Big 40K Core Rules Changes Seen at Warhammer Fest Demo Games! 10th Edition Reports from the Front
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 лип 2024
- Let's talk through the showcase games GW is holding for 10th Edition in Warhammer Fest Manchester...
Credit to two great Reddit Threads and ALL the people who helped out!
/ warhammer_10th_demo
/ i_just_played_the_demo...
-- Patreon Page --
/ auspex
-- SubscribeStar --
www.subscribestar.com/auspex
-- Buy Warhammer 40K miniatures here --
Element Games in the UK: elementgames.co.uk/?d=10426
Noble Knight Games in the USA: www.nobleknight.com/SC/Warham...
or Amazon also in the USA - amzn.to/303klKD
-- Buy 3D Printers from Elegoo Here --
shareasale.com/r.cfm?b=168032...
Discount Code for $10 off: MRT10OFF
-- Social Media --
Facebook: / auspex-tactics-1031297...
Discord: / discord
-- Subscribe to Auspex Tactics --
tinyurl.com/yc69mguy
0:00 Intro
0:58 10th Demo Games
4:24 Core Rules Changes
15:40 Space Marines Changes
16:44 Tyranids Changes
17:36 Datasheets
22:05 Outro - Ігри
I love that a flamer unit can inflict battle shock, that seems really thematic considering how flame weapons work in the real world.
Reminds me of the high morale damage in dawn of war
@@kittycatdreamz I love flamers in dawn of war
Just the fact that weapons can inflict battle shock is very cool, and suggests that morale-based units and armies might actually get some love at long last.
@@jarrakulYES NIGHT LORDS ON TOP LETS GOOO!!!
@@goopygoblin117 i feel like this will be a raptor/ warp talon datasheet rule
Blast being +1 attack per every 5 models is nice, it means that attatched units will not increase the vulnerability of the unit.
It would also make bringing Plauge Marines in fluffy sizes of 7 actually not a terrible plan.
And now T'au won't not take drones with infantry to avoid the 11+ blast. Ork boyz might be taken in respectable sizes. And Tyranid Gaunts won't be taxed for being hordey.
What are you talking about? Attached units DO affect the vulnerability of the unit. That's the entire point.
@@WardenOfTerra Yes but the break point currently is 6 models or 11 models. The new break point is every 5. So a 5 man squad gives +1 to blast weapons in 10th where in 9th it does not give 3 shots minimum. If you add a drone to a tau squad of 5 taking it to 6 models in 10th that makes no change to blast until you lose a mini, in 9th edition the enemy would get 3 shots minimum with blast weapons because you added the drone.
I don't think that part of the change matters to much (6 models vs 5 and 11 models vs 10), but +1 attacks per 5 is a better rule IMO because minimum of 3 shots sometimes made no difference at all depending on how lucky you rolled. The 9th rule also behaved wierd if a weapon has 2d3 shots a minimum of 3 from blast didn't do much (taking you from 2-6 shots to 3-6 shots), meanwhile a 1d3 blast weapon did get a big boost from blast going from 1-3 shots to flat 3 shots. Not to mention that if you rolled well on your shots anyway the blast rule didn't help you, you could just get lucky and the rule was extra stuff to remember during gameplay with no change to the outcome.
Meanwhile +1 attack per 5 models is a fairly easy to remember rule, it scales stronger per number of enemies, and its always useful with 1 extra attack. I think the new rule hits the sweet spot, its just better design. It's more interesting, easier to remember, and still keeps the idea of what the rule represents. Blast weapons are more effective against numerous model units.
Could be good for Iron Warriors, we have a strat (if it still exists in 10th) where for 1cp when working out how many models you are targeting with a blast weapon you double it. So 10 man becomes 20 man. If it stays then that’s +4 hits.
IMO they should give blast weapons 'an attacks value equal to the number of models in the target unit' (large blast), or 'equal to HALF the number of models in the target unit, rounding up' (small blast). The current and 10th Ed mechanics are so arbitrary and random, and require unnecessary dice rolls.
