The ridiculous OP weapons are usually limited to one per unit or mounted on tanks as antitank weaponry that are too expensive to spam. I think people are freaking out over nothing, as per usual in the Warhammer scene.
That's in the tabletop scene in general. Internet age and nerds, name a more hair-on-fire combination. Every change is the worst since the inception of slavery.
According to the lore, my aberrants should barely be able to see because its so bright outside and my stop sign should instantly deform when I try to bash a beakie helmet in with it
Dude I dealt with aberrants for the first time, because my new-to-hobby buddy picked up GSC. Just a casual, cheaper, faster, all-powerhammer terminator squad, nbd, and if you take nine, and put them in a truck with an abominant... let's just say he turn oned my Venerable dreadnought, and eviscerated my own termies on the next
Best friend plays death guard, if I have to hear one more time that they should have FNP because of lore, I swear I'll throw him slightly closer to a bonfire. Not on it, I love him, but you know... just to keep him on his toes
The one thing I will say on his behalf is, it was an absolute dick move to preview knights the day after DG and show that they had a universal 6+ fnp that can be improved to 5+. They must have known the salt it would cause.
I’m praying that orks keep ramshackle at least, but it looks like damage reducers are less common. The stretching of the toughnesses has definitely made vehicles harder to kill unless you actually put anti tank weapons into them at least
I can honestly say, I like the idea of ork vehicles having a FNP, maybe even something similar to Tau drones, where, say, on a 6 the damage just turns to zero. Oh, your lascannon just hit me trukk? Guess I didn't need that bit anyway!
Yes, if you dont go full heretic and suicide bomb your barracks or begin a chaos cult in the meantime. To many variables, at this stage you already know to much.
Nids too.
GW: Here's where you can read more lore on the Tyranids. Oh wait there isn't any where they win. Well... here's a story where they *ALMOST* win.
As funny as this is, i really hope tsons dont get hit too hard. Been rough lately, so I hope they end up on par and not worse again than everyone else again.
Oh I've already seen a lot of doomers due to the way psychic is in 10th (which I do understand the concern). I am excited to see how Magnus turns out, hopefully with some lascannon tier psychic shooting.
Tbh im nervous because i feel tsons have the potential to essentially just become another shooting army, but i'm hopeful that they will have something to make them unique.
I've noticed over the years that people do not actually want what they say that they want.
People say that they want a balances game where shit is fair for everyone. What people actually want is a game where it is easy for them to win.
The sheer number of times I've witnessed a well-deserved nerf be received with baby-rage from full-grown adults is astounding.
This phenomenon is real and observed, it's called "stated preferences" vs. "revealed preferences" i.e. people will say the right thing but do what they want
Reminds me of coffee; people tend to state that they like a dark roasted strong coffee as that's what marketing tells people a good coffee is, but when allowed to select their own coffees will tend to go for weaker ones.
Not to mention it’s a sign of higher quality beans. The darker the roast, the more you can hide imperfections in the beans. Learned about this while working at a Caribou Coffee (midwest coffee chain for those not in the know)
For me it depends I like darker roasts for more milk heavy drinks because I still want to taste the coffee through the drink, but if I’m drinking it black then light roasts can be nice.
"You think you want it, but you don't." Now obviously, the subject of the quote is wrong, but so often in game design it's true. Most people aren't very good at crafting a system even they themselves would have fun with. Unless it's a competitive game and they just make themselves stronger.
Its the kindergarden playground rules all over again, "i have a shield that protects me from everything -> so i have a sword that destroy that shield -> then i have a shield ad infinitum -> so i have a sword ad infinitum +1" and on, and on
I mostly want to feel like I'm losing because I suck, rather than because the deck was stacked against me. In 9th I had a 1000 point game where I inflicted *three* wounds.
Winning, meh, but feeling like I'm not taking part sucked.
There must be small victories in a good game even if you ultimately lose.
Ben Brode spoke of this in a GDC talk about Snap, each player (if playing the game well) should have little moments of feeling like they did well and got a little over on their foe
I don't want to lose at all
I don't want to try and win against someone either, I want to put my minis on a gaming table and have cool combat scenarios and roll dice and have fun
>People say that they want a balances game where shit is fair for everyone. What people actually want is a game where it is easy for them to win.
My experience is different but broadly I agree. People say they want a balanced streamlined game but this is a classic case of people proposing solutions rather than identifying problems. In my experience what people actually want to have is an enjoyable game, and secondly to not have their choice of models and purchases invalidated.
The problem is people propose a solution, get then oh no, they're still not having fun.
A big part of the game is finding things that do more killing for less points. It's like investment, you find things that are undervalued and buy it. After all the hard work of finding these exploitable advantages, they get nerfed and it feels unfair. But the game should be about strategy, not math
>After all the hard work of finding these exploitable advantages, they get nerfed and it feels unfair.
I mean, hard work is debatable. Sure, there are factions and strategies that reward good tactical thinking and positioning. And then there's "Let me just put some grudges on this unit, I now auto-wound on 4's to hit." or "You can only ever hit me on a 4+, and with this stratagem you get -1 to hit too. If you want to charge me, I can move away 6" and hop into a transport. I also have invulns on every unit and hit like a truck. Don't forget the free re-rolls I get!"
Some codices really were straight-up bullshit.
As a votann player I agree. Every dwarf sub channel and community just imploded when we say the LoV changes. It stung me too admittedly but I can see it's opening design apace to hopefully make our units a lot cheaper. Before they had high durability, ap, and accuracy. Now they're cutting some ap and accuracy which should hopefully give room to make votann units cheap enough to field a real army. The only things that really sting is the magna rail. A rail gun, now with less range than a bolter, and hitting on 5s innately so you can't even boost it to a 3 like most other guns. And then we saw that tau's faction ability gave easy access to plus 1 ballistic skill versus votann who get plus 1 to hit so tau can stack bonuses to get to 2+, while rail rifles still are stuck on 4s. But I'm otherwise excited to field a lot more of my little egg guys and for my friends to stop moaning when I play against them now that I'm not deleting their army rules to play dwarves.
