40K 9th ed

[WestRider]

Serried ranks it is!

[Ish]

 

[Munkie]

27 minutes ago, Ish said:

As I predicted, people have already started math-hammering the geometry...

This is what happens when you try to legislate behavior.

There is no fix to people gaming a system. You have to either have an ungamable system (what GW sort of tried to do) or people that aren't interested in gaming a system. 

Instead of trying to create a perfect system, GW should have let people just handle it on a social level as we've been doing for decades. 

Creating a different system for people to manipulate accomplishes exactly nothing.

[Mulgrok]

6 aggressors should still be fine.  When 1 is removed it should follow the rules of a 5 model unit.   I already stack them in a line of 4 in front with 2 in the rear.

[Sgt. Rock]

7 hours ago, necrontyr said:

Slight modification to Unit Coherency rules:

No more conga line bullcrap for capping multiple objectives and spreading out auras! I love it!

[Ish]

I don’t mind the change, per se, but I think it’s going to be one of the more difficult things to unlearn from editions past.

There’s always a handful of rules from an earlier edition that I always forget work differently (or just plain don’t exist) in a newer edition... With 8th Edition, I still forget that vehicles no longer have different armor values based on arc, for example. 

Luckily, I’d already chosen to go collect Adeptus Custodes during the quarantine. I’m never gonna have to remember horde rules or conga line geometry with them! 

[Lord Hanaur]

this coherency rule seems to be necessitated by the smaller board.

[Ish]

6 minutes ago, Lord Hanaur said:

this coherency rule seems to be necessitated by the smaller board.

But the board isn’t getting smaller.

[Sgt. Rock]

But it is! Gee Dubs sez so! And their word is law, don'tcha know!

[Inquisitor66]

Just now, Sgt. Rock said:

But it is! Gee Dubs sez so! And their word is law, don'tcha know!

I mean, their word kinda is law....they literally write the rulebook 😗

[Ish]

I swear to Zod, no one knows what the words “suggested” or “minimum” mean.

[Sgt. Rock]

1 minute ago, Ish said:

I swear to Zod, no one knows what the words “suggested” or “minimum” mean.

Of course. They're synonyms for "mandatory" right? 

[Ish]

6 minutes ago, Sgt. Rock said:

Of course. They're synonyms for "mandatory" right? 

So help me, Zod...

[Munkie]

25 minutes ago, Ish said:

I swear to Zod, no one knows what the words “suggested” or “minimum” mean.

Yeah but it will be the new standard. Any store wanting to run ITC events will be changing their mats. They don't have to, but they will.

51 minutes ago, Lord Hanaur said:

this coherency rule seems to be necessitated by the smaller board.

I think the 2 other hard counters they put on large blobs will be sufficient.

Large blobs were already more vulnerable to Ld issues than small squads in 8th. Now they're even more vulnerable than they were AND blasts will hurt them harder. Now they have more strict coherency rules too (and extremely punitive consequences for placement mistakes).

How many reasons do we need not to take large troops squads? I seriously cannot fathom writing a list for 9th that would contain more than 30 troops models, there's just too many reasons not to. I LOVED running blobs of wyches out of a Webway portal back in 5th, but they'll just be squads of 5, because having more makes them harder to use and easier to kill per model. 

The only chance blobs have, I believe, is if troops are the only thing that can score (with maybe some mission-specific exceptions). Otherwise, MSU will be the objectively correct choice in most cases.

[Lord Hanaur]

18 minutes ago, Munkie said:

Yeah but it will be the new standard. Any store wanting to run ITC events will be changing their mats. They don't have to, but they will.

I think the 2 other hard counters they put on large blobs will be sufficient.

Large blobs were already more vulnerable to Ld issues than small squads in 8th. Now they're even more vulnerable than they were AND blasts will hurt them harder. Now they have more strict coherency rules too (and extremely punitive consequences for placement mistakes).

How many reasons do we need not to take large troops squads? I seriously cannot fathom writing a list for 9th that would contain more than 30 troops models, there's just too many reasons not to. I LOVED running blobs of wyches out of a Webway portal back in 5th, but they'll just be squads of 5, because having more makes them harder to use and easier to kill per model. 

The only chance blobs have, I believe, is if troops are the only thing that can score (with maybe some mission-specific exceptions). Otherwise, MSU will be the objectively correct choice in most cases.

um...  I mean I am sort of ambivalent.  There arent many instances you have larger than 30.  Orks is the only one I can think of that can get to.40.  But MSU was kind of a thing 5th-7th.  even somewhat in 8th.  so.  i dunno if this is THAT big a deal.  Could even help certain armies.  my orks can really explode if I lose more than 13 orks.  if I lose 17, and I will,  this might be less punitive! 

[blackvigil]

I think the game is more interesting and tactical with a smaller board, so my home set up will be using it. I hope OFCC uses the minimum sized board too. Larger boards will encourage a gunline or airforce style of play. None of that will bother me, since I don't care if I win. I just want a fun game.

Also... How about those Eradicators? Damn!

[Ish]

I think they’re a little over-the-top due to the Total Obliteration special rule. I’m usually reluctant to make cross-faction comparisons, but in this case, it’s hard to avoid comparing them to Eldar Fire Dragons.

