Jump to content
Dusldorf

Vigilus Weekender data dump (from reddit)

Recommended Posts

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but I found it here on reddit:

  • City fight is a thing. It has special detachments, special rules and stratagems in the new campaign book.
  • There's a new army mechanic for picking detachments.
  • There are new "mega stratagems". They effect a whole load of units in a detachment. For example they can give every unit in a detachment a keyword.
  • GSC are in it, they get special detachments too.
  • The Orks have a stratagem to make a Stompa their warlord. There is even a Stompa warlord trait table.
  • These rules will be used in matched play.
  • You pay CP for specialist detachments - rather than in 7e, where formations were free.
  • They are more specialised benefits, so are quote-unquote "easier to balance".
  • An example of a stratagem/benefit is "indomitus veterans", which upgrades all intercessors in a detachment to veterans.
  • They said they were aware that armies with a load of CP (e.g. guard) have more CP than more elite armies.
  • The benefits only affect specific models (e.g. all manticores in a detachment).
  • Urban Combat is a box. There's a plastic wallet inside with cards to make a map (for building your own hive city). The overall map is "A1 A2 ish". You slot the cards together to make the city. There are apparently reusable stickers you can peel on and off to show control of a given area. The box also contains more content, which wasn't touched upon further.
  • The specialist detachments are more "characterful" rather than "powerful". These detachments won't be for every army or model out there - they'll just be for the armies and models that make the most sense.
  • These detachments are not intended to be a "replacement" of the 7e detachments.
  • Vigilus will be around for a while.
  • No Necrons and Tau on Vigilus. They may appear in later settings if they suit it. They don't want to make an unrealistic setting where every faction is present.
  • The setting isn't just one environment (e.g. everything being a frozen tundra). There are different biomes and a load of variety. Paul Denton is the artist who does the environmental pictures for it.
  • Water is super precious on vigilus if you didn't know this already, admech use a space elevator to fetch water.
  • Some guard detachments include one for Russes, a Tempestus Scion one, a Leman Russ one, a Sentinel one.
  • The factions present on Vigilus are going to be getting these rules.
  • Notably rather than "AdMech" being listed as a faction, they were instead listed as "Kastellan Robots". Eldar were also listed as "Windrider Host". All other factions were their general name (e.g. "Orks", "Genestealer Cults", "Space Wolves").
  • Some armies won't be appearing in campaign books (if they don't fit with any of the planned campaigns).
  • Normal space marines can be made into primaris now with surgery (or something).
  • Again, mini-marines aren't going anywhere.
  • GREY KNIGHTS ARE NOT GETTING THE PRIMARIS TREATMENT.
  • As to whether they'll have a load of Astra Miliatarum datasheets printed in the GSC book? No.
  • However, anything you've been able to ally in previously to GSC using the index is possible now. They used manticores as an example. Don't want to make previous purchases wasted.
  • They have tried to make them stronger as a standalone army - said that many GSC lists were just a tiny amount of GSC, and then a load of Tyranids and/or IG.
  • Strongly suggested they'd be getting subfactions.
  • The codex adds a load of options to the army, it's almost a complete replacement (said in relation to subfaction keywords especially).
  • The codex has exciting new mechanics, stratagems especially.
  • The releases shown today aren't the full set of releases - there is more to come.
  • Cult Ambush is getting something turn 1 - not the full deep strike like it was pre-FAQ, but "something more" than just a 9" pre-game movement (a la Alpha Legion/Stygies/Raven Guard).
  • Renegade guard codex isn't "in the works" right now.
  • There is more than one campaign book in the style of vigilus coming.
  • Each setting has its own theme.
  • Imperium will be in each campaign setting.
  • The next campaign setting is very fleshed out already - similar in structure to what we see with Vigilus and City fight.
  • Campaign books like city fight won't be limited (i.e. there won't be a 6 month window in which you can buy them).
