Goatboy’s 40k: 8th Edition Winners & Losers?

Today we look at who I feel will be the winners and losers from 8th edition and how 40K will settle once the new rules arrive.

Goatboy here and wow what a fun week.  We got a ton of stuff leaked about 8th edition, chatter on who play tested it, and answers on how much of a change the edition is going to be.  I for one am very excited about the rumored changes as I feel 7th has hit a rather low point for me game wise and hope 8th can refresh my feelings and get me excited about plastic crack once again.  Today’s little article looks at what I feel will end up being the winners and losers from this edition refresh and how I think the game will end up settling once we get our grubby little hands on the new edition rules.


I think the big winners out of this are the codexes with the longest time since a refresh.  It starts to make sense why we didn’t get a fully new Chaos Codex or an update to the old Tyranid book.  A full rework with all the units looked at and “fixed” will help these older books compete.  I suspect a much more reworked set of Tyranid rules to be seen while some of the newer books will have similar rules and themes as they need less.  It does make me sad that my Traitors Legion book only had a few months of usage so I hope some of those things show up in the Traitor legion keywords.  We all know how much the Ork book needed a refresh too with a set of rules while fun for regular play just couldn’t hang with any of the “serious” competitive armies.

We’re been evolving… just wait!

Speaking of competitive, it sounds like this edition was balanced with competitive mindset which is great for players like me.  They even looked at making other versions to help appease some of the other types of players out there as well.  It really feels like the growing pains they felt when GW released Age of Sigmar was taken to heart when they started reworking 40k.  They know we didn’t want a complete blow up of the game but a lot of mechanics could be removed, simplified and reworked to make a better experience.  How many times have you had an army that took up 4-5 books to be even usable?  How many times did you have an opponent screw up their rules?  How hard was it to actually have a copy of all the rules that wasn’t some badly photographed PDF or just trusted due to word of mouth?  This game got way to bloated and it the only reason why it wasn’t a complete waste was that most of the time only the new stuff was even valid for the table top events.

The big change to vehicles will do wonders for a lot of non super heavy options.  The Dreadnought was leaked for the Marine side of things and if that is any indication then I can hope the Gorkanaut/Morkanaut, Helbrute, and even the Penitent Engine might actually see the table top beyond a weird conversion or some kind of FW Legacy abuse.  The Land Raider might actually start to come out again especially if it doesn’t have to worry about getting grav’d on the first turn and left in your deployment zone.  I am just excited to see armies full of dreadnoughts crashing into lines, stomping around like little jerks, and kicking over all your opponents models like they are a Lego City.


The removal of the older version of the psychic phase hopefully ushers in a set of spells that are not nearly as back breaking as they were before.  It sounds like all the “broken” ones will be gone and replaced by more effective shooting options.  I am sure there will be some utility spells here and there and other forms of blessings but overall it is sounded like they got severely nerfed in a way that will allow other non psychic armies to compete.  This is a big bonus as if your army couldn’t find a way to ignore the blessings of your opponents (stomps, more WC) or just didn’t care enough to worry about them (Gladius, Dark Angel Gladius Dog nonsense, MSU) then your army had no hope of competing.  It also means all those armies who had a ton of “summoned” nonsense will be dumping a lot of daemons out in order to condense and rework their own armies into non abusive free mechanic nonsense.

Mortal wounds is an excellent way to bring the power of the idea of a damage equalizer without the over heavy handedness of the D table mechanic.  I know that sometimes stomps needed to be there to ensure some things don’t get too crazy – but the nature of needing 6’s means that some games never see them while others just were covered in back breaking stomps.  Mortal wounds gives you answers without feeling like it was luck you found the answer.  I bet that Knight weapons do mortal wounds and some other big monsters while a bunch of spells also can throw them out.  I hope it isn’t too much as while the idea of a Mortal wound is great – having too much spammed out will be a bit much as nothing big can survive.

My model’s so hot – my rules must be to.

This edition sounds like a return to actually making it easy for New Players to pick up.  I hit on how hard it was to keep up with all the rules right now in 7th and I am a seasoned veteran.  I couldn’t imagine someone new coming into this game, trying to pick up all the rules for one army, and have any hope in keeping up.  This new edition will mean shops will have a much easier time to sell something to a new player.  A boxed set or two plus one book for their “army” will let them have all the rules they need for that army and most likely any “ally” that would fit with them.  When was the last time your back pack for an event was filled with just one book or had to do with an overloaded tablet as you searched through your massive collection of PDFs?  Removal of some of the more annoying aspects of the game – templates, scatter dice, etc – helps those newbs out so much.  The rumors of the game rules only being 12 pages sounds great as it means it won’t take you forever to find the tiny nuanced rule issue.   It should also make it easier for TO’s to run their event as everything you need to know should be within those 12 pages and on that data slate for the unit itself.

Still – all these wins still leaves us with some Losers.


If you just built a new “competitive” 40k army for this year/season then you are probably out of luck as those armies are not going to work.  It sounds like Deathstars are getting kicked in the teeth and most likely won’t be on the table top like they are today.  It also means all the “free” bits are most likely going a way too.  Did you buy a ton of Daemons to bring on the table top when your Librarian in a conclave decided to go against their Oaths?  How about that jerk of a Primarch – Magnus – throwing out a ton of chariots on the table top (I got 3 to play at LVO this year).  What about all those free Rhinos in your armies Gladius whether they are green, white, or counts as white.  I had to put on hold a new “for fun” but competitive Death Guard army as I am sure the new rules mixed with rumored boxed set should change that up.  This problem means a lot of collections are going to be used differently but I think to have any hope for everyone’s army to be good we have to remove all these “bad” eggs from the mix.


I feel for those template makers who have done a good job creating interesting templates and other clear acrylic options.  I know I have a rad set of Chaos Templates and it does make me sad to no longer pull one out to “flame” a unit to death.  Of course the removal of my old Purifier army did more then enough to make me miss my old flamer templates.  I wasn’t a fan of the blast templates but I had a lot of fond memories of that flamer template.  The old day of burinating some Marine bikers with my Heldrake always brought a smile to my heart.  Especially when you murder an entire Incubi unit and leave the Archon on fire the entire game as my opponent/40k wife complains the entire time.

Don’t let the door hit you on your way out…

I get the feeling a lot of “balance” that GW knew was needed will be showing up in this edition.  I know they understood the Scatter Laser on every Eldar Jetbike was a bit too much but instead of “fixing” it right there they had to wait for everyone to get a good reboot.  I get the feeling Jetbikes will be good but the auto choice of a Scatter Laser will end up being changed.  Will just have to wait and see.  I think the change of Vehicles to wounds also changes how certain auto take weapons work as well.  I get the feeling Grav will have a decent rework and won’t be the auto death to a lot of things that it used to be.  I also suspect a lot of other weapons will get a good refresh so a lot of armies will need “new” weapon options instead of the tried and true Grav/Melta that we see now.  Wouldn’t it be great to see Plasma on the table top again?

I think the removal of WS effecting how opponents hits you will be really odd for some units.  I know the Daemon Princes and big close combat monsters always utilized the ability to hide behind a High WS to keep somewhat protected when assault by something mean like a Knight.  Now with a locked in “hitting” trait it makes that type of protection moot.  Will see if there is something else there to help like more wounds, some kind of saving throw, and some other way to ensure the big bold monstrous thing doesn’t die to the masses of a big IG blob.

Hopefully back to being balanced.

There hasn’t been anything said on how Independent Characters work other then a few tidbits and rumors I hear from time to time.  I have heard all kinds of things like they can only join units that have the same keywords as them (Jump, Beast, etc) or they cannot join any units at all.  I don’t know about this as while it works in AOS due to the overall lack of shooting in a lot of lists (well more of it now that the gun dwarves have come about and Tzeentch is floating around) it gets a lot harder in 40k where everyone and their mom has access to a pistol/gun/etc.  I keep trying to think how to work this in a simple and intuitive way but it only leads to just adding more wounds to characters and changing abilities to bubbles of effects.  Hopefully will see how these units work soon so we can have a direct answer.

I just got a sexy new mini – my rules better be good!

Overall I am extremely excited about this new edition.  Everything has me hopes that this will finally be a competitive game that can go beyond the weekend warrior type of thing and become something more.  I came back to the game right when old GT’s that GW ran were ending and a lot of good memories come from them.  I just hope the game can grab new players, continue to grow, and fill my hobby heart to the fullest.

~Are you excited about the new game?  Has GW done enough to turn it around and make it the king of the table top?


  • Losers in 8th? Basically every close combat unit, because they can be shot at the turn after their assault (the enemy can widthdraw).
    Winners in 8th? Heavy weapons, because moving and shooting is a no-brainer.

    • AircoolUK

      1. Don’t get suckered into bait & switch.
      2. Pistol being fired in the shooting phase whilst in CC is going to be a big deal .
      3. Snapshot mechanics were a huge disadvantage to units with high BS. It effectively meant that a unit with a BS of 1 had the same chance to shapshot as a unit with a BS of 5. How was that ever fair?

