New Apocalypse Faction Focus on Warhammer Community

[t-dog1996]

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/06/17/apocalypse-faction-focus-space-marinesgw-homepage-post-2/?fbclid=IwAR13Ffo4JYgDEYuYsUOzKn4oO-OPhrTNL5K7DKwDKAgAD_qS4EsOFk2ifw8

 

Posting here for those who haven't seen.

 

Very interesting how Tactical Marines are front and centre in the lead photo and get a name-drop in the second paragraph. Based on the marketing up until now I assumed this release would be very Primaris-focussed. Not that I'm complaining, maybe Tactical Marines will get some love in this system? Either way looks exciting how Apocalypse will be more like a new game than 40k on steroids. Getting War of the Ring vibes here!

Edited June 17, 2019 by t-dog1996

[Happy-inquisitor]

If that Aquilon Optics rule carries over to 40K in a similar form then I'm buying myself a tank or two.

[MARK0SIAN]

The plasma gun on the Repulsor already seems like it’s in a weird place for apocalypse. Not particularly good at hurting vehicles but also no better than a bolter at hurting infantry. There must be more to the damage system than they’ve explained.

[Panzer]

The plasma gun on the Repulsor already seems like it’s in a weird place for apocalypse. Not particularly good at hurting vehicles but also no better than a bolter at hurting infantry. There must be more to the damage system than they’ve explained.

Well we don't know how many shots a unit gets for example. If a unit of 5 Intercessors gets only one shot (statline has A1 and Bolt rifle says A:user) then the 2-4 shots of the Repulsor aren't that bad compared and is still much better against tanks (6+ instead of 8+).

We also don't know what supercharge in apocalypse does yet (or rapid fire).

[Marshal Vespasian]

Well it seems to be dependant on blast marker though we dont know yet how that works.

 

I like the destination between damage vs people and vs vehicles. Its kind of videogamey, but I think it cod work pretty well.

I hope we get to see a non-astartes force next, so we can hazard a guess as to how they change up the Power of weapons and saves when utilizing a d12.

 

Also: reinforcements apparently are a thing. I want this to be cool

[Panzer]

I imagine the blast marker are just so you know which units got wounded since you check the damage only at the end of the turn.

[autek mor]

GW still trying to push intercessors i see, top unit? really?.....

 

would have thought that aggressors and hellblasters be better suited for this format of the game.

[t-dog1996]

GW still trying to push intercessors i see, top unit? really?.....

 

would have thought that aggressors and hellblasters be better suited for this format of the game.

 

It's worth remembering that these aren't really tactical guides, they are adverts disguised as tactical guides. Intercessors are the flagship unit of this edition so it makes sense that they would want to push them.

[Panzer]

GW still trying to push intercessors i see, top unit? really?.....

 

would have thought that aggressors and hellblasters be better suited for this format of the game.

 

You are surprised about that but not about them listing Tacticals alongside with them? They've been much much worse for a long time now.

 

Also why would Aggressors and Hellblasters be better suited for Apocalypse? They'd just get deleted the same way but cost a lot more. What matters for infantry is numbers and durability when there are so many big guns on the board and Intercessors offer a good mix of both for a Marine army. I wouldn't be surprised if Intercessors actually turn out to be a top unit in Apocalyspe due to their 50% chance to simply ignore damage (Sv6+ on a d12) and decent ability to do damage with their Bolt rifles (5+/8+ on a d12).

[Leif Bearclaw]

You are surprised about that but not about them listing Tacticals alongside with them? They've been much much worse for a long time now.

 

Um, they don't. Sure they mention Tacs in the text of one paragraph, but only bring up Intercessors as a 'Top Unit' alongside Gulliman and the new Repulsor.

[autek mor]

 

GW still trying to push intercessors i see, top unit? really?.....

 

would have thought that aggressors and hellblasters be better suited for this format of the game.

 

You are surprised about that but not about them listing Tacticals alongside with them? They've been much much worse for a long time now.

 

Also why would Aggressors and Hellblasters be better suited for Apocalypse? They'd just get deleted the same way but cost a lot more. What matters for infantry is numbers and durability when there are so many big guns on the board and Intercessors offer a good mix of both for a Marine army. I wouldn't be surprised if Intercessors actually turn out to be a top unit in Apocalyspe due to their 50% chance to simply ignore damage (Sv6+ on a d12) and decent ability to do damage with their Bolt rifles (5+/8+ on a d12).

