40K 9th ed

[Munkie]

That's really good. It gives you the CP refund you would have had if your warlord could fit into a standard detachment. So there's no downside to taking Mortarion, for instance, other than you've used 2 detachments and had to buy one extra HQ in the battalion or whatever you wish you could put him into.

But still 2 detachments, one of which is a Demon Primarch and the total cost is 0 CP. Not bad at all.

[Inquisitor66]

It does stop these big dudes from being in patrol level games....unless they go solo..which will be awsome

[Ish]

1 minute ago, Inquisitor66 said:

It does stop these big dudes from being in patrol level games....unless they go solo..which will be awsome

I just happen to have seen a battle report on YouTube for that exact scenario.

[Ish]

Potential point cost leaks* have been spotted.

* Authenticity in no way guaranteed or even implied.

[Mulgrok]

doesn't look like the final draft.  I doubt it is close to accurate.

[andy]

Whoa, Nelly!

[Mulgrok]

probably a replacement for old artillery vehicles.  They would remain stationary most of the time anyway.

[Andrewgeddon]

2 minutes ago, Mulgrok said:

doesn't look like the final draft.  I doubt it is close to accurate.

What makes you say that? Seems pretty consistent with the CA books I've purchased in the past. 

Also, Blood of Kittens has $250 listed as the price of the starter box, though I don't know where this number game from ("grain of salt" and all that). If that's true, which I'm inclined to say it is, still seems to be a good value, but a bit of a blow for people expecting a $160 price tag like Dark Imperium.

[Mulgrok]

5 minutes ago, Andrewgeddon said:

What makes you say that? Seems pretty consistent with the CA books I've purchased in the past. 

Also, Blood of Kittens has $250 listed as the price of the starter box, though I don't know where this number game from ("grain of salt" and all that). If that's true, which I'm inclined to say it is, still seems to be a good value, but a bit of a blow for people expecting a $160 price tag like Dark Imperium.

I mistakenly assumed it would include the new units, but it is probably a list that includes changes only.   I forgot how GW tries their hardest to prevent all info from being in 1 easy to read location.

EDIT: current exchange rates + the usual 33% cost increase for US would probably result in $200 price for the Indomitus box

[blackvigil]

I really like that Hammerfall drop turret. I love the band Hammerfall, and I love me some good shooting!

[Ish]

$200-250 seems like a plausible price for the Indomitus box, depending on whether or not it comes with a soft-back mini rulebook or a full-blown hardcover deluxe rulebook.

I want to like the Hammerfall turret, but I’m not quite sold on it. Is it supposed to be a modular unit that gets dropped into a zone and then assembled (which it looks like) or is it dropped into place as-is (which the name implies, but the model absolutely doesn’t look like something that could be aerodynamically dropped... even with the Imperium’s usual tenuous notions of what aerodynamic designs are).

And what was wrong with the classic Deathstorm drop pod!? 

[andy]

Rumor has it this is the Space Marine version of the new faction-specific terrain kits GW is introducing a la Age of Sigmar.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

[Ish]

That would make more sense.

[Brandon]

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/hjhdyt/indomitus_datasheets/

It's here!! All the rules!! The HUGE leak we need. LOTS OF CHANGES!!!

[Mulgrok]

no more 3+ invulnerable for storm shield?  4++ and +1 to normal save, it seems.  I like it.

[Ish]

12 minutes ago, Mulgrok said:

no more 3+ invulnerable for storm shield?  4++ and +1 to normal save, it seems.  I like it.

Well, that’s gonna need a FAQ addressing how it works with Custodes... Unless they intended for my stormshield equipped Custodian Guard to have a 3++ Invulnerable Save and a 1+ Armor Save.

[Mulgrok]

12 minutes ago, Ish said:

Well, that’s gonna need a FAQ addressing how it works with Custodes... Unless they intended for my stormshield equipped Custodian Guard to have a 3++ Invulnerable Save and a 1+ Armor Save.

I guess the other way to read it is that it improves ALL saves by 1.  I really should stop trying to make conclusions based on incomplete data.

[ZeroStride]

An unmodified 1 always fails, so a 1+ armor save would still require a roll of a 2. But if there was AP-1 on the weapon, it would still require a roll of a 2.

Things that stood out on first read:

• Can't fall-back and Psychic
• Reinforcements can come in on the last turn even and not be destroyed
• You can charge over units, if you can fly, but you have to deal with terrain as usual
• Objective Markers are 40mm, and you measure to the closest part of the marker, not the center
• Command Reroll: only hit, wound, save, advance, charge, psychic, deny the witch, number of attacks
• Insane Bravery is once per BATTLE
• You have to declare your "additional warlord trait", psychic powers, etc on your list, you can't tool-box a different relic or psychic power (unfortunate)
   

[Ish]

 

[Dusldorf]

41 minutes ago, ZeroStride said:

 

• You have to declare your "additional warlord trait", psychic powers, etc on your list, you can't tool-box a different relic or psychic power (unfortunate)
   

where do you see this bit? i see where it says selecting warlord traits is part of "mustering your army" when starting a mission, but it still seems entirely up to TOs whether they want to allow toolboxing or not. 

[Munkie]

I've got to say, I'm not a huge fan of their approach to the Eternal War missions. Mission 6, in particular, is going to be an absolute pain in the ass just to set up. Diagonal deployments have always been tricky because laying a tape measure in an uninterrupted 7'2.5" diagonal line and measuring 12" back for the DZ edges is tricky. So memorizing the distances from the table corners and drawing at least a shorter, but still challenging line has been the common workaround.

