40K 8th Edition: 5 Early Takeaways

We are only days away from 40K 8th arriving, and from the GW teases we can finally get a handle on the game.

In no particular order here’s my initial thoughts on 8th Edition:

 

These will obviously evolve as I get the full rules and some test games under my belt.

Nice of you Primaris Marines to take our knee-pads…

It’s NOT Age of Sigmar – but you can see the 8 Realms from your drop-pod…

GW said the game wouldn’t be Age of Sigmar and they didn’t lie. Unit statlines, army construction and things like command points all show a complexity that exceeds Age of Sigmar, and pull from 40K rules heritage. The rules are certainly not 4 pages long.

They are 8.  The datasheets share a lot of shared philosophy with AoS Warscrolls and there is more in common now between a Kharadron Overlord Airship and a Rhino than you would think. Apparently in 2017, ultra clean slimmed down rules is the new black – across the entire tabletop industry.

 

The Sameness of Units is a Feature – not a bug

Get ready for the general homogenous-ness of all units in the game. The unified statline is the final nail in the coffin for GW trying for decades to nail down exactly how to handle vehicles. So don’t fret to much on the statlines – its the on-page rules that truly define your favorite units.

Commander REVERSE! Those 500 Chaos Cultists have hammers!

NOTHING is Safe

The grand unified stat-lines and the updated toughness/strength chart means the game is going to feel closer to a tabletop version of Dawn of War. If you just shoot or punch at anything enough – it will die. There are no more sacred cows.  You also have the ability to “brute force” your way out of bad unit mismatches, where in earlier editions you might have just been screwed in a Kobayashi Maru encounter.

It’s Going to be Bloody

This is a corollary to “NOTHING is Safe”. The teasers have reminded me of the mindset of playing Apocalypse games. The primary hallmark of that rulesset is that no matter how badass your uber model/unit is, it’s going back into the army bag when anything gives it some serious firepower attention.  Apocalypse games are also known for their incredible number of casualties, with only the dregs of both armies still slugging it out in the final turns.  I think 8th will have this vibe.

We’re back baby!

Variety is the Spice of Life

It sounds like GW has really tried to give every unit in the game a new lease on life.  For the last year or so – we haven’t really been playing in the Grimdark. 7th Edition has made us field armies of the best 10% of overbalanced units min/maxed with formations to slam against each other like an incredibly expensive version of Rock’Em Sock’em Robots.  I really think 8th is going to pull thousands of old dusty units off shelves and make every pickup game you play something new and interesting.

~ Agree, disagree, asleep?

  • James Drazic

    I noticed something interesting about that eagle. in all previous editions the blind eagle is the one looking to the future, while the sighted eagle is the one looking back to the past.

    In this edition, the sighted head is now the one looking to the future, whilst the blind head is now looking to the past.

    Just something to consider.

    • ieyke

      Guilliman’s back, baby!

      • Old zogwort

        Just in time to burn that xenophilic heretic with warp fire

      • Unless he’S actually Alpharius (who is really omegon)

    • Hawt Dawg

      Oh, I Iike that.

    • phobosftw

      More like James Eagle Eye Drazic amirite

    • AircoolUK

      …and that fact alone is probably reason enough for someone to set their army alight and post it on youtube.

    • Andy Wise

      That’s a great pick up. Well observed; you have the eyes of a, well, a sighted, forward looking eagle.

  • Brian Griffith

    You can’t really “brute force” big things like Knights. Yeah, you can try and plink away at them and hope to carve away their wounds but there are weapons that are better at doing that. Math isn’t on your side trying to take down a Knight with small arms fire in six turns.

    Mind you if you want to focus small arms fire at a big model I certainly won’t talk you out of it during a match. Just be aware that if you’re taking your eyes off my smaller models, they’re not gonna just sit there.

    • Jeremy Larson

      The point being if you brought an infantry-killer army currently, and wound up facing a bunch of Knights, you might as well shake hands and pack up your army. Now, you can at least attempt to ‘Brute-Force’ things. No, it’s not mathematically optimal, but it’s certainly possible. And this is IN ADDITION to any tactics you’d have currently, like trying to tie them up and wait things out.

      • NNextremNN

        Well we can now play Attack on Titan and actually have a chance of winning XD

      • Brian Griffith

        I see it more that if you overspecialize, you’re gonna get pantsed.

        7th was an edition in which we saw a lot of hyperspecialized lists. That worked because aside from a very select few who were insane savants, there wasn’t a whole lot of variety in the tournament meta. There were widely copied “optimized” builds, and if it wasn’t optimized it wasn’t worth playing.

        I’m looking forward to an edition that doesn’t require me to commit to a single strategy to the point where I’m required to spam stuff. You need a can-opener? Single can-opener units are good enough to be a threat, maybe two if you want to give your opponent some hard decisions on where he wants to focus his attention. You wanna be ready for hordes too? Well you have room for that now because you didn’t have to sink 1k points purely into anti-armor.

      • Flipmode

        Yeah…. But now you don’t get any bonus for getting behind that Knight army. It really is just focus fire, brute force and getting efficiency out of your bonuses.

        I fear this edition isn’t going to be an especially deep experience.

        • Muninwing

          the missions are perhaps what will save that… and i’m hoping that the fusion of narrative and competitive play will be easier than they are considering, and can create a new style closer to what i ideally like.

          use points. but have set balanced goals.

          ideally, have flippable sides. in other words, set plus and minus VP conditions, then play the mission with only one player scoring (the other player’s successes reduce player one’s points instead of gaining them for player 2).

          then switch, and using the same armies play the same mission again. with the same scoring, and compare the scores.

    • Carey_Mahoney

      Second paragraph is epic!

    • grim

      Oh no you can brute force them. It’s called a shadowsword:)

  • Karru

    The main problem I have with the edition right now is the focus shift they did. They purposefully changed unit entries around and cut certain ones into multiple pieces to people would be forced to buy larger detachments.

    For example, Nobz were gutted into 2 entries, because reasons. Nobz are one Elite choice while the Nobz carrying the WAAAAGH!-banner is another. Guard suffered the same fate. Company Command Squad is now 5 Entries, if you count the staff. For every Company Command Squad, you have to use 1 Elite and 1 HQ slot. For every Platoon Command, you use 2 Elite slots. This is a very sneaky and annoying way to force people to buy larger armies, because they need larger detachments. Especially once they start dropping useful Stratagems, detachments become a must.

    Then there is the entire blast are worthless thing. It still annoys me how badly they did it. How did anyone think it would be a good idea for a 179pts thing to average out more damage from its Heavy Bolters than it does from its Main gun?

    While this game might be an improvement over 7th, it has done a lot of gutting in order to accomplish that. It is clear to me that many house rules will be set in place in order to make the game better, these will most likely be aimed at how unit entries work and how blasts work.

    I’m already working on a list of house rules myself. First is the blast change. The other is slot merging. Characters that used to be part of units, but were removed because logic, will just be an added cost to the original unit and do not take up any additional slots.

