8th edition

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2923

Re: 8th edition

Post#11 » Mar 24 2017 12:09

Damn Pulse weapons really have none? Didn't expect that. o_O
Here is hope that they finally turn Burst Cannons into a proper weapon though.

Edit: I guess that means the balance might change a lot. Let us hope to see scatter laser without any armor modifier as well and Grav getting good rules for once as well. ;)

User avatar
Calmsword
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1511

Re: 8th edition

Post#12 » Mar 24 2017 02:30

Remember it's still speculation at this point. They've dropped a few bombs and I bet are waiting to see how the community handles it.

I would imagine that strength modifiers would allow for variety amongst different weapon layouts that 'just' AP denies any kind of variety. With entire rules on cards/slates it also allows for individual units to have special rules within the confines of the codex. This, again, is me speculating but it might allow for a Hammerhead's burst cannons to have additional AP while a stealth squad doesn't.
~Good Hunting

User avatar
Vash
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 631

Re: 8th edition

Post#13 » Mar 24 2017 05:06

I played 2nd edition.
It was a far more fun game, but it had a huge drawback. It took forever to complete a game. There were tables for everything. It basically was a role-playing game with miniatures on a larger scale.
Terminator saves were 3+... on 2D6. That means you rolled to save for each terminator separately every single time.

Each weapon, as discussed, had their own modifiers and set strength values. This I loved. Opened up for more variety and terminators actually were good.
But, there was an additional stat. And that was "wounds". Each weapon caused different amount of wounds on the target (not unit).
An assault cannon did 1D8 wounds, if I remember correctly, for each unsaved wound.
This, I hope doesn't get back though. There were way to many dice rolls, and way to much to remember/looking up in tables.

As mentioned, cover saves where modifiers on the to hit roll. This I like more than the current version. On top of that you had short, and long range stats.
Usually short range gave a boost to your to hit modifier, and long range a negative modifier.
These were individual for each weapon, adding more complexity to the weapon profiles.

But as everything, those weapons and items you use the most, you learn by heart after a while. So while it seems overwhelming with many new profiles and stats. We will get a huge load of from "Universal special rules".

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2923

Re: 8th edition

Post#14 » Mar 24 2017 06:58

Vash wrote:I played 2nd edition.
It was a far more fun game, but it had a huge drawback. It took forever to complete a game.

So...like 7e? :D

To the other stuff you mentioned...well I wouldn't expect to get a straight 2e reboot. They are probably going with a mix of 7e, 2e and AoS and maybe something new as well.

Calmsword wrote:Remember it's still speculation at this point. They've dropped a few bombs and I bet are waiting to see how the community handles it.

I would imagine that strength modifiers would allow for variety amongst different weapon layouts that 'just' AP denies any kind of variety. With entire rules on cards/slates it also allows for individual units to have special rules within the confines of the codex. This, again, is me speculating but it might allow for a Hammerhead's burst cannons to have additional AP while a stealth squad doesn't.

Wait a sec. Speculation on your part or speculation on their part? o_O
The part about the modifier sounded like you were sure it'll be like that. :D

User avatar
Vash
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 631

Re: 8th edition

Post#15 » Mar 24 2017 07:42

Well I hope they don't do a reboot of 2nd ed. With kids of my own, I don't have time for a 6 hour battle :D
Simplified rules of 2nd ed mixed in with AoS/7th ed WH40k would be nice.

Armour saves on terminators is something I am interested in how they solve, if they are looking at modification system.
I would like to avoid 2D6 save for them. That would be horrible for the simplicity and speed of the game.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2923

Re: 8th edition

Post#16 » Mar 24 2017 07:44

Vash wrote:Well I hope they don't do a reboot of 2nd ed. With kids of my own, I don't have time for a 6 hour battle :D
Simplified rules of 2nd ed mixed in with AoS/7th ed WH40k would be nice.

Armour saves on terminators is something I am interested in how they solve, if they are looking at modification system.
I would like to avoid 2D6 save for them. That would be horrible for the simplicity and speed of the game.

Yeah 2d6 would be HORRIBLE. Imagine having to take all those saves one by one after getting hit by a Firewarrior gunline etc.

They could give Terminator a 1+ safe or better and just say 1s always fail so they'd keep their 2+ armor even against weapons with small modifier.

