8th Edition Rumors

WoTR influence?

I've read on a couple of places that movement will be simplfied so that all units move like Light Cav
Charge range will be random
Spears will negate charge bonuses
All members of the formation attack

ShadowMaster wrote:WoTR influence?

I've read on a couple of places that movement will be simplfied so that all units move like Light Cav
INSANE !
Charge range will be random
Would be cool, but would make he games HECK of a lot longer
Spears will negate charge bonuses
Makes sence, would make taking spears worthwhile again, and will make Sarus with spears a suicide unit to charge from the front.
All members of the formation attack

I doubt this will happen, a unit of 40 gobbs taking 40 attacks against 5 Knights ? or how bout 20 Savage orc Big'Uns with xtra hand to hand weapon ? 60 strgth 5 attacks !!!!!

i dont mind 7th ed, they just need to update all the damn books so they can be in par with eachother.

Night goblins with nets and spears will become a staple of any O&G list I make if much of that is true.

It certainly seems like they want to improve the infantry blocks.

I saw something else today that indicated it may only be the front 2 ranks, but that is still a huge improvement. Especially when combined with new movement which makes it easier to adjust and protect your flanks.

Couple more -
Combat continues until one side breaks. (Not sure I buy this one)

Additional % based restrictions for army composition. This would be on top of the current restrictions.

This last one could have a huge impact. A 25% cap would end many of the current common powerbuilds seen today. DoC powerbomb, Slann + Twin EoTG, Twin Stanks, Multidragon, VC summon spam, etc could all be gone in a poof of smoke. If you take one big nasty lord - he becomes your only hero.

ShadowMaster wrote:
Combat continues until one side breaks. (Not sure I buy this one)

Sounds like something out of FoW, doesn't seem -too- possible. But, sky's the limit.

If some of those changes are true then I probably won't play the new edition.

Some of the best moments and what makes Fantasy so hard in many respects is the movement bit.

And personally, I find with all of the unbreakable and stubborn stuff running around, Calvary are having a plenty hard enough time. Just not the calvary who don't care if they charge or not (like Chaos Knights, for example).

I dunno, I'll hold my breathe until the new edition comes out, but they don't need to make Fantasy like WoTR, it'd just be silly.

The new % restrictions would be cool though, make for a very, very interesting game.

Autarch (CM) wrote:

ShadowMaster wrote:
Combat continues until one side breaks. (Not sure I buy this one)

Sounds like something out of FoW, doesn't seem -too- possible. But, sky's the limit.

I can see it being done. It would change the game quite a bit, but also speed things up greatly and also would make those units that don't break easily take more casualties instead of just holding blocks of infantry in place over multiple turns. Now that wall of non moving will go through multiple rounds in one go and actually take casualties and move on instead of basically spending the whole game in one or two long combats.

While I now appreciate and enjoy the complexities of WHFB movement - it is the hardest part fo the game for a new player.

If they want the game to be easier to understand and move faster - this change would accomplish that.

ShadowMaster wrote:While I now appreciate and enjoy the complexities of WHFB movement - it is the hardest part fo the game for a new player.

If they want the game to be easier to understand and move faster - this change would accomplish that.

I completely agree. If fantasy was changed to play a bit faster, or less of a headache, I would totally play the new edition. It's currently an overly-complex set of rules with (IMHO) too many restricitions on the basics. Just my buck fiddy.

KingdomCome wrote:

ShadowMaster wrote:While I now appreciate and enjoy the complexities of WHFB movement - it is the hardest part fo the game for a new player.

If they want the game to be easier to understand and move faster - this change would accomplish that.

I completely agree. If fantasy was changed to play a bit faster, or less of a headache, I would totally play the new edition. It's currently an overly-complex set of rules with (IMHO) too many restricitions on the basics. Just my buck fiddy.

This is one of the reasons why I like the game. It means that you have to have serious skill and tactics to play. If they remove some of the more complex rulings, then the game will not have that same edge to it. IMHO anyways.

The changes really wouldn't change much of the "tactical" aspects of the game though, really would just make the more cumbersome parts quicker.

Fantasy's sells far less than 40k and in past years other games have also started to outsell it like Warmachine and Hordes. The game is often seen by newer players as being too complex or cumbersome to play compared to something like 40k. 7th edition was a joke, the few changes they made barely warranted a new edition. It almost felt like 7th edition was nothing but an excuse for them to put out the new box set which they hoped to bring new blood into the game with, as it was a hell of a deal. GW knows it needs to do something to revitalize sales of Fantasy, or it's likely to see a continual decline.

I think Fantasy is a good system, but do agree that it is kind of a pain in the ass to play.

Thats what i like about fantasy more than 40k. Fantasy is much more involved than 40k, it makes you think. 40k has been sinplified so much that a 3 year old could play it without reading the rulebook..which is prob the reason why it sells better than Fantasy.

The main thing is people have a knee jerk reaction to any changes that they feel will dumb down the game, when really it is a game that does need to be toned down with some tweaks. Fantasy is NOT a complex game and not that much more advanced at all compared to 40k rulewise, the game itself just requires more thought in actual play in large part due to the nature of ye olde troop movement. But really making changes to speed up the play doesn't mean they are going to kill the game.... really if GW doesn't fix the game and improve its playability, then THAT will be what kills off the game.

I've never found anyone who found Fantasy to be too complex, they just usually find the game to be a bit of a pain to play compared to so many faster systems on the market. Fantasy rules are not difficult or complicated, they are about on par with 40k, it's the gameplay itself that sets the games apart. Complexity of rules and how much tactical thinking is needed to play are two different things. And 40k itself has not really been simplified all that much. 3rd, 4th, and 5th editions have been nearly identical outside of various tweaks. 3rd edition was no more tactical in nature than 5th or 4th, they are pretty much the exact same games with revisions tossed on.

Also we have to remember that these are just rumors which always leak out from the playtesters of new editions. Often many of these leaked rumors don't pan out the way the leaks potray and the rules still have some time before going to print even. Lot of this will probably be changed, dropped, and other things added. The new rulebook if by following their standard release structure, won't be coming out till next year potentially

I always find these conversations fascinating it goes on for ages and pages and then the book comes out and everybody buys it.

If you don't like it, there are numerous alternate gaming systems.

The only way GW is ever going to change is with you wallet. If they lose business to say Privateer Press (which they have) or any other company they may adapt to the customer's needs. However GW may have to go to the brink of collapse to finally get, so it require a lot of patience.

JerryB

Yet when they do change, people bitch and moan.

40K is what keeps GW going, Fantasy is a dying game and they either let it go the way it's been going and watch it finally die off like their other slow sellers which they will abandon eventually, or they have to make a change.

Course one really can't blame someone for being against change, it does not always work out for the best or we fall in love with a game as it is.

I disagree a bit Kyle. Fantasy is a bit more complex. Not rocket science, but certainly on the level of chess.

New players are always tripped up with understand the line of site rules. They try to charge things in their flank they can't see.

Wheeling is also a tricky move to accurately make without the galeforce9 game aid.

40k players also are not used to declaring charges at the start of the turn - nor are they used to the charge reactions and how those can effect how things play out.

I agree with Luis that 40k is too simple.

I think the changes we will see will involve things that will benefit the 20 man RnF bricks. They currently get run over by big stuff or out flanked by fast stuff. Unless your undead or stubborn - these units are risky to use. Plus it takes lots of models to build these units.

Those are merely matters of memorization. New players are always going to screw up when it comes to trying something that is very different. Is it truly more complex though? Not really. I think the problem is people are comparing the two games when they are nothing alike. Same applies to almost any other game on the market, they just are different systems though many share basic similarities in various areas of course. Just because someone who plays 40k doesn't get aspects of Fantasy doesn't mean "they don't get it", or can't handle it.... they are just being introduced to something that is completely different.

Wheeling is the one aspect of Fantasy which I think is somewhat complex and cumbersome that gets people though.

But again I think there is a general misunderstanding between rule complexity, and the level of tactical thinking a game requires. Per rules, Fantasy is not a complex game, but it is one that requires more tactical mindset to play as one is required to plan ahead and the game also is more damning for ones positional mistakes. Same applies the other way around, where you have games that are very complex rulewise, but really don't require much tactical thinking to play and often break down into a numbers game.

It's the need to plan ahead that makes it complex.
Anyone can learn to wheel

It's the baiting
march blocking
hammer/anvil/tarpit
setting up of flank charges
etc

40k strategy boils down to making sure you use the right gun for the right job. After that it's a dice off.

I think what Dan and Luis are saying (and I agree) is that one of the draws of fantasy over the others is that it is more complex (strategy wise) and you need to think more to play it.

ShadowMaster wrote:It's the need to plan ahead that makes it complex.
Anyone can learn to wheel

It's the baiting
march blocking
hammer/anvil/tarpit
setting up of flank charges
etc

40k strategy boils down to making sure you use the right gun for the right job. After that it's a dice off.

I think what Dan and Luis are saying (and I agree) is that one of the draws of fantasy over the others is that it is more complex (strategy wise) and you need to think more to play it.

QFT

ShadowMaster wrote:It's the need to plan ahead that makes it complex.
Anyone can learn to wheel

It's the baiting
march blocking
hammer/anvil/tarpit
setting up of flank charges
etc

40k strategy boils down to making sure you use the right gun for the right job. After that it's a dice off.

I think what Dan and Luis are saying (and I agree) is that one of the draws of fantasy over the others is that it is more complex (strategy wise) and you need to think more to play it.

The proposed changes won't really change most of those things though, like I mentioned I think it's a few think the idea of "simplification" will lead the game down the road of ruin when it likely it will improve the game. It still would be just as tactical of a game, just some things will play out faster and easier.

Now if they got rid of the line of sight rules and had everyone running around like skirmishes... I could see a problem.

ShadowMaster wrote:It's the need to plan ahead that makes it complex.
Anyone can learn to wheel

It's the baiting
march blocking
hammer/anvil/tarpit
setting up of flank charges
etc

40k strategy boils down to making sure you use the right gun for the right job. After that it's a dice off.

I think what Dan and Luis are saying (and I agree) is that one of the draws of fantasy over the others is that it is more complex (strategy wise) and you need to think more to play it.

I would have to disagree with your initial statement. It's actually easier to plan ahead in fantasy than in 40k. The movement and line of sight rules assure that the game is VERY linear with few exceptions. Fantasy , more so than 40k, hinges on proper deployment to win a game. If you're out of position, it becomes very difficult for your army to compete. In that regard Fantasy resembles checkers and 40k resembles chess. It's difficult to plan ahead with 40k due to units having NO movement restrictions. Thus they can move in any direction. This makes it more difficult to predict enemy position thus plan ahead. Chess. Fantasy doesn't require MORE tacics than 40k, it requires DIFFERENT tactics than 40k.
I just have to defend 40k from the Fantasy crowd that thinks 40k is nothing but rolling buckets of dice over and over again. I would actually make the case Fantasy is less challenging to play, after rules and deployment have been mastered.

Oh my, and here it has come, the 40k player has weighed in

I've played both. I played Fantasy for a bit, then played 40k as well, and played just Fantasy now.

Here is what makes the biggest difference IMHO, between 40k and Fantasy, are two big things, aside from the ones above mentioned.

1. Psychology

2. Recovery


1. Psychology: Psychology is possibly one of the most game changing events in Fantasy, and something which is seriously lacking in 40k. There is no test for the weak guardsman to charge the GIANT TANK-RENDING CARNIFEX. While rallying is less forgiving in 40k, there is a lot, and I mean ALOT of fearless or rerolling, and leadership stuff that makes for a world of craziness. Granted, there is a bit of that in Fantasy, but with Panic, Fear, Terror, AND break tests, there's a huge difference that relies on that final skill. I've watched entire armies PANIC off the table, and that just doesn't happen in 40k.

2. Recovery: In 40k, if you make a mistake, it is a lot easier to fix it. This is, in almost 100% of the time, the movement rules that make this happen. Sure, extreme situations happen, but normally, if someone catches you by surprise, say, by coming up your flank, or running behind you, or slaughtering a whole unit that you didn't expect to happen, you simply relocate your forces to compensate. With INFANTRY being able to move an average of 9" in ANY DIRECTION and have the potential to be UNHINDERED by terrain. This makes the recovery and learning curve of 40k much easier, not only speeding up game play.

In Fantasy, if someone manages to get into your flank, or even worse, your rear, while still advancing, well, your f-barred. Also, as it's been said before, it's near impossible to recover from bad deployment, and terrain plays a MUCH bigger role in Fantasy, because the movement is so much more difficult.


Don't get me wrong, 40k is a good game, and it's tough. However, after playing both, I just don't find it to be as challenging strategically as Fantasy. There are more reasons, but the forums are not the place to keep it going forever. I'll be happy to chat about it with anybody whenever, and please come change my mind, I'm game for it!

Dan

What makes fantasy chess like is that different units move in different ways. They have different uses. They attack in different ways and they have limited threat ranges - even to what may be a nearby location.

You can't bait in 40k
You don't get charge reactions
You don't have flanks
You don't have the risks of a failed charge to worry about

As you said - in 40k everything is skirmished. Everything sees 360. So it completely also lacks the line of site and movement elements.

I've played both and IMO 40k is a MUCH easier game. None of your ramblings about meltas and plasma will change that. You don't need to defend jack - no need to hijack the 8 Edition rules dicussion over a debate on fantasy vs. 40k.

Whoa! I apologize if I offended any one on this thread. I didn't mean it to be offensive and I've re-read my post and I don't think it was. I was just throwing a different point of view into the discussion. I'll not comment on this any more. No need to start a flame war over a different perspective.

Best to just leave 40k out of it and discuss Fantasy on it's own merits. Comparing games never seems to go well.