Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:
I'm guessing Armour Bane (1) plays into the fluff mention of being "even deadlier at short range". So extra AP at close range.

Yeah it’s probably something like “Armourbane [X] - when firing at a target within half maximum range, this weapon gains additional save modifier equal to -X.”

15 " -1 armor... yikes.

Can't be much worse than Woof Elves getting 30" Arcane Bodkins (at -3!)

Again, very happy with all of this, feels like a slight refinement of 5th/6th ed and what I wanted.

Lots of good stuff - hope the WS chart is also old school with high WS hitting on 2+ on even auto hitting.

Can't be much worse than Woof Elves getting 30" Arcane Bodkins (at -3!)

Was there anything about the WE that was fun to play against ever

Well looks like shooting is nerfed given shooting are allowed supporting attacks in 8th; wonder if supporting attack is flat out removed?

Putting AP as a separate stat is good for clarity, IMO, that is assuming the AP table from strength is translated into the state directly. Also not sure if Armourbane is some kind of separate rule given Handguns in past editions has S4 as well as AP, thus giving in a combined armour modifier of -2. If they opt to keep the AP stat directly tied to weapon strength it can explain why "Armourbane" is needed. Though I would prefer if it does something different from AP.

Liking the blast template with warmachines, seems hopeful that cannons will behave the same as they always have been; I'm actually quite hoping bolt throwers getting the same rules as cannons, just with reduced strength per model killed, just for consistency’s sake.

Though I do worry that, with the new to-wound table, and given a long enough lifespan of the system leading to a possible over-proliferation of giant monsters, as is FW's want, that will lead to an abundance of monsters that needs specialized lists to take out.

It outright says that longbows have volley fire which means shoot in ranks. I don’t think giving the commonest weapon in the game is “nerfing” it exactly. Restraining it a little, sure.

Besides, very few people actually want 8th edition - the director’s cut anyway so I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing either.

Wonder if with Volley, and standing on a hill, in the dark, with an Owl, will grant a third rank of shooting, or if it just caps out at the two?

Well, if what little we have been told of the game is accurate, your ranged units (like archers) will likely be fielded in wide formations rather than deep ones. I.E. a regiment of 20 models will be fielded in 2 ranks of 10, rather than 4 ranks of 5, that way you are getting the full effect of volley fire.

 The Phazer wrote:
Again, very happy with all of this, feels like a slight refinement of 5th/6th ed and what I wanted.

Yep agreed, still not sure about the magic phase being split up but I don't have any negatives about that it's just something new.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well, if what little we have been told of the game is accurate, your ranged units (like archers) will likely be fielded in wide formations rather than deep ones. I.E. a regiment of 20 models will be fielded in 2 ranks of 10, rather than 4 ranks of 5, that way you are getting the full effect of volley fire.

That's not a new thing though, I don't think anybody fielded their ranged regiments in a block.

 Rihgu wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:
I'm guessing Armour Bane (1) plays into the fluff mention of being "even deadlier at short range". So extra AP at close range.

Yeah it’s probably something like “Armourbane [X] - when firing at a target within half maximum range, this weapon gains additional save modifier equal to -X.”

15 " -1 armor... yikes.

Can't be much worse than Woof Elves getting 30" Arcane Bodkins (at -3!)

my chaos warrior army already is colecting dust, didn't need another reason to remain that way.

 Olthannon wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well, if what little we have been told of the game is accurate, your ranged units (like archers) will likely be fielded in wide formations rather than deep ones. I.E. a regiment of 20 models will be fielded in 2 ranks of 10, rather than 4 ranks of 5, that way you are getting the full effect of volley fire.

That's not a new thing though, I don't think anybody fielded their ranged regiments in a block.

Thats what I thought, but Im sure I have seen a recent TOW-article with a picture of a huge block och bretonnian archers that made me react despite my limited experience with Fantasy Battle.
Edit: at the lower part of this article https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/14/old-world-development-diary-on-bases-and-the-barons-of-bretonnia/ four by four blocks of archers, or perhaps eight by four. But then again, it might just be a wonky way of dislpaying units, like having characters running around by them self.

Seeing the fireball with S4 but AP- has me cautiously optimistic. Unless that's something exclusive to magic, they decoupled armor save modifiers from strength. If true, that's a good move in my book.