You could also potentially have something like a huge blast rule, for example counting as large blast against the target unit and small blast against other units in close proximity (e.g. within 3").
Can confirm I was in the queue for about 3 and a half hours. We played one turn, nids using 2 screamer killers and 40 termagants, marines had 2 dreads and 20 infernos.
Other couple things from the game I played, we were told models in combat could only fight if they were base to base, or if they are base to base with an ally that is toucing an enemy model.
Also objectives will be measured from the edges of the counter rather than the middle, so objective scoring zone is slightly bigger 👍
Dang one turn and that many models sheesh
@@ant1lebeuax is it still 3inch control area and a 40mm marker?
@@ant1lebeuax Also apparently you can't stand on top of the objective now. Meaning fancy looking objectives are now the new meta!
@@ant1lebeuax 9th edition you measured from the edge too, but A LOT of people misplayed this
Awesome to see the community pitching in for the Auspex Hive Mind, thanks for all the coverage.
Huge thanks to Auspex doing the Emperors work. I was at the event & it's was laughably organised with the shop queue along being nearly 90 minutes.
Agreed!
You used the wrong describing word, "laughably". People will understand what you mean if you describe it as "games workshoply" organised.
Stack 'em high sell 'em (not) cheap........
Hi Lee, agree
I lucked out in the afternoon around 3, there was no queue so I dived in and was though in 5 mins
I was first in the queue on Saturday. Got there at 9am while the previews were on.
All these rules came up in our game, except blast.
In our fight phase, enemy players fought first alternately. Same as 9th.
One thing not mentioned that came up in our game.
Deadly demise rule is 6 inches!
Loads of little quality of life improvements imo. Looked really good.
Thanks for the info, will be aiming to put together a follow up with a few small things that I missed here :)
Huge queues would be the most accurate description of the whole event really as the queue for the shop wound around half of the venue. (Which surprised me as I don’t think there were any discounts on offer and other than the event exclusive figures there was nothing there you couldn’t get from the GW store in the Arndale or your FLGS?)
This man feeds the street, one man content god
Thanks to everyone that contributed with info.
Queues were insane - great planning by GW having a huge hall, which they use about a half of, and then only putting 6 tables on for 10th edition when it's clear a huge amount of people are there for it
It was fucking horrible.
Yeah my son was talking about it for weeks and you should have seen his face drop when he saw the queues. He wasn't allowed to demo the video games either (fair enough I suppose as they are rated 18). Thank the emperor for the board game café
Absolutely agree, wasn't waiting 3-4 hours in a line for a quick demo that was only available on 5 tables which GW knew this was going to be the biggest pull of their 40k Fest day
Absolute joke
Warhammer fest is always trash and has always been trash. Everyone who has gone knows this and says it.
Despite I play a melee type of army, I have to admit that all those 3+3 inches synanigans with piling and consolidation never felt very "logic" but I also think that 1" engagement range felt quite OK. Let's see otherwise how it works around fighting through walls now. Overall I am glad that GW is trying to get rid of most of those rules that added little to the game compared to the degree of mess and misunderstanding they caused (ie: fight last... bye bye my belived Whirlwind ='(
As fun as it was, queued for over 2 hours to play 10 minutes! I'm not really an early adopter (mostly still playing 8th ed) but 10th ed should reset the playing field and appears to run smoothly. I am actually looking forward to it!
Same. I stopped mid-6th edition but kept up. This is the first time I’ve wanted to get back into it.
The only source you need for 40k… this guy is the absolute best
Matt Easton, of Schola-Gladiatoria, has pointed out that a large number of one-on-one combats with swords ended with both parties killing each other, so it would be nice if melee attacks at the same initiative step would be assumed to happen at the same time, whoever rolls first, so no models would be removed until after everyone has fought.
