40K: New Shooting Phase Teaser…

  • Posted by
  • at

Games Workshop takes aim with more teaser info in today’s 8th Edition Update: the Shooting Phase

Whether it’s bolters, plasma, missiles, bio-plasma, acid, poison darts, fusion/melta blasts, pulse charges, shuriken, fire, spikes, or goo–every army in 40K has some kind of shooting. And today, the folks over at Warhammer Community have given us a look at what shooting will look like once the new edition hits. It’s not that different from what you know now, but there are a few key changes…

via Warhammer Community

“You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you. The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat! This is going to make characters with pistols <cough-Cypher-cough> incredibly deadly up-close.

When picking a target, you won’t be able to shoot enemies that are in combat with other units, much like the current edition. However, you can fall back from combat in your Movement phase, allowing other units to fire at your opponent at the expense of your own actions this turn. Expect to see cunning generals deploying their armies in waves to take full advantage of this.

Heavy weapons are worth talking about too. These no longer snap fire if you move, and instead they have a flat -1 to hit modifier for moving units. This applies to all models with heavy weapons, vehicles included. There are a few other factors that affect hit rolls too – smoke launchers on a vehicle, for example, have the same effect of -1 to hit.”

Want more? Read the whole article at Warhammer Community

All in all, shooting doesn’t seem like it’ll be that different from what it is now. Though it is interesting to see that heavy weapons have a flat -1 penalty to hit, even if mounted on a moving vehicle. I guess in the Grim Darkness of the 8th Edition, suspension/stabilizers stopped working as well as they had before.

“Your aim is getting thrown off by those speedbumps!” “Sir those are Orks” “I KNOW WHAT I SAID!”

Other changes include armo(u)r saves being modified by weapons–or as they talk about in today’s article, by cover. In the new edition, cover will be a bonus to your save, but one that only applies to certain types of units. The example they give is that only Infantry can get a cover bonus to their armo(u)r save from being in a crater.

This makes me wonder if there will be different rules associated with each kind of terrain–or more likely, to each kind of unit. Infantry can claim cover from X kinds of terrain, vehicles from Y, and so on. One thing they point out though, is that if your weapon brings down the save value enough, you still just damage them. So you can shoot someone through a wall.

And some weapons ignore cover outright. I guess it’s true what they say: the more things change, the more they stay the same.

What do you think of the new save dynamic? Of the new shooting rules? Will Cypher *finally* feel worth it?

  • Kritarion

    Shooting in close combat, but only with pistols? I can dig it.

    • Karru

      Yeah, it would have been ridiculous if they allowed people to shoot their regular weapons in CC.

      • Commissar Molotov

        I was afraid it’d be like AoS where you can freely shoot while in combat.

        • Karru

          Considering how much flak they’ve gotten regarding that, it doesn’t surprise me that it’s getting removed.

          • Commissar Molotov

            I’ve been pleasantly surprised at most of the new rules – only one I really, really hate is turning vehicles into creatures. Tanks are not sacks of meat on treads, darn it.

          • Karru

            Yeah, it’s a pity. My biggest issue with it is the fact that it has potential to make vehicles, especially CC oriented Walkers, very unreliable. A single hit from a Lascannon has great potential to cripple them completely if the chart is too harsh. Since they already revealed that those charts can also reduce Movement, I can already see things like Dreadnoughts being in serious trouble if you want to use them as CC fighters.

            It mostly feels that GW only wants to push more models onto people. Instead of taking a single dreadnought or even two, you really would have to take close to three against your average army if you wish to actually see them do something.

            While vehicles could be destroyed with a single shot in this edition, it was still relatively difficult to do so. Without low AP weapon, destroying something in one shot wasn’t possible and you needed a 6 normally to Immobilise. After watching my Ironclad Dreadnought stroll through Imperial Guard AT fire, I was delighted to use it more often.

            Now I fear that taking that one Ironclad won’t do me any good. It will take a couple of hits, get crippled and then just sloooooowly crawl towards the enemy until they feel pity towards it and finish it off.

          • Shawn

            Kind of realistic though. As it get’s hit, hoses are busted, leaking oil, coolant, or hydraulic fluid, arm’s torn to pieces, the assault cannon jams, etc, but it slowly inexorably gets closer.

            I do see your point though. Hopefully, those low powered weapons won’t be as effective. Maybe a dread with T7 will get +1 to save against laspistols and lasguns and only have to worry about melta, plasma, and lascannons.

          • Drpx

            I’ve never seen a dread without a pod make it across the table into CC anyway.

          • Karru

            I’ve done it a couple of times, the main role it has is to soak up much of the enemy’s AT fire. I like to use Armoured Sentinels and Ironclad Dreadnoughts for that reason. Since they have that infuriating AV12 and 13, many of the “massed” AT fire that is usually aimed at Rhinos and such is useless or very ineffective in taking them down, forcing the enemy to use heavier AT in order to deal with them.

            This leaves my more “important” units alone. Leman Russes in my IG army and the Imperial Knight in my SM army.

            If they ignore them and go for my big guns, they will quickly realise how bad of a decision it was to ignore them. Those 3 Armoured Sentinels have gotten me plenty of victories by destroying my opponent’s backline with their Autocannons and Assaults. Ironclad Dreadnought is also very lovely once it gets close enough.

          • euansmith

            Papa Nurgle’s Armoured Fist would beg to differ 😉

          • Drpx

            Fuel line=circulatory system
            Crew=brain and nervous system
            Weapons and treads=arms and legs.