Fokke
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 133

Re: 8th edition

Post#17 » Mar 24 2017 09:14

Meh 2nd didn't take forever to play if you knew the rules. 1500 points was a good sized game, I don't think I ever played more than 2k. My 1500 point list was like 17 models. My group had it down on average to an hour per 1k points. so two people playing 1k each the game might last 2 hours. But we knew our armies and the stats for our armies in our heads so it was pretty quick. I preferred to make my terminator Khorne terminators with twin lightning claws for the 2+ save on 2d6 and some other bonus I cant remember. Was totally hero-hammer, something I have gone polar opposite in the last decade. My commander then was a Nurgle level 4 psychker with terminator armor, a daemon sword for the +2 WS and parry, and a power fist for the wounds and neg armor modifiers, plus combat drugs and a displacer field. He won a game vs nids single handedly because the psychic phase was SOOOOO much more powerful. Plaguewind with irresistible force on the first turn turned about half his army into plague bearers. He was also 365 points. Won another game with the first shot of the game with a lowly autocannon guy. 2d6 wounds to a Hive Tyrant which only had I think 7 wounds :) And guys shot individually. If guys 1-3 shoot enemy a, but guy 4 can see him due to terrain, he shoots someone else even in a different squad.

I like most of the teased rules so far. Be interested to see what they do with the armor modifiers for out AP5 weapons. If we stick to the d6 system we have now I cant see our pulse weapons having better than a -1. Not complaining, still better vs marines than we have now. I see lasguns dropping to -0. I have hated the AP system since its inception and am glad to see it go. I think we need to get out of the limited d6 system and use varied dice again.
Hope I am not the only one that wants to see sustained fire dice make a comeback :)

Hoping FW is off its butt and is working on pdfs to bring its various armies and units in line with 8th so those of us with primarily FW armies wont be sitting there twiddling our thumbs while everyone else is playing. Its not like they didn't know it was coming.

Unfortunately I think releasing this info so far ahead is going to hurt sales badly. I know aside from maybe a crisis team I want to mess around with, I probably wont have any 40k purchases between now and 8ths release. Doubt that I am the only one.

User avatar
Jefffar
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 1012

Re: 8th edition

Post#18 » Mar 24 2017 09:38

Well, if AP 2 equivalent will still negate all armour saves, it would be. -5.

AP 3 then is -4. AP 4 is -3, AP 5 is -2 and AP 6 -1.

But it could just as easily be AP - and 6 are 0, AP 5 is -1, AP 4 is -2, AP 3 is -3 and so on.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2923

Re: 8th edition

Post#19 » Mar 24 2017 09:49

Nah I never liked sustained fire dice. Always felt clunky to me.

Of course that info will hurt the sales but it's still a LOT better for GW than just one day dropping the new edition out of the blue.

User avatar
nic
Kroot'La
Kroot'La
Posts: 755

Re: 8th edition

Post#20 » Mar 24 2017 12:04

Panzer wrote:Of course that info will hurt the sales but it's still a LOT better for GW than just one day dropping the new edition out of the blue.


Releasing this info makes me think that the rumours of a June release are about right, sales of rulebooks/campaign books will be hard to achieve if everybody knows the rules are going to change soon.

I would expect a couple of months of AoS & boxed games leading up to a big fanfare around 40K 8th in early summer. Of course I could be wrong :smile:

As for the rules themselves, nothing there that really bothers me and one or two that excite me. So on balance happy enough. Although I am in the group of players who think that the current rules are playable - unless playing against a jerk in which case the rules are not the problem anyway.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2923

Re: 8th edition

Post#21 » Mar 24 2017 12:28

nic wrote:
Panzer wrote:Of course that info will hurt the sales but it's still a LOT better for GW than just one day dropping the new edition out of the blue.


Releasing this info makes me think that the rumours of a June release are about right, sales of rulebooks/campaign books will be hard to achieve if everybody knows the rules are going to change soon.

I would expect a couple of months of AoS & boxed games leading up to a big fanfare around 40K 8th in early summer. Of course I could be wrong :smile:

As for the rules themselves, nothing there that really bothers me and one or two that excite me. So on balance happy enough. Although I am in the group of players who think that the current rules are playable - unless playing against a jerk in which case the rules are not the problem anyway.

/sign to all of it :D

User avatar
Vash
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 631

Re: 8th edition

Post#22 » Mar 24 2017 12:53

Jefffar wrote:Well, if AP 2 equivalent will still negate all armour saves, it would be. -5.

