|
RagnarokAngel posted:This is actually way easier to understand as opposed to the dozen or so ways to come in from reserve in the old edition so you're a moron. Oh my.
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 14:53 |
|
|
xtothez posted:Yeah I hate the way they refuse to explain the meaning of all English words on the datasheet too and expect me to carry a dictionary around to all games. Bloody GW. straw man noun noun: strawman 1. an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument. "her familiar procedure of creating a straw man by exaggerating their approach"
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:06
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:This is actually way easier to understand as opposed to the dozen or so ways to come in from reserve in the old edition so you're a moron. Ways to come in from reserve in 7th Ed
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:11
|
|
|
The funny thing is you could preserve the fluffiness and cut the text down dramatically by having it be like Kunning Commandos the unit may deep strike. And then defining deep strike once somewhere
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:12
|
|
|
adamantium|wang posted:Ways to come in from reserve in 7th Ed Karandras allowed striking scorpions to walk onto the table from any edge as if they were just standing right off the edge. Ynnari had a formation that had you bring in 4 formations of bikers each from different table edges. Granted these are variations on outflank but still were different than all of them being "plant the unit 9" from an enemy unit". I may have been exxagerating when I said a dozen but I only ever played eldar and I'm still new (started playing in January or so) so i just kinda assumed there were probably other variations from armies I never even touched.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
adamantium|wang posted:Ways to come in from reserve in 7th Ed Cult Ambush was literally 6 different ways to arrive on the board picked at random, with unit and formation rules that modified it further. Also lots of units modified deep strike or outflank as required, drop pods & mawlocs being the most obvious examples. I don't see what the downside is to just having the rules you're going to use printed on the datasheet you're literally using at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:21
|
|
|
Cthulhu Dreams posted:The funny thing is you could preserve the fluffiness and cut the text down dramatically by having it be like Yes this. I still don't see what was wrong with USRs conceptually - yes there were too many niche things which were USRs, but the basic concept of "when a rule is generic it should be defined once and referenced everywhere" is a good one. The current version is like if you reprinted the movement rules on every dataslate for ~easy reference~.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
At least right now you know if your opponent is bringing them in from reserve you know exactly what it is, no matter the name. I'm sure when the codexes hit well have tons of confusing variations 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:32
|
|
|
xtothez posted:Cult Ambush was literally 6 different ways to arrive on the board picked at random, with unit and formation rules that modified it further. That list of 23 copies of deep strike doesn't have any variations. The rules text is exactly the same. Why is it bad to just use the same name for the same rule.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:40
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:That list of 23 copies of deep strike doesn't have any variations. The rules text is exactly the same. Why is it bad to just use the same name for the same rule. I think it's nice flavor text  . I actually kinda liked how each unit has a different hidey hole explained like striking scorpions are in the shadows, or necrons are waiting on their home world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:43
|
|
|
Corrode posted:Yes this. I still don't see what was wrong with USRs conceptually - yes there were too many niche things which were USRs, but the basic concept of "when a rule is generic it should be defined once and referenced everywhere" is a good one. The current version is like if you reprinted the movement rules on every dataslate for ~easy reference~. Agreed. They definitely needed to clean house and get rid of the 54 USRs which were only used by like 2 units each (Zealot and poo poo) but the concept itself just makes sense. fake edit: I'm the flayed ones' charnel pocket-dimension. 
my kinda ape fucked around with this message at 11:48 on Jun 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:44
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I think it's nice flavor text Liking it as flavour fine but I don't think expressing despair that they have 23 different names for a rule instead of 1 is worth calling me a moron over, really. There is no world in which anyone can defend that as good streamlined design.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:45
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:Liking it as flavour fine but I don't think expressing despair that they have 23 different names for a rule instead of 1 is worth calling me a moron over, really. There is no world in which anyone can defend that as good streamlined design. I don't think it's worth expressing "despair" over either tho. That seems drastic. RagnarokAngel fucked around with this message at 11:49 on Jun 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:46
|
|
|
I agree, it could be just one rule, KoW style, which I would be fine with. Hell, I would support it. Though, it could lose some flair, KoW can feel a little boring with how cold the rules are. That's the trade-off I suppose. As it is, I am also fine. It takes little effort to see that the rule is deepstrike, and all the models that have the rule make sense. poo poo like terminators, jump pack, etc. It adds flavor I guess. It is a small negative, sure, but not a big deal. While we are at it, did any of those 23 words apply to demons? Demons not being able to deepstrike is a big change. Now those bloodletters or whatever have to hoof it across the board. I guess I can save their points and try and summon them instead, but that has a mortal-wound risk... More choices and risk/reward now. Interesting I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:51
|
|
will blow your mind.