          • Commissar Molotov
        • Drpx

          At another unit on the other side of the table, lol.

      • AwesomeHarvey

        This reminds me of the original DoW animatic where they are in close combat and the Ork fires his slugga!

    • Heinz Fiction

      Wondering if pistols still give an extra cc attack though…

      • Karru

        I hope so, otherwise assaulting won’t be that useful compared to shooting in the long run. The current “advantage” of Melee when it comes to damage and attacks is the sheer number you usually get. A unit of Boys gets 4 hits a pop when they charge in. That’s 40 Strength 4 hits from a unit of 10 Boys. Now, if they reduce that to 30, I really don’t see a reason to take them instead of Shoota Boys. A unit of 10 Shoota Boys shoot 20 shots per turn to 18″ with the same Strength.

        Basically it would make Ranged units the “go to” Assault unit as they would be able to dish out more damage than their Melee counterparts. A unit of Assault Marines would hit the same amount as a Squad of Tactical Marines, but Tactical Marines can shoot loads before they would Charge.

        They might compensate it with giving Assault oriented units more attacks as a base. A Boy would get 3 Base and an Assault Marine would get 2. It would be the same things, except they would be able to shoot their pistols as well if the opponent for some reason didn’t back off on their turn.

        • Koonitz

          But if you can shoot your pistol in CC, instead of getting 1 extra attack with your pistol, you shoot your pistol in addition to your attacks.

          For example, those boyz getting 40 attacks instead get 30 attacks and 10 pistol attacks. Sure, they suck with the pistols, but they’re still getting 40 attacks. Is that better than the 20 shots, but then no extra shooting attacks while in close combat ’cause the shootaz aren’t pistols?

          Assault Marines, for instance, get 1 attack with a chainsword and 1 attack with their bolt pistol. Which is effectively the same statline (assuming the bolt pistol has 0 rend like the boltgun). Both hit on 3’s. Net zero change except for the added narrative effect. Unless you bring a plasma pistol. Y’know, then thing everyone’s abandoned ’cause they were useless.

          • Karru

            That would never happen. Charging seems to happen in the Assault Phase, meaning it happens AFTER you shoot. This means that you have to wait until your next Shooting Phase in order to shoot. Only the dumbest person on the planet wouldn’t Fall Back their tied up unit so everyone else can shoot at the unit that attacked them.

            There is a good reason why so many Assault armies wanted to remain in CC and not break the enemy. They know that if they aren’t in CC, they can be shot at. What do you think the opponent would do if they have a Assault unit within their lines waiting to finish off the unit they charged so they can repeat it again when their turn starts without taking extra casualties?

          • Koonitz

            And what if the ranged weapons you’d have to use to shoot that unit are needed elsewhere? Then you choose NOT to fall back because you need to hold the enemy off long enough for your ranged weapons to do the damage they need to, elsewhere in the battle.

            Or if the unit charged is actually a shock close combat unit that successfully weathered the enemy charge and are perfectly capable of slugging it out, holding the enemy off and preventing them from getting another charge. This freeing the weapons to fire at other elements of the army.

            You’re making it black and white when you should know full well it won’t be.

            Perhaps, as well, you’re still thinking within a 7th ed mindset. The mindset that was “bring a full shooting army”, ’cause it’s more effective than bothering with having some assault elements. Perhaps, now, in 8th Ed, you’re going to want to SERIOUSLY consider having close assault elements in your army to deal with or counter-assault these enemy units. If you do have these assault elements, you may not want to fall back as often as you think you will want to.

            We simply don’t know.

          • Karru

            The reason why I make these broad strokes is for the reason you just gave, we simply don’t know.

            Most things we’ve received though seems to point to Shooting getting a buff once again though. Unless they give Assault units some MAJOR buffs like Assaulting from Transports that aren’t Open-topped/Assault Vehicles, Charging being more reliable like getting your movement added to the charge roll or something and so on.

            That’s why I am highly doubtful that these “changes” will make people consider taking more Assault units into their army to make counter-charges and the like. Shooting seems to be much better idea, especially now that you can move and shoot your Heavy Weapons with little penalty.

          • Haighus

            There are some changes that make shooting quite a lot worse in basic terms though. Consider a squad of Space Marines shooting at Guardsmen. In the past, the Guardsmen would get no save in the open, and maybe a 5+ or 4+ depending on their cover. Now they get 5+ in the open, which could be a 4+ or maybe evn a 3+ in cover, depending on the rules. If all the basic weapons have their AP reduced in this way, a lot of units are going to become tougher. Ork armour might actually mean something!

          • Heinz Fiction

            Falling back would be the best option in most cases but not in all of them. Maybe the rest of your army has other targets to deal with or the units fighting are roughly of equal strentgh. Imagine a unit of CC specialists with pistols vs one without pistols.

          • Karru

            But why would the Assault unit charge a unit that is specifically meant to stop them? The system already seems to encourage an “all or nothing” play from Assault units. You either take loads of Assault units so you can charge multiple units to make sure the return fire from the enemy after they fall back will be limited or you go with a unit that is almost a guaranteed kill if they make contact.

            If you come across a unit that is meant to take a charge, you make sure you go around it or you charge it but charge the thing it was protecting with your remaining units.

            Taking a handful of Assault units feels like waste with these changes. I know that if my line was breached, I would focus on taking down the Assault unit properly instead of allowing it to finish of the unit it charged in my turn and then charge another of my units and repeat the process. Especially with Templates being gone, shooting something like a Plasma Cannon or even a Demolisher Cannon/Battle Cannon at them after your unit falls back might be enough to wipe them out or weaken them enough to stop being a threat.

          • Heinz Fiction

            There are a hundred possible reasons why the assault unit would charge the other assault unit or gets charged by it. I don’t know about you but I play this game vs an opponent and can’t freely choose my targets all of the time…

          • el_tigre

            I have about 200 in my bits box. I’m gonna be ‘Ebay’ rich.

      • Honest Kairos

        Maybe it’s an either/or scenario. Get your extra CC attack with pistol, or shoot with pistol.

    • BaronSnakPak
    • J Mad

      Been asking for this for years, Sargents/characters will have a “real” reason for them now.

    • Josh Felstead

      This might actually make Blood Angels players take hand flamers

  • Karru

    Time for some bad commentary!

    Let’s dissect this from top to bottom.

    Let’s start with Shooting “limitation”. The first part about Advancing (Running) and not being able to shoot as well as after falling back ain’t nothing new. The “can’t shoot when enemy is within 1″ of you” is. This one doesn’t feel meaningful in any real way as I seriously can’t see a situation where it would be relevant. If you get within 1″ of ANYONE in your movement phase or even after consolidation (if that is even a thing any more), the opponent can just move away to shoot you without hindrance.

    Heavy Weapon modifiers. I don’t like this. The reason is that it makes shooting even more powerful than it already is. Unless they add a ton more modifiers to make shooting less accurate, you can expect that armies with access to lots of heavy weapons in their squads will be quite powerful than those who do not, especially if they happen to have high “bs” skill than others. Space Marines are a good example of this, same with Eldar and even Tau to some extend. Oh, my Grav Cannon “only” hits you on a 4+? Oh no, that is so bad, I shoot just like Guard does normally.

    The problem with that comes partially from the “limitations” they mentioned earlier. -1 to shooting means little in the grand scheme of things, so rushing within 1″ of an enemy unit won’t be stopping their heavier units from shooting that badly.

    The -1 modifier from Smoke Launchers does sound fun though. It might give weaker vehicles like the Dreadnought a chance to get at least half way across the board before they get crippled almost completely.

    The Armour Save modifier from cover has potential. It will of course boil down to when and how will they count it. Logic dictates that you first compare the AP of the weapon and the modifier from the cover and then you add or deduct from your model’s save. As we all know, logic isn’t GW style really.

    This can mean nice things, especially if they make cover actually matter. A standard of at least +2 to save would be preferable from most things. If its something like +1 standard, then it won’t matter at all. Marines will be getting a 2+ save while armies that actually need it won’t benefit from it enough to matter. Orks getting a 5+ save instead of their 4+ from current edition? Amazing…

    It will need to be at least a +2 if not even a +3 to actually benefit people. Orks getting a save of 3+ normally as long as they take cover would make them more survivable and interested in things other than Trukks if they wish to make it to CC.

    • Koonitz

      Let’s continue the discussion:

      1) The 1″ sounds to me like if you are engaged in combat, you can’t shoot. If the enemy charges you and you choose not to fall back, guess what you can’t do? That’s the point. It’s the new wording for “if you are engaged, you can’t shoot”.

      2) That may be, but remember that a lascannon now grants a regular space marine a 6+ save. Add in light cover granting +1 (assumed), they have a 5+ save, heavy cover, a 4+ (assumed heavy is +2). This is effectively equivalent to what it is now. Terminators get a 4+/3+. A Terminator only loses 1 to his save in heavy cover against a lascannon. Any vehicle with a 3+/2+ save gets the same kind of save.

      What if weapons with AP3 are only -2 rend (based on AP2 being -3 with the Lascannon)? That means a krak missile grants a Marine a 5+ save. Heavy cover grants him a 3+, identical to his unmodified save.

      I think more models are going to largely survive against heavier weapons, with a bit of tactical acumen.

      That, or maybe GW just felt heavy weapons were just too static, so they wanted them to be more mobile. Now you can bring a devastator squad in a drop pod, and you might even want to. Doubly so, you may want to bring devastators with multi-meltas in said drop pod. Something you’d never see anyone do in 7th Ed.

      3) Cover. The current edition separates light and heavy cover (5+/4+), with the occasional thing granting only a 6+. Based on this, I suspect light cover will be +1, heavy cover like ruins, a +2.

      Another thing to bear in mind is that if AP2 is -3 (based on the LasCannon’s stats), and AP5 is 0 (Bolter stats), AP4 might end up being only -1 rend. Which means that in light cover, an Ork would still get a save. Sure, it’s not as much as they would have before, but we have to trust in the balance work done with the extensive playtesting they have said they’ve done, working light armoured models into the new mechanic. Also, ‘eavy armour would still grant a 4+ save against a rend -1 weapon, instead of being reduced to a 5+ cover save. Give and take.

      • Karru

        The issue is that you are using a Lascannon as your “go to” weapon in these examples. That Lascannon can only kill one model in the unit per shot. They did say it doesn’t work like AoS where if you cause multiple wounds with a weapon that it kill that many models in a unit.

        Heavy Bolters and Autocannons for example would decimate Orks, even if they were in Cover. Meanwhile Space Marines would cry with joy as their Regular Marines are always having that 3+/2+ save against vast majority of shooting aimed at them. Most rending will be 0 and -1. That’s why you need to give better Cover Saves as a standard so armies like Orks, Tyranids, Dark Eldar and other low Armour save armies/units can benefit from it. If they keep it around +1 or +2, only Marines will benefit from it as vast majority of weapons aimed at them wouldn’t matter at all. Even a -3 would become a 5+ and that is from the heaviest of weapons.

