40K Rumors: 8th Ed Latest Batch

A BIG batch of 8th Edition rumors are doing the rounds this morning. Take a cautious look.

Ok, some points…

This is a LARGE list and fairly detailed.  Proceed with caution and cross index these with KNOWN good information coming from GW. That will give you a blueprint to determine the trustworthiness of this set.

This rumor set deals with both the core rules and has a lot of detail on individual units, pointing to either a leak from the finished product, or the playtest group.

Latest 8th Edition Rumors

One of Faeit’s readers sent in this list:

– Assault 2d6”, multiple units
– Split fire: any unit can target as many targets as they want
– Normally the unit don’t have to target the nearest unit, but there are lots of abilities that have this restriction
– Invulnerable saves simply ignore armour penetration up to the given value. They are not that common, wave serpents and Canoptek wraiths have one
– Most power fields, etc. are separate saves that are taken in addition to other saves just like FnP of today, they may or may not ignore mortal wounds on a case by case basis
– Dodges, camos, etc are now to hit modifiers
– Characters cannot join units
– Characters can only be targeted if nearest target or within 12”
– Larger models are seldom characters, Gulliman is not for example
– Deepstriking units can be placed anywhere. Every unit with deep strike has a value. Have to beat it to land on target, otherwise opposing player can move unit the rolled distance
– There are no mishaps anymore
– Overwatch shooting against deep striking units within 9” at -1 BS
– Summoning is not a psychic ability anymore, normal deep striking with psyker as homing beacon instead
– There are spells that replenish or add wounds to demon squads
– Most vehicles have a single attack with high S, but no AP, some have considerably more like the battle waggon
– Vehicles and units fighting against vehicles usually can fall back without penalty, they cannot move in the charge phase when they have moved or shot in the same turn. Most walkers don’t have this rule
– Terrain enhances armour in assault phase for the defender, or both in consecutive turns, is negated by grenades
– Assaulting units get +1 attack
– Vertical movement does not count against the allowance but a model cannot go higher than the movement value in a given phase. Lots of exceptions for jumping, flying, etc. of course
Ranges are measured on the ground level from base or model to base or model, whichever is nearer
– Units are deployed within 3” of a transport, cannot move, but can charge in the charge phase
– No more firing from a transport, though some vehicles, especially open topped ones have extra firing points weapons if they transport enough (and sometimes eligible) models. But they use their own BS and the kind of weapon is fixed. For example Raiders have 5 fire point splinter rifles, but only if they transport kabalite warriors
– No challenges
– Hidden power fists viable again, wound allocation by owning player, any model in squad, but wounded ones first
– There are some precision weapons that let the firing player choose the wound allocation (always or on a 6)
– Units have always the same T and Save now. There are some models that have T- Sv – and adapt like drones and grots, most of the other combined units have matchings stats now, Black templar neophytes have a 3+ now, for whatever reason
– Command points allow to reroll saves, hits, wounding or charge distance, reroll any single dice throw, negate all terrain in 12” of one of your models, alter the attack sequence, boost psychic block rolls, allow additional reserves and allow units to get another charge phase after wiping out an enemy
– There are some models like Ghazghkull that have their own abilities that are triggered by command points
– perils of the war: snake eyes on the test, d6 on table, d3 mortal wounds and losing a spell are the worst cases
– Player can spend command points to choose who goes first instead of rolling, whoever spends more
– Matched games have a fixed number of turns, 5 or 6 rounds depending on mission, 18” is starting range and turn 1 charges are completely legal
– Reserves are not random, except for rounding: second turn half the units are deployed, third turn half of the remaining, fourth turn rest
– Flyers have an individual to hit modifier, mostly -2 or -3, a 6 is always a hit as usual, depends on the flying mode for flyers that have more than one
– Flyers are affected by heavy weapon malus, but most flyer weapons are assault,
flyer weapons have often a shorter range and a different name, but are otherwise identical to their ground counterparts
– Terrain does not influence movement distance per se. Some citadel terrain pieces half the movement or do other things.
– There are no warzone rules in the core rules
– True line of sight is used to establish line of sight to a model, but otherwise models count in or out of cover depending if they are in a piece of terrain or if they are touching it and the firing – line goes through the terrain
– In matched play, models have a fixed base size specified in the General’s Handbook. In the two other game types, they can use any base they want

 

Previous Rumors (Compiled by Blood of Kittens)

Release Schedule & Product Information

June 10th launch, they’re going to drip feed us rumors for the rest of  May.  Expect to see full Space Marine datasheets sometime around the end of next week, with a couple of fluff pieces talking about how the galaxy got ripped in half and how all the marines got taller.

About 1-2 weeks beforehand all 7th edition exclusive products are being pulled from stores for good. Codex’s, Rulebooks, Dark Vengeance, not the new campaign books such as Gathering Storm sense those are still fluff pieces, but expect those to become much harder to find.

On Day One:  5  new, free soft cover/PDFs launch with all the core 8th edition rules.

The Rules:  Containing your prophesized 12 pages of core rules, plus outlines for open play and the 14 universal FoC, ranging from 1 HQ and 1 Troop choice 1 command point allies to massive 20+ slot charts that grants a fist full of command.  The new force org charts are pitched as a great way customize your army, one of them is a big guns esqu 1 troop/HQ 5+ Heavy support, but really they’re just designed to scale command points to game size.

The free PDF version of the following books will be sectioned up among faction lines, but the paper ones are going to be the mashups listed below.

Armies of the Imperium: Exactly what it says on the cover, a splash of lore  and datasheets for every imperial unit in the game.

Armies of chaos:  The spiky version of the above.

Armies of Xenos: Split up among proper faction lines (Eldar, Tau, Necron, Nids), and containing datasheets and rules for the rest.

A galaxy in flames:  Art and fluff book.  Brings everyone up to speed on the setting, pushing the story forward by a few weeks and setting up the opening of a AoS style narrative campaign.

Starter Set & Codexes

The starter set goes live the 17th and is going to be Death Guard Vs. Ultramarines, $120 box.  Chaos gets a blob of cultists, a few terminators, a few plague marines, a lord, and drones.  Loyalists get 2 tactical squads, a devastator, an assault squad, plus a librarian and a captain.  Comes with dice and rulers as well.

In addition, there will be the standard soft cover core rules booklet and a small campaign book.  The campaign book has the stats for all the dudes in the box, plus a series of narrative missions that set up the ground floor for the first real story arc of the new edition.

AoS was very much a test kitchen for what to expect of the “New Warhammer 40k”.  AoS had a rocky start, but they learned from their mistakes, and recently even AoS has surpassed 40k in some regards.

The battle tome will become the template for the codex, not the other way around.  Each dex will get the special army wide rules, 6-12 relics, 6 warlord traits, and 6 psychic powers, only now it’s written that you can chose to ether select or roll on warlord/psychic charts.  It will also contain full rules and points for all the old and new units in a given army, and special rules for things like warbands, campaigns, narrative missions and the like.

Formations are back, but they cost points now, and so are decurons, but they will be a lot more flexible and take cues from their AoS counterparts.

Black library is going to do a soft reboot for some of the new 40k lore books, with a gimmicky “New Warhammer” type flagship launch to, as I said before, laydown a ground floor for the upcoming 8th edition.

~ Do you believe?

 

  • Nyyppä

    So, it’s Tau or go home. Roger that.

    • NNextremNN

      Ohh another prophet. Can you tell me some lottery numbers? I really need that money for all the new 8th edition stuff.

      • Nyyppä

        Show me the info that has the numbers in at I’ll give them to you.

        • NNextremNN

          I see no numbers for Tau in this rumors either. Hell tau are even mentiomed just once. You’er just crying about something we don’t know yet.

          • Nyyppä

            Well, unless they are now assault heavy this is what it is.

          • Ed Butlar

            Lol

      • orionburn

        It’s a day that ends with a Y, so yeah, he’s going to complain about 8th edition being broken when a) we don’t know all the rules yet and b) half or more of the items listed may not even turn out to be true.

        • kingcobra668

          His pathological complaining isn’t/wasn’t limited to 8th. Great candidate to block comments, really.

          • Hussein Alobaidi

            Thanks for the info, really hate dudes like that who just bring everything and everyone around them down.

          • orionburn

            I’ve started doing that with some. It just gets old. I don’t expect the game to be perfect but FFS give it a chance.

          • kingcobra668

            The funny thing is he is constantly telling people not to assume things on these rule bits, yet that’s all he does and always negative. I’m starting to assume he’s drunk.

          • NNextremNN

            I was thinking about it. But while often irrational or simply trolling I think he was not insulting. Which is usually more of a reason for me to block people.

            And I have to admit I sometimes fall for those and feed or provoke such trolls so I don’t know if I’m innocent either.

      • Steven Hyche

        Nyppa is going for most toxic player accolade

    • Andreas Noche

      Tau really are into first turn charge and rhino rush as we all know

      • Nyyppä

        And you are forced to deploy so that that is possible?

        • Andreas Noche

          Not at all, if you don´t want to play for objectives. Also: Rhino rush doesn´t really care where you deploy

          • Nyyppä

            Why would you when tabling the opponent is easy for them?

          • Anggul

            Silly us, we all forgot to read all of those Tau rules that are available already.

          • Nyyppä

            You failed on using logic. Nothing more.

          • TexBlade

            You mean the logic that we’ve seen not a single Tau rule or datasheet or leak? B/c that’s logic you’re failing to use.

          • Nyyppä

            The logic that we know what Tau are and we know the relevant rules and how these 2 interact. That’s what you failed to use.

            Obviously it’s possible that GW made Tau a melee army but I don’t think that’s the case.

          • TexBlade

            Again you fail to grasp the incredibly basic concept that we don’t know what rules the Tau are going to keep, gain, or drop. We don’t know what their LD stats will be like and how damaging the morale phase will be to them. We don’t know the point cost of their equipment.

            You can’t claim I’m using logic to know things, when it is impossible to know said things. But please continue to complain like a spoiled child.

          • Nyyppä

            Here’s a link that counters your argument: https://disqus.com/home/discussion/belloflostsouls/40k_rumors_8th_ed_latest_batch/#comment-3288293131

            I’m not claiming that I’d know anything that’s not revealed yet. I don’t have to know those things since my claim is about what we know. You’d get this id you weren’t so busy adding hidden meanings to what I’ve said.