      -1 to hit will now affect all units fairly. The new 40K appears to be taking a lot of inspiration from the old Rogue Trader in many ways. I’m pretty sure that there will be some penalties to some heavy weapons. Some may still be restricted to no move & fire, or a larger to-hit penalty. They may even bring back Move Distance penalties for some weapons that are either hard built into the unit profile, or on the units datasheet.

      We’re getting glances at the core rules. Whilst we’re picking up some of the bone, we’ve yet to see the meat, and I expect there’s going to be an awful lot of meat.

      • -1 isn’t fair either. Units which required a 5+ will only hit half as often while units with a 3+ get only a minor downgrade to 4+, which in the end means they only lose 25% effectiveness. That means units with bad BS get punished even harder.

        And while it’s great to utilize pistols in CC, when will that ever happen? If your unit is good in CC, they charge their opponent *after* the shooting phase and in the next turn your opponent widthdraws and shoots at your now freely targetable CC specialists, so there is no more CC you can use your pistols in.

        • Parthis

          … and yet most players avoid heavy weapons for this very reason.

          7th is all about mobility and weight of dice. No one was taking multimeltas and lascannons or their equivalent, especially the folks hitting on 5+.

          Also, it is entirely possible to lock units in combat; surround them. The idea that every unit will retreat because every unit can retreat is just silly and flawed thinking.

          • That nobody was talking about Multimeltas or Lascannons was due to Grav.

          • Parthis

            It has nothing to do with “grav”, it has everything to do with grav not being heavy.

            You see? No penalty. There are many reasons i’d take other ‘heavy’ weapons in place of grav if I wasn’t snap firing.

            … and if you can’t imagine surrounding your target, something that happens already, and often in AoS, then there’s little I can say to convince you.

            You’re going to have to play it for yourself and realise that it’s not as shallow or simple as you’re making out.

          • Even if Grav was heavy, the weapon would still have been chosen over the others any time just because of it’s insane effectiveness in general.

            You’re comparing AoS to 40k? Wow. Ok, then I know where you’re coming from… from a game where 80%+ units are CC. I’m not talking about such armies here. I’m talking about a balanced force which contains maybe 30% assault units here. You know, basically the fast-attack-slot in 40k. And no, I still don’t see how you’re going to surround your enemy that way. There is shooting in 40k and in my eyes it will get even stronger in 8th.

          • Randy Randalman

            It’s so stupidly easy to surround and lock a unit in combat that I’m having a hard time believing that you believe what you’re saying.

          • I do believe what I’m saying, thanks trying to bring in personal attacks as arguments, that helps a lot.

          • Nyyppä

            How do you surround something you can only charge from one side?

          • Karru


            That or play a game where vast majority of units are focused only in CC so people are much, much closer to each other and want to be close to each other.

          • Nyyppä

            You still can’t go through units so the wall of expendables will just take the hits, withdraw and make room for the guns to kill the enemy.

          • Karru

            Exactly. There is also the fact that most units will avoid the enemy charges. This means that they will try to make sure they are further and further away from the enemy so the required charge distance keeps being over the average.

            completely surrounding anything in 40k is almost impossible unless you flood your enemy completely with Assault units or your opponent allows you to surround him.

          • Nyyppä

            Nah, no need to move. Cheap fodder for the chargers for 2 turns makes sure that the guns have 3-5 turns to kill them.

          • Parthis

            Flying units can.

          • Nyyppä

            Sure, assuming they have room to land, which they will not unless the opponent has no idea on how to deploy.

          • Parthis

            By charging, smartly, or using units with flight… like many assault focused units, for example.

            Remember a charge isn’t to the closet model; that’s the pile in. You have complete control over where you start and end your charge. Blocking off lines of retreat is natural.

            You can also do it with multiple units, fast vehicles, terrain features, etc etc.

          • Nyyppä

            Maybe I was not clear. Let’s try again. How do you surround a target when you can not place a model anywhere but in front of it?

          • Parthis

            Thank you for trying again in such a condescending and deliberately testy way.

            Your assumption is that you cannot place a model anywhere but in front of your target.

            Your assumption is wrong.

            A charge is a move. If you can charge over the top of a unit and land within 1″, great, done.

            Do your transports hover? Done.

            Are your vehicles fast? Done.

            Can you hit a flank and charge around the back? Done.

            Assault armies are *more* than viable in AoS. If you want to work on the basis that it’s impossible to surround a target to prevent retreats then go for it, but you are wrong. There just isn’t anything I can say here to change your mind. Perhaps when you have rules in-hand and models on-table you’ll work some stuff out for yourself.

          • Nyyppä

            Basic gun line deployment tactics. Expendables in front, the rest so that nothing gets there without going through the operation meat shield. It does not get more rudimentary than that.

            Now, how do you surround that?

            AoS has comparably very little shooting. If most units are predominantly melee or melee only -> more melee -> some melee units work.

          • Parthis

            Again, a scenerio based on assumptions; that an assault army would hit you head on, that gun-line retreating tactics have any hope of scoring points in anything other than kill points, that the player with the assault army isn’t capable of anything other than running in a straight line into a rudimentary gun-line, that an assault army has no ability to flank, that an assault army can’t deploy to the larger threats, etc etc etc.

            I won’t convince you, because your overly simple debating style is to fall back to overly simple examples of where surrounding a unit is sub-optimal.

            I never said surrounding a unit is the right thing to do in every encounter and against every army, I said that if you *need* to lock a unit in combat it is possible, and it’s not complicated.

          • Nyyppä

            You forget that there is no need to move or cap objectives. That provelbial bunker will just table the assault army and there’s nothing that they can do to stop it. Hell, in 2-3 turns the melee army is already so weak that the gun line can do what ever it wants including capping those objectives. Barting incredibly bad luck, based on what we now know, the guns will always win.

          • Steven Hyche

            Tabling isnt an auto win in Aos i imagine its going to be the same in new 40k.

          • Nyyppä


          • Steven Hyche

            aos does have gunline armies

          • Nyyppä

            Well, that right there is a matter of opinion.

          • Steven Hyche

            ok well so is your whole arguement then so guess that wraps this up.

          • Nyyppä

            Erm, what? How is “based on core rules melee is weak in 40k 8th edition” an opinion at this point? How is it not weak? How are gun lines with meat shields not vastly superior?

          • Steven Hyche

            You are quite the narcissist i see. How is mine any more of an opinion when Ive actually played the game in a competitive setting and quite well but what you write is fact? Get over yourself

          • Nyyppä

            Well, unless you can present proof for your claim it’s just an opinion. My proof are the rules. What’s yours?

            No need to get personal even if you are not right.

          • Steven Hyche

            I have the same proof you do. Which is 0. You are just theory crafting. Its not personal you are in fact being narcissistic and full of yourself if you think your theory crafting is proof before actually playing a game or seeing the full rules.

            You have put yourself in a very large group of people who think they are right based on patch notes, rule changes and erratas and have too much pride to admit they can not foresee all possible variables. Its pretty typical to run into a few like you abd pointing it out doesnt make this personal.

          • Nyyppä

            Now you are just intellectually dishonest.

          • Steven Hyche

            Its not practical to assume every charge will end up in a perfect bait and switch either. You are crafting a battle off a perfect scenario to reinforce your opinion. Lets take both extremes out of the picture and go with the more likely scenario. A few units will get charged and a few will not. How will that effect the game? Who knows because you have no idea how this game will fully play out with just hints of the rules and NO hint at what the warscrolls look like.

        • Chaosrex

          You just need to surround the ennemy unit in CC so that they don’t have the space to leave the CC.

          be it with multiple small units ot with a Large unit with a lot of models.

          And if he could still get away, make so that when he’s done , some of his models are still in 1″ of your unit, so he won’t be able to shoot at it.

          • Karru

            Explain how one surround an enemy unit when you have to charge over +8″ at least and you only get a maximum of 2D6″ of movement. If you don’t charge then, you get shot for a whole round and the opponent just backsteps to get farther away. If you charge in and succeed, you won’t be able to surround them.

            Same thing with multiple charges. More charge, more variance on that 2D6 roll. Some might completely fail the charge while some are barely getting in.

            The problem is that with shooting getting even more buffs, like the minor annoyance modifier to heavy weapons, just backstepping away from a unit that is approaching them isn’t troublesome any more.

          • ZeeLobby

            It’s just as hard as it was before. It’s not like movement has gotten any different. There will be faster units, but every additional inch of movement maybe gets you an extra 1/3 inch wrap.

          • Frank Krifka

            If movement in AoS is any preview, It’s actually fairly easy to surround units and prevent them from retreating.

          • ZeeLobby

            How? Could you explain? Cause this all seems similar to how it was in 40K before. And surrounds were rarely seen.