Well now they dictate that distance from the corners so we don't have to memorize it anymore, which is great! Except we still have to try to measure that centerline to set the objectives. Oh, and we also have to measure the other diagonal center line to setup 2 more objectives...

Otherwise, I liked the mix-and-match mission-and-map style we've enjoyed for the past few editions. I understand that it's not really doable given the complexity of the missions, but I also suspect this was strongly pushed by the competitive voices within the design team. One of the unspoken realities of ITC play is having random deployments with preset missions. Some arrangements absolutely favor one player and skew tournament results. Eliminating this variable seems like something they'd want.

[ZeroStride]

And since rules are just "how you do the job" here's the jobs to be done...

All primary objectives on the missions are hold 1/2/more, scored in your next command phase

You choose 3 secondaries, you cannot choose more than one from each category, and each mission has a bespoke secondary that you can choose as one of those three...

Quote

[Purge the Enemy]
- 3 VP per character killed
- 2 VP per MONSTER/VEHICLE with 10 or less wounds, 3 VP for 11+ wounds
- 10 VP if one TITANIC is destroyed, 15 VP if 2+ destroyed
- 6 VP if you kill the warlord

[No Mercy, No Respite]
- X/10 VP, where X is the sum number of the models you kill in the game; add 10 instead of 1 if model has 10+W
- 4 VP per round if more enemy models are destroyed than friendly models (destroyed, not kill, so yes perils)
- 0/5/10/15 VP, your 3 highest point cost models survive, 5 for each
- 5/8 VP, kill a unit in the first battle round, add 3 VP if you killed more in the first battle round

[Battlefield Supremacy]
- 2/3 VP at the end of your turn, 3 units wholely within 3 quarters, wholey within 4 and over 6" from the center
- 4 VP at the end of your turn if 2 or more of your units are within enemy DZ (no aircraft)
- 3 VP at the end of your turn if you control more than half the objective markers

[Shadow Operations]
- 3 VP each time an INFANTRY unit completes ACTION, at end of movement phase do ACTION if within 6" of the center, and no enemies within 6" of the center (no aircraft), ends at end of your turn
- 5 VP each time INFANTRY does ACTION, in your next command phase, if wholely within enemy DZ
- 1 VP command phase, 1 VP end of battle for each objective with a banner on it. INFANTRY does ACTION on objective marker, no enemies nearby (excl aircraft)

[Warpcraft]
- 3 VP for each Mental Interogation, Psychic ACTION warp charge 4 18" target character
- 15 VP if you Psyhich ACTION 3x in the battle, Warp charge 3, within (?)" of the center
- 5 VP per PSYKER CHARACTER killed, 3 VP for any other PSYKER, you are not allowed to have Psykers

And the bespoke secondaries

Quote

Combat Patrol
- 5VP if you control the objective marker in your opponent's deployment zone, at end of your turn
- 5VP if you score the 2 objectives not in anyones deployment zone, in command phase (no turn 1)
- 3VP if you have non-aircraft wholely within 6" of your board edge, and opponent board edge. Instead, 5VP if also in their deploy zone.

Incursion
- 4VP Control both A-objectives, 2VP if you control both B-objectives, at the end of your turn
- 3VP Control the 2 objectives not in anyones deployment zone, 5 VP if enemy is within 9" of the center
- (action) 3VP if you control one A, 5 VP if you control both A, take an action, score @ end of turn, no aircraft
- 8/4/2/1 VP depending on objective, socre @ end of turn
- 2/3/5 VP if you control 1/2/3 in your opponent's
- 3/5 VP in their DZ, some board edge requirements, whatever rewards movement

Strike Force
- 15/10/5 VP at the end of the battle if at least 75%, 50%, 25% of your army force is remaining (calculating it is long)
- 3VP at end of your command phases if you control the point in opponent's DZ, and +2 VP for each point you control outside any DZ, max of 7 per turn
- 1/3/6/10 VP in command phase per Action completed
- X VP, at the end of your turn, if you control the center objective, where X is the turn number
- 5/15 VP if 1/2 objective markers were raized
- X VP, where X is the number of points you control, complete action (no aircraft)
- 5VP command phase, more objectives in the centerand more units within 12" of the center

 

[ZeroStride]

26 minutes ago, Dusldorf said:

where do you see this bit? i see where it says selecting warlord traits is part of "mustering your army" when starting a mission, but it still seems entirely up to TOs whether they want to allow toolboxing or not. 

Looking at page 251 and number 4 on that list (and yes, it is still up to the TO for sure).

[Ish]

29 minutes ago, ZeroStride said:

Looking at page 251 and number 4 on that list (and yes, it is still up to the TO for sure).

This is a rule that most tourneys have used since the dawn of time, but it’s nice to see it codified as an official rule.

[Dusldorf]

3 minutes ago, Ish said:

This is a rule that most tourneys have used since the dawn of time, but it’s nice to see it codified as an official rule.

not true lol, ITC has allowed game-by-game toolboxing for most things for all of 8th ed -- only exceptions have been stuff like upgrading of BA captains to death company.

dont get me wrong, i like the change that's suggested by this roster sheet, but it is certainly a big change if TOs start to disallow toolboxing of all kinds.