kombatwombat

I’m picking the Arquitor is coming, but not sure if it’ll be before or after the Vindicators. The Sicaran track sprue only uses half of the bits to make a Sicaran, and they don’t fit the Land Raider, Rhino or Kratos chassis - but they would fit the Arquitor. Also the rules for the Arquitor now include the full pintle weapon options - some of which were never available in resin - and the plastic Predator/Sicaran sponson options in addition to the Autocannons.

Skimask raises some good points - since reactions are a no brainer with no downside attached, it’s straightforward to build a list that will just annihilate reserves without a significant cost. It’s entirely realistic to have to eat shooting from three units during your own turn even without using reserves. For a combat army, that may mean your opponent does more shooting in your turn than you do - and there’s no trade off in terms of combat reactions. I think the borrowing forward concept is a winner. If you react, that unit can’t activate in the corresponding phase on their turn. Return fire? Give up your own shooting phase. Withdraw? That unit can’t move next turn. Hold the line? No counter charging for you. When I proposed it earlier someone countered that it would be a bookkeeping nightmare. I don’t think so? You’re probably reacting with 2-3 units per turn. You currently have to keep track of units that rapid fired and can’t charge, units that rallied and have to snap shoot, vehicles that moved at cruising speed and only fire one weapon at full BS etc. Is it such a burden to add remembering that a unit reacted?

I’m also in the camp of ‘reactions should be a tactical move with a cost attached’ rather than ‘a mindless buff where the question is which, not if’. I think the system would be much more interesting and palatable to more players with a small number of changes in an errata. - Return Fire is declared before To Hit rolls are made, and executed after resolving the active unit’s shooting. - Interceptor requires an Augury Scanner to be used, and does cost a reaction allotment. - A unit may only make one reaction per player turn. I think those are relatively uncontroversial, so the one that won’t be popular for fans of reactions in their current full, perhaps grotesque glory: - A unit that uses a reaction may not take any action in the same phase on their following turn, except to Regroup. For example, a unit that uses the Evade reaction in their opponent’s turn may not shoot in their own subsequent Shooting Phase, but may move and charge as normal. Note that the Charge Sub-Phase is considered distinct from the Fight Sub-Phase for this rule.

I think limiting any given unit to making one reaction per turn, rather than per phase, is a very sensible limit. It doesn’t make reactions any less powerful, but it does stop say a 10-man Siege Tyrant squad firing 80 missiles in a turn. Also, GW’s decision to errata the Return Fire reaction to trigger before the active unit rolls to hit was, umm, bold.

Isn’t the Lion awake and moving around (in realspace no less) as of the end of Warzone Fenris? Surely that has to make him the strongest competitor, along with Russ who hasn’t been ‘on-camera’ but has the largest fan following and has the grey ship at the Gathering Storm speculation. Ferrus is shown in Master of Mankind in everything but name at the head of the Legion of the Damned/Imperial Daemons. That would be a simple enough means of bringing him back to the setting, with a true centrepiece model to boot.

The article definitely sounds like ‘we read the Goonhammer article and are now in damage control’. Bet the meeting on Monday morning was entertaining. When the iOS App is debugged a little I’m keen to give the free version a crack. I do find the subscription model very anti-customer so I won’t be buying in. I don’t think that was a mistake on GW’s part though - I think it was a calculated move after being very closely analysed by the financial and marketing teams to find the point that gouged the most cash out of the marketplace. Which is odd, since I’d thought the rise of social media had somewhat quashed the anti-customer approach to business.

It’s an interesting perspective that definitely changes how you look at external balance and comparing units. That said, if that is the case, I think they got Eldar badly wrong. The implication seems to be ‘Eldar take grav-tanks. End of story.’ I feel the Fast Attack options needed to be cheaper, and the Elites (notably Aspect Warriors) need an aggressive points cut - or perhaps a huge rules buff might work better thematically for them.

You are absolutely, unequivocally correct. ...now, in that light, let’s discuss exactly what those problems were with templates and scatter :P

Hi guys, Not sure if here is the place to ask, but I’m wondering if anybody would know how to contact a commission artist/3D modeller for a small accessory piece on an Eldar Jetbike. I have someone who can do the printing so I’m just after design. I can find designers on google, but I’m looking for someone used to doing accessories for 40k/GW models so they understand about making it fit. Any help pointing me in the right direction would be appreciated!

Anybody who’s suffered the hate crime that is building Finecast Necron Destroyers will tell you that they take out all 3 places.

