40K BREAKING: New Unit Profiles Teased

Games Workshop has just unveiled what the new unit profiles will look like for 8th – Check this out!

Oh man, Games Workshop is not holding back right now. After the Q&A I had a ton of questions. But now Games Workshop just answered one of the big ones I had – What are the new profiles going to look like?! Well, here you go:

via Warhammer Community

 

“…One big change is vehicles. These now use the same profile system as everyone else. As you’ll see though, their stat lines are much above what you might expect from a standard infantry trooper. Wounds, for example, are not capped at 10, so don’t be surprised if you see larger vehicles like Land Raiders and Imperial Knights with dozens of wounds.

This means that there is no differentiation between monsters and vehicles, so you now have a standard system to compare between, for example, a Carnifex vs a Dreadnought.  Speaking of Carnifexes, large monsters like them also have a lot more wounds now. There are also no Super Heavy Vehicle rules, as such. With the stats going above 10, the system is now an increasing scale, which means models that previously fell just shy of super-heavy status, the Gorkanaut for example, can now punch at the appropriate weight, and become much more survivable.”

 

“You’ll see that the stats are still recognisably Warhammer 40,000, but with just a few changes. We’ve gained a Movement stat in exchange for a Initiative stat. With charging units now striking first, movement and co-ordination of your assault army becomes a big factor. You can also see that WS and BS are now standard rolls (Ballistic Skill sort of always was), though you can expect modifiers to both of these stats from in-game effects.

Strength and Toughness are still with us, and still use an opposing value principle (so much higher Strength will still wound on 2+, low Strength will wound on a 6+), and these aren’t capped at 10 any more either. Wounds is a big one. Expect a lot of models to get more of these. As you can see here, the Terminator has twice what he has now, and Guilliman has more too.”

 

Holy Terra! This is big news. As you can see, the stats are basically an amalgamation of both AoS and 40k’s current stats. It’s interesting to see Terminators with two wounds! Sorry Tactical Squad Marines, you might have two hearts, but only 1 wound…

I’m curious now to see the new Str vs Toughness chart! There is more info from GW which you can read HERE. I’m excited to see the change to vehicles and monstrous creatures…Oh man, where to start!

 

What do you think of these new changes? How are you liking the new stat line?

  • Kevin Maloney

    I…..am REEEEEAALLY not sure I like this….

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      it looks that way 🙁

      Big reduction in tactical decisions there.

      Unless there is some special rule (do 6+ wounds to a tank and on a 6 it explodes or something)…

      • Morten Jørgensen

        Isn’t there talk about a chart which will gradually reduce the effectiveness of vehicles as they suffer more wounds? Maybe vehicles will explode if you reduce them to 0 wounds or overkill them or something similar?

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          there needs to be some rule in place where vehicles can explode, and die suddenly, even without being reduced to zero wounds/hull points when hit by a powerful enough anti tank gun. It kind of gives vehicles their flavour and distinguishes them from monsters, gives the sense there is fuel inside and ammo and vital systems etc.

          • Morten Jørgensen

            If heavy weapons deal multiple wounds in damage, which I suspect they will, I think overkill=explosion would be a good mechanic.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            yep, but I like vehicles occasionally suddenly exploding as they do now, even without being knocked down to zero hullpoints. Oh well, maybe thats a sacrifice to realism along with the Land Raider now no longer being lasgun proof…

          • Stealthbadger

            GW said you’d need around 500 lasgun shots to take down a landraider. So… good luck with that

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            so three rounds parked next to a 50 man blob then.

          • We don’t know if blobs or FRFSRF will be a thing. Also, your know there could be 5 Lascannon Teams and 5 Melta guns in that blob, right?

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            true. We are just dealing with the info they have given us. It looks both promising and cr@ppy in equal measure, but its too soon to tell.

          • Stealthbadger

            Sure, spend three rounds wasting that kind of firepower because the rest of the army definitely will just be watching.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            sounds like a legitimate strategy to me. Surround the vehicle with guardsmen so the Termies can’t get out and then kill it with flashlights.

            Utterly unfluffy, but that is the future of 40K by the look of it.

          • Stealthbadger

            Then the landraider player is the dumbest landraider driver in the history of 40k.

            Do you really think that this got past the play testing with frontline, adepticon, et al without being picked up?

            Why not JUST WAIT AND SEE before coming up with loads of problems before you even know the full rules?

          • eldannardo

            haha, right on dude. I don’t know how some of these people live their lives with this mindset. How can it be mentally healthy to always jump to the most negative conclusion based on the briefest amount of information?

          • Stealthbadger

            Because the nature and tone of modern media is that cyniscim is smart rather than just easy. It like everyone sees themselves as a Dr. House type character when really they’re just Dr. Doolittle.

          • DJ860

            Hahaha, you have no power here, logic.

          • Heinz Fiction

            You are doing way to much extrapolation given how little we know about the rules yet.

          • Niklas Persson

            In what world would the termimators not charge the blob first? Or the land raider tank shock its way out of a surround?

            Like, it’s an ludicrous scenario you’re painting up – and one that is also quite possible with 7th ed rules. 50 guardsmen means a potential 5 meltaguns and meltabombs. They could surround and destroy it. But you’ll likely never see it happening unless you go out of your way to engineer it. The guardsmen would need atleast two turns of movement to envelop a land raider – but the raider can at any time move 12″ and then flat out another 6″.

            You sound like you’ve already made your verdict when it comes to 8th when such an implausible thing is the doom and gloom future of 40k.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            we are talking about lasguns destroying tanks. Meltabombs are meant to destroy tanks, not a problem.

            If you have a sufficiently big blob then the land raider can’t tank shock through them and make enough space for the Termies to disembark. It is a silly situation in any rule set I agree.

            Made worse by the problem of lasguns being able to hurt Land Raiders though. That just shouldn’t happen and its an abomination.

          • euansmith

            You could just assume that IG, like modern troops, carry some disposable anti-armour/anti-structure weapons. 😉

          • Erber

            Your math is off. It would take five rounds for 50 guardsmen to accumulate 500 shots.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            3 shots each, 2 for RF and one extra for FRFSRF.

          • Erber

            To be fair we have no idea if guardsmens orders still work that way, but I see, I don’t play guardsmen and didn’t think about FRFSRF.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            can make them put out a ridiculous number of shots at close range!

          • kingcobra668

            I guess if you sit there, have no counters, shooting is exceptional, etc, etc, etc.

          • Munn

            People who are still talking about the land raider thing need to take a good long look at themselves in the mirror and wonder about where their country of origins education system failed them.

          • Ronin

            Realism would be my lascannon punching that monstrous creature in the leg and it being immobilized all game. 😉

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            true. I would have liked to see a Monstrous Creature damage table to roll on like the vehicle table, rather than an AOS type progressive table applying to both.

          • Mike

            GW said MCs are joining the vehicle damage table.

          • Shawn

            Or blowing a 16″ hole through it’s head, yeah?

          • Valourousheart

            I’m sure that a multi-melta will have a damage profile that will be devastating to vehicles. But I suspect that it will still take 3-4 MM Attack bikes to guarantee that a land raider is destroyed in 1 turn. Maybe tanks will have a rule creates an explosion based on how much overkill you get.

          • Xodis

            Im assuming the Melta Keyword will be the big hero when it comes to Melta weapons. Its base profile will probably look pretty normal.

          • MarcoT

            You’d still have extremes, even a wound count won’t be predictable. With 12 wounds being hit by a damage d6 weapon it can take 2 shots or 12. It is really going to depend on the interplay of rules.

          • The Rout

            I don’t see why it being possible for a vehicle to instantly explode by a lucky shot is a necessity for some people. Especially since the shot in question is a Lascannon or something similar. Could a LC destroy a squad in a lucky shot? Ofc not. So why should a vehicle be susceptible to one shot kill?

            Let’s say I have 5 termies in a land raider. The guys and the vehicle currently cost roughly the same, currently it’s impossible for one lascannon or mm to kill the squad in one shot. It would take 5 shots. So it should take at least that many to kill the vehicle because:

            A) in realism terms a tank should be more durable than it’s passengers otherwise they would not exist as they’d be more dangerous to the inhabitants than simply walking. And they’d be a waste of resources. And they literally have tons more armour than the passengers but somehow some believe that having a reactor or fuel makes the vehicle grenade like. Termies have powerpacks too and I’d wager those explodey bits make up more of a proportion of the termies total size than the tanks engine does to it’s total aize.

            B) in game terms why would i want to take the vehicle when it’s squishier than just taking 5 more guys for very similar points cost?

            Apologies for the essay, just struggling to understand your thinking.

          • Andrew

            ‘So why should a vehicle be susceptible to one shot kill?’ – Because they are. Nether mind that fact that a penetrating shot might hit ammunition or fuel, any bullet (it doesn’t have to be an explosive round) that penetrates a tank hull creates shrapnel that fills the inside of the vehicle and a shock-wave that concusses the crew. The same projectile would obliterate a single infantryman but might very well leave the rest of his unit unharmed.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            Tanks are hollow metal boxes with people inside. They can take a lot of punishment, provided nothing actually gets into the hollow inside where the crew are. Thats called ‘penetration’ and is simulated by the roll of the same name in 40K.

            Once some explosive force gets inside the tank with the crew, they are usually killed or vital systems destroyed. People are squishy and explosives in enclosed spaces (or even shrapnel bouncing around inside) tends to make a mess of them.

            So can you see the need for the sake of ‘realism’ (or ‘suspension of disbelief’ at least) that vehicles should behave in the same way in our sci-fi world?

            In the real world a tank can be destroyed by lots of heavy hits that don’t actually penetrate the crew compartment, turret ammo store or engine. Guns can be damaged, tracks blown off, vision slits destroyed etc etc. This often happened when powerful explosive shells (which couldn’t penetrate but made a big bang) hit tanks or they are damaged by many smaller impacts. However ONE SINGLE PENETRATING HIT GOING INTO THE CREW COMPARTMENT USUALLY KNOCKS OUT A TANK!!!!!!!!!

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            In 8th edition, wounding a tank simulates bullets and lasers hitting the crew inside, the weapons, the treads, the etc. it is just predictable now rather than 100% random.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            yeah but anti-infantry weapons can’t hurt tanks! Its like hitting a brick with a haddock! Brick will be unhurt! Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Alexandre Ménard

            Why would the lander raider not be lasgun proof? T7 creatures at the moment are lasgun proof.

            The Dreadnought we see here, if the chart looks the same, is lasgun proof.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            GW have said anything can hurt anything and specifically gave the lasgun-land raider example.

          • Munn

            Because the chart isn’t the same.

          • As long as the vehicles are significantly cheaper as a result. Also, if my tanks are going to be one shotted and Monstrous Creatures are going to be stomping around with impunity to give the game “flavor,” I’ll pass.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            like I said below, I’d have liked to see a MC table which could one shot or reduce the mobility of monstrous creatures. Roll a 7, shot in the heart, which is an explodes/wrecked type result (except no explosion).

          • As long as it’s balanced.

          • Shawn

            I could certainly get behind that, but don’t make it an easy shot, otherwise all those points you spent are doomed on a good die roll.

          • Stealthbadger

            Don’t forget your vehicles now get a saving throw. Huzzah!

          • Ben_S

            Because living monsters don’t have vital systems inside?

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            brains? Hearts?

          • Tushan

            And yet you refuse to see the same logic for monstrous creatures because there obviously is no heart or brain that a shot can penetrate and outright kill the beast. Just tanks.

            ffs..

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            have you read my other comments? I specifically mention a similar rule for MCs and mention their hearts and brains and how they should be able to be one-shotted! Doh!

          • Tushan

            Nope. Missed that one.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            it is 4 and 8 comments above this one in this same thread, as well as elsewhere in this discussion.

          • Tushan

            My fault for missing..

        • Luca Lacchini

          Yeah, was thinking something along the same lines.
          Maybe you have to “shave off” the first layers of armor to activate a heavy weapon ability, maybe only tanks and properly armored vehicles will be safe from such weapons unless they have suffered damage, and so on.

        • Shawn

          ^This would be my guess.

        • Djbz

          I did ask on facebook and they said that stuff still explodes.
          No specifics though

          • euansmith

            Anything with the “Michael Bay” Keyword will explode.

      • Frank Krifka

        there are plenty of “instal-gib” rules in AoS. (if an attack does a wound roll a dice, if the total exceeds the remaining wounds the model is slain type of thing).

        So I’d expect something similar on units that have tank killing weapons

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          lets hope there is something like that.

      • Stealthbadger

        As a guard player I’m happy with this. Having leman Russes blown up by drop podding space marines turn 1/2 is just lame.

        And before you all say bubble wrap that got shot to pieces by everything else in the army and with drop podsare you seriously suggesting all my vehicles should have a daisy chain of infantry around them?

        Seriously this change is great as far as I’m concerned and just made vehicles worth taking again.

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          thats what whiteshields with fearless characters in the squad are for. Also corner deployment.

          • Stealthbadger

            And if I don’t want to spend the entire game castling up in the corner?

            Look I get you don’t like it but seriously why don’t you wait and see how it plays out. As I said I play Russes. Having them blow up to one lucky shot is stupid in my view where’s tanking 150 lasgun shots? I can live with that.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            40K is based on WWII with a bit of WWI thrown in. Tanks blowing up to single rocket or petrol bomb attacks is exactly what happens. It still happens. How many guided missiles will it take to bring down an Abrams? It won’t slowly be chipped away at, the warhead either penetrates and blows it up or it doesn’t.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            Just because it is realistic, does not mean it is satisfying for a game.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            true. But a TTG needs to be true and realistic for its setting, otherwise the fluff/game disconnect gets too big.

          • Stealthbadger

            Who cares about the real world. This is a game where Guy can blow up a tank with his mind.

          • Prospero 4life

            Yeah stealthbadger. You should just fill your army with min maxed combos. After all this game isnt about having fun and making fluffy armies, its about having your landraider get oneshot by a lance, or surrounding your vehicles with blobs of infantry that serve no purpose other than bubblewrap!

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            infantry protecting tanks from other infantry who have anti tank weapons is like a fundamental of 20th century warfare, not some weird abberation or rule artefact.

          • Prospero 4life

            First of all I know that. Second of all, this is 40k, i’m sorry I don’t want my super badass space soldiers of Cadia to have to baby coddle their heavy tanks from the 8 foot tall space werewolf vikings with their superheated deathrays.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            sorry to break this to you, but 40K fluff, particularly ground warfare weapons etc are heightened fictionalised versions of WWI and WWI combat. If it goes away from that then it loses the grimdark. We all know warfare will be remote controlled or AI drones soon enough, but thats not what we want on the tabletop.

          • Prospero 4life

            My bad dude, I forgot about the super soldiers and demons and primarchs in ww2. How could I be so blind? Of course I know the fluff has tons of influence from 20th century warfare. Obviously there is no swaying you from your adamant stance . Which I do not mind, as I said before NOT EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE TO PLAY THE SAME. If you like ww2 realism in your 40k games then go for it dude, but don’t expect anyone else to do the same because you think it is realistic and the right way to play.

            I love history, it is my major for crying out loud and I am very knowledgeable when it comes to historical warfare. I will play some games accordingly and others I will play to have fun. If you ask me or most people in my opinion if you should have to blob your infantry around every single tank instead of going for forward objectives or simply playing a GAME to have FUN the answer will be a stern no.

          • Stealthbadger

            Dude you clearly didn’t study history. If you had you would know the allies formed a daisy chain around every Sherman tank to stop the sneaky Germans getting a rear armour shot in. They held hands and sang songs. Ah happy times. Apart from all the death and destruction obviously.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            well just take you tank only force and watch as it gets blown up. Tanks and infantry have to work together, always have, always will, until both are replaced by drones.

          • Prospero 4life

            No one here said that. But have a nice day folks.

          • Xodis

            Yeah but that’s a lot better realized through snap firing vehicles and soldiers guarding the tank, then the typical “bubblewrap” defense of literally putting troops in between the tank and the weapon. http://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/509f6ee33b77acb307e6ae8ed60aadc60edb8b3afd3775331b81f0de40000ee9.jpg

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            I would rather agree, that the actual pile of infantry needed to protect a tank is a bit silly and ‘gamey’. Expecting your tanks to survive without infantry support is also silly and takes tactics away from the game. A sensible game might have a 6″ bubble around infantry into which enemy infantry can’t come (unless they charge) rather than the current 1″ which would fix this issue and make the battlefield look more realistic.

          • Xodis

            It would be pretty “rule heavy” IMO (since 8e is suppose to be rules light), but I was thinking vehicles can snap fire at any unit that moves within 6 inches, and any infantry that has LoS can use their snap fire to fire on that same unit.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            I prefer my solution as it would force people to kill the infantry first before being able to target the tank with their short range bazooka/piat equivalents (meltaguns etc) and would mean you wouldn’t have to have a physical wall of troops around the tank, which I agree looks and feels unrealistic.

            However any workable solution would be fine.

            If a player leaves a vehicle unprotected from strike infantry carrying anti tank weapons they deserve to lose the tank. Thats just part of the game.

          • Xodis

            I agree that you have to support your tanks, unless its something like a Land Raider which supports itself really, but I will take anything that gives a player a chance against an alpha strike kamikaze mission, right now its too flawless.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            I think it looks that way because people don’t take enough chaff troops to intercept such alpha-strikes. I usually do, having access to IA13 Renegades and their cheap troops like zombies and mutants, and such tactics are pointless against my army.

          • Stealthbadger

            Where have they ever said it’s based on WW2 or WW1 or did you extrapolate that from the fact it has guys riding wolves, people burning stuff with mind power, walking robot sarcophagus machines, jet and rocket aircraft, alien monsters, orbital bombardments.

            Hang on, it’s because both World wars and 40k have tanks and people isn’t it.

          • Stealthbadger

            This guy gets it.

          • Stealthbadger

            I stand corrected and will learn from my error. Thank you sir 🙂

        • Kyle

          You are misunderstanding what these people want. They want THEIR army to have tons of options. Yours is supposed to be stuck turtled up and serve as a punching bag for them for the duration of the game.

          • Stealthbadger

            Oooooooooh right, sorry. Got it. That’ll explain why the same three people are spamming the ERMAGHAD LANDRAIDERS DIE TO LASGUNS!?! I every thread. Thanks 🙂

          • Munn

            IDK I mean just think about all the poor riptides dying in droves to lasguns last edition.

          • Stealthbadger

            Damn, all those IG list sweeping the death stars aside with volley fire. #nerflasgunsnow #thinkofthelandraiders

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            no, they want rules that reflect combined arms operations, because that makes for good tactical games.

          • Prospero 4life

            This ideal can only go so far though, this isn’t Warmachine this is Warhammer. A game about pitting super unrealistic armies against one another in a clash of epic proportions making for a fun game. Not a game of 20th century warfare, tactical acumen and operations have its place and you can surely play the way you describe. But it is extremely silly to expect a guard player to do this one thing every game to ensure his tanks don’t just instantly die and he has no fun.

            Or anyone being required to perform a certain combo every game otherwise he loses for that matter.

          • ctFallen

            If this continues to take alot from AOS like it looks like its going to,it will highly revolve around combos and will be much closer to Warmachine or MtG than it is now. Everything can destroy everything as they have said so there is a good chance that he will have to use some combo to protect his tanks because now even massed grot blaster fire can knock his tanks out on the first or second turn.
            I don’t like the aos style fixed to hit in CC but i have gotten past it in aos and I don’t know how modifiers will effect it so ill still stay cautiously optimistic.

          • Prospero 4life

            Perhaps you are right, we will know once the game is out for sure! I for one am optimistic, I enjoy AOS even though I loved fantasy to death. But I have doubts that the game will be as combo reliant as AOS and Warmahordes tbh but I could be wrong. In either case everyone can play how they like. It is a gamer after all.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            Obviously it is a fantasy/sci fi game, but if tanks and infantry no longer have different roles, and can operate without each other, then a big flavourful and tactical part of the game has been lost.

          • Kyle

            What you want sounds like nothing of the sort. “Combined arms” in which tanks are invincible when plowing into a horde of infantry because hurrr its a tank! Up-thread you were literally complaining that you can’t just park a Land Raider in front of 80 guardsmen anymore because they might, maybe, possibly kill it in two turns of shooting. You are literally complaining that you have to put more thought into your turn than “ma Land Raider is UNSTOPPABLE!”

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            you are combining two conversations about two different things. It is SILLY that lasgun armed guardsmen should be able to kill a tank, lasguns are not anti-tank weapons. It is VITAL that tanks are protected (by infantry) against other infantry who have anti tank weapons.

            See, currently the game allows infantry with anti-tank weapons to threaten tanks. Infantry without anti tank weapons are no threat to tanks. By giving all infantry effectively anti tank weapons (by taking away the difference between tanks and other models) it removes an important tactical element in the game.

            Can you get that? Or shall I explain it again with shorter words?

          • Kyle

            It was your example, don’t like it you shouldn’t have used it up thread. You are the one conflating the ability of a lasgun to chip a few wounds when volleyed in a huge number as the same thing as few lascannons. As if somehow the meager wounds offered by that are going to make giant infantry bricks the new meta at the expense of combined arms play. You keep calling it effective AT except it is extremely inefficient AT. All the rumors point to heavy weapons dealing multiple wounds which I am confident we will see that confirmed tomorrow. Use whatever length words you want you and you will still be wrong.

          • There does seem to be a distinct Eldar/Space Marine flavor to the people who are upset, and a Orks, Dark Eldar, & Guard flavor to the people who are looking forward to the new edition. It makes sense, since balancing will amount to a massive nerf to the traditional top armies.

          • Stealthbadger

            I play ad mech, marines, orks, necrons, and guard. I am massively looking forward to the changes announced to date.

          • Rush Darling

            Nid player here.

            ERMAGERD UPDATES!

            LIKE!

          • Kyle

            I play Chaos SPESS MARINES and I am stoked about the new edition. I may even restart my Tyranid army if the new edition rocks. Poor nids have been just terrible for so long.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            I play Chaos SM, Chaos Daemons, Orks, Space Marines and Guard (well Traitor Guard). I like some of the changes like a M characteristic. Others like the loss of Initiative and the loss in the distinctiveness of different types of weapon and the loss of explodes results for tanks seem really terrible to me.

            I don’t think the distinction is by army. The distinction is by game style. Veterans are used to a 40K which is a simulation style game, more like Bolt Action, or the (true simulation style) Laserburn that preceded 40K. Each shot is accounted for in detail and each individual important.

            Newer players are used to games like X-Wing where the individual weapon types are abstracted out and we have a number of ‘attack dice’ or similar mechanism akin to boardgame mechanics.

            40K is moving from simulation type to boardgame type, and some of us don’t like it.

          • garry

            Simply put, when a tank explodes it’s not a lucky shot the tank is simply destroyed in a single devasting shot. After reading your thread i tried desperatly to find something that could blow up a tank with a single lucky shot, and honestly, no dice. So, your realism is kinda fake.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            do you mean in the real world? All AP rounds and anti-tank missiles function that way, either destroying the tank after penetrating the armour or bouncing off, possibly suppressing it but not destroying it. Have you read any military history ever?

          • The Hobbler

            This is entirely baseless conjecture. We do not have the details to verify this make believe version of eighth edition you have conceived.

            Either way small arms fire can most definitely harm tanks. Having high volumes of Lasgun fire makes the game far more realistic than the rock-paper-scissors style game you have somehow come to think represents reality. There are a myriad of sensors and weapons on the outside of vehicles that small arms will damage, and concentrated las fire will certainly begin to weaken armor. You have become so entrenched in the meta of old you have mistaken it as the proper way to play. These changes do not equalize weapons and units, they merely allow every unit the ability to contribute. A few lasguns are still nothing, it would instead take such a horde focusing on a single unit. But you seem to be forgetting that battles are never a mass of guardsmen vs a single land raider. There are always more units. Would you stick your army into a longshot quagmire as the rest of the enemy blasts you apart? Small skirmishes are not isolated, but you insist on treating them like they are.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            there is a lot of information in the articles written by SaltyJohn and others. These articles are presented as wish lists, but in fact these guys, through FLG, were involved in the playtesting and rules writing of the game. We can therefore make some reasonable assumptions looking at what they are trying to persuade us to accept.

            Small arms cannot hurt tanks. That is pretty much the definition of a tank, and the definition of small arms. Some weapons incapable of penetrating a tank can indeed damage it, taking off machine guns and radio aerials, but such weapons pose NO THREAT TO THE LIFE OF THE CREW and CANNOT DESTROY A TANK.

            GW is in danger of reducing 40K to an AoS style abstract game in the style of X-Wing. I don’t want my models to have numbers of ‘attack dice’, I want the granularity of 40K. I want it streamlined and sensible with less randomness, but I don’t want to play AoS with my 40K minis.

          • The Hobbler

            It isn’t that small arms with blow up a tank, it’s that you can reasonably assume that a large quantity of small arms fire will do sufficient damage as to disable a tank. Damage to sensor arrays, weapons, viewports, etc. That’s with conventional weaponry. Lasguns would be able to weaken armor plates if focused long enough.

          • I don’t play Star Wars, so I don’t get the comparison. I do play Infinity, which beats the snot out of 40k as a simulation (albeit at a smaller scale). I’m not really excited about particular rules changes. I am excited for a rebalancing. I don’t expect them to nail it, but I’m hopeful that they at least can make all the options somewhat viable. Too much of the current game revolves around list building and gimmicks. If they can fix that, I can deal with lasguns damaging my tanks.

          • lorieth

            I don’t think many real Eldar players will be upset, this is much more in line with what Eldar always aspired to (and almost were, in 1st/2nd Ed).

            Hopefully the units will be balanced a bit better so we can actually field the ones we like without either throwing points away or besmirching our reputation. Still not buying a WK though.

          • Emprah

            Actually, why not move 40k FAR AWAY from world wars? It is supposed to be way more advanced.

            Space marines would not care much about shrapnel inside a tank unless they took off their power armour.

      • eldannardo

        How does it look that way? There isn’t enough information in this release of information to speculate about vehicles exploding yet. These are just the base stats.

      • Derek Lee

        Contemptor dreads will probably still have the explode special rule. I bet the machines infamous for bigger deaths will still explode.

    • Ronin

      Hopefully we can explode monstrous creatures into giant splashes of acid too. 😉

    • Bryan Ruhe

      If you click through the link…

      “Don’t worry though – stuff still dies quickly, with powerful weapons dishing out multiple damage with each hit – but you will, as always, need to shoot the right gun at the right target to get the best effects.”

      So no worries.

    • dave long island

      Oh they’re gonna get blowed up. They’re gonna get blowed up real good!… lol

    • grim

      you should wait before assuming. Hopefully there is some kind of table.

    • We don’t really know all we have is a stat line.

    • Multigeneral

      Why do vehicles need to explode? On modern battlefields they very rarely suddenly explode because of a round penetrating the armor. Most just become combat ineffective and burn furiously due to ammo or fuel ignition, then might explode later as main gun ammunition cooks off. Ammo detonations upon impact are not as common as most would think. Looks great in the movies though.

    • kingcobra668

      They still have vehicle damage charts/tables it seems, so possibly.

    • carlisimo

      A few potential solutions:
      – Give multimeltas and other select weapons 3d6 wounds against armored units (if ~15W is a common tank stat, otherwise adjust accordingly)
      – Have vehicles “die” at 0 wounds remaining but blow up catastrophically if they they’re taken to, say, -3W.
      – Give certain weapons a special rule that allows you keep rolling dice to add to the wound count if the first roll is a 6 (not that I want to deal with a ton of special rules).

  • Patrick Boyle

    2 wound Terminators, yaaaay. Dread profile seems pretty solid too. All of course going to depend on the new SvT chart as said.

    • Dennis Harrison

      Does “..low Strength will wound on a 6+” mean on a 6?

      • Patrick Boyle

        Shadow Wars has a mechanism, though it’s for To Hit rolls, for handling needing greater than 6 to hit, where if you need say 7 to hit, if you roll a 6, you need to roll a further 4+ to actually land it. That may not be exactly correct numbers but that’s how the system works. At best guess it’ll be something similar here.

        • Dennis Harrison

          Yeah, I know. But you need a 7, 8, etc. Not a 6+

      • Xodis

        There will probably be modifiers to hit/wound rolls like in AoS.

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      also the weapon profiles should give us some idea how its going to work (they are coming tomorrow).

      • Jimi Steele

        Really hope they look like SW:A weapon profiles. I love the short/long to hit modifiers. And they mentioned Save Mod was coming back. Just so relieved to see Strength and Toughness staying.

        • Munn

          I’m a bit disappointed. Flat to wound works about the same as the old ST just plays out slightly quicker. In the end it’s a small distinction but…eh

          • Karru

            Not really though, they are vastly different. Fixed wounding means that no matter what the target is, it will bleed just the same. The S vs T represents the effectiveness of certain weapons against certain targets. A handgun shouldn’t be able to severely damage a tank for example, but the fixed
            to-wound system would easily allow it.

    • Sparowl

      *MegaNobz look around*

      Wait….wut? Can we get an invul save now that two wounds isn’t our special thing?

      • Dennis Harrison

        How about even moar wounds?

      • Munn

        You’ll probably have 4-5 wounds

        • Karru

          I think 3 to 4 at most would be accurate. 5 wound Nobz would have to be very expensive point wise. More points, less models needed, less money for GW.

          • euansmith

            1 Wound Knight Titans it is then 😉

  • Luca Lacchini

    Ld7 marines?

    • Fergie0044

      Remember leadership is getting a complete overhaul. We don’t yet know how good/bad a 7 is.

      • shady

        if its like aos then you add the number of models to a d6 roll. if that number is over your ld then you lose that many wounds(or models i forget)

        • J Mad

          Well 40k might not do this tho

        • Simon Bates

          Models. So if a Marine squad lost 2 models that turn, it would have a 1 in 6 chance of losing another. If it lost 3 it would have a 1 in 6 of losing 2 and a 1 in 6 of losing 1. Assuming that the mechanic is the same as AoS and that Marines don’t get any special morale rules. Marines have been resilient to morale checks since (at least) 2nd edition and in Epic, so I reckon they’ll get something.

      • Luca Lacchini

        Yeah, I know, it’s just so much… different from the statline I’m used to.
        Considering veterans such as Terminators and Dreadnoughts get 8 and Guilliman shows a massive 10, it’s a fun ride trying the guessing game.

    • ragelion

      Stormcast are bravery 6 space marines are most likely going to get some additional rule to help with leader ship.

      • Shawn

        Additional rule to help with leadership: AND THEY SHALL KNOW NO FEAR! 🙂

        • Xodis

          God I hope not lol. That rule needs to follow the way of the Dodo and die already. Itll be nice if moral was a thing again.

          • Shawn

            Nah, just re-envision the rule. It doesn’t have to be the convoluted psuedo-fearless that it was. ATSKNF grants a +1 or +2 to Bravery/Morale tests and/or regrouping (if such an animal exists in 8th), thus bringing space-marines back in line with their current leadership.

          • Shawn

            Nah, no reason to bring back that pseudo-fearless non-sense. Just re-envision the rule to reflect the new edition. ATSKNF: +1 or +2 to Bravery/Morale tests, and +1 or +2 to regrouping, if such an animal exists in 8th. That would bring them inline with the current leadership for space marines.

          • euansmith

            It will be replaced with, “AND THEY SHALL RIP OFF THE HEAD OF FEAR AND [REDACTED] DOWN ITS THROAT!!!!”

      • Xodis

        Chances are they can already use their leaders Leadership score if he is close enough.

    • EvilCheesypoof

      Single D6, and using the battleshock rules from AoS.

  • I am quite happy with this. Could make it more interesting if done well. Time will tell but I am happy to reserve full judgement until I play for myself.

  • Xodis

    This looks very interesting, Im excited to see more.

  • allheilstormcrow

    Yes! Right now i am optimistic about this

  • Anders Busch Hjarlvig

    So im guessing two wound terminators will mean about 6 wounds on a tyranids warrior 😀

    • Jabberwokk

      Squad Still dies to Str 8 Templates.

      Except there are no templates…..

      hmm…..

      • Simon Bates

        And probably no instant death either.

    • generalchaos34

      I would imagine, most “hero” type units in AoS have a min of 5 wounds since they cannot hide in other units.

      • Shawn

        What? The captain can’t hang out with the command squad anymore? Heresy!

        • euansmith

          I guess that Command Squad might have a special rule that allows them to give some protection to their boss.

          • Shawn

            Agreed, something unique to them. I wonder if the apothecary might, instead of FNP mitigate rend values by 1. That would be awesome. Also, being a U.S. Navy veteran, and being around actual marines, there should be an apothecary in every space marine unit! LOL. The U.S. Marines never go anywhere without a medic or two. I can’t understand why they forgot this basic war principle 40,000 years in the future. Perhaps the Imperium not only lost technology, but lost most of their common sense to, yeah?

          • euansmith

            It is like the way that a modern fire team has a couple of automatic weapons and a few LAWs. 😉

          • Shawn

            Absoutlely, maybe someone else other than Girlyman should have written the Codex Astartes?

  • ZeeLobby

    I actually like WS vs WS as a mechanic. Meant that a skilled opponent could have low armor, but still survive thanks to their martial skill. Kind of sad to see it go.

    • Patrick Boyle

      “You can also see that WS and BS are now standard rolls (Ballistic Skill sort of always was), though you can expect modifiers to both of these stats from in-game effects.”

      That’s probably still going to be the same, just achieved by different means.

      • Shawn

        Absolutely Patrick. And, if you look closer, you’ll note that space marines still essentially have the same WS and BS 7- 4 = 3 +, 7- 4 = 3+. Although it will be interesting to see how WS will compare in close combat with, say ICs, or in challenges.

      • ZeeLobby

        Yeah. I guess that’s true. I just always thought the WS table should be way more diverse than it was. I’m not adverse to there being unhittable or unwoundable models in the game, as long as they’re far and few between.

        How a gretchin would ever even hit a primarch is beyond me. Let alone wound.

        • Simon Bates

          I could imagine a Primarch ignoring a gretchin and not really bothering to defend himself. Might not even notice it in the midst of battle.

          • ZeeLobby

            but if a squad of them are enough to tie him up in combat, he’d probably notice. If he’s by himself walking down a sidewalk whistling and a gretchin screams, and starts to charge him from the front 50 yards away, he’s going to wait til he gets there and let it hit him first? Lol. I mean sure there’s tons of situations, but blanket solutions are just lazy imo.

          • euansmith

            Until that grott stabs Guilliman in the throat with a dull spoon 😉

    • SamuelKikaijin

      Really? It never went lower than 3+, and getting higher than 4+ was not common.

      • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

        It would have been better with a bigger spread, but it was better than nothing.

        • ZeeLobby

          Exactly. I thought it represented a cool differentiator. It was just poorly handled.