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I don't think it's worth expressing "despair" over either tho. That seems drastic. The stated purpose of the new edition was to speed it up and streamline it? That's what I'm frustrated about. GW: 8th is going to be faster and more streamlined Also GW: Have 23 names for the deep strike rule Me: lol thats dumb You: YOU'RE A MORON ITS BETTER
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
I guess I'm just an old fashioned ham that likes the flavor text to stay in the bestiary and the rules in the army list.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
WhiteOutMouse posted:
No, the only way to Deep Strike daemons is to summon them via Daemonic Ritual. Which has its own problems because you summon 3D6 power points worth of Daemons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:56
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:The stated purpose of the new edition was to speed it up and streamline it? That's what I'm frustrated about. I never said better I just don't think it would appreciably slow anything down. I didn't think moron would be such a touchy word for you but I am genuinely sorry if it upset you. I mean look I do see your point. There's a few examples I think better illustrate that, like how flamer weapons say "this weapon automatically hits" or how eldar shuriken weapons say "on a 6+ this weapon wounds with ap -3 instead of 0" verbatim every single time instead of just using a "bladestorm" keyword. A decision was made either to use the descriptions instead of having to memorize keywords which is nice but at a glance might be cumbersome. It's kind of a lose lose situation. The reason I don't think it honestly matters for the deep strike stuff is it'd probably only take a few games to notice a pattern that coming in from reserve always works the same, no matter what army you play. That is almost surely going to change when codexes hit though. Weapon descriptions like I cited above though, you have armies all with different weapons and different rules you're probably going to have to refer to multiple times.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 11:59
|
|
|
Honestly, it's nice to have the rules reminder text in the weapon profiles, even if they have dropped keywords. Beats flicking back and forth in a codex to find the specific entry for that keyword.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
Anything we know about the codex release schedule yet?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 12:07
|
|
|
Nothing to my knowledge, other than the rumor that they are all supposedly being released in a "relatively tight window". 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 12:21
|
|
|
The stupid 20+ flavor names for deep strike honestly doesn't matter right now since atleast all the ones I've seen are all exactly the same. You could say "this unit of marines is arriving by dogshit powerslide" and nobody would blink an eye and everyone would know exactly what's going on. But at some point, because it's GW, theres going to be Totally Not Deepstrike But Better, with another 20+ stupid flavor names to call it by and at that point every time someone says their unit of marines is arriving by dogshit powerslide you have to check with them if they mean dogshit powerslide or dogshit powerslip as one is the basic deep strike and the other is a new game breaking power rule that you have to plan your entire game against. It's not a lot of time lost, but it's time lost that doesn't need to be lost and there's A LOT of this poo poo in 8th which all piles up. 7th wasn't much better with it's later formation garbage but I'd rather powerslide through dogshit than play 7th anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 12:31
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:Anything we know about the codex release schedule yet? Looking back at AoS's release schedule, likely once, maybe twice a month interwoven with AoS/Blood Bowl releases. Expect it to go Primaris->Death Guard then Old Faction->Old Faction->New Faction->Old Faction->Old Faction->New Faction etc etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 12:52
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:The Crone is actually 156. See? SEE! Yeah, in that case with the points being that close the Harpy is generally the better choice. Maybe a bit less against flying vehicles and T8+ things, but much better all around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
Keywords like deep strike help with futureproofing against special rules you haven't made up yet instead of loving around with interpretations, unintended rule interactions and FAQs. If I made up a gun that shoots nearby incoming deep strikers, including the weirdboy's jump power, how do I write the rule? It'd be easiest if I could refer to 'deep strike'
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:00
|
|
My first car was a stick
|
It's not the biggest deal if you call Deep Strike by ten different names, but it is still inarguably the worse choice to just using a common terminology for a common rule.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:02
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, the Repulser is loving badass! It's a big, chunky hover Landraider. It looks so good and scifi.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
adamantium|wang posted:No, the only way to Deep Strike daemons is to summon them via Daemonic Ritual. Which has its own problems because you summon 3D6 power points worth of Daemons. I think the 3d6 power level is ok. It lets you get units that vary the full gambit of models in a simple roll. You can get lucky and summon the 17-power Lord of Change but you gotta leave behind around ~350 points of reserves off your list in matched play. Also nearly all the Demons have their wargear included in their point levels already, so Demons are basically playing their lists on both power and points at the same time anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:17
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
What the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:23
|
|
|
I like the new rules and I think it's a good thing that the stuff folks are arguing about are at best minor issues to me. So far the two most prevalent complaints are that the points are obtusely formatted (they are) and that the rules for specific mechanics could be streamlined by using common words (they could). My original concern, assault, seems largely addressed thanks to how specialized assault units work and have bonuses to charging. I still want to see how it looks in practice though. Oh yeah the matched play limitations are dumb too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:23
|
|
|
Big tank little gun. Is that a Bigmarine on top?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:24
|
|
|
Dunno if it's been posted yet, but this army builder is getting updated currently with points and power points for 8th: https://webapplications-webroster.rhcloud.com/rc/web/#!/rosterCreator Also seems to integrate the degradation charts for monsters and vehicles. Looks good so far!
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:27
|
|
|
That thing is one stupid looking contraption.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
How the gently caress does it move around Why is there a tiny base underneath it SO MANY GUNS
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:31
|
|
|
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/06/02/let-your-soul-be-armoured-with-faith/ So it mentions the new transport and the campaign stuff mentioned before. But also that the Chapter Approved books are making a return. Which is nice because I still enjoy flipping through the three old ones they released back in 01, 03 and 04. Guess it'll be the Fifth book of the Astronomican then. Also completed my Vraks bookset today. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:32
|
|
|
goose willis posted:How the gently caress does it move around It hovers and has rockets on the back. I guess it's technically a flyer? It does seem like a lot of guns kind of stuffed everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:33
|
|
|
I can't look at it without hearing a really loud clank clank clank sound in my head and imagining it bouncing off the ground and driving like a hoverbrick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
SteelMentor posted:Looking back at AoS's release schedule, likely once, maybe twice a month interwoven with AoS/Blood Bowl releases. Never gonna have those plastic sisters... But speaking of:  Pretty happy with how the sword arm turned out. Only bit of heavy conversion besides this is building one toting a burning of prospero heavy bolter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 14:53 |
|
|
That Hovertank is rad as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 13:38
|
|
