Chapter Approved 2019 - Speculation

[Trevak Dal]

Yep. People sometimes need to adjust what they use. How many are running flamers?

Yeah I want my elite units. to shoot s4 random dice when my army's bag is Only Shooting, and our base weaponry is s5.

 

Now if I could take two flamers on stealth suits? (Or indeed two burst cannons or fusion blasters on stealth suits) then heck yeah, that would be an awesome unit to use.

 

I got the flamers magnetized and I've used them, but it feels bad.

[SickSix]

IMHO removing templates was a mistake. Flamers need to be 3+D3 or at least have a base hit above one. Same with demolishers and the like.

[Ficinus]

If GW doesn't change how random attacks work, a lot of people who pick up the new Sisters are going to be very disappointed at how unreliable one third of the army's weapons are (actually, up that to two thirds given how unreliable S8 and D D6 is on melta).

[kombatwombat]

:cuss me no let’s please never go back to JSJ.

 

Sure it makes your unit stronger, but that sits up there with Destroyer weapons/Stomps and Mortal Wounds as the most painfully anti-fun mechanic. Winning a game by making it unfun isn’t helping.

 

 

I too am pining for the days of templates. They solved so many issues that 8th Ed has and the ‘problems’ with them for the most part existed only in the Internet echo chamber, not between two reasonable opponents. If we’re not going back to them, I really hope for a fix to template/blast weapons, they need help.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Tau units with BS3 would be able to hit on 2+ and reroll 1s with markerlight support...

[Panzer]

Tau units with BS3 would be able to hit on 2+ and reroll 1s with markerlight support...

 

Which you have to hit 5+ of first and only against a single enemy unit. Which can get destroyed by the enemy, so have a counterplay mechanic to it. Also Marines can give some of their units BS2+ just like that as well.

Edited October 9, 2019 by sfPanzer

[Ishagu]

Are Tau particularly weak? Nope, they are a powerful faction and one of the best mono books. A bit limited in play styles, but hopefully these new campaign books might fix that.

[Panzer]

Are Tau particularly weak? Nope, they are a powerful faction and one of the best mono books. A bit limited in play styles, but hopefully these new campaign books might fix that.

 

Nobody said T'au as a faction are particularly weak. Just that T'au players would love to actually use their most iconic unit to great effect again instead of the usual old Riptide spam.

Instead of inventing strawmans to dodge the discussion you could just drop out of it if you don't want to take part in it anymore.

Edited October 9, 2019 by sfPanzer

[Captain Idaho]

IMHO removing templates was a mistake. Flamers need to be 3+D3 or at least have a base hit above one. Same with demolishers and the like.

Totally agree.

 

Demolishers would single handedly return as castle killers if templates returned.

[kombatwombat]

Oh man, there has never been anything more satisfying in this game than dropping a Linebreaker shell into a Tau castle,

 

and killing the entire. damn. thing.

[Slasher956]

Oh man, there has never been anything more satisfying in this game than dropping a Linebreaker shell into a Tau castle,

 

and killing the entire. damn. thing.

yes ... 3rd Ed ...white scars bike chaplin charging a unit, causing them to brake - running them down and consolidating in to a 2nd unit then fighting again and end up consolidating in to a 3rd unit who cant fall back

 

in 3 turns (mine, opponents then mine) 1 model wiped out what felt like half a 1500 point army!

[Panzer]

Also nothing more annoying than having templates scatter off just to hit one or two models again and again because your opponent spend years to space his models before.

[Slasher956]

re templates

 

flamers should have them.

other weapons should have two profiles - solid shot & canister, canister is a blast template and solid shot a set number of shots with over flowing wounds /damage against infantry (representing the shots going straight through people).

 

as for scatter, that should be indirect fire only.

 

direct fire = 1 shot if hits you place the template so it covers max models in unit, if misses then opponent places it so it hits at least one model

[Ishagu]

I'm happy to never see templates ever again. The game plays better without them.

[Captain Idaho]

It really doesn't. The whole point of templates was to force players to spread out which has its own problems. In 8th edition, forcing opponents to spread their army out would be incredibly useful and balance the game away from boring castles that just sit there an throw dice at you.