    • Old zogwort

      Most if not nearly all thing just had to roll a 4+ to hit clowns. It wasn’t that much of a defensive stat.

      • ZeeLobby

        I mean that’s on GW just doing a horrible job making it relevant.

    • Thomas

      True, but it was balanced really badly. The fact that you always seemed to be hitting on 4s or (at a pinch) 5s, despite how lightning quick and skilled your opponent is.

      A Tau should have been Lelith Hesperax on 6s.

      • stinkoman

        will that be the case with this new system?

        • Thomas

          Nope, which is a sticking point for me.

          • Munn

            Fluff should always take a back seat to making a fun game.

          • Thomas

            Again, it’s a matter of degrees. And I don’t necessarily buy that the new way is automatically more “fun.”

            Is it fun to have your elite, highly trained troops buried under a hail of weak attacks, purely because the vastly inferior fighter happened to charge that turn? No, not really.

          • kloosterboer

            I dunno…maybe make sure your elite, highly trained troops aren’t in a dangerous position, to be charged like that?

            You really can’t make these arguments in a vacuum…and you can’t/ shouldn’t base rules around such highly improbably events (not to mention poor tactical choices).

            Why not just have a rule that noone gets to charge your highly specialized snowflakes? Wouldn’t that be fun?

            Fun is, of course, highly subjective. As are speculative opinions.

          • Thomas

            Yeah, lemme just keep my elite unit of close combat murderers way out of charge range. That’s a good tactic.

            And you’re kind of making my point for me. This IS a highly subjective thing, and yet Munn is sitting here speaking as if the new system is objectively more fun than the old one. Many people will find the old way better, and that’s totally valid.

          • Geronimo32509

            Unless of course Lelith has a special rule that makes it harder for enemies to hit her. For people who aren’t familiar with AOS, the base stat line doesn’t remotely tell the full story of a models defensive/offensive capabilities.

      • Arianod

        ‘Close combat’ in 40K also includes point-blank fire and such; when you see it like that, a Tau hitting Lelith Hesperax on 4+ doesn’t sound so unlikely. And it helps in keeping powerful characters from simply cutting through infantry like butter, which is OK in my book.

      • ZeeLobby

        Yeah, no doubt. I mean that fell on them. They could have made the chart a lot more interesting, like the To-Wound chart.

  • pokemastercube .

    so paladins and terminator equivliant units that had 2 wounds before going to 3 wounds then?

    • Sparowl

      (What such changes mean to Ork players) –

      MegaNobz go down to 1 wound. And increase in points.

      • Sorien

        LOL I’m not even THAT cynical!

    • Munn

      Could be 3 could be more

  • Decaramas

    Wonder what armor is used for now?

    So melee atttack is a WS roll to hit, then i guess its SvT, weapon may increase S to wound then a save roll which again might be modified by weapon and then apply damage minus armor ? Or will armour just be for ranged combat?
    So Ranged is Bs roll to hit, weapon strength v armour to wound, save roll, apply damage.

    Guess we find out more tomorrow

    • Patrick Boyle

      Where are you getting the impression wounding is changing? I’m not reading that at all, both ranged and melee seem to still be the same roll to hit > S v T to wound > roll save(armor or otherwise), it’s just that now vehicles also have Toughness and an armor save rather than AV.

      • Decaramas

        So where does the A stat come in ?
        In AoS damage is applied after a hit is either saved or not. So if you got one hit but it did 3 damage it would be one save roll that if failed would then cause three damage. I am presuming this will be in the new system.

        • Nightwalker

          A is number of Attacks???

          • Patrick Boyle

            That’s what I figured.

          • Decaramas

            Sorry of course, cheers guys

          • Munn

            Sigmar works a bit differently, a sigmar player WOULD be confused by that stat marker lol.

          • Nightwalker

            But this is 40k… which has had “A” since 3rd ed…

  • Nightwalker

    I am nervous about Dark Eldar…

    …either my poison is going to be really amazing now…

    …or they will feel it is too OP and nerfbat it to death…

    …really have to hold that breath!

    • Munn

      It will work in a completely different way than it did before to the point where comparing the two would be silly

      • Thomas

        And you know this how? You’re talking with a great degree of certainty here.

      • Nightwalker

        Source?

  • Tristan Smith

    That looks like a flat to hit roll in CC, which makes me a very sad panda. “My guardsman hits your daemon prince just as easily as he hits your cultist!” How is this a good, thematic, enjoyable mechanic? I hope I’m wrong about that one, as it bothers me more than tanks with wounds(which is a lot).

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      yeah, funny how superfast melee characters or troops now hit last if charged and don’t get any defence due to their epic skillz.

      Not a great step forward.

      • Xodis

        If someone manages to get the jump on those superfast characters they deserve the advantage IMO, still though we dont know what roll things like assault grenades or other wargear might offer.

        • Tristan Smith

          Ever have a clumsy guy charge at you in a fight? As a faster opponent it’s SUPER easy to hit him first. I liked Initiative values.

          • Thomas

            Also, the idea of a something like Guardsman getting the drop on Lelith Hesperax or a Herald of Slaanesh in ANY situation is kind of silly.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            yep, they would just leap into the air and scissor kick the poor sap in the back of the head before he could get within bayonet range.

          • Thomas

            “I may be the most skilled hand-to-hand fighter of all the Eldar race, with reflexes honed to a fine edge, but that Guardsman ran at me out of a vehicle so I’m totally caught off guard!”

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            too true lol

          • lorieth

            I feel like someone should make an Inquisition joke here. Just saying.

          • Xodis

            Yeah, but have you ever had an well qualified soldier charge you even if you WERE a much better fighter? He can get a few good hits in.

          • Tristan Smith

            We’re not talking about a green beret charging a member of SAS. We’re talking about a WWI tommy charging a 7 foot tall, power armoured, genetically enhanced super being, or space elf, or what not. It’s like a toddler running at a black belt.

          • Xodis

            Except even the lore has 7 foot tall, power armoured and genetically (and demonically) enhanced taken down by stupid things like a swarm of crappy guardsmen getting a lucky shot.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            a swarm yeah, as a freak occurrence in a novel, but who wants that happening every time on the tabletop?

          • Tristan Smith

            A swarm versus one guy is a very different thing than what we were discussing. Also, that isn’t related to striking first in any way. A marine would get dragged down by guardsmen after killing one or two yeah?

          • Xodis

            Of Course, but it wouldnt be the first time a superior enemy took an enemy for granted, its how CSM always lose in the first place, so arrogance has its place.

          • Tristan Smith

            I don’t want a game built on the premise that the statistical outlier is the norm. Yes, occasionally a superior warrior may be caught off guard due to arrogance. But what, we’re going to have a hubris stat? He would have gained that overconfidence through years, decades, centuries(we are talking space marines here) of consistently NOT getting hit by these people.

          • Thomas

            That’s an awesome, eloquent way of explaining the problem!

          • Xodis

            Assuming 4+ or 5+ to hit from the IG along with a Strength of 3 and a save of 3-4+ from the Eldar player) how often do you expect that to work out to the IG players benefit?
            We will probably read about it in lore more often than it happens in the game.

          • Thomas

            Have you ever read the fluff for Drazhar? How he seems to almost have a form of precognition, his movements are so fast? His reflexes are so well-honed that even Eldar often perceive him as only a black blur.

            How is it that some poor sap from the Fire Caste or a Imperial Penal Battalion could ever get the drop on that? On a warrior so skilled and blessed with superhuman prowess that even the greatest Exarchs view him with a mixture of fear and awe?

          • Xodis

            Thats all good, but there are things he can’t always foresee, and there is sometimes a good narrative explaination. We see in all types of lore when an underdog gets the jump on a clearly superior enemy and comes out on top, even if it is rather cheesy that he pulls it off.

            In all the examples given here, everyone says its “impossible” instead of highly unlikely. Given the stats of the SM Im sure the IG and Super Eldar Character of +5 death will also make the stats look highly unlikely and “not normal”.

          • Thomas

            I’m fine with it being something that happens rarely in the lore, but this new mechanic makes it a normal, everyday occurrence in-game. I agree, it’s not impossible, but turning it all the way around so that the charging player ALWAYS gets first strike is a bit far imo.

            If they have some way to mitigate it though, so that stuff like Incubi aren’t getting caught unawares by some rookie Guardsmen, that’ll be fine.

          • Xodis

            Correction, the new mechanic gives the IG soldier a CHANCE for it to happen everytime, statistically speaking (assuming 4+ or 5+ to hit from the IG along with a Strength of 3 and a save of 3-4+ from the Eldar player) how often do you expect that to work out to the IG players benefit?

          • Thomas

            But it’s not just a chance. They will literally always hit first if they get the charge. That’s literally what the rule is. That’s silly.

          • Xodis

            No they won’t, because they still need hit, then wound, then hope the Eldar doesn’t save. So the most likely scenario every time is the IG running in and getting cut down.

          • Thomas

            Yeah, you’re talking about making kills. I’m explicitly talking about hitting first. Which the inferior combatant will ALWAYS do if he gets the charge off. So it’s not just a chance or a one-off or a random fluke, it’s a system that ensures inferior fighters can ALWAYS get the drop on their superiors and I think that’s dumb.

          • Xodis

            Hitting is not attacking in the rules, its completely different…..

            Using that line of logic though….what about when soldiers actually fire their weapons as they charge? It does a good job at simulating that as well.

          • Thomas

            Cool, so are they going to be attacking with their ranged weapon profile? No? Then that’s pointless.

            And I’m not sure what you’re talking about here. I’ve literally only been talking about the rule allowing you to hit first on the charge. Not wounding, not making kills, not wiping out units. I don’t get where you’re getting all this from. There’s no real difference between “getting to attack first” and “getting to hit” first. I literally don’t have a clue what you mean.

            Basically: I think that getting a guaranteed first chance to hit because you happened to get the charge off is a dumb way of handling things.

          • Xodis

            Because you keep saying hit first, when they actually attack first, the chances of them hitting first is still pretty slim. Its a small difference buts actually important.

            The rules may allow them to attack with the ranged weapon profile, its still something we dont know yet. Honestly that would be a needless complexity to the rules that would bog down the game, in the narrative it makes sense though.

          • Thomas

            Oh please, that’s just wilful pedantry. You knew exactly what I meant. I’m not saying they’ll get guaranteed hits, but getting the first swing is dumb. You’re really reaching here. If you like the system, fine, but you’re not really giving any good arguments as to why it’s better than initiative.

          • Xodis

            I did know what you meant, which is why I corrected you, because like I said the difference is actually important.

            But it’s not dumb because they SHOULD have the first swing due to range weapon profiles anyways.

          • Xodis

            Faster? check
            Realistic? Only if you take into account that they should be firing while they charge, but yeah check.
            Easily mitigated with special rules for certain “special” people? Check.

            Need more?

          • Tristan Smith

            If I, as an individual without military close combat training, ran at you, an individual who claims to have these things. What would happen? You’d have me on the ground before I could think of my Momma’s name, and I think you know it.

          • Xodis

            It depends honestly. You might get in a good couple blows, you might not. Yes its a safe bet on the one with the training, but its not always the winning bet.

          • Tristan Smith

            Game design shouldn’t be making the statistical improbabilities the norm. If this was to be included IT should be the exception, not the other way around.

          • Xodis

            Its not the norm. Even if you give the IG the initiative against your Eldar Superhero, how often would it actually work in his benefit instead of allowing the Eldar to cut him down and then use his turn to his full advantage?

          • Tristan Smith

            Your position is that because an untrained man will sometimes, maybe, if the trained guy is distracted or something, be able to land a blow before being killed that the rules should reflect that maybe sometimes blow in every instance. You’re absolutely making it the norm.

