K_DUB Posted May 12, 2014 Report Share Posted May 12, 2014 I sure hope they add a "Dukes of Hazard" role to dedicated transports. I want to see a Rhino fly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted May 12, 2014 Report Share Posted May 12, 2014 (well it seems so since a Rhino can now BE a troops choice apparently). The internet seems to be ablaze with this. This is the current rule in 6th and was the rule in 5th. Page 89 of the rule book, under the dedicated transport section, in bold states the EXACT same thing as the above. This is not a new rule and you should've been handing out bonus VPs for them in big guns never tire and also the scouring. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonVilkee Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Well... Unbound armies certainly are at a disadvantage here. You can Eldar Jetbke in turn 5 all you want but you're not taking that objective from a Battle Forged force. They have to obliterate the objective defenders, while the Battle Forged company can deny Unbound armies with a Rhino (well it seems so since a Rhino can now BE a troops choice apparently). I'd say that's a big hairy deal. so long as most missions remain objective focused, it's going to be an up hill fight for the Unbound army to claim things. Naturally, that means when faced with a Battle Forged force its no different than playing now. So good. When facing Unbound, you can focus on troops and once their troops are too low to take more objectives than you can, you can ignore them as targets of necessity. That creates some pretty interesting strategy's. I think the idea of an Unbound army is kinda dumb, but I'm definitely seeing why a Battle Forged army might have some serious advantages here. Some people are focusing, i notice, on the destructive power that an Unbound army can field and rightly so. But does it matter if they cant take an objective? maaaaaybe not. I guess the wise Unbound General will not undervalue his number of troops even if he lets their quality slip. Seems like an unbound player could hardly afford to go with less than 6 troops choices. I dunno. This is a lot to absorb and anticipate from. If I was Unbound with lets say Tau. All the Broadsides I can field, Lets say around 250 when its all kitt'd out. That's 8ish units of them right? 24 Broadsides. None of them scoring. None of them contest. Heck now that I think about it... Unbound vs. Unbound would be even worse because then No one on either side could contest! the big IF here is: are missions going to be primarily objective based... or will they get silly and allow KP missions? Will TO's? That's a big question. I'm thinking unbound will be kinda nice teaching people, they can just slap down whatever they happen to own and then I can either use battleforged (showing how important missions can be), or use whatever I want and just push soldiers around. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonVilkee Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 The internet seems to be ablaze with this. This is the current rule in 6th and was the rule in 5th. Page 89 of the rule book, under the dedicated transport section, in bold states the EXACT same thing as the above. This is not a new rule and you should've been handing out bonus VPs for them in big guns never tire and also the scouring. I'm hoping vehicles can go back to contesting! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Not if they are unbound :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Well... Unbound armies certainly are at a disadvantage here. You can Eldar Jetbke in turn 5 all you want but you're not taking that objective from a Battle Forged force. If you have no models left on the table you can't score/contest objectives, and Unbound armies can take all of the most efficient shooting units from every codex in the game. Broadsides, Riptides, Warp Spiders, Wave Serpents, Paskisher, Annihilation Barges, etc, etc are all good enough that I'm pretty sure they can wreck armies that are forced to spend points on troops and stuff that won't matter all that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 I'm thinking unbound will be kinda nice teaching people, they can just slap down whatever they happen to own and then I can either use battleforged (showing how important missions can be), or use whatever I want and just push soldiers around. Teaching people wasn't really the issue, but sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 If you have no models left on the table you can't score/contest objectives, and Unbound armies can take all of the most efficient shooting units from every codex in the game. Broadsides, Riptides, Warp Spiders, Wave Serpents, Paskisher, Annihilation Barges, etc, etc are all good enough that I'm pretty sure they can wreck armies that are forced to spend points on troops and stuff that won't matter all that much. Thus my opposition. I dont agree with your conclusion though. Troops are going to be key in this. Make no mistake. Any General who skimps on that or underestimates that will be punished! But again... The missions are going to have a LOT to say about how true that is. My opinion may change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfestedKerrigan Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Video 3 in Jervis' series introduces ForgeWorld into the standard game of 40k. Thunderhawks, Baneblades, and a few other Lords of War will be included in the BBB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonVilkee Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Teaching people wasn't really the issue, but sure.I teach allot of kids or limited funds people that like to Team up... This prevents me from having to explain that we will play but their army isn't legal by the rules. I can now just say perfect you are an unbound army and move on. I've skipped that convo before and it can lead to problems when they keep buying stuff before I get a chance to clue them in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Separating the rules into their own book is awesome. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 If you didn't catch it, there's a blurb there saying that DV will end up with an updated book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 I'm hoping vehicles can go back to contesting! Again, that rule is IDENTICAL to the current one, and, I hope that vehicles DON'T contest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TW_Haines Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 The good news for everyone is that when you create a event all you have to do is say all army's, only unbound army's, or battle forged only. As for how troops and objectives will effect the game against unbound army's, well they are built to table a opponent. Thats why 3 heldrakes backed by a few cultists works cheap troops that may not be there at the end of the game, but your enemy is off the table so who cares. As for me I love the idea, but I play space marines and am big in troops and will be battle forged so cool beans for me. I just feel like the bugs got the dirty end of the stick again with the new powers, but until the rules come out I wont now if im right or not yet. TW Haines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgosaurusrex Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 I hope vehicles can contest, and all infantry can claim objectives. It will make battles less troop focused, but realistically shouldn't Terminators, Nobs, Shrikes, and Striking Scorpions be able to take objectives? I do agree with VonVilkee on the teaching aspect. It will be nice for newer players to simply play with the models they like from a given faction without breaking the core rules. I'm excited for Unbound armies. I have many half-finished collections that are no longer legal forces that I can now field as their own army or alongside another. Not being able to contest is a worthy drawback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Bigglesworth Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 I hope there are unbound missions and barkley forged missions otherwise I just don't see the gain. Seems like they just legitimize garage hammer rules. That is cool, but I would like to see them try to give more suggestions on balancing, i.e. foc mission types. I just hope they give more mission types in general and secret objectives. What would be really neat is a bidding system. I love 6th I think it has the best fun edition, and 5th had the best internal balance so I'm hoping they can integrate these a bit more. Most importantly I want to see a better balance between shooting and assault, since we have intercept and overwatch I don't see much issues with assault from reserve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fix Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 barkley forged missions 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonVilkee Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Okay maybe just walkers get to deny... :) I can dream right! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 That would actually be really cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Bigglesworth Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Walkers should be more diverse in their role, hq, scoring, denial. Transports being scoring or denial is a little risky. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 I don't like normal vehicles contesting/denying. If you have a walker do that, it makes them have more value. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgosaurusrex Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 I don't like vehicles scoring, but I think it's fine if they can deny. I do like that 6th ed made infantry unable to score from within a vehicle. Walker being able to deny if vehicles cannot would be an interesting change. It would certainly make walkers have more uses. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts