Horus Heresy New Edition, or Just Horus Hearsay?

[FellClaw]

The consensus I've seen online is that while the Libres are disappointing, the core rules seem to be a largely good change. Honestly, having had a brief read through the leaks and watched a 3.0 battle report, I'm not so sure.

 

For example, the cover rule preventing units that are more than 3" away from each other in medium area terrain from targeting each other for a shooting attack or charge at all just seems so unintuitive and clunky.

 

Melee looks to have been hugely nerfed across the board as well, while the lethality of shooting has been increased.

 

Personally, I think even without the loss of flavour and customisation, I wouldn't be enamoured with the new rule set. Sure, there are some interesting ideas—such as the aircraft rules and initiative modifiers to melee weapons—but many of the changes just seem bad for no discernible reason.

 

What do you guys make of the core rules?

Edited Sunday at 05:34 PM by FellClaw

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

24 minutes ago, DarkMark said:

With the new Nintendo launch I saw a new phase namely 'weaponised nostalgia'. GW really are the masters of this. However, they may have got it very wrong with this release. 

 

If you're excited for everything that is coming then great. If you are not then it may be time to assess where you're at with the hobby.  

GW suits proved to be contradictory in their decision making. This edition is apparently for new players and yet they have included Rogue Trader stats which only grognards remember.

[Sigismund's Ghost]

I think the core rules are rather schizophrenic, simplifying areas while complicating others. The two things I really don’t like are  the 4 turn game length and the challenge game within the game. As for the Marine Libers, they’re a steaming pile. If I’m being generous. Aside from the abysmal content, no editor got anywhere near them.

[OttoVonAwesome]

1 hour ago, Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf said:

SoH, except Horus Lupercal both versions, no special characters 

Welp I geuss I won't have to swap any weapons out on my SoH. I think the Reavers actually gained in this edition. lol

 

-Edit: Oof the Carsoran axes though. That's a shame. Geuss I'm just going rule of cool on the Tabars.

Edited Sunday at 05:54 PM by OttoVonAwesome

[Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf]

Just now, OttoVonAwesome said:

Welp I geuss I won't have to swap any weapons out on my SoH. I think the Reavers actually gained in this edition. lol

No jump packs(yet)...

[OttoVonAwesome]

2 minutes ago, Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf said:

No jump packs(yet)...

They were a legacy entry last time so I'm geussing that will be the case again. Although I kinda like them as on foot melee vets now that assault vets are back.

[Astartes Consul]

31 minutes ago, OttoVonAwesome said:

They were a legacy entry last time so I'm geussing that will be the case again. Although I kinda like them as on foot melee vets now that assault vets are back.

I think assuming something will be in the Legacy this edition because it was last time is a pretty big leap of faith. Especially as the Legacies had to be amended last time to add stuff like Jump Pack Palatine Blades. 
 

I’m sure there will be some things carried over. But given the general vibe of army selection in the Libers, I can’t imagine they’ll be as expansive as last edition. They’ve have any units removed from the main lists (Destroyers), some characters and things like Basilisks/Medusa that used to have models.

 

Seen some comments online being optimistic that we’ll be able to use the Legacies PDF to effectively field units in their 2.0 era loads outs. Can’t imagine anything further from what GW would want us to do. 

[Hungry Nostraman Lizard]

Fired off an email to them as well. In it I mentioned that my 5-6 group have all agreed to not touch third. I was planning on the marine libers, plus the knights one because I've been working on knights for the last few months. Now, I'm not getting anything. At least 30 models in my collections are invalidated. 8 or more characters, two terminator squads, veteran squad, terror squad, night raptor squad... my raven wing now has no leaders. 

 

[SkimaskMohawk]

Re terrain blocking LOS and leading to some odd situations where people can't charge and stuff.

 

It's interesting to note that what I've heard about medium terrain (having not read the rules) is very, very similar to how area terrain worked in 4th. You couldn't see through it, and could only see into it a set distance. This also applied if both units were in the terrain. Sound familiar?

 

The issue is that the set distance now is 3" when it was previously 6", and 6" was the maximum charge range to start with; 3" is less than the minimum charge range so it feels bad. But also, the main complainers about how bad it feels (goonhammer) also found being locked in combat to feel bad, or a tank getting one shot from a lascannon. So maybe it's a genius decision after all.

[Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf]

14 minutes ago, Hungry Nostraman Lizard said:

Fired off an email to them as well. In it I mentioned that my 5-6 group have all agreed to not touch third. I was planning on the marine libers, plus the knights one because I've been working on knights for the last few months. Now, I'm not getting anything. At least 30 models in my collections are invalidated. 8 or more characters, two terminator squads, veteran squad, terror squad, night raptor squad... my raven wing now has no leaders. 

 

Yeah, I have lot of gaps too now. At least, more that half a dozen units and equal number of characters are gone or useless. I gathered a quite big army during the last 10 years, and until this new edition I never suffered such quantity of "casualties".

 

[Sigismund's Ghost]

I shot off an email as well. 14 of my armies aren’t viable without major rework, and without RoW they’ll never work the same way again. Slapping in a couple centurions isn’t fixing anything. Every single army has models that are no longer valid. I included pictures so they don’t think I’m blowing smoke.

[Antarius]

Having mulled things over a bit more, I'm in "I might get the box and sell off the gun platform and the rulebook, possibly the Saturnine dread"-territory.

It seems to me that every time a new edition of a game rolls around, there's an initial burst of enthusiam, then a wave "oh no, this is going to suck, isn't it?" and then it sort of levels out either right before or after release. This time it really does feel different in certain areas though. I think what's bugging not just me, but the majority of people talking about this is:
 

- The (admittedly both nebulous and subjective) feeling that the game is moving away from customisation and the "old school" feel that seems to be a draw for most of the existing fanbase. This one is probably pretty normal every time there's a new edition, to be honest, but it might ring more true this time than it usually does

 

- Core Rules changes; this one I pretty much have at "normal levels of griping" but it is very much compounded by the next point

 

- The Libers seem to be met with almost universal disdain, not just because of the changes and omissions, but because they really do seem to be full of oversights and mistakes to a degree that - outside of internet hyperbole - isn't anywhere near normal for GW

 

- The journals, while most people seemed okay to enthusiastic about the idea, seem to be conceived in a much more cynical way than is the case for ToW equivalents; these seem to be paywalls to actually playing your army as it is supposed to be, rather than fun and interesting bonus stuff and lore. Add to this that there are 18 Legions, so you'll have to potentially wait for quite some time to have the opportunity to pay for having your army "reinstated" and you have a bit of a  show, especially when combined with the next point
 

- The edition churn is what people generally came to Horus Heresy to avoid and it just seems like you're going to "have" to buy several pounds of books, just to chuck them in the bin in 30-35 months (depending on when the "new edition coming out soon"-slump hits your gaming group), especially if you might not get "your" journal before half that time is up (that's assuming a journal per legion and a journal a month, which of course might not be accurate but it seems fair to assume that it's going to be a steady drip over the next 2-2,5 years) and it just feels really unsustainable, from pretty much any point of view.
 

So, in conclusion, it does seem like there's more negativity then usual and it also seems like there's more (or at least, less subjective) of a basis for it this time around 

Edited Sunday at 07:56 PM by Antarius

[Mandragola]

6 hours ago, 01RTB01 said:

 

I'm sorry but this is not an ok take. At all.

 

Saturnine could be 4000 points of models but it doesn't justify invalidating people's collections. It doesn't justify the U-turn from customisation is good to the toxic relationship version which is some customisation is ok, oh no... not THAT customisation.

 

Also if everyone buys saturnine as the core of their force, what a dull world we inhabit whereby everyone is running the same stuff. Wouldn't it be nice to see people being able to, I don't know, use what they've spent the last 3-10 years building, modelling and painting?