    • Simon Chatterley

      Yes….how dare a business try and sell more stuff to its customers.

      This edition is not even officially out yet and with no practice games at all you state it needs house rules.

      Why not play 10 games with various forces against varied opponents before you state the edition doesn’t work.

      • Hawt Dawg

        When will you smart people learn? Reason STILL has no place on the internet.

        • Crablezworth

          that’s also true

        • Sorry, the Cult of GW cannot claim reason to his cause, because instead of actually engaging with people who don’t like something you like, you belittle them and there arguments. Smug as you lot want to be, you are just as illogical for assuming this edition will be awesome as the people who assume it will be bad.

          • Hawt Dawg

            I love it how you waste time on me.

            And play the Defender of All on the internet.

      • Karru

        Math is a powerful tool, and actually pretty accurate in the grand scheme of things. D6 shots from a Leman Russ averages to 2 hits, which leads to whopping 1-2 damage done to the target! So yes, there needs to something done to Blast weapons to make them more viable and useful.

        Also, there is a difference between encouraging and forcing people to buy more models. The entire system they now have in place doesn’t encourage larger collections, it forces them. You have to buy multiple detachments because you can’t fit your units otherwise. Again, 2 Slots are required for what once was 1 HQ choice. SM has it even worse, it now takes 4 slots for the Command Squad, thanks to the fact that the Banner Bearer, Apothecary, Company Champion and the Company Veterans are all separate entries. You don’t see that as a dumb thing? Forcing people to take 4 Elite slots so they can field a unit that once was a single entry?

        • Marco Marantz

          Isnt the average of a D6 3.5?

          • ILikeToColourRed

            aye but the battlecannon is d6 shots, and needs to roll to hit (guard are 50% accuracy when full health)

          • Marco Marantz

            cool thanks….yes so the avg is not even 2 but close enough to….then the wound roll….hmmm. I dont understand why they didnt make bursts function like how D weapons work…on a 1 it misses everyone, less than BS its D3 hits and BS or more+ its D6. that way average BS is not going to suffer that much. Guard vehicles should be 3+ to hit anyway. Vehicles (with targeters) are their ‘thing’

          • ILikeToColourRed

            comparatively the necron monolith gets a straight 6 shots with its main gun (used to be a 36″ range battle cannon)

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Because marines need to hit better because they have fancy pants helmets. Also, because they are marines.

        • Bonesaw1o1

          couple of things I want to cover here.
          Firstly the heavy bolters vs battle cannon thing, yes I think randomised D6 was perhaps poorly chosen (perhaps 3+d3, that’s at least always 4) however the battle cannon is now much better at killing multi wound models like vehicles and monstrous creatures/heavy infantry because it does D3 damage with every wound, unlike the heavy bolters which do 1. Also taking into account the new wounds table, shooting against something toughness 6-7 (ie a basic vehicle or monstrous creature) the heavy bolters will only wound on a +5 for only 1 damage while the battle cannon is wounding on a +3 for 1-3 damage. the d3 damage is going to be especially valuable for making casualties from multi wound units ie tyranid warriors or tau battlesuits. I know the idea of rolling a 1 vs a big unit of orks sounds unappealing, but its actually somewhat realistic considering that tanks have machine-guns specifically for engaging infantry while the big gun is for killing tanks/bunkers etc.

          2. yes they have divided up some units just for the sake of dividing them (ie separate entry for sanguinary priest vs priest on bike). However there is an advantage to having split these into 4 entries, because beyond taking up a slot there isn’t any restriction on how many you can have per army. ie if I want to I can have 2 apothecaries and put them wherever I need them in my army, I don’t have to buy an unwanted champion and banner bearer simply because I wanted an apothecary and some kitted out veterans to buff up my chapter master. Also there are more slots in a standard detachment now. For instance the battalion detachment (roughly 1500-2000 points) has 6 available elites slots, so unless you were running an army with 3 elite units AND a command squad you should still be just fine fitting a full command squad on the table, and in the worst case you can just ditch the least useful member *cough* company champion *cough* and you’ve still got most of the squad

          • Karru

            I am sure you also noticed that the requirements also increased for the detachments. You now need 1 additional HQ as well as 1 additional Troop Choice for the Battalion.

            Also, you forget one little thing. The Command Squad you mentioned for example. The Company Champion was an option for the unit, you didn’t pay for him by default, he was an option, same as the Apothecary. Now, if someone wants to field the entire Command Squad, they need to spent 4 Elite slots for it. Tough luck if they want to field any Dreadnoughts or other Elite units, you are forced to take another detachment, in which you have to take more units that you might have not wanted, such as extra HQ choices or Troops.

            The fact is that it was unnecessary to split them like that. If nothing else, they could have easily just added some extra wording in there. Command Squad for example, “If you have taken either Apothecary and/or Company Champion, you can merge them into one unit. Should you choose to do so, they are no longer counted as separate choices and are considered only one Elite choice.”

            This also makes certain models very vulnerable. For example, the Company Commander or Platoon Commander of the Imperial Guard. Come within 12″ or just take a unit of Snipers, pop goes the weasel and no orders for the Guard player.

            As for your Battle Cannon comment, have you checked how “powerful” that thing really is? Let’s shoot it at a unit of Warriors:

            D6 shots, so 4 average, which leads to 2 hits because BS 4+.

            Wounds on a 2+, so that’s around 1-2 wounds, but I’ll make it a 2.

            Now, -2 to save, +1 from Cover which is a must for Warriors as you really want that Synapse over their “frontline fighting abilities”. That means they are getting a 5+ save against it. 1 wound gets through.

            Now the damage, D3 averages to 2. Gratz, your 179pts model could even kill a single Tyranid Warrior.

            Let’s add those Heavy Bolters in there:

            9 Shots, 5 hits, 3 wounds, 1-2 wounds caused. Amazing, right? The Heavy Bolters did around the same amount of damage as the Battle Cannon did to the unit of Warriors.

            Blasts are pointless now. Templates have their uses, but any weapon that was a Blast is now extremely unreliable.

          • Dan Brugman

            Note that one of the detachments is 1 hq and 3 elites mandatory plus up to 6 additional elites, just take that as a second detachment and your set. There’s also a detachment for 3-5 HQs, so add those to a vanguard detachment as your main and your problem is what exactly?

          • Karru

            So your solution to a problem where I mentioned that you are forced to take additional units is to take additional units?

            So let’s say I go with the Battalion Detachment and Vanguard Detachment. That is a minimum of 3 HQ’s, 3 Troops and 3 Elites. I, for one, don’t really like to use HQ’s that much, especially in this edition where they are less useful in fights thanks to the fact that they charge separately from units.

            The problem still is that GW is forcing people to take larger armies. They purposefully split certain units, because they wanted to force people to take multiple detachments. For example, Runtherds are now an Elite Choice, so if you want Grots, you need to take a Troop Slot and an Elite slot.