That's how it works with the initiative stat in older editions/heresy. Models fight in initiative order and are removed at the same time if they have the same initiative. It added a good bit of nuance to combat.
@@khorneflakes4446 Yes, I miss it.
@@sumotacular3681 I liked it also, but to be 100% fair to the game design, the old rule did lead to some hard match ups sometimes. If you were playing a nearly 100% melee army, and the other guy was also playing a mostly melee army but with higher initiative. It could result in a really unfun experience for the player at the lower initiative. Basically forced to charge into combats where all his guys die without fighting.
The current system favors whoever charges, which means positioning to get a charge is important, and some of the game can come down to rolling a high charge result to crush a fight, or a low result, failing the charge and losing badly on the counter attack next turn. So getting into position where you can get a nice charge, or the enemy can only try a long charge gives players some agency during a match. The old system in my situation above means that there isn't much choice, agency, or interesting decisions for the lower initiative player. Thankfully mostly in 7th edition you did not have to play a melee army at low initiative, you probably could field at least some guns.
I think the match up that feels the worst in a similar way in 9th is armies with high toughness vs dark eldar poison focused army, or super tough armies vs mortal wound spam. It just feels like there isn't much choice to the match up, you are overpaying points cost for units whos durability doesn't help in that match up. Nice Toughness 5, I brought poison guns. Nice Toughness 5, 4+ invulnerable, 2+ armor save, digustingly resilient -1 damage taking, but I brought 4 grey knight strike squads who deep struck on you and all cast smite, it ignores all of it. Your toughness doesn't matter, you armor doesn't matter, you invulnerable save doesn't matter, your reduced damage doesn't matter.
Basically just saying the initiative system was nice, but they have to make sure they balance the stats well and be careful about who they give what stats. If a unit is higher initiative, and can reliably kill the entire enemy unit in one round of combat, you risk falling into a situation that is totally hopeless and not very fun for one player. Meanwhile trying to move your models around the board and hope you get a good dice roll, is more in line with what warhammer is about. Moving your soldiers about and enjoying some dice rolls.
Big fan of Matts stuff
I think my biggest concern for this is that as codex's are released. whatever gets the first round through, is going to be so insanely hard to kill for EVERYTHING ELSE.
They have mentioned that all factions will get data sheets/cards for the start of 10th which should mitigate that issue
Engagement range was explained to us as "in base contact with an enemy model, or within base contact of a friendly that is in base contact with an enemy model". No within half an inch or within half an inch of someone within half an inch stuff. Basically just the front 2 ranks. It was also commented on by the host that it makes terminators extra spicy due to this change.
From what I got from the charging and Engagement range, the Engagement range is still you must be within an inch but if you roll excess range on the charge you must finish base rather than being within and being able to "pile in" around the unit to get onto an objective for example
This just makes me wish I could've gone to Warhammer Fest myself but I'm stuck in work this weekend. I'm glad we have Auspex to fill us in though! I'm still holding out for 10th being the final death of bloat however unlikely it may be..
It definitely won't be the death of bloat. 8th Edition was supposed to be the death of bloat as well, and it was for a while. But towards the end of 8th, they started bringing back the rules bloat because of whiny players constantly complaining that 8th edition was "too simplified". Then we got the outrageous rules bloat of 9th. I predict the same thing will happen with 10th. It will be great at first, then those same whiny players will constantly cry that the game is too simple (it's already started with all the crying about subfactions going away), and GW will slowly reintroduce all the rules bloat that they were trying to get rid of until the rules are a bloated mess all over again.
You really shouldn't wish that you were there. It was a terribly organised event. Be thankful you didn't spend a single penny on a ticket. Believe me, it was shit.
you really REALLY dont want to go
the queues for everything wrapped round the whole room, there was NOWHERE near enough spots
literally every queue, even for just dumb side things like a toy catapult, were an hour+long
as someone who was there, DONT go, i know im not gonna go again
@@WardenOfTerra wonder what access you got for the Super Duper admissions (£1000 ++)? 5 min queues maybe?
i wonder if we might see bonus cp from having your general on the board like in AOS and the possibility that second player might get a extra cp to help balance the first turn advantage.