          • Frank Krifka


            So far there are two ways I do it. The first depends a bit on list construction. When I play my compendium armies. I’ll often take a unit of fast cavalry specifically for the purpose of threatening enemies that are intent on charging with; either by drawing a unit into combat with a layered defense, and then moving the back unit around the edge to cut off a retreat, or using available terrain to limit the enemies ability to end a retreat move more than 3″ for any of my units.

            At the moment, I’m playing mostly Sylvaneth, and I’ve found T-rev’s with their ability to teleport to either a board edge or within 3″ of a wyldwood means that they have very little difficulty showing up behind troops. (In addition, Sylvaneth players are a bit spoiled, the most taken competitive battalion for Sylvaneth prevents units within 3″ of specific units from retreating at all.)

            Realmgates are also pretty effective at setting up an ambush if you don’t have anything fast at hand.

            Likewise, even if I haven’t necessarily built mobility into my list or my mobile unit is tied up in a combat, I’ll retreat through an enemy unit ending my move 3″ away, but behind the unit it was fighting. Since a unit that retreats has to end its movement more than 3″ for ANY enemy unit, that’s usually more than enough to cut off a retreat (unless the target itself is fast cav).

            There are plenty of seriously fast units in the game, and anything with more than a 8″ move is pretty capable of cutting off a retreat. It usually requires planning, but it’s pretty funny to see an opponents face when they thought they were going to smash a mid-power cavalry unit until it retreats and ends up behind them preventing them from escaping the upcoming charge from something killy.

          • Muninwing

            you could set up charges instead of just moving blindly forward… it’s called “strategy”

          • Carey_Mahoney

            So, no more Hit&Run special rule? Or mabye that will prevail, but just lets people get out of melee without any penalty.

        • Mr_Pickles

          oye, dem boyz wanna run den dey gonna get cut down like all de oother GITZ!!!! ‘CAUSE DEY GITZ TOO!!!!

          • Sorry, I didn’t get that one 😛 (non-native, maybe that’s my problem here, dunno)

        • Valourousheart

          You misread the rules today. If a unit falls back out of CC, they don’t get to do anything else that turn. No shooting, no running and no charging. And it is likely that the fall back move will be random. So they better hope they move far enough that they aren’t still in combat.

          So this isn’t the “no brainer” choice you are describing. Plenty of armies are going to have a tough decision to make about giving up a full turn or staying in CC. And that doesn’t even take into account you could get to charge that unit that just fell back again… and get to attack first again. That right there is reason enough not to always fall back.

          • You misunderstood. The fleeing unit can’t do anything, but the rest of the army can!

    • Majere613

      I’m actually fairly optimistic as a player who uses a lot of assault about that change. It largely removes the odd anomaly of charging a unit but not wanting to destroy it that turn to stop you from dropping out of combat, because now that’s probably going to happen anyway, so you’re going to need to co-ordinate charges better- and unless I missed it, we don’t yet know how charges are going to work.

      The new rules are definitely good news for Orks, who don’t need to worry about Initiative any more when they get stuck in. On the face of it they seem to be very bad news indeed for things like Wyches, Banshees and Harlequins, who will no longer be able to use high Initiative or high WS to stay alive in combat and still get shot to death out of it. Of course we’ve not yet seen their new stats or rules, so hopefully someone thought of that.

      • Yea, it’s especially the glass-cannons I worry about. Or well… storm guardians… It’s amazing how they seem to get worse with every edition.

        • Tigirus

          I dunno… they were originally WS/BS 3 with I 4 in a faction with no assault vehicles. I always remembered them being rather garbage, but then I didn’t play eldar much after they got op.

        • Ragnar_Blackmane

          Kinda too soon to already declare entire units ‘becoming worse’ when we know what, not even 20% of the basic rules, not to even mention the yet to be released unit and weapon profiles?

          • I’m expressing feelings and worries based on what we know so far. I can’t shun them away, so I just talk about them as is 😉 I nowhere said that’s the definite future to come.

      • Tigirus

        I’m super stoked about bringing my Sisters back out. Letting repentia strike first helps mitigate their horrible toughness, lack of save, and always strikes last, they might actually kill stuff again.

        Also I’m super excited about shooting double hand flamers in combat with seraphim.

        Banshees might have a version of their old masks that dropped enemy initiative and instead have something like “banshees always strike first in the first round of combat” on a side not for Eldar, Incubi no longer have to worry about not having grenades so that’s nice.

      • Hendrik Booraem VI

        Yeah, I see this change as helping orks out a ton. a 30-ork boyz mob charging and getting 120 attacks could easily wreck a Dreadnought before it could even respond, with just a little luck on the dice.

        They might even be able to take a Land Raider down more notches than a Devastator squad shooting lascannons.

    • J Mad

      We havent seen the CC phase yet…….

      • Yea and that’s basically the only hopes I still have left.

      • Nyyppä

        Unless there’s something that just lets them choose to not let the opposing unit leave combat it does not matter what’s in it.

        • An evil punishment for trying to widthdraw would also help – like we had in previous/current edition – a chance that the fleeing unit may get destroyed entirely – which of course will not count for Marines, because… tactics.

          • Karru

            Yeah, there should be some risk attached to it. Just giving up your actions that turn isn’t good enough. It’s not a choice at that point, it’s the only logical thing to do. There is maybe once out of 1000 assaults where the enemy doesn’t want to leave the combat and not allow the charging unit to be shot.

            A roll-off might be a good way. Both players roll a dice. If the one leaving the combat wins, they just move away from combat and cannot perform any actions this round. If the other player wins, the escaping unit doesn’t get away and takes D6 wounds.

          • Add in the initiative of the unit (does that still exist btw) and it may be a good start.

          • Karru

            It doesn’t. That’s why I said just a straight up roll off. Maybe they can compare movements. Add in the movement values of the unit to the result and compare them.

          • Yea, that could maybe work. On the other hand movement is probably based on race and unit-type meaning an assault-unit and a shooty unit of the same faction have the same movement which makes the point rather moot again. But somehow I feel there will be no penalty whatsoever. God, I hope I’m wrong.

        • Drpx

          WMH lets you leave combat, but everything you were engaged with gets to hit you with a powered up attack.

          • Nyyppä

            And? Who cares if you get to hit a guardsman with sD equivalent when the result is that gun line behind the guardsman pulverizing the melee unit with impunity? The reasonable way to do this would be to let the melee unit make an off turn charge. That would mean that you could potentially save the fleeing unit but would also risk another unit in the process.

          • Drpx

            Everything doesn’t have to be a Guardsman y’know.

          • Nyyppä

            Kroot, zombie, what ever expedable unit you wast to use instead.

    • Heinz Fiction

      We can’t judge the efficiency of close combat units until we know their point values. Imagine if we get two of them for one shooting unit: withdrawel would become a none-issue then. Also I’d like to see detailed CC rules before i make up my opinion.

      • Yea, I know they said they ‘playtested it a bazillion times’ (quote may be inaccurate).
        But still, there’s that bitter taste in my mouth.

        • Heinz Fiction

          Understandable. Game Balance was rather disappointing in previous editions. However, as existing army lists aren’t carried over, we shouldn’t judge rules by the impact they’d have on them.

          • No, but can speculate and talk about the feelings we have towards them according to what we already know 😉

    • J Mad

      OMG you saw 5-10% of the rules and you already calling something weak/broken! FFS wait till we see more rules…

      • That’s why I said it are opinions / feelings / assumptions.


        • J Mad

          I over dramatized it on purpose b.c its pointless to talk about “what is strong and what isnt” at this time, we know 5-15% of the rules and we want to talk about what things are broken….. :rolleys:

          • It’s called “speculation”. If you don’t enjoy it, no problem. But don’t judge others who do.

    • Sure

      The withdrawing unit can’t do anything on the turn they withdraw. So you’ll need 2 shooting units to address one assaulting unitin this manner. I read this and other teasers and see the opposite – assault may get a boost. Plus, there may be a way to prevent escaping close combat.

      • Karru

        With the current info we have, the problem is that there doesn’t seem to be ANY real downside to falling back from CC. If you do it, you’ll make sure that the unit is left wide open and ready to be shot. They will most likely be standing in the open as well, so Cover is a no go.

        Many of the Assault heavy armies also happen to have weak saves. Orks, Tyranids and Dark Eldar. With Templates gone, shooting something like a Battle Cannon on a unit of Boys that weren’t able to finish of your unit of Guardsmen are now nothing more than target practice.

    • Havik110

      Welcome back to 4th edition where necrons used to do this to you all day…

    • Nightwalker

      If they bring back “consolidate into combat” then I think running from combat might not be a good idea.

      I bet they brought that back, since they seem to be bringing back some other rules

  • AircoolUK

    If it makes you feel any better, I’ve already had conversations with many of my friends from back in the old Rogue Trader days who are spread far and wide across the globe.

    They’ve all taken the opportunity to get their children into the game that they themselves loved when they were young. The free, streamlined rules and the low entry costs were stated as the main reasons…

    …of course, we all know the real reason, it’s because they themselves see this as a good time to get back into gaming.