            Out of us it is btw. you who is complaining like a spoiled child. All I did was that I pointed out things that we know and how those things interact with each other. You are complaining about me doing that and how I’m not stopping just because you complain about it. Your emotional response is about me not recognizing you as an authority. 😀

          • TexBlade

            Here’s a link to someone complaining like a spoiled child, http://disq.us/p/1idmpv0

            “I don’t have to know those things since my claim is about what we know.” – Um, your link is to rumors. Do you not know the definition of a rumor? One of the key aspects of rumors is that you don’t know if they are true or not, ergo we don’t know.

            “All I did was that I pointed out things that we know and how those things interact with each other.” – Two things. You’ve pointed to rumors and assumed they are facts, and demand that other accept them as facts. And you’ve actually not said a single thing about how the things will interact. You really love being a shining example of failure.

            “Your emotional response is about me not recognizing you as an authority.” Lovely bit of projection you’ve displayed.

          • Nyyppä

            Awww, you are cute. 😀

          • TexBlade

            I love how that’s your catch all phrase for when you don’t have a logical response. Just lob an ad hominem and hope for the best.

          • Nyyppä

            Logical response to what? Your ad hominems? The conversation is just and endless circle in which I point out something we know, you say that we don’t, I end up proving that we do, you claim that we know nothing and it starts all over again.

            The “you are cute” is a response to your childish attempt to hide the fact that my arguments are stronger this time and you are using the very basic ad hominems in that attempt.

          • TexBlade

            Please link to where you’ve already shown what we know. Don’t forget that rumors don’t count as things we know since rumor is defined as, “Unverified information received from another.”

          • Nyyppä

            I’ve stated many times that we know what GW has told us and what different factions are about.

          • TexBlade

            I’ve stated many times that GW hasn’t said anything about the Tau army stats, rules, abilities, relics, etc. That makes it illogical to assume that a non-top tier army will become the number 1 army. That is your claim by the way, “So, it’s Tau or go home. Roger that.” According to you Tau is the only way to win in 8th.

          • Nyyppä

            Yet the rules are designed so that if everything else works according to their predetermined roles it is in no way unreasonable to assume that Tau, being the specialists of the style of warfare the core rules are designed for, would be the best. Not necessarily by much, but still.

          • TexBlade

            Actually it is entirely unreasonable to assume that Tau would the best. They are not the best currently. And according to you melee in 8th is strong than melee in 7th, but still a lot weaker than shooting, and yet Tau are not the best army in 7th.

            If we follow your logic. 7th shooting is superior to to melee to a greater degree than 8th shooting is to melee, and Tau are the most shooting focused army in both 7th and 8th. Then by you own acknowledgement that 8th melee is stronger than 7th melee Tau will fall further from the top ranks than they currently are.

          • Nyyppä

            The current power standings mean nothing. I’m talking about the army styles.

            Melee being more deadly is not melee being better.

          • TexBlade

            You didn’t say melee was more deadly in 8th than 7th. You said melee was better in 8th than in 7th.

          • Nyyppä

            I highly doubt that since that’s directly opposite of what I think.

          • TexBlade

            We’ve all learned that what you think is often wrong.

          • Nyyppä

            And yet you never seem to be able to prove that to be the case.

          • TexBlade

            I just proved it when you said “GW did not name any of the outside help other than pointing out that there are people helping them” and I linked you a video in which GW explicitly names people and groups that helped them play test this edition for balance.

          • Nyyppä

            So, who did they name specifically?

          • TexBlade

            Are you so lazy or so stup!d that you can’t watch a video and get the info yourself?

          • Nyyppä

            So you don’t know either. Right….

          • TexBlade

            Are you so lazy or so stup!d that you can’t watch a video and get the info yourself?

          • Nyyppä

            You failed with that dodge on the very first time. What made you think it would work now?

            It’s ok to admit that you don’t know.

          • TexBlade

            It’s ok to admit you’re too lazy to watch the video yourself. I’ve provided proof they named people. I can’t force you to watch, but you can’t claim they didn’t name people b/c you’re so stup!d you don’t know how to press the play button.

          • Nyyppä

            Now you’re just being sad.

          • TexBlade

            But less sad than the person that can’t press play.

          • Nyyppä

            That right there is a pretty fine existential dilemma. How can you be better and worse than you are all at the same time?

          • TexBlade

            I’ve pressed play, thus I’m not more and less sad than you, who can’t press play. Nice try and sounding smart but you just displayed the kind of stupidity that prevents you from watching a video.

            Since you need to have it spelled out for you, since you clearly didn’t get it on your own. You are the one that can’t press play.

          • Nyyppä

            But you did not listen to them since you apparently don’t have the info.

            Again, how do you know that I’ve not seen the video?

          • TexBlade

            You wouldn’t need me to spoon feed you a name if you’d watched it yourself. But I understand that watching a video is a very challenging task and was clearly too difficult for you.

            Additionally I was the one that to point out to you that they confirmed working with outside people to play test and balance this edition. So clearly I listened to the video that you had no knowledge about before I gave you the link.

            But please keep acting like you know everything b/c it’s hilarious to a lot of people when you end up showing how little you really know.

          • Nyyppä

            It’s no longer about my knowledge. It’s about yours. The outside help is common knowledge even to people who have not seen that.

            So, who are the people who aided them in the testing part of the process or do you just not know?

          • TexBlade

            It’s still definitely about your knowledge, and now it’s also about your apparently lack of knowledge on how to watch a video.

            “The outside help is common knowledge even to people who have not seen that.” – More lies considering you said this before, “Assuming that hearsay can be trusted the people who are helping GW to
            test the game should know their thing even if GW does not.” Something that is common knowledge is not hearsay. Maybe you should ask mommy and daddy for a dictionary b/c you keep failing to understand basic words like hearsay, rumor, assumption, bias, to name a few.

            “So, who are the people who aided them in the testing part of the process or do you just not know?” – I know the first person they name in the video. Do you? If you know the first person they name reply with the name. If you can’t reply with the name then that means you are too stupid to watch a video. If you can’t reply with the correct name then that proves you’re too stupid understand simply english.

          • Nyyppä

            It’s hilarious how you think your deliberate misinterpretation and a false claim based on that somehow makes me a liar. It’s also funny that you think that you can hide your lack of knowledge behind your bad behavior. 😀

            Anyway, while it was fun at the beginning when I thought you were a match but seeing that you are not capable of rational discussion makes this just….boring.
            The facts are clear. You are wrong. It’s up to you to see it since no one else can make you to do that. If you don’t want to it’s fine too. I just don’t want to paticipate in this anymore. I feel like I’m repeatedly slapping a defenseless infant.

            Good luck with your games. May you learn better tactics than the ineffective ones you have suggested thus far. You can learn to be better. I believe in you!

          • TexBlade

            Oh look you couldn’t supply the name. I guess that proves you are so mentally challenged, no surprise to anyone following you, that you can’t click play on a video.

            I really love how petty you’ve been about being proven wrong about your claim that outside help was hearsay. Your ego is so fragile it just can’t handle the fact that you were proven wrong.

            Thanks for confirming what we all knew. Have fun trying to troll someone less intelligent than you next time b/c you clearly met your superior is this thread. Of course the real challenge will be finding someone less intelligent than you that still has the ability to breath without a machine.

          • Nyyppä

            Apparently not. I went through my messages from the last 3 days and not once have I said, during that time, that melee was getting better in 8th. In case I am wrong and missed something please do correct me with a quote and a link to the post in which I said so.

            Obviously you can just not do that but you need to understand that that just makes you look more like a liar.

          • TexBlade

            That’s so cute you went back and edited out any that referenced melee getting better. How petty of a person you are.

          • Marik
          • TexBlade

            You didn’t say melee was more deadly in 8th than 7th. You said melee was better in 8th than in 7th.

          • Farseerer

            There is only one person acting like a cute wee child right now and I’ll give you a clue: it’s not TexBlade

          • Nyyppä

            The evidence suggests that you are wrong or lying.

          • Farseerer

            I 100% agree that you believe that

          • Nightwalker

            Notice which comments all have up votes? 😀

          • AEZ

            The logic that says GW made this edition focus much more on melee? That is the logic that makes a shooty army the best now?
            Complete nonsense.. even if they have the highest volume of shots.. you don’t know their hit scores or how much damage they will do.

          • Nyyppä

            They obviously focused on melee. They just managed to make it worse than it already was by making movement what it is. Assuming that neither player is a vegetable the movement rules make shooting a lot better than melee in the rules. Factions might have tools to change the status quo.

          • AEZ

            Assuming there aren’t very quick transports, Assuming there are no movement bonusses. Also: FORGETTING deepstrike abilities, FORGETTING that even melee oriented armies in 40K have quite some shooting, FORGETTING that you get a hell of a lot more melee attacks per melee mini than shooting attacks.
            You assume a lot.. doesn’t make you look intelligent. You forget even more: makes you look unintelligent.

          • Nyyppä

            Actually I’m assuming nothing still. All my claims are based on what we know. If sticking to what we know is stupidity then most of the commonly seen as actually very smart people are pretty damn dumb. If they are dumb then what are we who aim to work with facts and what are the people who work with pure beliefs?

          • Steven Hyche

            Thats kind of the point. You know nothing except one rule you disagree with. You dont like the rule and have based all your arguments on that small piece of the picture.

          • Nyyppä

            You can keep telling that to yourself but it’s not true. All the phases have been covered (unless there is some sort of command phase). Unless the factions fix the bias in the core rules it’s what I’ve pointed out the core rules are.

          • Steven Hyche

            The rules are 14 pages long and the brief recap we have seen is only a page long. Thats a lot of missing information.

          • Nyyppä

            Missions, force organization charts and so on. All are basic rules.

          • Nyyppä

            Missions, force organization charts and so on. All are basic rules.

          • Marik
          • Marik
          • The Rout

            Seriously, has anybody every been more “that guy” than this guy? (Nyyppa ofc)

          • ZeeLobby

            Since when do you deploy on objectives anyway? Usually you “move” to them.

        • Marcus Clark

          WoW @Nyppa , I just…Do you even read what you write…Talk about making salt and assumptions into facts, and then failing to provide any evidence of said facts.

          Anyway I am more interested in GW’s love for all the buildings they keep pushing out, it seems to me they are going to play a more pivotal part of future games, like all the mechanicus stuff. If anything makes the 8th complicated again its factoring these special rules in. Also Tau were pretty rubbish in last 2 editions, only spamming super walkers and marker drones had any real effect (queue death missiles that hit on 2’s). What I noticed was Eldar held the cheese army of the late 7th ed, followed by Space marines usually armed with grav guns jumping in and out of transports.

