I guess it might be fairer to say the GC's units that had recently been nerfed or underperformed got wrecked, while the units that we thought would be good remain so.
It's very hard to see that Aberrants will get much benefit from the FAQ that will make them worth the points they are now, given they were overpointed to being useless already by the last pass. Meanwhile Ridge Runners have got a lot better, and barely went up at all. Acolytes with hand flamers went up a bit, but were at least a solid choice and haven't gone up so much in the grand scheme of things.
Metamorphs were traditionally useless and got reduced in points last time to be actually worthwhile, but have reverted back to being useless for the most part.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: The grot & brimstone horrors thing is pant-on-head stupid or what?
Why are those clearly inferior model pointed the same as a guardsman?
Presumably some models are available at a discount because they're narratively common or make up the bulk of the army; and similarly other units pay a premium to ensure relative scarcity.
Cultists are more expensive than guardsmen because otherwise you don't see Chaos Space Marine infantry in Heretic Astartes armies – and in turn the CSM infantry get a minor discount in comparison with Imperial Space Marines.
Building armies that are at odds with GW's narrative is possible, but you'll pay a premium for it.
Thescotsman's all-grot army is a good example. It's not how ork armies appear in the fiction/background, so there's an in-game incentive against it.
For sake of gw developers i hope they aren't stupid enough to point stuff like that
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sunny Side Up wrote: Given FW thus far didnt get Legend-rules, I would think it's more likely that Chaplain Dreads, Elysians and Co. get squatted old-school.
Legends has been thing for units whose index got replaced by proper book. Fw is still in index. Logical point to put stuff to legends is when index gets replaced like rest of legends
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: The grot & brimstone horrors thing is pant-on-head stupid or what?
Why are those clearly inferior model pointed the same as a guardsman?
Presumably some models are available at a discount because they're narratively common or make up the bulk of the army; and similarly other units pay a premium to ensure relative scarcity.
Cultists are more expensive than guardsmen because otherwise you don't see Chaos Space Marine infantry in Heretic Astartes armies – and in turn the CSM infantry get a minor discount in comparison with Imperial Space Marines.
Building armies that are at odds with GW's narrative is possible, but you'll pay a premium for it.
Thescotsman's all-grot army is a good example. It's not how ork armies appear in the fiction/background, so there's an in-game incentive against it.
You still wont see chaos space marines in a chaos space marine army, at 6pts cultists are still better. They finally get a mintor discount over normal marines because for the first time in nearly 20 years GW realized they don't have ATSKNF. The fact you will only see cultists still is a testiment to how utterly terrible CSM are, not how good cultists are. They are now basically a 180pt 3x unit tax for a batallion if you want the CP refunded.
Barking up the wrong tree with this explanation. If this was ever their intention they'd include a rule like 'you cannon include more cultists than csm units', instead of derp 6pts a model derp 5pt grots'
The truth is, cultists, grots and brim horrors are a thorn in their side for the kinda edition they want this to be, an inconvenient group of units they'd rather not be there anymore. Nice model count, not too many, small units, fast paced game in a shorter time is their vision for 9th. So they basically just chucked them under the bus because its impossible to give them a place in that sort of vision without 1. breaking the vision and allowing loads of them 2. costing everything else even more expensive which leads to less models and 1. anyway. Their only option was to nerf them
Looking through more and more of the points, coupled with the rules changes, overall I'm increasingly just not impressed by what I'm seeing. The rules changes for most competitive and pickup play basically amount to a big Errata update, while the points changes basically just move the general army size back to early 8E and rejigger the spread a bit, with without any sort of consistency or clarity, with lots of negative changes to units and weapons that didn't need them.
I guess we'll see how things shape up, I could be completely wrong on this, but a lot of what I'm seeing doesn't appear to follow much rhyme or reason, with a lot of existing issues seemingly only made worse.
they spent years on this, playtested it all over the world, with much feedback...
Sorry, but 90 points for 30 morale immune snakebite grots would have sunk the edition real fast. You guys bitch all you want, but you should probably play some games first.
they spent years on this, playtested it all over the world, with much feedback...
Sorry, but 90 points for 30 morale immune snakebite grots would have sunk the edition real fast. You guys bitch all you want, but you should probably play some games first.
Oh man, you're right Daed! Especially if they're backed up by those OP Squigbuggies. That probably even leaves points for a Stompa! I know what Nanavati's going to bring to the next LVO, boy howdy.
I dunno, snakebites are pretty terrible so it's unlikely you'd want your entire army being that. Meaning you'd probably soup and Orks are quite possibly the most CP starved army in the game so that's a real cost. In addition, making your grots fearless is coming from your warlord trait and Orks don't have a way of getting extra warlord traits so your warlord would have babysit 30 grots all game to make them fearless?
That sounds like a very reasonable trade-off to me.
Sunny Side Up wrote: Given FW thus far didnt get Legend-rules, I would think it's more likely that Chaplain Dreads, Elysians and Co. get squatted old-school.
More then likely legends get updated with a new edition
You are referring to leaks Of points not the release still..
Expect a lot of FAQs, errata and updated legends which is basically just taking old datasheets and shoving them sans points into a pdf file never to be updated again.
they spent years on this, playtested it all over the world, with much feedback...
Sorry, but 90 points for 30 morale immune snakebite grots would have sunk the edition real fast. You guys bitch all you want, but you should probably play some games first.
Oh man, you're right Daed! Especially if they're backed up by those OP Squigbuggies. That probably even leaves points for a Stompa! I know what Nanavati's going to bring to the next LVO, boy howdy.
