Thematic armies

[Dremiah]

I can't help but be a little hopeful about using my Grey Knights after the Adepticon announcement that GW will reward players who use thematic armies in the next addition. Is there a more thematic army then the Grey Knights?

[Race Bannon]

All of them ^_^

 

In my opinion, one just need to care about the army more than the game.

[Phiasco]

A question I have is how an army list is qualified as 'thematic'. I can come up with fluffy reasons for almost any army composition or combination. I wonder if there will have to be specific criteria that GW will need to enumerate for us.

[Dremiah]

Well, of all the armies/factions, none have a more specific "theme" then the Grey Knights. They are purely built to slay demons. I'm hoping this is what GW means when they say they're going to reward armies with a specific theme.

[Myunch]

Well, of all the armies/factions, none have a more specific "theme" then the Grey Knights. They are purely built to slay demons. I'm hoping this is what GW means when they say they're going to reward armies with a specific theme.

As long as themed Grav lists don't get buffed I'm good >_< lol

[jeffersonian000]

I hope "themed" means "not a mix and match of best units from ever codex".

 

SJ

[casb1965]

I hope "themed" means "not a mix and match of best units from ever codex".

SJ

You don't mean "Castellans of the Imperium" do you

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Command points sound interesting. If they're better than Warlord Traits I'll be happy. 

 

We'll have to see how it all shakes out this year. I'm cautiously optimistic that the following things will happen;

 

- Consolidation of the game: This has been a sore point for so many years, as expansions and campaign books have added a huge breadth to the game. The concept of a single online army builder is an excellent step in the right direction. Apps like Battlescribe aren't without their issues, but for a quick way to find obscure units or builds you're fighting against, its invaluable. No one is going to buy all the supplements to the game. 

- Consolidation of rules: Stuff like 'if you get the charge you swing first' is a good idea. Melee units already suffer heavily from random charge range, no charging from a non-assault vehicle or Reserve/Scout/Infiltrate, terrain slowing charges, assault grenades or bust, and Overwatch/Supporting Fire. I'm hoping they remove some of the other obstacles. But making at least your initial charge hit home as intended is a good idea. Orks and Tyranids are both going to love that, as will Blood Angels and GK. If GW are serious about reviving melee as a major part of the game, its going to put the pure shooty armies in their place fast, and force a lot of meta changes. 

- Moving the timeline: While I'm not exactly thrilled by a lot of the lore, moving us beyond the stasis of 'Cadia fell and then....' is good for the game and background. Chaos needs a definitive win, to make them relevant from both a game and narrative perspective. It's boring watching the Imperium pull victory out of nowhere time after time. It would make both factions more interesting, and add the crucial element of uncertainty and risk. 

 

I was initially pretty skeptical and pessimistic about the news about 8th, but like 7th it'll work itself out. I still prefer 7th over 6th in many ways, I would just prefer the xenos armies get taken down a notch. Grav also needs to be toned down, it invalidates huge swathes of the Marine armoury and strategy. 

[TheMostGood]

Here's a run down on the things they talked about. I think it is important to remember like with anything in any game, they are a work in progress and some may not make it into the game itself. It's still very promising that they are looking to change things, are letting us know that they are changing stuff, and getting input from the competitive scene as well. 

 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/03/23/warhammer-40000-news-from-adepticon/

[Waking Dreamer]

Well, of all the armies/factions, none have a more specific "theme" then the Grey Knights. They are purely built to slay demons. I'm hoping this is what GW means when they say they're going to reward armies with a specific theme.

Thematic as in the way your army is composed. So say 6+ DreadKnight spam aint gonna get you those reroll buffs...since when have we seen that in the lore?

 

Though something like a GK Grandmaster with a unit of Paladins will get a buff because in the lore Paladins were the bodyguards for GMs..

[Bartali]

I can't help but be a little hopeful about using my Grey Knights after the Adepticon announcement that GW will reward players who use thematic armies in the next addition. Is there a more thematic army then the Grey Knights?

 

I wouldn't get too excited yet. Formations and detachments were initially talked about as rewarding thematic armies. Gladius does just that for example. Nemesis Strike Force gives rewards for fielding your army a certain way - but they're obviously worlds apart.

GW needs to learn how to balance them, and also reign in using them to sell models (hi Riptide Wing etc)

[Gentlemanloser]

Armour Save Modifiers....

 

Hopefully TDA goes back to saving on 2d6.

 

Otherwise this is going to suck.  Heck it's going to suck for Power Armoured armies more than flimsy armoured Xenos, unless something radically changes.

 

Say AP4 weapon now give -3 modifiers.  Your PA Marines who used to ignore (get their full save) Incinerators, now only save on a 6.

 

Ugh.

 

Unless there's a convoluted, compare AP to Armour, if AP > Armour, apply this modifier to the roll, new formula for beating Saves...

[Bartali]

To be fair, PA infantry have been useless through 7th and are only really taken to fulfil minimum requirements for formations/detachments.

 

I can't believe GW would actually make PA infantry less worth having in 8th... Although with the rumoured change back to 4" move in a game currently dominated by Cav/Beasts/Bikes/Jetbikes/Jump MCs etc is, err, going to be interesting.

[Gentlemanloser]

Or if for example bolters get a -1 sv mod.

 

All tda is now as effective as pa veered them.

 

But. This is all in a vacuum. Easy to see the negative. Hard to see the positive without more information.

[Race Bannon]

Yeah, 2+ TDA save on a D6 at the transition to 3E, coupled with the rarity of AP 2 weapons back then, meant the armor type was worth something.  Power creep over the editions is a real thing, but the armor didn't creep with it (nor could it when you have a D6).