 

Heresy was aimed at the "Old Guard", taking a 'brand new customers'', 'funnel' approach is deplorable and simply waving away with "new armies will be ok" is an utterly horrific point of view.

 

I've no intention of starting a new army. I'm very happy with the sizeable army I've collected. I don't have any interest in playing any other legion that the Third. I've zero interest in playing auxilia or mechanicum either.

That’s entirely true for you. I was only talking about my own collection. I don’t agree with GW taking away customisation, as I’ve said several times. 
 

My situation with my RGs is I have a few models made illegal but they’d be quite easy to fix. I’m lucky that I tended to want characters in power armour in 2.0, so they could infiltrate. I’m luckier than some. I’m sorry for those people. 
 

Across my collection I’ve got about 50-70 models I’d need to replace or rearm, however. I enjoy converting units and I’ve done several, which are basically all now illegal. I’m not at all happy about that. I completely sympathise with people who are angry about this because I am too.
 

I don’t really understand why people are saying GH are ok with this. I remember what I wrote on GH and people have read that, if the click count is at all accurate. Contributors on GH have a variety of opinions on this, which are all valid. The opinion that it’s fine as it’s so much easier and cheaper to build an army where you don’t have to convert everything is valid, though I don’t personally share it. There are other games for people who want that and heresy served hobbyists, previously. 
 

The issue with my RGs is that I hate their rules too. Who cares if my command squad’s load-out is illegal now if I don’t want to play the army at all? The bad rules make the bad change to customisation irrelevant, in this case.

 

So my choices are to invest more in an army whose rules I don’t like or to invest a lot more in a whole new army with better rules. But it’s still a far from perfect game without much of a scene where I live. So there’s a really strong case for doing none of the above, skipping the whole thing. So far, that’s what I’m doing. 
 

Perhaps oddly, the main argument in favour of me, personally, making a new army is that I enjoy making and converting heresy armies. For me, a new edition tends to mean an excuse to paint new toys, which is something I like doing.  

[Ripper.McGuirl]

1 hour ago, Mandragola said:

That’s entirely true for you. I was only talking about my own collection. I don’t agree with GW taking away customisation, as I’ve said several times. 
 

My situation with my RGs is I have a few models made illegal but they’d be quite easy to fix. I’m lucky that I tended to want characters in power armour in 2.0, so they could infiltrate. I’m luckier than some. I’m sorry for those people. 
 

Across my collection I’ve got about 50-70 models I’d need to replace or rearm, however. I enjoy converting units and I’ve done several, which are basically all now illegal. I’m not at all happy about that. I completely sympathise with people who are angry about this because I am too.
 

I don’t really understand why people are saying GH are ok with this. I remember what I wrote on GH and people have read that, if the click count is at all accurate. Contributors on GH have a variety of opinions on this, which are all valid. The opinion that it’s fine as it’s so much easier and cheaper to build an army where you don’t have to convert everything is valid, though I don’t personally share it. There are other games for people who want that and heresy served hobbyists, previously. 
 

The issue with my RGs is that I hate their rules too. Who cares if my command squad’s load-out is illegal now if I don’t want to play the army at all? The bad rules make the bad change to customisation irrelevant, in this case.

 

So my choices are to invest more in an army whose rules I don’t like or to invest a lot more in a whole new army with better rules. But it’s still a far from perfect game without much of a scene where I live. So there’s a really strong case for doing none of the above, skipping the whole thing. So far, that’s what I’m doing. 
 

Perhaps oddly, the main argument in favour of me, personally, making a new army is that I enjoy making and converting heresy armies. For me, a new edition tends to mean an excuse to paint new toys, which is something I like doing.  

Out of curiosity, what were you taking in your RG army that is so illegal now? It seems like even if you had a bunch of mor deythan with now unusable weapons, you could just use them as seekers or veterans? Aside from tartaros with fists, of course (which is straight up whack sauce).