Hey! Now you're getting it! I'm so proud of youuuuu!
Sorry, but 90 points for 30 morale immune snakebite grots would have sunk the edition real fast. You guys bitch all you want, but you should probably play some games first.
You... don't actually know the rules for grots, do you?
they spent years on this, playtested it all over the world, with much feedback...
Sorry, but 90 points for 30 morale immune snakebite grots would have sunk the edition real fast. You guys bitch all you want, but you should probably play some games first.
Oh man, you're right Daed! Especially if they're backed up by those OP Squigbuggies. That probably even leaves points for a Stompa! I know what Nanavati's going to bring to the next LVO, boy howdy.
Hey! Now you're getting it! I'm so proud of youuuuu!
Alrighty, let's get serious then. Got any rebuttal to the other guy telling you why 30 fearless grots is actually pretty fething bad?
You're a sharp guy, you drop the white knight schtick sometimes. Don't you think this balance pass is worthy of salt? GW made incremental fixes throughout 8th only to throw it all away at the start of 9th. It's honestly astounding.
PiñaColada wrote: I dunno, snakebites are pretty terrible so it's unlikely you'd want your entire army being that. Meaning you'd probably soup and Orks are quite possibly the most CP starved army in the game so that's a real cost. In addition, making your grots fearless is coming from your warlord trait and Orks don't have a way of getting extra warlord traits so your warlord would have babysit 30 grots all game to make them fearless?
That sounds like a very reasonable trade-off to me.
Deathskulls SSAG are probably on their way out. There is no more rerolling the strength. CP is lower as well.
Snakebitez get +1 to wound from the whole army at a big target over Deathskulls getting reroll wounds for 1 unit. There's a 5++ in melee now on top of 6+++ making multi-wound melee focused units pretty interesting. Buggies shooting into combat (skrapjet) with a 5++/6+++? I dunno. Sounds alright to me. My buddy won't leave the Deathskulls rerolls behind though - I know that much.
they spent years on this, playtested it all over the world, with much feedback...
Sorry, but 90 points for 30 morale immune snakebite grots would have sunk the edition real fast. You guys bitch all you want, but you should probably play some games first.
So its not 90pts... because you need to buy the character, use up the warlord trait and keep him near them.... Framing it as some sort of 'they did it to stop them being OP' because of one specific set of circumstances that probably would not 'sink' anything is imo... disingenuous.
They just don't want big units or units that dont do anything. Its fine, we'll have a few years of elite armies mainly 50% primaris vs primarsis. I'm shelfing my ork army for a while... guess a lot of folks will too. We can all play each other with marines ... funs
they spent years on this, playtested it all over the world, with much feedback...
Sorry, but 90 points for 30 morale immune snakebite grots would have sunk the edition real fast. You guys bitch all you want, but you should probably play some games first.
When losing 3 digit greenskins in a turn isn't that tough before morale...not really. And that includes t4 6++ orks.
You've been almost bluntly told by GW that you shouldn't use skew lists and the game is designed for more balanced lists across the board for years, decades even.
Don't get salty now they have actually pushed to ensure that.
If grots were designed to be a full army, they'd have their own codex.
Time to suck it up and stop whinging and start playing the game in the way its intended, the time of unfluffy spam and skew is over.
You want ultra competitive specificity? Go play sports guys, this isn't that.
Alrighty, let's get serious then. Got any rebuttal to the other guy telling you why 30 fearless grots is actually pretty fething bad?
You're a sharp guy, you drop the white knight schtick sometimes. Don't you think this balance pass is worthy of salt? GW made incremental fixes throughout 8th only to throw it all away at the start of 9th. It's honestly astounding.
What people perceive as white knighting is a pretty deliberate effort to take in all the information and process it in context.
In a broader context I can't tell you how everything will come together. A lot of stuff went up. Things that we valued before work differently now. People will be emotional about the units they like and won't review them in relation to how the game works now.
The game will surely not be perfectly balanced and that's fine (to me). What matters is if there is more (a lot more) good than bad. I doubt we'll see any silly FAQ stuff for melta or anything else. People will be disappointed there.
So its not 90pts... because you need to buy the character, use up the warlord trait and keep him near them.... Framing it as some sort of 'they did it to stop them being OP' because of one specific set of circumstances that probably would not 'sink' anything is imo... disingenuous.
They just don't want big units or units that dont do anything. Its fine, we'll have a few years of elite armies mainly 50% primaris vs primarsis. I'm shelfing my ork army for a while... guess a lot of folks will too. We can all play each other with marines ... funs
12" is a pretty big bubble and he doesn't need to be a slouch WL. There's more than just that to the picture, but I won't be able to convince people regardless. You're just going to have to play it out and see if you truly hate it or not.
PiñaColada wrote: I dunno, snakebites are pretty terrible so it's unlikely you'd want your entire army being that. Meaning you'd probably soup and Orks are quite possibly the most CP starved army in the game so that's a real cost. In addition, making your grots fearless is coming from your warlord trait and Orks don't have a way of getting extra warlord traits so your warlord would have babysit 30 grots all game to make them fearless?
That sounds like a very reasonable trade-off to me.
Deathskulls SSAG are probably on their way out. There is no more rerolling the strength. CP is lower as well.
Snakebitez get +1 to wound from the whole army at a big target over Deathskulls getting reroll wounds for 1 unit. There's a 5++ in melee now on top of 6+++ making multi-wound melee focused units pretty interesting. Buggies shooting into combat (skrapjet) with a 5++/6+++? I dunno. Sounds alright to me. My buddy won't leave the Deathskulls rerolls behind though - I know that much.