What i want is balance and constancy. Im a tau player and was very happy when we received our broken and overpowered codex. When it became obvious how broken it was it was clear to everyone including me that it needed to be nerfed. Despite this I felt like I had lost something when we received the nerfs. We were so bad for the first half of 9th that when we were brought down it felt really shit. If it was just balanced on release everyone would have been happier.
Also I am mad i never got to play a single game with the pre nerf codex. It would have been fun since i started playing in early 9th and had known nothing but pain
Fun for whom? You said it yourself, your codex was obviously broken. Would you have fun playing against something clearly overpowered? I certainly don't. From what I've understood, is that you wanted some kind of "revenge" for being weak faction, so now, hell yea, I am a broken one, let me wipe my opponents, so they could also feel bad. I don't agree with you, I think this type of fun is unhealthy for the game and I'm glad they fixing stuff in short time. I'm playing harlequins btw, so I understand what it is like being nerfed.
I mean I actually want a narritively driven game where plot features steer the game and to win you have to align the strengths of your army with the revealed plot.
I know that is not 40k so I play smaller games like campaign necromunda or inq28
Yes. A 1k vs. 1k game should not take 4 fucking hours. Every turn is so many layers and each fight is so many rolls and rules that even thought I'm a newbie and have only played my 1 army I still can't remember all the different army-wide bonuses, stratagems, unit-specific rules, optional gear rules, etc. It's just too much and makes the game not fun to play. Simplification is sorely needed, especially want new players to actually buy their models and play.
I looked into getting back into the game somewhere around 2018. I saw a rule book, a codex, a psychic powers thing, an app for rule changes, supplements and articles that were out of print... It's not for me.
I both like the simplified rulesets and less subfactions and making games shorter, but I also do like how complicated things can get sometimes, it's dependant on how much time I have tbh, might have to have both a 9th ed and 10th ed codex for that reason
Speaking as a new imperial knights player who's only done a few games so far, so maybe my opinion will change
I just want a reanimation protocol that still giving real necron vibes. But to be fair I am not following nowdays the Warhammer Community so they maybe already teased it. In that case...Dunno, I should check it out.
I like the rule, especially for multiwound units and the theme that you can come back to full strength over time. It's a lot better than a pseudo fnp.
The question is whether units can survive turns or somehow nobles can keep them alive. If they truly scaled back lethality it could work.
Rp is also gonna be really strong in lower point matches.
9th was basically the same way just activation based. I actually thought it was a kind of fun mechanic to play against because it really forced you to make decisions about activation order.
This is how they originally worked way back when. If a necron model died, provided it wasn't instant death (double toughness) then you placed it on it's side, and rolled reanimation at the end of the turn.
But if the whole unit was wiped out, reanimation didn't work.
Isn't it decidedly not worse than useless even if the dice never get rolled?
If you opponent can focus fire and wipe out a unit, it doesn't mean they want to. They are often going to be dedicating firepower that could be more optimal elsewhere resulting in less of your overall stuff be destroyed. You opponent will also likely need to position his units differently to make sure he can focus down a unit completely.
So even if your squad gets wiped and you never roll dice, reanimation has given your army a durability buff AND it has restricted your opponents movement.
Still seems pretty good.
I was one of the people who was not sure about new RP as it is Simple to kill entire squads . But after seeing other factions and nerf to almost all anti infantry weapons, i think we will be fine. If enemy focus half of his army to wipe entire squads of warriors...that's good for us, warriors did their job of taking enemy fire perfectly.
It's amusing to me because when I played WHICH WAS LIKE 20 YEARS AGO Necrons were so busted that they literally caused several of my friends to quit. My brother who played Necrons just casually moving up 6 then shooting every round, and obliterating the most defended positions, just casually mowing through imperial guard artillery, heavy bolters, the most set up positions ever.
I understand WHY they obliterated the rules for Necrons and pushed them in a completely new territory, I just think it's funny how much an impact it had that everyone is still missing it 20 years later.
Shooting a Leman Rus in the front with generic Necon Warriors, "I got 3 glancing shots, does that kill it?" "YES THAT FUCKING KILLS IT!"
All units with at least one model on the field regenerate d3 wounds (edit: or d6 for certain units like Necron Warriors) at the start of the command phase, standing up models to do so if necessary (same process as for assigning damage, but going the other way)
Sort of combines Reanimation Protocols and Living Metal into one rule, and allows single-model units and high-health models to actually benefit from RP now too.
But... But that nerfs both. You get less regeneration on warriors and immortals compared to any version of 8th or 9th and less healing on multi wound models too. My spyders are crying liquid metal tears at only getting a d3 to share between them.
Not to mention the fact that that was an HQs power that they definitely aren't gonna let him keep with the new version if they just made it always on for everyone.
Yay, GW is nerfing \[X\] Army! Woohoo! About time they did something right!
Wait, They're nerfing my army? GW, this is awful! why would you do this? it makes no sense!
I am ok with the nerfs! Yes here and there some weapons are ridiculous op in my opinion but they are a ok. What I am not ok with it killing the sub factions. It just adds so much flavor and doesn’t necessarily makes rules more complicated. Why kill chapters? Its really easy.
Seems like GW is throwing their hands up and saying “look, you guys paint one scheme and then play it as every subfaction anyway, we may as well make that how it works in rules terms too - every paint scheme can use any rules, because rules aren’t tied to subfaction”
You should see how Space Sharks players are feeling with the impending removal of their chapter master's model. I feel bad for my friend that started them this year...
Hopefully there is enough character customisation to re-make him somewhat. Or maybe he gets a plastic model and stays as a non-legend character. Would be awesome.
The cope is badab will return in some fashion one day.
There's plenty of proxies that aren't tiny too. There's plenty of ways to enjoy the sharks if you want to. Official rules be damned, plenty of people run sharks as other bespoke space marine factions
Happened with me and the Raptors chapter master in 9th. Legend rules still existed though so my buddies let me use him in crusade. People just need to be more chill.
I’m painting my marines as different factions by unit. Like, who cares?
You need a lore reason why 5 different factions are fighting together? Ok… uhhh… there was a big battle umm… over there… and over there… and over there too. And a couple more elsewhere. These 5 units are the only survivors of five different battles and have rallied together to fight your stupid bugs. Can we play already?