I am not saying your reaction is invalid (if you don’t like the new rules, you don’t like them), I’m just curious how that particular army could be so far gone. 

Edited Sunday at 09:17 PM by Ripper.McGuirl

[Lord Marshal]

I'm going to take a post to shill Battle Bunnies' fantastic Saturnine Dreadnought, because it's telling what a more grungy, weathered paint job and a better pose has done for it (also just because I found it informative):

 

 

Edited Sunday at 09:02 PM by Lord Marshal

[Djangomatic82]

NOTE: All of this is from the perspective of a Blood Angels player, i really don't have experience with many other armies, so take as you will.

 

I've fought the FOMO so far, though I saw my LGS had 2 pre-order boxes of MKII Tacs left and I had to fight the urge.

 

I'd say overall, my issues aren't grounded in the Liber problems. Yes, the Libers have done my BA dirty and I am unhappy bout that. 

 

BUT the Core rules have done even more harm. 3e has become a game where i CAN NOT play the kind of army that attracted me to warhammer in the first place.

 

I chose BA because I Love playing highly mobile jump pack assault armies, in every game, physical and digital. I like the gamble of trying to pull off a crushing assault. I play to hedge my bets, but I am okay if, despite my best efforts, the dice gods decide today isn't my day, I did my best anyways.

If you are familiar with MTG, I play Burn, RedDeckWins and combo decks. I hate Control, Taxes and slow grindy decks. 

 

The thing is, the Core Rules have to allow that kind of game play. Limiting deep strike to only 1 unit per turn kills that. Reserves aren't a alternative, they are a different tool for a different job.

 

The double nerf to charging by only being able to declare against a visible unit AND the reduced charge range across every unit is an explicit slap in the face to melee armies.

 

Beyond the Core Rules, the Design Philosophy for 3e has eliminated the real viability, in my mind,  of Melee armies. The rules team made a conscious decision to reduce close combats effectiveness through, 

1. the reduced the total number of melee attacks an army can put out by 1/3 to 2/3 it seems.

2. reducing the reliability of those attacks by removing almost all re-rolls.

I'm not sure yet if they have impacted the quality of attacks yet, overall AP and rules improving a melee attack seem to be about the same, but we'll see how that turns out.

 

I'm not sure what my plans moving forward will be, like i said, my printer and liber panoptica seem like the best bet, or maybe I go full digital and play HH on TableTop simulator. Both are much cheaper options, let me be as creative as i want and don't feed the GW beast.

[Brofist]

Have y'all feasted your eyes on the apothacary rules and how they work? I think those take the cake for the worst rules writing in this edition.

[Captain Idaho]

Oh, what they done with those?

[Sigismund's Ghost]

5 minutes ago, Brofist said:

Have y'all feasted your eyes on the apothacary rules and how they work? I think those take the cake for the worst rules writing in this edition.

It’s quite a contest. The apothecaries are competing with the IF reaction where they shoot themselves. 

[MARK0SIAN]

1 hour ago, Mandragola said:

That’s entirely true for you. I was only talking about my own collection. I don’t agree with GW taking away customisation, as I’ve said several times. 
 

My situation with my RGs is I have a few models made illegal but they’d be quite easy to fix. I’m lucky that I tended to want characters in power armour in 2.0, so they could infiltrate. I’m luckier than some. I’m sorry for those people. 
 

Across my collection I’ve got about 50-70 models I’d need to replace or rearm, however. I enjoy converting units and I’ve done several, which are basically all now illegal. I’m not at all happy about that. I completely sympathise with people who are angry about this because I am too.
 

I don’t really understand why people are saying GH are ok with this. I remember what I wrote on GH and people have read that, if the click count is at all accurate. Contributors on GH have a variety of opinions on this, which are all valid. The opinion that it’s fine as it’s so much easier and cheaper to build an army where you don’t have to convert everything is valid, though I don’t personally share it. There are other games for people who want that and heresy served hobbyists, previously. 
 

