Cap'm Heckus Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 A man can dream, can't he? 3 'Verns dropping 24d3 shots. Ahhh... brings a tiny little tear of joy to my eye. But, alas, you probably have the right of it. Rough Riders sticking around makes me happy. May yet get to have mine make that glorious charge before dying to the last man. Now if only they would give them about or outflank... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indefragable Posted May 11, 2017 Author Share Posted May 11, 2017 The Guard forums are proportionately more level headed for the same reasons that Guard are so fun to play, even in the nadir of 7th ed power levels: IG require actual tactics and thought to play well. While other Factions can ride the waves of power creep, IG commanders need to pull out the tactical display and solve actual problems on the battlefield. We can't rely on heroes of special rules. We need actual brains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duz_ Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 I may be miss-mathing here but wouldn't the change to twin-link make the wyvern 8d3 hits? It does 4 small templates re-rolling now (2 per gun and 2 guns). If the re-roll on each template translates to another d3 hits... Unless I'm wrong that's 8 to 24 shots per volley per tank. Average of 16 shots and 8 hitting? Id be happy with that change. Still means I can occasionally (albeit very rarely) get 20+ shots in a turn More like 6 on average though ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatBrannigan Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 I think lots of units are going to change to tone down the new twin linked rules. I can't see Vendettas getting 5 lascannon shots a turn! Or Spartan tanks getting 8. Happy to give GW more credit than that given their evolution in recent years and all the good stuff we've heard bout 8th so far. The dreaded Eldar leak is upon us and it doesn't talk about toning them down which is a shame. I genuinely think Eldar players would have like to hear that their army is being nerfed. They did pick out some of the more powerful units by name though so they've been identified. Interesting to hear that Eldar players will be "Happy" with Wraith constructs. What does that mean! Stop teasing us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkaniss Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 *snip*Interesting to hear that Eldar players will be "Happy" with Wraith constructs. What does that mean! Stop teasing us! Indeed, these sort of statements are pretty worthless. One guy says all Eldar players will be happy? How can he possibly know? :P I have an Eldar force I very rarely use, them being more balanced would make them more appealing to me and my opponents. I have a feeling we'll never be leaked/teased points - that we'll have to wait until the actual release of 8th and all the datasheets and so on. The twin-linked change makes a lot of units more powerful and considering CC is supposed to be viable again I'm expecting some more info to come regarding melee as it appears the pendulum has swung back to shooting with the leaks (so far!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duz_ Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 I ran the numbers quickly the other day On average by doubling the shots your are only slightly better off than having the twin linking re-rolls. It does speed the game up though as you don't have to pick through the missed dice. I suspect the Vendetta will have 6 lascannon shots. :) which in terms of fire power will be in lime with a lascannon devastator team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicodemus Doloroso Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 The Guard forums are proportionately more level headed for the same reasons that Guard are so fun to play, even in the nadir of 7th ed power levels: IG require actual tactics and thought to play well. While other Factions can ride the waves of power creep, IG commanders need to pull out the tactical display and solve actual problems on the battlefield. We can't rely on heroes of special rules. We need actual brains. Absolutely, and the requirement for brains and tactical thought is what always keeps bringing me back again and again to Guard. I tried my hand at Marines years ago and after one game sold the army because it was boring. Now, since that time I have admittedly built a Blood Angels successor army and since BA are "lower tier" marines and I build a force heavily focused on less optimized options it's still been challenging but Marines to remain a lot more forgiving and less satisfying than Guard. Hence my being bitten badly by the bug to build a new IG force! RE: Eldar ... I think that the faction focus article on them is significant for what it doesn't say. Scatbikes are not mentioned at all, nor other of the worst offenders for overpower. What is mentioned is that much maligned/never used units are mentioned as being useable again. I still have cautious optimism that GW releases a much more balanced set of armies this time around and even if they don't get it right the first time they have said they'll do an AoS annual General's Handbook that rebalances things and from what I've heard that has actually worked out quite well with that system. In a more balanced environment, I think that Imperial Guard generals will have their chance to shine -- we've been used to being underdogs and have honed our skills more sharply than others. IG will always require sound tactical decisions, but I think we may see more success than in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Mention of points in the latest. Sergeant upgrades could be cheaper across the board, or perhaps just pistols? Could be interesting if so. Marines at 13pts but the Multimelta gets pricey so I'm assuming a meaty profile for it - or maybe this means -4AP is something rarer? Most important of all is that GW appears to agree with what we've said: The points for units don’t appear on the datasheet but will be elsewhere in the same book. This is because you don’t need them to play if you don’t want, which frees up room to include more rules for weapons on the datasheet. It also means that, in the future, points for units could change without invalidating existing books – so if one unit or weapon starts to dominate tournaments, or certain units don’t seem to be carrying their weight in competitive games, we can address the balance. Very good to hear! Let's hope it pans out well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicodemus Doloroso Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Sweet Emperor on Terra ... 2000 points as the new standard points level with 13 point marines? I'm going to have to paint an insane number of Praetorians to be able to field a proper force. So with marines another point cheaper, and 2 points cheaper than they were in 3rd edition, I'm hoping that the humble guardsman who is currently the same price he was in 3rd will get a reduction (although how low can you go, really)? It may be that army size is somewhat mitigated by more expensive upgrates. I can't help but notice that a combi-melta is almost 3x as expensive as it used to be, although I think this is fitting considering its newfound deadliness with the new shooting rules we've seen. I guess lots of people enjoy larger games with more models but as a slow painter with little free time, I feel like I am never able to keep up :( Granted, if I stuck to one single army I could, but I like having variety. Ahh, I remember with great fondness the days of 3rd edition when a 25 man platoon, an armoured fist squad, a vanilla Russ, and a Basilisk = 1500 points. Under these new point levels and a 2000 point playing point I'll be building armies 2-3x that size to be able to play a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Going to love 2,000pt games in two hours :D Seeing Marines a bit cheaper is good I think (so long as this is equalled for all, which I'm sure is the case) but I also wonder where this leaves armies like Guard. Perhaps Infantry Squads will indeed be dirt cheap as a core unit, but this could open up doctrine style point increases. Want Grenadiers? Pay Xpts per model and away you go for example. Could work nicely... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duz_ Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 I don't think you can compare new points to previous points. It looks like they've completely built this new system from the ground up, which I happy with! It certainly was needed. Also the way they've kept "competitive" points off the data sheets so they're easy to update is amazing! Having said that, even with what I've seen for with the changes to rule and weapon profiles as a whole I wouldn't mind paying 5pts/model for a guardsmen with these new rules! :) The main thing I'm hoping for is that Guard don't pay the same armoury costs as Space Marines! Because regardless of point scale a Guardsmen will not be as effective as a SM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicodemus Doloroso Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 I don't think you can compare new points to previous points. It looks like they've completely built this new system from the ground up, which I happy with! It certainly was needed. Also the way they've kept "competitive" points off the data sheets so they're easy to update is amazing! Having said that, even with what I've seen for with the changes to rule and weapon profiles as a whole I wouldn't mind paying 5pts/model for a guardsmen with these new rules! The main thing I'm hoping for is that Guard don't pay the same armoury costs as Space Marines! Because regardless of point scale a Guardsmen will not be as effective as a SM. Well, if IG don't pay the same armoury costs as marines, I could live with 5 points but I still think that for balance Guardsmen really ought to be cheaper since Marines have gotten cheaper yet again. 4 point guardsmen would seem right when you consider the % decrease Marines have received. And Scions sure as the Warp better be cheaper as well! I love the glory boys but having played a bunch of games using marines lately it really hit home how overpriced Scions are. I continue to have faith that the prices will be appropriate given the playtesting that has gone on this time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Pounder Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Yeah, that always seemed a bit unfair. A power sword or plasmagun are far scarier in the hands of an Astartes. Must say though very excited about 8th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 The commissariat is expecting a lot of reports to come in when we finally get Guard point values. Just don't forget the punishment for spelling mistakes is death, naturally :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hfran Morkai Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 The changes we've seen so far make me excited to create a Guard army, I can't wait to see the lists and start playing. I really do hope it's possible to run a Mechanized Army (ideally with platoons and vets) as ever since reading Cadian Blood that's what I wanted. Annoying there's no big box of guardsmen anymore though. Bring on 8th! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulrik_Ironfist Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 I'm excited by the changes, though some I'm not too keen on. Templates were cumbersome but they made for more tactical decisions regarding spacing, as well as compensating for low BS. I'm also unsure about the fact that everything has a toughness value. It seems a bit wonky to me, but I guess we'll see. I am excited to see what changes are in store for the Guard. The new detachments seem to be a huge step up, and the fact that formations are going away is music to my ears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicodemus Doloroso Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Ulrik, I hear what you're saying re templates but on the flip side the lack of templates will really speed the game up since players won't need to worry to spend nearly as much time on movement and ensuring the proper spacing. I think that it will be a net gain for us since we tend to have more numbers and be more vulnerable to templates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulrik_Ironfist Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Ulrik, I hear what you're saying re templates but on the flip side the lack of templates will really speed the game up since players won't need to worry to spend nearly as much time on movement and ensuring the proper spacing. I think that it will be a net gain for us since we tend to have more numbers and be more vulnerable to templates. I get what you're saying, It's not a deal-breaker for me. In fact, I kinda like how it negates the whole spacing issue. On one hand, you can't force your opponent to squeeze through gaps in terrain and bomb a unit off the table, on the other, if you roll 6 shots, and hit with 6 shots, and wound with all 6, he's got to save 6 wounds regardless of how well he spaced his models. What I don't like about it, is the fact that you have to find out how many shots you get, and then those have to roll to hit, and then you roll to wound. It feels a bit more random, which I do not like. I do fear the with modifiers and stacking mods, we'll end up with battletech levels of complexity and mathiness, which will put people off. The game seems to want to be simpler in some regards and more complex in others. Above all else though, I would like to see verticality, that is 3 dimensions of play. Sure you can go up and down levels, but what about jumping from tall things? It's come up in game before. I would also like to see a mechanic for shooting in melee. Pistols should be allowed to make CC attacks with their profile (it would make hot shot laspistols so much better) and using BS instead of WS (Pistols only). Those are some wishlist things, that I'd like to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duz_ Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 I am glad the lack of templates will negate the can only hit top / one level nonsense people seemed stuck on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Talarian Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 I think that the new 2,000 point standard game will be due to the fact of them wanting to push more HQ choices/needing powerful units that may have some AoW aura. Simple speculation. I'm pretty excited for 8th changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulrik_Ironfist Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 I am glad the lack of templates will negate the can only hit top / one level nonsense people seemed stuck on I do hope that it gives the game a bit more dimension. Verticality is something the game sorely lacks. I also like how they've separated flyers into their own force org slot. It makes my FA slots less contested. I also hope for improvements to vets. I'd love to be able to field kasrkin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamansky Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 The game is going to become more dice-dependent. And that's what i'm afraid of. You won't need to consider armor facing, anti-template formation, weapon's AP... OK. The game will become faster. But it is going to lose some things that made brain work either. Just roll and pray for better results. It's not a strategy. It is a casino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'm Heckus Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 I think plasma pistols could make a comeback this edition. Especially if they can be fired while locked in melee. If you suddenly have a guy in the scrum who can fire off plasma pot shots every round you aren't just a tar pit anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkaniss Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Yeah as long as they aren't too pricey. I don't think anyone took Plasma Pistols in any army in 7th, 8th just may make a lot of older metal character models WYSIWYG viable again ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordCommanderSamirus Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 I noticed that todays rules that went up on Warhammer Community (Tau and Primaris Marines) that both datasheets had a Keyword relating to the interfaction organizations ( <Chapter> for Primaris Marines and <Sept> for the Tau). The <Chapter> for the Primaris Marines of course was to be expected as its most lilkely the source of the Chapter Tactics but the inclusion of <Sept> could be something similar. If so, could it possibly mean that we could see something similar for the various Guard regiments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.