40K: Are New Formations Hints At Future?


Are the formations & detachments from Fall of Cadia a hint at the direction 8th edition is going?

I was looking over the formations/detachments from Gathering Storm: Fall of Cadia and I started to wonder how exactly you were supposed to field these. Two of them, the Wrathful Crusade and the Grand Convocation, both clock in well over 3k points if you want to take the max number of units to get the bonus. The other two formations/detachments are a mix of units from different armies. This got me thinking – is the the future of Warhammer 40,000 8th edition?

TwoImperialKnightsRenegadeBundle_ProdSlideEveryone will need at least two of these…

Increase in Standard Game Size

Let’s take a look at those first two: The Wrathful Crusade and the Grand Convocation. Again, these two start at a massive +3k (almost 4k) in points if you just take the bare bones units. That means to field those you’d have to be playing at least a 3.5k or 4k game. That’s a HUGE game of 40k! Which, hey, more power to you. Big games can be a lot of fun for sure, but I don’t always want to play a 4k game due to time and (to be honest) player fatigue.

But that’s not the only formation that’s pushing the upper limit. Remember Wrath of Magnus?

wrath-det1That’s so last year.

That Sekhmet Conclave was another one of these massive formations. 9 units of Terminators even at the minimum of 250 points is still well over 2000 points. That’s not counting your HQ choice and you’re still going to want some upgrades, right?

Now, it’s in Games Workshop’s best interest to push larger games. Large games mean more models on the table and more models is, well, more money for them. So I get it from a business perspective. But that doesn’t mean I want to go there. The “Standard Game Size” changes from place to place and region to region. Heck, sometimes it changes from month to month based on what the local tournament is for the month. But it looks like change might be coming…

Integrated Allies

The next two formations/detachments also intrigued me. The Wrathful Crusade and the Castellans of the Imperium. Both of these had mixed Space Marines and Astra Militarum forces. From a lore stand point that’s fantastic! That’s how it is in all the books you read and background you dig up. Astra Militarum puts boots (and tanks) on the ground and the Space Marines come in and smash face. I have zero complaints about that from a lore/background lens. In fact, I’d love to see more of that – looking at you Chaos Marines/Cultists/Traitor Guard. Just throwing that out there…

dark-mechanicus-horzCan we be evil, too?

However, from a game play stance – is this really what we want more of? Now, some folks are thinking, “No! I hate allies and they ruined the game!” and other folks are thinking, “Yes! We’re already taking allies, now we just get cool formations, too!” and others are saying, “I play Tyranids…*crying intensifies*” …Okay maybe that last one is just me. But still, I understand where the two sides are coming from.

I’m not here to try and make peace between the two – I just want to point out that the proliferation of Allies isn’t just coming from one set of players. Games Workshop is pushing us all in that direction. The evidence is in the formations above and also their website and your local gaming store: Start Collecting! Bundles.

gw start collecting army deals 2016You know you want to dabble…just a little bit.

Think about it. If Allies become integrated more and more via formations/detachments so you want to bring them more and more. These Start Collecting bundles are all really good deals to start with so you pick one up. The next thing you know you pick up a couple more units to fill out that shiny new formation you wanted to run. Suddenly you’ve got a full 1500 point army this allied army you didn’t really plan on collecting…and the cycle continues.

Good For You, Good For Me?

I think it’s pretty clear from a business standpoint that selling more models is good for business. These formations push players into larger games and that translates into more models – That’s all pretty obvious. However, my fear is that Games Workshop will start pushing the ruleset towards these massive sized games and I don’t want that – not because those games aren’t fun, but because it can be too much.

bols-dp-1652Big Red’s Tau started as a side project…

I like to think of those big 4k+ point games like going to a buffet to eat. They can be enjoyable if you do them occasionally. But if that becomes the norm it can get unhealthy really quick. Players should have the choice of the game sizes they want to play and not feel pushed towards these large games. I want to make that point very clear: You still have a choice! Even if the game becomes all about the big battles, you still have the option to play smaller games. Kill Team (which is a lot of fun) is out there. Plus, you can learn a lot from playing smaller and leaner sized games.


So what do you think: Will 8th Editions new “Standard” sized game be 3k+ points? What about the increase of Integrated Allies? What do you think the “new normal” of 8th will be?

  • Defenestratus

    Perhaps its a sign that 8th edition games are going to take less time to play.

    • ZeeLobby

      Well. With AoS simplification it probably would be

      • AoS uses far fewer models than before and plays roughly in the similar amount of time, so not necessarily. That said it would be hard to make 40k play any slower. 😉

        • Jack Jomar

          Just re-add 2d6 terminatore saves, ridiculously customised hero wargear/wargear cards, and save modifiers on guns, random terrain/cover movement distance on 2d6, cover modifiers on to-hit rolls, and the ability for any unit to hit back in melee before it dies.

        • Noveltyboy

          In my experience this is due to such a big rules shift and the combos and individual units rules and stats and the lack of quick reference. Most people are far more in tune with 40K stats and generics like movement.

        • ledha

          a 2k point game of aos in 2 time faster than a 2k point game of battle or 40k

    • Severius_Tolluck

      Possibly.. it would be like back to 5th ed fantasy where characters were a thousand points and could destroy armies on their own! Not to mention D weapons now, and killing power increases on so many things!

      • ZeeLobby

        Yeah. Everything’s been leaning towards hero hammer now, in both AoS and now 40k

        • Honestly doesn’t sound like you play much AOS… Heroes are helpful, but it’s definitely not hero-hammer.

        • grim

          AOS horde armies are quite good.

  • DocNacho

    It’s a planet wide based narrative with tons of forces fighting… Of course the formations will feature outlandishly large armies…

    • OldHat

      Yea, I am with you. I think they are reading too much into it.

    • Walter Vining


    • rtheom

      Yeah, these formations are obviously meant for Apoc games where multiple players bring their stuff.

      • Frank O’Donnell

        Think of the units you used in a game of 40k when apoc was first released & think of the units you use now, what game are you playing ?

        • OldHat

          I don’t see Warhounds, Reavers, Revenants, or anything truly outlandish or Apoc only coming into the picture in standard games. But maybe I am just less salty than you. 😀

          • Frank O’Donnell

            Formations, GC, SHW SHV Flyers, SHF, when apoc came out first none of these things where in 40K, it’s nothing to do with been salty mate it’s a fact.

            If you don’t want to admit your now playing apoc all the time I’ll except that your playing 28mm Epic instead.

          • OldHat

            I will give you 28mm Epic. That makes more sense! Apoc to me was always 3k and up with many, many people involved. Though we don’t have Titans, a lot of Epic-ness has carried over to 28mm and I think it has been thoroughly limited to models that fit the scale about right (Knights!).

          • rtheom

            I would also say, based on your statements, that your gaming group dynamic is quite different from mine. My group really doesn’t use most of that stuff you listed aside from the smaller formations, and even then, I’d say they are relatively uncommon.

        • rtheom

          If I’m playing against someone I enjoy playing against, then I’m playing with the same units in games about the same size.

          Otherwise, it’s usually Wraithknights or Imperial Knights, but the point scale hasn’t really changed.

          I think it’s a case of semantics here. I would say that anything 3000 or less is regular 40K, anything over 3000 is Apoc territory. Therefore, I’d say those formations are meant for games over 2500.

          Granted, since there’s no true definition of Apoc vs. Not Apoc, your scales could be different.

          • Frank O’Donnell

            GW now see 40K in a very different way to how it was up until the end of 5th ed, if you’r happy with the game as is that’s all that matters but it doesn’t change the facts.

            If you play a 2k game using the marine demi-company how many points will you have on the table if you go for say all free razorbacks ? my guess is it won’t be far off 3K.

    • Drew_Da_Destroya

      The Grey Knights formation from their book clocks in at over 2000 points too… I think they just like making huge fluffy formations.

      • rtheom

        Well, I think the more likely reality is that GW likes giving people incentive to buy more models to play bigger games. Not only that, they like including models that people don’t buy otherwise.