I'm not sure what the point of that to-wound table is. Unless a whole lot of things get a toughness boost, effectively sixes still wound in the overwhelming number of cases. I would have preferred if they hadn't been so liberal as to give a range of four toughness values a 6+ to wound.

I hope the restriction to only the first rank firing without special rules is indicative of smaller unit size caps.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:
I'm guessing Armour Bane (1) plays into the fluff mention of being "even deadlier at short range". So extra AP at close range.

Yeah it’s probably something like “Armourbane [X] - when firing at a target within half maximum range, this weapon gains additional save modifier equal to -X.”

15 " -1 armor... yikes.

Can't be much worse than Woof Elves getting 30" Arcane Bodkins (at -3!)

my chaos warrior army already is colecting dust, didn't need another reason to remain that way.

This AP1 may sound scary until you realise that without that on average you need 9 BS3 archers to kill a single Orc Boy with light armour and shield at close range...and this AP1 doesn't really change this math too much.

S3 shooting used to be anti- fast cavalry/ lone mages/ maybe skirmish tool and with the same math as in 6th it's not going to be different here. A very important tool, sure, as who wins the battle of support units, wins the game, but hardly a scary prospect for Chaos Warriors

 Fayric wrote:

 Olthannon wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well, if what little we have been told of the game is accurate, your ranged units (like archers) will likely be fielded in wide formations rather than deep ones. I.E. a regiment of 20 models will be fielded in 2 ranks of 10, rather than 4 ranks of 5, that way you are getting the full effect of volley fire.

That's not a new thing though, I don't think anybody fielded their ranged regiments in a block.

Thats what I thought, but Im sure I have seen a recent TOW-article with a picture of a huge block och bretonnian archers that made me react despite my limited experience with Fantasy Battle.
Edit: at the lower part of this article https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/14/old-world-development-diary-on-bases-and-the-barons-of-bretonnia/ four by four blocks of archers, or perhaps eight by four. But then again, it might just be a wonky way of dislpaying units, like having characters running around by them self.

That too continues good old tradition of fb era white dwarf pics gw goes retro hard here

Next they return goblin green paint...

I would like to also point out that templates are coming back! I understand why some people get competitive and bitter over then but I'm my gaming circles it has always been pretty fair and I like how they introduce a visual factor for the big rocks and explosions.

tneva82 wrote:

That too continues good old tradition of fb era white dwarf pics gw goes retro hard here

Next they return goblin green paint...

They do occasionally release new paints to go with new armies. Releasing a new Goblin Green base paint to tie into the nostalgia would be a great idea. I’d grab a pot; mine is running low.

Coat'd'arms(or whatever it's called exactly) sells same colours(literally) as that era gw so if you need it you can get it.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Wonder if with Volley, and standing on a hill, in the dark, with an Owl, will grant a third rank of shooting, or if it just caps out at the two?

From the article:

Models can (almost always) shoot only once, no matter how many Attacks they have in their profile, and unless they have the Volley Fire special rule or are stationed on a hill, only the front rank may fire.

The "or" seems to indicate that you can only benefit from one such factor. Depending on how exactly those two rules are phrased ("an additional rank may shoot" or "the second rank may shoot") it might allow three (or more?) ranks to shoot under certain conditions. Right now it feels like they are going for "one rank, and maybe a second one but no more".

That’s what I’m wondering exactly. Hill + Volley = 3 Ranks shooting works for me


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cyel wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:
I'm guessing Armour Bane (1) plays into the fluff mention of being "even deadlier at short range". So extra AP at close range.

Yeah it’s probably something like “Armourbane [X] - when firing at a target within half maximum range, this weapon gains additional save modifier equal to -X.”

15 " -1 armor... yikes.

Can't be much worse than Woof Elves getting 30" Arcane Bodkins (at -3!)

my chaos warrior army already is colecting dust, didn't need another reason to remain that way.

This AP1 may sound scary until you realise that without that on average you need 9 BS3 archers to kill a single Orc Boy with light armour and shield at close range...and this AP1 doesn't really change this math too much.