If anything but deffskulls reign supreme for Orks barring any really odd day 1 FAQ and before their new codex I'd be shocked. Army wide 6++ is great when the entire army is made of wet paper, crazy good rerolls and obsec on any infantry. Ork elite infantry actually made out okay with point bumps so they'll be more present I reckon. Also, your warlord dying almost never matters anymore so the warlord trait probably isn't going on a SSAG but rather you'll just upgrade your biggest boss warlord from a missile to a full-blown ICBM.
Orks are going mono-kultur IMO and deffskulls just gives you overall most bang for your teef, by far IMO
Alrighty, let's get serious then. Got any rebuttal to the other guy telling you why 30 fearless grots is actually pretty fething bad?
You're a sharp guy, you drop the white knight schtick sometimes. Don't you think this balance pass is worthy of salt? GW made incremental fixes throughout 8th only to throw it all away at the start of 9th. It's honestly astounding.
What people perceive as white knighting is a pretty deliberate effort to take in all the information and process it in context.
In a broader context I can't tell you how everything will come together. A lot of stuff went up. Things that we valued before work differently now. People will be emotional about the units they like and won't review them in relation to how the game works now.
The game will surely not be perfectly balanced and that's fine (to me). What matters is if there is more (a lot more) good than bad. I doubt we'll see any silly FAQ stuff for melta or anything else. People will be disappointed there.
Well, I try and do the same too. It's why I was pretty pumped (and still am pumped) about the fundamental 9th ed rules. And that's the harder part -- maybe they need to come back and do a couple fixes for hordes but they did improve on the 8th ruleset. Which is why completely dropping the ball on points makes this even more painful. You don't even have to look at the game as a whole, just within a faction. Especially since you can look within the Marines points drops and see care and attention placed to nerfs AND BUFFS. Then I look at Nids or Eldar or Orks or Chaos and see none of that. We know the core rules, we know Warp Talons didn't get anything to make them deserving of an 8 point hike. And yeah, hopefully that's a typo. But I could give you about 20 other examples of that sort of crap and I've known these points for like 3 hours now. There's just not a lot to hang your hat on here.
I haven't rebuilt my lists yet, but with Eldar as my primary army, I was initially worried, but I really like how most of my weapons are now built into the model cost. It looks like if a unit has identical weaponry (like Eldar Rangers all having long rifles and pistols), they were dropped to 0 and then increased the model points. Rangers, for instance, went from 60 pts. to 75 all-in.
Daedalus81 wrote: What people perceive as white knighting is a pretty deliberate effort to take in all the information and process it in context.
Oh pull the other one. For weeks now you've been on the "wait for the rules!" bandwagon, even as we got more and more and more stuff revealed. Even after the full rulebook leak. And now here we are, with all the points, what some might call the final piece of the puzzle, and you're still acting like everything is fine and nothing is broken.
We've seen a number of reviews for these points, and so many of them are saying that they feel utterly random/inconsistent, and seem to reverse some of the positive changes from 8th. But we need more context, somehow?
Well, I try and do the same too. It's why I was pretty pumped (and still am pumped) about the fundamental 9th ed rules. And that's the harder part -- maybe they need to come back and do a couple fixes for hordes but they did improve on the 8th ruleset. Which is why completely dropping the ball on points makes this even more painful. You don't even have to look at the game as a whole, just within a faction. Especially since you can look within the Marines points drops and see care and attention placed to nerfs AND BUFFS. Then I look at Nids or Eldar or Orks or Chaos and see none of that. We know the core rules, we know Warp Talons didn't get anything to make them deserving of an 8 point hike. And yeah, hopefully that's a typo. But I could give you about 20 other examples of that sort of crap and I've known these points for like 3 hours now. There's just not a lot to hang your hat on here.
Yes, I shall wait and see. I hope the army wides all give a good perspective and special exemptions/bonuses a la Tau. But it does look like my SM army got the 'You thought you were killy before? Now try these units!!!' Whilst my Ork army got the 'You liked picking up your dead models before???? Now pick up even more units per turn!!!'
Alrighty, let's get serious then. Got any rebuttal to the other guy telling you why 30 fearless grots is actually pretty fething bad?
You're a sharp guy, you drop the white knight schtick sometimes. Don't you think this balance pass is worthy of salt? GW made incremental fixes throughout 8th only to throw it all away at the start of 9th. It's honestly astounding.
What people perceive as white knighting is a pretty deliberate effort to take in all the information and process it in context.
In a broader context I can't tell you how everything will come together. A lot of stuff went up. Things that we valued before work differently now. People will be emotional about the units they like and won't review them in relation to how the game works now.
The game will surely not be perfectly balanced and that's fine (to me). What matters is if there is more (a lot more) good than bad. I doubt we'll see any silly FAQ stuff for melta or anything else. People will be disappointed there.
So its not 90pts... because you need to buy the character, use up the warlord trait and keep him near them.... Framing it as some sort of 'they did it to stop them being OP' because of one specific set of circumstances that probably would not 'sink' anything is imo... disingenuous.
They just don't want big units or units that dont do anything. Its fine, we'll have a few years of elite armies mainly 50% primaris vs primarsis. I'm shelfing my ork army for a while... guess a lot of folks will too. We can all play each other with marines ... funs
12" is a pretty big bubble and he doesn't need to be a slouch WL. There's more than just that to the picture, but I won't be able to convince people regardless. You're just going to have to play it out and see if you truly hate it or not.
