Warhammer 40,000 BIG FAQ 2 Discussion | Warhammer 40,000 8th Ed State of Play
The Spider September 28, 201810
112
10 Likes
Bone and I sit down and discuss the brand new Warhammer 40,000 BIG FAQ 2 released earlier today!
Tabletop Tactics website & On Demand:
https://tabletoptactics.tv
For all your hobby and gaming needs, visit Tabletop Tactics’ sponsors Element Games: http://elementgames.co.uk/warhammer?d=30
Official Tabletop Tactics Merchandise: http://www.tabletoptactics.tv/store/
Transform your battlefield with Gamemat.eu: http://www.gamemat.eu
Related View More
The Chef April 1, 202319
18
Iron Warriors vs Imperial Fists | Boarding Action Battle Report
Katie March 29, 2023107
32
Sylvaneth vs Maggotkin of Nurgle | Age of Sigmar Battle Report
Katie March 28, 202337
51
T’au Empire vs Genestealer Cults | Warhammer 40,000 Battle Report
The Beard March 24, 202342
60
Ultramarines vs Necrons | Warhammer 40,000 Battle Report
The Chef March 23, 202342
28
10th Edition Reveal Reactions!! | Backstage Livestream Catch Up
The Beard March 22, 202368
45
Stormcast Eternals vs Skaven | Age of Sigmar Battle Report
The Beard March 21, 202341
51
Ok, first, thanks guys for the quick posting of the video and your critique. For someone who doesn’t play as often as I’d like this information was invaluable. Second, I actually agree with Bone’s fix to the soup problem, and while it may address such a big issue in the tournament scene, honestly guys, in my experience when it comes to the rules there will ALWAYS be a loophole that someone will find and exploit that either doesn’t conform to the spirit of the game or just makes no sense whatsoever BUT because it’s in the rules some players feel… Read more »
In my opinion the option to take allies is a very fluffy thing. I feel bone may be on to something with his opinion on how to deal with the prevalent issue of soup. Another soloution could, If you select a brigade or battalion detachment your warlord must me selected from this detachment, also implamenting that relics and stratagems can only be used by units that share 2 key words with the warlord. This allows people to still get the cp from adding in knights or other units from different armies but prevents those cp’s being abused on elite army… Read more »
I don’t understand why GW can’t just have fliers measure charging distance measuring a straight line. That way, when you deep strike 9 inches away, you have at least a 9 inch charge even if you have fly. Screening still helps protect you from deep strike because it increases the distance of the charge. But you won’t have the weird interaction that’s in the new ruling where for some reason a demon prince can fly over a line of guardsmen in the movement phase but not the charge phase to get at the knight he wants to kill. Also, the… Read more »
Hmm but what about codexes that have strategms that affect other units in different books such as admech strategms affecting questor mechanicus units? If I was to offer a potential solution to this, I’d limit either the amount of “allied” detachments one could bring and/or limit how much of your army they can take up. So maybe for a 2000 points game, anything that isn’t your primary detachment with your warlord can only take up to 500 points of your list. So up to 1500 could be space marines as your primary faction and then up to 500 points on… Read more »
I’m not a fan of the bone way, because i think having allies is ok, but having only allies is not really nice. posted this on youtube comments too. I think one thing worth trying vs the soup lists is adding a rule that you have to have more of your warlords faction keyword detachments, looking at non imperium, chaos etc etc. so if you have an astra militarum detachment (and i think the only faction keywords their characters have are IMPERIUM, ASTRA MILITARUM and ) you would have to have 2 detachments of astra militarum to be able to… Read more »
Hey guys, love the vid and figured I would throw my hat into the ring. Towards the end there you made the point that it is easier to balance internally book by book then to balance everything across a system. The problem with that logic is that (especially in the highest tiers of play) people will still use the most efficient units possible. With the “pure” army rules that you are discussing here, that would almost inevitably lead to people using the most efficient codex. You could easily imagine a top 16 with only 2 or 3 differant codices present,… Read more »
And, since we’re discussing the general state of the game, there’s one more thing I can’t help mentioning… So, it looks like in order to get a clear idea of how to play the game of 40k with their army of choice, a player needs to study and learn (and keep track of) the following documents: – Base Rulebook – Designer’s Commentary – FAQ to Rulebook – Big FAQ 1 – Big FAQ 2 – Codex – FAQ to Codex – Chapter Approved 2017 …soon to be followed by Chapter Approved 2018 Is it just me, or does anyone else… Read more »
Great review guys, thanks a lot! There’s one thing that people don’t mention a lot – the CP farm has been nerfed even harder than it might seem at first. At least in my games, the absolute majority CP are spent in the first 2 turns, 3 at most. As a result, with the abilities like Grand Strategist or Labyrinthine Cunning you only get about 3 battle rounds of farming CP efficiently – AND (considering random distribution) that farming is not that efficient at all. I mean, if you’re refunding spent CPs on 6+, and you spend 12 CPs, you… Read more »
speaking of chef, when will he be back for a 40k game?