    One of my friends who’d just bought the AoS starter set and will also be buying the new 40K when it arrives for his eldest son said it felt like a recovered alcoholic entering a shop of fine wines and spirits and picking up just a ‘few’ bottles for himself.

    Surely it can’t be coincidental that my old 6th form chums who waited for early doors in the Newcastle GW for the first copy of Rogue Trader, or who played Space Hulk on the floor with hundreds of others during GW’s Games Day/Golden Daemon Awards, are suddenly interested in getting started again.

    • Nick Davidson

      Similar reasons to me getting back in after a 20 year plus absence. Sigmar made fantasy easy to start, and the new 40k (which I’ve been waiting for patiently since the first rumours last year btw) looks like doing the same for my favourite setting

    • ZeeLobby

      That’s awesome. I’d say it depends a lot on your age and your place in the cycle. I think this is true for most editions of this game. Every new edition sees some people returning and others leaving. I know 8th fantasy saw a lot of my friends come back post-college.

      • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

        Its an interesting phenomenon. 6th killed 40k and 8th WHFB in my old club.

        • ZeeLobby

          yeah, i think those 2 were pretty consistent. Both were pretty poor rulesets. It doesn’t help that at the same time a bunch of other game systems were coming out or picking up steam.

          • Karru

            It never really surprised me that those two editions were the ones that killed the game for many. Both were released during the “dark age” in GW existence where they forced people to buy more and more of their models through bad rules.

            For example, 8th edition was ruled entirely with large units. Larger you unit, more powerful you were as a whole. 40k on the other hand started putting more and more emphasis on larger models. Flyers and Flying Monstrous Creatures and later on Super Heavies.

            They wanted people to buy more of their expensive kits in great amounts and made sure the rules were catered to those willing to pay more. This of course is always a bad tactic and will drive people away as not everyone has the interest to spend hundreds upon hundreds of currency just to have a decent fighting chance.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, not to mention this was after they kicked out everyone involved with the earlier editions. They fired most of their experienced game designers. So the likelihood of positive rules changes was pretty low.

            I can’t tell if AoS and the new 40K are brilliant, and a whole new generation of up and coming designers are involved, or whether it’s just so simple that no design was needed.

          • Karru

            There is some minor potential here. Considering that they have been taking in outside influence as of late for playtesting and suggestions, they won’t be able to throw out something that is complete trash.

    • Dennis J. Pechavar

      I agree that a good deal of the things they are talking about makes me feel like this is heading back towards a 2nd Ed style game with a 3rd Ed streamlining. I am cautiously excited.

  • Majere613

    Whilst I’m not thrilled about the loss of templates, I do like the fact that single models are now no safer from such weapons if they’re on their own. It was an odd anomaly of the old rules that if you flamed ten guys, or dropped an artillery shell on top of a particular model in a big squad, that one guy took ten or so hits if he kept saving, whereas on his own he’d only take one.

    I’m certainly going to be interested to see what units like Burnas, SoS Witchseekers or SoB Dominions/ Retributors can do under these new rules.

  • Karru

    The winners of 8th will be Marines, no doubt about it. Most of the rules we’ve seen so far seem to cater mostly to them, making them more effective.

    Heavy Weapons and moving for example doesn’t affect them at all really. They are reduced from a 3+ to a 4+ from it, so it isn’t that bad for them. Meanwhile a reduction from a 4+ to a 5+ is much worse.

    Then you have the new cover modifiers. Getting a bonus to your Armour save only really affects Marines. Orks getting a 5+ save isn’t nearly as big of a deal as Marines getting a 2+ save.

    All in all, the edition from the get go seems to favour armies with good saves and high stats more than it does those with bad saves and lower stats. It will come down to pricing of the units, which is worrying to say the least. Making Boys even cheaper while Marines might remain the same isn’t exactly my idea of a good plan. Playing any horde army is extremely expensive as it is, making them more expensive isn’t they way to get people interested in them.

    The only big losers according to the current info we have would be armies that would like to use large units to tarpit enemies. Since the charging will most likely still be the 2D6″ and nothing else, surrounding an enemy will be impossible against an opponent that knows anything about the game. If one tries to tie up a unit, they can just move away and let the rest of the army deal with it.

    The minor losers of this edition seem to continue to be Assaulting still, which is a pity. Even with Chargers going first, the probability that they will keep the 2D6″ charge is so high that charging won’t be that effective when used by multiple units. Then all the buffs they are giving to shooting makes Assaulting all the more undesirable.

    • Yep, I fully agree with that. I always taught people that moving back to a modifier system makes things easy, but for sure not better balanced as the biggest winners from modifiers are units with good stats.

      • Karru

        Indeed. If one already has good stats, modifiers won’t matter nearly as much. Unfortunately people don’t want the modifiers to be “too extreme” so they keep them small. This leads to armies that would rely on them in order to survive and be effective less effective while armies that don’t really mind them or need them get stronger.

      • Nyyppä

        The mistake they made is that cover does not add negative hit modifiers but makes armor better.

        • Hit modifiers still would punish bad units. Like Orks only hitting half of what they usually hit (5+ to 6+) whereas 3+ shooters only lose 25% of their hits. No matter how you turn it, a modifier system is beneficial to high-stat-units only.

          • Nyyppä

            Sure, but tacticals in cover would not be essentially terminators. Marines hitting 1/2 times instead of 2/3 times is better for assault than them hitting normally and getting 2+ saves.

          • Randy Randalman

            Except thankfully GW eliminated the incredibly stupid AP mechanic so now Orks and Tyranids who previously got no save against boltguns now get saves against boltguns. We have no idea what the new points costs will look like, and it will be months before every army starts getting their own unique bits in codex form.

          • Hm? Didn’t they say they will release 5 books and rules for every unit and every model currently existing right from the start?

          • ZeeLobby

            Randy doesnt read! He just makes bold positive claims defending GW.

          • Jeff Biery

            I think you’re looking at the math the wrong way. Tacticals would go from a 67% chance to hit to a 50% chance to hit. Orks would go from a 33% chance to hit to a 17% chance. In either case, they’re losing 16.7% more shots. For every six shots, each unit loses one more hit.

          • No, while you are looking at absolute values, I am looking at relative ones. Making a unit half as effective and another one only 75% as effective is not balanced. Even if the absolute numbers are the same. Relative numbers can mean a lot, because it’s related to their point-costs. You basically need an additional 100% of the amount of Orks to get the same result, but only 33% more Marines.

          • Jeff Biery

            I understand what you’re saying, that isn’t the issue here. I just disagree with that being the more fair way of balancing the units. What I’m looking at is a unit firing 12 shots. Space Marines go from 8 hits to 6 hits while the orks firing 12 would go from 4 to 2. They’re each getting two less hits and that seems more fair to me than saying the space marines should go from 8 to 4 when the orks go from 4 to 2. Then you’d be losing more hits for having a better accuracy.

            Each side should lose the same percentage of hits from their pool and that makes way more sense to me than the old system of an ork and cypher being equally likely to hit a flying vehicle.

          • OK, I don’t see how absolute numbers will ever be fair, but I can’t change opinions 😉

            PS: I never said the old system was fair either. But imo the new one ain’t.

          • Jeff Biery

            The fairness comes from everyone seeing 17% less favorable results when they roll a batch of dice instead of some people losing 17% of their rolls while others lose an extra 50%.

            Views of fairness aside, I don’t see how the system you’re proposing could be functional in the game. It sounds like you want everyone to miss an extra half of their shots for shooting into cover, but if you took a unit with an odd number BS you’re going to hit problems. Fire warriors, for example, would go from needing a 4+ to hit to a 5.5+. Does that make it only on 6’s?

          • As I said, absolute numbers aren’t fair from my point of view. Say there’s a model behind a wall, only 50% visible. Now I’d expect half of the shots to hit the wall instead of the model. Means 12 Marine shots will not lead to 8 hits, but to 4 and 12 Orks will not land 4 hits, but 2. And not that Marines still land 6 and Orks still 2.

            And that is actually easy to implement. It won’t be fast, but it would be fair: No hit-modifiers, no save-modifiers, but a re-roll of all your hits on 4+. Fair for all, same for all. Or in other words: A 4+ cover on top of your armour.

          • Jeff Biery

            Maybe that’s the difference then. I don’t expect a wall blocking 50% of the target to stop 50% of the shots because I don’t see the situation as an even distribution. A skilled shooter might have to change what parts he’s aiming for but his accuracy doesn’t necessarily get cut in half for less of the target being visible in the same way that a baseball pitcher’s throws aren’t uniformly distributed across the 360 degree arc around him. That’s not a bad idea for how to implement it though. I’m just glad we don’t have situations where a marine hiding behind a wall is just as easy to kill as one doing jumping jacks on top of a hill. I’m also glad my orks will get a save at all now.

