Horus Heresy New Edition, or Just Horus Hearsay?

[Matcap86]

19 minutes ago, Unknown Legionnaire said:

 

I am crossing my fingers they'll do pdfs for lesser factions like they did in 2.0 but I am not holding my breath for it. 

 

 

That's pretty much what they said they'd do:

 

[TheTrans]

100% baseline humans should get brutalised in close combat, but they need an ability to fight back. In 1.0 you had blasts among other things, hell even mass fire worked fine before return fire began making it a problem shooting in your own phase.

The other issue with the weapon skill chart is that yes, WS 3 humans should have a hard time hitting marines, they have bulk attacks blah blah blah.. with the old WS chart, initiative helped a lot mitigate mook attacks, so marines could get in clean house first and the paltry remainders would at least hit back on 4s.. no longer.

The other issue though is with nominally 'elite', or even expensive models that need to get into combat, say many of the Mechnaicum punchier bots, Ogryns etc.. often they hit a marine squad (espcially blood mechanicum), and get absolutely trounced by krak grenades (wonder why they went to AP3 not AP2.. hmmm....) then to add insult to injury, your big stompy bots of doom are smaching these little dudes running around their legs on 5's... is pretty crap. Again you can argue 'oh but they are ponderous' but thats what Initiative should be... no good hitting like a freightrain if you can't hit. 

When it is 2 pips to hit on 5's that allows some nuance between weapon skills unlike the current iteration which just absolutley punishes anything WS3 to an absurd degree. 

Again yes this is how the fluff goes rah rah, but we need game mechanics and balance as an overlay. Like if we go purely on fluff, size of particular armies etc, who did the most fighting and what not, well every battle is about 200 human-like models per side, with maybe 20-30 marines, and never shall you see a custode. Not much fun is that.

So while yes, thematically it should be Custodes punching down, hard into marines, Marines punching down hard into humans etc... there needs checks and balances so while thematically it happens yes, but there needs to be some counterplay for armies. 

I suppose we can all argue until we're blue in the face about this but as @Unknown Legionnaire said, it honestly doesn't come down to balance, lore or anything reasonable like that, it just comes down to GW wanting money and (probably) creating a rules churn for 30k to make sure that happens. 

[TheTrans]

5 minutes ago, Matcap86 said:

 

That's pretty much what they said they'd do:

 

 

How long did it take Mechanicum/Todes/Solar Auxilia to get books, and hell they where a paid for item. 

How long did it take for Milita rules which were borderline useless outside of a few specific loadouts, and Demons also which... dear god did they get done dirty!

So a few months... well.. mayb.... I wouldn't hold my breath. They don't want people using existing armies without forking out dosh for rules! 

[BitsHammer]

If GW cuts militia or other legacy units it will likely be because they don't have a dedicated model kit and the management has gotten a wild hair up their backsides about people buying stuff to use in multiple game systems.

[Unknown Legionnaire]

14 minutes ago, BitsHammer said:

If GW cuts militia or other legacy units it will likely be because they don't have a dedicated model kit and the management has gotten a wild hair up their backsides about people buying stuff to use in multiple game systems.

 

And that's precisely the thing - Armies like Militia or Daemons have a bazillion 'dedicated' model kits in the eyes of the gamer / modeller / hobbyist and have been a wellspring of creativity over the years.

But not in GW's eyes.

 

And on a sidenote, then you get those people who are of the opinion HH didn't exists before plastic kits. Uh-huh. Bite my shiny metal behindness.

 

EDIT: midnight typos.

Edited June 3 by Unknown Legionnaire

[Gorgoff]

1 hour ago, Unknown Legionnaire said:

 

Why ? Because they believe those factions don't make them any money.

 

 

That's why Solar Auxilia got their whole range replaced with amazing plastic kits, yeah, because doesn't think they making them money. 

It's incompetence which caused the issues SA has and nothing else. Hopefully they learned from their mistakes and were annoyed enough by the rightfully complains from AA players to actually change some things. 

1 hour ago, TheTrans said:

100% baseline humans should get brutalised in close combat, but they need an ability to fight back. In 1.0 you had blasts among other things, hell even mass fire worked fine before return fire began making it a problem shooting in your own phase.

