40K 9th ed

[blackvigil]

I agree with this move... There is still a "tax" if you don't want to field troops, so we'll still see several lists with 3 bare bones troops choices, but that's fine. 

[Ish]

I’m predicting a return of DAVU (Dire Avengers as Vehicle Upgrade).

[blackvigil]

Funny you mention that... I am building my eldar army, and looking at 2 min squads of DA in falcons or serpents, along with a unit of snipers. I think that will be normal in lots of armies that have decent transports. Honestly though, I like driving cars around the board. lol. I love mechanized forces.

[Ish]

Coupled with the previewed changes to make vehicles more well-rounded and... yeah “Footdar” seems like its going away for another edition, I’m also predicting a resurgence of Razorbacks and Devilfish.

 

[Sgt. Rock]

 

2 hours ago, Andrewgeddon said:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/04/taking-command-of-your-pointsgw-homepage-post-1/

Detachments COST Command Points, rather than giving them, with the exception of the detachment that our Warlord is in, as long as it's a Patrol, Battalion, or Brigade. 

Love it. If you take a more old-school "mixed arms" Battalion type list, you get max command points. If you want to take that all Terminators / Carnifex' / whatever army, or add some allies, you can, but at a cost.

I don't *entirely* agree. For the health of the game, especially at a more competitive level, it's great, and necessary. But from a personal standpoint, it means that taking a small, fluffy allied force just for funsies isn't practical, and hamstrings me before I even put models on the board. I can't take a patrol detachment of a Platoon Commander and two Armored Fist squads as a fun Rynnsguard attachment without suffering for it.

I do hope mechanized armies make a resurgence, because I've been wanting to make a mech Guard army for a long, long time. Chimeras for days!

[Ish]

The theory is that that Patrol Detachment of Imperial Guard are adding some tactical options that your primary force lacks (in the case of Crimson Fists and mechanized Guard: getting a lot of cheap Troops into scoring positions). 

[Lord Hanaur]

People seem to hate change.  Its a super weird phenomenon but damn do people hate it!  Lol.  I still hear people bitching that its not like it was in 2e (looking at you Matt D).

Some stuff will change.  everyone will figure it out.  some stuff will get rage shelved.  Some will get reasonably shelved...and other things you already own will be dusted off.  a few new models will probably get bought.

The very nature of a hobby.

[Ish]

Embrace change!? What are you some sort of Tzeentch cultist?

[Lord Hanaur]

8 minutes ago, Ish said:

Embrace change!? What are you some sort of Tzeentch cultist?

Some have definitely suggested that I am the worst.  Tis true.  😞 But Tzeentch cultist?  I'd take that over what some people have said!  Lol   

All I'm saying is that this train has never been about 3e.  4e.  5e.  6e.  7e.  None of it.  Change has never stopped and it won't.   So embrace this and profit.  

[andy]

If I read things right, most armies will be getting more CP with the new system, so spending a few to get a 'recreational' additional detachment is net zero CP cost relative to the current edition. Maybe even a bump if one is frugal 😉 

[Lord Hanaur]

Just now, andy said:

If I read things right, most armies will be getting more CP with the new system, so spending a few to get a 'recreational' additional detachment is net zero CP cost relative to the current edition. Maybe even a bump if one is frugal 😉 

yeah that is totes possible.

[Andrewgeddon]

48 minutes ago, Sgt. Rock said:

 

I don't *entirely* agree. For the health of the game, especially at a more competitive level, it's great, and necessary. But from a personal standpoint, it means that taking a small, fluffy allied force just for funsies isn't practical, and hamstrings me before I even put models on the board. I can't take a patrol detachment of a Platoon Commander and two Armored Fist squads as a fun Rynnsguard attachment without suffering for it.

I see this sentiment posted a lot on Facebook, and I understand what people are saying, but to me it's not a handicap, it's just a *different* advantage. If a Battalion is the "basic" FOC, then you are paying CPs to break this restriction. Yes, I might more CPs, but you have X more HQ, heavy support choices, fast attack, etc.

Plus we don't know how much the other detachments cost. If I have 1 or 2 more CPs than you because you took a patrol detachment, I think "hamstrung" and "suffering" might be a bit disingenuous.

[Sgt. Rock]

36 minutes ago, Lord Hanaur said:

People seem to hate change.  Its a super weird phenomenon but damn do people hate it!  Lol.  I still hear people bitching that its not like it was in 2e (looking at you Matt D).

Some stuff will change.  everyone will figure it out.  some stuff will get rage shelved.  Some will get reasonably shelved...and other things you already own will be dusted off.  a few new models will probably get bought.

The very nature of a hobby.

My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!

Seriously, though, it does look like overall, 9th ed is going to be a massive, sweeping change for the better. And I recognize that having that small attachment of an allied force will present its own strengths, I just worry about fluffy players like me not being as competitive because of it. But nothing has been released yet, so it's too early to judge. Overall, though, I'm excited as hell for 9e.