Ok so if it would 'sink the edition'
Explain to me how it wont still sink the edition if i have 90 fearless grots @ 450pts compared to 90 fearless grots @270pts a difference of 180pts
Does that 180pts now mean the edition wont be sinked? because 180pts means 90 fearless grots sinking the edition's ability will be magically gone? 180pts is loosing a unit on the first turn. Are you saying 9th ed it pot luck first turn who goes first wins when you are running the ship sinking fearless grot horde
perhaps, more likely they would not sink anything at 3pts a model
Found an interesting interaction here with a fringe benefit to Tyranids:
As far as I can see, all sniper-style weapons have been changed to "Each time you select a target for this weapon, you can ignore the Look Out, Sir rule."
Old One Eye just gets made flat-out untargetable if there are Carnifexes nearby:
In addition, while any other friendly <Hive Fleet> Carnifex units are within 3” of this model, enemy models cannot target this model with ranged attacks.
*Page 155, 156, 157, 158, 161 and 164 – Land Raider, Land
Raider Crusader, Land Raider Redeemer, Repulsor Executioner,
Repulsor and Stormraven Gunship, Abilities, Power of the
Machine Spirit
Delete this ability
Daedalus81 wrote: What people perceive as white knighting is a pretty deliberate effort to take in all the information and process it in context.
Oh pull the other one. For weeks now you've been on the "wait for the rules!" bandwagon, even as we got more and more and more stuff revealed. Even after the full rulebook leak. And now here we are, with all the points, what some might call the final piece of the puzzle, and you're still acting like everything is fine and nothing is broken.
We've seen a number of reviews for these points, and so many of them are saying that they feel utterly random/inconsistent, and seem to reverse some of the positive changes from 8th. But we need more context, somehow?
No, I think people interpret me saying "lets look at everything together" as "gw did nothing wrong".
Yes, the rules are out. I've played games - out of context of points. I play a really savvy Ork opponent running Deathskulls 70% of the time. The game plays differently. Melee is not dead. Grots hold objectives really well and when holding objectives is half your score or more it matters. That was at 3 points, but my stuff was lower points, too.
The goonhammer review was probably the most ridiculous thing I've seen. They used old lists that can't exist any more and counted soup as mono faction. They rushed their analysis out the door.
The game is not the same. The usual expectations do not apply.
*Page 79 – Triumph of Saint Katherine, Solemn Procession Add the following sentence to this ability: ‘In addition, for the purposes of any terrain traits (e.g. Dense Cover, Obscuring), this model is considered to have a Wounds characteristic of 9, not 18.’
Whoops! We didn't think that one through. Uhh... they count as having 9, I guess!
Hmm, so Sacred Rose don't get free Overwatch, and the morale part of their rule was changed to auto-passing Attrition tests (same net result as it was originally).
At least the Triumph of Saint Katherine now is treated as having 9 wounds instead of 18... for terrain only. Wish that was just in general, as it would probably make it playable .
The goonhammer review was probably the most ridiculous thing I've seen. They used old lists that can't exist any more and counted soup as mono faction. They rushed their analysis out the door.
The percentages based on individual lists were skippable nonsense. The faction summaries were largely pretty decent, except when their tournament bias goes hard (like the craftworld entry).
*Page 79 – Triumph of Saint Katherine, Solemn Procession
Add the following sentence to this ability: ‘In addition, for the purposes of any terrain traits (e.g. Dense Cover, Obscuring), this model is considered to have a Wounds characteristic of 9, not 18.’
Whoop! We didn't think that one through. Uhh... they count as having 9, I guess!
They can't cover every possible exception in a general rule.
*Page 79 – Triumph of Saint Katherine, Solemn Procession
Add the following sentence to this ability: ‘In addition, for the purposes of any terrain traits (e.g. Dense Cover, Obscuring), this model is considered to have a Wounds characteristic of 9, not 18.’
Whoops! We didn't think that one through. Uhh... they count as having 9, I guess!
But the fact that it's covered in the FAQ before the game launch means... they did think it through?
*Page 79 – Triumph of Saint Katherine, Solemn Procession
Add the following sentence to this ability: ‘In addition, for the purposes of any terrain traits (e.g. Dense Cover, Obscuring), this model is considered to have a Wounds characteristic of 9, not 18.’
Whoops! We didn't think that one through. Uhh... they count as having 9, I guess!
But the fact that it's covered in the FAQ before the game launch means... they did think it through?
You don't know if they "fixed it after the fact" or not. You cannot know that unless you were on the design team, given that the FAQs for 9E went up today.
You can speculate on that, certainly, but you cannot know.
You don't know if they "fixed it after the fact" or not. You cannot know that unless you were on the design team, given that the FAQs for 9E went up today.
You can speculate on that, certainly, but you cannot know.
Its entirely irrelevant unless people want them to write that rule and then say, "excluding these following units that exist now and any potential units we might make in the future".
You don't know if they "fixed it after the fact" or not. You cannot know that unless you were on the design team, given that the FAQs for 9E went up today.
You can speculate on that, certainly, but you cannot know.
Its an exception to a rule. It cannot be anything other than 'after the fact'
It isn't necessarily particularly meaningful, but there is no possibly way in a linear progression of time that it would anything other than after.
Unless, I guess, you believe that they decided 'Hey, we want the Triumph to be an exception to something, what kind of rule can we make up that we can exempt them from?'