  • There are more codexes coming out next year.
  • There are currently no plans to release an "agents of the imperium" codex. The designers felt that the units don't translate to the battlefield well. An inquisitor etc. feel more appropriate for rogue trader/kill team. Specifically gave example of a character with a simple rapier and a laspistol doesn't feel "right". They actually used Eisenhorn as a very specific example too.
  • For boxed games they usually work about a year in advance.
  • The person giving the seminar was working three years ahead on some stuff. Miniatures team plan significantly further than 1 year.
  • More rogue trader explorations (or at least this style of release) will come in the future.
  • Beta codexes are a sort of thing we'll be seeing in the future, but not in the same way as the Sisters of Battle beta. The beta rules will be put in white dwarf (e.g. a datasheet, a few stratagems), if they're well liked they'll find their way into matched play 40k (maybe with tweaks depending on feedback).
  • Sisters of Battle should be good standalone.
  • They don't want to punish soup. They'd rather reward builds than penalise them. No comment on whether they'd try to reward monofaction armies.
  • They are aware that they don't quite "get" soup yet.
  • Points are worked out using a formula, some of which depend on points themselves.
  • Open play rules are mainly to "scratch a certain itch", and gives an opportunity to add more "creative and crazy" rules into the game without breaking play.
  • They know the fly FAQ change was an issue. They wanted to solve a simple problem which lead to oversights. They want to create simple fixes rather than add a load of complication to the game.
  • They don't want to be changing the rules constantly and frequently. They say that most players aren't in the tournament circuit. Instead missions included in Chapter Approved etc. are meant to put a new spin on the rules.
  • They don't like the idea of having too many required books either (e.g. having one page from a campaign book, two from white dwarf etc) - they say that it will be possible to build an army without needing hundreds of different sources.
  • They say their goal is to have it be possible to make a good army with fewer sources. They used GSC as a specific example.
  • Index options are here to stay for a while. They're just not in the codex because it's bad to have a codex with selections you can't buy.
  • Kill team has more coming.
  • The miniatures team make the concepts for models, and when it's fleshed out and the model is designed they send it to the rules team to make rules for.
  • Miniatures team always comes first, design team doesn't really present to miniatures team USUALLY. So no "orks need a flying thing, make a model for that".
  • Since the rules designers work maybe a year or so in advance, they sometimes get confused on rules (because they're not going to be implemented for a few months/a year).
  • Robin Cruddace will have a column in future White Dwarfs to explain ways you can play etc.
  • The codex design team is lead by Robin Cruddace and the seminar person (can't remember name). Also on the team are James Gallagher, and "a few new guys".
  • They won't design primarch like models for each army (e.g. nids, tau, orks). They'll just keep making cool models, if it happens to be Lord of War size then sure, they'll get a lord of war.
  • Primarchs will be done rarely, to keep the feel that they're "special".
  • "We should totally do Angron soon!" was a direct quote by the seminar person.
  • Another direct quote is "Sanguinius looks pretty dead to me."
  • Whichever primarch mini they want to make next is whichever one they want to make (coolness).
  • Robin Cruddace did a PhD in Physics and apparently really loved maths. (This actually seems funny given the internet memes of him being the guy who said "maths is just an opinion" etc.).
  • GW do keep an "ear to the ground" on online forums (indirectly and directly). They just don't really post. It's hard to take suggestions from online because of how many good and bad ones there are. The Ork dakkadakkadakka rule was actually thought up by the design team before it was also suggested online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s really refreshing to see how open and up-front GW has become, given the notoriety they previously developed for secrecy and keeping fans at arm’s length.