AP 3 then is -4. AP 4 is -3, AP 5 is -2 and AP 6 -1.

But it could just as easily be AP - and 6 are 0, AP 5 is -1, AP 4 is -2, AP 3 is -3 and so on.


Yah, simply put thats the direct translation.
But on a deeper ground it won't end up that way.

With a modifier system, you can represent the weapons more accurately.
What I mean is, not all AP4 weapons will get -3 per default.

Looking at the 2nd ed stats and comparing them to Armageddon (boxed game releasing soon?), a boltgun has -1 and not -2 as you suggest.
Power swords, in 2nd ed, were -3 to save, so there was a chance for a space marine power armour to shake off the hit.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2923

Re: 8th edition

Post#23 » Mar 24 2017 01:18

Yeah i don't think that there will be much that straight out has a modifier that completely ignores he kind of armor it would with the current rules. I bet most things that barely ignored armor in 7e will leave a 6+ or better in 8e.

User avatar
Bloodknife92
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 510

Re: 8th edition

Post#24 » Mar 24 2017 06:41

I have only 2 wishes with this edition.

Reduce the amount of reading that must be done, as I find in every single phase of a game, ESPECIALLY against amateur opponents, the rulebook and/or codexes are coming out. This really extends play time exponentially, making it hard to have a good, well paced game. I'm excited to know that they plan to approach this exact issue, from what I read, so that's really really REALLY good! I look forward to hour-2hour long games again, instead of having to plan an entire 6 hour block to play a game, which, as a father and university student, and soon-to-be nurse, I really can't produce on a regular basis :D

My other wish is that GW don't force me to pay a stupid amount of money for three books, when I'm really only going to use one. Sure, make the extra books available, but really? Force people to buy two dust collectors? That's disappointing. I love hard copy documents over digital copies ANYDAY, but I've had to use my friend's iPad with the digital rules because it was the more cost effective option. Please oh PLEASE GW don't do this again! It's hard enough convincing my wife to let me buy a Stormsurge :D

I'm not saying I have a hard life. Infact, I have a damn good one compared to some people in the world (I get to play this game, for one), but it could be made even easier :P
The days of goodly English is went

User avatar
Gragagrogog
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 363

Re: 8th edition

Post#25 » Mar 24 2017 08:52

Vash wrote:Yah, simply put thats the direct translation.
But on a deeper ground it won't end up that way.

With a modifier system, you can represent the weapons more accurately.
What I mean is, not all AP4 weapons will get -3 per default.

Looking at the 2nd ed stats and comparing them to Armageddon (boxed game releasing soon?), a boltgun has -1 and not -2 as you suggest.
Power swords, in 2nd ed, were -3 to save, so there was a chance for a space marine power armour to shake off the hit.


Ye I don't think there's a chance in hell AP4 weapons will get better than -1 modifier (you still want plasmas to be useful compared to MPs), that's assuming they don't completetely redo weapon characteristics or do things like -2+ (minus-two plus) save what I've seen last time I played fantasy...

As for wishlisting, I'd like some formations that include a combination of suits and vehicles and being actually good, instead of this "let's make the best formations include new models we want to sell" BS.

User avatar
Bloodknife92
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 510

Re: 8th edition

Post#26 » Mar 24 2017 09:24

Gragagrogog wrote:As for wishlisting, I'd like some formations that include a combination of suits and vehicles and being actually good, instead of this "let's make the best formations include new models we want to sell" BS.


Now how financially beneficial would that be for GW? :P
The days of goodly English is went

GuidingOlive
Shas'Saal
Posts: 53

Re: 8th edition

Post#27 » Mar 25 2017 02:44

So for more AoS-y Rend to AP Translations, speculation abound, I doubt that -4 Saves is going to be possible outside confluences of special rules. Therefore, in my mind, the AP goes something like this
AP-/6 = 0
AP5/4 =-1
AP3/2 =-2
AP1 =-3
This means that our plasma is actually a decent option against Fusion since the difference is much less based on doubling out. Now this probably isn't a direct translation and I fully expect weapons to change. The reason it isn't a direct translation is Tau gets pretty powerful when their weakest weapons are still -1. And really, the Assault Buff doesn't change anything for us getting charged. We're almost always going last and our lack of melee capabilities is already apparent so Power Fists are really always going to connect. However, it would fully solidify Tau as the premier Shooting Army since Scatter Lasers vs. Burst Cannons starts leaning in favor of the BCs (assuming Rending the special rule gets changed to 6's = -2 Modifiers).