Great review, totally agree with you guys regarding soup.
When 8th first came out I was pretty pleased to see the auxilary detachment that lets you take a unit at -1 CP because itd let you ally, at a cost. Then we realised, nope, keywords let you ally in alot at no disadvantage. Needs to be addressed for matched play.
Imperial Guard chaff shouldnt make your army more tactically astute. 31 Regular warhammer joes with flashlights give you more tactical acumen than having Guilliman in your force…
you should get extra CP’s for single faction
I look at stratagems this way. Do I have to think about wether the stratagem is worth spending? If no it’s under costed. On wings of fire for 1CP I would use pretty much every turn. A lot of the fixes deal with a large number of what could be considered as abuses. GW can review this for Chapter Approved and apply sensible rules and point adjustments once the dust has settled.
Thank you guys for the quick voxcast and your feedback, as always, spot on commentary and insights! I am also somewhat hesitant about some of these changes, I don’t play any assault armies in 40k, however I also think the taking the ‘ignore terrain and models’ from the charge phase is an unnecessary change! If the vertical charge was the problem, then the GW design team could have just added a ‘designer’s commentary’ paragraph explaining how its meant to be played and be done with it. However it would appear that this change was intentional, I just don’t understand why… Read more »
Now being in orktober can we get some talk or news on the beloved orks!? With all the big faqs orks have silently gotten better not being affected by most of these rules. We still have da jump, still have great border control, now going second is even less devastating and our mobility is based on fundamental abilities like advance n charge. Get ready cause it is about to be the age of the greenskins!
Hey guys, great content as usual.
My thoughts were it’s funny how you say some decisions where knee jerk reactions- then post a video of your immediate untested beliefs over said changes. Granted you guys are more in tune with the game as a whole-just my observation. I’d be interested to see games played to evidence your opinions in an unbiased way. Also this is definitely only half the picture-chapter approved can’t come quick enough!