 

So, if Bolters get their -1 save modifier (like they were in 2nd edition) and TDA get their 2D6 armor save (like they were 2E), then the armor will be what it really is: the best armor the Imperium can make.  Grey Knights would truly be the force they have always been written to be: the elite of the elite amongst the elite.

 

A lot of discussion is simply in a holding pattern.

[jeffersonian000]

The major issue has always been the excessive ease at which armies can access AP2. Most AP2 of better weapons are also high strength, which makes T4 useless. Plasma really needs to be AP3, and TDA really needs to add a 1 to Toughness. Those two changes make TDA viable. Or, change Armor Pen to needing to be less than the save to bypass, rather than equal or less. That would have the same effect, too.

 

SJ

[Commander Dawnstar]

Part of me wonders if the "thematic" element is hinting at a change to army construction that will move more in the AoS direction. In AoS you gain access to additional rules and equipment if your army draws entirely on factions from the same alliance (so think Armies of the Imperium, Chaos, Eldar etc) and an army built entirely from a single faction gains access to some more gimmicks as well as broadening its selection of units that can count for (in 40k terms) their Compulsory Troops in a CAD. It's the first thing that comes to mind anyway.

 

As for Command Points, one thing I recall is that Guilliman's debut batrep on Warhammer TV used a resource by that name. Essentially they were a (fairly sizeable) pool of rerolls that could be used to reroll any single die, with no limits on how many you could use per turn.

[Myunch]

Part of me wonders if the "thematic" element is hinting at a change to army construction that will move more in the AoS direction. In AoS you gain access to additional rules and equipment if your army draws entirely on factions from the same alliance (so think Armies of the Imperium, Chaos, Eldar etc) and an army built entirely from a single faction gains access to some more gimmicks as well as broadening its selection of units that can count for (in 40k terms) their Compulsory Troops in a CAD. It's the first thing that comes to mind anyway.

 

As for Command Points, one thing I recall is that Guilliman's debut batrep on Warhammer TV used a resource by that name. Essentially they were a (fairly sizeable) pool of rerolls that could be used to reroll any single die, with no limits on how many you could use per turn.

This would make lots of sense. Not sure how that would pan out. However, it would be nice to consider "thematic" as a list one one faction, 3 and 4 sets of allies in one list doesn't always seem like a "theme" imo.

[Quixus]

The major issue has always been the excessive ease at which armies can access AP2. Most AP2 of better weapons are also high strength, which makes T4 useless. Plasma really needs to be AP3, and TDA really needs to add a 1 to Toughness. Those two changes make TDA viable. Or, change Armor Pen to needing to be less than the save to bypass, rather than equal or less. That would have the same effect, too.

 

SJ

While this would help against AP 2, it would make the other end of the spectrum even less useful. Bolter rounds are supposed to be armour piercing mini rockets, yet they are already stopped by good infantry armour (carapace armour or equivalent). Changing the AP rules would make it even worse. I'd say the easier way is to rework the weapons instead of the armour. I do agree though that terminators should get their armour save against plasma weapons at least. Other AP 2 weaponry is debatable.

[jeffersonian000]

 

 

The major issue has always been the excessive ease at which armies can access AP2. Most AP2 of better weapons are also high strength, which makes T4 useless. Plasma really needs to be AP3, and TDA really needs to add a 1 to Toughness. Those two changes make TDA viable. Or, change Armor Pen to needing to be less than the save to bypass, rather than equal or less. That would have the same effect, too.

 

SJ

While this would help against AP 2, it would make the other end of the spectrum even less useful. Bolter rounds are supposed to be armour piercing mini rockets, yet they are already stopped by good infantry armour (carapace armour or equivalent). Changing the AP rules would make it even worse. I'd say the easier way is to rework the weapons instead of the armour. I do agree though that terminators should get their armour save against plasma weapons at least. Other AP 2 weaponry is debatable.

Define "Stopped". 50/50 isn't "Stopped".

 

SJ

[Plasmablasts]

One option would be a really radical rejig of the weapon, armour and vehicle rules. Give all models an armour value more like that of vehicles and a toughness value (fluffed as the internal resilience of a vehicle). Weapons have an armour penetration value that starts at 0 for, e.g. an autogun. The shooting sequence remains To Hit, To Wound (even vs vehicles) and then Armour Penetration, which would be the AP value + d6 to beat the target's Armour value. Get the armour and AP values balanced well and that system would allow more scaleability than the current six point armour save. TDA could then be given an armour value comparable to current AV13 or AV14 vehicles.

[Quixus]

Define "Stopped". 50/50 isn't "Stopped".

SJ

It has the same chance stopping a bolt round as a space marine's fist (or any other AP - weapon). No matter how you turn it, that is ridiculous.

[the jeske]

I hope "themed" means "not a mix and match of best units from ever codex".

 

SJ

One could hope for something like that. On the other hand you have something like the new eldar grand coalition codex, which more or less has the theme of being a mix of 3 books.

Plus sword wind host and mecha suit formations are also thematic as hell. IMO before going extra deep in to themes GW should fix the core of lists for their factions. Any change to terminator armor could be a huge boon for the GKs. There was a time when Tac termis were great, and there was a time where melee termis were ok, so the rules [technicly] could be shaped in to something that promotes termis being taken.

[Waking Dreamer]

While I certainly don't want it to be broken...the unique GK trait of every astrates in the chapter having their own TDA, and legendary battles of 100+ GK Terminators being teleported right in the heart of the battlefield (War of Armageddon), needs to be translated better on the tabletop.

 

Mass deep-striking Terminators is as thematic as you can get for GKs...they just need to make it an effective tactical choice - even if I dare say competitive!

[Quixus]

Isn't that pretty much exactly what the NSF already does? You can take only knights in TDA and deep strike up to half of them on turn one and the rest from turn 2 onwards.