Now outside of speculation, I'm excited for the new changes. So long as they allow Characters to stay inside units (get on that AoS) I have no issues so far. It is rumored that they will cut the rulebook down to 30 pages which is fantastic. Yeah a lot of rules will be doled out to individual datasheets but it'll be much easier to digest. As for the Assault buff, I don't like it personally (Power Klaws, Power Fists, Thunder Hammers, all become pretty strong) but I think it's absolutely needed for the game. Porting Rend from AoS is probably the best thing they could have done. I think no one enjoys just removing models w/o any feeling of chance (I'm reminded of using an Overcharged Ion Accelerator w/ markered Ignores Cover on a Command Squad and removing them all because they didn't have Invulns). Also porting Battleshock is so nice (so long as most things actually have to take it *stares at Fearless*). But these rules also don't yet cover the biggest problem the game currently has; the Psychic Phase. I'll be much more excited to see those rules. Oh also, praying for the 9" movement Riptide.

Note: I am a competitive player and what may be enjoyable to me may not necessarily be so to the general populace.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2923

Re: 8th edition

Post#28 » Mar 25 2017 06:01

GuidingOlive wrote:So for more AoS-y Rend to AP Translations, speculation abound, I doubt that -4 Saves is going to be possible outside confluences of special rules. Therefore, in my mind, the AP goes something like this
AP-/6 = 0
AP5/4 =-1
AP3/2 =-2
AP1 =-3
This means that our plasma is actually a decent option against Fusion since the difference is much less based on doubling out. Now this probably isn't a direct translation and I fully expect weapons to change. The reason it isn't a direct translation is Tau gets pretty powerful when their weakest weapons are still -1. And really, the Assault Buff doesn't change anything for us getting charged. We're almost always going last and our lack of melee capabilities is already apparent so Power Fists are really always going to connect. However, it would fully solidify Tau as the premier Shooting Army since Scatter Lasers vs. Burst Cannons starts leaning in favor of the BCs (assuming Rending the special rule gets changed to 6's = -2 Modifiers).

Now outside of speculation, I'm excited for the new changes. So long as they allow Characters to stay inside units (get on that AoS) I have no issues so far. It is rumored that they will cut the rulebook down to 30 pages which is fantastic. Yeah a lot of rules will be doled out to individual datasheets but it'll be much easier to digest. As for the Assault buff, I don't like it personally (Power Klaws, Power Fists, Thunder Hammers, all become pretty strong) but I think it's absolutely needed for the game. Porting Rend from AoS is probably the best thing they could have done. I think no one enjoys just removing models w/o any feeling of chance (I'm reminded of using an Overcharged Ion Accelerator w/ markered Ignores Cover on a Command Squad and removing them all because they didn't have Invulns). Also porting Battleshock is so nice (so long as most things actually have to take it *stares at Fearless*). But these rules also don't yet cover the biggest problem the game currently has; the Psychic Phase. I'll be much more excited to see those rules. Oh also, praying for the 9" movement Riptide.

Note: I am a competitive player and what may be enjoyable to me may not necessarily be so to the general populace.

Actually it would buff some rare Tau lists even considering our Fusion Blade Commander would be able to attack first against any unit when he gets the charge....which is actually pretty scary with S8 AP1 attacks. :D

I really really hope that Burst Cannons will have a better rending than Pulse Weapons no matter what. So if Pulse Rifles have -0, they should have -1. If Pulse Rilfes have -1, they should have -2 and so on. It would make them actually worth fielding again.
It has absolutely nothing to do with me fielding 4 Stealth suit units in my list or anything. :P

I'm unsure about the characters inside units. Sure they'd need something to protect them since 40k is way more shootier but it would prevent stupid deathstars lists. I hate deathstars with a passion. Even more than pure gunlines. Bringing a deathstar list should allow your opponent to drop a brick on your models. >_>

Keep in mind we don't know everything about the assault buff. It's VERY likely that unwieldy weapons are still going to attack last.

Not sure about Battleshock. I think it could be done better than in AoS and hope we don't get 1:1 the AoS version of it.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests