Implications of the 8th Edition of Warhammer 40,000

[Killax]

34 minutes ago, Furious said:

I'd like to point out the idea that 40k, with its dozens of factions of Space Marines, being somehow more diverse than any Fantasy game is very amusing to me. You literally use the same models for multiple armies.

True, though even if the shoulderpad and helmet are different you create a new hobby experience. It's more or less how Chaos Space Marines came to life, where some Punk Rock fans decided that they wanted their Space Marines to look like Punk Rock Band Members.

A lot of Games Workshop's eventual factions came forth out of conversions and specialisations. By large because your working with a ton of the same models and want certain models to look slightly different  or in other words, make your army unique in a way that isn't too time consuming.

[Greyshadow]

I didn't know 40K wasn't getting downloadable dataslates. This is one of the best thing about AoS. I hope we don't follow in their footsteps...

[wayniac]

4 minutes ago, Greyshadow said:

I didn't know 40K wasn't getting downloadable dataslates. This is one of the best thing about AoS. I hope we don't follow in their footsteps...

From what they said no. but the way they worded it was "after 40k" so maybe all existing models NOW will have it, but anything after won't?  It was vague GW-speak so you aren't quite sure what they meant.

[Killax]

14 minutes ago, wayniac said:

From what they said no. but the way they worded it was "after 40k" so maybe all existing models NOW will have it, but anything after won't?  It was vague GW-speak so you aren't quite sure what they meant.

More or less this!

What I believe will be the case is that they will make data-slates and app for the 5 books that will come out. I don't think GW intends to support the app much after that, simply because there is likely too much to cover to make it all in there.

[RuneBrush]

10 hours ago, wayniac said:

From what they said no. but the way they worded it was "after 40k" so maybe all existing models NOW will have it, but anything after won't?  It was vague GW-speak so you aren't quite sure what they meant.

That was my interpretation too.  Anything that has an existing box set will get a downloadable PDF, but any brand new releases will get it in the box.  My initial thought was "that's poor, need to update my warscroll designer for 40k", but then it dawned on me that new boxes may be getting a physical dataslate (rather than rules on the instruction booklet) which means we wouldn't need to download and print them off as we've already got a rule sheet.

[someone2040]

My interpretation (and correct me if I'm wrong), is that essentially there are no free dataslates for 40k.

If you want to see the rules for a unit, you've got 3 ways

1. Buy the Index books if your unit is an older unit

2. Buy the box (Only for new units).

3. Buy the codex (Once codexes come out)

But maybe I've missed some piece of information somewhere that states units will have rules on the website for 40k. 

[Killax]

I think it's just the savest to assume that 40K will not be the AoS treatment. It involves a lot of time and costs aswell and I believe that GW knows that their 40K player group is big enough to still support it in their older styles.

As what we do see with AoS is that you basically want one of the Grand Allegiance books and the Generals Handbook. After that pretty much every faction is open to play as you like.

What I expect to see with 40K is to have the 2 Imperium, 1 Chaos and 2 Xenos books actually function like a mix of a Grand Allegiance book and Generals Handbook. I expect these data slates to show up in an app. We know the costs are not gone in the 40K system. These will likely not be implemented into the free app. 

So to me this logically would mean we'll see Faction books appear for the 40K system aswell like we see Battletome's for AoS. In many cases I also expect these Faction books to cover their faction better as we sometimes saw with AoS' earlier Battletomes. These expansions will likely not be covered in the app. By large again because 40K as a system is still far more modular as AoS and I simply said don't think an app can process all that variable data and still be accessable for a phone.
 

[RuneBrush]

54 minutes ago, someone2040 said:

But maybe I've missed some piece of information somewhere that states units will have rules on the website for 40k. 

Pete Foley put up a Twitter post (see Wayniac's post on page 1) that heavily implied we'd have existing units available online.  This could be wrong, but I think they want to give everybody the ability to play the new 40k with their armies for free on day of release.  Basically the equivalent of the Compendium PDFs

[Captain Marius]

They would be missing a trick if they didnt at least make existing unit rules free on an app. Free compendiums might be a bit much though as they would cannibalise sales of the Index books. 

As for rules in the box, theyve been doing that for years with multilingual pages incorporated into the instruction booklet. Theyre not useless but they very nearly are, and i wouldnt expect anything more with future releases.

They outright said theyll do codexes for all the factions so the cycle of one upmanship can begin anew i hope they have a more structured approach than the truly random way in which theyve dealt with AoS, which as ot stands currently has 4 proper battletomes and what amounts to a load of inconsistent mess spread over multiple platforms. Fun, but not well structured!

I absolutely dont want to see strength and toughness in AoS, i see them as outdated and unnecessary mechanics. I am a tad disappointed 40k wont be getting random player turns as i enjoy this mechanic greatly.

Lastly the new marines put all the old ones to shame - fair play to GW for not just wiping out the whole old marine range like they did the world that was! Compromise works!