Would be great to have something to offset the first turn advantage! I always liked how Star Wars: Legion handled it - each player activates one unit back and forth, until all of your units have been used. Much better flow than one person having a full turn with all their units
I’ve been waiting for a vid going over this stuff. Thanks Auspex.
seem like some rules from boarding actions have made it way or was designed to be used for 10th.
Example is the overwatch, in boarding actions you can set to overwatch and if another player moves, advance, charges etc, you can fire overwatch
Thank you sooo much for your awesome work Auspex Tactics : ).
So the floor on blast weapons is now a bit lower but more reliable, and the ceiling is a bit higher but less reliable, depending on the size of the target unit? Seems neat!
AT, you are the beauty AND the beast!!! Thanks so much for your non-stop 40k coverage
I still think the regular Boltgun is going to remain Rapid Fire. But the change to Assault weapons also seems to have come with a loss of shots (Auto Bolt Rifles used to give an additional shot in addition to the ability to fire after advancing).
You are a god at keeping us up to date. I'm heading to your patreon now.
Interesting to note, with the infernus marines in a combat patrol, in the What else is in Leviathan? Article on Warhammer community, it mentions how a portion of each side of Leviathan forms a combat patrol and then shows a page from the book that’s called “Playing Combat Patrol” or something and it shows the Confirmed Tyranid Combat Patrol versus what appears to be the Terminator Captain, the Terminator Librarian, the Squad of of Terminators, and five Infernus marines. I think it is a safe bet that’s the Combat Patrol for the space marine side of the box.
18" for the attack of the screamer killer seems like a lot. I would've guessed 12" maybe 9"
I wonder if Overwatch and aupex scan will be combined into one strategem, kinda makes sense for trimmed down rules
from the terrain previews it sounded like engagement range was still a thing, might just be the games being simplified a bit for demos
I waited for about 3.5 hours on Sunday. The Oath of Moment was in play in our game. Basically, the host saw that our nids were rolling successful saves like mad due to luck, so to make it a fun demo, we retconned in the oath of moment totally having been triggered in the command phase so that the dread would get to reroll all dice rolls against the screamer killer. I wouldnt count it out in 500 point games yet, but it may have been a "hey lets tilt the scales a bit to maintain a fun environment" decision rather than anything concrete.
they said the combat patrols for nids and marines are included in the leviathan box, it is a selection of the units within just not all
By the throne! this guy can make videos like an absolute machine!
This is my go to channel for the latest on 40k. I appreciate the time and effort required to keep us up to date.
Simon from WHTV was our game master; can confirm the Fight First is the player who's turn it IS, alternating. Then fight normally is starting with the player who's turn it ISNT.
So same as now, but they've just gotten rid of Fights Last
Charging player doesn't get to go before enemy fight first!
I asked the event game manager for my table and he gave the example of the Lion fighting first and cutting down a swath of charging enemies
Insane output man! Keep up the good work we really appreciate it
Wait so blast will work on space marines now OMG.
i am happy about this
I wonder if sonic weapons will now have a similar ability to Death Scream. Even if it’s just blastmasters making enemy units take battle-shock tests every time they are hit would be pretty nice.
With CSM getting a codex in Spring 2023, I'm wondering what will happen to the all but confirmed standalone Emperor's Children codex. I wanna bring the noise with some rockin' new models
@@SarajevoKyoto Agreed. I am worried we are going to have a similar release to the World Eaters, late into the edition.
@oneearrabbit Honestly I'd take that over nothing. A limited range with the promise of expansion would be alright
@@SarajevoKyoto Agreed.
@@SarajevoKyoto I'd rather stay in CSM than have a codex like the WE one.