Fire Dragons are PL 6 for a squad of five. With lower S, lower T, and significantly fewer W... They’ve got 2” extra movement, but that’s totally not worth bragging about since they have half the range on their fusion guns... To top it off, the freakin’ Eradicators get to double-tap, which means that they’ll get more shots than the Eldar, even though the space elves have two more bodies in the squad.

Obviously, this all comes with a big asterisk and footnote about it being subject to change when we have a complete understanding of all the rules... But, for now? Oi vey.

 

[Munkie]

44 minutes ago, Lord Hanaur said:

um...  I mean I am sort of ambivalent.  There arent many instances you have larger than 30.  Orks is the only one I can think of that can get to.40.  But MSU was kind of a thing 5th-7th.  even somewhat in 8th.  so.  i dunno if this is THAT big a deal.  Could even help certain armies.  my orks can really explode if I lose more than 13 orks.  if I lose 17, and I will,  this might be less punitive! 

It's not the risk of having squads larger than 30, it's the multiple risks to squads larger than 5.

I'll be taking at most probably 6 squads of 5 troops. Immune to blasts, immune to coherency restrictions, nearly immune to Ld concerns (CP or 2 when I absolutely need it), free sergeants, breakable eggs in separate baskets. There's just no upside to large squads.

[Ish]

3 minutes ago, Munkie said:

There's just no upside to large squads.

That we know of... I’m rather expecting Tyranid ‘Gaunts, Ork Boyz, Chaos Poxwalkers, and maybe Imperial Guard Conscripts to all have incentives baked into their rules that incentivize taking them in hordes. 

[blackvigil]

15 minutes ago, Ish said:

I think they’re a little over-the-top due to the Total Obliteration special rule. I’m usually reluctant to make cross-faction comparisons, but in this case, it’s hard to avoid comparing them to Eldar Fire Dragons.

Well... You're not wrong. Fire Dragons are trash compared to Eradicators. I was trying to explain my outlook to my wife... Any time marines get something that is far and away better than the chaos or xenos equivalent, it won't hurt to be mad about. I accept that GW loves marines more than their other children, by a lot. It's not even close. Marines have their own tab on the GW site, separate from the Imperium section. They are the chosen ones, and will *always* have better stuff. When other things rise above them in the meta, GW "fixes" it. 

I'm not being sarcastic. I just accept it. I bought elves because I like elves. They will never be as good as muhreenz. That's ok. I'll play them too.

[Lord Hanaur]

1 hour ago, blackvigil said:

I think the game is more interesting and tactical with a smaller board, so my home set up will be using it. I hope OFCC uses the minimum sized board too. Larger boards will encourage a gunline or airforce style of play. None of that will bother me, since I don't care if I win. I just want a fun game.

Also... How about those Eradicators? Damn!

smaller boards dont add options.  they just make melee good

[Lord Hanaur]

35 minutes ago, blackvigil said:

Well... You're not wrong. Fire Dragons are trash compared to Eradicators. I was trying to explain my outlook to my wife... Any time marines get something that is far and away better than the chaos or xenos equivalent, it won't hurt to be mad about. I accept that GW loves marines more than their other children, by a lot. It's not even close. Marines have their own tab on the GW site, separate from the Imperium section. They are the chosen ones, and will *always* have better stuff. When other things rise above them in the meta, GW "fixes" it. 

I'm not being sarcastic. I just accept it. I bought elves because I like elves. They will never be as good as muhreenz. That's ok. I'll play them too.

eldar have lived a very long time in the sun.  Lol.

[Mulgrok]

I hope Assault Intercessors can take a thunder hammer on the sergeant.  Then I would definitely run at least 1 squad with Adrax.

[ZeroStride]

I dunno, the same reasons for taking large units are still the same reasons.

I'm still going to take units of 9 Repentia, why wouldn't I? I want to drop miracle dice on a charge, which is an investment into one squad only; I want to use Tear Them Down for +1 to wound and/or other strats, which is an investment into one squad only; I'm taking support characters to buff them, which means I need to protect those characters until the Repentia do their job and die horribly are redeemed in the eyes of the Emperor.

Likewise there's going to be other things like Green Tide, or the daemons strat that brings a unit back (whatever that is).

The whole unit coherency thing isn't a reason to run MSU, it's just a mental-tax for the benefits of getting the most out of your CP. The blast weapon thing isn't a reason to run MSU, it's the same as if your opponent rolls hot on their 3d3 hits, or d6 hits, etc (but it does reduce variance, which is strong). Hell, larger squads are now more resistant to leadership effects, because let's say you have a squad of 5, 2 get killed, you fail leadership now you have 2 remaining, the remaining 2 flee on a roll of 1 or 2. That is incredibly powerful vs elite units, but a blob of 20 Tzaangor? Eh, if they fail a morale check, about 1/6 remaining will flee, as opposed to the previous potential of: lots.

And no...the smaller table size is also not a reason, because all the missions are laid out using the center of the board as a reference point, so you could play on a 6'x12' table floor, and the deployment zones from the center of the board would still be the same distance apart...and the objectives would still be the same distance from the center of the board.

[Inquisitor66]

2 hours ago, Munkie said:

There's just no upside to large squads.

Stratagems effect units. 1 large squad benefits a lot more from a stratagem than many small ones.