        Meanwhile shooting a Heavy Bolter at a Marine wouldn’t matter at all really. They still get their 3+ or even a 2+ save against it. An Ork would get a 6+ save or a 5+. Shoot a Krak Missile and they get 4+ or a 3+. Ork gets none or a 6+. Shoot a Plasma Gun and the Marine gets a 5+ or 4+. Ork gets none.

        • Haighus

          I wonder if there will be a cap to cover modifiers- say cover can’t improve your save to better than a 3+. This could mean Orks end up on par with Space Marines in good cover, but Marines can never get better than they are.

      • AircoolUK

        As far as I know, cover will be a blanket +1 save, but it would make sense for there two be a better modifier for stuff designed to be armoured, such as Bastions, Aegis Defence Line and other buildings designed to take a lot of punishment.

        Or you could just take a flamer.

    • AircoolUK

      You’re missing the point on this one. It means that models that are part of a unit in close combat can fire their pistols in the shooting phase at the unit they are in close combat with, as long as the enemy unit isn’t in close combat with another unit.

      Basically, if you’re engaged in close combat, you can shoot your pistols in the shooting phase and then use your melee attacks in the close combat phase. So whilst a pistol doesn’t give you an extra attack anymore, it does let you shoot your close combat opponents in the shooting phase, but using the profile of your pistol. This is great for units that have funky pistols (yeah, I’m thinking Wyches against high Toughness opponents if they still auto-wound on a 4+), or for moderate assault units (like Assault Marines) who are often armed with reasonable close combat weapons (Chainsword) and a Bolt Pistol.

      -1 to shooting with heavy weapons whilst moving is another good idea for me. I never liked snap fire as it favoured units with a low BS. A unit with a BS of 5 has the same chance to snap fire as a unit with a BS of 2. At least now the modifier is the same for each unit. Same goes for vehicles. Vehicles with a high BS were punished by Snap Fire, whilst again, low BS units, less so.

      Finally, some decent cover rules. Whether there’ll be a datasheet for general cover types (woods, walls etc…) I have no idea. Hopefully there will be, but you can guarantee that each item of cover that GW sells will come with their own rules. At least now the cover rules will be clear. It also cleans up the disparity for cover saves against high AP weapons such as meltas. It was a bit rubbish that a Melta could, er, melt your Power Armour to slag, but a few tree branches could save you. Now cover works just like an extra layer of armour.

    • Christoffer Borchsenius

      Do the math again. As a guard player I am happy. If You know the profiles for All the new weapons Please share.

      • Karru

        I was mostly referring to Orks on that Save front and Tyranids. Basically armies that move around a bit more or rely on Assaulting the enemy instead of shooting them behind fortifications.

        I was mostly speculating on the AP values as well. If Lascannon, one of the most powerful Infantry wielded AT weapon in the game is -3, you can presume they won’t be going beyond that. Since AP5 is equal to 0 now, one can guess that AP4 is -1, AP3 is -2 and AP2 is -3. AP 1 is still a mystery though, it might just translate to extra damage or Mortal Wounds.

        • Simon Bates

          I think there’s every reason to anticipate that AP1 might generally become -4, or at least in some cases. Very likely such weapons will also have high damage output, but then so will most AP2 weapons.

          • Karru

            I don’t think they’ll give them the -4. Again, considering that 40k takes the AoS ruleset and adds little to it, so it too only has -3 at best.

            AP1 weapons will most likely cause D3 Mortal Wounds if they roll a 6 to wound or something.

          • Simon Bates

            I disagree. AoS rending can and does go lower than -3, albeit rarely, and at the same time has few base 3+ saves and very few (if any) native 2+ saves. -4 makes a lot more sense than AP1 ever did as it actually fits into the mechanics, rather than being AP2 with an extra special rule against vehicles. AP1 isn’t really all that common, it’s just melta/fusion weapons and a few much less common weapons and psychic powers. Many of these may well do a lot of damage, but I can’t see why they would substitute a mortal wounds output instead of giving them extra armour penetration against very well-armoured targets.

          • Karru

            What weapon has less than -3 in AoS? I’ve tried looking for it, but I can’t seem to find it.

          • Simon Bates

            I’m pretty sure there are others that I can’t bring to mind but the Sylvaneth relic weapon “Daith’s Reaper” is -4 on a 6 to wound. Not exactly common, I grant you, but it is there. But as I said before, what in AoS has a 2+ save (before cover or mystic shield)?

          • Karru

            Ah, well that explains it. Relics might give some characters the ability to get a -4, but I highly doubt that weapons that used to be AP1 would get a -4. One alternative I see is that it just outright ignores cover modifiers. -3 and no Cover modifiers would hurt even a 2+ save, as it turns into a 5+ save.

            I haven’t come across a single model that has a 2+ save base, but then again, AoS was build with the idea of combining units to make them effective. You are supposed to use the Mystic Shield or other buffs to increase your save.

    • Nightwalker

      Cool argument and all, except Grav cannons aren’t heavy, they are Salvo, so they are not impacted in any way by what was discussed here. We don’t know how they will perform until we see all the rules.

