|
Where do I look up those changes? (Thanks btw)
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:08 |
|
|
Harvey Mantaco posted:Where do I look up those changes? (Thanks btw) FAQs are here: https://www.warhammer-community.com/faqs/ The specific rule you're looking for is here (first rule, handily): https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/warhammer_40000_rulebook_en.pdf
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
Flying units all crash to the ground between movement phases, occasionally scraping along (but not above) the terrain to charge into melee.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
Cage Kicker posted:Flying units all crash to the ground between movement phases, occasionally scraping along (but not above) the terrain to charge into melee. Change “fly” to “hop” and it makes more sense in your head.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
What’s with the bases on that rogue trader and the kroot character? It looks like there’s bits of rock molded to their feet, which seems kinda weird if they’re supposed to be in a spaceship.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 20:24
|
|
|
Badablack posted:What’s with the bases on that rogue trader and the kroot character? It looks like there’s bits of rock molded to their feet, which seems kinda weird if they’re supposed to be in a spaceship. The Blackstone Fortress is going to look like an ancient space station hewn from obsidian and now half-wrecked, I suspect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Change “fly” to “hop” and it makes more sense in your head. Yes this absolutely makes the flying jetbikes with no ground propulsion system whatsoever and also the literal aircraft in hover mode being unable to move over units during the charge phase much more sensical.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 20:36
|
|
|
Would have helped if they'd made a SKIMMER keyword too rather than lumping dakkajets into the same category as zoanthropes
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
I will never stop being bitter at the constant nerfs to jump infantry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
xtothez posted:Would have helped if they'd made a SKIMMER keyword too rather than lumping dakkajets into the same category as zoanthropes From a man who plans to run a few tractor kannons, I like things just the way they are. FLY is a good key word.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Re-Ban all flyers IMHO
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 22:01
|
|
|
Pendent posted:I will never stop being bitter at the constant nerfs to jump infantry. Assault Marines are too good for this dead, gay world.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Raphus C posted:From a man who plans to run a few tractor kannons, I like things just the way they are. FLY is a good key word.   My 4th is on the way, and I had to pull the bits for the Traktor out of the loft (replacing the KMK barrel).
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 00:21
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Yes this absolutely makes the flying jetbikes with no ground propulsion system whatsoever and also the literal aircraft in hover mode being unable to move over units during the charge phase much more sensical. Good thing this isn't a simulation then.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 00:28
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Change “fly” to “hop” and it makes more sense in your head. Which makes perfect sense for jetbikes but not so much for dedicated aircraft There should be two keywords, FLY and AERIAL Things that actually do hop around should have FLY Things like supersonic ork planes should have AERIAL, only be usable in matches of Death from the Skies if both players agree to do that, and all of them unable to charge or be charged by anything that doesn't have AERIAL
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 01:08
|
|
|
I’m sorry we thought about it more than games workshop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 01:09
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Yes this absolutely makes the flying jetbikes with no ground propulsion system whatsoever and also the literal aircraft in hover mode being unable to move over units during the charge phase much more sensical. To be fair, if you have to fly up and over to get to someone to melee, you don't then have room left to land and start fighting. At that point you're just crash-landing on top of them. I do approve of adding a crash-landing ability to the game though, especially for orks 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 01:10
|
|
|
I feel like adding "Jump" to jump infantry is different enough to "Fly" to be easy enough to differentiate so a flak cannon isn't as effective to infantry ten feet in the air as a aircraft 10 thousand feet or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
...I wonder if it would be better to represent actually-flying-flying vehicles as just, like, stratagems. Spend 2 CP to have a plane far above do a strafing run or drop a bomb or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 01:32
|
|
|
I actually quite like the single FLY keyword; It's similar to the principle of making vehicles into Monstrous Creatures, and just simplifies the game. They just need those rules to be more elegant, and the various Units that rely on it to be a bit (a lot, if they're Assault Marines) better in general. But the basic principal of streamlining it down isn't a bad one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 01:53
|
|
|
It irks me that Tau stuff like Ruptides and Ghostkeels don"t have the VEHICLE keyword.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 02:02
|
|
|
Stephenls posted:...I wonder if it would be better to represent actually-flying-flying vehicles as just, like, stratagems. Spend 2 CP to have a plane far above do a strafing run or drop a bomb or something. So go back to 3rd edition?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 03:02
|
|
|
Stephenls posted:...I wonder if it would be better to represent actually-flying-flying vehicles as just, like, stratagems. Spend 2 CP to have a plane far above do a strafing run or drop a bomb or something. Yeah I'm down with this. There's cool airplane models and GW wants to sell them but I don't think it belongs in 40k combat. Vehicles like that move too fast and fight in ways that isn't conducive to 40k style combat. You'd have to do something more like X-Wing, and gently caress mixing the two at the same time. Again, unless you and your opponent specifically feel like playing death from above. They should release a boxed game (did they?) for playing with only flying-flying machines, and then have rules for mixing that with 40k if you wish, but otherwise 40k should only have troop transports and tanks. And then yeah, stratagems can represent some ongoing air battle spilling into the ground battle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 03:24
|
|
|
Booley posted:So go back to 3rd edition? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 03:34
|
|
|
Ilor posted:This is always the correct answer. Not for Dark Angels players.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 03:35
|
|
|
Floppychop posted:It irks me that Tau stuff like Ruptides and Ghostkeels don"t have the VEHICLE keyword. It irks me that the Stormsurge doesn't have the BATTLESUIT keyword. But the Ta'unar does. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
Funny that 3rd edition Dark Angels should get mentioned, the last time I went through the work of building and painting a full WH40K army was during 3rd. I thought, what army would look cool? and without doing any research beforehand picked up the new Dark Angels Codex and started cranking out a Deathwing army... Anyway, spurred on by interest from the new GW and a positive reception to 8th I've decided to dip my toe back in with Orks. Assuming that I want to run some Meganobz, Bikers, a few of the new vehicles, and some Kommandos what paint jobs should I be trying out? Deathskulls seem good and paintable, Blood Axes seem to be a good match but I don't think I want to try intricate camouflage on a bunch of figures. Bad Moons seem paintable but not really the play style I'm interested in. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 05:20
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:Yeah I'm down with this. There's cool airplane models and GW wants to sell them but I don't think it belongs in 40k combat. Vehicles like that move too fast and fight in ways that isn't conducive to 40k style combat. You'd have to do something more like X-Wing, and gently caress mixing the two at the same time. Again, unless you and your opponent specifically feel like playing death from above. Lords of War too. Then you could call it something cool like... apocalypse? if you want to represent these things that don’t belong in tactical level combat. poo poo, shrink it down and we could call it something cool like .... epic!