Prometheum5 wrote: Are all chainswords in the Space Marine codices not now Astartes Chainswords?
Nope.
They aren't changing datasheets except in very specific circumstances. They even make a point of it with the new (boxed set) stormshields errata.
Demolisher cannons are one of the big exceptions, because they changed mid-edition and they have to deal with old wording in some books.
Change the second sentence to read:
‘When they do so, all restrictions and modifiers that apply to
this model also apply to its embarked models.’
That should mean that embarked units can shoot at models in engagement range of the vehicle.
I don't think so. The land Speeder Storm had a new sentence added that said models embarked can not fire if the vehicle is in engagement range. Are all open topped changed to add that or just the storm?
Change the second sentence to read:
‘When they do so, all restrictions and modifiers that apply to
this model also apply to its embarked models.’
That should mean that embarked units can shoot at models in engagement range of the vehicle.
I don't think so. The land Speeder Storm had a new sentence added that said models embarked can not fire if the vehicle is in engagement range. Are all open topped changed to add that or just the storm?
No, you're right. I just missed that in the sea of blue (and trying to do other things while scanning the FAQs)
Pistols only for embarked units.
Change the second sentence to read:
‘When they do so, all restrictions and modifiers that apply to
this model also apply to its embarked models.’
That should mean that embarked units can shoot at models in engagement range of the vehicle.
I don't think so. The land Speeder Storm had a new sentence added that said models embarked can not fire if the vehicle is in engagement range. Are all open topped changed to add that or just the storm?
Venoms and Raiders got that same nerf. Starweavers didn't - they already had similar language in their rule, but it is based on the limitation on the Starweaver itself, so now RAW Harlequins in open-topped transports can fire in combat with everything because the transport can and therefore they can too. Another GG Gee-dubs moment here.
Just looking at deathguard it seems the FAQ is not going to fix any of the lost abilities going into 9th.
I was hoping we might get a replacement for Inexorable Advance as the heavy weapon part is no longer valid (Only heavy weapons are on vehicles anyway, bar reaper Autocannon on Terms). The 18" rapid fire was basically trumped by malicious volleys anyway already.
Leaving the only benefit being advance and shoot assault weapons with no -1.
Well I love that the GSC relic that adds +2 to wound is defended that it caps at +1 with well if you ever run into anything that gives a -1, you still get it. But we can't think of an example of such a unit interaction but it is there if you need it.
But the Space Marine +2 to hit for executioner rounds has the same explanation but is immediately followed by an example.
What -1 to wounds exist as a normal ability besides from Quins?
mightymconeshot wrote: Well I love that the GSC relic that adds +2 to wound is defended that it caps at +1 with well if you ever run into anything that gives a -1, you still get it. But we can't think of an example of such a unit interaction but it is there if you need it.
But the Space Marine +2 to hit for executioner rounds has the same explanation but is immediately followed by an example.
What -1 to wounds exist as a normal ability besides from Quins?
The named Keeper of Secrets has a -1 to be wounded, though I'm not sure if that's ranged, melee, or both.
including designers commentary (a couple paragraphs of nothing) and edge of silence (the stormshield issue):
The bearer has a 4+ invulnerable save. In addition, add 1 to armour saving throws made for the bearer.’
Funnily enough GW fixed it same way as meganobz. Specifically these units. Ergo it\s possible GW will do same thing THIRD time since they didn't fix core issue causing it I'm going to have good laugh if(or rather when...) 1+ unit appears on 40k again.
including designers commentary (a couple paragraphs of nothing) and edge of silence (the stormshield issue):
The bearer has a 4+ invulnerable save. In addition, add 1 to armour saving throws made for the bearer.’
Funnily enough GW fixed it same way as meganobz. Specifically these units. Ergo it\s possible GW will do same thing THIRD time since they didn't fix core issue causing it I'm going to have good laugh if(or rather when...) 1+ unit appears on 40k again.
It still does though, explicitly even, in Crusade .
Watch them day 1 FAQ that example out of existance, and instead cap it as 2+ (or change the benefit to +1 to save throws like with the shields).
White Scars...
not just for bikes anymore
I guess it sucks for attack bikes (no more ignoring the penalty for heavy weapons)
But this is the 'Advance, shoot assault weapons at no penalty and charge' army now. Works for everything.
*Page 175 – White Scars: Lightning Assault
Change the second sentence of this Chapter Tactic to read:
‘Models with this tactic do not suffer the penalty for Advancing
and firing Assault weapons.’
'I know we added primaris bikes, but there are a lot of primaris with assault weapons....'
*Page 79 – Triumph of Saint Katherine, Solemn Procession
Add the following sentence to this ability: ‘In addition, for the purposes of any terrain traits (e.g. Dense Cover, Obscuring), this model is considered to have a Wounds characteristic of 9, not 18.’
Whoops! We didn't think that one through. Uhh... they count as having 9, I guess!
But the fact that it's covered in the FAQ before the game launch means... they did think it through?
They fixed it after the fact.
Looking at the URLs of the FAQs, the Adepta Sororitas FAQ was done in January while most of the rest of them were done last September.
including designers commentary (a couple paragraphs of nothing) and edge of silence (the stormshield issue):
The bearer has a 4+ invulnerable save. In addition, add 1 to armour saving throws made for the bearer.’
Funnily enough GW fixed it same way as meganobz. Specifically these units. Ergo it\s possible GW will do same thing THIRD time since they didn't fix core issue causing it I'm going to have good laugh if(or rather when...) 1+ unit appears on 40k again.
It still does though, explicitly even, in Crusade .