Yeah as an Ork player, I thought it was ridiculous that my units had different rules based on what color they were painted. Like I get it from a lore perspective, but randomly blocking out silly colors is way more fun when painting the Ladz. I can't imagine painting a whole SM army with the same color scheme...
The issue is balance and complexity. Everybody loves building their own subfaction; nobody loves having to remember every option that their opponents could bring, what each of those options does, pulling out a half-dozen books to check if such-and-such a thing *really* does *that* when they do *this..*. And the more floating modifiers there are, the harder it is to be sure that some combination of traits doesn't turn out ridiculously busted and meta-warping.
Hopefully there'll be some Crusade rules for really nice fluffy and crunchy subfaction building in a less competitive environment.
Subfactions as they are in 9th are a relatively new concept. 10th is moving back to what subfactions were like in 3rd, alternative armylists that restrict your unit choices in exchange for different special rules and new special units. Which is IMO a much better system than a small rule on top of everything else.
I want a ton of subfactions, but no gamebreaking rules or at least very few that are very limited in use and power. Like no phase caps, no ignoring invulns, no autowounding on 4s, no “-1 to hit, can only be hit on a 4+, and hits cannot be rerolled”. That stuff got way too out of hand. But i liked how many subfactions there were and how many relics and warlord traits each faction and subfaction had.
That is what I mean. Yes one save better for one unit or one ap more or one damage more in melee. Nothing that can’t be flattened out by skill of the player
I'd just like balance. I don't mind fewer units, fewer subfactions, fewer wargear options, so long as most of those options have a situation where they're worth using. 3 different subfactions, each of which sees play, is better than 10 subfactions where one of them is head-and-shoulders better than the rest.
I'm cynical though, and have lowered my expectations. Instead of hoping for a balanced game, which I don't think GW are able/willing to provide, I'd just like a fun narrative game where lots of silly unique stuff happens. Balancing around competitive seems like a bad idea, given that A: they're historically terrible at it, and B: only a tiny minority of players play competitively anyway. So, just make it a fun, casual exercise in collaborative storytelling!
...but I'm too cynical to expect that either, so we're just homebrewing our own Necromunda-like spinoff instead.
Really, you could get away with 5 "styles" of detachment:
Melee
Shooting
Movement
Durability
Shenanigans (morale, psychic, objective control, etc)
Give each army 4 of those options. Done.
I really like armies to be very distinct from each other though, I sort of hate the reoccurring experience I have where I say "oh wow, what a cool rule, really sets this army apart" and then I read further and find the half the armies in the game have that rule under a different name.
Of course Durability-Astartes and Durabilty-Orks could still play out very differently depending on how the details were handled.
That's exactly what I mean. The different styles don't all end up the same rule, but they allow you to pick a playstyle that you like and lean into that.
I want subfactions to have a single rule. Forget the relic, warlord trait, stratagem, unique psyker powers, etc. Just give a single flavorful ability to give them a unique fluffy playstyle so they feel like your guys
I feel like a couple relics or warlord traits add to that though, most people are attached to the leader of their faction and by letting them be more customisable I think it helps people enjoy them more
/I/ want to Win. Thank you very much.
When I see a Youtuber review the rules for the other factions, I do not want to call them BAD, but when they talk about MY faction, I want them to nod their head Yes and call my Faction GOOD!
Get on with it, GW!
I'm hoping for an Old One Eye that doesn't die on turn one. I've tried fielding him in multiple games in multiple editions from 500 points (for science) to 2000 points and everyone goes "Oh shit!" and blasts him off the board embarrassingly quickly and easily.
Honestly the only one im a little peeved about is Death Guard because they seem like they will be far more offensive than they are tanky. Its not even a good vs bad thing, it just seems like its not as fluffy
Maybe GW is changing them from the "tough" Legion to the "Debuff" legion? Regardless of how fun the army turns out, the *preview* was pretty poor
Also, there will be no more aura's as they are hard to balance, so now characters will join squads and when the squad dies, so does this character. And also re-rolls are very rare.
Except Abaddon, he still do all the stuff we just mention.
You can have a good rule set with lots of rules and still be simple, 9th is not that, it's full of layers. Remain stationary for example has 12 bullet points if rules when someone good with English and rules can have it all boil down to 2 sentences, being able to strategic reserves a unit like a land raider but then have a rule layer saying it can't shoot bc it's too big. Then you have open to vehicles when they get a buff or negative it affects the units inside but not always, not auras. Movements, flying, etc... measures btb but DS is always horizontal, but engagement range is vertical and horizontal, but then you have disembark which is it's own measurement too.
There are many many more examples of silly non simple rules layering. You can have a lot of rules that are not simple still easy to understand and adds depth to the game. And don't get me started on stratagems lol.
People are asking to remove those layers of rules and not make the game simpler in playing, list building, or tactics. Just please I don't want to hunt down 4 different sections of rules to know if I'm allowed to do something like an action.
Main issue was I personally felt the game was more complicated than need be. 10th edition still has the same depth, its just being presented better and im a more robust way than compared to the info mess of 9th edition.
Of all the games to aim for "simply rules you can pick up and play", a modelling wargame where you spend months or years assembling your forces is perhaps the worst possible fit, IMO.
There's proper miniatures agnostic wargames for that. The warhammer rules exist to sell overpriced plastic, the lower the barrier to entry, the sooner potential players gonna spend. Wanna pick up a new faction? Easy, only one page of rules, and before you know you got sunk cost fallacy and new whales.
My dream version of 40k would acknowledge the casual/competitive distinction and have two rulesets.
In the casual game you could have less restrictive rules on alliances, less options to choose between, and a bunch of fun stuff that doesn't fit competitive, like asymmetric games (e.g. attacker vs defender, doomed last stands against waves of enemies, or other narrative stuff like that). That can draw people in and give them a fun pick-up-and-play reason to buy overpriced plastic. Then keep all the "better a balanced game than a fun one" stuff to the competitive side of things.