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 05:22
|
|
|
What ever happened to Aeronautica Imperialis, is that still around?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 05:28
|
|
|
Strobe posted:It irks me that the Stormsurge doesn't have the BATTLESUIT keyword. Neither one should, FW is just bad at writing rules. Drones tanking wounds for a stormsurge would only make playing against Tau even more miserable than it is- at least most people never have to deal with a taunar. Frankly drones need to be entirely rethought. They’re a terrible mechanic that serves mostly to slow the game down and cause bad feeling for opponents.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 05:46
|
|
|
Pendent posted:Neither one should, FW is just bad at writing rules. Drones tanking wounds for a stormsurge would only make playing against Tau even more miserable than it is- at least most people never have to deal with a taunar. I kind of agree, but the Stormsurge sucks really loving bad and I don't think that getting drones to tank for it would make it good. It's just irritating that there's nothing even close to consistency on what is and is not a battlesuit once you get up that high. At present a Ta'unar costs a minimum of 1879 points so I'm not sure there's any combination of it plus drones that will make a 2k game against it anything other than a massive curbstomp for the other player to inflict on something barely more durable than a Castellan. T'au Lords of War are in a really lovely place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 05:53
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Lords of War too. Then you could call it something cool like... apocalypse? if you want to represent these things that don’t belong in tactical level combat. poo poo, shrink it down and we could call it something cool like .... epic! Since you seem unwilling to go back to 3rd or 4th to make the game what you want it to be, have you considered only playing 1000 point games? Its pretty hard to take the poo poo you hate when you're at a lower points level. The armies you'll field around 1000-1250 are pretty similar to what you'd have in a 1750 or 2k game of 3rd/4th too. Perfect for everything you want.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 06:05
|
|
|
Booley posted:Since you seem unwilling to go back to 3rd or 4th to make the game what you want it to be, have you considered only playing 1000 point games? Its pretty hard to take the poo poo you hate when you're at a lower points level. The armies you'll field around 1000-1250 are pretty similar to what you'd have in a 1750 or 2k game of 3rd/4th too. Perfect for everything you want. Why I never thought of that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 06:21
|
|
|
Booley posted:Since you seem unwilling to go back to 3rd or 4th to make the game what you want it to be, have you considered only playing 1000 point games? Its pretty hard to take the poo poo you hate when you're at a lower points level. The armies you'll field around 1000-1250 are pretty similar to what you'd have in a 1750 or 2k game of 3rd/4th too. Perfect for everything you want. Sure. Also you can simply agree with your opponent that flyers and lords of war are not allowed.  I don't see myself ever playing in a serious 40k tournament as long as I live. Gross.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 06:36
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:Sure. Also you can simply agree with your opponent that flyers and lords of war are not allowed. Yuck. Human interaction.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 06:39
|
|
|
Revelation 2-13 posted:My first impression is that orks look really cool and fun. Obviously it remains to be seen whether they'll win any tournaments, but I think their kulturs all look god drat amazing and I cant imagine them not being both good and fun in normal play. At a glance they certainly have a ton more decent playstyle options. Boyz costin' a little more is fine, given that there's other stuff that's viable to put on the table besides a green wall with trukks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 06:55
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:What ever happened to Aeronautica Imperialis, is that still around? Last seen being quietly taken in a sack to the nearest river and being chucked in with a rock tied to the bottom.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 08:07
|
|
|
Lungboy posted:Last seen being quietly taken in a sack to the nearest river and being chucked in with a rock tied to the bottom. If only it had the FLY keyword.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 08:13
|
|
|
Stephenls posted:...I wonder if it would be better to represent actually-flying-flying vehicles as just, like, stratagems. Spend 2 CP to have a plane far above do a strafing run or drop a bomb or something. Having jet aircraft in a game with 40K's scale and board size as actual on-board units has never made any sense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 11:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:08 |
|
|
Nothing in 40k makes sense. Just roll with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2018 11:27
|
|