          • Nyyppä

            Still, no salt and no assumptions. You not wanting to accept GWs teasers as evidence is not a problem of mine. Either they are lying or I am right about the core rules as far as they have been revealed to us.

    • MarcoT

      Nothing on this list helps Tau. What are you on?

      • Nyyppä

        It’s a gun line. Gun lines rule this edition. They are not dependent on characters unlike many other armies. They have interceptot, skyfire and split fire.

        • Astmeister

          You do not know, if any of these rules will be in 8th. Nor do you know their effect.

          • Nyyppä

            You mean you that can’t fathom how the effectiveness of assault is affected by just the movement rules. The rules GW has announced already.

          • The Rout

            Yeah, all that increased movement speed, assaulting from vehicles and increased deployment zone have got my combat focussed SW army terrified. oh wait, not terrified, elated. My bad.

          • Nyyppä

            You’ll crash in to the wall of expendables and get shot to pieces. If that’s ok to you then kudos, you are going to love the new edition.

          • The Rout

            hahaha yeah because i will have zero shooting to move those expendables out of my way and no way around those expendables to assault what i want.

            Do you not think i have to deal with those issues now? Do you not see how this will be easier with more movement and less distance to cover? Have you never popped someones bubblewrap?

            What do you even play? You know, besides a game of riddles from under your bridge.

          • Nyyppä

            How long did you plan on firing thos bolt pistols at them? 5 turns?

            You are ignoring the fact that your opponent can now just leave from assaults. After that your units will just be shot again. Rince and repeat.

          • TexBlade

            Tau have always left assault after the first turn. It’s because all the models have been removed as casualties.

          • Nyyppä

            Yes. Remember how that blood letter spam ruled the tournaments against Tau? Me neither.

          • TexBlade

            Remember that time the top Tau player was ranked 17th in tournament play? Clearly Tau are so OP that the best rank they can get is 17th place. I didn’t know they made trophies for 17th place.

            https://www.bestcoastpairings.com/itcplayers?faction=20YaAc7wrp&gameType=1

            https://www.bestcoastpairings.com/itcplayers?gameType=1

          • Nyyppä

            They are compared to melee armies. They are not compared to invisible deathstars etc. we are talking about Tau vs. melee armies, are we not?

          • TexBlade

            We are not since you started the discussion with “So, it’s Tau or go home. Roger that.” Please tell me where in the one sentence you said anything about melee armies.

          • Nyyppä

            It’s a pay to win game. You pick the best faction/combination and play that. Based on the rules GW has revealed, melee armies will not be good (see movement for reasons) and Tau is as far on the other side of the spectrum as anything can be at the moment. GW said that armies keep their play styles.

          • TexBlade

            GW has said that this is the most balanced edition of 40k ever. You keep reminding people that GW said, “armies keep their play styles” then you clearly need to remember that GW said that all armies will be viable.

            So which is it? GW shouldn’t be believed when they say things will be balanced and thus no reason to believe them when they say armies will keep their play style or GW should be believed about army play styles and thus should also be believed about army balance?

          • Nyyppä

            Well, making the most balaced edition ever is not much of a task. I think that most of the community could have done that just by making point adjustments and minor changes to the core rules. One must also remember that GW thinks that all armies are viable in 7th while that clearly is not the case.

            I do believe that they have play tested the game with outside help and found a way to make it all work together, sort of. Assuming that hearsay can be trusted the people who are helping GW to test the game should know their thing even if GW does not. And who knows, maybe the designers have matured beyond trying to one up their favorite factions above everything else.
            What I’m afraid of is that the type of balance that they have achieved means very specific lists or it just does not work. I don’t have any reason to assume that it os so other than GW’s history so let’s call it a huch.

            I like mainly melee armies. Maulerfiend to me is the single coolest concept of a unit in the game. A huge rampaging machine infused daemon smashing through the battlefield while ripping anything it catches apart. I want to field those and be able to win against roughly equally skilled opponent. I want that opponent to be able to win too with what ever he/she likes to use.
            I don’t believe that to be the reality when the game launches. It’s possible but nothing I have seen so far bestowes confidence in me. They have always made sales speeches how everything is awesome and those advertisements have yet to hold true even for half of the factions. Look at melee centurions and vanguard veterans. Marines are great yet those 2 units GW claims are awesome (source: codex SM) are simply put useless. Other examples like that are dark apostles and warpsmiths, most if not all melee monsters, vespid, wraithblades and nid stealers.

            When they say that all units and all factions are viable they end up claiming that everything in the game is roughly on the same level of power either alone or because of some synergy. That is possible, but I very much doubt that they understand what that means and what it takes to achieve that and that they have managed to get that done. That has never happened in the past and they’ve had plenty of chaces to get that done.

            But, there is a margin of error. It is possible that they’ve got their act together and made a great game.

          • TexBlade

            “One must also remember that GW thinks that all armies are viable in 7th while that clearly is not the case.” – Now you are lying. GW has repeatedly shown acknowledgement that armies, specifically Nids, are not viable in 7th in the recent daily ‘leaks.’

            “Assuming that hearsay can be trusted the people who are helping GW to test the game should know their thing even if GW does not.” – It isn’t hearsay. GW has explicitly stated they had outside help play test this edition so that balance could be achieved. Facts are your friends. I suggest you start finding, learning, and using some in future discussions.

            “But, there is a margin of error. It is possible that they’ve got their act together and made a great game.” – And all it takes for you to acknowledge your bias and assumptions is roughly half a dozen people roughly half a dozen hours pointing out your bias and baseless assumptions.

          • Nyyppä

            I’ve not seen anything in which they tell us that some armies suck in 7th.

            GW did not name any of the outside help other than pointing out that there are people helping them, or at least I’ve not heard their names from GW. Hence the hearsay.

            There is no bias on my end. The rules we know are biased against melee armies, plain and simple. None of your effort made any sort of difference.

          • TexBlade

            “I’ve not seen anything in which they tell us that some armies suck in 7th.” Nyyppa has not seen it, thus it must never have happened. He has spoken so it must be true! Let no logical person challenge him on this! From the warhammer community website, “Rules and points for every single model
            in the game are being realigned for the new edition – so expect to see
            many units that might have been absent from competitive play make a
            welcome return.”

            “GW did not name any of the outside help other than pointing out that
            there are people helping them, or at least I’ve not heard their names
            from GW. Hence the hearsay.” – They called several people out by name in the Warhammer 8th Ed Live Q&A. https://www.facebook.com/WarhammerTVteam/videos/368356113559373/ Maybe you should educate yourself some more before you speak incorrectly so matter of factly.

            “There is no bias on my end.” – More lies.

            “The rules we know are biased against melee armies, plain and simple.” – More bias on your end. The one thing you seemingly hate the most, the movement out of combat. Is also a benefit to combat units. It is impossible to tar pit a combat unit now. But your bias didn’t let you see that. Your bias only let you see how the shooting armies would benefit from that rule.

          • Nyyppä

            Your bitterness is hilarious. Besides the only one lying here is you. 😀

          • TexBlade

            I’ve proved you’re a liar. Prove where I’ve lied. Oh and do it without lying even more.

          • Nyyppä

            Actually you didn’t. You added meaning to my words that is not there.

          • TexBlade

            Thank you for admitting you can’t prove I’ve lied, because I haven’t, and admitting that you’ve lied about me lying. Liar.

          • Nyyppä

            Nah. You are just projecting again.

          • TexBlade

            You should try googleing projection b/c you’re using it wrong.

          • Nyyppä

            I agree that you think so.

          • TexBlade

            I’m glad you could admit that you’re using it wrong.

          • Nyyppä

            Well, I had nothing to do at work so I went through my comments under this article and found out that:

            – You are lying when you imply that in my opinion things that I have not seen have never happened. I never claimed that it was so.
            You tried to prove this by claiming that GW admitting that some of their unit designs in 7th are not competitive is somehow synonymous with them saying that there are whole armies in 7th that suck. Obviously it is not so and we all know that what is and is not competitive is merely a difference of what is optimal and what is not even if the differences between units in terms of cost/effectiveness scale would be minor. As an example if there were 2 WKs, otherwise identical but one just moves 11″ instead of 12″, the one with 12″ move would be the competitive option while the one with 11″ move would not be a competitive option. Thus you either do not understand what competitive means in this context or are lying about it.

            – You lied about there being bias in my end. There is none. I have pointed out that armies might fix the inherent bias against melee armies in the core rules (the ones we know), specifically the movement rules which are severely biased against melee armies. I have no way of knowing what the final product is so I’m not going there. I’ve spoken only about what we know.

            – The leaving combat option in movement phase is in no way beneficial to melee units. Sure, you can’t be bogged down to a combat but you can do nothing else after leaving it either. This means that the CC specialist unit leaves the combat just to be charged again during the next opponents turn just to leave the combat again on “your” next turn and so on. So the tar pit is there. It’s just moving now.

            This is either you not understanding the movement rules or you lying. Not sure which but if I was a betting man I’d go for your lack of understanding. You claiming that your lack of understanding or lies are there because I’m biased according to your claim is a lie though.

            So, It was not me who lied. This is now proven in this post. Do you need more help with understanding this or are you satisfied?

          • TexBlade

            “You are lying when you imply that in my opinion things that I have not
            seen have never happened. I never claimed that it was so.” – You claimed it right here, “I’ve not seen anything in which they tell us that some armies suck in 7th.” That’s you saying you’ve not seen GW acknowledge that some armies 7th suck, and as such it never happened b/c I told you they did and you said, “I’ve not seen anything in which they tell us that some armies suck in 7th.” So now you’re just compounding your lies with more lies on top of it. Are you a child that doesn’t know how to own up to lying and so keeps on lying or are you a compulsive liar that simply cannot stop lying?

            “You tried to prove this by claiming that GW admitting that some of their
            unit designs in 7th are not competitive is somehow synonymous with them
            saying that there are whole armies in 7th that suck. Obviously it is
            not” – Look I get it. You’re not smart enough to make the connection that many many many other players have made. I’m sorry I had to embarrass you by making it obvious that you didn’t grasp their simple message.

            “You lied about there being bias in my end.” Uh, yeah, no. You have obvious bias on your part. People call you out on it repeatedly, they just don’t use the explicit word bias. Also unless you are not human, it is impossible not to have bias.

            “There is none.” See, more lies about your lack of bias.