S3 shooting used to be anti- fast cavalry/ lone mages/ maybe skirmish tool and with the same math as in 6th it's not going to be different here. A very important tool, sure, as who wins the battle of support units, wins the game, but hardly a scary prospect for Chaos Warriors

Except….when I shoot you? I’m not aiming for a wipe out, and unless I’m very lucky I’m not even expecting a panic test. What I am trying to achieve is to start eroding your rank bonus, so when combat comes, you’re hopefully on the back foot.

tneva82 wrote:
Coat'd'arms(or whatever it's called exactly) sells same colours(literally) as that era gw so if you need it you can get it.

I know, but it would be a great little bit of retro marketing.

People have already decided that volley fire is just shooting from the second rank, but wouldn't it be more logical that it's the same rule from the 8th edition? (half the models in the rear ranks can shoot)

Well, they told us what Volley means

Where?

Santtu wrote:People have already decided that volley fire is just shooting from the second rank, but wouldn't it be more logical that it's the same rule from the 8th edition? (half the models in the rear ranks can shoot)

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Well, they told us what Volley means

Yes, that only the front rank may fire unless you have Volley or are on a hill. So to the letter of that statement any number of ranks can fire with volley or on a hill, until they expand further, people are nostalgia glasses-ing the rules.

Cyel wrote:



This AP1 may sound scary until you realise that without that on average you need 9 BS3 archers to kill a single Orc Boy with light armour and shield at close range...and this AP1 doesn't really change this math too much.

S3 shooting used to be anti- fast cavalry/ lone mages/ maybe skirmish tool and with the same math as in 6th it's not going to be different here. A very important tool, sure, as who wins the battle of support units, wins the game, but hardly a scary prospect for Chaos Warriors

Well, it certainly shreds barbarian cav and it still trades very likely well into points against even "hard" targets like that. I'd rather avoid being forced into tzeentch or nurgle again permanently on my chaos warriors to not get attritioned to death. But that will be a debate for when we see the points GW gives.

I hope good scenarios requiring players to take the middle of the table, like in Warmachine, will be the death of static gunlines. May they rot in hell.

I can sort of agree that the last thing the game needs to do is buff elves - but equally its hard to believe AP-1 in half range is going to make much difference.

stand and shoot is within half range so I imagine it will keep their units alive longer.

armourbane in 40k/HH is half range bonus to vehicle penetration, so one assumes it's just -1AP within half range.

For the elves, there are a range of options to help them.

For example, they could just get a flat -1 to hit an elf, in melee or shooting. Being T3 won't matter if they get hit less.

Or they could inflict a -1 to hit when being charged.

You could have a '2s count as 1s for hitting' rule, where 2s are auto misses whether people could or not.

basically, IMO they should just be harder to hit and use that as their defence. This is what the eldar in 40k should have, but they keep degrading those rules into nothing but pro-marine mechanics.

You achieve that with high ws and better shield/weapon types.

Not by just once again letting elves get away with not playing the same game.

Dudeface wrote:

Santtu wrote:People have already decided that volley fire is just shooting from the second rank, but wouldn't it be more logical that it's the same rule from the 8th edition? (half the models in the rear ranks can shoot)

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Well, they told us what Volley means

Yes, that only the front rank may fire unless you have Volley or are on a hill. So to the letter of that statement any number of ranks can fire with volley or on a hill, until they expand further, people are nostalgia glasses-ing the rules.

Accurate point is accurate!

Not Online!!! wrote:
You achieve that with high ws and better shield/weapon types.

Not by just once again letting elves get away with not playing the same game.

That's spurious reasoning. Orcs don't play the same game as everyone else because no one else has animosity. Dwarfs don't play the same game because no one else can ignore march blocking like they did. Lizardmen and morale tests on 3D6 etc ad nauseum.

Army wide special rules automatically make an army 'not play the same game' as other people. That's their point. And the elves are no different. I am an ardent disliker of the elf army getting ASF and was since it was introduced in 8th, but that's not the same thing as saying 'elves can't get any special rule that affects their ability to fight or be struck in combat'.

High WS only works if the hit table reflects it - now that's a potentially good bet given the similarities between WFB and HH mechanics and rule names so far shown - the BS hit table is the same in HH. In which case their melee defence won't be bad assuming they're going to be WS4 or higher and no one else's WS has changed. They will be very vulnerable to shooting however, and their bowman plastics don't get shields so counterfire will decimate them.