40K 9th ed

[Inquisitor66]

I kinda hope they reduce the #of stratagems available to an army for each game.   Maybe pick a hand of 10 from all those available to your force before each game.  I can't keep track of all the things I can do.

[Ish]

Personally, I’d like to see Stratagems get tossed out entirely... But I’m probably alone in the wilderness in that desire. A dramatic reduction in the number of Stratagems would be nice.

Maybe a half-dozen universal ones (re-roll a die, bring an extra magic item, deep strike a squad, etc.) and four or five that are unique to each codex? Plus one more unique to each < Chapter Equivalent > sub-faction?

[andy]

I'd be happy to ditch re-rolls across the board. The bubble-based ones are too powerful for my tastes (I mean, why even make the rolls for Space Marines..? just say you hit with all shots minus one, and wound with all hits minus one and you're there...) and the one-offs pull all the drama from the game (explosions, perils of the warp, etc. are all negated).

[Ish]

I am very excited by the teases in the marketing material released to far that they’ve had an eye towards making smaller game sizes work just as well as larger games.

Although Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader was my first exposure to the game, it was during Second Edition that I was able to get friends into it and started playing “for real.” Then as now, the standard army size was 2,000 Points... But a Codex: Space Marines Tactical Squad of ten men cost 300 Points. Plus 30 for krak grenades, 15 to give one bloke a heavy bolter, 10 for another dude’s flamer, and 5 to give Sarge his chainsword and bolt pistol... 360 Points! 

Under the current 8th Edition codex, an identically equipped squad of Tactical Marines costs 136 Points.

Basically, in any army list you compared between then and now, we’ve seen a dramatic reduction in the cost of most units. That means the 2,000 Point games I was playing in the Nineties had an average of 30-40 infantry and 3-5 vehicles. A similarly pointed game today can easily have 100+ infantry and 10+ vehicles.

I miss the smaller games, where it was platoon versus platoon, instead of company versus company.

[Andrewgeddon]

2 hours ago, Ish said:

Personally, I’d like to see Stratagems get tossed out entirely... But I’m probably alone in the wilderness in that desire. A dramatic reduction in the number of Stratagems would be nice.

Maybe a half-dozen universal ones (re-roll a die, bring an extra magic item, deep strike a squad, etc.) and four or five that are unique to each codex? Plus one more unique to each < Chapter Equivalent > sub-faction?

I totally agree. I get the appeal, but it seemed to me yet another thing that you had to manage, especially if you had to manage them from across multiple books. Plus you had to keep track of your opponent's as well. Without them, you wouldn't probably see less people spamming minimum Battalions for the Command Points. Would love to see something like "If your army has a Battalion, you get X Command Points. If not, you get Y" and have that be the end of it.

[Andrewgeddon]

Apparently there was some sort of Q&A today about the new edition (was at work so missed it), but Blood of Kittens put up this summary:

 

-1 cap for modifiers
6s always hit
Nova (Mike Brandt) missions look to be for match play.
Forge world rules taken over by GW main!!!!😍😍
Deathwatch will be one of the first new codexes, they get the new marines.
CP based on game size. Detachments still a thing but sound kinda pointless now.
Overwatch reworked and units leaving combat can take damage.
Monsters get blast rules and can shoot into combat when stuck.
You have to play with terrain for competitive games.
Obscured back! Block LoS
“Combat attrition” in moral phase sounds like stat reductions will happen.
“Terror units” will now do different things than minus to ld
“Blast” is a keyword and is based on weapons not the unit will be added in appendix with new rules for all weapons that have it.
“Psychic Awakening” will be folded into new codexes as they happen and some stuff may be trimmed from them as they go.

[Ish]

One thing I’ve always advocated for was a return to the old Force Organization chart (1-2 HQ, 2-6 Troops, 0-3 Elite/Heavy/Fast, 0-1 LoW) and then allow players to manipulate the Force Org chart by spending CPs prior to gameplay.

So, everybody might have 6 CP to start, but if you spend 1 CP you can add a fourth Heavy Support slot. Spend 3 CP to add a fourth, fifth, and sixth Heavy Support slot.

This still lets people play their thematic Armored Battlegroups and First Company Veterans lists, but attaches an opportunity cost to it.