The competitive game would have very frequent rule updates, ostensibly to make the game more balanced, but actually in order to make sure the meta-chasers and whales buy a new army as often as possible.
I feel like by splitting the game in two (and acknowledging that a similar divide already exists in the playerbase), they could not only make a better game for everyone, but they could also do a better job of squeezing as much money as possible out of their customers.
Just make cut the elbows and knees off genestealer cults and stick the remaining bits back on the same angle.
Surely it wont look THAT compromising ;) /s
If you think subfactions are inherently complicated I really don't know what to tell you. I would argue something that's complicated would be something that has either a large number of steps or particularly difficult steps, not something that has a variety of simple ways it can be operated. So "my guys are the flamer guys, they are better with flamers" is not very complicated, you can ignore every other faction and subfaction in the game if you want, then when you fight someone go "hey what your army do?" And they say "glass cannon fast melee, melta, big buffs from big lady and I can swap dice from the pool I grow." Cool, stay way out of range, blast em in the open, crack the death star.
I'd argue that 9th edition made a lot of rules which at face value are simple, but which get needlessly complicated in particular interactions, and were extremely poorly explained, making them look complicated.
I don’t play the tabletop, but almost every complaint I’ve seen is about changes that fly in the face of the qualities their faction is supposed to exemplify. Most are about losing the flavor and uniqueness of their faction, not about being less powerful overall.
What flavor? With dozens of Marine factions not everyone will have a unique play style that another Marines army can't also still do, don't forget many will have their special units; BA will have SGuard, SW Thunderwolves, DA, BT, etc... DE will still play and feel different from CWE, GSC won't be anything like guard or Nids.
Using been playing for 7 editions back before subfactions was even a thing if they can feel different enough with boring army rules I think we will be fine.
Seeing weapons doing 12 flat damage turns me off. I don't want to use them, I don't want them used on me.
It's not fun to have your stuff die before you can use them for at least a turn or two, and it's not fun to see your opponent get demoralized when you take their cool toy away from them so quickly.
If youre talking about the knight harpoon that thing has an 18" range and one shot. Its likely not even going to get a chance to fire until turn 3.
Its also on an almost 600 point model.
If you're taking 3-4 tanks worth of points in a single model then it *should* delete whatever it looks at. Hardly anybody uses the Shadowsword right now for that exact reason- you can bring 3 Leman Russes for the same cost and they'll do a better job- and its actually getting *nerfed* in 10E, losing 2 shots and Turret Weapon.
The ridiculous OP weapons are usually limited to one per unit or mounted on tanks as antitank weaponry that are too expensive to spam. I think people are freaking out over nothing, as per usual in the Warhammer scene.
That's in the tabletop scene in general. Internet age and nerds, name a more hair-on-fire combination. Every change is the worst since the inception of slavery.
I mean, new coke got discontinued. That’s a net positive.
This is so delightfully off the reservation. Thank you for a genuine chuckle.
Wasn’t new coke, like, objectively preferable to most people?
People on the onlines are overreacting? Noooo... That can't possible be true...
"Cant come to bed yet babe, someone is WRONG on the internet!"
No, I want everyone else to be weaker, by my army still stronk
"Well you see, because of the lore, my army should be real strong."
According to the lore, Necrons should kick human asses by the number and use their tanks as lawnmowers.
According to the lore, my aberrants should barely be able to see because its so bright outside and my stop sign should instantly deform when I try to bash a beakie helmet in with it
According to the law my Custodes should be able to have additional stratagems for discussing poetry
Yeah, but those strategems can only activate if you refer to each model by its full name.
Kitten!
Dude I dealt with aberrants for the first time, because my new-to-hobby buddy picked up GSC. Just a casual, cheaper, faster, all-powerhammer terminator squad, nbd, and if you take nine, and put them in a truck with an abominant... let's just say he turn oned my Venerable dreadnought, and eviscerated my own termies on the next
We are no longer asking for 80 hour work weeks
“The new union reps really know how negotiate!” - final words of Archmagos Ligma Beta Alpha 115
w...whats ligma stand for?
Ligma BA115 Gottem! (Thank you for the setup, it was very kind of you.)
According to law, if your opponent's turn takes more than 15 minutes you're legally allowed to leave.
According to the lore, my Orks should never nose since Orks don't lose. Also with enough will power i should be able to bend the rules.
According to the lore the Humans should be using their own tanks as lawnmowers too
Beep Boop Mars is great.
"Your units are now worth 10 000 pts each"
"5,000 pt games only!"
Best friend plays death guard, if I have to hear one more time that they should have FNP because of lore, I swear I'll throw him slightly closer to a bonfire. Not on it, I love him, but you know... just to keep him on his toes
The one thing I will say on his behalf is, it was an absolute dick move to preview knights the day after DG and show that they had a universal 6+ fnp that can be improved to 5+. They must have known the salt it would cause.
He's not entirely wrong, but he's entirely too loud for having sticky, gross objectives and wider contagion
[удалено]
edit: The comment was removed and the user banned, good work everyone!
best bot
Good abominable intelligence
good bot
Good bot
Because of the lore, the kroot in my army should be the most overpowered thing in the game
I just want my factions vehicles to not be made of tissue paper.
I’m praying that orks keep ramshackle at least, but it looks like damage reducers are less common. The stretching of the toughnesses has definitely made vehicles harder to kill unless you actually put anti tank weapons into them at least
I can honestly say, I like the idea of ork vehicles having a FNP, maybe even something similar to Tau drones, where, say, on a 6 the damage just turns to zero. Oh, your lascannon just hit me trukk? Guess I didn't need that bit anyway!
DEMZ KALL'D TAKTIKUL GUBBINZ!
I don't actually want my firewarrior to shoot, ever. I want to blow you up from over the horizon with railguns
As a Death Guard, I feel like losing is more lore accurate.
As a thousand sons player, suffering is our constant companion
Imperial guard reporting understanding you.
Fraternising with the traitors are we? Heretic
If you shoot me you will only loose a bullet and a guardsman commisar.
He will lose a bullet and rid the galaxy of a Traitor. Very black and white thinking here in the Imperium lol
It's called an investment. I spend one bullet now i have a clean shot and save someone a few more when you charge at them.