The issue with my RGs is that I hate their rules too. Who cares if my command squad’s load-out is illegal now if I don’t want to play the army at all? The bad rules make the bad change to customisation irrelevant, in this case.

 

So my choices are to invest more in an army whose rules I don’t like or to invest a lot more in a whole new army with better rules. But it’s still a far from perfect game without much of a scene where I live. So there’s a really strong case for doing none of the above, skipping the whole thing. So far, that’s what I’m doing. 
 

Perhaps oddly, the main argument in favour of me, personally, making a new army is that I enjoy making and converting heresy armies. For me, a new edition tends to mean an excuse to paint new toys, which is something I like doing.  

Can I ask, more out of curiosity than anything else. From the games you guys have played, how often do the new tactical statuses come up? I’ve got a serious worry that my armies are going to spend a huge amount of their time pinned or suppressed or whatever because when GW adopts a new mechanic they tend to REALLY push it. They’re certainly really pushing it in the various articles. 
 

I’m interested to know if it’s actually going to be debilitating or just a bit of occasional flavour.

[Unknown Legionnaire]

Lol, I just read through the leaked Mechanicum rules ...

They just invalidated the Mechanicum list I was trying to build since the tail end days of first edition for a second time, and this time for real.

I took models apart and re-modeled them according to 2.0 and now they're worthless again. Hooray.

And Thallax have to be units of 6 now because guess wha' ? The box comes with six of them. What a steaming pile of horse manure.

Also, no more jetpacks for Archmagi ... oh sorry, no more antigrav ...

Seriously, this edition can bite my shiny metal ...

 

[Cleon]

So I might be misunderstanding things, but what is the point of Crimson Paladins?

 

Slow moving terminators that have at most one ranged weapon per squad, only basic power swords and a shield that only has any effect if you are hit by and exactly 2 damage weapon. At least under the old rules they could upgrade the sword and the shield was actually useful in melee (not to mention being able to take smaller squads to actually benefit from the being outnumbered rule....

[Shard of Magnus]

Short version: apothecaries have a special rule that sets the target # you have to roll to succeed when making recovery tests.  But the special doesn’t enable recovery tests.  The narthecium lets you make a recovery test in one of the phases, and I think there is a reaction (called medic! for more confusion) that can be used to trigger a test too.  And I do t think all the rules are in one place for quick reference …because why make easy.

Edited Sunday at 10:15 PM by Shard of Magnus

[Djangomatic82]

9 minutes ago, Cleon said:

So I might be misunderstanding things, but what is the point of Crimson Paladins?

 

Slow moving terminators that have at most one ranged weapon per squad, only basic power swords and a shield that only has any effect if you are hit by and exactly 2 damage weapon. At least under the old rules they could upgrade the sword and the shield was actually useful in melee (not to mention being able to take smaller squads to actually benefit from the being outnumbered rule....

I've been trying to figure out our new BA units roles too.

So far it looks like Dawn Breakers are our best generic Melee unit, though Vet Assaults can be kitted out for any job, so they may outshine the breakers.

Angels tears look like the only Destroyers left in the game. They have Rad grenades as a shooting attack now, but no melee weapons to take advantage of the reduced T. I will say that the reworking of Phage (T) to apply the -1T to the entire target unit for the rest of the battle is pretty good and how it should have been in 2e, so maybe there is a place for them there, especially with the grenade launchers, but we'll see how that pans out. The loss of assault cannons is a major gripe though.

Paladins..are maybe a side grade to Tartaros with Deeps Strike? The Heavy attribute of the assault cannon removes the Implacable Advance benefit, and they have no other ranged weapons to use, as far as i know, so that looks like a dead rule. Unless Slow and Steady does something, but i have not seen the rules for that USR.

[Corswain]

I'm actually really pleased to see that my FLGS has sold out of Saturnine. I know how tight things are out there and I hated the thought that the store would be stuck with huge boxes they couldn't shift through no fault of their own.