I don't want GW to tell me "hey, you see your EC collection? Well half of it can't be EC anymore."
I like the idea of any unit being able to fire overwatch - if within a suitable range.
It's bad. This means that units have the reactions and speed of absolute gods. War games should always be about weighting up actions and their consequences. Making it so that every unit can fire overwatch completely takes away from that and immediately swings shooting-heavy armies like Tau straight to the top spot in ANY meta - be it casual or competitive. It's inherently bad game design.
Sneaking extra movement in 9th always bothered me, especially when resurrecting models. You call it "gamey" and that's a good word for it. It never seemed like that was intended in the rules.
In the test game I played the referee confirmed:
1) fight first via charging goes before innate fight first but only on the turn you charged.
2) the player who's turn it ISN'T then chooses who to fight with and you then alternate picking units to fight with until everything has fought.
Really cool. Thank you for sharing. 👍
im interested in combat patrol ive got 3 boxes sitting here but not sure i wanna build them until i know how combat patrol works. Dont wanna build and find out my combos arent legal
There's always queueing at any festival, they're a logistical nightmare
The test playing of 8th edition was a similar affair at the Coventry Richo Arena Warhammer Fest
I'm curious how Dark Angels/Space Wolves will work...
My guess for the overwatch in movement phase will be triggered when an enemy unit ends its movement within x distance, probably 12", maybe 6". I think there are some Age of Sigmar rules with similar design.
10th edition is looking to be awesome.
Not really, it's GW, they make mediocre game rules
@@11AleZZok we get it, you don’t like GW. Feel free to leave
@@11AleZZ "your opinion is wrong"
@@11AleZZ Then why are you even here?
Because I like the game, that doesn't mean that the game is solid, I'm not a fanboy
If you can't end on an objective how does that interact with vehicals without bases? A baneblade is only in contact with the table on the tracks
I feel like being able to charge objectives should be a thing
That would be almost always worse than advancing wouldn’t it?
@@chandlerpearce6213 well if the phases are about the same, movement -> shooting -> charge. You might theoretically be able to merk a unit off the obj from range and then try to charge onto it to cap it.
@@Dragoon-flys I guess that’s true yes, I hadn’t thought about it that way
Also I somehow forgot that you move before charging, so ignore me hahaha
I’m thinking of ASOIAF where they’re seperate
Fighting inanimate objects should be a thing? You need to get your head checked out.
@@chandlerpearce6213 Ranged armies can struggle to contest objectives (and instead have to focus on tabling) as melee units that charge on to an objective "own" it after they've charged and killed enemies, while ranged armies just shoot them off it and then still don't own the objective. This gives them a chance of taking it.
overwatch does sound like Boarding Action, though that might be just combat patrol rules.
I'm glad CP is out of army building. Having 2 currencies when building your army was just stupid.
Otherwise positive about it all though we haven't seen it all combined.
Interesting to see the codex release schedule for the rest of 2023 - Ad-Mech after Nids and SM - could this be the fabled arrival of Dark Mech in 40K!!!
Had the same thought 🤞
If the cp start at 0 I wonder what happen with the relic keyword like the contemptor and other forge world
well some hero have extra cp if they didnt loose them so you can get with it. or maybe they gonna erase that rule
@david Arbour true if it not lost or It might be on name characters
@@davidarbour2683 That would bite. Imotekh the Stormlord is dynasty locked unless that is changed so hardly anyone takes him anymore. His main draw was the two extra CP for taking him. If that's gone his finecast will be sitting on a shelf.
@@Weefather Ummm you havnt seen his actual rules yet. Could be he is actually worth playing besides the 2 CP, IF he even still has the 2 CP bonus.
I think they will simply remove the CP cost from all models. CP seems to be moving to a In the Moment resource versus a PRE game resources. So all pregame expenses will likely be changed to zero/removed.
Well if 0 starting CP is true that's gonna be curtains for any pre battle stratagems, going to be sorry to see Rapid Redeploy go.
