7th ed in hand

[daboarder]

yeah

there are some awesome things you can do such as repentia in a redeemer (wooo!) but there are some stupid things too (like GK and daemons in the same list

Drbored assesment of TFG being the loser may be correct. but I dont think it is, I dont think 7th will stop TFG gaming, but I do think its going to kill tournaments

[DarkLink]

6th didn't kill tournaments, far from it, and 7th appears to be an overall improvement on 6th even if there are some readily apparent lapses.

[Mr.Pickelz]

Can you still take Formations within a Battleforged army list?
Cause i got a pretty big Green Tide and Kult of Speed that would love to run down some gitz.

[daboarder]

6th didn't kill tournaments, far from it, and 7th appears to be an overall improvement on 6th even if there are some readily apparent lapses.

It did in australia.

our biggest annual even went form having 120+ people to 30


edit: man, nids are even more screwed than I thought.....smash means that you get a single attack.....so how do we kill tanks now?

[Inafmy]

Also with a 7th edition in hand... this is bad. Very bad.
And this is not coming from a tournament player. Haven't played in one of those since early 5th edition.

Just getting in casual games in an open venue is going to be like pulling teeth without some sort of pre-existing relationship with a player. The rules for setting up terrain alone are a nightmare... or perhaps I should say the NON-rules for terrain.

"Exactly how you set up terrain is purely a matter of taste." -pg. 130
Which player's taste, pray tell?!? If you though unbound army composition was bad get ready for unbound scenery spamming. Want to form a free, impenetrable wall of derelict, 13 AV, 5 Hull Point, side-by-side Aquila Strongpoints? Want to fill the opposing Tyranid players entire deployment zone with difficult terrain? Go for it dude...

"Games Workshop manufactures a range of Citadel scenery models for this purpose ... we have found the that the more scenery you place on the battlefield , the better the game will be." -Same page.
So the veil has dropped... they directly foreground their "manufacturing" in a rules section. Broken rules as a means to sell plastic crack isn't even disguised behind "narrative forging" anymore. Will the enjoyment of players be an overt goal anymore or we be referred to only in terms of our "consumption of Games Workshop products in mass quantities that satisfy the corporation"?

I've read it over and over and I still don't see what checks and balances there are on terrain set up... there is absolutely no mechanic. At all.

So basically, the guy who argues better pre-game gets his way... or you can choose not to play.

Page 132 discusses what to do when deployment zones don't have enough room to deploy your army in them... OK now, the fact that they already contemplated your deployment zone being crowded by impassable crud means they KNOW this is likely going to be an issue... and they did it anyway.
Their solution, just "reduce the amount of scenery in a deployment zone, or shuffle it around slightly in order to give models the space they need to deploy". OK, who is doing the reducing and shuffling? What if the guy who wants to "reduce and shuffle" is not in agreement with the other guy? Who "taste" gets to win? By the time you are to this point, your models are all unpacked and ready to go... the other guy can just say, "my way or pack up and leave the table to me and some one stupid enough to play me".
And why not? There are no real rules controlling this most basic of requirements for the a game: the f@#$in' battlefield.

Page 130 also gives a another real winner: Fortifications are place during your deployment... so you have to shoe-horn them into the most absurd (and unlikely) positions to get them in there or get into a "reduce and shuffle" argument with the guy who placed all the crippling crud in your deployment zone is pursuit or his artistic expression, erm, I mean "tastes".

When the options for play balance begin and end with "boycott people who you think are WAAC" and the options for easy going pick-up games boil down to "only play with people you know", you can be sure that this hobby is spinning round the drain... Good luck recruiting new players in open venues.

The problem is not that this is the "Unbound option" for scenery placement... the problem is that there is NO OTHER option but this wibbly-wobbly set of non-rules for how to set up the space for a game.

[Arkhan Land]

my feelings are that theyre either about to update the nids codex a ton to adjust this stuff not to mention any changes to perils. so essentially once again im walking around with a recently printed 50 dollar book with like half a dozen FAQ pages making me wonder if I wasted money on half-baked codex, but without those pages Ill feel like I wasted money on a half-baked codex with no update, which could be even worse.
Hopefully theres something giving them more than one smash attack and hopefully SITW gets buffed a little, maybe theyre hoping that with the unbound rules your simply willing to finally buy all those carnifexes and tervigons theyve been trying to move, just for the extra smash hitzzz

[daboarder]

I dont, having seen how minimal the changes to this edition are I actually dont expect to see army wide errata's for the change over anymore.

[Sainhann]

Oh and if you think you are going to be stopping any of the powers casted think again.

The caster needs 4+ to cast the Denier will need 6's in most cases to Deny the power.

Plus if the Psychic Phase is the only major change then this is looking like a money grab by GW.

[White Tiger88]

Plus if the Psychic Phase is the only major change then this is looking like a money grab by GW.

You would be surprised by this how?

[Mr Mystery]

I''m most looking forward to Maelstrom of War missions. Win with your brain, not a Netlist*




*Possibly unfair on Netlists, but hopefully you get the gist.