City Fight was always my favorite way to play WH40k (just as Seige was my favorite way to play WHFB). Encourages building great looking terrain, generally favors common infantry and vehicles over elites and rare stuff... But it still looks awesome as hell to see a Chaos Scout Titan slugging it out with a Knight Lance up-close and personal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ish said:

It’s really refreshing to see how open and up-front GW has become, given the notoriety they previously developed for secrecy and keeping fans at arm’s length.

Hasn't really been long enough to know if this is a facade or the genuinely the new GW. They're telling us what we want to hear. The above is vague at best and commits to nothing.  

GW's notoriety is well earned. Don't forget it too quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, it’s obviously “marketing speak.” Which is always about getting (and keeping) your customers excited, happy, and eager to spend money... without making any firm promises as to when, where, and what. Always gotta take these sorts of things with a grain of salt.

Still, compared to the complete “radio silence” we saw from them for the 2000’s, I’ll take it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ish said:

Meh, it’s obviously “marketing speak.” Which is always about getting (and keeping) your customers excited, happy, and eager to spend money... without making any firm promises as to when, where, and what. Always gotta take these sorts of things with a grain of salt.

Still, compared to the complete “radio silence” we saw from them for the 2000’s, I’ll take it. 

I miss the codex release without model support, and just that you were expected to convert what wasn't included in the kits. I fully understand why they had to stop doing this, but I miss it. 1990s, maybe?

But, I suppose I agree, marketing speak is probably better than no speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dusldorf said:

Again, mini-marines aren't going anywhere. 

An army doesn't have to be going anywhere to be going nowhere. This non-answer leaves open the possibility that while Normal Marines kits will continue to be produced, all the new stuff will go to the Primaris until one day they just don't get rules in the newest codex.

But not to end on a glum note,

11 hours ago, Dusldorf said:

You pay CP for specialist detachments - rather than in 7e, where formations were free. 


Interesting. What's your take on this? Like rather than your Battalion giving you 5 CP, your Totally-Not-A-Decurion would give you -3 CP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StygianArcanum said:

What's your take on this? Like rather than your Battalion giving you 5 CP, your Totally-Not-A-Decurion would give you -3 CP?

Frankly, I think they should just assign points costs to them the way they do for Warscroll Battalions in AoS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, StygianArcanum said:

Interesting. What's your take on this? Like rather than your Battalion giving you 5 CP, your Totally-Not-A-Decurion would give you -3 CP?

It's going to create yet another incentive for people to take guard brigades/battalions instead of mono-armies.

Makes it pretty clear that GW is being honest when they say they don't "get" soup yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, StygianArcanum said:

An army doesn't have to be going anywhere to be going nowhere. This non-answer leaves open the possibility that while Normal Marines kits will continue to be produced, all the new stuff will go to the Primaris until one day they just don't get rules in the newest codex.

Pessimistically, I suspect that GW realizes that most of it's line isn't primaris, so they keep telling us this as deliberate lies so we'll keep buying the stuff they plan to phase out. Definitely something GW has done in the past.

I, optimistically, hope I'm wrong on this point.

In either case, GW would be smart to create a new kit or two of loyalist mini-marines purely to reinforce the idea that they aren't ditching the mini-marines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dusldorf said:

It's going to create yet another incentive for people to take guard brigades/battalions instead of mono-armies.

Makes it pretty clear that GW is being honest when they say they don't "get" soup yet.

Yeah, what the cheapest Battalion of IG you can get?  That's the "tax" for getting some nasty "formations".  

For narrative and fun purposes, I love soup, (I have this aspirational Inquisition/Assassin/IG/Ad Mech/Deathwatch 3k army I'd love to buy/build/play, but it isn't feasible for 99% of gaming situations), but I think it should be severely hamstrung for organized play (like, if all your detachments aren't the same mini faction, you get NO CP).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, fluger said:

For narrative and fun purposes, I love soup, (I have this aspirational Inquisition/Assassin/IG/Ad Mech/Deathwatch 3k army I'd love to buy/build/play, but it isn't feasible for 99% of gaming situations), but I think it should be severely hamstrung for organized play (like, if all your detachments aren't the same mini faction, you get NO CP).  

Seems like the kinda thing that polishes already shiny armies and screws over any faction that is already screwed...

I'd enjoy an ally chart/limit based on how capable my codex was. Like rate the strength of each codex 1-3, 1 being best and 3 being worst, then give them access to that many different allies within their army. So like Inquisition might be fully mixable with certain other screwed factions, but SM don't get allies because they have enough strength already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

Completely true. But if you aren't fixing the problem, why tweak it?

That's like saying it's impossible to make a balanced game, so why make games at all?

 

They're pushing the story forward. They're giving people more (though not necessarily more balanced) options. They're creating products for their business. Hopefully they won't introduce too much imbalance, but that's how 40k works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Dusldorf said:

That's like saying it's impossible to make a balanced game, so why make games at all?