I totally agree that your main (warlord) faction should be the only one to generate command points! Its cool to ally in some stuff but not to make the army benefit from it. On another note I dont get why they dont remove the army trait -1 to hit, if they will not remove it they might aswell give other equal stuff lite +1 Ballistic skill +1 toughness, +1 to wound in shooting, insted they give +1 to hit in Close combat (only first round) +1 to wound in close combat (first round) ignore cover saves, reroll 1’s if you… Read more »
I’m finding that the game is more focused on the competitive game. With players trying to find loop holes or mistakes to give them the edge. Is this in the spirit of the game. For me I would like space marines to become tougher to kill. And not by increasing numbers. Perhaps by increasing toughness to represent their ability to walk through bolter fire. With strength 16 weapons. Why isn’t toughness changing. In old Warhammer. If the toughness of the target is more than double the weapons strength. You had two rolls to make .a las rifle shouldn’t be able… Read more »
First off as always, great work!! Also very suprised they didnt fix soups (becuase they havent) almost every person ive talkad to on tournaments hate it. Even the once who plays it hate it. How can GW have missed this? Also hate the more or less total removal of first turn combat. The factions who needs it cant do it and the ones with acces to realy powerful fast/long moving units like different jetbikes can now still use it and their the ones who should be limited. Feel like the limitations often punishes the wrong factions. Great ideas from you… Read more »
No flying charge issue is so incredibly simply fixed, by having the model measure the diagonal distance from base to base. I don’t get why GW had to make it difficult and ruin the rules of flying units. I guess it’s a buff to Necron wraiths as they are now the only unit that charge through units and terrain. They are not going to drop soup armies because they want the 15 Imperium armies to be able to team up. They need it for armies like Ynnari that is nothing without the team up and it also fits the fluff.… Read more »
The abusive CP farming is still a problem and I would venture like Spider said, the new beta rules actually seems to further add incentive for Imperial soup. I feel like a really strong way to prevent is to make armies of allies no longer count as battle forged. If you take from a single codex then your battle forged. Which means Soup armies lose three command points, relic options, chapter traits/ regimental doctrines/ house traits, and warlord traits. That completely diminishes the farming aspect of CP without punishing purely elite armies who kinda rely on warlord traits or relics… Read more »
I disagree with not letting allied detachments use their strategems (what you said about the warlord not understanding the tactics/techniques/procedures of his component units isn’t necessarily true, the HQ’s of those units will understand the task they are required to perform and use the best strategy/tactic available to them. All the warlord needs to do is appropriately task his force elements and expect their commanders to do what their trained to do) That being said I agree that soup needs to be combatted, personally I think if your battle forged army can only contain ONE Battalion OR ONE Brigade it… Read more »
Wait, were people taking relics on characters in a detachment with a faction different than that of their warlords? Because that was always against the rules. For example, you can’t take relics on Imperial Knights if your warlord is from Astra Militarum. It’s the first sentence on every codex’s relics page.
Firstly thank you very much for the quick upload, brilliant stuff!!! However, and I don’t really want to complain but i don’t really have any choice at this point, my 3 armies are raven guard, necrons and harlequins. My RG are now obsolete and ill just run them as ultramarines now, my harlequins I’ll probably stop painting or playing with now until something changes, and no changes to my necrons except a nerf to my favourite unit the wraiths? I love GW but I feel like the armies I have chosen just turns my matches into dark souls, always an… Read more »
I dont know if it would be really addressing the situation but I wouldn’t touch the current number of command points for stratagems if you’d use a full battle forged army (monodex). What I would do as a ruling would be like this : if your army include more than one detachment with different faction keyword (ex. Astra military battalion, Imperial knight super heavy, and blood angels supreme command) increase by 1 all the cost for all stratagem used by the army. It is simple to remember as a rule, less appealing for soup army and more potential for monodex… Read more »
It’s really sad seeing how soup is a major issue. They nerf the Slam Captain, because the Slam Captain is too good in soup… but in so doing ruins Blood Angels. This is why there needs to be some major drawbacks to taking soup lists. I personally would go back to the CP gain you get for Brigades and Battalions you got in the Rulebook, they are fine. But then increase the CP you gain from being battle forged by A LOT, but at the same time saying that all the detachments must share faction keywords in order to gain… Read more »
I disagree on what you call a contradiction between the Stratagem ruling and the Daemon Prince ruling. The stratagems have the exact same name, and the same wording. The only exception is that Thousand Sons and Death Guard specify the Legion (in order to actually work) where as CSM don’t. They are 99.9% identical to each other. This is also a ruling they made for Psychic powers. Daemon Princes on the other had are not. Firstly they have different unit names. Second of all they have different rules! The Daemon Prince of Tzeentch can cast 2 psychic powers. The CSM… Read more »