            ” I have pointed out that armies might fix the inherent bias against
            melee armies in the core rules (the ones we know), specifically the
            movement rules which are severely biased against melee armies.” – Your bias makes you see things that only benefit shooting armies when they in fact benefit both. The freedom to get out of combat ALSO benefits melee units. This is at least the second time I’ve had to bring that to your attention.

            “The leaving combat option in movement phase is in no way beneficial to melee units.” – Oh look, now three times. It is a benefit to them if you are not a brainless player.

            “Sure, you can’t be bogged down to a combat but you can do nothing else after leaving it either.” – So you admit that leaving combat has the same negatives to a shooting army that it does to a melee army since the unit leaving can do nothing else after leaving.

            ” This means that the CC specialist unit leaves the combat just to be
            charged again during the next opponents turn just to leave the combat
            again on “your” next turn and so on. So the tar pit is there. It’s just
            moving now.” – Wow. Wow, but you are lacking brains. A melee focused army is going to have different melee units. The enemy ties up your anti-vehicle melee unit with a tar pit mob? Retreat out and assault it, ON YOUR TURN, with your anti-mob melee unit. Now they can’t keep tar pitting you or pushing you back. The fact that I had to point that out to you speak VOLUMES.

            “This is either you not understanding the movement rules or you lying.” – This coming from the person that can’t figure out how to avoid a tar pit unit. LOL!!!!!!!!!!

            “So, It was not me who lied. This is now proven in this post.” – Well we’ve proved that you’re not smart enough to avoid a tar pit unit. AND we’ve proved that you have lied. AND we’ve proved that you are biased.

            Satisfied now?

          • Nyyppä

            Well, that’s one huge fallacy bundle from you. Try to be truthful next time and maybe I’ll waste my time burying your argument under facts again. ^^

          • TexBlade

            That’s a long winded way to admit you’re wrong, and that you’ve got no defense.

          • Nyyppä

            I agree that you think so.

          • TexBlade

            That’s adorable. You’ve copied Farseerer’s retort b/c I destroyed your “Awww, you are cute. :D” retort before. Thanks for admitting you were wrong and doubling down on the lack of defense.

          • Walter Vining

            AROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! FENRIS HJOLDA!

          • The Rout

            wish i could upvote more, i geniunely shout Fenrys Hjolda when i complete a particularly successful combat phase, killed 10 termies with 1 wulfen once, good times 🙂

          • It’s all fun and games until we start drop podding blood claws on his gun lines. It’s probably too much to hope for Wolfen 😉

          • Marik
        • NNextremNN

          They always had and now all others get this too. If anything this is a nerv to Tau by taking their specials and give them to others.

          • Nyyppä

            Which does not make them worse but rather make others vaquely like them.

        • kingcobra668

          You sure assume a lot for someone constantly telling people not to assume….

          • Nyyppä

            Tell me something I have assumed based on what we know that is unreasonable.

          • AEZ

            You assume Tau will have lots of shots: not unreasonable.
            You assume their hit roll and the strength and damage of those shots is overpowered: unreasonable.
            You assume other armies don’t have fast cavalry or deepstriking that can hurt a gunline:unreasonable.
            You assume all current special abilities will remain: unreasonable.
            You assume shooting is overpowered: unreasonable.

          • Nyyppä

            Over powered compared to what?

            You assume that the Tau player is stupid enough to not screen your assault units: Unreasonable.

            You assume that GW lied when they told us that factions keep their play styles: Unreasonable.

            You assume that players playing shooting armies are stupid enough to not take advantage of the new movement rules: Unreasonable.

            See? 2 can play that game.

          • AEZ

            If you buy screening units you have less shooters.
            Saying they keep playstyles doesn’t mean that playstyle is overpowered.
            If you deploy on the backline.. there is nowhere you can go.
            2 can play that game.. sure.. play.. but you just showed you are a very bad player.. and you assumptions show you are probably a bad 40K player too.

          • Nyyppä

            Only if those screening units can’t shoot.
            I don’t think the gun line playstyle is OP. I think that the core rules make the opposite play style weak.

            You don’t have to move if you have time to shoot everything anyway.

            What you see as being a bad player is just me assuming that my opponents are not vegetables.

          • Haighus

            Not to mention we have no idea of points costs- Tau units could cost more than they do now- effective units are fine so long as they are appropriately priced.

        • AircoolUK

          You really don’t have anywhere near enough information to come to such conclusions.

          You’re judging all the information in the context of the previous edition.

          • Nyyppä

            We know how many things work and have a good idea of the rest just because the rules are almost an exact copy of the AoS rules. We know that the already revealed rules are very biased against melee and hybrid armies. We can be very sure that Tau is not a melee or hybrid army. We know that the concept of Tau is to be the best shooting army while being very lacking in melee.

            Now, if you can’t add 1 and 1 together with that info it’s not because we don’t know everything but rather because logic is just not your thing.

          • Emprah

            You are saltier than the dead sea mate lololol.

          • Nyyppä

            I get that you don’t have a counter argument but also can’t admit that I am right. Thus you have a need to try to shame me into silence. It’s fine. It’s not working but it’s fine that you have that need. I don’t mind.

          • Walter Vining

            Lets see….from your comments alone, you are assuming that supporting fire will apply every time. I promise you almost 100% that it will be once per phase. even if you can just walk out of combat, you are likely going to get murdered still anyway so how are your dead models going to walk out. with supporting fire being only once per phase and I assault across your entire army, getting it all into combat on turn 1 you either will evaporate on turn 1, or you will evaporate on turn 2. and yes that’s some assuming from me.
            btw I also play tau, how much do you want for your stuff?

          • Nyyppä

            Actually I don’t even take the supporting fire in to count. It’s pretty meaningless. It does not matter if the fleeing models survived. What matters is that now your melee unit is out in the open.

            Who is stupid enough to let the opponent charge everything or anything on turn 1?

            I don’t play Tau anymore. I traded that broken faction away and got nids instead.

          • Walter Vining

            don’t care, will still buy it. how much?

          • Nyyppä

            Well, let’s say 2k for may nids and 4k for my chaos. That’s €, not including postage.

          • Walter Vining

            I will wait till after you official rage quit and stop charging commission level pricing for something that’s probably not even commission level work

          • Nyyppä

            Most of it’s not even painted. That’s just the rough value of the plastic. 😀

          • Walter Vining

            ill still wait for you to rage quit. that way the bottom drops even further. and your value for plastic seems to be new cost, its used now so not even worth that.

          • Nyyppä

            That’s the price. Take it or leave it. I don’t care either way.

          • Steven Hyche

            Lots of armies get first turn charges even on board edge in AoS. The whole destruction faction and many chaos builds.

          • Nyyppä

            And? This is 40k.

          • TexBlade

            Well you’re the one saying we can assume how the rest of the rules will play out b/c this is edition is based on AoS. According to Steven H there, AoS has lots of armies that get first turn charges. Combine that with your statement that 8th Ed is based on AoS and we can assume that lots of armies in 40k will have first turn charges.

          • Nyyppä

            In theory any army in 8th can have 1st turn charges. Why is this important?

          • TexBlade

            You’re the one going on and on about 8th edition favoring shooting far more than melee. First turn charges against shooting armies is clearly not preferential treatment to shooting armies.

          • Nyyppä

            And yet the movement rules make that ability almost meaningless.

          • TexBlade

            Yes because having half your army forced to retreat from combat at the beginning of your turn one which means half your army can’t run, shoot, or assault is meaningless.

          • Nyyppä

            So, we are now assuming that the opponet is stupid enough to not screen the assaults. Roger roger.

          • TexBlade

            So you’re wasting half you army points on screening units? That’s pretty stupid.

          • Nyyppä

            If things are even remotely priced like they are now 15%, roughly, will be enough to buy the time needed to table the assault army. Let’s say 20% and be on the safe side.

          • TexBlade

            No it won’t. Turn 1 make contact with your front lines. Pile in move to drag additional units into combat. Now the melee army is tying up more units in assault than it charged AND more units than it used in the charge. And as you said a unit that retreats can do nothing else the turn it retreats, so the melee army will always have an at least 1 to 1 ratio in denying enemy units a turn of attack.

          • Nyyppä

            Nope. I’m not bad enough a gamer to let you do that and I know no one who is except you obviously. At best you’ll get one unit. That’s assuming that the gun line did not start. If it did you’ll most likely get nothing.

            Yet again why would anyone care if the meat shield retreats? It’s job was to stop your charge so that the big hitters get to do their jobs. It’s doing it’s job excellently. Great success!

          • TexBlade

            “I’m not bad enough a gamer to let you do that and I know no one who is
            except you obviously. At best you’ll get one unit. That’s assuming that
            the gun line did not start. If it did you’ll most likely get nothing.” – Oh my God! I didn’t realize I was speaking to the number one tournament player in the world!!!! With his unpainted nid and chaos army that he’ll sell for a mere 6k, not including shipping and handling of course.

            “Yet again why would anyone care if the meat shield retreats? It’s job
            was to stop your charge so that the big hitters get to do their jobs.
            It’s doing it’s job excellently. Great success!” – And the front line chargers have done theirs. They contacted your meat shield and pushed them back, now you’re going to waste your big guns on the front line chargers clearing the path for the real killer melee units to assault your big guns without meat shield nor friendly units in the way. Good job you just played into the hands of the melee army and lost.

    • Geko747

      1st turn charge? Would love to see Tau handle that.

      • Nyyppä

        Who forces you to deploy anything in to the frontline?

        • Alvin Adorno

          world eaters legion rules.

          • Nyyppä

            New edition. New rules. No reason to think that they get the same benefits.

          • AEZ

            Well somehow that doesn’t count for the Tau I presume? Inconsequent … it’s a sign of a low IQ.

          • Nyyppä

            They said they kept the factions and their respective play style. Tau plays like a gun line because it’s designed to play like that. Are you saying that they lied?

          • AEZ

            I’m saying a gunline doesn’t have to be overpowered. AoS proves it.

          • Nyyppä

            That is true.

          • TexBlade

            New edition. New rules. No reason to think that Tau get the same benefits.

          • Nyyppä

            No reason to think that they would not. It’s what Tau is after all.

          • TexBlade

            Then the same logic applies to world eaters legion. Either Tau will remain close to what they are like you claim here, and thus so will all other armies, or world eaters legion won’t retain their unique army rules like you said above and thus Tau are just as likely to have their army unique rules removed.

            So which of your two conflicting statements is it?