          • So a skilled shooter will still hit 75%, but a bad shooter will stop hitting entirely? Now with this only the first part of the sentence makes sense for me.

          • Jeff Biery

            The game mechanics don’t shift anyone to not hitting at all, if that’s what you’re asking.

            In real life, yeah I imagine if you took some random person from the street and entered them into a shooting competition that it would be very likely they don’t hit the target at all while the professional would probably still hit the smaller/moving targets with great accuracy (just not as accurately as they do against the larger, stationary targets. Let’s call it something like 17% less shots hitting the target).

          • Yes, they do shift someone to not hit at all.
            Say you hit on a 5+ and get a -2 modifier. Or you hit on 6 and get a -1.

          • Jeff Biery

            We can agree to disagree if you want, but I don’t think we’ve seen anyone mention more than a -1 modifier nor do I know of anyone with a BS1 offhand. I haven’t even seen anyone say the usual “6 always succeeds” rule is no longer in place so it seems weird to base arguments off of changes we haven’t heard. I’m going from what information we currently have.

            IF they do go that route with all those things though, it still wouldn’t bother me too much as it’s the same idea we’ve had with armor saves all this time that some people get one and others don’t. A model with a 5+ save suffering a wound from a rend 1 weapon will still get a save while a model with a 6+ will get nothing. That’s why you pay extra points for better stats though.

        • Farseerer

          Negative hit modifiers will probably still exist for units like flyers and jinking so it makes sense to have it seperate to covers saves in this edition. ( It never made sense to me that Jink saves were the same as cover saves )

          • Nyyppä

            Cover has been covered already. It’s + to armor.

    • Randy Randalman

      What are you basing the “high probability” of the 2d6″ charge on when there’s been literally zero information on it?

      • Nyyppä

        It’s been there always and AoS uses it?

        • It wasn’t there in 2nd which 8th seems to be based on rather heavily. But I doubt it gets removed.
          On the other hand, 2D6 doesn’t make much sense if you have units with different movement-stats (so also doesn’t make sense for AoS).

          • Nyyppä

            Ah, my mistake. This is still the veritable AoE. No reason to doubt it’s existence.

          • Yea, I agree, the likelyness for it to stay is bigger I’d say.

          • Karru

            8th is more based on AoS than it is on earlier editions. GW wants to make them very similar like WHFB and 40k were before, but they will have their minor differences.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah. I dunno where all these 2nd edition comments are coming from. Shadow Wars took a lot of stuff from Necromunda which was based around 2nd. So far most of what we’ve seen from 8th has come directly from AoS.

          • Karru

            Most likely people are getting confused. With SW:A getting released and people seeing it having things like rending and modifiers, people assume they are being used in 8th edition as well. These are definitely AoS rules we are getting.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, for sure.

          • Kyle

            Charges were a fixed distance in 3rd edition too. One of the things I have hated most about the newer editions is the 2d6 charge. Nothing is as frustrating as failing a 3″ or 4″ charge or seeing a critical shooting unit receive a lucky 12″ charge and get slaughtered.

          • Yea, I feel the same. Random charge distances should go imo. Unless you charge through terrain or something – in which case it should be less, but still not random.

    • MVBrandt

      You’ll want to wait until judging. Assault armies can be extremely viable. Trust me.

      • Karru

        I will remain very sceptical until I see the full picture. Assault armies have been suffering greatly since 6th was released and have continued to do so ever since. All the info they have released so far also point out that the massive downsides of assaulting are still in place while shooting is getting massive buffs once again.

        • Graham Bartram

          Vehicles now stand a chance of delivering your assault units, tar-pitting is gone, the rest is pretty much speculation. So far I’m thinking assault may be not so bad. We also have no idea how overwatch is going to work yet or how melee unit special rules will effect the assault. Just pop some corn and don’t set fire to your army just yet. Sceptical is fair enough though, we are not in full possession of the rules … ..yet.

          • Karru

            Actually, we don’t exactly know if they stand a chance. Current notes we have would actually indicate otherwise as vehicles are easier to kill or cripple now than they were in earlier editions.

            The effectiveness of vehicles, especially transports, will boil down to their toughness, save and, most importantly, the damage charts they have. In the case of Transports, you can throw in the Movement value and disembarking rules as well.

            If transports get less than 12″ of movement, even for a basic transport like a Rhino, it will be difficult to get much use out of them. A handful of hits from an Autocannon or even a Plasma Guns could be enough to cripple their movement to a crawl after which their cargo either has to get out of the tank to be shot or remain and sloooowly make their way towards the opponents lines.

          • Graham Bartram

            Fair point, though I think you are being a tad pessimistic. I would hope (yes I know….hope is the prelude to despair), that the damage table for transports can keep the engines running long enough to get across the board, or stand a fair chance of doing so at least.

            As for vehicle speed, it’s about due for a boost at the lower end but I wouldn’t be too sure they will get one, sadly.

            IMHO, Rhinos should always have had the “Assault Ramp” as an upgrade. That’s an omission long overdue for fixing. Just pay a few extra points and your rhino is an assault vehicle with a frontal assault ramp….
            …… but then I also want a chip recovered from the head of Ferrus Manus by the Ad-Mech, that contains his recorded brain patterns, to be placed in a Mars custom-job Imperial Knight as it’s machine spirit. Behold; Ferrus Reborn, Imperial Knight Primarch! I can but dream. XD

  • Nyyppä

    Melee. Melee is the biggest loser. The movement rules alone make melee armies useless. So good luck with your Khorne, nids and orks.

    • Randy Randalman

      Really? Do you know what the move characteristics are on Raveners, for example? Or how many wounds Nobz will have now?

      Melee will be genuinely viable for the first time since 4th edition because a unit doesn’t get to shoot, over watch, and then fight first against a cc unit.

      • Really? You know more about the new CC than we do? Why don’t they get to shoot, overwatch and fight?

      • Nyyppä

        It does not matter how fast they are. The opponent can just leave combat with his/her meat shield and gun them down. Gg for melee armies.

        • Dan Wilson

          Oh… I guess that’s where tactics are going to come into play… What are you doing allowing your dedicated anti cc unit to be bogged down by a meat shield!?

          • Nyyppä

            If you have any idea how gun lines are played when the opponent brings a melee list I really do not have to explain this. Do you?

          • Fergie0044

            But if you’re playing a pure melee army you’ll have already thought of this and will be making use of transports, outflank, deepstrike, jump/jetpack guys etc to help avoid the meat shield … right? Or setting it up so you charge half his army at once, he can fall back but that will leave half his army unable to do anything else for one turn – just make sure you charge the useful half!

            (Assuming any of these mechanics are in the new edition of course)

          • Nyyppä

            If any of those even help against the shield the shield was done wrong.

    • Gorsameth

      The return of movement stats might be a small boon to assault armies. Allowing basic units to get up the board faster then currently by not being limited to 6″.

      That said, the ability to walk about of combat is a HUGE blow

      • Nyyppä

        Yeah, it’s not the delivery that is the problem here. It’s reaching the meaningful targets.

    • MVBrandt

      Actually not true. Can’t say much in detail, but folks with khorne, nid, and ork melee armies should excitedly hang tight.

      • Nyyppä

        Based on what they have revealed thus far it is impossible to make melee armies work.

        • Parthis

          … it really isn’t.

          You’re being deliberately obtuse.

          • Nyyppä

            You must understand that you are assuming that your opponent is an idiot and thus your ideas work. A badic player can just deny your ideas with the most basic of tactics without a margin of error. Just saying.

          • Nyyppä
          • Parthis

            Learn from who? The panicky l33t gamer crowd?

            They’re not my kind of Pepple.

          • Nyyppä

            They are still a lot more learned in the arts of wargaming tactics than you are. It’s not the messenger but rather the message that is important.

          • Parthis

            Sure, yet i’m not the one struggling with the concept of one unit surrounding another.

            Go, learn was it?

          • Nyyppä

            Yes, go learn the rules. You can not place a model where there is no room to place it. You claim repeatedly that it’s possible but it’s not.

    • Kyle

      Or maybe, just maybe they have restructured assault to account for that. The old rules were always stupid. You wanted to charge a unit and win combat but not by to much. Goldilocks combat with chainsaws.

      • But the reason for not wanting to be too good in assault was because you didn’t want to be shot to bits the turn after – which now looks to be case whatsoever.

        • TenDM

          You’re assuming shooting will still blast an assault unit to pieces in one or two turns the way they do now. I don’t think there’s much chance of them nerfing an already weak playstyle, so I’m predicting a major increase in reliability and survivability for dedicated assault units.

          Think of it this way, the reason assault units are so squishy is because they’re pretty much invincible once they get into combat. Now they know the unit will get shot every turn they can make a dedicated assault unit strong enough to survive three turns without worrying that it’ll get a turn two charge off and never die.