 

 

perhaps the way i wrote my post gave the wrong impression. i am more amused than anything by the constant intercessor push to the point that they have been the most buffed unit in all of 8th edition and still......are not considered auto includes for imperial armies. i like marines, so i am happy for any edge that they get regardless of the unit that GW decide to improve. obviously apocalypse is more about fun than balance in the meta but top unit? if that is the case then i'll wait for a few months for some more player feedback before i decide to buy six boxes of interccessors.

[Boldthreat]

Granted we didn’t get to see the unit, but the blurb about Chaos Space Marines being able to choose Bolters or Chainswords had me wondering about Tactical Marines. I would have assumed that Tactical Marines would have shorter ranged, weaker bolt gun... but a better anti tank punch. I hope Tacticals aren’t just a cheaper 5 man Bolter squad.

[Marshal Rohr]

I probably won’t be playing Apocalypse with or against marines. Just from the snatches of rules we’ve seen so far this will be the most fun with reinforced battalion sized guard armies focused on infantry vs Xenos hordes or straight on armor vs armor brawls.

[Panzer]

Not sure what makes you say that considering we have barely seen anything at all so far.

[Maritn]

I wouldn't be surprised if Intercessors actually turn out to be a top unit in Apocalyspe due to their 50% chance to simply ignore damage (Sv6+ on a d12) and decent ability to do damage with their Bolt rifles (5+/8+ on a d12).

It's even a 58% chance (50% would be 7+).

I'd really like to know what the save throws of other infantry and especially Terminators are.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Maritn

[Orange Knight]

I probably won’t be playing Apocalypse with or against marines. Just from the snatches of rules we’ve seen so far this will be the most fun with reinforced battalion sized guard armies focused on infantry vs Xenos hordes or straight on armor vs armor brawls.

What gives you this impression? The rules we've been shown are only small crumbs. We don't have the full picture or how the game plays or how it has been balanced. The Astartes and weapon stat-lines are different so we cant gauge how they'll perform in Apocalypse.

[Marshal Rohr]

 

I probably won’t be playing Apocalypse with or against marines. Just from the snatches of rules we’ve seen so far this will be the most fun with reinforced battalion sized guard armies focused on infantry vs Xenos hordes or straight on armor vs armor brawls.

What gives you this impression? The rules we've been shown are only small crumbs. We don't have the full picture or how the game plays or how it has been balanced. The Astartes and weapon stat-lines are different so we cant gauge how they'll perform in Apocalypse.

 

 

 

Just the SAT and SAP characteristic imply it'll be more fun to roll back your super killy units to get more infantry on the table to duke it out with other infantry, or to throw down all tanks vs all tanks. The new article about damage confirms my gut feeling. This is going to be a blast with weak armies vs weak armies or Kursk in Space. 

Edited June 19, 2019 by Marshal Rohr

[Panzer]

I still don't see where you get that idea from. Or do you imply that tanks are only good against other tanks and infantry only against other infantry?

Edited June 19, 2019 by sfPanzer

[Marshal Rohr]

I’m implying the game types that will result in the most cinematic experiences will be armor brawls or infantry slugfests. If you’ve ever played a game of Warhammer 2 this would be like only Empire Infantry and minimal artillery and magic units vs only Dark Elf infantry and minimal artillery and magic units. If you try to evenly match armies against other armies with the same infantry and armor focus you can make the game more tactical by not having to worry about big beat sticks, and play at a faster pace than doing it normal 40k.

 

Like if you did GSC vs Guard, and included minimal vehicles in an urban board, the armies are going to be of similar damage output and resilience, you won’t have to fret about a single baneblade getting your goat and you use the abstract nature of the damage and alternating activation to focus on movements and objectives without having to factor in reserving enough damage to kill a titan or marine squad.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Marshal Rohr

[Panzer]

Yeah but given the informations we got so far I simply can't see that being the case yet. Imo you are jumping the gun with such assumptions.

[Marshal Rohr]

I’m really not, they’ve already put out the info I need to make this assessment. Damage, resolution, and shooting.

[Panzer]

I guess we simply disagree then.