            I was just taking an inventory for my Orks and noticed I have 3 HQ’s now. Painboys are no longer HQ’s, they are Elites. This means I can take 1 Brigade Detachment or 1 Battalion and one additional “minor” detachment, unless I buy more Warbosses or Big Meks.

            Currently a good chunk of old HQ units are now Elites, because F you, that’s why. You are now forced to buy Captains, Warbosses, Chaos Lords and so on in bulks because you have little choice in the matter if you want support characters or elite units. Your other option is to not take Command Points and take them separately using the Auxiliary Support Detachment.

          • captkaruthors

            No they don’t. You can take single units as auxiliary choices. So you’re fine.

          • Karru

            And lose one command point for each one.

          • Erich Schoenholtz

            Which isn’t much when certain detachments are adding more to your command point pool total anyways.

          • KingAceNumber1

            “Blasts are pointless now. Templates have their uses, but any weapon that was a Blast is now extremely unreliable.”

            Play AdMech, one of our best weapons in 8th is a blast. Neutron Laser is d3 hits, s10, ap-4, d6 damage, but 1 and 2 on the damage roll turn into 3

          • AircoolUK

            D3+3 would be totally overpowered because it doesn’t take into account that blasts could deviate and hit nothing. On top of that, there were rare cases where you’d either hit your own troops, or the unit firing the weapon.

            Also, small blast templates were rarely used due to their lack of reliability.

            The biggest problem of templates was the way it forced units to use maximum spread. That was unfair on a lot of armies.

          • Muninwing

            d3+3 with a roll to hit would mean an average of 5 shots per turn, which would statistically point toward 2 hits every time.

            which is not how i ever rolled.

            i would miss big with everything in one turn, and then hit ten each with three pie plates the next.

            i think that the Battle Cannon has changed its role. it is no longer a horde clearer. it is an elite killer, which doubles as a vehicle grinder.

          • Karru

            I’d like to see what Elite unit you are planning on hunting with that thing. Nobz? That seems to be the only unit it can damage.

            Against Terminators, it has to get through a 3+ or a 4+ save depending on the Cover. Even then, it requires a 3+ to kill one model in the unit when it damages something.

            Against Warriors, on average, that thing does a massive 2 damage! It doesn’t even have enough damage attached to it on average to kill one Warrior.

            The fact is that the Battle Cannon has a hard time killing anything or even damaging them. That -2 is almost meaningless thanks to the fact that most of the time, the enemy will be getting a Cover save, so it is basically -1 at that point. On top of that, it can’t hit the broadside of a barn from inside and does very little damage as it is still only D3.

          • Muninwing

            terminators are a unit of 5 for over 200 points. kill one (two get hit, 4+ saves one) and you’re not doing nothing. then add in the other weapons… the las so many mount on the front, if it hits, will more reliable kill one. and HB sponsons if taken will have a small chance of killing another. and while ASTKNF gives a reroll, any unit that takes a wound has to make morale.

            the battle cannon isn’t what it was. but it’s going to have its uses. and if you don’t think so, there are plenty of turret variations to switch it with instead. the Vanquisher will be better at antitank, the exterminator at antihorde, the executioner anti-heavy-infantry…

            it’s a middle-ground weapon that is utilitarian, but not specialized enough to really do well at one role or another. i actually wonder if that will be far more useful if more variation of units are appearing on the table.

          • Karru

            With the current pricing and the way detachments work, you are much, much better off with taking Heavy Weapon Squads over Leman Russes. For every Full HB Leman Russ, you can get 9 Autocannons or 7 Lascannons/Missile Launchers. Even if they are less survivable than the Leman Russ, at least they have 3 things going for them. They have better damage output, can get even better with Orders and are multiple targets for the enemy to shoot at.

            Leman Russ has now been made irrelevant. All the variants are also nerfed to the ground. Exterminator was intentionally gutted so it wouldn’t be useful. Exterminator has a high chance to cripple itself whenever it fires and Nova Cannon has as bad damage output than the Battle Tank. Demolisher is a joke and Punisher lacks AP. You will always be better off with taking other options in the book instead. Heavy Weapon Squads and Sentinels are far better and more flexible. The only advantage that the Russ has is the fact that it has wounds and takes longer to die. That’s it. It has very little damage potential and as such serves as nothing more than a brick on the table.

          • Muninwing

            executioner, not exterminator. exterminator is now pretty fun — 4 autocannon shots. with a heavy stubber and 3 HB sponsons, it’s probably the best infantry killer that still can harass lighter vehicles. but the punisher is definitely going to lead in mook killing.

            and “takes longer to die” is actually a great reason to take them. if half of the heavy teams get killed in shooting during round one, and the rest get killed in round two, they have limited effectiveness. whereas the Leman Russ might be plugging away at enemies until the very end, when it can matter the most.

            again, it’s an all-rounder. just coming out of an edition where so many people were focused on extreme min/maxxing, it’s easy to fall back into that trap. but i think it’s going to be a little more complicated than that.

          • Karru

            Now fixed, why couldn’t they name them more different! *shakes fist angrily*

            I still find Leman Russes to be almost worthless. Get them to half wounds, which isn’t that difficult really, and they are useless. 5+ to-hit makes their already limited number of hits even less likely to hit.

          • Muninwing

            they added the executioner in 4th. the exterminator has been around since 3rd. i have two in my Armored Company.

            they are like anything else. they have their uses. but as a treadhead player, i love how much more survivable they are and how much less likely they are to actually do nothing (or nothing good for me) on bad rolls.

            i really need to see what FW does with the tank hunter though to really make the call as to what i will do with my AC…

            the 4th edition version was awesome: ordnance, so rolled for damage on the better table twice and took the better result… rolled to hit, but placed a small blast that was S10AP2… if an Ace was piloting, with Ace Gunner, you hit on 3s and rerolled 1s, virtually guaranteeing a first turn vehicle kill, and the 6 on the damage table vaporized all occupants if it was a transport.

            the rules after 5th have been useless. almost to pay back for how awesome it was. if it’s still not playable, i’ll run my conversion as a jagdtiger-style vanquisher.