 

I agree. They overnerfed any blast weapon except the Scorpius tank which quite ironically is the only tank so far which didn't get a plastic tank.

Y'all noticed that? 

Again incompetence.

It's not that they know, they really seemed to think that blast work as they are funny enough. 

1 hour ago, TheTrans said:

The other issue with the weapon skill chart is that yes, WS 3 humans should have a hard time hitting marines, they have bulk attacks blah blah blah.. with the old WS chart, initiative helped a lot mitigate mook attacks, so marines could get in clean house first and the paltry remainders would at least hit back on 4s.. no longer.

 

Yup great change. 

I have several changes for the cc phase in my head which would make up for it and that's why I wait before I complain. 

Maybe you are to young to know but in older editions all models involved in a close combat could attack no matter how far they from the models in direct contact.

Bring back that :cuss:.

I hit your four dudes only on 5s? Well, great to know because I have 40 dudes left who starts swinging now.

Oh and bring back the modifier for numerically superiority in close combat. Both would even things out and would on the same time be very lore accurate. 

Suffocate those Astartes in bodies.

1 hour ago, TheTrans said:

 

The other issue though is with nominally 'elite', or even expensive models that need to get into combat, say many of the Mechnaicum punchier bots, Ogryns etc.. often they hit a marine squad (espcially blood mechanicum), and get absolutely trounced by krak grenades (wonder why they went to AP3 not AP2.. hmmm....) then to add insult to injury, your big stompy bots of doom are smaching these little dudes running around their legs on 5's... is pretty crap. Again you can argue 'oh but they are ponderous' but thats what Initiative should be... no good hitting like a freightrain if you can't hit. 

 

Again not the chart is the problem but the distribution. You keep pointing on symbtoms and not on the root of the problem. 

 

1 hour ago, TheTrans said:

How long did it take Mechanicum/Todes/Solar Auxilia to get books, and hell they where a paid for item. 

 

They get their book first day. They already said so. Not Militia or daemons though.

1 hour ago, TheTrans said:

How long did it take for Milita rules which were borderline useless outside of a few specific loadouts, and Demons also which... dear god did they get done dirty!

Skill issue (you can make eye watering broken daemon armies) plus another hard to swallow pill:

Daemons and Militia are more or less just a side note acording to GW in the game. It's about the war between the legions. If you play a PDF army you have to accept that you won't get the same ammount of love the main factions get. 

I agree that they could make a :cuss:ton of money of Militia though and I can't think of a reason they not constantly add new units for them whenever they release some thinks in other games like the bikes in Necromunda etc.

But we already said it twice and now we do it again: incompetence 

Managers and sales decide which gets released and those people have no clue. 

Edited June 3 by Gorgoff

[Cyrox]

35 minutes ago, Gorgoff said:

 

 

I agree. They overnerfed any blast weapon except the Scorpius tank which quite ironically is the only tank so far which didn't get a plastic tank.

Y'all noticed that? 

Again incompetence.

It's not that they know, they really seemed to think that blast work as they are funny enough. 

 

 

The Scorpius does have a plastic kit?

 

Plastic Scorpius

 

[Stitch5000]

7 hours ago, TheTrans said:

Ok.. so 'mental' stats can now go up to 12, which is fantastic! Gives more range and variation between models etc, fantastic, means maybe we can have some well trained mortals... oh..oh  nope.. a basic legionary is still 7s across the board... so that means poor old Mortals are going to get absolutely smashed when it comes to any 'mental' based stuff...

They said that Horus Ascended has a LD of 14!

[Stitch5000]

1 hour ago, Gorgoff said:

Snip

you seem to be conflating "incompetence" with "choices I don't agree with" 

[HeinzD]

Love the talk about Kaesoron in this thread, him or Fabius Bile would be an absolute dream, but i think we cant ask for too much, considering that we Emperors Children Players already have a handfull of named characters 

 

[Castellan Wulfrik]

4 hours ago, Gorgoff said:

Inhave some tough pills to swallow for y'all. 

