08-05-2017, 23:14
Well, not every shot hits the reactor, head or ammo supply, some might just punch through a less important part or take off a couple of inches of armor plating.

There is still the chance that 2 Lascannon shots might be enough to take down a Dread.. 2xD6 wounds might be enough with slightly above average dice rolls and bad armor saving from the Dread (and then there's still that Missile Launcher from the Tac Squad as backup for the last 1-2 wounds).

Right, I'm not saying that is unrealistic, what I'm saying is unrealistic (and subtracts from immersion) is that there appears to be ZERO chance of a Lascannon being able to one-hit-kill a medium vehicle in 8th Edition. A minor issue, but it would still bug me if true.


Now i'm curious if vehicle rushing really gets to be a thing since disembarking troops can immediately engage in close combat, i hope the designers saw this potential problem and either have rules for shooters to mitigate it (or playtesting has shown that transports have a good chance of blowing up if they rush straight into an enemy gun line firing overwatch) or make the transports soft enough so they won't be able to deal well with dedicated AT weapons.

I'd hate for the game to cause this loophole and really wish for it to succeed in a balanced matter.

If 3rd Edition-style Rhino Rush (or anything close to it) is back, the pendulum will have swung completely back to 40K: The Choppening, as somebody else put it. Start 12" on the table, transport moves 12" Turn 1, and pops smoke. Turn 2, transport moves 6", disembark 3", Charge 2d6" (and only have to get within 1"). So by Turn 2, on average, you could contact an enemy unit up to 41" from your board edge (5" into the enemy deployment zone).

So your choices would be: kill all transports on Turn 1, deploy no more than 6" onto the table, and/or make use of tarpit/speedbump/bubblewrap units. Only the last option is really palatable, and I doubt it would be enough against a dedicated assault list. Of course, the usual caveats, we don't have all the details yet, etc.

CIRO
09-05-2017, 08:22
Based on that toughtness chart, 8th might not suck.

Captain Marius
09-05-2017, 09:59
To flog the dead horse a bit, a rapid firing plasma gun has the potential to kill more 1 wound marines/armoured infantry than a lascannon and so has its niche.

Im interested to see what the deal will be with s5 guns now wounding guard/tau/eldar/hormies on 3s!

Re: rhino rush, we never saw it vs overwatch in the olden days, it sounds like its going to be mass carnage (more so than usual!)

Rogue Star
09-05-2017, 12:46
To flog the dead horse a bit, a rapid firing plasma gun has the potential to kill more 1 wound marines/armoured infantry than a lascannon and so has its niche.

We haven't even seen it's rules yet, I dunno how it can already be considered ineffective next to the Lascannon, etc.

Wolf Lord Balrog
09-05-2017, 12:58
Im interested to see what the deal will be with s5 guns now wounding guard/tau/eldar/hormies on 3s!

I didn't think about that, that's another nerf to the Tau, with their S5 basic guns now only wounding light infantry on 3+ instead of 2+, a 20% reduction in firepower. Plus those light infantry will be getting their saves much more often in 8th. Time to bust out whatever the 8th Ed version of AP4 pie plates is?

Captain Marius
09-05-2017, 13:04
I didn't think about that, that's another nerf to the Tau, with their S5 basic guns now only wounding light infantry on 3+ instead of 2+, a 20% reduction in firepower. Plus those light infantry will be getting their saves much more often in 8th. Time to bust out whatever the 8th Ed version of AP4 pie plates is?

Mind you for all we know pulse rifles could change to s4, or s6!

What other major shifts will we see with the new wound dynamic? S10 power fist wounding T6 vehicles/monsters on 3+? Grots wounding wraithknights on 6+!!

Kisanis
09-05-2017, 13:29
I didn't think about that, that's another nerf to the Tau, with their S5 basic guns now only wounding light infantry on 3+ instead of 2+, a 20% reduction in firepower. Plus those light infantry will be getting their saves much more often in 8th. Time to bust out whatever the 8th Ed version of AP4 pie plates is?
But the game mechanics tend to lean towards tactical boons for shooting.

Shooting is more powerful. Avg shooters are more powerful. Split fire is in. ASM makes middle road guns better.

So while the weapons may be nerfed in one aslect The meta in game opens up to their usefulness in other ways.

This game isblooking to be more tactical. Placement and decisions in game look to be better rewarded. Its not all about list building with a few die rolls added in.


Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

barrangas
09-05-2017, 13:46
Who knows, maybe Tau pulse weapons might get -1 to ASM to make up for the loss of wounding.

Voss
09-05-2017, 14:03
Kisanis, what is rewarding placement or 'decisions in game?'

So far I'm seeing a lot of dice & statistics tyranny. For example, S6 and 8 matter a lot more, while 5 and 7 are to be avoided, as they are heavily nerfed by the to wound chart. Targeting decisions are purely matter of mathhammer, with lots of focus fire and cross field shots with big guns in order to min\max wound and armor rolls.

Rogue Star
09-05-2017, 14:28
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/09/new-warhammer-40000-characters-may9gw-homepage-post-4/

Well it's confirmed, like AoS, Independent Characters cannot join units.

barrangas
09-05-2017, 14:50
Actually having looked at the wound table now, I find it interesting that weapons like a Lascannon will only wound on a 2+ if the Toughness is 4 or less. So unless dedicated transports have a T4, which kinda seems unlikely except for really light ones, then the Lascannon and similar weapons take a kind of significant hit against most vehicles and MCs.