      That’s the key… we have to see all the rules…

  • thereturnofsuppuppers

    Sounds good. Hope to see something similar in the next edition of AoS

    • Miguel Cortes

      You already can shoot into combat in aos. So this doesn’t matter. Plus if your unit flees in aos they dont regroup like 40k. So you just lost that unit if they run.

      • thereturnofsuppuppers

        I would hope to see warmachines unable to shoot into combat in the next addition.

  • D_Ork

    Sounds good to me. My Sluggaz are ready.

  • Fergie0044

    It’s hard to be sure from these little snippets of the rules, but that pistol one seems dumb. So you CAN shoot your pistols if you’re locked in combat but it MUST be at the nearest enemy? But you CAN’T shoot at enemy units locked in combat?
    So my marines​, fighting for their lives against a horde of orks would request a quick time out so they can shoot their pistols at a nearby (but not the ones their actually fighting) horde of orks???
    I’d rather keep it as a blanket rule that there can be no shooting into or out of combat. Simpler.

    • Karru

      “You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you. The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat!”

      “When picking a target, you won’t be able to shoot enemies that are in combat with other units, much like the current edition.”

      These basically explain the situation. You can shoot the enemy you are in CC with if you have Pistols. You cannot however shoot at another unit that’s, if they for some reason were, within 1″ of you.

      They might have worded it badly, but what they seem to be getting at is that you can’t shoot the unit you are in CC with or another unit that for some reason was within 1″ of your unit, unless you Fall Back. Then the unit that fell back cannot shoot, but everyone else can shoot at the unit they just broke off from.

      • Fergie0044

        Ok that makes sense. So units armed with pistols get to make an ‘in combat’ shooting attack. Guess that will make plasma/melt etc pistols more useful.

    • Christoffer Borchsenius

      Try reading the rules again…. . The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat! This is going to make characters with pistols incredibly deadly up-close.

    • AircoolUK

      Basically, except in some unlikely situations, it means you can shoot your pistols in the shooting phase at the unit you are currently engaged with in close combat.

      So units in close combat with each other can shoot their pistols in the shooting phase. However, as you only get a shooting phase on your turn, it means that units armed with pistols have a great advantage now, especially if those pistols have a bit of a kick on them, like Plasma Pistols or Blast Pistols.

    • J Mad

      Shooting your pistols while in combat is amazing, think about plasma/melta pistols, now they have a better use and will always work. The Way im reading it is you can even shoot WHAT you are fighting.

  • Miguel Cortes

    So my unit of 20 Black Templar can shoot their pistols at the closest enemy unit. Which technically be the unit they charged or are in combat with, or the nearest unit not in combat with. Rapid fire 40 shots then attack in cc with 2/3 attacks a piece? Uhhh….ok

    • Iron Star

      I think youre reading too much into that.

    • carlisimo

      We don’t yet know if pistols will get two shots under certain circumstances, or if they’ll continue to add +1A in close combat.

      • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

        I doubt it. It feels like the complaint about pistols largely being a waste of points has been acknowledged, and now they’re making close-range fire-fights be represented by the rules rather than relying on the Assault phase being an abstraction.

        • AircoolUK

          Yeah, I think you can kiss goodbye to the +1 attack which never really made sense as if you had a Plasma Pistol and a Chainsword you got to make two Chainsword attacks.

          Meanwhile, if you had a Laspistol and a Power Sword, you’d get to make two Powersword attacks.

          The rule usually made buying a decent pistol for your squad leader or independent character far too expensive as you usually got to use it once, generally before you charged into close combat.

          It also made the high powered pistols that named characters had somewhat redundant as well.

    • Karru

      If you are locked in combat and still within 1″ of the said unit, yes. Something that will never happen though. If there is still a unit standing after a unit of 20 BT charge them, they will Fall Back and let the rest of the army kill them instead.

    • Djbz

      Pistols only fire one shot…

      • Nykidemus

        One of the Skitarii units has a 5 shot s2 pistol. I think there’s a 5 shot S3 or 4 pistol on one of the other admech leader types.

        • Djbz

          Yeah, I know, but usually pistols only have one shot.
          And I don’t imagine that will change.

  • SilentPony

    So getting into close combat is basically worthless because your enemy can just move their units away from it, and shoot your assault squad dead easily.

    Well I know a lot of Blood Angel, Space Wolf and Ork players that are basically going to stop playing.

    Oh, and also drop pods are worthless because if you’re too close, can’t shoot.

    • SIA

      We learned that a few days ago but most people seemed to not be concerned about it.

    • Karru

      It will encourage multiple charges and/or “deathstar” units. The idea is that you either finish of the enemy on the turn you charge or you charge so many targets that if they start falling back with them, there won’t be too many units left to shoot you back.

      Taking one or two Assault units will be pointless though, unless they can wipe out whatever they charge. Enemy falls back and the remaining army kills the unit now standing in the open.

      • SilentPony

        And also tarpit armies are dead. Nids, Orks, plague zombies, technically guardsmen throwing themselves to block an enemy.

        So its just another ‘Space Marines only’ edition.

        • Karru

          Tarpits are dead yes, but armies like ‘Nids and Orks won’t die because of this. Both armies can still do significant damage if they reach CC and they are numerous. MSU tactic, flood the enemy with smaller units and tie up their ranged units so they can’t shoot you back in their turn.

          It will be up to all the Assault rules to decide if ‘Nids and Orks remain useful in this edition.