          • Nyyppä

            World Eaters are about wrecking face. Not about speed. I agree that they will be about wrecking face in 8th too just like Tau are and will be about overwhelming firepower.
            There’s no conflict, just acceptance that GW had to do something to make Khorne playable after nerfing KDK and they could not figure out anything other than to give them a remote chance for turn 1 assaults in TL.

          • TexBlade

            So your earlier statement about WE losing their ability to wreck face was wrong. Thanks for clarifying that.

          • Nyyppä

            Never said that their ability to wreck face would seize to exist. That’s all your imagination.

          • TexBlade

            You implied it right here, “New edition. New rules. No reason to think that they get the same benefits.” Wrecking face is a benefit to a melee army.

          • Nyyppä

            No, I did not. Khorne will still be about wrecking face even if their benefits would be taken away from WE. Then it’s just regular zerkers, still aiming to wreck face.

          • TexBlade

            “Khorne will still be about wrecking face even if their benefits would be taken away from WE.”

            Ok so now we’re back to armies not keeping their current benefits. That means that there is no reason to assume Tau are going to be OP gun line.

            Thanks for clearing that up.

          • Nyyppä

            Not op as a gun line. Gun lines being op against melee armies. According to the rules we know.

          • TexBlade

            Which are not all the rules, which means you are making the assumption that the current melee/shooting balance of the released rules is representative of the melee/shooting balance of the entire rule set.

          • Nyyppä

            I know it’s not all the rules. The point is that unless melee units are really, really good the movement rules make them really, really bad.

        • souledgar

          Rhinos zooming in an pooping a squad of marines in charging distance, Drop Pods slamming down behind the gun line, pooping out more marines. Supporting fire being retained or no, Tau will need to rethink their strategies regardless thanks to charging out of vehicles being a thing.

          • ZeeLobby

            Eh. Will just need to bubble wrap like we used to. It’s a good thing. Means you can’t just take 5 riptide lists.

          • TexBlade

            Bubble wrapping might not offer the protection it currently does since the pile-in move in 8th can drag in outside units without giving a chance to overwatch.

          • ZeeLobby

            Eh, it’s still doable, if spaced smartly. That said I think it’s funny that templates were removed to reduce the amount of tedious spacing, and now new mechanics are added to make spacing all the more important. I guess without templates it’s pretty easy to form a 3″ gap and bunch up units.

          • TexBlade

            It would be poetic if the Tau Supporting Fire range was reduced such that units lending supporting fire have to be within the range of getting dragged into melee via pile-in.

            And I agree that bubble wrapping will still work and be a thing in 8th. I think, or hope, it just won’t be as fool proof as it currently stands.

          • Nyyppä

            So they move something like 24″, are still able to let the squad out and that squad can still charge?

            Pods can be broken. That is true. There is no “behind the gun line” though.

        • AEZ

          Objectives

          • Nyyppä

            How are they forcing that? What makes you think that tabling the opponent is not enough to win the game?

          • AEZ

            What makes you think shooting will allow you to table opponents. In AoS shooting can be usefull.. but will never table opponents.. melee can. Now 40K is more shooting oriented… but if GW doesn’t want it that way.. it will not be that way.. it’s all about the numbers they put on warscrolls.

          • Nyyppä

            GW did not want deathstars either but lo and behold, here they are.

            At is all about the scrolls. True. It’s not hopeless, just not encouraging.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            It can be done, have pulled it off with wood elves and tomb kings. its not common but certainly doable.

          • AEZ

            Well most troops would have trouble killing themselves in 5 turns with shooting.

          • Steven Hyche

            Tabling isnt auto win in aos

          • Nyyppä

            This is 40k.

          • Steven Hyche

            Tabling isnt auto win in aos

    • Karru

      Nah, the real winners are Power Armour armies. Space Marines and, if we get lucky, Chaos Space Marines.

      Shooting is catered towards those with high base accuracy, so your Space Marines having that 3+ to hit can shoot their Heavy Weapons without any major problems while moving. Cover is catered towards armies with good saves, while it is purposefully meant to hurt armies with bad ones. Space Marines are almost always guaranteed a 2+/3+ save no matter what is used against them while and Ork Boy will be getting a 5+ against base weapons and 6+ or none against depending on the weapon.

      Space Marines are harder to kill, so the moral system also favours them heavily. Ld 7 requires at least 2 casualties before they can lose a single model to Moral, not that easy when they are getting that 2+ save almost every time.

      Rhino Rushing will be powerful tactic again. Heck, we might even see total devastation using Drop Pods.

      Tau will be strong, but not nearly as powerful as Space Marines will be. Tau still suffers from their lack of aiming ability and need to have Marker Lights to actually hit properly. They also suffer from a mediocre Ld, so killing a handful of them per squad can easily lead to a unit wipe.

      • Tau could go to BS3+ as well. Space Marines might also be twice as expensive as now. Remember 50 point Rhinos and 70point Bolterbacks?

        • Karru

          Here’s the thing, if there is something that can be said with pretty much 100% guarantee, is that GW will never make the game “cheaper”.

          Every single edition has done the same thing. Lowered the price of models so one has to buy more. A sensible solution would be to make Space Marines more expensive, yes, but that wouldn’t be good for business. No, they want to make sure people buy more, so the most likely scenario is to keep the price the same or reduce it slightly, while other armies like Orks and the like are made even cheaper in points. GW has a hard time when it comes to thinking logically how to get more people interested in the game.

          • Astmeister

            I think they have changed their ideas since the new CEO. Already AoS began a different technique: Just make all units viable so that you can/have to buy all units. This is much better than always just selling the super units. Because this helps to sell all the miniatures line, which is available anyway.

          • Karru

            This hasn’t been the case in 40k, even after the change. The Pink Horrors, Traitor Legions and “free” upgrades from the benefits are just some of the latest examples.

            They keep making things cheaper as a whole to make sure people need to get more. It’s a simple business strategy, which is unfortunately one of the main reasons why the balance has been so abysmal.

          • Astmeister

            But 7th edition in general was still a child of the old CEO. I assume that everything will get much better now. Stupid me… 😉

          • AircoolUK

            Then perhaps they can normalise points values by raising the overall minimum points allowance for armies.

          • Muninwing

            according to some ex-designers, it was when the upper management let the Sales team dictate to the Design team that quality started tanking, back in 5th (tail of 6th for WHF)

          • Making Orks, Guardsmen, etc. cheaper and leaving Marines the same is the same as raising the Marine points in game terms.

          • Karru

            Maybe not directly, but the number of other armies outside Space Marines will be much, much lower than they already are.

            That’s my core problem with this. I’d like to face something else beyond Space Marines for a change. People don’t play Orks, Tyranids, Guard Infantry Armies and the like for one huge reason. They are extremely expensive. Their point costs are low to compensate their lack of power. In the perfect world, the elite armies would be made more expensive point wise, a lot more expensive, so horde armies can be balanced better. This way they can encourage people to play other armies beyond Space Marines.

            My Space Marine army of 5000pts costs the same as my 3000pts Ork army when it comes to money, that is not a good way to encourage people to play armies that require “more” to play.

          • AircoolUK

            That’s definitely one aspect to the game. The prospect of having to buy, glue and paint an army with a high model count just puts me off.

            However, if we once again look to AoS, we’re seeing a lot of large models (with a price tag to match), so perhaps we’ll see a lot more medium sized models such as Dreadnoughts and their Xeno equivalent. Or at least ‘battlions’ that offer the chance to take armies where the majority of your models are medium sized with the usual Hero and Infantry tax.

            I’d quite happily field a ‘Mad Max’ style Ork army with buggies and wagons etc… Maybe we’ll get to see Ork Motorbikes in the future?

          • Ben_S

            Wouldn’t simply playing games at lower points achieve the same effect?

          • Karru

            Not really. The problem is that this game “needs” two players in order to function properly. The Ork player might want to play 1000pts games, because that’s how he can play a “balanced” game without having to pay 2/3 more than your average SM player just to play the game. The problem is that not all armies like to play 1000pts constantly. Especially after 7th edition where their numbers were almost equal to your average “horde” army thanks to the free stuff they got.

            Trying to find someone to play 1000pts games with you might be pretty problematic.

          • Ben_S

            I agree that it can be difficult finding players at non-standard points levels. But making marines more expensive, leaving Orks the same, and playing at
            (say) 1850 points would have the same effect as leaving marines the
            same, making Orks cheaper, and playing at (say) 1500 points.

            So, if GW are reducing the cost of other armies, the response should be to adjust the game size accordingly. (Though I agree that a few people can’t change the widely established standards.)

            However, I suspect that, if marines were made more expensive, as you suggest, it would just tend to push the standard from 1500-1850 up to 1850-2250 (or whatever), so they could still bring all their toys. This would make the effect indistinguishable from a points reduction for everyone else anyway.

          • Muninwing

            they are the source of the repeating phrase “barrier to entry” — so they at least understand that to get new players the initial costs have to be lower.

            by dropping the books, that’s at least doable.

            but they have no reason to drop prices on models. in fact, they regularly do drop effective prices — the dreaded “price increases” that people complain about are usually inflation adjustments for multiple years’ worth. the years they don’t, their product costs slightly less… and some kits have never had real price drops.

            this isn’t like computers, where prices remain high because performance increases. or like other electronics, where prices drop due to volume and efficiency for the same effective product. it’s more like fishing gear, where suppliers can charge what they want because it’s specialized and their customers are people with enough money to have spare time.

      • Nyyppä

        That is a good poin. Except rhino rushes etc. will be weak. Better than they are now, but still weak.

        • Alvin Adorno

          or they can make rules that apply to foot troops apply to transports like the above mentioned world eater legion trait of moving 3 inches before the game.

          • Nyyppä

            Can. They can do a lot of things. What makes you think that they will?

      • TenDM

        Who says Heavy Weapons can’t modify Hit rolls? I know they’re trying to make the rules less complicated, but what you’re pointing out is a pretty obvious imbalance when playing, so they might have thrown something like that in to balance it. Imagine stronger rapid fire weapons with worse hits while double tapping.

        • Karru

          This is Games Workshop we are talking here.

          Also, the problem with the “testing” they’ve done is this; the people they contacted seemed to be from the top tournament circuit. The problem is that these people most likely followed the current 40k meta with their armies. This leads to me believing their armies are mostly Eldar, Space Marines, Ad Mech, Tau and Necrons. Armies that are very powerful in the coming system due to the things I mentioned.

          I have my doubts that they properly tested Orks, Tyranids and Imperial Guard before they made their final decisions on “balance”. They looked at the system and though “this will work out well for everyone!” but didn’t actually think about the “bad save” that also have low ballistic skill.