          • Muninwing

            a battle cannon shot by an IG tank is, statistically, identical in effectiveness to a SM with a krak missile against armor.

            i did some mathing — compared a number of various vehicles, rounded the same way on everything, uniformly ignored cover, and found some interesting numbers.

            the spread is huge for antitank, versatile, and anti-infantry weapons. bolters *can* take down anything, but they won’t. i first started this as a “how many lasgun shots will it take…” to feed my curiosity, but added more to give it an all-around feel.

            i want to add meltas next, see how they compare.

            but…

            a landraider is 18 SM lascannon, 1152 lasgun, 864 bolter, 32 battle cannon, 32 SM krak missile, 32 battle cannon

            whereas a Stompa is 41 SM lascannon, 3240 lasgun, 2430 bolter, 60 SM krak, 60 battle cannon

            and a Landspeeder Vengeance is 8 SM lascannon, 162 lasgun, 97 bolter, 10 krak, 10 battle cannon

            what i’ve learned is that LRBTs need to be command vehicles, with variants being the tanks-of-the-line in an Armored Company. the added to-hit will help when trying to do multiple wounds.

            i’ve also learned that statistically higher AP does better against higher armor, but for lower T a battle cannon is actually not far off from a Lascannon… it takes avg 11 lascannon teams to take out a LSV, whereas it only takes 10 Battle Cannon rounds. but against a Landraider, it’s almost a 3:5 ratio, and a stompa it’s getting on 2:3.

            but i have not factored terrain. i have not factored best-case and worst-case scenarios. i have rounded down as much as possible. so of course this is just a general estimation.

            i would, however, hardly say that the LRBT is useless. i will agree that certain variants might be much better off, but that’s a different conversation.

            then again, with the orders “Strike and Shroud” (shoot then pop smoke) and “Kill on Sight” (reroll 1s), the tanks also become better just as the weapons teams do, and like the SM cannot. so there are even more factors that even just survivability that can effect the real usefulness

          • AircoolUK

            Certain units can’t claim a cover bonus unless they’re at least 50% obscured.

          • It’s the best out of a bunch of poor choices, and it’s not terribly good at killing elites. d3+3 isn’t the only way they could have sorted it out. 2D3 would have been better, but only Space Marines can get that, because reasons.

          • AircoolUK

            To me, it’s an all rounder. Decent at hurting armour, but not as well as dedicated anti-armour, and also can be used to smear a few infantry if need be.

            Instead, infantry is going to get introduced to the Heavy Bolter, which is actually viable for the first time in decades.

          • Muninwing

            because they could shoot them and move in 4th, when i built my AC, most of my LRs have HBolters, even in the front. i had to do some modding to get them there, but i’ve got them.

        • Crablezworth

          its pretty dumb

        • captkaruthors

          You aren’t reading enough. Auxiliary slots account for that. You are speaking about things you aren’t fully aware of.

          • Karru

            You do realise that you are losing one command point for each one you take, right?

          • Commissar Molotov

            Don’t stop him now – he’s busy speaking about things he isn’t fully aware of!

        • Muninwing

          2 hits, at d3 wounds each… that’s 2-6 wounds, average 3.

          as good or better than a lascannon. both at anti-armor and at anti-infantry. especially elite infantry, like terminators.

          take a command tank and hit on 3s.

          • Karru

            mmmmmm… Battle Cannon is Damage D3, you know that, right?

          • Muninwing

            already switched it

          • Karru

            You seem to completely jump over two things. Armour Save and the Wound roll. The Battle Cannon is only -2. That means it is only reducing the enemy save by -1 majority of the time. Terminators are getting a 3+ save against it. SM are getting a 4+, Warriors a 5+ and so on. You also need to wound the thing, so rolling a 1 with either dice means one less wound through.

            On average, you are looking at 1 wound done, which is 2 damage on average. Against vehicles and monsters, it will be lucky to even get that much through. Needing a 4+ or a 3+ to wound and reducing the enemy save by -1/-2 means they are getting a 4+ or 5+ against the shots as well.

          • Muninwing

            you are always assuming cover save, which is not a given, and is tainting all your assumptions. again, target priority and firing lanes are a big part of play. funny enough, you also seem to be forgetting this when comparing. lascannons miss entirely half of the time, and with cover are saved against 1/3 of the time.

            you are also seeming to forget that lascannons only have one better ap.

            and a 1 with either die is a risk i’m willing to take. the more likely payout is better. and scatter always made ordnance a crapshoot anyway — sometimes for worse for you than others. i love not being able to accidentally hit my own units with a bad roll.

            there are no guarantees. but a battle cannon has the (highly unlikely, critical-level) potential to do 18 wounds in one round.

          • Karru

            Considering few things about the new ruleset, one can freely assume that most targets will be in cover. First of all, Cover no longer does nothing to hinder your movement in any way. In that case, why would you ever leave it and not get your +1 save?

            Secondly, I don’t know if you play on planet bowling ball, but our tables usually have very little straight lanes of fire for the same reasons why 7th edition was made boring. Lots of LoS blocking terrain, forests, ruins and other bits and pieces litter our tables to make sure that camping armies won’t be able to dominate the table while Assault armies can still get close enough while hopping from cover to cover.

          • Muninwing

            so you’re admitting that it matters what board you play on…

            and that everyone getting cover all the time will affect how all weapons perform…

            ok.

            just figure it in to your comparisons.

            because a lascannon team in those conditions is hitting on 3s, wounding most vehicles on 5s, denied the shot on a 4, and then doing its d6 damage… and only has one shot. that’s [(1/2)*(2/3)*(1/2)=(1/6)] only a one-in-6 chance of doing its damage… which could be only one wound.

          • AircoolUK

            If you factor cover into your calculations, you therefore have to shift the relative performance of every weapon with which you compare to factor in cover as well.

            So just ignore cover, it skews the results and subsequent perceptions.

          • AircoolUK

            Assuming cover is stupid as that would mean every other weapon comparison you make would have to assume cover as well.

            So you may as well not assume cover if you want an accurate measure of how the weapons compares against others.

            Plus, picking a target with multiple wounds, an outlier save and an invulnerable save is going to make any weapon look rubbish!

      • JJ

        Who said no practice games? I played 2 last night!

    • AircoolUK

      Sounds like a great way to screw up balance.

      Blasts have been problematic in every edition. The biggest problem being how to resolve getting the shot on target, and how/which targets get hit by the blast.

      In some editions, BS had little to do with the accuracy of the blast, and in others it had a great influence. Then there was all the problems with armour facing and cover saves. Sometimes the ‘direction’ of the blast was taken from the centre of the template, and at other times, the direction of the blast was drawn from the model firing the weapon.

      Finally, cover… whether it was a hit modifer or a save modifier, there were still the problems outlined above.

      The fact is, there was no reliable way to integrate BS into both the placement of the template and the number of models hit/direction of blast/armour facing without adding an extra layer of complexity that was just some arbitrary dice throw unrelated to the profile of the model.

      So why not just take the two steps – BS to-hit roll and arbitrary dice throw and cut out the middle man. The rules might now be a lot more abstract, but the overall result is similar.

      • Karru

        My intended way of working with Blast Weapons in this edition would have been this:

        Battle Cannon: Strength 8 AP -2 Damage D3, Heavy 1 (2D6)

        You roll to-hit normally using the vehicles BS. If you hit, you roll the number of hits indicated within the brackets. So in the case of the Battle Cannon, you would cause 2D6 HITS on the unit. If you missed, you rolled half the number indicated, so D6 in the case of the Battle Cannon.

        No blast templates required, the rule is still simple and there is no hassle. The weapon works and isn’t too powerful, at least in my opinion.