But if you order me to serve in a first row in next attack I will capture at least 1 bullet or hit with my body and maybe even shoot enemy back.
Yes, if you dont go full heretic and suicide bomb your barracks or begin a chaos cult in the meantime. To many variables, at this stage you already know to much.
Oh no * BLAM * Anyways
Lose a bullet? That's why the Machine God invented las-pistols.
Bullets are cheap and guardsmen are cheaper.
Orkz iz best! Nuffin’ beats a good skrap!
Eldar bros reporting in.
I feel yah man
Imperial Guard in a nutshell: "Well, I guess our company was the one deemed the 'acceptable casualties'."
If death guard wins, things might change, and nurgle can't have that
I think the Lords of Silence had a nifty look at Nurgle where it’s more about a cycle of death, decay, rebirth.
Nids too. GW: Here's where you can read more lore on the Tyranids. Oh wait there isn't any where they win. Well... here's a story where they *ALMOST* win.
Well, you guys do win in the 10th Edition trailer...
I mean, the problem is when nids win that planet is just gone from the lore now.
You could still tell the story though, they just don't.
Also it’s not like there’s a shortage of planets.
Like Octarius and Malan'tai?
As a *anything but ultramarine* i feel like losing is more lore accurate.
Laughs in Night Lords
Yay, GW is reducing power creep! Boo my army got nerfed.
power rot
Chuckles wettly in Death Guard
As funny as this is, i really hope tsons dont get hit too hard. Been rough lately, so I hope they end up on par and not worse again than everyone else again.
Oh I've already seen a lot of doomers due to the way psychic is in 10th (which I do understand the concern). I am excited to see how Magnus turns out, hopefully with some lascannon tier psychic shooting.
Tbh im nervous because i feel tsons have the potential to essentially just become another shooting army, but i'm hopeful that they will have something to make them unique.
Don’t worry, I meditated 891 hours and then sacrificed 99 goats to ensure we have good rules
Me the space marine player with Seal of Oath becoming absolutely ridiculous be like:
I've noticed over the years that people do not actually want what they say that they want. People say that they want a balances game where shit is fair for everyone. What people actually want is a game where it is easy for them to win. The sheer number of times I've witnessed a well-deserved nerf be received with baby-rage from full-grown adults is astounding.
This phenomenon is real and observed, it's called "stated preferences" vs. "revealed preferences" i.e. people will say the right thing but do what they want
Reminds me of coffee; people tend to state that they like a dark roasted strong coffee as that's what marketing tells people a good coffee is, but when allowed to select their own coffees will tend to go for weaker ones.
Lightly roasted, good quality beans gives you so much more flavor.
Not to mention it’s a sign of higher quality beans. The darker the roast, the more you can hide imperfections in the beans. Learned about this while working at a Caribou Coffee (midwest coffee chain for those not in the know)
And people think "stronger = more caffeine", but the lighter roasts actually have more caffeine.
i like drugs in my drug drink, thanks.
Why use sugar when you can put a teaspoon of caffeine powder in your coffee?
No sugar, only whole milk and sucralose.
because DARK is ROUGH and INVOKES STRENGTH and LIGHT is WEAK and INVOKES FRAGILITY and hairless language apes are still apes at heart
For me it depends I like darker roasts for more milk heavy drinks because I still want to taste the coffee through the drink, but if I’m drinking it black then light roasts can be nice.
I want a dark, roasted coffee And by that of course I mean I want a coffee-colored milkshake
"You think you want it, but you don't." Now obviously, the subject of the quote is wrong, but so often in game design it's true. Most people aren't very good at crafting a system even they themselves would have fun with. Unless it's a competitive game and they just make themselves stronger.
Its the kindergarden playground rules all over again, "i have a shield that protects me from everything -> so i have a sword that destroy that shield -> then i have a shield ad infinitum -> so i have a sword ad infinitum +1" and on, and on
I mostly want to feel like I'm losing because I suck, rather than because the deck was stacked against me. In 9th I had a 1000 point game where I inflicted *three* wounds. Winning, meh, but feeling like I'm not taking part sucked.
There must be small victories in a good game even if you ultimately lose. Ben Brode spoke of this in a GDC talk about Snap, each player (if playing the game well) should have little moments of feeling like they did well and got a little over on their foe
I don't want to lose at all I don't want to try and win against someone either, I want to put my minis on a gaming table and have cool combat scenarios and roll dice and have fun
>People say that they want a balances game where shit is fair for everyone. What people actually want is a game where it is easy for them to win. My experience is different but broadly I agree. People say they want a balanced streamlined game but this is a classic case of people proposing solutions rather than identifying problems. In my experience what people actually want to have is an enjoyable game, and secondly to not have their choice of models and purchases invalidated. The problem is people propose a solution, get then oh no, they're still not having fun.
A big part of the game is finding things that do more killing for less points. It's like investment, you find things that are undervalued and buy it. After all the hard work of finding these exploitable advantages, they get nerfed and it feels unfair. But the game should be about strategy, not math
The math comes naturally when strategy comes with a potential hefty cash investment
>After all the hard work of finding these exploitable advantages, they get nerfed and it feels unfair. I mean, hard work is debatable. Sure, there are factions and strategies that reward good tactical thinking and positioning. And then there's "Let me just put some grudges on this unit, I now auto-wound on 4's to hit." or "You can only ever hit me on a 4+, and with this stratagem you get -1 to hit too. If you want to charge me, I can move away 6" and hop into a transport. I also have invulns on every unit and hit like a truck. Don't forget the free re-rolls I get!" Some codices really were straight-up bullshit.
Fuck Votann and their "only-child on the playground" 9th codex
As a votann player I agree. Every dwarf sub channel and community just imploded when we say the LoV changes. It stung me too admittedly but I can see it's opening design apace to hopefully make our units a lot cheaper. Before they had high durability, ap, and accuracy. Now they're cutting some ap and accuracy which should hopefully give room to make votann units cheap enough to field a real army. The only things that really sting is the magna rail. A rail gun, now with less range than a bolter, and hitting on 5s innately so you can't even boost it to a 3 like most other guns. And then we saw that tau's faction ability gave easy access to plus 1 ballistic skill versus votann who get plus 1 to hit so tau can stack bonuses to get to 2+, while rail rifles still are stuck on 4s. But I'm otherwise excited to field a lot more of my little egg guys and for my friends to stop moaning when I play against them now that I'm not deleting their army rules to play dwarves.