        • Muninwing

          let’s face it, the “we’re trying to make this less complicated” has already been disproven by so many of their choices.

          “Most power fields, etc. are separate saves that are taken in addition to other saves just like FnP of today, they may or may not ignore mortal wounds on a case by case basis”

          a case-by-case basis means that there are more individual rules to keep track of. supposedly looking up rules in the USR section was too complicated despite applying to all armies… but sorting through which not-invuln does what and which ignores what is actually more of a burden on the player.

    • AircoolUK

      Not you again 🙂

      By wiping the slate clean, they should be able to get units, armies and playstyles balanced.

      • Nyyppä

        Absolutely. Should. But this is GW. They think that 3 WKs are well balanced against one LoS.

        • Tirelion

          Go home troll, no one wants you and your insanely jaded comments here.

          • Nyyppä

            Awww. Cute.

          • Farseerer

            My god. Why are you even on here except to troll? You’ve been nonsensically whining and heralding the 40k Apocalypse for as long as I’ve been reading the comments sections on BoLS.

            You must be a hoot to play against (which I doubt you actually do)

          • Nyyppä

            Only since 7th made it impossible to use pre necron codices that were not imperials. Besides how are facts nonsensical whining or are you saying that anything that does not cater to fanboyish narrative is nonsensical whining regardless of how true the points are?

          • Farseerer

            There must be an awful lot of GW fanboys around if everyone who thinks your attitude stinks is one.

            Calling people ”Cute” when they give an argument you don’t like is not good discussion. The idea that you think people should take you seriously when you’re being dismissive of anything you don’t agree with boggles my mind.

          • Nyyppä

            Not really. There are plenty of people who just don’t get the power difference of for example sisters and eldar. Those people tend to play the top armies and think that winning a game with netlists agains fluffy tier 3 armies is about skill.
            Those people too think that facts they don’t understand are just about bad attitude.

            I don’t call people cute because I don’t like their arguments. If they have arguments I’ll either counter them or adjust my standing on the thing of they are right and I am wrong.
            I call people cute when their comments are mainly about trying to silence me with personal attacks to hide their argument’s weakness.

          • TexBlade

            I was on the fence about taking you seriously this entire time, but the fact that you used Sisters vs Eldar as an example just sealed it for me. You can’t be taken seriously even at the best of times. Thanks for the laugh at work. I’ll have to figure out an excuse that won’t get me trouble.

    • Atharius

      The part about spending command points to get another charge immediately after destroying a unit in combat is a real boon for Tau. My orkz will really suffer from that one.

    • DJ860

      Let’s hope you choose the latter.

    • JacersErasers

      This one comment has triggered so many people it’s shocking. Honestly everyone replying and arguing over it is just wasting time, and is making an issue over nothing. We all know they’re wasting time because it’s Orks or go home.

      WWWAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!

      • Nyyppä

        I hope you are right. That or CSM. Or nids. There can be no heroes if the good guys just roflstomp the bad guys

        • Parthis

          I’ve always felt that 40K has no good guys, at all, apart from the ‘nids, who have no agenda other than their base nature; to eat.

          (in fluff, at least. GW’s marketing clearly puts the imperium as the good guys…)

          • Nyyppä

            Let’s say “the defenders of the current way of life” then.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            Also known as “douchecanoes”

    • Marik
  • MarcoT

    Litterly everything sounds good on that list. Re-rolling charge ranges with command points and charging from vehicles is especially interesting, and I thoroughly love free casualty removal. So clean, so nice.

    Now let’s hope they actually got the points costs reasonably balanced and it’s a new golden age.

    • Maitre Lord Ironfist

      realy like the Charge from Vehicles. Maybe LR gets some buff. But finaly Repentia do not need a LR as default anymore x) yay

    • Astmeister

      They also have to develop a good balance between units and codizes. Otherwise it will end up like 7th edition WHFB. Perfect core rules but bad internal and external balancing of the army books.

    • Muninwing

      it’s going to be a very different game.

      though if they don’t bother to balance points out, it’s going to be all for nothing…

  • Interesting. I like a lot of these though some of them don’t make sense (grammatically and game wise – no impact on moving through cover!?) so I’d be curious to see how much of them are true (if any at all). I’m liking the addition to modifier rolls though – makes it much cleaner. More thoughts here – http://www.3plusplus.net/2017/05/40k-8th-edition-rumors/

    • Astmeister

      8th Edition WHFB and AoS do not have modifiers to move through terrain as well. And the 8th 40k edition is pretty much AoS version 2. So I would bet on this rule disappearing. However, I also do not like the idea of terrain not slowing down units.

      • That is intensely frustrating if true. They had finally figured it out with the flat -X” to moving through terrain and we now go to…nothing.

        • AircoolUK

          Terrain will have it’s unique rules I expect as in AoS. No Move modifier for moving through terrain doesn’t mean that individual terrain pieces won’t have a modifier.

          Look to see how AoS does things and extrapolate; minimum blanket rules with the detail in each warscroll.

          • I hope so – I will wait and see but feel they had already had it nailed with their most recent edition in that one sense (while making everything else more random).

            Any of the terrain pieces silly like burning forests cause DX wounds?

          • AircoolUK

            I wouldn’t know. For our AoS games we scrap superfluous terrain rules (Mysterious Landscapes) as its just another thing to forget about whilst playing. As far as I’m aware, a wood (for example) doesn’t have any rules beyond providing cover. Meanwhile, avoid Sylvaneth camped in a Sylvaneth Wood as they get a multitude of bonuses. However, a Sylvaneth Wood has its own Warscroll.

          • Pascalnz

            wow, the mysterious landscapes are super important, I’ve only played a few games but, things like ensorcelled and the sacrfice one, won me games. they are what made me choose to go on one side. Literally every game they have been important.

          • AircoolUK

            I don’t doubt it. It adds an extra level of depth to taking/making a wide berth of terrain items. In fact, having terrain effects that influence the game by giving you bonuses replaces the need for abstract objectives.

            However, for me, I just don’t use them (ok, I’ll admit that we’ve played many ‘Death World’ games over the decades, but we have a GM for those to deal with all the nasty ways that could get you killed.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            There are only 3 of us left playing it, but yeah we NEVER used that, it was just annoying( I am the only sylvaneth player that I have ever met and I wont use wyldwoods, I hate that particular terrain piece model) I do have a nice forest dragon though 😀

          • Muninwing

            i still don’t see how that’s more efficient than having more standardized USRs and putting them all in the core book…

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            You do realize all pieces of terrain currently have unique rules in 40k right now, and no one plays with them, lol.

        • Astmeister

          I copy AircoolUK’s answer. Besides I think that there will not be any “to move” modifiers. Afaik there are none in AoS.

  • Wampasaurus

    “Characters cannot join units”
    I simply cannot accept the idea of that being correct or a game rule. How are any of your Warlords/ Independent Characters/ Uniques (whatever you want to call them) would be unable to join another unit. I would venture most of them ( a third of my Blood Angels codex! 15/44 entries) have a substantial amount of characters. That is NOT including any unit which had a Sergeant in it which are also characters, though perhaps not in this edition.

    • This is something from editions past though you had the opportunity to join still. Removing this is likely to stop all the silliness of deathstars. We also have no idea what the characters look like now, they could be much beefier and hiding them in squads where you pick models that die might be too good.

      • AircoolUK

        AoS manages fine without characters joining units. Instead, they confer certain abilities to a unit within a certain range. As intervening models block line of sight (except models from the shooting unit) it’s not too hard to shield characters. With templates gone, there’s also no need to keep units spread out whilst leaving lots of visible gaps.

        • TexBlade

          If the characters cannot join rule is true then I hope the “characters cannot be targeted unless closest enemy or with 12 inches” is true too. I think those two need to be a package deal because one without the other just won’t work well in game.

    • Astmeister

      And again: It is the same system like in AoS. It seems to work there fine and kills a lot of potential abuse of deathstars and such.
      You should not thing of 8th 40k in any way as the editions before. Just read the AoS rules (just 4 pages) and apply this mechanics to 40k.

      • Wampasaurus

        Yeah this doesn’t seem to be relevant. Characters (Heroes in the case of AoS) can be targeted normally in AoS. Also 40k has a significantly larger number of units that have the ability to fire a ranged attack. Characters seem likely to be shot off the table before they even have a chance to participate in a battle. I dunno. Its weird and this IS after all at this point simple rumors and speculation. Nobody has any concrete images of ACTUAL rules yet, so let’s wait and see

        • Astmeister

          Dude reade the rumours. You cannot shot characters unless it is the closest target or you are within 12 inch.

          • AircoolUK

            Those ‘rumours’ look like someone has just shotgunned a bunch of ideas in the hope that some will hit so they can claim that ‘they called it’ if just one of them turns out to be true.

            I remember some of the AoS rumours which had people tearing chunks out of each other, only to turn out to be absolute cobblers.

          • orionburn

            Exactly. Half of these rumors are all theories that have been posted time and time again in the comments section. In a few weeks we’ll get an article stating we need to get rid of all these false rumors going around.

          • Astmeister

            But still you are commenting on these rumours.

          • AircoolUK

            Sure, it’s fun to speculate. I’m looking forward to the new edition. Perhaps the biggest thing to happen to 40K since its original release.

            I’m hyped, excited and just enjoying the chat.

          • Astmeister

            I also think that there is not much sense in judging the new edition from the core rules. Actually all the core rules of all editions have been okay until now. Just some (or a lot of) codizes have introduced imbalance. However this might be much better, now that all armies get an update from the start on.

      • Matthew Pomeroy

        I have been playing AoS since pretty much day 1 and those 4 pages don’t really say anything at all about heroes and units.

    • Parthis

      I’m sure this will go down like a lead balloon with some people here, but AoS does not allow characters (HEROes in AoS) to join units… and it works really, really well.

      You can’t just hide them in a blob anymore. This really is the end of Deathstars. It’s all about finding synergy, playing well, not over committing.

      Again some will hate this, but, AoS is a much more tactical game than 7th Ed 40K, and if the above is true, I am happy.

      • Wampasaurus

        Understand as a Tyranids player I’m delighted by the idea of it. I have so few characters in my codex it changes almost nothing. I simply can’t wait to swarm over some smug loyalist character with a 30 model swarm of Hormagaunts and tear them apart. It just seems to fail to address the issue of nearly every unit in the game having a ranged attack and many of them being in range turn 1. Bye bye character driven armies…..