[Ish]

That’s about 10 1/2 feet per gallon. 

[Sgt. Rock]

Don't you try to confound me with your newfangled math!

[ZeroStride]

I think that if the terrain rules, and the new missions, and universal competitive format are all successful, then what we're going to see is that future balance changes, and new/rewritten rules are going to be fantastic.

Not to mention that, according to the play testers that are TOs, the format will stay at 2000 points, even though point costs are increasing across the board. That means faster games, and a lower bar for entry. More players playing more games; the same kind of games and missions with the same terrain rules and guidelines. That's good stuff that may not show its full value in the first few months, but will pay off in spades.

Can't wait to get my Crusade on. I'm unreasonably hopeful and excited for that.

Edit: Also did anyone else catch that you score objectives in your next command phase, from that version of the 4 Pillars Mission they posted? That means a lot less of, "Surprise I run out and grab stuff and you don't get a chance to counter-play."

[Sgt. Rock]

30 minutes ago, ZeroStride said:

Can't wait to get my Crusade on. I'm unreasonably hopeful and excited for that.

Edit: Also did anyone else catch that you score objectives in your next command phase, from that version of the 4 Pillars Mission they posted? That means a lot less of, "Surprise I run out and grab stuff and you don't get a chance to counter-play."

Right? I'm so incredibly stoked about the Crusade bit. And I missed that part about scoring objectives, but damn, that changes the ballgame completely. They really do seem to be putting in a LOT of work, to the degree that I've never seen them do so far. Good on ya, Gee Dubs.

[WestRider]

3 hours ago, Andrewgeddon said:

I see this sentiment posted a lot on Facebook, and I understand what people are saying, but to me it's not a handicap, it's just a *different* advantage. If a Battalion is the "basic" FOC, then you are paying CPs to break this restriction. Yes, I might more CPs, but you have X more HQ, heavy support choices, fast attack, etc.

Plus we don't know how much the other detachments cost. If I have 1 or 2 more CPs than you because you took a patrol detachment, I think "hamstrung" and "suffering" might be a bit disingenuous.

It's not really any different than using any of the before game Stratagems now. Upgrading to a Chapter Master or Master of the Forge or Berserker Terminators or whatever. The vast majority of the time, when people use those, it's functionally done during the list-writing stage, and they're planning on using that every time they play the list. You trade away one form of in-game flexibility for (depending on what you pick up with it) more raw power or a different form of in-game flexibility.

[blackvigil]

Crusade should be really cool. I can't wait to read those rules. I'm not sure if you'll need someone to "run" the crusade like a narrative game, or if you just play games and slowly expand things independently. Clearly, I'd be playing it with buddies, or even an ordo crew, but I'm curious. 

[WestRider]

3 hours ago, blackvigil said:

Crusade should be really cool. I can't wait to read those rules. I'm not sure if you'll need someone to "run" the crusade like a narrative game, or if you just play games and slowly expand things independently. Clearly, I'd be playing it with buddies, or even an ordo crew, but I'm curious. 

I'm guessing it takes some cues from the WarCry campaign system, which is all player tracked, just honour system. Works great as long as everyone involved is on the same page about what they want.

[MexicanNinja]

1) when do i get more intercessors with chainswords, because Blood Angel reasons.

2) can I still kill things with my hammers?

3) enough with the rumors and tell me when i can throw my stripper dollars at GW for this box set!

4) That's what she said...

[WestRider]

1 hour ago, MexicanNinja said:

1) when do i get more intercessors with chainswords, because Blood Angel reasons.

Also, when do we get actual Primaris Assault Marines, with Jump Packs as well as the chainswords?

[Ish]

28 minutes ago, WestRider said:

Also, when do we get actual Primaris Assault Marines, with Jump Packs as well as the chainswords?

About two years from now when they release the second Codex: Space Marines for this edition.

[PumpkinHead]

I see lots of rage on the internet about the table size changing. Is there general consensus that the tables are going to 4x5, or are people flipping out for no reason because of not complete information? 

[Ish]

15 minutes ago, PumpkinHead said:

I see lots of rage on the internet about the table size changing. Is there general consensus that the tables are going to 4x5, or are people flipping out for no reason because of not complete information? 

Considering that every game store, every game club, and every gamer with a homemade table in their basement and/or garage has a 6’ x 4’ table it doesn’t really matter what GW writes in the rulebook: the standard will continue to be 6’ x 4’*.

GW has never, as far as I can recall, ever given a specific requirement for table size for any of their mainline games... Heck, until the recent releases of WarCry and Underworlds, I can’t remember them ever specifically giving a table size requirement for their spinoff games (board games being the obvious exception, because, you know, board games.)

I’ve always thought the game would be better on a 6’ x 6’ table or a 4’ x 8’ table (with the default playing across the longer axis). But that’s just too impractical for game stores, church hall tournaments, and people with short arms.

* (Well, that or 6.56’ x 4.10’ for all those Europeans that just bought a sheet of 2 meter by 1.25 meter particleboard at their local DIY.)