        This was never more apparent than when they created that Necron formation that includes a Lord (ok), Warriors (ok), Monolith (ok)… and Tomb Blades (huh?)…

  • Zingbaby

    Angel’s Blade also seems to be geared towards 2500 point games at least. It is essentially unusable in “competitive” 1850 (or smaller) games.

    • BaronSnakPak

      I’ve played 1850 games with a list that had both the Lucifer Armored formation, and the Orbital Intervention formation. Grav and melta spam made short work of it, but it is doable.

      • Zingbaby

        It is possible to build a list yes, though even that isn’t easy, but that Lucifer formation etc still can’t build a ‘balanced’ list that can compete in “competitive” 40k is all I’m saying. And those are just formations… but the actual detachments are entirely unusable under 2000 points.

        • euansmith

          Maybe GW are also trying to push the style of play more towards their chosen style; narrative gaming. It would be better, of course, to have an elegant and balanced play environment that could be used for both narrative and competitive play.

  • Valeli

    4k games as a baseline seem problematic to me (and not just because I don’t have a 4k army yet).

    I have nothing against big games in theory (they seem fun as a one-off), but the #1 thing that got me into 40k was the ability to use GW’s brick and mortar stores to hop in and get a pick up match (more or less) whenever I wanted. That was a huge asset of theirs.

    If the default size goes up to 4k, there’s no way they’ll keep games moving fast enough for people to keep getting many games in unless they /seriously/ gut other aspects of the game to streamline it. If people in your stores can only get in 1/2 as many games (which would lead to many people coming in and getting none), you have a problem.

    In the end, this isn’t a win-win for GW. If people have to buy more models, but end up unable to get games in, they’ll simply stop buying any models.

    As for allies, I’m positive GW would love to push them further. It gets people invested in more ranges, and that’s a win-win for them. I’d worry about the non ally-friendly lists though…. they need some TLC, and GW has a history of not giving them that.

    • orionburn

      They may change things to make 4k games more manageable for time, but I can’t see it really becoming the norm. The start collecting boxes and other bundles deals have been a welcome addition, but that’s a lot of money to really get into the game and that would turn new people away.

      • euansmith

        Huge armies are going to take time to deploy and put away, so the rules are going to have to be pretty streamlined to counter that. 😉

  • orionburn

    If…and big if…large scale games like that become the norm then something has to happen to speed up the game. I love fielding tons of models but yes, knowing I’m in for 4+ hours of a game can wear you down. It could just be a carrot dangling out there to get you to buy more models on the chance you actually field it 2-3 times a year.

    “…and others are saying, “I play Tyranids…*crying intensifies*”

    ^^^ And so much of that…lol ^^^

    • ZeeLobby

      Regardless of rule streamlining, moving 300 minis still takes the same amount of time regardless.

      • Lord Elpus

        Sounds like my Orks Troop choice!

  • Master Avoghai

    Hopefully GW will do something to resolve the Apocalypse problem : today it’s just “40k with more models”… It simply doesn’t work.
    The ultimate proof is a little yellow box in last WD’s battle report who says that the 2 opponents chose not to use apoc rules “because with the formations and units special rules it would have made too much for them”…

    If even GW doesn’t manage to play an Apoc game with the current rules, something has to be done…

    I would love to see a simplified game for 40k at normal size and a epic-like game to represent 3000+ battles

    • I only use apoc rules in games when there’s a lot of players, they’re too cumbersome and don’t add much

  • Commissar Molotov

    …They’re going to “dumb down” the game, aren’t they?

    • ZeeLobby

      Only if this is the norm size of games. I’d assume they’d have to. This could just be ridiculous stuff to play during end times.

    • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

      TBH, a Command/Move/Attack turn structure would significantly speed up gameplay, but I don’t even pretend that that’s the direction 8th is going.

    • grim_dork

      Boy I hope not. In my circles we love the direction that 7th has gone, many of us have been playing together for more than 15 years and where the game is now is the best it’s ever been. All the options are there, presently, for games of any size.

    • euansmith

      Maybe they will “play smarter, not harder”? 😉

  • Michael McGuiggan

    Actually this started back in the Haemonculus Covens Supplement with the Carnival of Pain that clocks in at about 3000 Points. That is a few years old now.