        • Brian

          Why are tarpit armies dead? You tarpit the enemy Death Star, the Death Star does what? Lose a turn by withdrawing, only to get charged again on the tarpitters next turn? Or stay and slug it out with the tarpitting unit? Either achieves the goals of the tarpitter.

          • Nykidemus

            and the tarpitter gets to swing first, due to charging. It seems like unless the deathstar has something that can shoot at the tarpitting unit before they charge, withdrawing isnt very advantageous. Among other things it also moves you further upfield.

          • Brian

            Granted, if you can use flight or jump or the like to escape the tarpitters, *that* might make a difference. But tarpitting flyers was a challenge already.

    • Heinz Fiction

      It’s really not that big of a deal. Nowadays you aim to win the CC in a even number of rounds (=in your enemy turn), whereas in 8th edition you’ll aim to win the CC in the first round, inflicting as much casualties as possible.

      Everything else is a simple matter of pricing CC units vs shooting units correctly (if shooting units are favoured by the rules, they should be more expensive)

    • Nwttp

      So you want a magical force field to hold two units together? Say what you will about the balancing issues (which, I assure you will still be awful, unless they have entirely new people working on it… or just anyone working on it maybe) but this is actually more realistic. I’m sure they will be some penalty to running in close combat. Didn’t they discuss it in a different article already?

      • SilentPony

        No, who needs a magical force field? Ever tried getting away from someone literally holding you down? Not easy and certainly not quick.

        • Nwttp

          Yes, and I’ve easily gotten away from those weaker than me…

          • SilentPony

            So you’re saying you’re so awesome if you were surrounded by 20 gretchin, admittedly weaker than you, with pistols, wrenches, knives and chains you could easily EASILY get away from ALL 20 of them, without getting hurt, EASILY.

            Because that’s how close combat works. One side just decides to stroll away, while the other lets them.

          • YetAnotherFacelessMan

            If you’re surrounded by gretchin, then how could you withdraw? I don’t think the withdraw rule lets you move through your opponent’s miniatures, so if they’re surrounding your unit, you’d have to at least fight long enough to open a hole.

          • Nwttp

            Not too good with reading comprehension are ya bud?

        • Nwttp

          Not to mention, if you’re having a meele weapons fight with someone, way would they be holding you down? If it gets to that point, you’re dead. This isn’t mma

    • Arufel

      You truly are the most miserable bugger on BOLS and that is saying something.

      • SilentPony

        I prefer the term honest

    • AircoolUK

      Then attack with dedicated fast attack assault units. I can’t see Tau being able to outrun Tyranids any time soon, but at least they can probably buy some time with their lives so their mates can fire off a few shots.

      I can’t see why Blood Angel or Ork players would be put off by this, as far as I can see, it’s an advantage to them.

      Ok, you might get into a situation where the enemy just kite your assault units, but they need to be a minimum of 3″ away at the end of the movement phase. So the best way to prevent them doing that is to envelop them when in close combat.

      However, if an enemy tries to tarpit your dedicated assault units (which ideally should be fast attack with a high Move value), you can just disengage by jump-packing 12″ away.

      So therefore, the only good tarpitting units are dedicated tarpitting units with a high Move value.

      There are pro’s and con’s for both sides, which means that you need to chose the right unit for attacking and the right target to attack.

    • Ravingbantha

      Until we know everything, let’s not jump the gun, it’s entirely possible certain units will have some sort of rule that lets them chase down an enemy trying to escape. Something like that has been around for a long time.

    • Ulrik

      “So getting into close combat is basically worthless because your enemy can just move their units away from it, and shoot your assault squad dead easily.”
      – its not worthless, its round of CC
      – unit falling back cant do anything in the round it fell back

      “Well I know a lot of Blood Angel, Space Wolf and Ork players that are basically going to stop playing.” – good for them

      “Oh, and also drop pods are worthless because if you’re too close, can’t shoot.” – oh, yeah, droppod is worthless because you arrive in the one inch distance…always 🙂

      LOL, you made my day 🙂

  • Dan Osmond

    It’ll be interesting to see what effect things which currently grant shrouding have. Will it be -x to hit or +x to cover save? I think -x to hit makes more sense and would be more valuable to armies like bids with their venomthropes.

    • AircoolUK

      To hit does make more sense, especially as it prevents the super stealthy units from getting into the situation where there cover save couldn’t be improved by either being in cover or being stealthed/shrouded.

      Tau Stealth Suits for example were at a certain disadvantage with certain range brackets when fighting at night as Stealth would not stack with Stealth and Shrouded would not stack with Shrouded. As they already had Stealth & Shrouded, being in the dark of night for some reason didn’t them make any harder too see, whereas you would have thought dark would have made them much harder to see.

  • Xodis

    They also just released a new video for a fluffy reason we are getting Truscale Marines.

    • Farseerer

      Sounds like they’re basically blue Custodes. Current marine miniatures stay as is

      • Karru

        That’s a relief. While the idea of getting true-scale marines sounds nice, I want to finish off my Ultramarine army one day. It would have been impossible if they had replaced the current model line with true-scale ones.

        • Farseerer

          Totally right. Good move on their part for sure

          • Maitre Lord Ironfist

            My Problem with the Argument is, that it will take Time till/if normal Marines fade out.

            they can not be that stupid (it is GW, they might be) to just piss off so many ppl with something that sells good.

            I see the worries and arguments, but they miss the point and are to simple. Normal Marines will stay, these will be an option. At least for at least 2 Years – otherwise they loose too much old Fans. And to be honest. There are by far enouhg guys who will be the new shinies, either for the playing sake, for the power sake or for the “it is a new shiny thing!” sake

        • ZeeLobby

          Well. They’re getting assault and terminator variants eventually. So they will replace the old ones. They’re just not “immediately” replacing the old ones.

