8e - Facebook live 40k developer stream part 2

Quote :

Okay, so what happens when Ironjawz charge their boars into your spearmen on turn one?

Depends who wins the turn rolloff. If my buffs are up, it's a grinding stalemate. If they're not, usually the Oooorruckerzzz will eat through my spearmen faster than I want.

Vect is definitely going into war in his Dais more sooner than later. After all, his grip on Commorragh has been loosened after the GS events. Also, I expect Kheradruakh and maybe Malys if not Drakhar

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

Do you not think?  I had heard they are looking at releasing a Chaos triumvirate with Abaddon, Urkrathos and a 3rd character than is possibly unknown to us at this moment in time.

You've heard wishlisting rather than solid rumours.

As far as Chaos is concerned it'll be a Death Guard release next.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

I'm actually pretty concerned about this simplification myself. 6th an 7th edition had plenty of variation, and an extremely broad range of army/unit combinations to use, in addition to what sounds like much more depth in the actual core rules, making each game pretty unique.

I'm not seeing that so far in what they've told us. It sounds WAY oversimplified, and I don't want to play a basic dice game. If I did, I could have saved myself thousands of dollars in models and supplies.

Nah, 40K is a very simple game anyway, it's just for the last couple of editions it's had ridiculously overly convoluted rules writing masquerading as complexity.

40k was in no way simple. You had so many layers of complexity. Majority stats, for example, are gone now. No more "majority toughness" benefitting your Succubus in with the Grotesques now, and no more "majority weapon skill" either. There was a real strategy involved in just that mechanic alone in determining where things were placed, what units were comprised of, and who you wanted to die first.

And then there's vehicle facing. While not very important for us, for people like Guard players it was absolutely essential. Did your Leman Russ stand up to an entire Tau shooting phase? Or did it get ground down because they managed to sneak over to your side armor?

And the psychic phase, where a solid psyker army had to strategize their entire power pool for maximum effectiveness, be it a defensive seer star or an offensive Tzeentch daemon army.

All of this is gone. We're going to have absolutely "I wish I could use stronger words on this forum" stupid things like Hammerheads SWINGING IN CLOSE COMBAT with a Necron Monolith. Wyches dying to DROP PODS. A Land Raider getting stuck in combat with Assault Marines.

This is like the gift of the magi. On the one hand, the Dark Eldar are going to be stupidly powerful. On the other hand, gone is every reason for me to care about this game. My fluff is ruined, the gameplay itself is now Age of Sigmar, and the new models coming out look hideous with their overly complex nonsense. I'm too invested, financially or otherwise, to give up on the game entirely, but I'm also too far gone in terms of not accepting the absolute BS this company is trying to shove down my throat. All that remains is ransacking tournament tables.

k, we get it, you dont care/like the new rules.

For me, if i'm having fun with the game then i dont care.

Ok. If you're so sure that there is nothing left for you, neither the fluff, nor the rules:
*opens door*

I'm allowed to not like things, it's just the things I do like everyone else is pessimistic about. Besides, without me, all you'd be left with is 7 pages of arguing over whether Dark Lances are going to be better or worse this edition.

Really? without you? Ok...

Well Im not arguing about DL's..... for me they are better, i stopped using them long ago b.c they didnt work.

[quote="TeenageAngst"]I'm allowed to not like things, it's just the things I do like everyone else is pessimistic about. Besides, without me, all you'd be left with is 7 pages of arguing over whether Dark Lances are going to be better or worse this edition.


Honestly, with all due respect, yes you are allowed to not like things, as are we all. But your constant pessimistic attitude is forcing me to not enjoy this forum. You reply to almost every thread with the same "the new edition sucks no matter what you say" type post. You can not like things as much as you want, but you are killing the fun for everyone else by forcing your opinion down our throats, much like you claim GW does with its business practice.

Like I said im not trying to disrespect you, but I feel im not alone in saying your attitude brings down the fun of reading these threads sometimes.

I'm sorry, I'll try to be more positive with my posts.