Watch them day 1 FAQ that example out of existance, and instead cap it as 2+ (or change the benefit to +1 to save throws like with the shields).
Example is trumped by actual rules. New ss now gives modifer. No 1+ save.
mightymconeshot wrote: Well I love that the GSC relic that adds +2 to wound is defended that it caps at +1 with well if you ever run into anything that gives a -1, you still get it. But we can't think of an example of such a unit interaction but it is there if you need it.
But the Space Marine +2 to hit for executioner rounds has the same explanation but is immediately followed by an example.
What -1 to wounds exist as a normal ability besides from Quins?
Inquisitors have a relic that gives them -1 to wounds.
including designers commentary (a couple paragraphs of nothing) and edge of silence (the stormshield issue):
The bearer has a 4+ invulnerable save. In addition, add 1 to armour saving throws made for the bearer.’
Funnily enough GW fixed it same way as meganobz. Specifically these units. Ergo it\s possible GW will do same thing THIRD time since they didn't fix core issue causing it I'm going to have good laugh if(or rather when...) 1+ unit appears on 40k again.
It still does though, explicitly even, in Crusade .
Watch them day 1 FAQ that example out of existance, and instead cap it as 2+ (or change the benefit to +1 to save throws like with the shields).
These _are_ the day 1 FAQs.
This is it. For everyone who was claiming 'wait to see what changes in the FAQs'-- here you are. Wait over. Rules, points, FAQs, done.
Never actually existed (people assumed the box set stormshields rules would be applied to other storm shields, despite datasheets not working that way- see the Demolisher cannon, which has to be FAQed for every entry individually). The real problem was and is the crusade rule, and other things that allow a 1+. None of that has changed.
Voss wrote: Never actually existed. The real problem was and is the crusade rule, and other things that allow a 1+. None of that has changed.
It did exist, because you could give them the Artificer Armour relic. They even call that out in the Designers Commentary.
Hence the second sentence and third sentence- 'The real problem was and is the crusade rule and other things that allow a 1+' and 'None of that has changed'
These _are_ the day 1 FAQs.
This is it. For everyone who was claiming 'wait to see what changes in the FAQs'-- here you are. Wait over. Rules, points, FAQs, done.
If so they have certainly missed stuff.
For instance Myphetic Blight Hauler gives all units wholly with 7" the benefit of cover.
No idea what that means for 9th, Light cover? heavy cover? Obscured?
I am sure that's not the only 8th ed rule that has not been covered
including designers commentary (a couple paragraphs of nothing) and edge of silence (the stormshield issue):
The bearer has a 4+ invulnerable save. In addition, add 1 to armour saving throws made for the bearer.’
Funnily enough GW fixed it same way as meganobz. Specifically these units. Ergo it\s possible GW will do same thing THIRD time since they didn't fix core issue causing it I'm going to have good laugh if(or rather when...) 1+ unit appears on 40k again.
It still does though, explicitly even, in Crusade .
Watch them day 1 FAQ that example out of existance, and instead cap it as 2+ (or change the benefit to +1 to save throws like with the shields).
Example is trumped by actual rules. New ss now gives modifer. No 1+ save.
The Crusade relic paired with a model with a 2+ save (like a Terminator) would still give a 1+, as it hasn't actually been FAQd like the shields (...yet) and thus still improves the save characteristic by 1.
Honestly I'm not sure what whould be more funny: GW ignoring it and letting 1+=2++ live in limbo, or them changing the relic to remove it granting a 1+ save despite it expicitly stating a 1+ save is possible in its example.
These _are_ the day 1 FAQs.
This is it. For everyone who was claiming 'wait to see what changes in the FAQs'-- here you are. Wait over. Rules, points, FAQs, done.
If so they have certainly missed stuff.
For instance Myphetic Blight Hauler gives all units wholly with 7" the benefit of cover.
No idea what that means for 9th, Light cover? heavy cover? Obscured?
I am sure that's not the only 8th ed rule that has not been covered
Sure. There are errors that are going to need to be fixed. But anyone expecting massive changes and datasheets and whatever? Not happening. Never was going to happen- that was obvious when they decided to transition with the 8th edition codexes.
These _are_ the day 1 FAQs.
This is it. For everyone who was claiming 'wait to see what changes in the FAQs'-- here you are. Wait over. Rules, points, FAQs, done.
If so they have certainly missed stuff.
For instance Myphetic Blight Hauler gives all units wholly with 7" the benefit of cover.
No idea what that means for 9th, Light cover? heavy cover? Obscured?
I am sure that's not the only 8th ed rule that has not been covered
These _are_ the day 1 FAQs.
This is it. For everyone who was claiming 'wait to see what changes in the FAQs'-- here you are. Wait over. Rules, points, FAQs, done.
If so they have certainly missed stuff.
For instance Myphetic Blight Hauler gives all units wholly with 7" the benefit of cover.
No idea what that means for 9th, Light cover? heavy cover? Obscured?
I am sure that's not the only 8th ed rule that has not been covered
That's supposedly been covered in the 'Rare Rules' section of the Core Rulebook:
Voss wrote: These _are_ the day 1 FAQs.
This is it. For everyone who was claiming 'wait to see what changes in the FAQs'-- here you are. Wait over. Rules, points, FAQs, done.
Possibly, but there's no main rulebook FAQ, and I wouldn't put it past GW to have one of those.
Especially when they said they're going to fix the Character rule, among other things.
These _are_ the day 1 FAQs.