    • nurglitch

      The Tyranid data-slates had a kind of proto-super-detachment (Living Tide, etc) that clocked over 3000pts too.

  • The larger a ‘standard game’ gets the less likely the smaller games will work; Kill Team is fun if people stick to basic squads but once people start going with elites it can get very one sided.

    A massive game has no appeal to me, it costs too much and takes too long to paint and build. While I’m sure I’m not along I bet there are plenty of people who love the big games. It’s a shame that GW didn’t stick with platoon sized games for standard then company+ for apocalypse.

    • ZeeLobby

      But massive games have huge $$$ to GW.

      • I can only speak for my gaming habits. I had my birthday in December and then obviously Yule. I spent that money to get into Antares. GW’s policy of bigger and bigger games is forcing me out after nearly 30 years. Though I haven’t spent much there for a good few years my son is slowly getting into gaming and I am not going to encourage him to choose GW.

        Having said that the new Gangs of Commorragh has got my attention so I may buy that. If GW continues to support the small games then I may stick around with them for a bit longer…maybe…

      • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

        they do and they don’t. They block new players and its new players who spend the most, so could be counterproductive if big becomes the norm.

        What makes GW money is new players, and persuading old players to start new armies or expand old ones. One reason they’ve done so well lately is all the subtle ways they have of persuading veterans to buy boxed sets.

        Really they should remove the barriers to starting new forces and for new players- like the books and expense of basic troops, and make flexible scaleable rules that can work at all different point values to encourage new gamers.

    • David Leimbach

      It’s not a matter of how long it takes, it’s how long you’ve been in the game and how long you’ve been collecting.

      Your first two tac marine squads will last you forever. If you enjoy building and painting then eventually you’re going to have a big army.

      This is where the allies rules are great, because I can collect a diverse set of models I like to build and paint and ally them in the game.

      • Again, just speaking personally, I’ve no desire to have hundreds of minis. I’ve been playing & collecting 40k nearly 30 years and have loads of different armies but I’ve never collected beyond 1.5k pts (apart from in 2nd when most things were cheaper points wise).

        Currently I have maybe 15 marines and 5 eldar, most of which are unbuilt. I had an army and sold it to start a new project but I’m just failing to find the enthusiasm.

  • Muninwing

    there are no “standard sized” games.

    play what you want.

    GW never sets points limits or levels; that’s usually done either locally, personally, or by tournaments.

    • Horus84cmd


    • grim_dork

      Exactly right.

    • Slite

      I like you and your words are nice.

      • Muninwing

        awww, thanks!

    • Shawn

      Wish I could uptick this three or four times. This to me, is the competitive lot once again influencing how we play the game.

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      no, but the idea of 6 objectives itself favours games of 1500 or more, as it doesn’t work well below that limit.

      Also the size of formations, as the OP says, is an upward force if people want to use them.

      • Muninwing

        this is true.

        – if 6 objectives is unwieldy or inappropriate, then use 3 (just double-number them for the sake of maelstrom cards)


        – formations are not a necessity, though they are fun. it’s on the same list as something like a Marauder Bomber — points are a huge limit to using it, and if i had the ability to field one i’d want to… but that doesn’t make it a necessity, only an option.

        i get it. i play Deathwing. i love my terminators, even though they are not competitive — they’ve taught me to be a better player. and they are an impressive army to see on the table. but even in the old days they were unfieldable under 750 points, legally unusable for killteams, and some people complain about their resiliency (well, used to…) in regular games. Used to be able to field them with Belial as HQ and get ObSec, but now they are formation/detachment only. and they require other units and additional support (literally — on their own there’s nothing on the board at the end of turn one, so it’s an auto-lose).

        but i can field a unit with my green men, i can field a smaller detachment with my newly-expanded ravenwing, or i can keep working on my Iron Hands until they are fieldable.

        they are an upward force for influence. this is true. but if the community dislikes the direction, they are the ultimate deciders. well, that and time — tournament rounds would add a fair amount of extra time if they upped the points, and that could be a breaker as well.

  • John Bower

    But he’s talking like you ‘must’ take 9 units of termies, erm, no, just 3 is enough. Most formations can come in around the 2k mark in my experience. Look at what ‘crons can field for less than 2k, they can be quite nasty.

    Also the idea that marines and guard are fighting alongside each other is far more fluffy than marines ‘or’ guard.

    • Matt Razincka

      THANK YOU. That means the minimum is more like 1500 points. Which would fit just fine in a 2k game.

  • mgdavey

    “That Sekhmet Conclave was another one of these massive formations. 9 units of Terminators even at the minimum of 250 points is still well over 2000 points. That’s not counting your HQ choice and you’re still going to want some upgrades, right?”

    But the formation requires 3-9 units. So that’s 750 pts min

    • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

      Most all of the TL Formations have a manageable minimum size.

  • I’m happy to see these formation extra bonuses for playing large games. Personally I love 4K points games of standard 40k (I don’t like apoc much), because it is much closer to the cinematic scale where the narrative elements thrive.

    It is way more time consuming, i would like it if the game got faster

  • benn grimm
    • OldHat

      This is BoLS reading into campaign stuff too much. No way this will be the norm. Hell, look at AoS, where things are much slimmer than Fantasy was. If anything, the old GW MO of “moar models!” is potentially on its way out.

      • benn grimm

        I get the slightly exaggerated tone of the post, but they do have a point. It’s been apoc by (not very stealthy) stealth for a while now, despite most people only playing larger games fairly rarely. Just look at all the free stuff people take now, even if you’re only playing 1500 pts it looks more like 2000pts from a couple of years ago. Add in all the mini titans, shopping list formations etc, the direction seems pretty clear.

        • OldHat

          But no one is really making anyone play games that size. We as players choose to. 1850 is the norm, which is down from 2000, but up from 1750, both of which were the “norm” once. I think players just play what suits the edition and their free time, no matter what GW wants. And the direction I see is “play cool games! WOO!” from a now very enthusiastic model/game company. Knights are cool. Formations are cool. Options are cool! That is what I am seeing now – a GW that is all about that fun.

          • benn grimm

            Or choose not to. We still play 1000pt games, kill team etc quite a bit, with 1500pts being the general norm. The direction I see is shopping list formations (buy all this spam and get free special rules for being a special customer! Wooo!) and a rather crass love of money which far outstrips any love for the game and has in fact damaged it quite heavily.

            I remain unconvinced anyone at the studio or in the warhammer stores actually plays the game for fun anymore. The main problem being; I remember when the game was run by gamers for gamers, not by zany graduates and jaded designers for hedge fund managers and hoarders.

            Luckily, 40k has been popular enough for long enough that we can both find likeminded folks to play with regardless. And they still make the best sci-fi/fantasy military models in the world (imo) so I can live with the junk.

  • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

    Personally, I think these Campaign book Formations are there to push spectacle and maybe drive new army sales, but I don’t expect them to be the norm in competitive play. Luckily, the max size incentives in these kinds of Formations are small compared to what they get at minimum size, which leads me to believe that the company has received the right takeaway from Mont’ka, which is that in order for a Formation to be viable, it has to be scalable for different point limits.

    • Adam Wright

      Is that the book with the AM or the WS and RG Marines?

      • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

        I was referring to the book with the AM, Assassinorum, and Farsight Enclaves Formations, specifically the AM Formations. The problem there was that one of the Cadian Core choices was unplayable in the Decurion because you were paying upwards of 1200 points for basic infantry and lackluster Fast Attack units when you had perfectly viable auxiliary choices that could perform similar roles while not painting you into a corner tactically. Many of the more recent Formations reflect moving away from that by not being locked into large unit commitments.

        • Adam Wright

          Well they did give the Ork decurion the same kind of treatment in the revised supplement they put out this year. Their army detachment isn’t too great unless you’re playing over a 2000 point game.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            Daemonic Incursion was the last forced maxout Decurion that had this problem, although it was helped by cheap basic Infantry, cheaper alternate unit choices, and no hard restrictions on “Mark” mixing. After that, Formationhammer got easier with Deathwatch and Genestealer Cults having largely small point-value Core choices that didn’t require maxing out to function.