        • KingAceNumber1

          I agree with everything except a miss still causing damage. In this case your shot is abstracted to either “any sort of hit” (your initial hit, which then causes 2d6 hits on the unit) or “a total miss” which is nothing and represents scatters. In this case, rolling double 1’s on the 2d6 would be a representation of the blast only catching a few dudes, or a partial hit. Having a weapon that always does d6 hits even if you totally miss is a little much, but I agree that where they are is iffy.

          • Karru

            Another alternative I was thinking was to make it work was to make it just like it is now. If you missed, you rolled D6 shots and then rolled to hit again. That made it sound more complicated and “tiresome”.

            One alternative would be to make it something like D6 hits if you hit and get +1 hit for every 5 models after 5 models, so +1 if the unit has 10 models, +2 if it has 15 and so on.

            Still, most of the time, blasts at least hit something if it missed, at least against large units. Maybe something could be done to reflect that. Maybe you get the “extra hits” if you miss the target as your “hits”, representing that against a large unit, you still get something with shrapnel and such. I admit that it does make little sense why you would get D6 hits against a single Dreadnought if you miss.

        • Muninwing

          that’s far better than battle cannons are now…

          far better.

          even missing, you still want one guaranteed hit? somehow i think those numbers are not good. and to tweak them to be better would get far more complicated.

          i’d rather just make it 2d3 and call it a day. ups the averages while still not being stupid.

        • Fergie0044

          I’d rather see the number of hits changing depending on the size of the target unit.
          Your BC simply cannot miss, which I think is way too powerful.

        • AircoolUK

          But you’ve now just created the game’s best anti-armour weapon capable of causing up to 36 damage. One shot could take out anything in the game… it’s preposterous!

          Not only that, but you’ve still got the potential to cause 18 DAMAGE WITH A MISS!

          I’m now thinking that you’re the guy who wrote the Grey Knights Codex…

          • Karru

            Absolutely amazing.

            So then I take it you agree with me that Knight should be nerfed even more then? It has the potential to cause up to 36 damage as well with the Rapid Fire Battle Cannon and has the durability of a god pretty much. Maybe make it a D6 shots as well, I mean, if even 18 potential damage is all that matters and is still too powerful, I guess we should nerf blasts even more.

            Just ignore the math, just look at the max damage.

    • Muninwing

      i’m looking at blast-replacement and thinking that it’s not very far off. some roles may have changed, but that may not be for the worse.

      a Leman Russ battle cannon is not the template horde killer it was. but it’s great at anti-vehicle shenanigans. and it’s great at anti-elite effect. not every shot will hit (just like templates).

      if it turns out to be too skewed statistically, we’ll see them correct the profile to something like “Heavy 2+d6” for an average of 2-3 hits per round with the possibility of 0-8.

      then again, 8 hits, if not saved, could be 48 wounds on a big one that’s killing a Stompa in one round. more likely, it’ll do 6-9, which thus far is the one thing i’ve seen that can kill a Dreadnought in one go.

      • Karru

        Again, the average Battle Cannon does 2 damage, if you round up per volley. This is not good in any role. It can’t even kill a single Tyranid Warrior, shooting at anything with a 3+ save (which is most vehicles) that thing has little to no chance of damaging it even once.

        • Muninwing

          maybe warriors are not the right choices then? target priority is part of playing the game.

          and with a -2, a vehicle’s 3+ becomes a 5+ (and pulls even with the 5++ vs shooting that certain units get). it’s not an impenetrable shield.

          • Karru

            But when you only average out 1 wound, that 5+ becomes quite the problem. Especially since you are doing a whooping 2 damage on average to something that has 7+ wounds.

          • Muninwing

            compare it with other weapons though

            looking at one battle cannon, it’s not doing everything. but neither is one lascannon, one missile launcher, or one melta.

          • Karru

            I compare it by pricing. For one Battle Cannon, I can take almost 7 Lascannons. Let’s say I shoot a Dreadnought. So, that’s 4 hits, 2 wounds, -2 to save (with cover) so a 5+ save. Let’s say it saves 1. 4 Damage. Twice the damage that a Battle Cannon would have done, same price.

          • Muninwing

            you have to also price by survivability. those lascannon teams are very easy to kill.

          • AircoolUK

            I’m pretty sure the playtesters would have headed down this route at some point…

            …and to cut a long story short, decided that the Battle Cannon should have the stats given above, along with its points value.

  • Fergie0044

    Having glanced over the leaked rules for Chaos and Admech I’ve now lost a lot of my excitement for 8th. It’s all just so … bland. I’ve only just started my Admech army so I couldn’t say if they got nerfed or not, but all the fun uniqueness seems to have been sucked out of them! And compared to the current legion rules, chaos seems to also be lacking in flavour.

    I can live and hope that the new codex will sort this out and these are only a stop-gap solution but for now I’ll stick with 7th.

    • BrassWitch

      They got quite the swing from the nerf bat. At least cawl is still a nice mini I guess.

      • Tshiva keln

        Can you really say they are nerfed? Until we play we won’t really know. You have to remember quite a bit of the game has changed – not only will your units behave differently on the table but so will the opponent’s. Rules and numbers may have changed but you have to take it in context with the new game, not the old one before you can truly say they are nerfed. Also if we are to believe all units and armies are more balanced than they were before, then logically any that were nerfed were overpowered to start with. Personally I doubt everything is balanced yet but I hope they errata as they go on and over time we will get there.

      • KingAceNumber1

        Simplification bat != nerf bat. I am happy with admech in 8th. There’s still a lot of power in the army.

        • Fergie0044

          Could be my own bias but I really liked the sicarians (as models) so them now sucking really burned me. sure they’re cheaper but who wants a horde elite unit?

          • KingAceNumber1

            I don’t think they suck. Infiltrators getting to be placed wherever is great, popping up behind an IG weapons team and unloading those flechette shots at them is super useful, or even charging off the infiltrate with goads. Rust stalkers are a bit harder to use but hit like a truck if you can deliver them, at least theoretically. Plus no instant death helps both units a lot. I think if you have enough threats they can absolutely play havoc with your opponents backline models and flankers. They are definitely less good than in 7th but so is everything in every army with a few exceptions. They’re also pretty cheap points wise.

          • Fergie0044

            I’m new to the Admech so I could be wrong but on paper they’re; slower, no FNP (they already had 6++), no stealth, no AP after round 2 of combat, neurostatic is less powerful, no scout, no crusader, no grenade option for ruststalkers, no extra attack for bringing two swords and no furious charge.

            Meanwhile infiltrators can now infiltrate better than before (not new, just better), ruststalkers rending is better and they’re cheaper. I no longer think 5 man squads are viable which for me doesn’t fit with the ‘elite murder bots’ thing they had going.

    • The Index books are just “get you by” rules, so you can start playing 8th with whatever army you have from day 1.

      I think the new Space Marine and Nurgle codexes (which I am assuming will be the first two released) will be when we really see what 8th has to offer.