The theme of the video was probably “soup is still here and it’s still a problem,” you’re not wrong. You did touch on this, and I wish more time was spent on it, three whole armies are still pretty much rendered unplayable competitively: blood angels, grey knights, khorne daemons, and for a little while, genestealer cults. Am I the only one who finds this unacceptable? They are all melee focused, BA especially are both melee and fly/jumppack/deep strike centric, and are especially gutted. I don’t understand why thousands sons smite can be propped up because “that’s what the army does,”… Read more »
So sad I couldn’t hear a chef rant. I miss him so much if I’m being honest. His passion inspires me even if I occasionally disagree
On the cp restrictions, I am initially feeling a lot more positive about them than you guys were. Doing some quick maths on the Castellan list, you start with 20 cp (Which is insane) but then by the end of t1 you’ve spent 6 on the knight, about 6 on a slamcaptain, and then a couple more on making the knight act at full, or taking cover with crusaders etc etc. So from what I can work out the list has 1-2 turns at full effectiveness which is manageable. They might have not gone far enough but I actually really… Read more »
Hi thanks for that, clear resumé. Would it be possible to make a cut between the definite rule changes and the “beta” propositions? Your soup proposition is the best idea, I organise my tournaments with the mono-dex limitations, to get round the soup abuse, but I will test this idea. However as i do not play the game at ITC level I’m a bit worried that the changes are going too far just for that aspect of the game. Matched Play could be seperated into two section. One for causual play and the other for Tournaments. But then most local… Read more »
Another really good discussion guys, really agree on basically all your points. I’m with Bone, I 100% should think you should only draw CPs, Relics & Strategems from the Codex your Warlord comes from. You can still soup but there is real penalty for doing so, the current incarnation is still free rain to do so.
As a blood angles player I feel we have been nerfed dramatically to an already struggling army by removing 2 of the army’s strong points with the strat increase and the charge change for fly units. Feel as stated before army getting nurf for abuse of alpha units.
I had a thought. The CP increases in costs is under a heading that everyone seems to be overlooking is the heading for this is ‘Interim balance’. The key bit no one has mentioned is INTERIM – that means this is a temporary patch. There is a new CP system mechanic coming in CA, but GW want it behind the CA paywall – I mean I would too if I was in there spot. I am now certain, the CP increases and regen limited to one per turn are INTERIM, it is a temporary measure (and they will return to… Read more »
So I’ve had a look and a read and a sleep and a re-read and more of a think and here are my two pennies on this FAQ. Simply put it didn’t do enough. Which is the general feeling I’m getting from all the other comments. It changed a few things but didn’t really fix any issue besides the farm of CP. The change to fly in the charge phase I think is fine personally it makes thematic sense though it does hurt an army that is not in the best place right now. Though I would gave done it… Read more »
Have you thought about running your own 4 or more person tournament with the proposed unofficial rule changes Bone made here. Like paid tactica series at TableTopTactics.tv but on Freeview/YouTube. Maybe include SN battle reports for bodies, they like running custom rules. Gw might see an example of how it could be better. The new list ideas in such a tournament might spark a passion at gw to drop the hammer as severe as Bone suggested. Also Freeview/youtube people would see how awesome tactica is and want more tactica at TableTopTactics.tv using the official rules. A boss tells you what… Read more »
Question for you guys! About Eldar Rangers: Since the rule says “ANY” of your movement phases, wouldn’t this mean the 1st movement phase too? And also, this pretty much forces your Rangers to have a -1 to hit in any turn in which they come in, which seems way off of the intended use of… well… scout snipers.
I think in narrative play, go for as much soup as you can eat. In competitive it should be off the menu. In terms of this FAQ in general I feel rather underwhelmed. One is because most of my armies have been hit at some level (Flesh Tearers/Blood Angels and Chaos Daemons). I do like how the Deep Strike reserves rule theoretically affects both assault and shooty armies now though. I do think it’s silly though that strategems are still affected by it though. Denizens of the Warp etc aren’t ‘free’ (especially since it’s one of those armies that naturally… Read more »
Not impressed with this FAQ. The change to fly is ridiculous, there is no reason whatsoever that Reaver jetbikes shouldn’t be able to jump over enemy screens. I can’t understand why they just didn’t add the line “Units with Fly, or can ignore terrain and models when moving, measure directly from base to base for determining charge distances.” No more 3″ charges after deep striking 9″ away, it’s a 9″ charge, but no silly unintended consequences that make no sense. The 2CP strat to give your whole army cover in turn 1 is going to be hugely situational. Heavily mechanised… Read more »
I really like Bone’s idea on how to solve soup. Makes sense and hits where it, imo, should without hurting other things. Like… I’d hate it if they increased guard points costs in order to nerf soup or how they nerfed Blood Angels now by upping their strategem costs, sure, it affects soup, but it hurts pure Blood Angels more.