Glad it's gone. The main game hasn't even started and already players are wracking up their brain for strategems.
At least it'd make for a natural game escalation, rather than the game being decided in the first turn.
D Cannons are still gonna be my favorite unit.
Nice
Re standing on objectives, i heard that it was only for the demo games, so that the markers don't get moved accidently to prevent having to remeasure after each game which would slow things down. Hopefully not actually a 10th ed rule.
I would hazard that the no standing on Objectives could be to prevent shenanigans that I used to pull with my Knights of "you can't contest the Objective if I put my huge base blocking it"
I was hoping that exactly this was the case! Introducing such a massive rule to solve the non-existing problem of players forgetting where objectives are located just seemed bizarre..
@@ElOvnen It's to stop people dropping massive bases on it so you can't 'contest' it. It's an essential rule alteration to prevent the cheese moves.
Does this change to CP indicate that Martial Legacy will be eliminated?
I'm a bit worried by how limited CP will be. I was really interested in the more reactive strategems, hopefully we are able to use a reasonable number of them during the game.
It's worth mentioning that the 30k equivalent of "stratagems" are only usable once per game and still can be pretty impactful
I like the idea of less common, more "tactical/reactive", more impactful stratagems rather than just using it to buff units half the time
@@SmashingPixels Aren't reactions once per phase in Horus Heresy? That's 3 "strategems" per turn. I realised though that since the preview was a tiny demo game it might be that in combat patrol games you start with 0 but in Strike Force games you have more? I'm sure WarCom will confirm soonish...
@@SmashingPixels One reaction per phase (with some rules like warlord traits and wargear that allows certain reactions to be used more than once per phase) and one Advanced Reaction from your faction that can be used once per game.
@@Cerebus1000 And a grand total of three reactions per phase across the game, if my copy is to be believed.
I quite like the rule of not ending movement on an objective. It felt gamey when I could park a land raider on top of an objective to stop my opponent from being able to get to it. This rule gives more of an edge for infantry units that can circle the objective to deny it, but the opponent can create holes in the circle by causing casualties. (Possibly with the overwatch rule?)
The last time this happened was in 5th-7th edition but not in 9th…
That's just a simple nerf to big-based units. You still capture the objective by being within 3" of the marker, now the marker just serves as unnecessary area denial.
@@notdoomguy1616 You can still move over it, you just can't end on top, so that's not much movement lost and it removes an extremely gamey mechanic. All good stuff for me!
@@Lifaenil Yes, you can. But imagine you're playing knights. Your Knight Crusader needs to get over an objective, but suddenly, you're denied 7" of movement, because your humongous base can't touch the marker and the terrain.
The only way I see this rule being reasonable is if 100mm+ bases get some sort of rule to ignore this.
My guess regarding the "not ending movement on objectives" would be to hindern massive models from just blocking the complete objective with their massive bases
no different to a large squad fanning out around an objective. Its not a good change
When i did my demo game we got a hint that tyranid gaunt regen would be to bring a whole dead sqaud back
Are we still rolling 2d6 to charge?
That Screamer Killer is crazy. I sure hope it's at least a little expensive
Why? It's melee-only. It should swing heavily to being good in close combat.
@@WardenOfTerra it’s not melee only
@@meta1587 it's almost the same as it use to be
That Screamer Killer is *massive!*
I like the no mini on top of objectives rule. It will avoid the old drop pods on objective trick that made your opponent unable to score because he couldn't get in range
how is that different to a squad of infantry on it? You still have to kill them and them to get on it if you cant move past. Its easily possible to screen the objective out, the squad will just be open to fire from most sight lines
If GW isn't publicizing it but telling people to take pictures and talk about it then it shows a shift in the way they will advertise and push the game. In other words they are testing to people of the community to spread the information from one location. I do find this really cool and hope they learn from this.
It has been the obvious answer for years as it means leakers now just benefit GW without fear of repercussions. For the most part GW seem to be doing relatively sensible business decisions for 10th edition.
