Horus Heresy New Edition, or Just Horus Hearsay?

[Stitch5000]

9 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

which will let them move and hit the vulnerable side of the tank, 

MIGHT let them move and get the side arc...In reality it will take 2 turns of waddling to the side to cover enough distance to change the arc...

[Misterduch]

1 minute ago, Marshal Rohr said:

Heavy Support Squads are ten strong. 

 

Yeah no :cuss: sherlock? But If that 10 man moves and fires they will need 6 hits followed by 6 pens to take down a single pred. If they stand still that drops to 3 pens/pred but means they will likely be firing into the front arc, which  compared to a 16,67% chance to one shot a pred on a pending hit is an improvement 

 

 

 

[Mogger351]

8 minutes ago, Misterduch said:

 

Yeah no sherlock? But If that 10 man moves and fires they will need 6 hits followed by 6 pens to take down a single pred. If they stand still that drops to 3 pens/pred but means they will likely be firing into the front arc, which  compared to a 16,67% chance to one shot a pred on a pending hit is an improvement 

 

 

 

Duplicate glance results do a point of damage too, so there's that extra.

[Marshal Rohr]

10 minutes ago, Misterduch said:

 

Yeah no sherlock? But If that 10 man moves and fires they will need 6 hits followed by 6 pens to take down a single pred. If they stand still that drops to 3 pens/pred but means they will likely be firing into the front arc, which  compared to a 16,67% chance to one shot a pred on a pending hit is an improvement 

 

 

 

Yes, so the sidegrade being (see if you can keep up with this) is that now squads that previously had to be still to do 6 hits and 6 pens can now move and do 6 hits and 6 pens. In addition any hits that glance also removes HP when applying two status effects, and even if they don’t remove the HP from two effects the effects are permanent so no matter what after a tank is glanced one time it’s only shooting snap shots or it’s not moving or it’s not reacting and that is until something with battlesmith fixes it.
 

as it stands, without tanks being cheaper, some kind of battle smith self repair wargear, tanks are still going to struggle like they did in 2.0.  

Edited yesterday at 11:37 AM by Marshal Rohr

[Marshal Mittens]

So I had more time to digest all this, and I will say one big takeaway is holy word salad, they made very simple things a paragraph or more in rules. 

 

I think this is going to be an infantry edition, at least based off what I have seen so far. A lot of the bonuses don't do anything extra against T4 3+ 1W infantry, it's all extra stuff against multiwound or the like units. Dreads and vehicles will be in a rougher spot, we'll, melee dreads. Ranged dreads will likely be fine. 

 

At least based off what I see here. 

[Captain Idaho]

Not sure on the challenges rules being worthwhile. A lot of information to take in yet I'll just accept your challenge by Horus with a Sergeant whilst Guilliman hacks your squad to death, then I win.

 

Bearing that in mind as state of play, points for challenges benefits becomes a negative skew whilst anyone who plays even half sensibly will just use Sergeants to challenge and limit combat resolution as well as casualties of powerful characters.

 

Then we can add together multiple combats and it all just becomes a lot of extra stuff to keep track of for little benefit to the narrative they're going for.

[Marshal Rohr]

2 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

Not sure on the challenges rules being worthwhile. A lot of information to take in yet I'll just accept your challenge by Horus with a Sergeant whilst Guilliman hacks your squad to death, then I win.

 

Bearing that in mind as state of play, points for challenges benefits becomes a negative skew whilst anyone who plays even half sensibly will just use Sergeants to challenge and limit combat resolution as well as casualties of powerful characters.

 

Then we can add together multiple combats and it all just becomes a lot of extra stuff to keep track of for little benefit to the narrative they're going for.

Doesn’t look like sergeants can issue or accept challenges. Just Command Models and a Master Sergeant upgraded with the Champions rule. 

[Stitch5000]

14 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

Not sure on the challenges rules being worthwhile. A lot of information to take in yet I'll just accept your challenge by Horus with a Sergeant whilst Guilliman hacks your squad to death, then I win.