I need help understanding Tactical Restraint: CPs can only be gained during Battle Rounds…pre-game Relics Stratagems, Reserve, are all fair game to get multiple CPs back Rules as Written right? I know some Tournaments are starting a Mustering Phase where this happens but that isn’t official GW Phase.
P.S. Thanks for all you do, love the TTT Content!!
You forgot the biggest buff to Ynnari… The Yncarne doesn’t need to start in reserves now!! Have it on the board turn 1 for FNP on your entire Ynnari army, good stuff!
Really should’ve just made Captains a 0-1 choice instead of strat changes, and made it so you can still move over units. This was due to people deepstriking on top of a building, 9″ away diagonally from units, then getting the 3″ horizontal charge off. This is what happens when people abuse the RAW. Don’t worry, whatever the WAAC competitive guys take in their soup next will be nerfed next time, and eventually by 9th ed, everything will be so bad that you’ll just throw dice at each other across a table rather than make a list. As a Flesh… Read more »
As you guys point out soup is the big problem and that comes down to managing how you deal with allies. Why not just do exactly what they already do in AoS and limit allies to 20% of the total points? That way you can only spend 400 points on allies in a 2000 point game and the rest has to be mono-faction. That has really helped AoS in a big way – maybe people ally in one or two models to cover a huge deficiency in an army (e.g. dwarves allying in a wizard) but you don’t see these… Read more »
Normally I don’t comment on videos but I just wanted to say that my local club actually plays with the allies rules that Bone was talking about. For those that haven’t gotten this far in the video yet they are as follows: The warlord determines your primary faction. You may only gain CPs from detachments of your primary faction, may only use stratagems from your primary faction, and may only take warlord traits and relics from your primary faction. We decided to start playing this way a few months ago because certain forces have an inherent advantage due to the… Read more »
Also at the moment its looking like my crons got an indirect boost, still allowing alpha strike, it seems like the gate of eternity on both monolith and nightscythe might negate the turn 1 rules – definitely needs clarifying.
“You may only use stratagems and relics from your warlord’s faction” – so clean. Still allows farming, still allows soup. Rewards mono builds, makes you make decisions about units vs access to relics/gems. The main problem with this solution that everyone is missing is that it is far too clean and simple for GW, so they will never implement it.
Wow guys, great and balanced quick reaction to the FAQ2, totally agree regarding the Soup issue. I wonder if the Callidus Assasin will now be more popular as CP farming has just been made more difficult and CP have increased? As so many strategums are used turn 1 the ability to put even more pressure on an opponents CP stack by making them use an extra CP will be useful!
So firstly i dont comment often if at all so thank you for your content, you are the only guys I now sub too and still watch and appriciate the quality of your content so well done!. On the note of soup armies honestly I think your solution is good, elite armies often have some of the best strats and they obviously were not meant to have 15 cp to spend on them. I enjoy allies such as a guard regement backed up by a small space marine force or an elite grey knight strike force turning up to support… Read more »
The fluff bunny in me is reeeeeeeally not liking the nerf to my incredibly acrobatic (only in the movement phase) killer clowns! ;_; Chapter Approved should be very very interesting though!
So, i agree. Soup hasn’t changed. Sure, the amount of CP regained has changed, but the reason soup was taken initially hasn’t been changed. No idea why the Raven Guard, Stygies and Alpha legion stratagems have been nerfed so hard. I accept that using SftSs on a unit of Aggressors could be extremely strong 50% of the time, but, it is only 50% of the time (technically less with the seize roll) but that is a fix needed for Aggressors rather than the stratagem imo. This change, the deepstrike change and the charge change make Reivers more useless than they… Read more »