          • Adam Wright

            Well they gotta make sure their brand new armies didn’t suck, otherwise sales could tank. Give ’em great rules and those models would go like hotcakes. The GSC seems to be very popular amongst the competitive and WAAC crowd.

  • EnTyme

    I feel I should mention that AoS has several of these mega formations that would require 3k+ points, but the standard game size is still 1k-2k, and we don’t even have a FOC for anything larger than 2.5k. I think these mega formations are more to say “if you want to play large-scale games, here are some benefits for using a lot of models”

    • Walter Vining


  • Davis Centis

    I don’t think this is the case. More likely they’re trying to help qualm the “formation madness” by making these more appropriately “Apocalypse” formations. So, you can take the Sehkmet Conclave trimmed down for a basic game, but if you got the models and want an apocalypse game, the formation automatically upgrades itself to that new level of play! Play the basic formation for the basic bonuses, and get the really awesome back-breaking ones for the game where it needs it.

  • Lion El’ Jonson

    *Hides in 30k bubble of comfort*

  • DeCold

    Yeah, I wish we had dark mechanicus and traitor guard formation, that would be great.

  • Horus84cmd

    In a word – no. Move along…move along….

  • nurglitch

    Honestly, I find that the points-value of game I play is going down. In 6th edition it was 2000pts, then 1850pts, and now 1650pts. I expect I’ll be playing more 1500pt games in the future.

  • Walter Vining

    where in the rule book does it define what a standard size game is? just wondering if maybe I missed some fine print somewhere that says the minimum sized game I have to play is 1850 or something…..yanno

    • Mike Linke

      It doesn’t matter what the rulebook says or doesn’t say. I can only fit so many models in my KR backpack to get to a shop to play. It’s cool if you, or GW like 4000 point games, but 1500~2000 is what I can actually carry to any event.

      • Walter Vining

        that whooshing sound you may have heard was the point of my comment going way over your head.

  • Jon

    What if the allies chart goes away and its just replaced by formations. So GW can keep a little bit of control on the narrative and power level of things.

  • Lord Elpus

    I’ll stick with my Orks… who needs allies when you have most fun.

  • Or perhaps they decided that the bonuses should only really appear in very large games to limit the overpowered nature of some of the current ones for detachments.

    So you get to run a nice army, and you get a bonus when playing really big games, but the bonus is extra and not intended for normal sized games.

    • Shawn

      Sssshhhhhh, don’t tell the tournament players, they might riot.

  • Jared Swenson

    It may be an indication. It may not be. It’s hard not to make the End Times comparison, but the rules for End Times didn’t really give us an idea how the next fantasy edition was going to be.

  • Krizzab

    yes, we must spend gorrilions of money on them :P.

  • Donald Lindsey

    Maybe they’ll do for 8th what they did for 3rd…cut the points cost per model in half…1500 to 2000 points will still be the standard but require twice as many models. Your 3000 point formations would be right about 1500 to 1850.

  • Greg Betchart

    I play at that level. You can field a more wider variety of forces, bring out things you normally don’t, prohibits kiting, and allows for more recovery from mistakes. It also makes cheese lists laughably harder to get rid of as the meta changes.

  • CF

    GW has slowly been merging Apoc into the base 40k game. Many of the formations we’ve seen were either from Apoc modified or similar to some that were Apoc only.

    My group will play big games often but they can take a bit longer to play. We’re “big-or-go-home” players who have a lot of stuff. After the money and time spent to build them up, you want to use them.

    I can see where the 1850 / tourney crowd is coming from but it’s been clear for some time that GW is not catering to that crowd. In those small games it’s easy to see who can thrive … but many times in big, big games … even those laggard armies can be tough to play against.

  • Randy Randalman

    They can push 40k into the realm of more epic sized games as there are now so many Specialist Games on the smaller scale being released beneath it.

    • euansmith

      Like Adeptus Titanicus? 😉

  • Noah Jerge

    If this is the case, I would think it is not necessarily a good thing, especially for the players. Wasn’t fantasy killed off due to having high barriers to entry?

  • Nyyppä

    Looks a lot like AoS grand alliances.