          • Farseerer

            Where are you getting this? and by this I mean the Replacing part

          • ZeeLobby

            uh. logic? If you want to resell space marines to space marine players, you just make new ones and phase out the old ones. This has happened countless times before in this game. This is just the first time that they’ve added fluffy reasons for it and made transitional rules. You’ll always still be able to play with your old models though.

            I mean tomb kings are still a viable AoS army, even if you can’t buy the models.

          • Farseerer

            It’s a different faction for gods sake. They literally confirmed on their facebook page that all the current marines will remain still valid.

            Spinning a narrative to fit a belief that current marines are being phased out and calling it logic is insane.

            There is literally no evidence for it. None. ZERO. Your hypotheses are not the same as hard evidence. To think you had the nerve to say you valued good discussion a few threads back.

            This is glorified scaremongeriing

          • ZeeLobby

            I mean tomb kings are a different faction and still valid. Doesn’t mean you can buy them. There might be zero evidence, but from a business standpoint it makes total sense. LoL. I mean live in denial, that’s your choice, but if you really think they’re going to continue two product lines that appeal to the same people going forward, you’re just crazy.

          • Xodis

            It depends really. Either they can create yet another Imperial faction and keep that going forever (same way we are getting Custodes) or they can risk alienating their largest fanbase ever and try to remove/replace the literal hordes of small Marines out there. I think the best business decision is to keep it as a separate faction personally. Adds more Space Marine revenue and helps keep the revenue they have coming.

          • ZeeLobby

            But it’s going to cannibalize at some point. Like it just has to. The aesthetics and place in the universe/fluff are identical (especially now that there’s rumors of assault and terminator variants). There’s no way they’re going to continue new releases for each. I fully expect within 2 years there to be iron hands and blood angels new marines. And there will be little, if any, releases for the smaller older marines.

            I mean ofcourse they’re not going to say or hint that now, and they’ll never not let you play with your mini marines. They’ll just phase out support. It makes sense from a business perspective. If you like the marine aesthetic, and their fluff, and now these new marines are getting all the attention, how long until you buy some and start a faction that gets updates? Better yet, you can’t say that they’ve alienated the older mini marine players cause “hey! you can still play them”. And in the end, it’s easy to comfort your decision because these are closer to the true-scale marines you’ve always wanted.

          • Xodis

            It doesn’t have to if they keep them separate. Sure if we see the Landraider XL and the Dreadnought XL, and even the Rhino XL then you are 100% correct they will be phased out. If we see the “Emperors Hammer” which is a LandRaider with a much different aesthetic paired with the “Guilliman Dart” some super Rhino that is also aesthetically different then we will have two separate factions that are similar. The rules themselves could also limit how many we get or if they are the new “Space Marine”. I can see the XLMarines being the equivalent of Movie Marines, you only need a few squads to take out a planet as opposed to the 100+ squads that make up a battle company. Works as an awesome way to hook the new kids on the coolest faction without dropping 400+.

          • ZeeLobby

            Eh, why make XL’s? Why not just lower transport sizes. Wouldn’t need to remake those. All they want to do is get you to re-buy your marines. They don’t mind if they keep selling the same vehicle. It’s things like tactical squads which literally don’t sell anymore. You can get full tactical squads on ebay for like 10 bucks. Heck, the new current plastic marines ran for a while with the old old rhinos.

          • Xodis

            I guess it could go either way really, but its a perfect way to get rid of all the old named heroes as well.

          • ZeeLobby

            True. You could remake them in the new sizes, or pull a primarch-ing on them and have them reborn but now with super geneseed. LoL. Now that they’ve opened up this plotline for any possibility, it’d be pretty easy to justify redoing anything in that range. And hey, you can still play with your old stuff, so no biggie. I mean i’m pretty sure EVERY company allows that. In the end most people upgrade though eventually. 32mm round bases has proven that. Sure you get some who stick behind, but most people eventually do it. Especially when there’s fluff, gaming or support incentives.

          • Xodis

            Oh I’ve already stated that I have no intention of upgrading my CSM to XLCSM….but I probably will anyways lol.

          • ZeeLobby

            Haha. I’m already considering listing a bunch of unbuilt stuff I have on eBay. I have other factions to play until the switchover is complete, so I’m in no rush. But I know I’m going to want the tru-scale guys in the end anyway.

          • Xodis

            Yeah, Im thinking about scrapping my CSM soldiers and seeing how it all plays out too. Big question is “How would this effect the non codex Space Marines?” I mean if the Space Wolves and Blood Angels get a new and pure geneseed….whats going to make them go werewolf and vampire?

          • ZeeLobby

            Ah, yeah. I dunno. IF GW were smart, they’d provide upgrade sprues for all side factions going forward. It would have to save them money in the long run, not producing a ton of larger boxes with extra vanilla space marine molds just to provide blood angels tactical squad.

          • Xodis

            Not bad, and hopefully whenever Abaddon or Fabius take over one of the production facilities or Chaos just starts infusing the soldiers with more chaos power making them grow, we get some sprews for all that too

          • ZeeLobby

            Haha. Exactly. I mean I think it’s definitely going to happen. Just might take some time, and it’ll be gradual. But yeah. I don’t want to keep playing mini marines. Not when there’s bad@ss bigger ones that fit the fluff better. I just wish they didn’t decide to go the ridiculous story route. I mean I get why they did, but I feel like they coul dhave just said these are the new marines, and sure people would have gotten upset (i mean they are now anyway), but it wouldn’t have had to be pidgeon-holed in.