This is it. For everyone who was claiming 'wait to see what changes in the FAQs'-- here you are. Wait over. Rules, points, FAQs, done.
If so they have certainly missed stuff.
For instance Myphetic Blight Hauler gives all units wholly with 7" the benefit of cover.
No idea what that means for 9th, Light cover? heavy cover? Obscured?
I am sure that's not the only 8th ed rule that has not been covered
That's supposedly been covered in the 'Rare Rules' section of the Core Rulebook:
Looking at the URLs of the FAQs, the Adepta Sororitas FAQ was done in January while most of the rest of them were done last September.
I think maybe they just overwrote the old files from that FAQs at that time.
I've just changed the links for each and every updated FAQ in the Warhammer 40,000 FAQs sticky post in YMDC. I can assure you that GW did not (and never has) just reused the URLs of the old FAQs.
These _are_ the day 1 FAQs.
This is it. For everyone who was claiming 'wait to see what changes in the FAQs'-- here you are. Wait over. Rules, points, FAQs, done.
If so they have certainly missed stuff.
For instance Myphetic Blight Hauler gives all units wholly with 7" the benefit of cover.
No idea what that means for 9th, Light cover? heavy cover? Obscured?
I am sure that's not the only 8th ed rule that has not been covered
That's supposedly been covered in the 'Rare Rules' section of the Core Rulebook:
I would run RAI light cover for now, as that is functionally the same as "cover" in 8th, unless thats buried somewhere under rare rules that Im not seeing.
Looking at the URLs of the FAQs, the Adepta Sororitas FAQ was done in January while most of the rest of them were done last September.
I think maybe they just overwrote the old files from that FAQs at that time.
I've just changed the links for each and every updated FAQ in the Warhammer 40,000 FAQs sticky post in YMDC. I can assure you that GW did not (and never has) just reused the URLs of the old FAQs.
So basically none of the FAQs could possibly account for playtesting? Or did they just create the file then and updated it as they progressed?
This speaks of a much longer timeline for rules writing, which is a little nuts.
Also I feel they made typo in Craftworlds FAQ which removes Rangers -1 to hit. It should be "change last sentence to read". If anyone can throw them about it somewhere would be nice. I have their FAQmail but honestly doubt they read it.
Also, is unlimited Smite from a single psyker still a thing? Am I missing something, maybe matched/tournament rules?
Ice_can wrote: Thinkn you mean Psychic Awakening and most of them already had their 8th edition FAQ's just probably very few of them actually need changed for 9th.
Phoenix Rising is name of our PA book.
And it has abilities which don't work anymore in 9th.
So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Surprised they haven't touched Saga of the Beast yet, cause that one is long overdue. It even has SM involved so I'm surprised it hasn't been uploaded.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Sternguard are 17 pts. Right in the middle of Intercessors and Tactical Marines.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Lias Issodon (if that's who you mean) is Sir Not Appearing in this Book.
Some other FW models went goodbye as well.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Sternguard are 17 pts. Right in the middle of Intercessors and Tactical Marines.
That's almost silly but alright. How did Lias fare?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Lias Issodon (if that's who you mean) is Sir Not Appearing in this Book.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Lias has been legended as No model = No Rules welcome to Main studio rules
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Lias Issodon (if that's who you mean) is Sir Not Appearing in this Book.
Uh what about the other FW guys with no model?
Not sure about 'no model' specifically, but Goonhammer mentioned these, there may be others they deemed 'not relevant'
Chaplain Dreadnoughts
Lias Issodon
Hellwrights
Sororitas Repressors
Death Rider Commissars
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Lias has been legended as No model = No Rules welcome to Main studio rules
Having a model didn't protect the FW characters from disappearing to begin with(looking at you 8th Ed Index and excluding Hamath Kraatos).
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Lias Issodon (if that's who you mean) is Sir Not Appearing in this Book.
Uh what about the other FW guys with no model?
Not sure about 'no model' specifically, but Goonhammer mentioned these, there may be others they deemed 'not relevant'
Chaplain Dreadnoughts
Lias Issodon
Hellwrights
Sororitas Repressors
Death Rider Commissars
True, though I'm less sure how that works in practice.
If someone put Elysian infantry and heavy weapon squads on the table and told me they were using Regiment traits X & Y, I wouldn't even blink.
I get from the other side, the Elysian player might be upset at losing whatever unique stuff Elysians get, but from the other side of the table, it doesn't have the impact.
Its actually Titanic units, not Superheavy. So your Armigers don't get to do it too, unfortunately.
Titanic is super heavy, Armigers never where super heavy units.
Interesting, I always thought Superheavy was the same as Lord of War, not Titanic, since a Super-Heavy Auxilliary Detachment or a Super-Heavy Detachment was required to take Armigers. Good to know.
Missed out on getting a copy of Indomitus this weekend? Don't worry, we've got you covered.
Due to unprecedented demand, Indomitus sold out online in minutes – but we don't want anyone to miss out, so today we’re going to make Indomitus available as a Made to Order item.
If you missed out and still want one, you can order it right now. These will be limited to one per customer order, and they will arrive some time after July 25th (we're not quite sure when right now – we'll make them as fast as we can!).
Missed out on getting a copy of Indomitus this weekend? Don't worry, we've got you covered.
Due to unprecedented demand, Indomitus sold out online in minutes – but we don't want anyone to miss out, so today we’re going to make Indomitus available as a Made to Order item.
If you missed out and still want one, you can order it right now. These will be limited to one per customer order, and they will arrive some time after July 25th (we're not quite sure when right now – we'll make them as fast as we can!).