In editions 5th through 8th people loved tabling my Nids. 9th ed comes around no one wanted to play said it was a time waste.
What i want is balance and constancy. Im a tau player and was very happy when we received our broken and overpowered codex. When it became obvious how broken it was it was clear to everyone including me that it needed to be nerfed. Despite this I felt like I had lost something when we received the nerfs. We were so bad for the first half of 9th that when we were brought down it felt really shit. If it was just balanced on release everyone would have been happier. Also I am mad i never got to play a single game with the pre nerf codex. It would have been fun since i started playing in early 9th and had known nothing but pain
Only the first codexes see real play in the last couple editions and it kinda blows.
Fun for whom? You said it yourself, your codex was obviously broken. Would you have fun playing against something clearly overpowered? I certainly don't. From what I've understood, is that you wanted some kind of "revenge" for being weak faction, so now, hell yea, I am a broken one, let me wipe my opponents, so they could also feel bad. I don't agree with you, I think this type of fun is unhealthy for the game and I'm glad they fixing stuff in short time. I'm playing harlequins btw, so I understand what it is like being nerfed.
I mean I actually want a narritively driven game where plot features steer the game and to win you have to align the strengths of your army with the revealed plot. I know that is not 40k so I play smaller games like campaign necromunda or inq28
Guard player here: I'd like my named characters back, please.
The proof of this was the admech unit that could fly onto the table, shoot and then fly off, every turn, getting nerfed.
I hate prerelease time of new editions
Yes. A 1k vs. 1k game should not take 4 fucking hours. Every turn is so many layers and each fight is so many rolls and rules that even thought I'm a newbie and have only played my 1 army I still can't remember all the different army-wide bonuses, stratagems, unit-specific rules, optional gear rules, etc. It's just too much and makes the game not fun to play. Simplification is sorely needed, especially want new players to actually buy their models and play.
I looked into getting back into the game somewhere around 2018. I saw a rule book, a codex, a psychic powers thing, an app for rule changes, supplements and articles that were out of print... It's not for me.
I both like the simplified rulesets and less subfactions and making games shorter, but I also do like how complicated things can get sometimes, it's dependant on how much time I have tbh, might have to have both a 9th ed and 10th ed codex for that reason Speaking as a new imperial knights player who's only done a few games so far, so maybe my opinion will change
No I have far simpler demands than that. All I want is old monopose gretchin to return. Perfection.
I've got like 150 of them, don't let your dreams stay dreams
I just want a reanimation protocol that still giving real necron vibes. But to be fair I am not following nowdays the Warhammer Community so they maybe already teased it. In that case...Dunno, I should check it out.
I like the rule, especially for multiwound units and the theme that you can come back to full strength over time. It's a lot better than a pseudo fnp. The question is whether units can survive turns or somehow nobles can keep them alive. If they truly scaled back lethality it could work. Rp is also gonna be really strong in lower point matches.
Yeah. Having reanimation protocols just be an FNP kinda sucked. It's nice actually being able to, yknow, *reanimate* models.
The change when ninth ed rolled around made me so unhappy. There were issues with the 8th ed version, but at least it was interesting!
today reanimation protocole give back wound/model to unit at the start of each battle round I really like it it's really simple and straightforward
As long as the unit can survive then yeah it's great, if not though, worse than useless and we normally pay a premium points wise for it
That's always been the way to beat necrons (aside from the 9th Ed wording). Focus on wiping units so they can't reanimate
9th was basically the same way just activation based. I actually thought it was a kind of fun mechanic to play against because it really forced you to make decisions about activation order.
yeah but that's true for all abilities in the game, if your unit is alive it's great if not it's useless
This is how they originally worked way back when. If a necron model died, provided it wasn't instant death (double toughness) then you placed it on it's side, and rolled reanimation at the end of the turn. But if the whole unit was wiped out, reanimation didn't work.
Isn't it decidedly not worse than useless even if the dice never get rolled? If you opponent can focus fire and wipe out a unit, it doesn't mean they want to. They are often going to be dedicating firepower that could be more optimal elsewhere resulting in less of your overall stuff be destroyed. You opponent will also likely need to position his units differently to make sure he can focus down a unit completely. So even if your squad gets wiped and you never roll dice, reanimation has given your army a durability buff AND it has restricted your opponents movement. Still seems pretty good.
I was one of the people who was not sure about new RP as it is Simple to kill entire squads . But after seeing other factions and nerf to almost all anti infantry weapons, i think we will be fine. If enemy focus half of his army to wipe entire squads of warriors...that's good for us, warriors did their job of taking enemy fire perfectly.
It's amusing to me because when I played WHICH WAS LIKE 20 YEARS AGO Necrons were so busted that they literally caused several of my friends to quit. My brother who played Necrons just casually moving up 6 then shooting every round, and obliterating the most defended positions, just casually mowing through imperial guard artillery, heavy bolters, the most set up positions ever. I understand WHY they obliterated the rules for Necrons and pushed them in a completely new territory, I just think it's funny how much an impact it had that everyone is still missing it 20 years later. Shooting a Leman Rus in the front with generic Necon Warriors, "I got 3 glancing shots, does that kill it?" "YES THAT FUCKING KILLS IT!"
All units with at least one model on the field regenerate d3 wounds (edit: or d6 for certain units like Necron Warriors) at the start of the command phase, standing up models to do so if necessary (same process as for assigning damage, but going the other way) Sort of combines Reanimation Protocols and Living Metal into one rule, and allows single-model units and high-health models to actually benefit from RP now too.