  • Connor Lund

    The minimum cost points wise is actualy only 610 (2 Dominus and 4 bare bones vanguard). People do realise its not actualy a decurion right? The lists are just there to tell you what you can bring.

  • Jim Cook

    There may be an expansion of “tiers” of combat; “standard” being about the size of a starter Apocalypse army, “skirmish” being more traditionally sized, good for an evening, and, of course, Kill Team. Shot in the dark.

  • David Leimbach

    It means they’re raising the “Power” of armies. They want you to buy the more “elite” troops. If you’re paying 40+ points per model, you’re not actually having more models.

    What bothers me about this, is where does it leave your generic troops? 2500 points of ork boys is a lot of models. Throw in some gretching and green tide becomes green carpet. Good luck moving your flyer because every spot on the board is covered by an ork.

  • Adam Wright

    The Fall of Cadia is supposed to be a massive event is it not? Would not a fluff shaking event of this magnitude not have massive armies being hurled at one another?

    I think the potential sizes of the detachments and formations only speak to the importance of this event, not to how GW is trying to push Apoc sized games as the new “norm.” For those players who might want to boohoo over how these detachments won’t fit into their 1850 point armies…do you really think GW tries to design every new formation just for tournament size games?

    Also, I actually like the new detachments that allow you to take AM alongside SM’s and SoB and Admech and other factions. I think it’s extremely fluffy and so far, none of the detachment rules seem outlandish unless you’re playing massive games. OTOH, I can see allied shenanigans becoming worse if 8th doesn’t do anything to make sure it gets reined in.

    A way to keep the stupidity from running rampant there would be to disallow IC’s from joining any unit that is not from their same army/faction on top of only allowing up to one IC in a unit period. So, for example, you cannot have a BT chaplain join a 50 man unit of Guardsmen just to give them Sealot, or the Superfriends bs with half a dozen IC’s alongside Libby Conclaves on bikes and some Dark Angel bikers for re-roll jink shenanigans or whatever.

    (Ok, admittedly the Superfriends stuff I’m just guessing at…I’ve just heard rumors but I’ve never actually seen a listed out Superfriends deathstar)

    • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

      Superfriends was kind of soft-banned in the draft Errata when they decided that Marines couldn’t mix Chapter Tactics, but that does not mean that other armies can’t build similar units (Harlequins, FSE, and Genestealer Cults have hardcoded Formations that do that out of the box).

      • Adam Wright

        I was mainly talking about the Wolf deathstars that combined them and the Dark Angels. You could have a Thunderwolf Lord, with a couple of Iron Priests riding wolves, with a Rune priest or two on bikes to add psychic powers, all combined with a unit of TWC (including the cheap fenrisian wolf bodyguards for the Lord and iron priests for ablative wounds). Add in a mix of Ravenwing or Sammael from DA for re-rollable jink cover saves. Now you have a mega deathstars unit that is probably popping invisibility and that other power that allows you to re-roll saves or whatever.

        It’s ridiculous, not only from a power gaming standpoint, but from a fluff standpoint since the Wolves and Dangles despised each other.

        Also, since Wolves and Dangles and Bangles don’t have Chapter Tactics, they technically aren’t affected by the Errata.

  • Matt Craufurd

    We already know that the formations come from management not the design team. They say we want you to put in X number of formations that cost £XXX. The purpose of formations is to sell more models. The purpose of the mega formations is to sell lots more models.I don’t think 8th is going to be about putting lots more models on the table than we have now.

    You could just as easily say – GW haven’t released any models with 25mm bases for years now. All new releases have been on 32mm bases, so technically you can’t fit as many models on the table as before. Does this mean 8th edition is going to be about less models? Or does it mean 8th edition is going to be about bigger tables?

  • Parthis

    As long as the rules are streamlined considerably (And they really do need to be) then larger armies are fine.

    Scale + Bloat slow down games.

  • EmperorOfMankind

    I hate the fact that the most people play on 6’x4′ table regardless of points. I hate larger point games for a few reasons, takes too long, there is no room to maneuver, I don’t have enough painted minis anyway.

  • Crablezworth

    7th edition is apoc and apoc is garbage