          • Xodis

            No its not the norm, its a chance that more often than not wont happen, but at least keeps the game balanced and simple.

          • Tristan Smith

            “Chargers always strike first” is the new rules. The norm. Which you are backing with statically unlikely occurrences.

          • Xodis

            No, you picked an unlikely scenario to try and defend your point. Charging Eldar with Guard is what is statistically unlikely. All the game did was give the player a chance at making it work, no matter how bleak it may be.

          • Tristan Smith

            Are you serious? Now the issue is that “who charges eldar with guard?”, not that you disagree with my original premise that faster/better trained opponents would strike first regardless of being charged? Way to move the goalpoasts.

          • Xodis

            Im not moving the goalposts, You changed the course of the discussion so I changed with it.

            In an extreme example “Like IG charging Eldar” the chances of the IG being relevant is very low below average, but we agreed its rare even in the lore.

            In the same extreme example, the game simulates this by allowing the IG soldier to have a brief chance before being cut down on his own turn.

            So this extreme example actually gives the players a chance to simulate the same dramatic lore we read about.

          • Tristan Smith

            I never changed the course of the discussion. My premise was always that a slower less well trained combatant would be struck first by a more highly trained/faster combatant even if the slower one was charging. You’ve now moved on to how unlikely guard charging eldar and having an effect would be. And then argue that the game let’s us, through allowing the guard to strike first, act out that unlikely situation. Thus making the statically outlying case the norm in the rules. Thank you for agreeing.

          • ZeeLobby

            This.

          • Xodis

            You did change it from a Fluff perspective to a game rules perspective, what I did was explain how both are the same and related while still being realistic.
            By giving the IG player a “chance” no matter how unlikely it allows for those special circumstances to happen, the strict rules and statistics of it actually happening are very slim though. If things worked your way the probability would be even less and that’s before we start including wargear into the equation.
            So it wont be the norm because it wont happen nearly as often as you may think.

          • Tristan Smith

            Fluff informs the game rules man, one can’t be divorced from the other. The slower guy always strikes first if charging. It happens every time. How is that in any way more realistic. What the heck are you even on about?

          • Xodis

            No, game rules should not be hindered by the fluff. Go for a fun game and hope the fluff matches. Otherwise Space Marines really need a boost in their stats to match the fluff.

            Also because the charging unit “should” be firing their weapons as they charge.

          • Tristan Smith

            We can disagree on rules being informed or hindered by fluff, that’s fine. It’s just that I want a game that accurately represents the world I read about, not a generic game with a 40k skin, which is what this edition kind of feels like to me.

            Charging unit firing is covered by the unit firing before the charge in my opinion. Although who knows if that’s still going ro be a thing.

          • Xodis

            I dont think you can have a game world that accurately represents the 40K fluff….everything is always written to be so completely and utterly unstoppable, until it just finally gets stopped. We have stories of Joe Nameless the Space Marines in heroic battle the likes of which normal men can’t comprehend, and in the next novel Joe Nameless gets splatted like an IG rookie. Its why the joke of “Movie Marines” is a thing.

            Im sure we will get assault weapons that allow shooting before charging though, but I never considered them to be the same. During my training, quite a few drills encompassed close quarters firing (because screw melee TBH), moving/shooting while advancing on the target, and the shooting charge followed up with a close quarters attack after they were pinned from not wanting to get shot. I can only assume that IG get either the same type of training or something better.

            For the record I dont even like or play IG (I play Eldar) so I’m not actually rooting for my team here, I can just see how they would underestimate them or even give them this advantage in order to accomplish a goal they deem more important.

          • Iron Star

            As some one who has bounced hundreds of drunks out of bars, i agree with you. I dont think this will be that cut and dry though. Im sure something that had an I5 will have something to replace itm

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          run at a judo guy and see what happens.

          • Xodis

            I know what would happen, a good fight.

            Even the worst soldiers in 40K are badasses.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            or waking up 30 seconds later having been thrown against the nearest wall.

          • Xodis

            Yeah not likely. You’re assuming that I’m some fat grognard, that never had a fight or whatever. What you fail to know is that I’m actually trained in CC and was a level 3 combatives instructor for the US army. Again even the worst 40K soldier is a well trained machine.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            no, I’m assuming you are a heavily laden Imperial Guardsman charging a limber Harlequin with an overclocked metabolism wearing disruptive holographic armour who has trained as a warrior for 5000 years.

          • Xodis

            Yeah, and it happens in the lore…not saying its normal, but chances are it wont be a single Imperial Guardsmen, but a whole bunch of them.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            the point is it removes a current way of distinguishing between units that reflected the fluff. Thats a loss to the game.

          • Xodis

            And my original point was that there is so much you dont know that your super awesome character probably has some type of keyword rule to help insure his superiority.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            lets hope so, but wouldn’t it have been easier to include such a fundamental thing in the stat line? We could call it, I don’t know, Initiative?

          • Xodis

            Why though? Just another stat to measure and balance with everyone elses Initiative. It works as seen in AoS, and it will work fine here so special cases can stay special.

          • Tristan Smith

            This just seems to me to, as with most of the other “streamlining” changes, that people don’t want to take the time to think out complex interactions in their gaming anymore. Which I suppose is fine, but I don’t personally enjoy streamlined, trimmed down, fast to play games.

          • Xodis

            Well if “fast to play” is greater than the 90 minutes a 1500 point game should be, than maybe you are right. I personally think its fine to simplify some more boring aspects while focusing on others that are less boring and more tactical.

          • Tristan Smith

            We definitely have differing opinions on what’s boring, and what’s tactical, which is fine. lol

          • Tristan Smith

            You’re assuming we’re talking about YOU. We’re referencing the average IG member, which as has been established in fluff, not exactly a highly trained and motivated operator.

            Addendum: well, maybe Knight was referring to you, I was speaking in abstracts. 🙂

          • Xodis

            Im not assuming anything “run at a judo guy and see what happens.” I was the subject inferred, and there are much better trained soldiers out there than me, which would qualify as an IG soldier.

          • Tristan Smith

            Hence the addendum, I hadn’t realized Knight said that.

          • Tristan Smith

            What qualifies you as imperial guard? 40k background has established for decades that guardsmen, regular guardsmen, get really crappy training in comparison to modern day.

          • Xodis

            Even the crappiest training in modern days is far superior to those of the armies of the past. The weaponry and armor improvements also give a significant bonus to survivability.

          • Tristan Smith

            How is that relevant? We’re not discussing today versus 1700. We’re talking about today versus a fictional time period where you pray to your damned toaster. We’re talking about an armed force that deliberately treats manpower as more expendable than ammunition and equipment. Imperial guard are not modern soldiers, they are cannon fodder.

          • Xodis

            And when that Manpower does not value their own lives they are even more dangerous than one who does. Because they have been convinced that their lives are meaningless so taking out an enemy actually gives them meaning. All of which cant be introduced into a games rules, so its up to us to fit the narrative.

          • Tristan Smith

            That doesn’t make a dude faster. Just makes him disregard his own safety. Which would change nothing about the other guy being faster.

          • Xodis

            Except being faster isn’t always enough. No the soldier isn’t fast enough to get a solid hit in a normal fight, but willing accepting his death to get a chance at hurting the enemy seems reasonable. Its why an animal defending her children is so deadly, because she would rather die and take you out then let you hurt the pups.

          • Tristan Smith

            In that case, chargers strike at same initiative would seem to represent it better. Which I still think would be silly.

          • Xodis

            And that might happen depending on hos assault grenades work this edition.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            Cadians are meant to be so well trained, since childhood, that their ordinary line infantry would be superior to our special forces. Even Space Marines admire the Kasrkin etc. Yet Eldar flower arrangers and musicians are faster.

          • Tristan Smith

            Hrmm, good point. This is GWs ugly propensity for wild variations in the fluff abilities of things being represented by the same stats on the tabletop.

            Kasrkin ARE special forces though, they’re not the regular cadians.

          • That’s more of an issue with GW fluff writers acting like 12 year olds and insisting that everything was the best thing evar! Initiative was not a stat that varied widely inside of factions. A keyword can easily replace it.
            A standard Eldar player is probably not going to be a fan of 8th. A leveling of the field is going to feel like quite the nerf.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            its fairly obvious we were talking in abstract terms, not about each other. I am not interested in whether you can beat a competent martial artist in a fight, it was an example about what would happen when a normal human meets a trained one in a fight. It would be far more extreme if the opponent was a superfast alien.

          • Xodis

            When using the Judo scenario it was not related to the 40K universe at all.

            That being said, you are also talking about soldiers who deal with the alien, witch, demon, etc.. on a regular basis. Yes in a normal situation a IG soldier would not be able to handle a single Eldar soldier, but there are so many things the rules do not take into account that we have to when trying to explain it. If a single IG soldier is charging an Eldar hero….whats the roll for desperation, because that is literally what it would take for the scenario.

        • ZeeLobby

          Yeah. This sounds silly. It’s unfortunate initiative just doesn’t give you the upper hand. Maybe if a charge just reduced the initiative of the receiver. Then you can still charge lilith, but that doesn’t mean you’ll go first.

          • Stealthbadger

            To be fair I always thought it was stupid orks would charge in then just wait to get hit in the face by pretty much everyone before remembering why they were there in the first place.

          • ZeeLobby

            I mean but that’s just what the models do on the table. It doesn’t represent what would happen on a battlefield. No unit when accepting the charge waits til they come face to face before they react. A howling banshee isn’t going to let the ork strike her in the face before she swings her sword. She’ll swing her sword to meet the charge, and if it’s faster than the ork (which it should be) it’s quite possible she’ll take him out.

            Ork’s strength has always been their toughness and their numbers. Not their ability to alpha strike.

          • Stealthbadger

            Your assuming that the charged party isn’t aiming at someone else or somehow not ready for the charge. Ever knifed a camping sniper In a FPS? Same thing.

          • ZeeLobby

            Hey. I’d be a huge fan of flank and rear charges. But whoops, those are no longer words at GW.

            They could also give bonuses for charging a unit already engaged.

            Both of those would be WAY more interesting then charge = auto strike first. Especially if everything wounds everything. Thus begins the lazy piece trade.

            And your FPS example is silly. A sniper should simply have a lower initiative. Problem solved. But a DE wych dual-weilding poisoned blades shouldn’t be placed in the same position as an IG sniper hiding under a blanket.

          • Stealthbadger

            It’s not thoguh is it. You assume every time the party is ready for the charge. If you really need a reason to justify it beyond the fact its a mechanic that makes them game suck less for the armies GW arbitrarily gave low I stats for then just work in the basis the person being charged was caught off guard.

          • ZeeLobby

            I’m not assuming anything. The current solution is just that REGARDLESS of what they’re doing, they’re getting punched in the face. That’s just stupid. It just ignores an entire tactical aspect that could have been interesting.

            God forbid an army have weaknesses, lol.

          • Stealthbadger

            I’m not saying armies shouldn’t have weaknesses. Why should eldar always hit first no matter the scenario?

          • ZeeLobby

            Because their lightning fast centuries old martial beasts as opposed to Joe Shmoe who was forced into the IG after not paying his taxes, lol. And I never said they should always hit first, I just said that they shouldn’t ALWAYS be hit first. I would be completely fine if they’re already engaged their initiative is modified. If their pinned, their initiative is modified. If a character is in the IG, it might boost their I, etc. All of this is way more interesting than blanket mechanics.

          • Stealthbadger

            I get where your coming from but if we want to go the fluff root then why doesn’t my tactical marine get to deck 12 dark eldar taking no wounds in return. I mean it happens in the fluff…

          • ZeeLobby

            Lol. Fine take the lazy way out of the discussion. I understand. Everyone hitting first cause they’re running towards you is just a blanket solution. There’s nothing that logically justifies it fluff or not.