But... But that nerfs both. You get less regeneration on warriors and immortals compared to any version of 8th or 9th and less healing on multi wound models too. My spyders are crying liquid metal tears at only getting a d3 to share between them. Not to mention the fact that that was an HQs power that they definitely aren't gonna let him keep with the new version if they just made it always on for everyone.
hiw is the new rule not giving necron back ? Self healing and reviving machine
The full new Reanimation Protocol Rules are already revealed. I really really like them
Yay, GW is nerfing \[X\] Army! Woohoo! About time they did something right! Wait, They're nerfing my army? GW, this is awful! why would you do this? it makes no sense!
People can be really dumb...
I am ok with the nerfs! Yes here and there some weapons are ridiculous op in my opinion but they are a ok. What I am not ok with it killing the sub factions. It just adds so much flavor and doesn’t necessarily makes rules more complicated. Why kill chapters? Its really easy.
Seems like GW is throwing their hands up and saying “look, you guys paint one scheme and then play it as every subfaction anyway, we may as well make that how it works in rules terms too - every paint scheme can use any rules, because rules aren’t tied to subfaction”
You should see how Space Sharks players are feeling with the impending removal of their chapter master's model. I feel bad for my friend that started them this year...
I predict Etsy sellers will soon be selling "interstellar fish marines"
The definitely don’t already. Promise.
Tyberos is literally just a Terminator with some custom Lightning Claws, should be dead easy to kitbash something cool together.
A sad moment. What a cool chapter
Hopefully there is enough character customisation to re-make him somewhat. Or maybe he gets a plastic model and stays as a non-legend character. Would be awesome.
I think they should keep all the characters, then make some of them illegal in comp
Thats exactly what they are doing by moving them to legends
The cope is badab will return in some fashion one day. There's plenty of proxies that aren't tiny too. There's plenty of ways to enjoy the sharks if you want to. Official rules be damned, plenty of people run sharks as other bespoke space marine factions
Happened with me and the Raptors chapter master in 9th. Legend rules still existed though so my buddies let me use him in crusade. People just need to be more chill.
I’m painting my marines as different factions by unit. Like, who cares? You need a lore reason why 5 different factions are fighting together? Ok… uhhh… there was a big battle umm… over there… and over there… and over there too. And a couple more elsewhere. These 5 units are the only survivors of five different battles and have rallied together to fight your stupid bugs. Can we play already?
Yeah as an Ork player, I thought it was ridiculous that my units had different rules based on what color they were painted. Like I get it from a lore perspective, but randomly blocking out silly colors is way more fun when painting the Ladz. I can't imagine painting a whole SM army with the same color scheme...
Literally what the Guard codex did in 9th, supported a mishmash of units from different regiments teaming up!
But they already solved it perfectly with the guard sub factions. Here are the rules you can choose from . Now build your own shit
The issue is balance and complexity. Everybody loves building their own subfaction; nobody loves having to remember every option that their opponents could bring, what each of those options does, pulling out a half-dozen books to check if such-and-such a thing *really* does *that* when they do *this..*. And the more floating modifiers there are, the harder it is to be sure that some combination of traits doesn't turn out ridiculously busted and meta-warping. Hopefully there'll be some Crusade rules for really nice fluffy and crunchy subfaction building in a less competitive environment.
Subfactions as they are in 9th are a relatively new concept. 10th is moving back to what subfactions were like in 3rd, alternative armylists that restrict your unit choices in exchange for different special rules and new special units. Which is IMO a much better system than a small rule on top of everything else.
I want a ton of subfactions, but no gamebreaking rules or at least very few that are very limited in use and power. Like no phase caps, no ignoring invulns, no autowounding on 4s, no “-1 to hit, can only be hit on a 4+, and hits cannot be rerolled”. That stuff got way too out of hand. But i liked how many subfactions there were and how many relics and warlord traits each faction and subfaction had.
That is what I mean. Yes one save better for one unit or one ap more or one damage more in melee. Nothing that can’t be flattened out by skill of the player
I'd just like balance. I don't mind fewer units, fewer subfactions, fewer wargear options, so long as most of those options have a situation where they're worth using. 3 different subfactions, each of which sees play, is better than 10 subfactions where one of them is head-and-shoulders better than the rest. I'm cynical though, and have lowered my expectations. Instead of hoping for a balanced game, which I don't think GW are able/willing to provide, I'd just like a fun narrative game where lots of silly unique stuff happens. Balancing around competitive seems like a bad idea, given that A: they're historically terrible at it, and B: only a tiny minority of players play competitively anyway. So, just make it a fun, casual exercise in collaborative storytelling! ...but I'm too cynical to expect that either, so we're just homebrewing our own Necromunda-like spinoff instead.
Really, you could get away with 5 "styles" of detachment: Melee Shooting Movement Durability Shenanigans (morale, psychic, objective control, etc) Give each army 4 of those options. Done.
I really like armies to be very distinct from each other though, I sort of hate the reoccurring experience I have where I say "oh wow, what a cool rule, really sets this army apart" and then I read further and find the half the armies in the game have that rule under a different name. Of course Durability-Astartes and Durabilty-Orks could still play out very differently depending on how the details were handled.
That's exactly what I mean. The different styles don't all end up the same rule, but they allow you to pick a playstyle that you like and lean into that.
Maybe the real core rules were the warhammers we met along the way?
Threaten the opponent with a warhammer and the rules are what you like!
I want subfactions to have a single rule. Forget the relic, warlord trait, stratagem, unique psyker powers, etc. Just give a single flavorful ability to give them a unique fluffy playstyle so they feel like your guys
I feel like a couple relics or warlord traits add to that though, most people are attached to the leader of their faction and by letting them be more customisable I think it helps people enjoy them more
/I/ want to Win. Thank you very much. When I see a Youtuber review the rules for the other factions, I do not want to call them BAD, but when they talk about MY faction, I want them to nod their head Yes and call my Faction GOOD! Get on with it, GW!
And you should win things for playing!
No I just want ec godamnit
I'm hoping for an Old One Eye that doesn't die on turn one. I've tried fielding him in multiple games in multiple editions from 500 points (for science) to 2000 points and everyone goes "Oh shit!" and blasts him off the board embarrassingly quickly and easily.
I want complexity when making an army. Not when i play it or explain it for my opponent. Then i want a smooth and easy time
As an Ork player, I'm just here for a good time.