          So basically your assault units shouldn’t be at the mercy of the dice. It won’t need to hide in combat during your opponents turn, which means you won’t get screwed over when you accidentally cause one too many wounds and wipe the enemy unit out.

          • So what you’re saying is that Storm Guardians will turn get 2 wounds and 3+ armour? Awesome! [awesome from a gaming-perspective, not a fluff-perspective]

            (seriously though, I don’t see that happening yet – if anything, they will get cheaper)

          • TenDM

            Storm Guardians will always be cannon fodder, but Striking Scorpions and Howling Banshees should definitely be able to survive a few extra turns.

            I mean why wouldn’t they increase the survivability? Even if their only motivation is that they hate you and the assault phase assault has already been nerfed right out of the game.
            There’s no reason to think assault won’t get a buff to match this.

          • But how exactly would you buff such units? Your only options are additional hitpoints, better armour or an additional save. None of these options is really fitting.

      • Nyyppä

        Well, now there’s infinite overwatches. So much better for melee units.

  • J Mad

    We know something like 1/30th the rules and you already jumping to conclusions? ffs wait at least another week or 2 to post something like this.

    • Nyyppä

      If you thought that there will be 100 pages of rules in this edition you will be very badly disappointed with the final product. Thus far almost everything is copy pasted from AoS 4 page rules. Maybe 40k gets 5 pages, who knows, but that’s still us knowing 80% of the rules when assaults are covered today.

      • I’m not sure we will see anything new today, it’s 1st of May which is a holiday in UK, no?

        • Nyyppä

          Yeah, but they already announced it…..or was it that it’s just the next thing….? Yeah, either way, today or tomorrow, it does not matter.

      • Randy Randalman

        It’s already been confirmed by GW that there are at least 14 pages of rules in one of the FIVE books. That’s just the rules without the units, wargear, or points. So you know about 5% of the rules, not 80%.

        • Nyyppä

          Yes. Terrain. The basic rules are free and given away in printed form during the launch. 14 page free rules from GW? Not likely.

          • “How can I get the rules?

            We’re going to make it easier than ever to get your hands on the rules and start playing. The core rules for the game will be free, and you’ll have several options on how you get your hands on the full rulebook. Watch this space for more.”

            From the 8th FAQ… so actually very likely, coupled with the day 1 rules for all the units and you can play with no further investment.

          • Nyyppä

            Likely they are included in the army books, you know, to make up the last 4-5 pages.

      • J Mad

        Its being said 12-14 pages. But we saw a couple paragraphs of rules for, shooting, movements and very few stats. How is that “knowing enough rules”

        Think about it, we saw maybe what 5 paragraphs out of 14 pages…. IDK about you but I would consider that 10% or less.

        • Nyyppä

          Still don’t think so. GW is not giving rule BOOKS to people for free.

  • Ebsolom

    I’m looking forward to 8th edition personally. I’ve been waiting patiently for the big red reset button to be pushed while the game ran itself aground under the weight of codexes, dataslates, formations and clunky rules.

    Embrace the change brothers & sisters. Let us dust off those armies and units that have barely seen the light of day and have some fun : )

    • orionburn

      I agree. I’ve been excitedly getting my Nids painted and getting them ready for 8th. I’ve been collecting for over a year and yet to play a game with them because of 7th edition problems. I’m looking forward to what 8th brings. I’m not expecting perfection, but things are looking up.

    • Parthis

      My sentiments exactly. It’s going to be great dusting off older armies and units, throwing them on the table and finding my new favourite way of playing.

      I know the gaming club i’m part of and co-ordinate 40K is very excited too. 40K died there with 7th, but now there’s a real sense of optimism.

      There’s even a guy starting and painting a *new* Ork army!

  • benn grimm

    Probably, hopefully, possibly… sure you’re not promoting a new boy band?

  • Angus MacKenzie

    “If you just built a new “competitive” 40k army for this year/season then you are probably out of luck as those armies are not going to work.” I keep seeing this sentiment on forums and in articles and I frankly have no sympathy.

    1. Your army will work as GW has assured us that they not dropping any models and every model will have rules.
    2. Unless they pull a full 180 from AoS and expressly forbid playing certain factions together, you will be able to play with all of those models at the same time, in the same game even!
    3. The fact that you chased the meta, purchased huge numbers of (perfectly functional) models in order to spam and abuse rules exploits and unbalanced formations, and now have more rhinos/demons/flyrants/what have you than you think will be effective in the new edition DOES NOT mean your army does not work. It simply means you will have to work harder for those wins. You will have to try new army compositions, new unit composition, new tactics, and new strategies.

    When all this shakes out and you realize that you no longer 9 flyrants or 12 rhinos and razorbacks, then sell the extras on eBay and get on with your life. But before you complain ‘my army doesn’t work!’ don’t forget…you bought those models. Did you really think you’d be able to play Gladius and Riptide Wing forever?

    • ^^This… so much this.

    • Working harder for wins is the antithesis of competitive play. Thats the whole point of min/maxing, to make the game as easy as possible.

    • Farseerer

      Angus you beautiful man, tell it like it is.

      If you have ever run a Imperial superfriend Deathstar with a Riptide wing or something equally dire and unfluffy just accept that lists like that had to die for 40k to live.

      I understand that in tourneys you’re in it to win it and by all means the rules were there to be abused but the incipient change is good.

    • Troy G

      I feel like you missed the point somewhat dramatically. The army won’t work in the way it was intended to work.

      It might cost more points. It might have more limitations on building an army, and thus you have to take some firewarriors to go with your 7 riptides.

      Either way, if you build towards a certain army, and the rules change, it sucks.

      I had just purchased and built 6 razorbacks to run as Inquisition Razorbacks when Agents of the Imperium came out, and got rid of that option.

      I’ve been running Militarum Tempestus as troops for my inquisitional force. If MT get rolled back into IG as GW has indicated that probably won’t work any more. It will be a bummer, and I’ll move on. Will I still be able to Take MT w/ my inquisition? Almost definitely, but chances are I’ll need some IG troops, and HQ’s in there which will be a bummer.

  • David

    Anyone who invested the time in a competitive army
    Anyone with a summoning army having only just been forced to fork out for a million horrors
    Anyone who likes complexity/tactics
    A large portion of your playerbase who don’t find AOS to be fun

    Mantic, wyrd etc
    That winey person who complains at other armys not being fluffy while running a top tear army and losing massively -with less skill he will definitely have a better chance
    New players trying to learn the rules (although that’s not the same thing as keeping them interested

    • matty199

      You also forgot winners
      – people who like the game mechanics of sigmar
      – people who dont like 7ed and needing a hundred books to play a game

    • orionburn

      So because you may have to learn some new tactics that makes you a loser? Yeah, I’m shedding tears at the guys running an invisible wolf star that can’t use their awesome “tactics” and “competitive” army to cheese their way to a win.

      • David

        No I use aos as a game with no depth I snooze to a win 6/7 games ignoring the objectives it’s great if I’m hung over and want to play it’s significant choice light compared to most other wargames

        Learning different tactics is half the fun as is mixing them up

        The loss of complexity just means you don’t have choice or tactical options. And as a wargamer 40k did complexity better than any other system it’s what separated it if I want a simple game I have aos large or dz small if I want complex I have malifaux small or kow large
        40k competing with kow is fine it competing with aos means they occupy the same space why run two armies

        40k was the best large complex game but make it simple and as players we lose the option so we all lose out

    • Parthis

      “Competitive army”… heh.

      Deathstars are not tactics. Deathstars are not clever.

      You’re part of a very vocal, fairly small group of people who have dominated this ‘scene’ for far too long.

      As an interesting aside, many of the people who fall into your ‘losers’ category have been involved with the development and testing of 8th, and are, publicly, happy.

      The real winners here are the people who want to walk into a GW or FLGS, put models on the table and play games without facing the awkwardness of WAAC netlisters.

      I’m sure Mantic will take your money. I look forward to your army burning video.

      • orionburn

        Agreed. The only guy in our small group that is pitching an absolute fit is that guy that power games, runs wolf stars, a SM list with 40 some grav weapons, or Tau with multiple Riptides and/or Storm Surges. Every one else in our group is excited and many guys that ditched 40k are actually looking forward to playing again.

        I don’t get the hate at having to learn some new tricks with your army. There’s a ton of things in my Dark Angels army that never see the light of day because they’re near useless in 7th right now.

        • Parthis

          “Look at my tactical genius and be awed! For I found a list on the net and have put Azrael with the dog things from the space wolves and now I win!”

          • orionburn

            lol. This is the same guy that recently used his SM Librarian Conclave to summon Blood Thirsters in a game. He’s a good guy but he loves the power game, and sadly that also makes him the guy I like playing against the least.

      • David

        Don’t like an army don’t play it
        either there will be power lists of a different description in which case you will still have them only different
        Or list building becomes as unimportant as aos
        And as someone who never runs the same list twice it’s a big part of the game to lose

        • Parthis

          If you’re someone who never runs the same list twice (which is just fabulous, darling) then surely the idea that an effort to rebalance and make non-relevant units relevant again must interest you.