 

They're pushing the story forward. They're giving people more (though not necessarily more balanced) options. They're creating products for their business. Hopefully they won't introduce too much imbalance, but that's how 40k works.

I did make a suggestion towards more balanced game within the same post that critized replacing an unbalanced option with an equally unbalanced option:

 

1 hour ago, paxmiles said:

Seems like the kinda thing that polishes already shiny armies and screws over any faction that is already screwed...

I'd enjoy an ally chart/limit based on how capable my codex was. Like rate the strength of each codex 1-3, 1 being best and 3 being worst, then give them access to that many different allies within their army. So like Inquisition might be fully mixable with certain other screwed factions, but SM don't get allies because they have enough strength already.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, fluger said:

Yeah, what the cheapest Battalion of IG you can get?  That's the "tax" for getting some nasty "formations".  

For narrative and fun purposes, I love soup, (I have this aspirational Inquisition/Assassin/IG/Ad Mech/Deathwatch 3k army I'd love to buy/build/play, but it isn't feasible for 99% of gaming situations), but I think it should be severely hamstrung for organized play (like, if all your detachments aren't the same mini faction, you get NO CP).  

The fact that you can put together an IG Battalion for 180 Points is a substantial part of the problem, yeah. I wouldn't go quite so far as "no CP", but I think something like "Detachments that are not the same Faction as your Warlord do not contribute CP" could help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, WestRider said:

 "Detachments that are not the same Faction as your Warlord do not contribute CP" could help.

More elegant, yes.

Makes it work more like the -1 CP detachment, gives you access to a lot, but with no massive CP advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WestRider said:

The fact that you can put together an IG Battalion for 180 Points is a substantial part of the problem, yeah. I wouldn't go quite so far as "no CP", but I think something like "Detachments that are not the same Faction as your Warlord do not contribute CP" could help.

Just spitballing here, but what if the Imperial Guard was returned to having an Infantry Platoon (infantry squads, special weapon squads, heavy weapon squads, etc.) all fit into the force org chart as a single Troops choice?

This would make it harder to “fill” a Battalion FOC with a minimum amount of Imperial Guard.

Plus, narratively it would make more sense that the amount of Imperial Guard grunts that we’ve been calling a platoon since the early Nineties isn’t now a Battalion! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Ish said:

Just spitballing here, but what if the Imperial Guard was returned to having an Infantry Platoon (infantry squads, special weapon squads, heavy weapon squads, etc.) all fit into the force org chart as a single Troops choice?

This would make it harder to “fill” a Battalion FOC with a minimum amount of Imperial Guard.

Plus, narratively it would make more sense that the amount of Imperial Guard grunts that we’ve been calling a platoon since the early Nineties isn’t now a Battalion! 

I love this idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ish said:

Just spitballing here, but what if the Imperial Guard was returned to having an Infantry Platoon (infantry squads, special weapon squads, heavy weapon squads, etc.) all fit into the force org chart as a single Troops choice?

This would make it harder to “fill” a Battalion FOC with a minimum amount of Imperial Guard.

Plus, narratively it would make more sense that the amount of Imperial Guard grunts that we’ve been calling a platoon since the early Nineties isn’t now a Battalion! 

Are the Imperial Guard the only ones that can make such a cheap Battalion? Didn't think this was an issue of just a single codex causing problems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Genestealer Cults, Tyranids, and Orks can all fill out a Battlion FOC fairly cheaply too. The main difference is that they don’t have the same “soup ingredient” options that the Imperium does. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, WestRider said:

The fact that you can put together an IG Battalion for 180 Points is a substantial part of the problem, yeah. I wouldn't go quite so far as "no CP", but I think something like "Detachments that are not the same Faction as your Warlord do not contribute CP" could help.

I'm personally a fan of the "CPs generated by a detachment may only be used by that detachment" solution.

All the CP batteries die, but the soup doesn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ish said:

I think Genestealer Cults, Tyranids, and Orks can all fill out a Battlion FOC fairly cheaply too. The main difference is that they don’t have the same “soup ingredient” options that the Imperium does. 

Is it just the imperium that needs to modified/regulated? If it is just the one faction making problems with their soup, perhaps the regulation needs to address only them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×