 

Bearing that in mind as state of play, points for challenges benefits becomes a negative skew whilst anyone who plays even half sensibly will just use Sergeants to challenge and limit combat resolution as well as casualties of powerful characters.

 

Then we can add together multiple combats and it all just becomes a lot of extra stuff to keep track of for little benefit to the narrative they're going for.

It's almost like they thought of that as early on as you did and stopped that from being possible. 

[Marshal Rohr]

2 minutes ago, Stitch5000 said:

It's almost like they thought of that as early on as you did and stopped that from being possible. 

Did someone piss in your cheerios? We are all seeing this for the first time and thinking out loud together. It used to be a tradition to do this after weekenders and we didn’t have to deal with snarky comments the whole time. Take it to Reddit if you need to farm dopamine. 

[TheTrans]

So looking at the Status Effects on vehicles.. 

They've somehow made them worse... like sure... you can't one shot them now with a single AP2 pen... but a bunch of missile launchers will now just be able to strait slap a landraider into uselessness.... then factor in some lascannons chewing off the hullpoints. 

Given it looks like the 'standard' game wants you to be in the 2500-3500 bracket, I can't imagine vehicles have gotten much cheaper, and a 5 hullpoint rhino is going to get taken apart pretty quickly, possibly, somehow, even quicker than before.... 

 

So hey, I suppose we can cross our fingers, glug some cope and say 'It's ok, these rules, much like 2.0 have weird failings and some pretty blatant issues inbound.. but as long as balance is solid across the different armies.... the game should be ok'.

Their track record is good for that yeah? right? 

 

Also please, for the love of god, stop with the 'get a better meta' or 'play with better people' in regards to the impending spam that is coming our way. For starters some people have very limited options to get games in so it doesn't help them.

 

The other side is... why do we just allow GW to shovel out drivel. They are a game company and a mate brought this up to me earlier, for whatever reason, wargamers, espcially GW wargamers are very happy existing with terrible rules/broken armies etc... and just glug it up on the next release. A boardgame would just die if it released itself in the state that GW drops stuff. I'd imagine there is a level of sunk cost playing into it, but god damn do we just get whacked, thank daddy GW and ask for another edition in 3 years. 

So coming back around to 'get a better meta' if a community is so perfect at self policing etc (like it seems apparently everyones community is online and no one ever has issues with spam lists/waacers etc) why do you even need rules? As rules should be there to limit terrible outliers, much like laws.

Lets be perfectly clear, relying on a community (of wargamers no less) to use restraint is a slippery slope at the best of times, and any 'unspoken rules' within a community are just actually house rules, that if GW actually cared about supporting a product after the fact, they'd roll into updates and errata.. but yeah..

I suppose we just sit around the fire, sing kumbuya, cross our fingers and hope balance across factions isn't the travesty it was in 2.0..

 

Salty bastard out...  

[Dhar'Neth]

3 hours ago, Aarik said:

I'm really not loving this new FOC.  At first I thought it would require a ridiculous number of high command/command units (I'm going to lump them together into just "command") to unlock enough detachments to run a varied, non-spam list, but then realized that it's mitigated a bit by using your prime slots to unlock additional FOC slots, and I've broken my brain trying to figure it all out.  Please let me know if I'm misunderstanding something. I hope I am.

 

I have listed some units below which I think represent a varied, unproblematic army (and omitting compulsory troops and HQ for now, since I don't think they are problematic in this example by themselves). It's easy to see that they fit into the old FOC:

 

• Command squad: No FOC slot/with master of the legion
• Contemptor: Elites
• Rapier battery: Elites
• Terminator squad: Elites
• Recon Squad: Troops
• Saber: Fast attack
• Jetbike squad: Fast attack
• Landspeeder: Fast attack
• Predator: Heavy support
• Leviathan: Heavy support

 

But it's much harder (for me at least) to figure out how the  to make a list with them in the new FOC.  Preliminarily, here is what I think the building block considerations are:

 

 

• Primary Detachment: 4 command slots (and thus 4 more detachments); 2 additional FOC slots from prime slots
• Officer cadre: 2 command slots (but only 1 detachment because the Officer Cadre itself costs 1 command slot); 1 additional FOC slot from prime slot.

 

So taking that into account, here is how the units slot into the new detachments/FOC:

• Command squad: Warlord or Combat Retinue Prime slot in Primary Detachment for additional FOC slot
• Contemptor: Heavy Support Prime slot in Primary Detachment for additional FOC slot
• Rapier battery: Support Prime slot in 1st Officer Cadre
• Terminator squad: Shock Assault
  • (unlocked by Primary Detachment)
• Recon Squad: Combat Pioneer 
  • (unlocked by Primary Detachment)
• Saber: 1st first strike 
  • (unlocked by Primary Detachment)
• Jetbike squad: 1st first strike 
  • (unlocked by Primary Detachment)
• Landspeeder: 2nd first strike 
  • (unlocked by Primary Detachment)
• Predator: Armored support 
  • (unlocked by 1st Officer Cadre)
• Leviathan: Heavy Support Prime slot in 2nd Officer Cadre

 

Without using our prime slots on more FOC slots, these units would require NINE (9) total detachments.  The Primary Detachment gives enough command slots for four more detachments, so we would need to get five more through five more Officer Cadres.  Thus results in a whopping fourteen (14) command units.  Fourteen.

 

But if we use all our prime slots on more FOC slots and get get more Officer Cadres as needed, we can reduce that to six detachments for the listed units, plus two officer cadres.  This gets us down to "only" seven (7) command units being required (4 in Primary, 2 in 1st cadre, 1 in 2nd cadre).  Is this not absurd?

 

Now, I cherrypicked the units a bit to make a point about the ridiculous number of command units that can be required, but I think this is a very plausible collection of units.  It's also one that could easily be arrived at by a new/casual player who just grabs one of whatever they think is cool, rather than worrying about min-maxing or spamming units.  The type of player that GW is ostensibly aiming to please with these changes.  And even leaving that aside, trying to figure out how the  to fit them into the FOC was, without exaggeration, by far the worst time I've ever had trying to make a list.  God help anyone who tries to explain this to a new player.  Whereas 1-3 HQ, 0-4 Elites, 2-6 Troops, 0-3 Fast Attack, and 0-3 Heavy Support is super simple and easy. 

 

And it doesn't even do anything to combat spam.  Assuming contemptors still come in talons, I can get 8 for 2 command units (using my 2 Primary prime slots), or 9 for 3. Basically the same as before.   And outside of dreadnoughts, it encourages spam, or at least skew lists, by granting more detachment efficiency for the same units/types of units (e.g., 12 predators for 1 command slot).  This seems to be the exact opposite of fixing the problem.  It made normal army building needlessly complicated and did nothing to curb spam and skew.

I might be wrong, but I understand that each high command slot gives one apex detachment, so you can only take one officer cadre. At least that, what the lines suggest - High command gives accces to apex detachment while (regular) command gives access to to auxiliary one.

Edited yesterday at 12:27 PM by Dhar'Neth

[Mogger351]

GW seem to be hunting the leaks and shutting them down. Guess they realised they dont have content for the next 4 weeks otherwise.

[TheTrans]

9 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

GW seem to be hunting the leaks and shutting them down. Guess they realised they dont have content for the next 4 weeks otherwise.

I imaigne today's warcom article is going to be late so they can frantically make a new article say 'lol get a load of these potato pic leaks'.  

[Marshal Rohr]

I have a suspicion Vehicle Squadrons and Talons didn’t make it. If you want to run a Contemptor, leviathan, and Deredeo you’ll need to use three Heavy Support Auxiliary detachments. 

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

1 hour ago, Marshal Rohr said:

Doesn’t look like sergeants can issue or accept challenges. Just Command Models and a Master Sergeant upgraded with the Champions rule. 

Sgt. will be muttering the following under his breath with a single tear streaking down his face while he is forced to watch the top brass have a go at each other:

 

"I am rubber, you are glue."

[Lord Marshal]

Army building article. I'm sure nobody has already seen the rules therein today.

 

Veteran Assault Marines! I'm not saying I called it, but...

 

 

Vanilla Centurions can take two Auxiliary Detachments instead of the one everybody else gets, which is nice.

 

Vehicle Squadrons and Dreadnought Talons are GONE.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 02:19 PM by Lord Marshal

[SkimaskMohawk]

When i read Marshall loss' initial bullets i got really excited because it seemed like we were partially going back to 5ths glance/pen dynamic of suppression on glances and chance to kill on pens. But it really is more like modern 40k instead. No chance of instant kills and more "wounds" to burn down. Kinda really enjoyed the 5th style instead of the 8th...

[Marshal Rohr]

Man, my gut reaction to army building includes a lot of curse words. I’ll let someone with a bigger brain explain how to fit my collection in because I can’t. 

[Uprising]

With how well 2nd edition went, and what is being revealed for 3rd edition, my group is basically staying with 1st edition of Horus Heresy or using our models for other games.  These changes do not look like fun, and add alot of bloat to the system.  If I wanted a more crunchier game, my group just goes play battletech.  

[BitsHammer]

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/itpl4ywx/rules-in-the-age-of-darkness-how-to-build-an-army-in-the-new-edition/

 

Looking at the article, I wonder what counts as "troops" now. Like where do bikes and assault marines go in this FOC? 

 

And I just needed to keep reading as they translate a modern list into the new list:

 

Edited yesterday at 02:17 PM by BitsHammer

[Lord Marshal]

9 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

Man, my gut reaction to army building includes a lot of curse words. I’ll let someone with a bigger brain explain how to fit my collection in because I can’t. 

 

Since there's no limit to Detachments, I think with enough Vanilla Centurions, you should be able to fit most stuff in? 

 

Edited yesterday at 02:20 PM by Lord Marshal

[Nagashsnee]

I will withold judgement untill i get my books and see how easy it work in practise.

 

But sweet Emperor they are not even pretending its not a purely made for marine players game anymore. 

 

'Yes you see we took away the army neutral symbols from FOC and replaced it all with space marine specific artwork'. Such a weird choice. 

[firestorm40k]

So, based on this article, I can't use the (just over) 2,000 points of Imperial Fists I've got painted, as it's not legal 

 

I've only got one HQ built and painted, a Castellan, so that denies me access to additional Auxiliary slots,unless I use that 'prime' bonus thing to give me an additional one. 

 

So I have to choose between my Contemptor, 2 Cataphractii, Tactical Support Squad, or either of the Heavy Support squads I've got. 

 

That doesn't sound like list building is more flexible than it ever was, GW! 

 

Unless someone can explain this to me better than GW's writers, but it looks like I've got to add stuff I didn't necessarily want to, in order to get the Auxiliary slots just so I can use what I've already got 

[The boater]

12 minutes ago, Lord Marshal said:

 

Since there's no limit to Detachments, I think with enough Vanilla Centurions, you should be able to fit most stuff in? 

 

Basically this. I guess technically there is a hard cap to one basic, one apex, and 8 auxiliary in your main army… but if someone can’t fit their usual army into that, then I don’t really know what to say. Also the legion specific might throw that door even wider open, lol

[The boater]

5 minutes ago, firestorm40k said:

So, based on this article, I can't use the (just over) 2,000 points of Imperial Fists I've got painted, as it's not legal 

 

I've only got one HQ built and painted, a Castellan, so that denies me access to additional Auxiliary slots,unless I use that 'prime' bonus thing to give me an additional one. 

 

So I have to choose between my Contemptor, 2 Cataphractii, Tactical Support Squad, or either of the Heavy Support squads I've got. 

 

That doesn't sound like list building is more flexible than it ever was, GW! 

 

Unless someone can explain this to me better than GW's writers, but it looks like I've got to add stuff I didn't necessarily want to, in order to get the Auxiliary slots just so I can use what I've already got 

Yes, in order to bring all the additional stuff, you now have a centurion tax. So you gotta build like 2 more single guys to make you collection fully work… or if they still have the option for the optae, then you gotta build like three more cheap points sgt models

Edited yesterday at 02:35 PM by The boater