[Ishagu]

They were thematic and even fun, but highly inaccurate, they slow the game down, they encouraged a different type of positioning that slows the game down even more, they discourage certain types of lists, they often cause debates or arguments, etc.

 

The bad outweighs the good many times over.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Ishagu

[MegaVolt87]

It really doesn't. The whole point of templates was to force players to spread out which has its own problems. In 8th edition, forcing opponents to spread their army out would be incredibly useful and balance the game away from boring castles that just sit there an throw dice at you.

 

Exactly, adding a risk/ reward to castles via templates and the old assault rules with the consolidations, as a stick to the castle's carrot. Right now, castles are pretty much diamond encrusted platinum carrots right now. Also the older meaner assault rules would make the assault phase serious business again, shooters are also living that diamond encrusted platinum carrot life as well. 

[MARK0SIAN]

I think every army could benefit from at least one weapon that was specifically anti-castle. An area effect weapon that was simply deadly to tightly grouped units. A hard counter. Something that if you planned to castle and your opponent happens to have bought one, you either need to rethink your plan or you will have a bad time.

 

Orbital bombardment seems like it was meant to fit that bill but it’s simply not devastating enough. There are so many rewards for castling, it’s time we bought in some risks too.

[Ishagu]

The downside of castles is losing board control and objectives. I think that mission design is how you deal with them. In ITC it often can't happen due to the way secondary objectives are chosen and scored, but in CA missions that require your army to move and be built in more generalist ways it's not really an issue.

 

CA19 could be even better in this regard.

[Dark Shepherd]

A condensed army is easier to assault :)

[Captain Idaho]

The game is skewed towards castles and shooting. There's nothing easy about assaulting a Tau or Iron Hands castle.

 

Templates were thematic and crucial to balance. Without them what do we have? Castles springing up everywhere.

 

It's possible to fix it by (as mentioned above) there being at least 1 way to hit multiple close units like that. Say a Vindicator hits a unit and every unit within 3" of that unit is also hit by D3 shots, which actually wouldn't break the game or stop castling.

[Ishagu]

The game is skewed towards castles and shooting. There's nothing easy about assaulting a Tau or Iron Hands castle.

 

Templates were thematic and crucial to balance. Without them what do we have? Castles springing up everywhere.

 

It's possible to fix it by (as mentioned above) there being at least 1 way to hit multiple close units like that. Say a Vindicator hits a unit and every unit within 3" of that unit is also hit by D3 shots, which actually wouldn't break the game or stop castling.

You suggestion would punish an elite army with expensive units that relies an auras or defensive positioning because of limited screens, and do nothing against hordes.

[Captain Idaho]

It would be 1 change as part of many.

 

But no it wouldn't punish an elite army with expensive units if said units didn't castle up.

 

Hordes don't castle. Except Astra Millitarum who would hate to have their cheap weapons teams and multiple vehicles. That's ideal.

[Ishagu]

It would be 1 change as part of many.

 

But no it wouldn't punish an elite army with expensive units if said units didn't castle up.

 

Hordes don't castle. Except Astra Millitarum who would hate to have their cheap weapons teams and multiple vehicles. That's ideal.

But an elite army often needs to be defensive, to position itself far away from an assault or firepower. And this might have absolutely nothing to do with character auras.

 

D3 Vindicator hits will do nothing against blobs of Guard or Plaguebearers, but it's enough to kill an expensive marine character or a tank like a Rhino.

[Slasher956]

so whats your answer ishagu?

 

create another couple of  tables in the rule book called blast radius, and in the shots coloumn put a * then in the rules for the weapon say BLAST RADIUS <X>.  So you then look in the table to see how many shots you get against the unit....

 

then the tables go something like this:

 

blast v infantry

blast radius X - unit size 1 - unit size 2 - unit size 3 etc etc

 

blast v vehicles & monsters

blast radius x - starting wound a to b  b to c  - c to d

 

 

 

EDIT - ok thats an off the cuff idea... however thinking about it .. it could work... you have a base chart that individual weapons / units could modify... 

 

EDIT 2 - ps unit size 1 would be something like 1 -5 models 

unit size 2 6 -10 

etc etc

Edited October 9, 2019 by Slasher956