          • Koonitz

            I call this “jumping to conclusions”. Whether you’re right or wrong is irrelevant at this point. The only thing we know. ABSOLUTELY, is that GW has just said Guilliman just created a new type of gene-altered Astartes.

            Based on this, we can ASSUME they will be represented by the models in the leaked image. It’s probably even a safe assumption. But we don’t know for sure.

            Beyond that, you’re making WILD speculation by jumping to conclusions based on what I see being a very pessimistic outlook of GW and their motives.

            As such, I will be viewing these comments as such. Wild speculation. You’re welcome to make them, but I’m certainly not going to believe them.

          • Farseerer

            Watch out, apparently thinking like this means you are in denial.

          • ZeeLobby

            Well, there was never going to be just one :D.

          • Koonitz

            Yet, in the end, I can still use my old, 25mm based Terminators in lieu of the new 40mm models, so frankly, I’m not even concerned if they ARE, despite there being absolutely ZERO evidence to confirm it, so… *shrugs*

          • ZeeLobby

            Right, and i”m not saying you should be upset. I don’t even understand why some people are. That was never my intention, to upset people. I just think the business reasoning behind the change is sound. The market is over saturated with marines at this point. You need to do something to reinvigorate that market.

          • ZeeLobby

            “Hey timmy, you want super human armored marines?” “Yeah mommy!” “K, you want the small ones or the big ones?” “Big ones!”. Anyone who sees this going any other way is just delusional, haha. Only to old farts who are probably over invested in the fluff does the running of these two factions in parallel make sense. And that’s why they did it, for defenders justification to defend.

          • Koonitz

            Because a kid doesn’t know the difference between an Astartes and a Custodes, and his parents, who don’t even play the game, also don’t know better?

            Heck, that probably happens all the time, NOW!

            “Space Marine Tactical Squad”
            “Indomitus Crusade Tactical Squad” (I dunno, making this up as I go!)

            Which one do you want for your Space Marine army, Timmy? The Space Marine, or the not-Space Marine?

            At this point, we’re both jumping to conclusions, though mine is more to show you how the argument can swing both ways, instead of to sow panic at Space Marine players.

            It’s probably also why GW is so eager to let people play and use whatever they want, so kids that buy the wrong stuff can still play with it without someone going all “but that’s not the right model!” at them.

          • Koonitz

            Oh and, while we’re at it, do you know how long it’ll take for someone to produce a full Marine army using the ‘true scale’ counterparts instead of the regular Marines?

            Even despite the fact that the models will likely not be officially ever released as such.

            I’m looking forward to those.

          • ZeeLobby

            Well if they cost more points, probably not too long. I don’t think they’ll change the stats of these to their mini versions. I think these will just be THE space marine stats going forward. As they should be. They represent the fluff a lot better.

          • ZeeLobby

            I think you misunderstand me. I’m all for it. Myself, and the community in general, has been waiting for true scale marines for a LONG time. Ones that actually have the strength to perform as they do in the fluff instead of being the cannon fodder they have been. I’m all for it. I’m not sowing panic, I’m promoting an awesome change!

          • AircoolUK

            It does look like that as opposed to, for example, Terminators replacing Marines, whereas we all know, Terminators a just a separate unit, even though they’re Space Marines.

          • ZeeLobby

            IMO I would have been more likely to believe that if now there weren’t “assault” and “terminator” new marines coming out. Looks like there will be a pretty massive parallel.

          • Drpx

            If you want to resell space marines to space marine players, just release new weapons or unit options and the bits to accompany them like they did with grav weapons/all of 30k.

          • ZeeLobby

            I just 3D print my weapons now, lol. Know that’s not the same case for everyone, but I know plenty of people who just convert them at this point. It was easier to justify those sales back in the day, when getting that one special weapon was as simple as picking up a blister. Now you’re getting a whole squad of additional vanillas you don’t need.

  • AircoolUK

    Looks like terrain will be the same as AoS as well, with each terrain piece having their own datasheet and no doubt containing rules for what types of units get that armour save bonus.

    As for pistols in close combat… about time. Now rather than just using them to get an extra bonus attack, you can now use their weapon profile against the unit you’re engaged with.

    Good news for a lot of units, although it’s a terrible shame that Bolt Pistols will lose their AP, or not, depending on your army.

    Also makes Plasma Pistols more useful, although the jury is still out on whether a Tau Pulse Pistol is still nothing more than a fancy cigar lighter.

  • piglette


  • Marco Marantz

    Looking good. You should be able to point extra points for stabilization though. Surely in an era of warp drives stabilizers should be somewhat effective.

  • MechBattler

    WELL Alrighty then. Heavy weapons just got a major buff. Especially those on vehicles with Ordnance. Leman Russes and the like just got a shot in the arm.

  • Arthfael

    I never liked the +1 attack for pistols counting as CC weapons. This is better.

  • Jay Barton

    So there won’t be a penalty for walking away from combat? The enemy just let’s you walk away? Many sense not made.

    • Derek Lee

      The penalty is losing your shooting action if successful and maybe failing the breakaway and losing your shooting anyway.

      • Jay Barton

        Oops misread it. I read it as step of of combat and shoot. Meh b 🙂