        • Astmeister

          Haven’t you read the rumours above? A character can only be targeted if he is the next target or you are within 12 inch of him. Problem solved.

          • Wampasaurus

            Yes I actually did read that as well as the rest of the article before I decided to post, thanks. I think people are fundamentally misunderstanding the exponential number of ranged attacks armies in Warhammer 40k have versus in Age of Sigmar.

          • Astmeister

            That is the reason why they decided that you cannot simply shot at characters from everywhere. But just as the next target or 12 inch. So I guess that is their compensation for it.

          • Wampasaurus

            I’m starting to believe you can’t read. I posted about that part already. Yet still you persist in bringing it up 3 DIFFERENT TIMES. Yes. I read the VERY NEXT POINT ON THE LIST. 12″ or the closest target. There are many ways to get a unit within 12″ or to make them the closest target. It’s really not that hard to accomplish

          • Astmeister

            Calm down!
            It might be “not very difficult” to get one unit within 12 inch of a character. But will this be enough to finish a character? I don’t think so. The wounds of characters will be much higher then now, you will almost always have a save roll and the weapons presumably have no instant death.
            I do not say, it is impossible to kill a character… but it should not be super easy.
            And again: See AoS. It works there just fine. So there is just little adjustement to be done in 40k where you have so much guns. -> 12 inch and closest target.

          • Muninwing

            if you can still doubletap rapid fire weapons, but cannot if you moved (which has, i think, been in at least one earlier edition; they seem to change the specifics of RF in each edition), then the ability of many armies to effectively maximize their “approach and kill” to a character is far less…

        • orionburn

          There’s always going to be a trade off. I think Nids are going to be rewarded with greater movement. Nids still have a fair amount of shooting unless you’re running a crap load of Hormagaunts. Yes, they are never going to have the firepower compared to SM or Tau. Hoping for the best and that Nids will be a competitive army in 8th.

        • Nyyppä

          Speaking of nids if they still mess up the synapse it’s not even funny anymore.

      • wibbling

        Playing well? Playing well? Good grief, don’t let that one out. Next you’ll be suggesting players should adapt their tactics to the new game!

        As Ted said : Careful now!

    • Tirelion

      So far, everything from GW has alluded to this being the case. Characters cannot join units in AoS either.

    • TenDM

      I agree for the most part, but GW seem to really be out to get Deathstars, so they might nuke it with a rule like this and then phase it back in next year when they’re more comfortable with the new balance.

      You’re spot on about Blood Angels and armies like it though. The Eldar have Phoenix Lords which exist to be folded into Aspect Warrior units. I think a much bigger part of the 40k model line relies on things like that. A ton of models become un-sellable. That’d be the biggest obstacle in the way.

      • TexBlade

        We also don’t know how many of the current models with the character rule are going to retain that character rule in the new edition.
        It could happen that models like the Phoenix Lords drop the character rule but MUST be added to a unit of their matching Aspect Warrior while models like Eldrad retain the character rule.

    • generalchaos34

      sgts still exist in AoS, they are part of their squad and usually get an extra attack and some sort of special piece of gear.

  • Andrew

    Eh, I’m turning to jerky from all the salt.

  • Solotaire Confinement

    New standard size bases now 35mm and all existing armies have to be upgraded to be played!

    • Tirelion

      Yeah….this one hurts…..going to cost a significant amount of time and money.

  • Alvin Adorno

    if they keep the legion rules from the latest chaos book the world eaters with the 3 inc predeployment move will bash lots of face.

  • Marco Marantz

    hhmm…even though i never use deepstrike because i have terrible luck with it, i kinda think the potential for units to die or go way off prevented it from being abused.

  • Rainthezangoose

    Limiting people shooting out of an opening top vehicle​ makes no sense thematically and will hurt some of the weakest armies in the game : shrugs:

    • Pascalnz

      you have literally no idea about points values or what armies will be strong or not.

      stop thinking so 7th, you’ll feel better:)

      • Sweetcurse
      • Karru

        Actually, we do have some idea. The points will remain roughly the same or lower. This has been GW MO since forever. They want to increase the average size of armies so people buy more. Basic business tactics.

        • The Rout

          I both agree and disagree, yes GW usually do a point reduction to encourage sales but there are notable exceptions.

          Kill team is very low entry level, same with shadow wars. Hell, even AoS (which 8th is clearly based on) could be played with literally one model each.

          I reckon we will see a reduction in terms of monetary costs to be able to play a small game of 8th with a scaling system for bigger games. More command points for filling more FoC slots for example. This means the entry level cost is lower but the cost to play your standard/ big games will increase a touch. Win, win for GW, easier to entice newbies while also enticing vets to spend more and diversify their range.

          • generalchaos34

            I got into sigmar on a cheap Skaven intro from ebay and now I have 4! armies because I limited myself to 1000ish points and I kept getting good deals on the armies and 1000 points is really easy to reach for under $150 for a lot of armies (and its a really fun point range to play at) So I can definitely see them pushing collecting more factions over game size.

          • The Rout

            My point exactly, well our point now I guess 🙂

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            thats where shadow war will really be a gateway drug kind of game, you start small, then want some more, then some more and next you know, you are at 4-8 armies, the initial hate on AoS allowed some of us to pick up really big armies really cheap too, this edition of 40k may be the same.

          • Muninwing

            6th had a lot of hate, and armies weren’t ditched wholesale like when GW killed their oldest product and allowed you to use the same models to play their new game.

            8th edition 40k will at least be the next edition of the same game. they don’t have to lie/push/repeat to get people to believe that.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            most likely it will be well received. but its also obvious from some forums not everyone is happy in the direction its going so it wouldn’t hurt to check ebay after drop for some good deals.

          • Muninwing

            it’s always been like this though. collectors collect.

            i think it’s a clear sign that the last leadership of GW (and i think it wasn’t the CEO but his lieutenants, especially whoever was heading up sales and was given influence over the creative/design team) really did not take the time to understand their market or their product.

            a better game with more balance and more varied kinds of fun (competitive, narrative, campaign, pickup, beer & pretzels, etc) will attract more players. the short-term strategy of aiming for the competitive ones by codex-creeping new models into sales boosts was part of corporate culture that did not translate well into gaming culture.

        • Muninwing

          except a major reason to redo all the armies at once would be to recenter the points so nobody has a temporary advantage.

          so really, we do not know.

  • LordKrungharr

    My Thunderwulf Lords may not like not joining their smaller counterparts. Nor will Abaddon appreciate not being in a big juicy deathstar with Cypher, a Cabal, and 3 Nurgle Obliterators.

    But there is more glory to be had on one’s own I suppose….

    • piglette

      Well it says you can’t target characters more than 12 inches away. So he could move along with the death star and all assault together.

  • piglette

    I’m stoked for this. The rules have always been the weakest part of WH40k. I would say about 85% of these changes sound positive to me right off the bat.

  • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

    there are some cool rules mechanisms here. The only thing that worries me from this list is the vertical movement and difficult terrain rules. Terrain is so important, I really felt the loss when bikes and monstrous creatures were allowed to climb vertical levels. It will be really odd if height is more or less ignored.

    • orionburn

      Lot I like. Lot I hate. Glad this is all rumor stuff and not fact just yet. The loss of vertical movement doesn’t make sense. I can’t see that one being legit.

      Good if deep strike mishaps are gone; bad for the “player gets to move your model.” Scatter dice seems like it would be easier than your opponent going back and forth when you’re placing models.

    • TexBlade

      Never did like how some players put bikes on the second floor or above in ruins. We already apply a lot of suspension of disbelief but that’s too much for me.

      • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

        I’ve seen Dreads and all sorts balanced up there!

        • TexBlade

          I can sort of/almost understand a Dread up on the second floor since it has arms & legs, though the Dreads with two gun arms definitely shouldn’t be up there. Really can’t figure out how a bike on two wheels got to the second floor of building that didn’t have any staircase or the like.

          Now you’ve got me picturing a Dread with a powerfist trying to pull itself up to the second floor, and it’s rather entertaining.

          • generalchaos34

            The problem is the more odd or specific restrictions we put on unit types and such the more bogged down the game gets in the main rules (like does he have hands or gun arms? How do weird MCs working into this?). Now there is two ways around this just make the bike keyword have a specific restriction (and they wont do this because they will want to expand and change keywords in the future) or you can have a rule on the model itself “Bikes: you cannot go up 2nd floors in buildings” but more than likely they will keep it simple and let the game move fast.

          • TexBlade

            I agree that a specific rule would be too much because there are likely thousands of rules that could be created in that vein.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            None of GWs ruins look sturdy enough to support a flock of pigeons on the second floor let alone a dreadnought!

          • Muninwing

            my 3 year old thinks that super cars have sticky wheels so they can climb… maybe it’s that?

          • TexBlade

            Your kid has good imagination. I like it.

  • mrbleak

    I like these but can we pls get rid of Apoc, Str D, Super Heavies, F… Primarch!, and all that jazz that ruined the game.

    • Str D is already gone. You’re not going to be getting rid of the super heavy vehicles though. They are here to stay.

      • TexBlade

        Super Heavies and Gargantuans are getting a nerf this edition. There will be damage tables for them and as they get wounded they will suffer negatives to all kinds of things. They might not be able to fire specific gun types, or have less attacks in assault; their str may go down or not be able to move as far.

      • Muninwing

        IIRC, an early rumor removed distinctions between superheavies and other vehicles. but what’s a superheavy now will have better and beefier rules to correlate with the current strength level.

        i’d be ok with that. some superheavies are better than others, and slapping a label on there just gave people stuff to hate.

  • No information about casualty removal?

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      The article said the owning player picks the model(s) that die.

      • Ah, I missed that. Thank you.

        • TexBlade

          Owning player picks model, but any model in a unit that is below full wounds must have the wounds allocated to it first. According to these rumors anyhow.

          • Muninwing

            so 5th with improvements.

            i still like the 6th/7th “closest” rule, but i know how many spats of bickering some people got into over it.

          • TexBlade

            Closest model feels more realistic, but I agree it slowed the game if people couldn’t agree or were looking to drag a game out.

          • Muninwing

            yeah… meaning that they relied on players being adults and casual, instead of understanding how people really are.

          • TexBlade

            I don’t think I’ve ever had a problem like that outside of tournament play, but maybe I’ve been lucky.

  • Hendrik Booraem VI

    DO NOT WANT

    • JJ

      Which part? Or are you hanging onto 7th?

      • Hendrik Booraem VI

        Yes. I would prefer to hang on to 7th edition.