1. Humans should get massacred in close combst against astartes unless they outnumber them big time.

2. Humans should have instead other things going on for them. Aome other bonus only they have which makes up for it.

3. Solar Auxilia always had been the army with a ridiculously high leadership in both 1ed and 2ed so I don't understand anyone who fears they won't get anything like it in 3ed as well. I expect them to have higher leadership than astartes but lower cool.

4. The disparity between WS isn't a problem, having too many units with ws5 is.

5. Claiming any units without Ws5 cannot perfom is wrong, plain and simple. That's a skill issue not a games issue imho. You can't expect expect regular grunts to beat the best of the best units in close combat. 

6. The regular Astartes is just a lowly grunt in this game. That's the baseline how this game works. They have their uses but yelling HUZZAH and running at a unit of Varagyr isn't it. 

7. Mental stats can go up to 14. They said it in the article. 

8. We know almost nothing about the new edition. This is way to early to start digging in the salt mine. Just wait and see. When we have the full product in our hands we try it and THEN we start complaining based on the whole picture. ;)

 

Completely disagree with the way you are framing it. We're talking about units that hit 33% of the time fighting units that hit 66% of the time based on a single increment on a scale, the math speaks for itself: it's poorly designed. That's a massive difference for close combat specialised units that is extremely hard to balance in points costs, for both the unit cost as well as the cost of upgrades. Putting it down to skill issue is the most reductionist lazy argument you could have possibly made. I don't disagree that certain units will compare badly to others, that much is obvious we're not playing checkers, but that doesn't change the fact that the game has extremely limited granularity in the way close combat is calculated with the current weapon skill chart. 

[Marshal Rohr]

@Gorgoffthere is no one left to learn from 2.0’s mistakes. The ones responsible for it have gone, and the ones still there are doing 3.0 instead of continuing on with 2.0. That’s a solid indicator the ones that stayed weren’t happy with 2.0. 

[Marshal Rohr]

42 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

I've opted to write the lengthy response because it's these sorts of "know it all I'm the best player in the world GW should do what I ALONE want because they're incompetent otherwise" type posts that lead to the HH community giving off a god awful image to outsiders.

 

(Scene, a normal day on the BnC)

 

Mogger, kicking in door: Well, well, well if it isn’t those stinky Horus Heresy elitists no one likes. 
 

Horus Heresy Elitists: dude get out of here

 

Mogger, shocked: This is exactly the gatekeeping I was talking about!!!

[Mogger351]

14 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

(Scene, a normal day on the BnC)

 

Mogger, kicking in door: Well, well, well if it isn’t those stinky Horus Heresy elitists no one likes. 
 

Horus Heresy Elitists: dude get out of here

 

Mogger, shocked: This is exactly the gatekeeping I was talking about!!!

 

Sorry you two seem to need to project, but thanks for confirming you're being elitist and gatekeeping I guess?

 

Sorry for expecting some nuanced discussion of upcoming rules without hearing how you two are the last bastions of the "true hobby" and how you hate the game you love and the company that makes it. But of course you know best, so anyone who disagrees should get out, right?

 

There's been some lovely discussions over fluff characters and game structure until the "I R smarter than GW and youre all dumb" mentality came back.

Edited June 3 by Mogger351

[Marshal Rohr]

1 hour ago, Castellan Wulfrik said:

Completely disagree with the way you are framing it. We're talking about units that hit 33% of the time fighting units that hit 66% of the time based on a single increment on a scale, the math speaks for itself: it's poorly designed. That's a massive difference for close combat specialised units that is extremely hard to balance in points costs, for both the unit cost as well as the cost of upgrades. Putting it down to skill issue is the most reductionist lazy argument you could have possibly made. I don't disagree that certain units will compare badly to others, that much is obvious we're not playing checkers, but that doesn't change the fact that the game has extremely limited granularity in the way close combat is calculated with the current weapon skill chart. 

The WS chart is kind of baked into the Heresy’s appeal, so the staggering difference in outcomes based on the single point you mentioned can’t really get fixed without changing the system that attracts people to the Heresy. I think the merging of weapon USRs into a single weapon profile may actually solve some of those issues, like a Solar aux companion/sergeant with power sword getting +2 initiative and +2 attacks at AP 3 would let that guy chew through some tacticals before the regular tacticals strike back

Edited June 3 by Marshal Rohr

[Stitch5000]

39 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

@Gorgoffthere is no one left to learn from 2.0’s mistakes. The ones responsible for it have gone, and the ones still there are doing 3.0 instead of continuing on with 2.0. That’s a solid indicator the ones that stayed weren’t happy with 2.0. 