TeenageAngst wrote:

I'm sorry, I'll try to be more positive with my posts.

I appreciate your polite response, and I know you have a lot of valuable insight to share with us all, thank you for taking my comment as constructive and not negative. If I sounded too harsh, I apologize.

With regard to the simplification thing, I'd argue that 40k has tended to be complex, but in the wrong way.

It had pages and pages of convoluted rules and then yet more rules for each army and even subtypes of army. However, this plethora of rules didn't translate into tactical complexity.

What I mean is that, once they're actually on the table, units have very few options. Move, run, shoot and/or assault. That's your lot, really. Oh, and phychic on some units, I guess.

To be clear, I'm not saying that there were no tactics in 40k - merely that you'd expect the sheer volume of rules, books and options to translate into more than the same 4-5 actions for every unit.

RolandDarkfire wrote:

TeenageAngst wrote:

I'm allowed to not like things, it's just the things I do like everyone else is pessimistic about. Besides, without me, all you'd be left with is 7 pages of arguing over whether Dark Lances are going to be better or worse this edition.

Honestly, with all due respect, yes you are allowed to not like things, as are we all. But your constant pessimistic attitude is forcing me to not enjoy this forum. You reply to almost every thread with the same "the new edition sucks no matter what you say" type post. You can not like things as much as you want, but you are killing the fun for everyone else by forcing your opinion down our throats, much like you claim GW does with its business practice.

Like I said im not trying to disrespect you, but I feel im not alone in saying your attitude brings down the fun of reading these threads sometimes.

TeenageAngst wrote:

I'm sorry, I'll try to be more positive with my posts.

The real MVP's.

@TheShredder

A simple set of options can lead to a wealth of tactical options; despite it normally being a poor example when compared to Wargamimg, I'll point to Chess Now. Each side has an identical army and each model is extremely restricted in what it can do, but as a result of the brilliant balance it has, high or even moderate level chess play can be bamboozlingly tactical. (Especially if you're playing 1 minute Blitz, but lets not go there).

My point is that a simple base can make for some great play, if it's balanced correctly.

Now, I'm not saying that 'all tables should be symmetrical' and 'all armies need to be identical', that would be stupid, and go completely against the grain of everything that this hobby is about. However, having every unit 'limited' to doing five things a turn is hardly as tactically limiting as you've stated it to be.

Ikol wrote:

@TheShredder

A simple set of options can lead to a wealth of tactical options; despite it normally being a poor example when compared to Wargamimg, I'll point to Chess Now.  Each side has an identical army and each model is extremely restricted in what it can do, but as a result of the brilliant balance it has, high or even moderate level chess play can be bamboozlingly tactical.  (Especially if you're playing 1 minute Blitz, but lets not go there).

My point is that a simple base can make for some great play, if it's balanced correctly.

Oh, I quite agree. I wasn't actually talking about the new rules (I'll make my decision when I see them in full) - just the old ones.

My point was just that the vast number of rules in prior editions didn't actually translate to tactical complexity.

For what it's worth, I have played since 2nd edition and I have disliked 7th edition the most.

How much tactical skill does 40k really require? I have always felt that the most important choices are made when building your army list. Choosing units that match your style of play or weapons that are suitable against your opponent...basically the choices that we make that are not affected by the roll of a dice.

Once you are on the table, for me, I think target selection and movement/placement of your units are the main tactics left. After that its down to the dice.

I don't feel like 40k is being simplified at all...for me it is only becoming more streamlined. There is no fun to be had in having constant re-rolls upon re-rolls, invul saves en mass or overpowered armies in the current set up.

There are rules that have never made sense. Jinking that gave you better armour for example.

When I started playing the game relied heavily on using modifiers and for me this worked well. Then they wanted to move away from modifiers to simplify the game. It's ironic that as we make the move back to modifiers some people feel they are going to simplify the game.