          Also, the idea that list building in AoS is unimportant is laughable, I can only assume it’s a game system you’ve never spent much time with.

          Well fear not, because you will, we call it 8th and you’re going to love it.

    • Gorsameth

      7th is imo the worst edition since I started playing in 3e for competitive play.
      Your mistaking competitive for money-hammer where the person to spend the most on the latest gimmick wins.

    • Ulrik

      “Anyone who likes complexity/tactics” – yeah? Where it came from? Because you cant make absurd anti-fluff deathstars, it lacks tactics? I dont think so. Au contraire. Deathstars and competetive meta of 7th was death of tactic and boredom. May the deathstars rot in hell 🙂

      • David

        I would rather play a good non fluffy game than a fluffy game with nothing to differentiate it

        Also while I have only once played a deathstar and got board it comes down to are they op and there an interesting option that should be viable but invisibility needed a nerf

    • A game does not need to be complex for there to be tactics present.

      Chess is a perfect example. As is xwing. Both have a large number of tactical applications, and both have very simple rulesets.

      Anyone investing time in a competitive army should already know that since 30 years ago if you want to be “competitive” that you have to chase the meta and constantly acquire a new army on a regular basis.

      Anyone who willingly busted the game with a million horrors does not garner much sympathy lol.

      The concept that a simpler rulebase makes the game easy and that people that need to “git gud” are going to somehow be able to win more is also, quite frankly, absurd.

      • ZeeLobby

        All true.And in some better games you can chase the build meta rather than the faction meta. At least in WMH you see a lot of moving around to different skews rather than having to buy all new armies.

      • David

        Chess has tactics as does not.
        I should have put x wing on my winners list
        I only ran 3units of pink but that’s still 66 blue potentially

        • AOS has plenty of tactics. A tactic is nothing more than a choice. I’ve been playing AOS since release. There is a shed load of choices that have to be made during a game of AOS.

          The whole AOS has no tactics thing is nonsense.

          • Karru

            My reasoning for people saying that “AoS has no tactics” is something like this.

            When people refer to “tactics” they usually refer to things that are mostly reliant on the skill of the player. These are things like Movement, choosing right targets to engage, army synergies through list building and so on.

            These are things that are found in all table top games, so people don’t usually count these. Then comes the “unique” tactics game can offer. For example, Charging in 5th edition was fixed, so it relied on your positioning and movement skills to get your unit close enough to charge. This was a tactic that relied on player’s skill.

            Many of the “unique” things in AoS that could be considered tactics are very random and hardly rely on player’s skill. Magic is heavily luck dependant. You can’t “deplete” your opponent’s defence dice any more. It is also very likely that the opponent can block you with a simple roll.

            Charge ranges are another thing. Yes, you still need skill to manoeuvre, but even the most skilled player, a god of gaming, can fail a charge in certain situations. For example in 7th edition will fail a charge if you roll 4 or less on your charge dice if you charge through difficult terrain and got yourself as close as you possibly could to the enemy.

            It’s the randomness and things that people cannot dictate which causes people to say “this game lacks tactics”.

            AoS has plenty of tactics, but nothing that could be considered unique to it. That is also something to consider.

          • While I agree with all that I feel it is highly disingenuous to make the claim “the game has no tactics”. Consider that WHFB 8th edition also had random charges, random spells, random terrain, etc… but people will claim AOS has no tactics, but WHFB did.

            Player skill is also another thing that is contentious. What randomness does is make you rely more on the skill of adapting and reacting, rather than forcing a tactic that always works.

            Static tactics are like chess in that they always work.

            Some people prefer static tactics over reactionary tactics. But I find neither is more or less “tactical”.

            It is more apt to say “I require a game that has little random elements in it.” No one would argue with that. There is a world of difference between stating “I don’t like this game because I don’t like heavy use of reactionary tactics” over stating “this game has no tactics”.

          • The biggest Issue that I have with static tactics is that every game plays out the same to me.

          • Karru

            Indeed, saying that a game doesn’t have tactics is wrong. It might lack some tactics one desires, but if the game has any interactive elements, it will have tactics.

            I partially disagree with your comment about the “reactionary” tactics instead of static ones. You say that randomness makes you rely more on adaptation and reaction rather than forcing a tactic that always works. I don’t see it that way.

            The problem with randomness is that you can absolutely lose a game because of it. It doesn’t matter how skilled you are, if you roll badly or your army really needs something that is behind a random thing, you can lose. This is why you take the “route of least resistance”. This leads to people choosing “solid” options in attempts to reduce the amount of randomness involved. Which in turn leads to the “same game” being played over and over again instead of trying out multiple different tactics.

            What AoS does well in this regard is the fact that many of the aspects that were random in earlier games, like Psychic Phase in 40k, is that it does give people more “fixed” options. Spells, traits, artefacts. You have loads of options in that regard to play around with.

            Unfortunately it does lead to some very static lists. Once a person finds the “ultimate” combination he wanted, you won’t be seeing much differing from that. This changes between individuals, but this has been my experience thus far.

          • I guess since the random stuff started in 2008 or so, I still see the same people winning most of the time as they were before hand, indicating that the level of random is not as bad and that unskilled players aren’t beating skilled players, indicating to me that player skill is still important.

            The ultimate combinations and min/maxing is why I dislike static tactics, because I get super burned out on playing the same way over a period of time.

            Back in WHFB 5th, 6th, and 7th and 40k 3rd, 4th, and 5th, the lists were also pretty static. My tournament lists at GTs were very similar if not the same as most everyone elses in the gaming hall, and that was at the national level. Thats what led me to quit the hobby for a few years from 2007 – 2010. The samey got to me.

          • David

            Why I say AOS has no tactics is that list building has very little impact if I take wanderers for example they have one good core choice they get better at 20 models however suffer 1 casualty they weaken so you run them in 30’s 3 mandatory core slots – half your army so your lists end up being very similar each game

            as to the game
            try and give initiative to them to avoid the double turn on turn 2

            positioning doesn’t matter much so you deploy so that when your enemy advance they are in range they advance their is no penalty for moving so you retreat so that everything is just in range you shoot

            next turn same thing until they are dead or get a double turn and when you reach the back board edge throw a speed bump in the way.

            Repeat each game and most importantly remember objectives almost never determine game outcome

            So Little choice in list building
            No meaningful choice in positioning
            Single simple optimised strategy
            No meaningful objectives

          • Pretty much every game I’ve played of AOS has relied heavily on objectives. Simply watching the twitch streams from the last GT shows that that is not a correct assessment.

            List building is also huge in AOS (its one of my dislikes in any game).

            Army lists are very similar in every game at the tournament level because people are running what the community has found as optimal. This is true in 40k now. This was true in 40k during the golden years of 3rd – 5th, this was true in WHFB for pretty much forever.

    • Farseerer

      You seem to basically embody what so many people have an issue with in this edition.

      if you expect people to feel sorry for you because you were ”forced to fork out for a million horrors” then I don’t even know what to say.

    • kloosterboer

      “forced”. LOL.

  • OldHat

    Way too early to judge 8th. Why not wait for the entirety of the rules to release before we jump to conclusions? Sheesh.

    • Because some people enjoy ‘speculating’ based on what we already know? Sheesh.

      • OldHat

        This is hardly speculation as much as an ill-informed declaration.

        • Then why are you here? Just to complain and blame others of things you don’t like?

          • OldHat

            Well that escalated quickly.

            You must be new to the internet. This is where anyone can post opinions. I know that must be shocking to such a sweet summer child, but trust me, mine was hardly “complaining” or “blaming”. Save your harsh vibes for the real trolls.

          • Wow. Yes, trying to get to personal attacks is surely the attitude of a good argumentative adult. Well played, sir, well played.

          • OldHat

            Hey, I offer top-notch snark for free. Can’t complain at those prices!

  • m3g4tr0n

    Orks always win, baby!

  • Jason75

    These seem like positive steps for me. I think someone worked out that if you wanted to have all the rules for 40k 7th edition it would cost you something like £2500, money wasted on rules that would be invalid in a few years’ time, which could be better wasted buying plastic models.

    Now, if GW follows some of the pattern of AoS, 40k will be fast to learn, easy to play, hard to master (like Lord of the Rings or War of the Rings), and cheapish to get into, allowing you to get started with as little as a squad and a character, maybe less.

  • Branahar

    12 pages of game rules, are you kidding me, thats going to be a complete nightmare….

    • Farseerer

      why though? Needing 5+ books to just play the current edition is the definition of a nightmare if you ask me. Not to mention it presents a significant barrier of entry for new players -> less people play -> less models are bought -> less money available for product support.

      The more people that play 40k, the more financially viable it is for GW to put out more niche things like plastic DKOK, Sisters and mini factions Like DW and GSC

      • I think there was a bit of sarcasm in there (in the previous 12-page-reply I mean) 😛

        • Farseerer

          Oh right. Sorry for the rant Branahar if you were being sarcastic.