Likewise, I think adding a second detachment of allies should be something that costs CP rather than something that adds to them. If you want to attach a platoon of Imperial Guard to your Space Marines, it should be because you value their contribution to the game or because you like the theme... You shouldn’t just be slapping the “Loyal 17” onto every army list because MOAR KOMMAND PINTS! 

[Andrewgeddon]

30 minutes ago, Ish said:

One thing I’ve always advocated for was a return to the old Force Organization chart (1-2 HQ, 2-6 Troops, 0-3 Elite/Heavy/Fast, 0-1 LoW) and then allow players to manipulate the Force Org chart by spending CPs prior to gameplay.

So, everybody might have 6 CP to start, but if you spend 1 CP you can add a fourth Heavy Support slot. Spend 3 CP to add a fourth, fifth, and sixth Heavy Support slot.

This still lets people play their thematic Armored Battlegroups and First Company Veterans lists, but attaches an opportunity cost to it.

Likewise, I think adding a second detachment of allies should be something that costs CP rather than something that adds to them. If you want to attach a platoon of Imperial Guard to your Space Marines, it should be because you value their contribution to the game or because you like the theme... You shouldn’t just be slapping the “Loyal 17” onto every army list because MOAR KOMMAND PINTS! 

I would be 1000% behind this.

[Lord Hanaur]

they are droping troops taxes mostly it sounds like.  not sure I like that idea.

[Ish]

Just now, Lord Hanaur said:

they are droping troops taxes mostly it sounds like.  not sure I like that idea.

Hard to say without knowing more details, but I’m also not too fond of the idea. I’m of the firm opinion that wargames* should be all about the basic rank-and-file generic Troops, with the elite specialized units playing a supporting role... whilst also having options for players that want to make an All-Elite thematic army viable, but with trade offs.

So a 40k game should be all about the Imperial Guard grunts and Tau Firewarriors, with Crisis Suits and Leman Russ Tanks attached to the list to help out.

The game should be written in a way that the players see their grunts as valuable and not as a punishment .

 

* Individual character / small unit skirmishers like Necromunda exempted.

[Inquisitor66]

I think, if they are making objective holding more important, ala itc, that objective secured rules should make troops valuable outside of there killing power.

 

Tanks take ground, troops hold it

[ZeroStride]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pLkIFWf81YIhGD6Cy_zfvX4zm5GbkYTTEHEPapCTONY/preview?pru=AAABcnbNzmU*KwIOWFv7HNeBy13je6D7lA

Transcript.

[Andrewgeddon]

Did the sweepstakes they are running reveal the price of the new starter box and the release date? 🤔 

Can't seem to post pica, but the legal print notes:

-The value of the contents of each prize is GBP £120 (one hundred and twenty) / AUD $290 (two hundred and ninety) Australian Dollars.

-The prize will be dispatched by Games Workshop in July 2020. Additionally, entrants will not be informed of the contents of the prize until those products have been officially announced to the public by Games Workshop. Entrants must therefore be aware that should they win, there will be a delay between the notification that they are a prize-winner and receipt of the prize. By participating, entrants confirm their acknowledgement of, and agreement to, this clause

[Andrewgeddon]

1 hour ago, Ish said:

Likewise, I think adding a second detachment of allies should be something that costs CP rather than something that adds to them. If you want to attach a platoon of Imperial Guard to your Space Marines, it should be because you value their contribution to the game or because you like the theme... You shouldn’t just be slapping the “Loyal 17” onto every army list because MOAR KOMMAND PINTS! 

From the Q&A:

Stu - Yes. What you're doing is if you want to take some cool stuff from Codex 1 and Codex 2 you have to pay CP to requisition assets. So one player might be spending CP to add an Imperial Knight, another will pay to outflank units. Lots more decisions to make, provides a benefit towards staying in one force. You can do whatever you want, but there's a price.

[Ish]

30 minutes ago, Andrewgeddon said:

Did the sweepstakes they are running reveal the price of the new starter box and the release date? 🤔 

 

It probably is a hint, but the final price isn’t as simple as saying £120 GPB at this year’s  average exchange rate equals $150.00 USD. You have to account for tariffs and other taxes. So the final price for us might be as much as $200.00 USD.