Who are you talking about here?

[Irate Khornate]

I don't mind the WS chart being the way it is. I mean sure you can adjust it, but then that raises the situation of why did this WE despoiler squad trade with my dedicated melee elite squad? 

[Marshal Rohr]

1 minute ago, Stitch5000 said:

Who are you talking about here?

The lead designer for 2.0 went to creative assembly in… 2020? 2021? He left a while before 2.0 came out. Since his departure they’ve hired multiple new designers, including our own Iron Hands Fanatic and after the preview it looks like Prince of Biel Tan from Twitter moved from WarhammerTV to Forge World. 

[Marshal Rohr]

7 minutes ago, Irate Khornate said:

I don't mind the WS chart being the way it is. I mean sure you can adjust it, but then that raises the situation of why did this WE despoiler squad trade with my dedicated melee elite squad? 

My initial reply got flagged for some reason so here it is without references to Ballistic skill

 

I think the current WS chart isn’t perfect, but the WS mental math is so second nature to all of us trying to change it would inevitably end up in 40K territory where there’s no longer any interaction between the two players. 

[Joe]

6 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

The lead designer for 2.0 went to creative assembly in… 2020? 2021? He left a while before 2.0 came out. Since his departure they’ve hired multiple new designers, including our own Iron Hands Fanatic and after the preview it looks like Prince of Biel Tan from Twitter moved from WarhammerTV to Forge World. 

 

Anuj wasn't the lead for 2E - Andy was. He's still very much the project lead by all accounts. Neil Wylie is still there as well. So that's 2/4 from 1E (Andy Hoare, Neil Wylie, Alan Bligh and John French), and 2/2 from 2E in terms of senior staff / project leads.

 

Anuj's main contribution to 2E before leaving was Liber Mechanicum, which he's tried to distance himself from a few times on social media. 

[Cyrox]

So, getting back to the actual 3.0 release, anyone planning on doing Luna Wolves, seeing as we are getting lots of Mk2 Armour?

 

(Before I get screamed at - I know, its set during the dropsite massacre and the XVI were the Sons of Horus at this time)

 

I'm feeling inspired by this that I saw on instagram:  (credit: @milliepaints) 

 

 

[Marshal Rohr]

11 minutes ago, Joe said:

 

Anuj wasn't the lead for 2E - Andy was. He's still very much the project lead by all accounts. Neil Wylie is still there as well. So that's 2/4 from 1E (Andy Hoare, Neil Wylie, Alan Bligh and John French), and 2/2 from 2E in terms of senior staff / project leads.

 

Anuj's main contribution to 2E before leaving was Liber Mechanicum, which he's tried to distance himself from a few times on social media. 

Andy has been the MANAGER since 2017, James H and he himself mention it in Warhammer Twitch interviews and James mentioned it elsewhere. There have been other mentions on social media and in other interviews including Anuj’s own LinkedIn 2.0 was heavily influenced by his game design. Andy and Ben do a lot of the actual game dev for Necromunda and given the new stats it seems Andy is more directly involved with 3.0. 
 

edit: are you sure Neil is still there? To be clear I think Anuj gets unfairly maligned and personally attacked by most people, especially some people here, and he seems to be a nice guy but during the lead up to 2.0 there was a lot more credit taking, and in the fallout there’s been a lot more revisionism about who did what for 2.0. 

Edited June 3 by Marshal Rohr

[redmapa]

Well apparently the new army construction rules are even more open than the RoW system, you know what that means? Destroyer Company for everyone (maybe?).  I hope boxnoughts stay as a unit, my heart can't take the idea of them being gone in every version of 40k.

 

All these new stats make me feel very excited to see what can be done with them, my favorite part of 5th edition was how leadership was used to enact actions for your units like going to ground, getting up, sweeping, death or glory attacks, psychic powers, etc and that sort of RPG feeling was lost and I'm glad to see a version of it return.