      • Karru

        And that’s the problem. For the next year or so, we’ll be seeing mostly Guilmarines, some Space Marines, with luck some other Imperials and few Chaos. Until then, if you chose any other army, you are boned for a few years most likely. All you have to do is check on Death over at AoS and you’ll know what I mean.

        • I agree, but what’s the alternative? Seems to me, this is really the only practical way they could do a clean break from 7th.

          • Fergie0044

            Yea yea, complain as I might this is probably the best way. Doing full codexs for everyone at launch would have been too big a job and probably ended up leaving them rushed and messy.
            Here’s hoping we get them in months and not years time.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Considering at the rate they pumped out 7th ed codexes the last two years, I do not see this as a problem.

          • Crablezworth

            or they could have just, you know, fixed 7th. I hate when babies get in my bathwater..

        • AircoolUK

          Everyone has to accept the fact that 8th is pretty much a whole new game, whereas all the other editions, even the ones with large changes were still the same game at the core.

          Unfortunately, because it’s a new game, we have to wait for codexes and new units/mini’s. If you’re not happy with the ‘quick fix Index books’, there’s nothing to stop people from playing the current or previous editions.

          However, it does’t matter how much people complain about a new edition, they still always end up playing it.

          • Karru

            I already have and I am waiting with excitement once they start rolling out the books. As much as I personally don’t really like AoS as a whole for multiple reasons, it still has some rock solid books going for it. As soon as I saw the Chaos God books, Disciples of Tzeentch and Blades of Khorne, I started to experiment with a Nurgle army.

            I always wanted to do a Mortal Nurgle Army for AoS, but the rules were so bland for them. As soon as the book for them hits, then I’ll most likely start AoS at full speed.

            That’s my problem with 40k right now. I collect SM, Eldar, IG and Orks. I don’t like Guilmarines at all and that is mostly what we’ll be getting for the next year or so. That’s my main problem, they made these books so bland and people will have to wait for years to get their own armies updated. On top of that, GW will most likely be focusing more on releasing new factions instead of making all the armies books first.

          • Scatter 667

            I agree, that we will need the codices to get more flavour into 40k. The CSM Legion rules are very dull in comparison to traitor legions. KDK somehow vanished and the SM chapters are not kitted out.
            But i think the pipeline is full of books soon to be published. SM and Death Guard will, most likely be the first, although i still hope they put all Legions in one single book, cause in the end they are not as diverse as Dark Angels from SM. My guess would be they publish most before the end of summer. This game is in development for a long time and they for sure playtested the codices too (debateable if it was good or not) and therefore the codices had to be finished too. I only hope they don’t break the game by publishing op codices.
            One agrument actually is that they worked with tournament organizers and they now that only a few supported armies would cause a horrible imbalance.
            Keep the fingers crossed;-)

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Welcome to he club. *says the sister player from 2nd*

          • AircoolUK

            But everyone always has to wait years to get their codex updated.

            Sure, the Index books released with the game are bland, they fulfill the same function as the army lists in the back of 3rd edition. Every unit has its rules for the new edition. Yes, P-Marines are likely to get the first new Codex, but if 8th didn’t exist, then whatever Codex was due for release would only appease the players of that army, and everyone else would still be waiting for their preferred new codex.

            No-one is going to wait years for their armies to be updated, because they don’t need updating. The rules for them in 8th exist in one of the 5 Index books.

            The Index books aren’t codices, they’re not full of new rules and fluff etc… because they’re not intended to be.

          • Karru

            Again with this bs argument.

            I’ve been trying to explain this time and time and time again, but it seems people still don’t understand. The difference between the past editions (4th through 7th) was that when the new edition was released, your codex was still fully functioning. All those interesting rules and wargear didn’t suddenly just go out the window. Sure, there were some rare cases where a piece of wargear was invalidated because the rule didn’t exist, but it wasn’t like you just lost your entire book in one go.

            8th edition did the same thing AoS did and will most likely end up the same way. Most armies from Fantasy are still not getting any rules. They are playing with those extremely bland Grand Alliance rules to this day. High Elves, Dark Elves, Regular Dwarves, Empire and regular Wood Elves for example have yet to receive their own Tomes. Guess what tomes GW keeps releasing? That’s right, tomes for entirely new armies!

            So all those that have spent possibly thousands of dollars into this game suddenly have a choice to make. Spend a ton more money, effort and time to start a new army or enjoy your bland cracker, because you lost the GW army lottery.

            To make it absolutely clear. You cannot use the “everyone has to wait to update their books in every edition, it’s nothing new” is null and void in 8th edition. In the past in 4th through 7th, my codex didn’t go up in flames and get replaced by a bland, pretty much bareboned ruleset that contained the bare minimum to be used. I would still have to use my old full fledged codex until they released my new one. Now one has to wait for years to even get something resembles that.

          • “However, it does’t matter how much people complain about a new edition, they still always end up playing it.”

            That’s not entirely true. I didn’t play 7th at all, and I am still very unsure about 8th, as I will likely have to pay to even give it a try. There are other games to play.

          • AircoolUK

            I never played 8th either… then again, I didn’t complain about it, I’d already thrown in the towel by then 🙂

        • Severius_Tolluck

          Hey now, new death has been teased with shadespire.

        • KingAceNumber1

          I have it from a reliable source that all codices will be released before the end of the year. I know for a fact that most if not all are already written, but have not made it to the printer. I have seen a PDF of the complete Eldar codex with my own eyes.

          • Mr.Custodes

            Would that reliable source happen to be Warhammer Fest?

            “All codices have been worked on together and are currently being playtested.”
            😛

          • KingAceNumber1

            Lol no, but the corroboration is nice!

          • Fergie0044

            Hey now, don’t you go getting my hopes up!

        • Drpx

          Only GW could kill Death.

    • gordonshumway

      This is my exact feeling. I was so excited for the new dataslates I couldn’t sleep. I truly thought they would be fun and flavorful and energize me. They did the exact opposite. I have zero desire to place a single one of my models on the battlefield. They are all boring boring boring. Or in the case of some strictly worse than they were before. And I played KDK…pretty much all we had going for us was fun. And they sucked the fun right out of the game.

      It’s hugely disappointing and I truly hope codices eventually fix it. But for now I have no desire to play or to purchase new units. And I was super open to it! I was a willing, happy customer. This can’t have been GW’s intended outcome.

      • Hunlow

        What don’t you like about the Khorne units? If anything Berserkers got better without losing much of anything, the Lord on a mount now gets extra attacks for the mount ripping and tearing and the daemons seem pretty much the same. Other then losing BftBg, which I admit sucks to lose, what have you seen that looks worse?

        • gordonshumway

          The Bloodthristers are strictly worse for one. Before a Bloodsthirster would be lucky if it made it to close combat, but if it did you were rewarded with a full strength attack that would likely decimate the unit it charged and earn back its points before it died immediately the next turn. With the new “monster” wounds a Bloodthirster is more than likely to arrive with 5 or fewer attacks, if it arrives at all, completely ignoring their classical flavor as unstoppable murder machines and hampering their usefulness on the battlefield.

          As for berzerkers you are correct, they are better than they were. But because they were so bad before I never owned any and I do not fancy purchasing a nearly 20 year old kit just to play them.

          And not just the loss of BFtBG but the loss of any consequential armywide special rules for Chaos period just made a weak army even weaker. Marks of Chaos do actual nothing. Even the juggerlord has suffered. Sure he gets extra cool attacks…but his movement was downgraded to 8″ so he is less likely to make it to combat. Also the removal of relics and fiddly wargear takes all the fun and flavor out of building the leader of your warband, which was a big part of the appeal of chaos for me. Perhaps codices will fix this, but how long will I have to wait for that.

          I used to get such a charge from putting my Lords on the table. I lovingly sculpted them to my specifications. Now they are just Thing 1 and Thing 2. Beefy guys. I am not remotely inspired to play my blood-crazed murder machines, because rules wise they just aren’t that blood-crazed anymore. They are barely blood-curious.

          I might as well focus on an army that got a remotely decent special rule and quality of life fixes like my harlequins…but even after looking at them nothing is grabbing that part of my brain that used to fire at a mile a minute for 7th ed listbuilding…

          • Jason E Lips

            You play World Eaters and you own zero Berserkers? I am the opposite of you. My Khorne has sat in an Army Case for years, but now my 30+ Berzerkers are calling me, chanting for blood and I am getting pumped to play some games. I cannot wait.

          • gordonshumway

            KDK is not World Eaters. But yeah, zero berzerkers.

          • Mr.Custodes

            You can still play KDK (demons and CSM in same detachment) but you’ll have to wait for codex if you wants your keywords to do anything.

          • Karru

            Actually, the thing that made KDK what it was, was all the special rules attached to them. Blood For the Blood God and Bloodtithe table for example. Just go look at the Blades of Khorne and then say one should play a Khorne army without using it saying it is the same thing.

          • Mr.Custodes

            That’s what I meant by wait for the codex. You know the disgustingly resilient rules all Death Guard have? Most likely you’ll get something attached to staying in-faction.

            The 7th ed Blood Tithes would have just crippled KDK in 8th, so they’re going to use new, non-free stuff bonuses. The name of the game is patience.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            Just keep in mind that you don’t need Sorcerers to summon anymore, and a lot of the other Blood Tithe powers could be acquired through CP expenditure.

  • Tom Fägrell

    The full rules (minus fluff) and Indexes are leaked on Reddit, in case anyone had missed that.

  • phobosftw

    Absolutely gutted (first world problems) they removed jink (5+ after advancing for ravenwing doesn`t count!) and where the hell are artifacts and relics? throw us a bone GW , for the love of Primaris Marines..

    • Farseerer

      Jink was one of the most broken things in 7th. Ravenwing having easy access to a re rollable 2+ cover save was one of the most unbalanced and unfun things to play against.

      A squad of 3 black knights were more survivable than two Baneblades because of it. It was nonsensical.

      • Karru

        This is actually one of the things I can totally agree with you. Jink needed to go a long time ago. It was utterly broken rule right out the gate. Even without the 2+ re-rollable, it was utterly no-brainer rule, as you 99% of the time you would use it as you needed it. If I was getting shot by Bolters or such, no need to Jink. If I was getting shot by something that ignored my save, lol Jink and back to my great save I go.

        • Severius_Tolluck

          LOL except in third and 4th where raw meant psycannons didn’t care.

        • Defenestratus

          Except jink was the only way to keep something like a vyper or a raider alive longer than a tenth of a second.

          • Karru

            Both Vehicles were heavily nerfed to begin with in 7th. All they had to do was give them their old rules back, such as the Nightshield and they would have been that much better at surviving.

            Overall, Jink did more bad than good to the game.

      • Thomas

        Template weapons. Done.

        • Mr.Custodes

          Now getting those templates in range was the hard part, and you were out of luck if you didn’t have an AP3 or better flamer…

          • Thomas

            Not really. Just spam them. The amount of times I lost Ravenwing squads to Burna Boyz, Purifiers, Sternguard…

            Ignores cover was a thing for a reason. Sure, it could have been handed out more evenly, but acting like Ravenwing were some unbeatable, god-tier faction is just wrong. They were good, but you still lost games with them.

        • Drpx

          Close combat. Done. But, “muh shooting meta.”

      • phobosftw

        If it`s broke -FIX IT – Don`t remove the thing all together.. I tell you my windriders are awfully upset about this whole situation, there`s talk amongst the men of adding a couple of Wraithknights and scatbike squads to the up until recently cheese free army list of mine, I fear this is not going to end well..

    • Mr.Custodes

      Artefacts, relics, special equipment, and vehicle upgrades are in the codices, and they’re listening and planning on making changes based on complaints to the final version.

  • Manwiththedogs

    Making the game more bloody isn’t something I thought it needed. You spend so much time painting these models, I’d hope they spend a lot more time on the table.
    Mechanics like suppression could have meant reducing a units effectiveness without throwing them back in the bag. Oh well.

    • Karru

      This way is better for GW. People want more staying power, GW makes sure that the way to assure that is by taking more models and units. This means players have to spend more in order to play. Simple GW logic that they have been using since forever, the new Design Team is just more subtle with it.

      • Thomas

        “Buy some models, nerd. Then shut and buy more models. Congrats, you just won at Warhammer. Buy more models.”

    • Drpx

      Yeah having to immediately pick stuff up after setting it down feels like playing with dominoes, but I guess this is the price for faster games.

      • AircoolUK

        Just paint up 5 Imperial Knights instead 🙂

  • Crablezworth

    I can’t help but notice you left out the complete gutting of vehicle fire arcs. My opponent had an antenna on his tank, what waac tfg…

    • Drpx

      Everything’s a turret now.

      • AircoolUK

        Yep, the Necron Annihilation barge does donuts so it can fire its weapon in any direction it likes, and as it’s a skimmer, it doesn’t leave skid marks.

  • Crablezworth

    “The Sameness of Units is a Feature – not a bug” I can’t believe someone wrote that

    • gordonshumway

      Yeah this author is delusional. I admire GW’s attempt at balance in 8th…and some semblance of order was needed after the bloat and chaos of 7th…but they scrubbed clean every ounce of flavor in the game. And 40k’s biggest asset is it’s amazing flavor.

      • Mr.Custodes

        That’s because these are literally rules so you don’t have to wait 3 months to play your army. Wait. For. Your. Codex.

        • Defenestratus

          Wait for my codex and then what? Be forced to drag another book around to play my games? Isn’t that one of the things we hated about 7th?

          • Mr.Custodes

            Wait, why are you taking more than your codex, unless you’re planning to use out-of faction allies which is a penalty of itself.

          • Drpx

            The whole Imperium is one faction at this point.

          • Drpx

            Get ready to carry a binder full of data sheets more like.

          • AircoolUK

            D’oh… just print out/photocopy/whatever the datasheets you need. Unless you’re too feeble to carry a few pages of A4 paper, you should be fine.