Stu - Yes. What you're doing is if you want to take some cool stuff from Codex 1 and Codex 2 you have to pay CP to requisition assets. So one player might be spending CP to add an Imperial Knight, another will pay to outflank units. Lots more decisions to make, provides a benefit towards staying in one force. You can do whatever you want, but there's a price.

I iz da Prophet of da Waaagh!

[Andrewgeddon]

6 minutes ago, Ish said:

It probably is a hint, but the final price isn’t as simple as saying £120 GPB at this year’s  average exchange rate equals $150.00 USD. You have to account for tariffs and other taxes. So the final price for us might be as much as $200.00 USD.

Yeah, I'm putting my money on $180 like the previous boxes. Still, if this drops in July it will be MUCH sooner that I would have initially thought.

[Skkipper]

They heard we canceled ofcc so it was safe to release 😉 

[Ish]

They do have a boiler-plate disclaimer in the contest rules about there being a delay between prize winners being notified and prizes being delivered. So there’s that...

July seems early, September seems too late. My bet would be on August.

The Third Quarter for the fiscal year is July through September. I imagine they’ll want to have it in hobby stores and fully stocked through all their distributors and other non-specialist sources (i.e., Amazon) by Q4 and the holiday buying season.

[andy]

 from the Q&A Doc:

Quote

I love it. I want it. When can I have it!

Really soon. We’re a few weeks off just yet, but we wanted to give you a bit of a heads up, so you could get ready (and because we were too excited to keep the news to ourselves any longer)! We’ll let you know when we have more news on an exact release date.

Exactly when depends on your definition of 'few' but in my mind, a few weeks is less than a couple of months. I hope to see in pre-order first week of July ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

 

[ZeroStride]

Their fiscal year starts in June, IIRC.

Edit: Yeah, June 3rd 2018, June 2nd 2019, so that either means "the first Monday in June starts the year" or "the first Sunday in June ends the year". Upon the advice of my cats, I do not feel like investigating more into things and will instead pet the cats.

[Brother Glacius]

I was already going to go broke with the new admech stuff....and now I got a whole set of new necrons coming up

[big bad swear word]ing gw.

[Brother Glacius]

and of course GW's pricing is ..... well we all know what it is. $20 for a single cav model? $12 for a new flying guy....give me a break.

[Ish]

Then there’s things like ten infantry models for $35... For a kit that’s been around twenty years... and you’re going to need five or six boxes, minimum, for an moderately competitive army. 🙄

Like I said earlier in this thread, the ever increasing scale of the game has really turned me off. Part of it is the time sink of trying to play a complete game, part of it is feeling like the table is too damn cramped, and part of it is purely financial.

I mean... I can slap together a Bolt Action army of comparable size to any 40k army for less than half the price. I can put together a Pike & Shotte or Black Powder army for a quarter the price. I could build a De Bellis Antiquitatis army for less than the price of a single blister packed 40k figure... 

Value is subjective and all that, but I don’t know if I feel like 40k is offering me the right level of value anymore.

I’m not going to jump on the Ruined Forever! bandwagon, but I’m also not tripping over myself in a rush to buy the new rulebook.

[blackvigil]

I have always liked smaller games, with fewer models. To that end, I normally play vehicle heavy, or highly elite lists. I can't stand fielding a horde. At one OFCC, years ago, I had 40 grey hunters, 15 blood claws, and 4 misc characters. To me, that was ridiculous. I never like to have that many dudes on the table... Anyway, I'm agreeing with you. I don't like dealing with giant tables of toys that just get put right back in the case.

I love Kill Team, for that reason. If I see a dope model, I can just buy it, and run a kill team. I'm going to do some Night Lords, but just a few. 

They said in the announcement that you can play 9th ed with very small points values. Supposedly there are things that change, like the size of the play area, the missions, etc. I like that. My home table with friends has always been 1500. Granted 1500 is a lot more models on the table than it used to be... but I like it.

[Ish]

I’m hoping to see 1,500 Points become a good, viable game size. That’s enough for a demi-company of Space Marines with one or two supporting vehicles, a platoon of Imperial Guard with a squadron of Leman Russ backing them up, or even a lance of unsupported Knights.

Thats my personal “sweet spot” for the game.