Until they don't make enough starter boxes and scalpers snap them all up :|
I like streamlined rules vs dumbed down 😆
Dude you are literally the best
Is the objective circumference the same as the previous edition
From the warcom article, yes.
if you start with 0 CP wouldn't that also mean that relic units don't have a point tax anymore? would probably still be restricted to 1 unit per army in that case.
Or you just eat the points cost, like my Spartan costing double my Crusader.
haha thats me in the white top looking at the new models
Was this an IRL closed beta?
if you went to warhammer fest, you could queue to play it
Soo, if my Hormagaunts are outstretched so far that it's difficult to actually be base to base without being on top of each other, what do we do? Or any other model where they're WELL over their base, like all my old Carnifexes. Carnifex won't be difficult, but I'm thinking now how many models would have to "drift" into combat and not even face the enemy directly.
BLAST
Can I exceed the initial amount of shot from a weapon? If I roll D6 and make 6, can I do 7 or 8 attack?
Hi, thanks for this, where does it say exactly what the Torrent ability does? Worried sororitas player here.
probably the flamer auto hit ability
@@kyleroach-smith1291 Thanks, I'd guessed as much, I was wondering (really hoping not), if it comes with other baggage, possibly preventing lovely overwatch or something.
Didn't they already say that basically each half of the Levi box would be a combat patrol? Or two? I feel they showed one off during the reveal?
This was the key thing I wanted (and expected) from the box. Looking forward to pitching my new Ork Combat Patrol against these two.
I'm gonna hope for some variant rules in the book for Alternating Activations
Just add it in yourself with your playgroup. Mine has been playing that way for all of 9th, and we intend to keep using our system throughout 10th
Our group has been doing the same. We alternate activating models, moving through the phases. The only downside we found was it is harder for melee units to get into melee, especially smaller units who are prone to getting shot to bits after they've moved into position. Or slower melee units (Gravis, terminators, etc) could be moved away from by a unit intended as the charge target.
It does make the game tactical and mean that the aforementioned issues were due to poor choices as much as an inherent problem. It was a challenge to be worked around, but perhaps would benefit from the option to maybe charge with movement, or advance that was less swingy.
Outriders charging 20 necron warriors was perhaps not a smart move, but also should be something one can pull off.
Yes we’ve also had some difficulty with pulling off charges, I actually like this charge movement phase idea, it’s how warhammer fantasy worked, I may have to try it
The overwatch thing seems great, means you can defend units such as artillery with screening troops, bit more 'realistic' 😊
Overwatch has a range now and the range destriction is 24 inch
not starting with CP is a little concerning, as a raven guard player I'm worried I won't be able to deepstrike assault centurions
To be fair that is quite silly.
Well you'd get the cp to do it first turn I would think. Unless it's high cp cost but given that there will be less cp and strats I doubt it
@@keith6848 you'd get 1 CP at the start of the first command phase, however the deepstrike strategem as it is now is used in the deployment phase. they would probably have to rework it to say something like "choose a unit in reserves, that unit can deepstrike this turn" if they want to keep it
@@Praetors2 ahhh yeah ok, thought it was movement. There would have to be something to do it, termies can alpha in
@@Praetors2 I think that's what they were planning to do with Terminators. I can see it being applied to other units for other factions. Notably since Raven Guard, and Genestealer Cults rely on them.
I just went back and looked at the new Terminator datasheet. In 9th, Deep Strike rules required you to set up “more than 9” from enemy models.” The new rules say “not within 9” of enemy models.” This makes me think base to base contact may be necessary.
It's the same rule, but worded in a way so that people can place their models exactly 9 inches away instead of the stupid '9.1' which created confusion. It has everything to do with 'rules as written'.
@@WardenOfTerra The point of 9.1” away is that you need a 9” charge. If it would be 9” away you’d only need a 8” charge.