[Killax]

Mk X armour is large


Mk XI armour is going to be the bomb  
 

[PJetski]

After seeing the full datasheet for Primaris Inceptors it makes me wish Prosecutors were that good

 

Rules-wise I would like to see something put in the game to limit hero sniping because I think it's a little bit too easy to pick off heroes right now. Something like:

-Heroes can't be targeted by shooting attacks unless they are the closest model or within 12"

Monsters and flying units would be exempt from the rule since they're relatively easier to target than a small hero on foot

[Sleboda]

25 minutes ago, PJetski said:

Rules-wise I would like to see something put in the game to limit hero sniping because I think it's a little bit too easy to pick off heroes right now

Sniping is vital. Please, no herohammer.

[wayniac]

13 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Sniping is vital. Please, no herohammer.

You can have no sniping and not have herohammer...

[PJetski]

12 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Sniping is vital. Please, no herohammer.

Why are these two things are the only options? Is there no room in the middle?

Most non-monster heroes are mediocre at doing damage and are usually only good at buffing their army. This is very different from WHFB where heroes were murdermachines.

[Sleboda]

I agree that not all heroes are beasts in terms of damage output, but buffing is pretty big too. It is important to be able to take both out.

Even if you disagree and think buffers should be safe, how do you diffentiate types of heroes?

No, I'm glad heroes are not safe.  I LOVE the "everthing dies, nothing is safe" aspect of the game. It would dramatically shift the character of the game if suddenly, mid-cycle,  heroes gained new protections. 

I'd wager that several models in the game are written to be hero snipers. How do you change those if you neuter them?

[JonWebb]

I did wonder if we would see an AoS 2.0 once the dust settles on 40K. There may be some good rules to port over. 

Sad to hear they won't be putting the 40K data sheets up for download. That was a great move on their part, and allowed me to get past my initial reservations for AoS and get playing again, having left at the tail end of 6th ed. 

Seems like a misstep, given the recent resurgence of GW figuring out where they went wrong the last decade.

[Greyshadow]

3 hours ago, Auticus said:

Kinda bummed a lot of the issues I have with AOS are not in 40k, like freely shooting out of combat etc, the heroes getting sniped so easy etc... kind of hoping new GHB updates some of the AOS rules.

I suppose you could look at this as a positive? If 40K is going in this direction, it is reasonable to think the chances of these things coming to AoS eventually have increased. Yes, we may have to wait a few years though. 

[Killax]

I think GH2 will bring some good changes.

I too like to thake the middle where sniping excists and shooting out of your combat target does not.

Likewise I like abilities not stacking with the same name when we have a propper Shooting Phase.

Rule of 1, Summoning and Battleline rules also are ideally reconsidered. The caps keep it an army

[stickybluetoffee]

So, not sure if this has been spotted already, but some 40k units have a 7+ save - so like Zombies they have no save normally but can benefit from cover and mystic shield etc.

i like that one

[PJetski]

They really learned a lot from AOS, AOS GHB, and playtesting 40k. I am very impressed with the new edition of WH40k and hope to see changes of similar brilliance brought into AOS

[Jamopower]

The combat phase looks more streamlined and bland compared to AoS. The different ranges on melee weapons and the alternating activation in combat add a lot to the combat in AoS. In 40k everything seems to have 2" range or even more, depending on the base size, chargers can all strike first and there's the consolidate movement after striking to ensure that flanking is not so useful. Other thing related to combat is that stuff like assault marines seem to be quite underwhelming. Less attacks than now, and you only get to use the pistols after one full round of combat if you charge. Sort of makes sense as it's more shooting oriented, but I have a feeling that the game will be tactically less deep than AoS. Well time shows.

[Killax]

5 hours ago, stickybluetoffee said:

So, not sure if this has been spotted already, but some 40k units have a 7+ save - so like Zombies they have no save normally but can benefit from cover and mystic shield etc.

i like that one

I have to say I find it confusing. 

Personally the easiest way to migate this is to have a rule simply mentioning that if you have - as a Save that it will change to a 6+ if you add +1 Save.
I mean, that's the most obvious thing to resolve it anyway? 

[Tommy]

Maybe some poor sods will have 8+ saves and need multiple bonuses to get anywhere!

My personal hope is that post the immediate excitement of the 40k launch, as people are getting to grips with it all, they come back strongly to AoS with Aelves, some other new goodness (Death? Slaanesh?), GHB2 and a new campaign. Do it GW!

[Menkeroth]

I hope too, and Skirmish and Shadespire indicate they won't forget about us as well.

[RuneBrush]

On 2017-5-26 at 5:55 PM, Sleboda said:

No, I'm glad heroes are not safe.  I LOVE the "everthing dies, nothing is safe" aspect of the game. It would dramatically shift the character of the game if suddenly, mid-cycle,  heroes gained new protections. 

I'd wager that several models in the game are written to be hero snipers. How do you change those if you neuter them?

For me this issue isn't that you have hero snipers - it's the fact that any unit with a ranged attack is capable of it and you can find yourself with no heroes by the end of turn one.  AoS hero models are also epically proportioned - head and shoulder over the rank and file quite literally, which means you can nearly always draw Line of Sight if you choose to (even the Necromancer is larger than his skeleton minions).

40k is dealing with this with sniper weapons that can target anything they have line of sight to.