        • TexBlade

          Cool, you and very small minority can buy all the old edition books that GW will need to get out of inventory.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            A bit presumptuous, the opposite could just as easily be true. AoS has been a complete fail here, but I know there are other places where it is popular.

          • TexBlade

            The improving sales of AoS suggest that pockets of failure are more rare than common.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            or that its selling really well in small pockets where it is successful , still does nothing for us here where it neither sells nor can you get a game. 8th 40k could be that good or it could flop.

          • TexBlade

            I never knew anyone that played WHFB around me, but now I know four 40k players that have AoS armies. Your anecdotal evidence suggests it isn’t doing well. My anecdotal evidence and sales evidence suggests otherwise.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            the sales evidence doesn’t say anything other than models are sold, I could go buy a box of wood elf archers to add to my sylvaneth but that in no way implies AoS is successful because those models sold.they could be used for KoW or whfb or whatever. The point is you cant assume just because something is popular 1 place that it is popular all over, which was basically what I was getting at with assuming 8th would be a success.

          • TexBlade

            Clearly you need to read up on the definition of anecdotal evidence. Your single point of evidence of no one playing is less valid proof that AoS is unpopular than the sales evidence is proof that AoS is popular.

            Add in the fact that AoS models sales have improved because of the updates and improvements to the rules lend additional evidence that AoS sales are because of the popular rule set.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            what proof? most of those models are all old warhammer models thats not evidence in any way of a popular rules set. hell confrontation sold models like gangbusters but the game went down hard.

          • TexBlade

            Most of the new sales of AoS models since the generals handbook came out are old models? Doesn’t matter if they are old models or new models, increased sales in the AoS line is still increased sales in the AoS line.

            Confrontation didn’t sell models. Confrontation led to people making videos of torching their WHFB models.

            My evidence of increased sales is GW’s financial reports. You know the reports that they have to give and that they are not allowed to lie during b/c that gets them in legal trouble.

            But please tell me how your baseless evidence that you don’t know anyone playing AoS is valid evidence that AoS hasn’t become more popular than WHFB. By that logic I should discredit the existence of black holes b/c I’ve never seen one. Or maybe I shouldn’t believe men walked on the moon b/c I can’t see the footprints in my telescope.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            noone said anything about it being more or less popular than fantasy. I dont recall any videos of confrontation players burning warhammer models, not sure you are talking about the same thing i am. AoS has basically a handful of “new” armies, the rest is still legacy, again you are jumping to conclusions and making assumptions.

          • TexBlade

            So you’ve got no evidence to back up your claim that AoS isn’t popular. Thanks for confirming that all your evidence that I’m wrong has been anecdotal and thus lacking any merit. That makes you the one making statements based on assumptions.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            no more evidence than you that it is.

          • TexBlade

            So you have evidence on par with sales figures? Oh that’s right you don’t. You only have anecdotal evidence, which is the weakest form of evidence.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            sales figures only tell of model sales, not what they are used for, its no better evidence. I buy xwing ships all the time for the rpg, but by your argument that means I play xwing (which i do not) and your “evidence” then says xwing must be popular because its selling ships. I bough the only copy of AoS to sell at our local store, the only box of stormcast sold were converted into custodes. so by you evidence, AoS is being played by 2 people, it is not, its played by 1.

          • TexBlade

            Holy logical fallacy Batman! Just because you buy xwing products so they can collect dust doesn’t mean everyone else does. It also doesn’t mean the majority of sales for xwing are for dust collecting. Just because you can’t find anyone to play AoS doesn’t mean no one else can.

            “so by you evidence, AoS is being played by 2 people, it is not, its played by 1.” – That is never what I said. I said the increased sales figures that happened because of the improved/updated rule set release are proof that AoS is popular. I never claimed they were a one to one ratio. That was your stupid assumption.

            Do yourself a favor and do some reading, https://www.google.com/#safe=off&q=logical+fallacies

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            didnt say that, what I said was clear, not everyone buys models to play the game. There is no logical fallacy in it simply because you dont agree. and yes your implications are that everyone who buys models = proof of a games popularity, that is simply not true. There is no evidence at all that supports your assertation. sending snarky links also does nothing to support your argument. The entire point I was making from the start is simple,. you are assuming that this game is going to be some great success when in reality it has just as much chance of being a failure. assuming a small minority of players will be hating it is just as wrong as assuming a small minority will love it. I used AoS as an example because simply put, here it is a failure.

          • TexBlade

            “didnt say that, what I said was clear, not everyone buys models to play the game.” – What you said was I don’t see anyone playing the game and the only people buying the models don’t play the game thus it’s wrong to say the game is popular b/c I don’t see it. Logical Fallacies abound.

            “yes your implications are that everyone who buys models = proof of a games popularity, that is simply not true.” I always find the things being bought are never popular. /s The fact of the matter is that the majority, vast majority, of sales are b/c of people playing the game. The AoS app has between 100k and 500k installs, and that’s just for Android phones. Clearly people aren’t downloading app just to look at the pretty pics and numbers.

            “The entire point I was making from the start is simple,. you are
            assuming that this game is going to be some great success when in
            reality it has just as much chance of being a failure. assuming a small
            minority of players will be hating it is just as wrong as assuming a
            small minority will love it.” It does not have equal chances to succeed as fail. GW wouldn’t be releasing this edition if there was a 50% chance it’d flop. GW is a business and releasing an update with a 50% chance to kill your business is not how you stay in business for decades, like GW has. Additionally there is far more positive feedback and reception to the details about 8th than negative feedback and reception, so again not equal chances.

            “I used AoS as an example because simply
            put, here it is a failure.” – Seriously go read those fallacies b/c you keep bringing up this flawed argument. Your insanely narrow perception of something is not representative of the whole thing.

          • Muninwing

            a point to note is that as long as KoW and 9th age are still going strong, model sales of GW product are not necessarily good evidence that AoS is being played.

          • Muninwing

            there are still large regions in certain areas that have effectively rejected AoS.

            many of them initially did so, but have slowly come on board after the GHB made the game less… half-done.

            there have been increases in certain areas, and decreases in others. the real conjecture is whether they would have had the same had they created a game that was actually a sequel to WHF instead of shoehorned in…

          • TexBlade

            “many of them initially did so, but have slowly come on board after the GHB made the game less… half-done.” – I never meant to imply that AoS didn’t have a rough, very rough, start. Just that the GHB has made the game more popular and if/since 40K is adopting the GHB style it stands to reason that 8th will not have the rough start that AoS did.

            “the real conjecture is whether they would have had the same had they
            created a game that was actually a sequel to WHF instead of shoehorned
            in…” – An answer to that is beyond me. It would take analysis of WHFB’s sales trend in the years leading up to the AoS release and comparing the previous sales trend around the release of WHFB 6th, 7th, and 8th editions to extrapolate a likely sales projection for 9th. Then compare it against the sales numbers for AoS since it’s release. Personally I don’t have the time or drive to do all that.

          • Muninwing

            there’s a difference between creating a new game and creating a new edition of an old game.

            i think that 40k being partially still itself and partially incorporating the lessons learned from AoS is probably the best we can hope for.

            i think that i’m getting a little sick of the redo that the current design team is doing, mostly because it shows that they don’t have the skill to work on a preexisting property, and should have worked on their own game instead of trying to make WHF/40k into a fundamentally different thing.

          • Muninwing

            we had a thriving WHF community. 7th into 8th i’d go into the local store on game night and get a pickup game with a new player each week, and 2-3 other games would be going on.

            that trailed off, but that was due to balance issues, bad choices by GW, etc — and a couple dozen people were ready to go for WHF 9th edition when it was rumored (i was one of them).

            AoS utterly failed in this region on release.

            there are three gaming stores within a half hour drive of my house. two more within an hour in-state. of those five stores, two stopped carrying WHF/AoS models entirely. two more relegated them to the back.

            the largest gaming group has started playing it again, but has a rather large group that went back to 6th, or else plays 9th age instead.

            i think that the GHB has fixed some of the problems, but just doesn’t replace the old game. if GW was smart they’d release rank-and-file rules for larger scale AoS. then again, if they were smart they’d have created a setting that wasn’t so bland and derivative.

          • Matthew Pomeroy

            I know that there are good numbers of folks who buy models just for the hobby aspect without ever intending to play any games of any kind, they just like to paint. Dakka has plenty of examples of those folks (and damn they make some good paintjobs)

  • What about “Die, Mr LasCannon, die!”? :/

  • Thatroubleshootah

    I am really only concern ed as to whether my entire army still moves, shoots and assaults before my opponent gets to do anything. If they don’t change this is think they are making a mistake.

  • jazeroth

    – In matched play, models have a fixed base size specified in the General’s Handbook. In the two other game types, they can use any base they want.

    so i need to rebase all my marines to 32 mm? that’s dickish

    • rtheom

      Well, you can’t say the community didn’t whine enough about that in Sigmar. It’s not very surprising that they did that.

      • jazeroth

        very true, problem is i have a crap ton of marines that will need rebasing :*(

    • TexBlade

      I hadn’t considered that. There are A LOT of people with models gathered over many years. Maybe matched play will allow for several acceptable sizes? It could say marines have to be on 25 or 32 bases.

  • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

    Nope, most of this is ridiculous and contradicts what’s already been spoiled.

  • euansmith

    This looks very wish listy – it even includes a wish of mine the Summoning would be deep-strike with Sorcerers acting as homing beacons.

    Now, given that I an consistently wrong about everything, I think it is probably better just to wait and see how things turn out.

    Of course, I am probably wrong about that too.

    • Matthew Pomeroy

      broken clocks are right 2x a day (unless they fail their save and are trashed)

  • Haighus

    I don’t know whether it is amusing or sad that this entire comments thread has been dominated by Nyyppa arguing against, well, everyone else in the thread. I know who I feel is generally coming off better in the arguments too.

    • Marik

      I’ve just been laughing the whole time, posting Wonka memes in response to his posts. He is either the most “Obvious Troll is Obvious” person I have ever seen, or he legitimately thinks he is smarter than everyone else. Given the people I have met playing this hobby, neither answer would surprise me.

  • gordon ashacker

    Characters can’t join units? I hope this is not true. That was my most despised rules change for AoS from Warhammer Fantasy…….

  • Nightwalker

    For those who came to read the comments… just don’t… please just stop now while you are ahead… you’ll suffer a brain hemorrhage from exposure to pure stupidity…

    …alright, don’t say I didn’t warn you

    • Haighus

      Well, you nyypped that one in the bud… 😉