      • David

        Different games for different players. I’m glad their are games that cater for people who like simplified rule sets and its great that GW have AOS I welcome the diversity of choice that offers.

        But if every game follows that direction then there is no differentiation between game systems and it is more likely that people jump from 40k into one of those others. If you are a regular 7th player you like complexity so malifaux must be laughing its head off because they become the most complex game so they are the ones who will get more revenue and be able to make more minis

        GW will be pitting AOS against 40k and FLGS will essentially pick one system and ignore the other why run two armies or only be able to play half the players when you can all pick one and then play each other

      • Branahar

        Condensed rules breed gamesmanship, I haven’t had any problems with 7th. Im talking about core rules only nothing about codexes, which I love.
        The pictures and diagrams have been a blessing.

    • Yeah. Those games like xwing that are leading north american sales with their tiny rulesets… nightmare and failures.

    • Sorien

      Well take out all the pages for special rules (will be on dataslates), unit types, moral and psychic powers..there isn’t much left.

  • Philip Goldsmith

    So, I am that new guy. Got a set of marines/dread/terms from my brother, who had bought some ork/marine two-player box. Hobby store had a handy box of DA colors, so my marines became DA. Then I started collecting books. And Codices, and more books and lists. You know how 40k goes. This was all before even getting my little units to the table. Going from never having done wargaming to doing something like 40k was hard. Never did even get in a full match. Instead, I discovered WarMachine/Hordes, with it’s simple rules, easy to follow gameplay, and ended up going that route.

    I’ve always wanted to get into 40k. I love the setting, the models, and the lore, and still have a soft spot for the DAs, but I don’t have the time or money to throw down on a library just to be able to start deciding what army to build. Do these new rules actually look like they’ll help folks like me, who see it as just a big cluster of contradictions? No one likes to try to play a match, only to have the opponent pull out a rule from a dusty book you’ve never heard of and had no idea existed. Especially not every turn of the match, which is what 40k feels like when you don’t have years of experience and accumulated errata with it.

    • Karru

      It will boil down to GW in the end. AoS is already starting to do something very similar to what 40k 6th/7th did. They release books that add rules for people to use which can create massively different army interaction possibilities and ways to do things differently.

      This is a good thing but also a bad thing. Since you need to get the book in order to have the rules, you won’t know they exists before someone informs you of it, just like 40k does now.

      AoS and the coming 40k will share the same “issue”. While people keep saying that they cut the amount of rules one has to learn, they actually just hide it under the rug. Instead of having one central place for the rules, they are split amongst the hundreds of different units. The rules can have different names, but do the exact same thing.

      It will be easier for you to get into the game. All the rules you need will be in front of you. The core rules might be around 10 pages or maybe even less and the actual rules are spread across the units. So instead of having to go through different sections of the rulebook, you just read the dataslate of the unit as it will have all the rules attached to the unit, except the “core” rules which include movement and so on.

      • Philip Goldsmith

        So similar to the WarmaHordes concept of each unit having it’s unique ‘features’ listed on it’s card, including any rules for it specifically. That isn’t so bad, since it’s easy to just look at it to see what it does, regardless what they call the rule on that particular unit. That’s fine, it actually allows you to have large numbers of unique units that do unique things, without over-doing the books required to play.

        As it stands, I have to have the big core rulebook, then the faction book, then the codex, any errata books for my specific army, then any books or sheets to detail out anything special or unique I get due to unit interactions.

        Looking at that from the outside, it’s intimidating.

        • Karru

          That about sums it up, yes. You can take a look at AoS in the meantime. 8th edition will be heavily based on it with minor differences, so you’ll get the basic idea.

          • Philip Goldsmith

            Excellent, I think I’ll give the AoS rules a look. I’ve considered it, but the models aren’t quite what I’m after. And honestly, I tend to side with whatever models I like best.

  • Winners
    Groups everywhere that will have people that don’t feel the need to have a law degree in 40k to play join them for once.

    People that hated deathstarring.

    People that hated the concept of their opponent bringing a ton of free stuff via formations or summoning.

    People that enjoy rule mastery as a “skill” and enjoyed mastering a 300 page ruleset to get a one-up over the person they were playing.

    People that enjoyed death starring and overwhelming their opponent with min/max units that couldn’t be killed.

    People that enjoyed overwhelming their opponent with 3x the army size via free summoning models.

    Git Gud

  • I’m starting to get the feeling Orks are going to be amazing this edition!

    • Farseerer

      All 5 of the new books are just going to say MOAR DAKKA FUR DE ORKS!!

      • I don’t get it.

        I actually do think Orks will be amazing in 8th edition.

        • Explain in detail.

          • Interesting request.
            It’s just in my blood to be certain about this?
            Detailed enough?

          • I guess I have to live with that. I was curious though what details you see helpful for Orks which I didn’t take into consideration yet. But well, be it as is.

          • If objectives work like they do in AoS, and I think they will but we’ll see, model mass is key to owning objectives. I’ve done well by focusing on where I am scoring points and how many points each objective is worth.
            But it still comes down to model mass.
            Then all I have to worry about is does another army have some kind of Objective secured rule that negates my numbers.
            I’m expecting my walkers to cause all kinds of trouble now and mostly live to talk about it.
            My Battle Wagons! Can’t wait, I basically never use them anymore.
            The problem is I could say IF 8th is like AoS all day. But from what I’ve seen so far, having played Orks for 19 years so far.
            GW makes Boys meaningful on the table top again and I set up my 3 to 1. I can be confident with that. Hell, my shoota boys have already beaten a storm surge nearly to deff last year. And they sucked in close combat.

          • OK, interesting. Thanks.

          • CthulhuDawg

            17 years stuck in with the greenskins and I’m still buying boyz kits. WWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Dead ard’ and proppa!

          • Overwatch still in. Not amused 🙁

          • Overwatches … a unit can over watch more than once…
            Burna boys are looking stronger and stronger!

    • Gorsameth

      moving out of combat hurts melee armies, to hit modifiers hurt low BS armies like Orks more, Armour modifiers hurt low SV armies like Orks more.
      I don’t see how Orks are going to improve in 8th.

      • Maitre Lord Ironfist

        you measure them by the scale of now. But in real we do not know the changes to them in termes of Rules/Stats (maybe) and Gear.

        • Gorsameth

          Ofcourse, everything can change once we have a full picture. But the info we have so far is not good for Orks.

          • Maitre Lord Ironfist

            the psycic stuff at least makes the Wairdboy better x)

            i got my Orcs here 2 Games last year. Just because it is not fun if everything is too expensive and not Worth it. Even withGK i can run more then 1 Way to paly the game.

            I got some hopes, tat i might complet my Orks

          • Super excited about the Warphead now! We don’t even have to roll to miss..er HIT and more ! Make mine a double! Heck if we get anything resembling the Ironjaws Foot of Gork, or what ever it’s called?(Fist of Gork?)
            That just spells doom! Here take a buncha mortal wounds! And again! And again!

          • The ‘foot’ was actually had it’s own blast-marker in 2nd Ed 40k ^^

          • Yep, I have been on the wrong end of that a few times.
            In AoS we’re talking D6 mortal wounds and one a 4+ another and so on until the 4+ doesn’t come up and it can jump from unit to unit. It’s amazing! It’s on my wish list.

      • Burna boys? That’s how I’m going to do it. Lots of burna business after I back out of combat with some grots. Followed by a charging Deff Dread!

  • Ravingbantha

    Just because everything is being revamped and redone, does not mean things will be balanced or fixed. I’m not saying things won’t be, or can’t be, but it’s still the same people that screwed things up to begin with. How about we wait till the game launches before we actually start talking about how the game is. All we have now is just tid bits

  • Crablezworth

    My architect git frustrated with his last house and instead of fixing it set it on fire. I can’t wait for the house he’s designing for me…

  • DeadlyYellow

    Call my a cynic but I’m wagering the big winner is still going to be whichever army is on showcase.

  • Cody Raugh Ferguson

    Big loosers here is SoB. SM will basically have everything that made them special. Their flame template use has been nerfed, and now even Celestine has gotten less effective all while still not having anything to make them capable of being effective in melee or at further than 12 inches.

  • Baldrick

    So one must not blood rage and get excited about change too quickly…..one should generally wait until the final ruleset is out for 8th Ed, BUT!, no more psychic phase….this is great news. Wonderful. Tone down in Psychic powers…this is great.
    Overall , based on the very limited leaks of 8th Ed, its sounding like 8th Ed is a cross over between 2nd ED and 4/5th Ed……….

  • highwind

    “I dont know the new rules but I do know who does profit from them and who not!”

  • Sparowl

    “Speaking of competitive, it sounds like this edition was balanced with competitive mindset which is great for players like me.”

    Competitive 40k?

    That was a good chuckle. I look forward to future satirical articles.