The deathstar problem that plagued 7th Ed was more complex than just having multiple characters in one unit. Most of the problems stemmed from a few factors, some of which 8th has coincidentally solved. The problems were overwhelmingly to do with defence rather than offence. 1. Character abilities transferring to units outside of their faction with unintended consequences - think Azrael giving his 4++ to Space Wolves. This has been solved by keywords. 2. Psychic powers and other abilities conferring increases or rerolls to saves, particularly invulnerable - this is where you got the 2++ rerollable. This has largely been solved by GW being much stingier with giving out bonuses to saves and almost zero rerolls to saves. 3. Invisibility. Nothing more really needs be said on that one. 4. The Look Out, Sir! mechanic - a huge part of the issue. It was the source of save allocation shenanigans, where you could put the character out front, use him to tank the Lascannons, then use the rest of the unit to eat the Bolter shots. Unfortunately this mechanic still somewhat exists (drones, Deathshroud etc), but removing it and taking hits on the closest model would mean that if you put the character out front to tank the Lascannon, he will be swamped with Bolter fire. 5. GW being careless with which Character rules carried over to the unit. Things like Hit and Run that a lightfooted character could somehow impart on a unit of Cataphractii. GW has shown with their new FAQ/Errata model that they’re much more willing to pay attention to these interactions now. Enforcing a ‘one character per unit’ rule is a solution to a lot of these problems, but it’s a real baby-with-the-bathwater solution. These issues are not unsolvable, and GW has already solved a lot of them.

In terms of changes I’d like to see, I’d be keen on some pretty drastic changes. I think these would lead to a much better overall experience, though it may have to be in an Advanced Ruleset. A. Keep the turn structure/phases, but go to alternating activation unit by unit. B. Move to D12s for Hit/Wound/Save. C. Make the To-Wound score on a D12 Toughness plus 7 minus Strength (so same Str/T means 7+ to wound and go from there). D. Allow auto-wound and impossible-to-wound scenarios if you reach 1+ or 13+ To-Wound. E. Open up the Toughness values - say 3/5/7/14 for Guardsman/Astartes/Custodes/Predator. F. Similarly open up the Strength values, but less than the T values to reduce overall lethality. G. Return the use of Templates, without scatter if the player base really can’t handle it. H. Utilise facings for anything over 9 wounds, with simple arcs and three Toughness values for front/side/rear (or, even simpler, +1 T for front, -1 T for rear, no change for side). I. True LoS measuring from hull/body to hull/body only. To-hit penalties for obscured models. J. Return to Characters joining units. K. Remove stratagems as a mechanic and return unit special abilities to their special rules rather than only being able to do their schtick for as long as they have CP. L. Utilise both keywords and Universal Special Rules to cut down on rules bloat. Start with that and then adapt the rest of the 8th Ed mechanics to it. It’s far from perfect, but it combines a lot of the advantages of both 8th and prior editions. Edit: M through Z. Remove Mortal Wounds as a mechanic.

The quantity over quality and shot volume issues are symptomatic of the ‘everything can hurt everything’ philosophy. In days gone by, plasma, Autocannons and other multi-shot Str6-7 weaponry were still the best choice overall... until they came up against Av14, at which point they were literally useless. Having things not being able to be damaged by some units made elite, hard-to-damage units far more worthwhile. I think the game is sorely missing the rock-paper-scissors element of having to pack the right weapon for the job. If we kept the current Toughness system rather than the old Av, then I think the game would greatly benefit from going back to the old To-Wound mechanic that included impossible to wound scenarios. I’d actually go even further, and get rid of the ‘roll of a 1 always fails’ for saves. Let some few elite models have a 1+ save that makes them impervious to harm from small arms. Force the taking of weapons dedicated to killing elite units rather than just throwing high-volume, low-Ap at everything.

I can assure you this is definitively incorrect. Take Perth as an example. We have something in the realm of two formal events per month over here. Last year there were... two? ITC format events here, this year there will likely be three. Neither of them saw big crowds. The two biggest events last year - the state Masters and Team Championships - both used ETC format, which was widely praised. The first event this year, First Blood, was bigger than either of those events and used missions straight out of CA19 Maelstrom, which also saw huge acclaim amongst participants. ITC has crept insidiously over here, but it is mostly amongst the most hardcore of the hyper-competitive set. You can find ITC events if you want them, but you can find all formats easily.

Can you really look at the cheesy-grin cartoon villain plastic Daemon Prince and honestly say to yourself it looks better than the old, menacing Juan Diaz one? We’re not talking model detail quality or ease of assembly here - we’re talking purely model beauty. A plastic recut of the old metal Daemon Prince with no change to the design, only using modern plastic technology is one of the closest things we’d see to genuine universal acclaim. Edit: pics for reference. I call it, How and How Not To Do Menace: A Masterclass.