Can I also just make a quick comment on vehicles and them now having close combat stats. I am ok with this to a point...as long as it doesn't include static vehicles like drop pods. I think it's one of the more controversial changes and it will divide opinion. Should a charging tank or spiked skimmer be able to kill infantry? Yes I think they should. Is it slightly dangerous to hit a moving tank? Yes i think it is. I am just worried when someone charges the side of a Rhino with their HQ and the HQ dies in combat...lets wait and see on that one.

50 Internet Points to the first guy to successfully run over a Primarch with a Rhino.

The spikes on my raiders will draw blood from someone other than me!

mynamelegend wrote:

50 Internet Points to the first guy to successfully run over a Primarch with a Rhino.

I don't own any primitive vehicles such as Rhino, will a Raider suffice?

JonTheArchon wrote:

The spikes on my raiders will draw blood from someone other than me!

After the 1st 20 games or so, i cut off all my spikes.....

amishprn86 wrote:

JonTheArchon wrote:

The spikes on my raiders will draw blood from someone other than me!

After the 1st 20 games or so, i cut off all my spikes.....

I cut off the back half but left the front ones

Everyone saying the gaming is being simplified I would refute....

Movement - from 3rd to 7th we have had fixed move values, now we will have a huge range ala 2nd ed where potentially entire armies have different move values for every unit.

Shooting - AP changing to modifiers makes the whole thing more complicated rather than save or don't. Adding cover modifiers (I would have preferred these to be hit mods rather than save mods) further changes things. I do mourn the loss of (the theory at least) of blast and templates.

Combat - its a new way of picking and resolving fights and while I think this choice is in the air right now, its solid enough in AoS for me to give it the benefit of the doubt. The hit modifiers in combat we have only seen a fraction of but either way, the combat is going to be more complex to resolve

LD - I really like this version of LD. I had 2 units of 20 scorpions flee from 5 ravenwing black knights this weekend just gone thanks to 2 failed LD8 tests.

USR - the removal of these makes it more likely for a unit to have rules you might not be aware of. It gives the writers opportunities to give characterful and different rules to units as relevant. Instead of 10-12 pages of USR you will now likely have hundreds of them spread across the units of the game.

I am sure with the full rule book I could go on...

On the combat abilities of vehicles, I think people might need to think about what these states represent. In the case of open topped vehicles like DE, EH and others - its the crew fighting as well as the bulk of the vehicle being used. With tanks and larger vehicles - its the bulk and weight being used to batter the enemy. Its not like they turn in circles to hit each other with corners - the would be pushing and ramming and having crew open hatches to defend (ala the movie Fury) and so on. I don't necessarily agree with how the rules have been implemented (jury is out there) but I think as a method of showing how a tanks bulk can be used in close quarters, its not terrible.

Massaen wrote:

Everyone saying the gaming is being simplified I would refute....

Movement - from 3rd to 7th we have had fixed move values, now we will have a huge range ala 2nd ed where potentially entire armies have different move values for every unit.

7th had fixed movement values, sure, but it also had dozens of unit types, all with different rules for movement. Added to that you had all the army-specific, formation-specific and unit-specific movement rules. There was far more complexity than there than you'll get with movement values for each unit.

This isn't necessarily an unwelcome simplification, but it's a simplification nonetheless.

Massaen wrote:

Shooting - AP changing to modifiers makes the whole thing more complicated rather than save or don't.

Eh? I think this one is reaching, to be honest.

More importantly though, I'm confused as to why you think that complexity is always in the game's favour. Having a complex system of shot resolution doesn't add any tactics to the game. Surely, if anything, it's better to have a simple system and then save the complexity for stuff that actually gives meaningful tactical choices?

"Surely, if anything, it's better to have a simple system and then save the complexity for stuff that actually gives meaningful tactical choices."

I agree with this, and in my opinion from what we know so far i think a lot of that complexity will come from how stratagems are used, with different factions having access to different ones. Knowing what ones an opponent has access to and how to counter them with your own will be a nice addition.

Formation rules are gone now right? Formation special rules suck so I hope they are gone.