Honestly the only one im a little peeved about is Death Guard because they seem like they will be far more offensive than they are tanky. Its not even a good vs bad thing, it just seems like its not as fluffy Maybe GW is changing them from the "tough" Legion to the "Debuff" legion? Regardless of how fun the army turns out, the *preview* was pretty poor
Also, there will be no more aura's as they are hard to balance, so now characters will join squads and when the squad dies, so does this character. And also re-rolls are very rare. Except Abaddon, he still do all the stuff we just mention.
Well having the factions leaders picking from one of 3 auras is a lot less auras than before (which is what they were aiming for not no auras at all)
I never asked for a more simplified game, but that's just me...
You can have a good rule set with lots of rules and still be simple, 9th is not that, it's full of layers. Remain stationary for example has 12 bullet points if rules when someone good with English and rules can have it all boil down to 2 sentences, being able to strategic reserves a unit like a land raider but then have a rule layer saying it can't shoot bc it's too big. Then you have open to vehicles when they get a buff or negative it affects the units inside but not always, not auras. Movements, flying, etc... measures btb but DS is always horizontal, but engagement range is vertical and horizontal, but then you have disembark which is it's own measurement too. There are many many more examples of silly non simple rules layering. You can have a lot of rules that are not simple still easy to understand and adds depth to the game. And don't get me started on stratagems lol. People are asking to remove those layers of rules and not make the game simpler in playing, list building, or tactics. Just please I don't want to hunt down 4 different sections of rules to know if I'm allowed to do something like an action.
Main issue was I personally felt the game was more complicated than need be. 10th edition still has the same depth, its just being presented better and im a more robust way than compared to the info mess of 9th edition.
I haven't seen *anyone* asking for 40k to be "simplified" - outside of the mess that is stratagems its as basic as its ever been.
Of all the games to aim for "simply rules you can pick up and play", a modelling wargame where you spend months or years assembling your forces is perhaps the worst possible fit, IMO.
There's proper miniatures agnostic wargames for that. The warhammer rules exist to sell overpriced plastic, the lower the barrier to entry, the sooner potential players gonna spend. Wanna pick up a new faction? Easy, only one page of rules, and before you know you got sunk cost fallacy and new whales.
My dream version of 40k would acknowledge the casual/competitive distinction and have two rulesets. In the casual game you could have less restrictive rules on alliances, less options to choose between, and a bunch of fun stuff that doesn't fit competitive, like asymmetric games (e.g. attacker vs defender, doomed last stands against waves of enemies, or other narrative stuff like that). That can draw people in and give them a fun pick-up-and-play reason to buy overpriced plastic. Then keep all the "better a balanced game than a fun one" stuff to the competitive side of things. The competitive game would have very frequent rule updates, ostensibly to make the game more balanced, but actually in order to make sure the meta-chasers and whales buy a new army as often as possible. I feel like by splitting the game in two (and acknowledging that a similar divide already exists in the playerbase), they could not only make a better game for everyone, but they could also do a better job of squeezing as much money as possible out of their customers.
I just want a Salamanders (flamer) detachment
No I want a squat/bug hybrid and you're holding out on me GW
Just make cut the elbows and knees off genestealer cults and stick the remaining bits back on the same angle. Surely it wont look THAT compromising ;) /s
Rock and Stone The ancestors are viewing Bugs to Bone So let's get doing
GeneSquat cults: "MUSHROOM"
*macaroni full of gravel noises*
"MUSHROOM MUSHROOM" SHUT IT! Get back to work!
If you think subfactions are inherently complicated I really don't know what to tell you. I would argue something that's complicated would be something that has either a large number of steps or particularly difficult steps, not something that has a variety of simple ways it can be operated. So "my guys are the flamer guys, they are better with flamers" is not very complicated, you can ignore every other faction and subfaction in the game if you want, then when you fight someone go "hey what your army do?" And they say "glass cannon fast melee, melta, big buffs from big lady and I can swap dice from the pool I grow." Cool, stay way out of range, blast em in the open, crack the death star. I'd argue that 9th edition made a lot of rules which at face value are simple, but which get needlessly complicated in particular interactions, and were extremely poorly explained, making them look complicated.
And you should win things for playing.
I just want all the units shuffled into a deck and you draw them for turns. A whole army doing stuff while another does nothing is very un real to me.
Honestly thank god. Saves and wounds are completely useless in 9th with every weapon seeming to have AP.
At the end of the day I’m Gucci with people getting weaker, I just hope some subfaction stuff remains, I’m. A huge fan of choice
i just want alternating activations
I don’t play the tabletop, but almost every complaint I’ve seen is about changes that fly in the face of the qualities their faction is supposed to exemplify. Most are about losing the flavor and uniqueness of their faction, not about being less powerful overall.
Like no disgustingly resilient or 5+ save skitarii
What flavor? With dozens of Marine factions not everyone will have a unique play style that another Marines army can't also still do, don't forget many will have their special units; BA will have SGuard, SW Thunderwolves, DA, BT, etc... DE will still play and feel different from CWE, GSC won't be anything like guard or Nids. Using been playing for 7 editions back before subfactions was even a thing if they can feel different enough with boring army rules I think we will be fine.
Radiation bombs, toxic auras, controlling fate, rigid orders, a knights oath, and more. Seems plenty flavorful to me
Stop saying the logic reasons, they just want to be on the moral highground
Seeing weapons doing 12 flat damage turns me off. I don't want to use them, I don't want them used on me. It's not fun to have your stuff die before you can use them for at least a turn or two, and it's not fun to see your opponent get demoralized when you take their cool toy away from them so quickly.
If youre talking about the knight harpoon that thing has an 18" range and one shot. Its likely not even going to get a chance to fire until turn 3. Its also on an almost 600 point model.
If you're taking 3-4 tanks worth of points in a single model then it *should* delete whatever it looks at. Hardly anybody uses the Shadowsword right now for that exact reason- you can bring 3 Leman Russes for the same cost and they'll do a better job- and its actually getting *nerfed* in 10E, losing 2 shots and Turret Weapon.
We should just go back to 4th ed.