            And as for your space Marines fluff, it’s not my problem you only read Imperial​ propoganda. In Eldar books they strike down several space Marines quite easily :D.

            Just curious but why do you feel the need to defend this poor rule? I mean does everything in 8th rumors so far just seem perfect to you? I mean what would be wrong with admitting they could have tackled this in a more interesting way?

          • Thomas

            Right? It’s like people are incapable of adopting the position of “these changes sound cool, but there are a couple of things that don’t sound so great.”

            It’s like you have to LOVE absolutely everything.

          • ZeeLobby

            I just think it’s funny that if you frequent BoLS, you knew who these people were going to be right off the bat.

          • Stealthbadger

            The same can be said of certain frequent posters who whine continuously despite having quit the game years ago.

            Sorrry, I meat to say legitimately criticise. 🙂

          • ZeeLobby

            Hey, at least I feel like I have a soul, lol. There are a ton of things I love about 8th so far, but I feel no obligation to admit that it’s perfect. There are some things I have questions on, and others I think are just lazy game design. But I’m a human, I have doubts, fears, joys, etc.

          • Stealthbadger

            Wait, because I like this rule I now have no soul?

            I don’t know if 8th will be perfect, I highly doubt it. Maybe I should wait to see it in full first though Eh? Remember it got playtested by the adepticon of et al. Do you really think they didn’t take this into account and maybe theres another mechanic coming thatmedies it? I mean do we think powerfists will go first if they got the charge in? Maybe models can set up in overwtach like shadow war which negate the charge bonus. Who knows.

          • ZeeLobby

            You said it, not me. I’m assuming your some robot sent back in time to convince everyone that GW can do no wrong :D.

            I just don’t see why it’s impossible to make an opinion about something without knowing everything. If I had to know everything to form opinions, I would never be able to make one.

            But you’re right, it’s possible that there will be some modifiers that do make this a lot more interesting. All I was saying is that as it stands, it’s just not that great, and could be better. I never said I’m burning my armies or that 8th edition is ruined, haha.

          • Stealthbadger

            In the year 2042 with the advent of 205th edition GW were able to pinpoint the exact moment of the imperial guards power creep to the time they made it so that for once they got to hit first when charging. They sent back a robot to try and criticise the decison on forums but he was distracted by the ruling lasguns killing landraiders.

            By this time the imperial guard faction models had become self aware. I was sent back to make sure the charge rule stayed for all future editions at all costs.

            I am… THE INITIATIVE TERMINATOR.

            Seriously, thoug, I think we’re just on different sides of this one rule. I am not saying all the ne stuff will be great. I’ve not paid enough attention to the other changes. I just don’t see THIS rule as bad.

            Oh and buy and imperial guard army.

          • ZeeLobby

            LoL. That was perfect. And yeah, we might just disagree on this one rule. I guess I was just initially shocked because this is honestly one of the only things I’ve seen in the rules so far which seems out of place. They’ve done a pretty good job accommodating everything else.

            I mean I hope it’s not a case of everything wounds everything. Even though we’re all on S and T now (vehicles, walkers, etc.), I’m really hoping there are some areas where unit A simply can’t hurt unit B. Gretchin vs Land Raider for example. Things like this make a list builder have to diversify his tools, and fill weaknesses and gaps. Those are fun and important parts of the game imo. So I hope there are some N/As on the To-Wound chart to represent that. Gretchin wounding a land raider just makes the narrative goofy imo.

          • Stealthbadger

            Erm because I like this rule? I don’t feel compelled to like all or any of the rules. I like what I’ve seen so far. Just because you have a different opinion doesn’t make you smarter.

            I’m perfectly aware there were problems with 7th for example. Why is you quoting fluff smart and me dumb?

          • ZeeLobby

            So what’s an example of a rule you’re not a huge fan of? Or you think could have been better?

          • Stealthbadger

            In 8th? Dunno, I haven’t seen them all yet.

          • ZeeLobby

            So so far there is not a single thing you have doubts about or question? You have no issues with anything but are willing to defend everything so far? Do you at least like have a questionable opinion on something?

          • Stealthbadger

            Crikey, where’ve I said that? Right now the only two rules I’m really aware of is everything can (not definitely will) wound everything and chargers hit first. So if you mean I like these two rules then yep you are correct sir.

            How about thinking of it another way, not so much the charged party going last but the charger getting an I lack style hit. Hammer of wrath on crack sort of things to represent the crushing hit of 5 eldar being hit by 30 guardsmen piling in?

            You’ve tried to say the fluff doesn’t support this newsystem, if you want to go down that route there a lot of fluff stuff that would ruin this game.if you want to view it selectively then that’s ok though.

            What do you hate all of the rules in the new edition, you know because you must do if you don’t like this one.

          • ZeeLobby

            So if they wanted to make the charge mechanic more like hammer of wrath, or the shock of a charge, it should have an impact on morale or leadership. That would have been a cool and realistic mechanic. Runewars actually does this, and it’s a pretty awesome concept. Meaning that getting the charge is psychologically impactful.

            I mean it’s not just fluff. It’s like reality based on real battles. LoL. Charges would be a thing you’d never hesitate for if it guaranteed you’d hit first every time. That’s completely outside the fluff. Even movie producers understand this. Any realistic charge in a movie you never see one side just take all the hits first then give them back, lol. It’s usually a mixture of the two. I would have preferred that as well. Anything more realistic than what was given.

            I like all the rules but this one actually. Everything else I’ve heard sounds good so far.

          • Stealthbadger

            well in that case sounds like 8th will overall be a good thing for you. Happy days.

          • ZeeLobby

            Never said I wasn’t happy :D.

          • Xodis

            Not really, especially since the Eldar players knows the benefits of charging first. It would mean they clearly ignored the threat in order to focus on whatever else they did in that turn.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah. That just doesn’t make sense to me. Initiative should represent reaction speed as well. So not only did the general fail to direct his Eldar troops, but their craftworld was the slow one…

          • Xodis

            Thats one way to look at it, they other would be..

            “Sir, monkeighs are coming up behind us….swords drawn.”

            “We will deal with them when they get here, right now focus on *insert reason here*”

            *IG charges, more often than not misses completely or fails to wound*
            *Eldar cut them down*

            “The monkeighs are gone, carry on”

          • ZeeLobby

            *insert reason here* being anything from deploying/waiting on an objective to fighting for their lives surrounded by enemies. Doesn’t that seem like a lazy wash solution for what could be an interesting game mechanic?

            “We will let them strike us when they get here. If we live we’ll hit them back!”

          • Xodis

            Not really, because that would add quite a lot of time wasted on a single phase. Quite the opposite of the current goal of speeding things up.

          • ZeeLobby

            Why? How would comparing a single stat “add quite a lot of time”. I mean you’re not using a table, you’re not even performing math. If they gave chargers a flat bonus you’re performing basic addition. Where are these people that would add minutes to their game to figure these out??? Im worried wargaming may just not be for you if these things are a struggle.

            I mean of speeding it up is the sole goal, they could have just renamed this to Warcoin, and you could flip it at the game start to decide the winner. Sure this is an extreme but I’d consider your assessment of time spent pretty extreme as well.

          • Xodis

            Because it wouldn’t just be a single stat, it would also have to be worked out with every weapon that changes initiative, balanced between forces, units, and weapons available to those units, and then take into account for any wargear that may alter initiative.
            On top of all that it makes H2H completely irrelevant to some forces (again), why charge if you get cut down before you have a chance? So now we need extra rules so that melee is an actual option for those armies or do we just eliminate them from half of the game?
            however if you want to continue to try and insult my intelligence its best if we just end this conversation.

          • ZeeLobby

            Good lord man. I mean we do all that now. That is not what adds hours to every 40K game, lol. And initiative still exists every other turn. It’s not like I has been removed from the game or something. I’m not trying to insult your intelligence. I’m trying to point out that you just reached for an extremely small needle in the haystack.

          • Xodis

            Just because something was a certain way it should stay? I know its not the main problem of the 40K time sink, but its not important enough to warrant any time IMO.
            Initiative does not exist, the player whose turn it is just goes first which makes it even more simple than comparing numbers (barring there being weapons that go last like power fists which makes sense from a balance POV), secondly turn Initiative around, does it make any more sense that the faster player should attack first and then just stand there so the enemy can hit them? If the Eldar were THAT much faster that an IG soldier charging them would still be second, why doesn’t the Eldar get multiple attack rounds?
            Your comment assumes I would have a problem grasping those simple concepts and dismisses that maybe I have different views about what is important/realistic for a fast game while still being focused on a narrative.

          • ZeeLobby

            The length of time to perform any of those decisions is just laughably short. I mean seriously, I’d have taken almost any other arguments as valid over time. Re-rolls, chart rolls, table lookups, special rule interactions, formation special rules modifications, etc. All of these take WAY more significant time than saying “I’m iniative 7, what’s yours?” “6” “OK, I go first.” Especially since it’s STILL THERE! So now you’re talking about a small splinter case of iniative not mattering. Saving a total of 8.2 seconds a game. It’s true, you’ll get those seconds back, so i concede, lol.

          • Xodis

            Also, it simulates not just running across the battlefield sword drawn, but possibly firing a weapon as you close the gaps.

          • ZeeLobby

            And they wouldn’t fire the weapon point blank as well? Or use it as a gun butt? I’m sorry, but it just doesn’t make sense from a fluff perspective, and is lazy from a mechanic perspective. I like a lot about the new 8th rules so far, but that is just a poorly thought out one.

          • Xodis

            Im sure they would fire it point blank, but at that point we are really bogging the game down for a glint of realism, when it could be simulated with “attack first”.
            I disagree, it makes total sense from a fluff perspective, because other than dedicated H2H units no one is going to put away the guns and draw swords, not today, not yesterday, not in 40K.

      • Tristan Smith

        Forgot about that, and as a guy who plays a lot of Slaaneshi themed armies, I’m a little worried that the new rules have stolen my “thing”.

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          I imagine they’ll replace it with a special rule, like the old Elf ‘always hits first’ rule from WHFB. Except knowing GW it will be described and implemented slightly differently across lots of units leading to confusing tangled rules conundrums…

          • Tristan Smith

            Bwahahahaha, that sounds about right.

      • lorieth

        I agree to some extent, but you have to remember that the superfast characters will actually *be* superfast. If I can move 9″ and you can only move 6″, it’s going to be a lot easier for me to charge you than vice versa.

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          that would be true on an infinite sized board where no-one had to remain near objectives.

      • Seb

        Skipping a long discussion on high quality vs low quality troops and first strike. We should probably consider historical examples over fictional 40k heroes.

        Battle of Isandlwana, high quality well drilled troops were caught out of position. Whilst the Zulu did inflict a wipeout, it cost the Zulu near equal in dead. They achieved this with, 20000 warriors. Move on to Rorke’s Drift, 200 defenders vs 3-4000 Zulu.

        The British, in position and defensible, repelled all attacks and held the outpost. Including surving continual sniper fire from the dozens of rifles captured at Isandlwana which accounted for near 25% of British casualities, 17 (+15 wounded). Read that. 17 verse 350+ Zulu dead and +500 wounded.

        In reviewing this example, outgunned but quality assault troops against well drilled, experienced soldiers don’t fair well unless massively outnumbering their foe. To do the deed, the Zulu paid in full to get to the British line, every time.

        This and many other historical examples is why I like initiative differences in gaming. The expert can lay in a few blows, but that swarm will likely overwhelm him. Ever wonder why folks don’t readily charge a man with a gun? Sure the mob will get him, but who wants to be the first to die on the way in?

        This rule makes the mob land blows, first time, every time. So, it bugs me.

        The hope being, there are modifiers for specialists like a counter-assault move etc. which may bring back the tension of taking on a close quarter behemoth, other than whittling wounds.

        There have been some amazing warriors in our history, they had 1 mortal hit point like the rest of us. I could rattle off a few examples of solo fighters holding bridges, breaches and gunpits in Korea. But I’m likely well past belabouring the point. 😀

    • Munn

      Fluff should ALWAY take a backseat to making an engaging game. Besides guardsman and fire warriors are literally the only model in the game that hit on less than 4 in CC anyway NOW.

      • Tristan Smith

        We differ on the fluff/rules perspective. From my point of view, if the fluff doesn’t inform the rules why aren’t you playing a historical ruleset with 40k minis? If the fluff doesn’t inform the rules, is it 40k?

        As for the “most things 4+” argument. Basic troops hit other basic troops mostly on 4+. But characters etc… increased the spread a lot. I don’t disagree that with that system a wider range would have benefitted the game massively.

    • EvilCheesypoof

      The Warhammer community article said there would be modifiers for both WS and BS, so expect that to go up and down depending on certain things.

      • Tristan Smith

        I didn’t catch that, I suppose that goes a way towards allaying my fears. But at this point, if there are still modifiers but to a flat roll instead of a stat comparison it seems like change for changes sake, and by no means simpler.

        • EvilCheesypoof

          Not necessarily simpler, but more accurately representing different types of weapons. Like if your opponent has a storm shield, you’re -2 WS or something like that.

  • Old zogwort

    Its too bad that we do not have AV any more but I might just love the rest of the changes, killing of I is certainly something that I am going to enjoy.

    • EvilCheesypoof

      Removing AV is the best thing they’ve done so far, it’s going to improve a lot of models, especially walkers.

  • Thomas

    Multi-wound Termies is awesome. Combined with the change to armour modifiers (as opposed to negation), it should see Termies becoming a viable unit again.

  • Sorien

    So if there is no more I stat, how will combat work in subsequent phases? Just like AoS?

  • Michael Bradbury

    That’s one hell of a Dreadnought – tougher than a Primarch, with just 1 wound less!

    (I assume special rules will beef up Roboute somewhat)

    • Thomas

      Yeah, and (assuming the S and T values work like they currently do), it’ll be hard to do much to it with anything below an autocannon. Which is kind of how it already worked (at least against the front armour).

      It’d take a lot of bolters to bring it down.

    • generalchaos34

      But imagine that they will be susceptible to things like anti tank weapons that will probably cause 2+ wounds on a hit. RB will probably have a mechanic like AoS where he ignores wounds on a 4+ after he fails his armor save to keep him chugging along

  • Shawn

    I’m liking the profiles so far. They are closely resemble the 7th ed stat line, just simplified to the die roll needed instead of figuring out any math.

  • Adam Parrott

    Will the facing of the Vehicle no longer matter aside from weapons and access points? I’ve always liked that mechanic.

    • shady

      i havent heard anything but they could easily make a rule if you’re facing the rear for example, you get +1 strength(or something like that)

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      thats a good question, removes another big element of tactics.

    • Munn

      That was literally the dumbest mechanic in the game if you played anything but marines lol. Where the F++K does the front of a triarch stalker end?!!

      • Adam Parrott

        Meh, I liked that it resembled real tanks and their different armor thickness. To my knowledge, there is only a few cases that extreme where finding the the facing was difficult because of the model.

    • Xodis

      I hope it works on some vehicles but not all. It was silly when a random vehicle had a “weak” point that made no sense.

      • Adam Parrott

        ;p Blame it on their engineers? or manufacturing politics

  • Erber

    They were not teased, they were unveiled and shown to the public. Get your verbs straight.

  • Orblivion

    Anybody else find it odd that Dreadnoughts can move further (supposedly faster) than Terminators?

    • Erber

      Not really, they are bigger and have longer legs. It makes sense to me.

      • Orblivion

        Actually the legs are the reason I think it is backwards. As cool as they are, Dreadnoughts have a terrible design from a mobility standpoint. They shouldn’t be able to do much more than shuffle.

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          I can forgive them for this. Termies are meant to be somewhat slow (hence no sweeping advance), and even if Dreads do shuffle, a shuffling dude 12 feet tall might move at normal walking pace.

          • Orblivion

            Fair enough. I don’t really have a problem with it, it just stood out to me and I was curious if I was the only one.

        • Erber

          Sure, but they still only move at the same speed as regular marines. I would imagine other more agile walkers have a higher movement value than 6. Like an eldar war walker would have movement 8 or something like that.

        • Aura1

          Depends on the type of Dread. Contemptors must have a 15 foot stride and are often posed running. The stumpy ones though I can totally see rocking more than moving.

  • Jeremy Larson

    I really HATE fixed to-hit roles. It’s ridiculous that a Grot will be able to hit a Blood Thirster with the same probability that it will hit another Grot.

    • kloosterboer

      The ridiculous part of grots vs bloodthirster is, well….grots. And bloodthirsters.

      Contemplate this on the Tree of Woe.

      • Khelban Blackstaff

        Crucify him!

    • Xodis

      Yes but its not that hard to hit a giant brick wall, go try it with your hand, I promise you will connect, and the odds of damaging the wall/bloodthirster are about the same as well.

    • EvilCheesypoof

      Calm down, they said there will be modifiers for both WS and BS. And all the stats will represent overall ability to effectivley attack each other, not just one particular thing. That’s why stats aren’t capped at 10 anymore as well.

  • Iron Father Stronos

    HOLY HELL BATMAN!!!!

    TWO wound terminators!!!!!!! EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

  • Vachones

    If the rumors are true and 8th drops sometime in mid June, then I have to applaud GW for taking the time to slowly feed us the new changes. They know this is a huge shake up and they know they screwed up with AOS. Clearly these are changes many of us are going to have to get used to, but I think its way too soon to get too worked up about guardsmen killing Land Raiders or grots taking on a blood thirster until we know how the game works as a system.

    Having said all that, I’m really really glad S versus T is still a thing. Fixed to hit is one thing, fixed to wound would worry me a bit.

  • Karru

    Time to do some commentary on these.

    First of all, the fixed to-hit rolls. I get the BS, but the WS is disappointing. Having a Gretchin hit Guilliman on the same result as he would against a Guardsmen sounds ridiculous to me.

    Then the thing I was afraid of, “low” toughness vehicles. That Dreadnought won’t be doing much most games. Couple volleys of Bolter Fire or even 3-4 Autocannons and that thing is worthless. If not completely dead, it’s limping hard due to the damage chart. Then again, it’s not like AV would do any better here, except ignoring the Bolter Shots, but it will come down to pricing.

    The Ld is interesting, but slightly worrisome. With that bad of an Ld, I doubt they’ll include things like Pinning or Fear much into the game. If the Emperor’s Finest have that much trouble feeling brave, I don’t even want to know how bad Grots or Guard are.

    Overall it’s a mixture of 40k and AoS. It will come down to the full rules and weapon profiles to determine how good or bad this change truly is.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      They already said they are copying the Battleshock tests from AoS, so Ld is a representation of that.

      We do not know what the S of weapons will be, or how they interact with T.

    • Stealthbadger

      Are there going to be WS modifiers like with BS?

      • Red_Five_Standing_By

        In the article they indicated that there will be modifiers to both BS and WS.

        • Stealthbadger

          Well then probably not worth getting our panties in a bunch then until we see these rules then is it?

          • Karru

            That’s why I made the comment “It will come down to the full rules and weapon profiles to determine how good or bad this change truly is.”

          • Stealthbadger

            Then you sir are a sensible man. As much as any of us are in this childish hobby 🙂

          • Karru

            I must admit, just the other day I was almost raging at these changes, but little by little I’m getting more intrigued by them. Maybe this will be a refreshing new start for 40k after all. While it stings to see the old go, maybe something amazing comes from this new one.

          • Stealthbadger

            It all depends on what the full picture is. I wasn’t initially thrilled to here the frontline YO DAWG CREW were involved but you know what. On reflection they love the game and hopefully they’ve done a good job fixing the Janky stuff rather than unleashing their inner Ward for their pet projects. We’ll see and I’m sure there will be many many opinions shared as fact in due course.

            It will be fun arguing with you all 🙂

          • Vachones

            Just a point of clarification, Frontline Gaming is most definitely NOT the “YO Dawg” crew, you are thinking The Long War crew, very very different.

          • Stealthbadger

            Well that’s probably an improvement in itself 🙂

          • Vachones

            If 8th edition wins you over Karru, then they really will have something awesome on their hands 🙂

        • Multigeneral

          Given the “back to the past vibe” of the new mechanics, I bet cover modifies BS now instead of being a different save altogether.

    • Xodis

      Its not hard to hit a giant brick wall, and the chances of it doing damage are almost exactly the same.

      • Karru

        In this case it’s slightly different though. The brick wall loses integrity greatly when you start flinging small rocks at it to the point where it collapses after you’ve thrown a dozen rocks at it.

        Anyway, as I said, until we know ALL the rules, these changes are still between good and the bad.

        • Xodis

          You but those small rocks are still pretty deadly rocks so it makes sense. My comment was directed at the Gretchin hitting Gulliman example though, and just stat wise you are going to need about 50+ smalls rocks even without any of his special rules.

    • A bravery of 7 in AOS is very good for a line unit.

  • Rob brown

    To be honest, vehicles being one shotted is one of the least satisfying parts of the game and makes shooting armies far too effective.

    Finally maybe Dark elder stand a chance of getting into combat!

    Drop pod vets can back the f*$€ off now too.

  • nurglitch

    Neat

  • I like this. Termy stats seem legit – and im over the moon re dreadnoughts. D weapons can go blow my power sword!

  • Ironchestnut

    That is, actually, not nearly as bad as I was expecting.

  • GreekSauce

    Surely, the tough HQs and MC/GC’s like BobbyG will have special rules that say: This model can only be hit on 5+ regardless of the attacking unit WS or modifiers.

    • ZeeLobby

      I dunno. Their new policy may just be everything die fast.

      • I hope so. That speeds up game time.

        • ZeeLobby

          I guess. I’m fine with the game moving faster, but everything just dying to everything else, regardless of what it is, real fast makes battles a lot less interesting for me at least.

          • If I have to choose between that and geniuses figuring out that all knight armies can’t be hurt by most models out there, I’ll choose the former.

          • ZeeLobby

            Well that’s easy, you simply restrict what players can field on the table. You don’t just normalize everything to blandness. You cost things correctly with points. You impose penalties for taking certain units. You put limitations on certain units. There’s tons of way to do this without just making it a D-6 roll off game.

          • This is GW. Restrict is not in their vernacular.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, it’s a shame. Maximize configurations to maximize sales to maximize profits I guess.

          • From a business standpoint it makes sense.

            If I make a $100 wraith knight model and then say “you can only ever take one” then I know I will only ever sell one per player.

            If I make a $100 wraith knight model and then make it so that you can take however many you want but it can be hurt by everything so the game isn’t busted… you’re going to sell a lot of wraith knight models still.

            At the end of the day GW is a publicly traded for-profit organization. It makes no sense for them to write rules that restrict model sales.

            We leave that up to the part time designers like me publishing out of our garage 😉

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, I mean I get the business side. Just not a fan of it. Just like people despise balance because it means removing flavor from the game, this is just an example of business doing the same.

          • Thomas

            That’s a very short term business outlook. There’s a solid argument that fostering a healthy gaming scene with good balance and restrictions on OP units would foster a better atmosphere for growth in the long run.

            Happier gamers, more people playing more games for a longer time period, translates to long-term growth and increase in sales. Not many people are going to go into a game where all their buddies are complaining about massive units of unkillable giants that stomp all over them.

          • Vachones

            Everything dying to anything does not mean that some things are not a lot more efficient than others. It’s still a game of using the correct unit for the job, and the player who uses their units the most efficiently still wins.

          • ZeeLobby

            True. I’ll wait for final stats, but I have a feeling it’ll make things seem a lot more vanilla.

        • GreekSauce

          They said today that 1500pts should only take 90min in 8th ed. If this is the case, then 2000 – 2500pt games may become the new normal on 40k nights at the FLGS. We have about 2.5 – 3hrs of gaming. It will be fun to bring out more toys…

          • Xodis

            Or we can keep 1500 as the norm and get multiple games!!! lol

          • GreekSauce

            True. Could get in 2 games ever game nite

  • Deathwing

    I’m not thrilled about this always hit everything on a base roll of X no matter what it is thing. Then again its not like anything i say will change it at this point. Its either accept it and play or don’t and skip this edition.
    So I will compromise and do all of my complaining about it on the internet up to and including THE DAY this releases as official, after which it REALLY wont matter and there’s no point in continuing to complain about it.

    Hope commanders and champions and bloodthirsters all get rules for extra blocking and what not to make it interesting when they fight each other at least.

    • davepak

      Or, its wait until you see more rules.

      Many critters in AOS (which inspired this, obviously) have modifiers.

  • Philip Estabrook

    Terrific. Solves the age old Dreadnought issue!

  • Slaanesh Devotee

    It’s funny how tactical dreadnought armour gives a 2+ save, but full dreadnought armour only gives 3+ save.

    • Mr.Custodes

      An iphone is better than the brick phones from the 70s.

      • Slaanesh Devotee

        Do you think that’s what it is?

        Isn’t it all just the same old adamantium stuff? And that difference in size/thickness.. hm~

        • Aura1

          More delicate/exposed mechanical areas on Dreadnoughts? So you can hit the leg drivers and arm joints easier but the additional wounds mean they don’t stop easily.

      • Multigeneral

        They are both good phones. One is just a phone and indestructible. The other is a computer that breaks if looked at funny.

    • Multigeneral

      Having 4 times as many wounds counts too.

      • ikari_kun2002

        And better Toughness.

  • Baldrick

    Ok, so let’s make some assumptions. 1. The above profiles are correct, 2. Initiative no longer exists, as stated above just below profiles, 3. Charging always strikes first…………..

    Someone bring me a powerfist…….actually bring me two………..

    • Xodis

      We don’t know if unwieldy will be a special rule on weapons anymore, so that might not work out well.

      • Munn

        Or even what powerfists actually DO anymore. For all he knows it could heal wounds now.

        • Xodis

          Yeah, I think double strength and -2 rending is a good start though lol

  • EvilCheesypoof

    I noticed plenty of people are complaining about the fixed WS roll, but they mentioned in the article that it WILL have modifiers. So expect different weapons changing that to hit roll, like a storm shield giving their opponent -2 WS or something like that. Or maybe even just certain units doing that to enemy units they fight against.

    • Baldrick

      Correct. It’s 2nd Ed……..almost,sort of……..but yes……

    • ikari_kun2002

      I get that, but why have a “fixed” roll with modifiers – probably a whole lot of them – when we had a perfectly good “roll required is based on how much better/worse your opponent is” system?
      I’m also going to miss Initiative.

      • EvilCheesypoof

        The modifiers might actually make things more interesting, rather than most combats coming down to 4+ to hit with the occasional 3+ or 5+. The WS chart wasn’t that great.

  • Justin Dicken

    This is great. With MCs having more wounds, Tyranids will be hopefully be relevant again.

  • eldannardo

    I like the fixed to hit for CC, will speed the CC phase up a little. Looks like wounding is the only mechanic where you need a chart.

    Can’t wait to see the weapon profiles tomorrow.

    I think the biggest “let me see it” would be the psychic powers. I want to see the way they interact with units.

  • Andrew

    Simplifying the WS/BS stat to a die roll is fine with me, since they kept the basic stat line; it should still give each model flavor and character. That was one of my main gripes with AoS.

    • Thomas

      Fixed to hit in CQC is kind of “eeeehh” to me, but I’m just mostly glad that they didn’t go for fixed to wound.

      • Andrew

        Well, there’s still modifiers for both melee and ranged, so, I think the flavor will still be there. It makes more sense to me to ascribe a fixed value to both in a larger scale skirmish game. Still having the same statline overall I think will keep the feel of each model.

  • Talos2

    Makes sense removing the initiative stat as it has no real purpose anymore. Movement six marines is interesting as I imagine eldar might be more so they could be very fast

  • Dumbcow1

    wait…Terminators will maybe be worth their points now? How is this not headline worthy news? XD

  • Juan Carlos González

    Still many unanswered questions and what I’m seeing doesn’t instill me with confidence.

    First, apparently the tactical consideration of flanking a tank to hit the weaker armor is gone out the window, which makes the game that bit shallower.

    Also, I hope vehicles get a massive reduction in points because, as any Tyranid player will tell you, R7 is damn fragile for something that used to have Armor 12, specially when it’s almost a given that multiple wound inflicting attacks are coming back.

    Also, it’s fine and dandy that whoever charges gets the first round in a slugging match, but what happens in subsequent turns? What determines who strikes first then? Also, Initiative was used for more than just turn order. Many rules and attacks demanded an Initiative check. What will those things target now that there’s no measure of a unit’s speed and reflexes?

    And then, fixed value to hit in melee is crap. It should be harder to strike at a highly trained blademaster than it is to hit a near unmoving object.

    This is looking more and more like the bastard child of 2nd Edition and AoS, neither of which I’m particularly fond of.

    • ikari_kun2002

      All of these are good points, but I’m still going to wait and see.

    • kloosterboer

      This edition will definitely weed some players out. There’s always previous editions!

    • Munn

      See, this is so ignorant of basic things we already know it’s super hard to take it seriously. ‘OH if the game works exactly the same except for these changes(but not all the changes they’ve announced because I didn’t bother to read those) then it’ll suck!’

      • Juan Carlos González

        If you have additional information that sheds light on my queries feel free to share it instead of resorting to smug condescention.

  • GHOSTvirus

    Oh for god sake!!! AOS IN SPAAACE!!!

  • Defenestratus

    I’d like to see how the whole combat phase works out. There’s no way a space marine should be able to hit something like the avatar of khaine or a bloodthirster on a 3+.

    “oh but the Avatar is going to have a bucket of wounds!”

    Sorry, but its different. “Avoiding Damage” is not the same as “Absorbing Damage” in a cinematic sense. The Avatar is lithe and fast for his size and his blade skill is unmatched. Laying a finger on him should be nigh impossible.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      He could have a rule that says that models in base contact with him have a -2 to hit.

      • Defenestratus

        But then a bloodthirster fighting an avatar? Does that make sense that he would get a -2 to hit?

        This is precisely what I was terrified about and I’m hoping doesn’t happen – streamlining the rules leads to watering down of the character of the units.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          I think the core character of the avatar is that he is a big walking avatar of a god who kicks butt and takes names.

        • Brian Griffith

          It’s mechanically identical to how WS vs. WS presently works.

          When you get two high WS guys, they’re each less likely to hit each other than they were if they were swinging the Wailing Doom or an Axe of Khorne at some schlub guardsman.

          So under this new system, each of them gets a penalty to be hit in close combat, but each of them hits on, say, a 2+ normally. After a -2 penalty they’re hitting on a 4+ in their big knock down drag-out fight, and that sounds about right for a climactic battle between two living personifications of violence incarnate.

          • Deathwing

            This is actually exactly how i hope it is going to work.

        • Munn

          Why wouldn’t they be able to hit a blood thirster? Have you seen how big those things are?

  • Fraser1191

    I hope terminators roll on 2 d6 for saves :p

    • Brian Griffith

      Well, we don’t know if invulnerables are still a thing.

      If they are, they just became super-valuable, since they probably won’t have to deal with save modifiers.

      IE there will actually be some thought going into “Hmm, my 2+ is getting modified to 6+ by that giant neeming death ray, but I can roll my invulnerable for 5+…”

      • Fraser1191

        I mainly like the idea of terminators basically being able to walk through a battlefield only being scared of melta esque weapons

        • Munn

          Which would be stupid, especially when it takes 4 hours to roll all their saves. This has come up a lot and I am SOO glad you guys aren’t involved in developing the game.

          • Fraser1191

            Hahaha
            People just want their faction to be the strongest

  • SilentPony

    Wait, baseline terminators have 2 wounds and no Invul?!

    • Munn

      I would put money on invuls as we no it pretty much going away.

  • dakota5X5

    it may be a more of a return to rogue trader/2nd ed than people were expecting. most players will be used to guns inflicting

    one wound with instant death for twice the targets toughness. with this many wounds we may be seeing weapons inflicting multiple wounds again.

    the leadership of the marine is also telling – if 7 represents the unshakeable resolve of the emperors finest then what would guard or orks have? We could well be seeing a much more dynamic morale phase with a real chance of units being broken

    • ikari_kun2002

      They seem to be doing the AoS battleshock thing instead of break tests, period. This is a little like Instability, but fr everybody. Marines might, say, halve their losses from failing battleshock tests.

  • Dan Dolan

    not impressed. So a marine still has as many wounds and as many attacks as a guardsmen. Thats just flat dumb. Unlimited stat line superhuman soldier has 1 wound lol. Great job

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Do you want to field a bunch of marines or just a squad or two?

    • Brian Griffith

      Abstracted on the scale of this sized battlefield, yes that’s the case. The marine gets better armor, gets to shoot better, gets to be a better scrapper in close combat, and is harder to shake in the heat of battle.

      In games that are smaller scale than full armies, the statistical differences between marines and guardsmen are more pronounced.

  • frank

    Personally im not bothered by them changing how vehicles work the vehicle rules are wierd and make the game much harder for new players to learn how to play. Not saying im gunna love the new rules but happy to give them a chance.

  • Jared van Kell

    I am enjoying the fact that GW have taken a leaf so to speak from Privateer Press’s book and are becoming a lot more open about what is on the horizon as opposed to the outright secrecy of the days of yore.

    • MechBattler

      Many bothans died to bring us this information.

      • Jared van Kell

        Those are acceptable losses. The fight continues.

        • MechBattler

          Okay, I just have to ask. How the HELL did a bunch of alien furries manage to be spies among the nazi-like human supremacist Empire? How did they even get through the door to do any spying? The Emperor despised aliens and they were never allowed into his military. How did they get in deep enough to steal information that sensitive?

  • piglette

    Muh land raider

  • silashand

    Love the nerd rage going on. We have about five whole rules leaked and the Interwebz asplodes as usual. I personally am willing to wait and see what the rest looks like before jumping to conclusions. Though admittedly I like pretty much everything that has been teased so far. Let’s hope the rest follows suit.

    • kloosterboer

      It’s awesome to behold, really. I’m waiting for someone to set fire to their collection before the complete rules even hit the streets.

      Which, of course, is a perfectly valid form of self expression.

  • 40KstillRulesTheTT

    This game is gonna get much, much better !

  • Dawnstone

    Ah hey’re keeping Strength/Toughness, praise the chaos gods!

  • Teddy L

    I don’t think we have the all the facts just yet and judging by some of the comments some power gamers are sounding off. If 8th edition balances 40k and gives all the factions a chance of winning it’s gonna be a good thing. Keep calm and carry on painting!

  • Dawid Brol

    So the vehicle at the rear is as strong as the front ??

  • Juan Carlos González

    I’ll assume they’ll revamp “Eternal Warrior”, because otherwise those 9W are a REDUCTION, not and increase. With lascannons doing 1D6W on a hit that would mean that in 8th you could do in two hits what in 7th you would need a minimum of six to accomplish.

  • Gavenga323

    Space marines… at leadership 7? IF THEY SCREW UP MY GUARDSMEN’S LEADERSHIP, THE COMMISSAR WILL BE HAVING WORDS WITH THEM.