        • Thomas

          “8th is great because you don’t need to lug around books full of rules any more! It’s so streamlined!

          Btw, pls buy the 250pg rulebook, the stopgap army rules with no flavour and then buy your proper Codex when it comes out if you actually want to have fun with your army.”

          • Mr.Custodes

            Or you know, wait for your codex with the actual 8 pages of rules and all the fluff, cool painting schemes, and stratagems in it. Again, get you by rules. Anyone who went through 6th ed fantasy knows this.

          • Thomas

            “Please play our brand new edition of 40k! We think it’s the best ever! Btw, pls don’t play it for several months to a year, because the rules are really bland and we haven’t got around to writing fun ones yet.”

          • archie d

            Can anyone comment on how soon these codices will come out? Everyone keeps saying wait for the codex, but I worry that means waiting 2+ years from past experience for some of them (like right before 9th edition comes out is when the last one will get its update). Maybe this is a different situation because it is a complete reset? Or maybe we have experience from AoS (which I haven’t played).

      • AircoolUK

        Surely if you want the flavour, go back and read the most recent codex, but keep your eyes closed on the rules pages.

  • Hunlow

    What they have done to Thousand Sons is a travesty. I understand watering down units for balance but they stripped them of their flavor for no reason. They don’t even have their own psychic tree any more! Yet the shiney new Nurgle faction does get one. I. Am. Furious.

    • BadMrPumpkin

      I thought being mad was a khorne thing? I’m sure you’ll get stuff in a new book.

    • Scatter 667

      The index book s lacking a lot for most of the legions. I guess the codex is just right around the corner and i hope it will contain all Legions, since 4-5 seperate books for CSM would really suck, cause it would cause again a paper overflow instead of fewer books to lug around. I actually wouldn’t buy them and neither any non World-Eater model because of that.

    • ILikeToColourRed

      the depth covered in the legions book has not been replicated at all

    • you’ll have to wait for a new book. again lol.

      • Hunlow

        Yeah I just bought one 6 months ago. If that isn’t just a giant kick in the nuts. Way to “let me play” my army right away GW. I am so salty that T-Sons are going to be stuck in 7th until their new ‘dex drops because this shell of an army is unplayable.

        • I feel ya. Thousand Sons were my primary army since 3rd edition. They have always been a horrible army rules/power wise. So I’m used to this lol.

        • Mr.Custodes

          Shouldn’t you be able to return it?

          • Karru

            If I remember correctly, you had to have purchased it within 3 months or something.

          • Mr.Custodes

            8 weeks of the anouncement 4(?) weeks ago.

    • 301stFeinminsterArmoured
      • Hunlow

        If you can find it I’d love to see it!

        • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

          I don’t so much see a removal of flavor as a shift to fit the background given to them in the HH books as the founders of the Librarius. That being said, the powers they do get feel more Tzeentchian, focused primarily on messing with fate and time, and stronger mind-bullets.

          • Hunlow

            Get out! Don’t try to make excuses for GW. They just expanded the CSM Tzeentch table in November and 7 months later completely remove it! There is no excuse for that. No there is no fluffy way to explain away the removal. It should be in the book and it was a dick move to omit it.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            Everybody got their Psychic powers edited out to one degree or another.

          • Hunlow

            But it didn’t get edited it got deleted!

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            So did everything in Angels of Death, so no Fixing stuff with Iron Hands Librarians, no Lightning for White Scars, nor summoning volcanoes for Salamanders.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            It’s not going to be that way forever. Also, you get to have buckets of Mortal Wounds each turn. Does the prospect of deleting entire units in the Psychic phase just not appeal to you?

          • Hunlow

            So what that it’s not going to be that way forever? It’s an incomplete product without it and you don’t make customers happy with incomplete products. And yeah I want to murder in the psychic phase but 3 sorcerers do, reliably,​ an average of 6 mortal wounds IF they get their powers off and IF they are not denied so I wouldn’t call it buckets.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            3? Just running a CAD, er, Battalion? I figured that you’d be running closer to 10-12.

    • AircoolUK

      M**********r!

      I hope that post was dripping with sarcasm, otherwise the point you’ve missed is currently speeding away behind you at just above head height.

      • Hunlow

        I get this whole edition is getting stripped down but GW removed the psychic tree from the army of psychers. There is literally one in every squad of thousand sons. It’s tantamount to taking power armor from marines.

    • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

      Thousand Sons War Sect looks enticing now that CSM vehicles can take Marks and benefit from Legion buffs. Nothing like ridiculously hard to kill Heldrakes.

  • Just like in AOS, you’ll need to wait for them to release your army’s specific book to get the specific lores, artefacts, etc…

  • Danny Carr

    The 5 main things I took from the indexes was:

    1) Chaos lost a lot of flavour as did well everything really. Army books will hopefully fix that.
    2) Dedicated assault units actually look like they’ll be effective IF you can get them there considering how quickly everything will likely die.
    3) On paper at least things like Magnus, Swarmlord, Guiliman, Abaddon, Avatar etc look like they’ll genuinely be royal pains.
    4) Characters with above 10 wounds are going to be shot to absolute pieces because they look too dangerous to let them reach an assault or left alone to unleash psychic shenanigans.
    5) A minor note since they’re not important but since their units I grew fond of; Custodes look slightly weakened and sisters look slightly strengthened.

    Mixed feelings on the rules on the whole tbh but I do think it was needed as 7th had grown to be ridiculous.

  • Graham Bartram

    Well the loss of Doctrina Imperatives for Skitarii hasn’t pleased me, but then again, other bits did. All in all what we all need to remember is that these books are a stop-gap to full codex releases and nothing more. All our armies will feel somewhat stripped down and flavourless for a while, but if you are a CSM, SM, or Ad-Mech player, that won’t be long.

    • Graham Bartram

      Bit crap if you are a Xenos player.

      • Graham Bartram

        Yes it is, stop talking to yourself.

      • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

        IDK, Nid and Dark Eldar players are going to feel awesome about how this edition changed their armies. Necron and Tau players (can’t speak for CWE or Harlequins, because all that I’ve seen of either is the Starweaver and Guardians) are obviously feeling a little less sanguine about the update, but they’ve needed the piss taken for a while now.

        • Graham Bartram

          That’s pretty much it, and a better chance for Orks too. Ironically I may get my Tau out of mothballs, I stopped playing them when it got easy. XD

          • Muninwing

            i’m thinking of taking out my Armored Company, and checking out if my Wych Cult is useful again…

  • Defenestratus

    I still don’t see why the Imperial Knight and the Wraithknight datasheets are essentially copy/pastes of each other. That really didn’t need to happen. I wouldn’t care if one was better than the other but — with the exception of the weapons (and one of them is even the exact same) — they are the exact same rules-wise and I think thats just sad and pathetic.

    • Drpx

      Probably to stop the whining about one being better than the other especially now that you can take full detachments of both.