Edited June 3 by redmapa

[Gorgoff]

3 hours ago, Stitch5000 said:

you seem to be conflating "incompetence" with "choices I don't agree with" 

The SA flame tank can only wound models in his fire arc which is the width of his tracks due to how the weapon arc is defined for it. 

How would you describe that gold nugget of work? 

A little oppsiwhoopsi? 

Only the fact that it has a sponson and a certainly not intended rules interactions allows it to wound outside its arc as lon as the sponson can see the targets. 

Should I go on and list all the whacky or straight up non functioning rules in 2ed before it dawns on you that whoever wrote those rules may have been incompetent? 

I refuse to believe that anyone reading in this forum from time to time never hearded how may rules are bad, vague, non functioning. 

Abd a lot of those rules were spotted by most players day one. 

Most rules work as intended of course, I won't deny it but some core ones doesn't and never got adressed in FAQ and for how much those books cost us I demand proof reading before they get sold to us. 

1 hour ago, Castellan Wulfrik said:

Completely disagree with the way you are framing it. We're talking about units that hit 33% of the time fighting units that hit 66% of the time based on a single increment on a scale, the math speaks for itself: it's poorly designed.

 

I agree and disagree here.

Like I said the whole cc phase is not written in favor to huge blobs of trash units and I would love if they adress that in 3ed. We will see I guess.

The chart is good as is imho though.

How many units have WS5 isn't. 

 

1 hour ago, Castellan Wulfrik said:

That's a massive difference for close combat specialised units that is extremely hard to balance in points costs, for both the unit cost as well as the cost of upgrades.

 

Agree

1 hour ago, Castellan Wulfrik said:

Putting it down to skill issue is the most reductionist lazy argument you could have possibly made.

 

Despoilers work for me, they don't work for them.

Whats the difference here? 

Am I just lucky all the time? 

In my humble experience it comes down to the fsct that some players love to complain and not to figure out ways to get around obstacles like that.

And that's a skill issue and not a rules issue. If a knucklehead like me find ways (blind, concussive, pinning etc) to get the most out of my Despilers and regular terminators everyone can. 

Don't give up so fast. 

1 hour ago, Castellan Wulfrik said:

I don't disagree that certain units will compare badly to others, that much is obvious we're not playing checkers, but that doesn't change the fact that the game has extremely limited granularity in the way close combat is calculated with the current weapon skill chart. 

But what is your idea? Making modt units hit most units on 4s again? Why is that more granularity?

My solution would be to make numerically superiority more worth it instead. 

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

 

I'm not following AA here, I'm assuming it's a typo, or they're getting feedback of alcoholics anonymous, alternating activations or breakdown mechanics. Who knows, either way I'm not sure incompetence applies given that they obviously have limited resources and though that Auxillia were a safer bet than militia. Given they have sales and attendance data and you do not, I'm not sure the incompetence of doubting their decision there.

 

I was talking about how units in the games work and how they include or not inculde certain units. 

That they make a :cuss:ton of money makes their shareholders happy but doesn't make it any less incompetent when it comes to army designing. 

Would they make less money if more units would be viable, if we could use more units from their whole portfolio and had more fun playing?

I'd argue they would make more money. 

 

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

 

It did get a plastic tank, talk about some incompetence fact checking.

 

Thats the difference between you and me. I'm not offended by this because its true. 

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

 

The distribution is possibly a symptom of an overly wonky chart as well, it literally works both ways - dishing out stats in limited ranges with harsh impacts are both relevant factors.

 

True dat.

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

 

Way to open with a personal insult to the frater there.

 

The irony. :D

 

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

Interesting you note it's a game about the war between legions then immediately open the post complaining GW was too incompetent to capitalise on a solar auxilia release, which aren't legions. 

 

Splitting hairs doesn't change the fact that GW did say it word for word and that people playing daemons like me must accept the simple fact that they are playing an NPC faction. 

See above what I think about that decision.

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

Now I'll take umbridge here that you said incompetence, there is no we. Their managers and sales teams get to decide what's released because they seem to know what sells and turn greater record profits every year. It's almost a textbook definition of competence.

Of capitalism not competence in game design and how to handle players. 

 

[Irate Khornate]

Think we'll get another article today?