Indeed. If it is base to base, then it does remain a 9 to charge out of deep strike.
@@tiberiumnp8030 I'd argue it's still a 9" charge as you need to be within an 1" to be in combat, exactly 1" isn't within 1"
Overwatch in the movement phase had a range of 24 inchs
Could be patrol rules with are different a little
It'd be concerning if there are genuinely different datasheets for combat patrol vs 1000+ point games. Codex's will look like an absolute mess if so.
We also still havent seen anything that talks about how unit composition is going to be dealt with (e.g. how many heavy weapons or melee weapons can a squad take. How many models can be included in a unit etc). Thanks to that info not being on the datasheet I have to assume they've separated it out to then be included where the points are listed, but it has the potential to impact a lot!
---
The change to ripper swarms being included in the termagant unit makes me wonder if the same will happen with Necron Warriors and Canoptek Scarabs
I like the CP changes. Takes away some of the alpha strike problems while still giving an interesting resource to use.
I never really got why some enhancements pregame cost CP instead of just points. Especially when you had so many warlord traits and relics and some where just objectively better but they all cost the one CP. If warlord traits and relics now just cost points I feel like that would be easier to balance and gives more design space.
Comment for the Skull Throne
These demo games sound interesting. Maybe there should be an "easymode" format played without stragems and command points.
so if we are starting with 0 cp does that mean leviathan dreads and sicarans are gonna be put in legends, or will the CP cost of theese units be removed since there in plastic now?
I'm curious about existing Legends units getting revisited with all the sheet changes and things like Relic Predators costing CP.
I am hoping they just do away with relic stuff and instead just have them as contemptor dreads and you pick weapons (points ) I cant see them killing off units from heresy into new 40k as so many people buy them for 40k solely . I mean other way is just to make a relic unit only able to be used once in an army ... so no stacking multiples of the same unit .
So a twin-linked lascannon, isn't _really_ twin-linked, but rather just "Ballistus" (?), however, a D6+1 damage profile seems really cool given its long range, high strength and high AP. I'm curious how they plan on balancing various lascannon weapon profiles this time around...
Any reports on ruins beeing breachable by troops?
If all of this is correct flamers with 12" range are going to be so dangerous to charge. Imagine getting overwatched without needing to roll to hit at the end of movement and in the charge phase
Looks good so far!
Need t shirts that say "fair few"
seems massively simplifed I don't like the assault weapon changes. It was an interesting trade off
Assault - Base to base (3rd Edition), Consolidation (3rd), Fight Sequence Order, (3rd just with initiative missing), Not ending movement on Obj makes zero sense, how would you "ever" end up on the objective then? Assault Weapons (3rd, and bolters aren't or weren't assault weapons), SM Fall back and shoot (3rd), Never Ending swarm type rule (3rd). All but the "obj" thing are good things.
Physical objectives rule sucks. You can prevent your models being charged just by putting them an inch away from the objective. It’s ruin walls all over again only worse as it’s on an objective.
Objective: its to stop very large models flopping on an objective >> from making it impossible for enemies to contest cos they are bigger than the 3" rg. Eg Baneblade.
no different to a large squad fanning out around an objective. Its not a good change
Kinda worrying the rate of how often the nids won in those test games.
Warhammer Fest 2023 was an absolute shit-show. It was one of the most unorganised events I've ever been to. The event organisers have no idea what they're doing, and their logistics were COMPLETELY off in terms of how to make people navigate around the venue. They over-sold tickets which made the entire venue ridiculously over-crowded. I waited 3 hours in the queue just to get inside the venue - there were multiples of THOUSANDS of people queued up. There must've been at least 3 times the capacity at the venue. I swear, when I got inside, it felt like I was stuck in a music festival crowd, which is horrible for what Warhammer Fest is meant to be. I'm never going to a GW event ever again. I don't understand how anyone could truly enjoy the event. It was such a terrible experience.
wooo! Sweep and Advance Lite!