Yeah should also help slap down some of those scalping prices, going to laugh if they end up going for under retail on ebay or even better not selling.
Its actually Titanic units, not Superheavy. So your Armigers don't get to do it too, unfortunately.
Titanic is super heavy, Armigers never where super heavy units.
Interesting, I always thought Superheavy was the same as Lord of War, not Titanic, since a Super-Heavy Auxilliary Detachment or a Super-Heavy Detachment was required to take Armigers. Good to know.
You may have a point there.
But I guess it is more precise to say that Super Heavy is only a detachment name while Lord of War is the battlefield role and Titanic is a Keyword.
And nothing ever got additional rules just for being a Lord of War.
Missed out on getting a copy of Indomitus this weekend? Don't worry, we've got you covered.
Due to unprecedented demand, Indomitus sold out online in minutes – but we don't want anyone to miss out, so today we’re going to make Indomitus available as a Made to Order item.
If you missed out and still want one, you can order it right now. These will be limited to one per customer order, and they will arrive some time after July 25th (we're not quite sure when right now – we'll make them as fast as we can!).
OK. This is very cool of them, and perfectly solves the issue. It also screws over the scalpers, so that is a plus. Good job GW!
Missed out on getting a copy of Indomitus this weekend? Don't worry, we've got you covered.
Due to unprecedented demand, Indomitus sold out online in minutes – but we don't want anyone to miss out, so today we’re going to make Indomitus available as a Made to Order item.
If you missed out and still want one, you can order it right now. These will be limited to one per customer order, and they will arrive some time after July 25th (we're not quite sure when right now – we'll make them as fast as we can!).
OK. This is very cool of them, and perfectly solves the issue. It also screws over the scalpers, so that is a plus. Good job GW!
That's a normal pre-order period : you make an order for a product during a limited time and they produce it. They finally came to reason.
Missed out on getting a copy of Indomitus this weekend? Don't worry, we've got you covered.
Due to unprecedented demand, Indomitus sold out online in minutes – but we don't want anyone to miss out, so today we’re going to make Indomitus available as a Made to Order item.
If you missed out and still want one, you can order it right now. These will be limited to one per customer order, and they will arrive some time after July 25th (we're not quite sure when right now – we'll make them as fast as we can!).
I was wondering why today's article-of-substance seemed late.
Hmmm. I was going to complain about them undercutting stores, but they made a point to reference checking with local stores as the preferred option.
Would've liked to see what the 'limited time' for the MTO is. Today to... Release Day? Sooner? Later? Is there a secret cap to orders, and that'll determine the end date?
Personally, I wouldn't go for something that might ship 'sometime in the next 120 days,' but it is at least a legit attempt to deal with availability complaints, and at the same price point. So they've made that a nonissue as far as I'm concerned.
Missed out on getting a copy of Indomitus this weekend? Don't worry, we've got you covered.
Due to unprecedented demand, Indomitus sold out online in minutes – but we don't want anyone to miss out, so today we’re going to make Indomitus available as a Made to Order item.
If you missed out and still want one, you can order it right now. These will be limited to one per customer order, and they will arrive some time after July 25th (we're not quite sure when right now – we'll make them as fast as we can!).
OK. This is very cool of them, and perfectly solves the issue. It also screws over the scalpers, so that is a plus. Good job GW!
Right. There are Indomitus sets on eBay for $400. Those people can suck it.
Looks like you can still order Indomidus if you missed the other pre-order. I just ordered one, but who knows when it will show up... It said up to 120 days
Part of that 120 days is probably them getting more printings of "Edge of Silence"(the fluff/datasheet book), more printings of the special version of the Core Rules, more printings of the instruction setup, and more printings of the box for the product.
Leth wrote: Wow, so I assume all the people freaking out because GW didn’t have a response 10 seconds after the pre-order sold out are going to own it and eat crow?
Nah, that would require taking personal responsibility for freaking out that a company did not have an immediate response over the weekend, not like something would take coordination between multiple departments to figureout or anything.
I wonder how you all survived before the internet and instant gratification.
gungo wrote: So based on FAQs and points the winners in 9th are
Ad mech
Space marines in general
Custodes
Astra militarum
Possibly ~630 pt castellan if that price point sticks
There send to be a reoccurring common theme with these armies that I can’t quite figure out...
Necrons in general did pretty well. Immortals got hit above the minimum, likely because of the edition of MSU tesla spam, but didn't get hit hard enough to stop it.
Don't have CA2019, but a number of things are generally down from Codex/2018 costs. Lychguard and Destroyers look like bad hikes, until you realize their weapons went to 0.
That happened with some other xenos as well (I'm sure a few riptide owners started screaming before they looked at the next section, for example)
Eldar are the big exception (except clowns). They got roundly stomped.
Does anyone know the rough points tally for the Space Marine half of this box set?
Looking around today I got the Necron half to about 990 points (no idea about wargear options).
gungo wrote: So based on FAQs and points the winners in 9th are
Ad mech
Space marines in general
Custodes
Astra militarum and scions
Possibly ~630 pt castellan if that price point sticks
There seems to be a reoccurring common theme with these armies that I can’t quite figure out...
Don't forget Death Guard. I built ~1800 pt lists to port over to 9th when points dropped for my armies and when I ran the lists the new points, Death Guard came out 150 pts. UNDER 2k, It was the only army to do that. My other armies came out either right on 2K or over. Poor Tyranids.
Leth wrote: Wow, so I assume all the people freaking out because GW didn’t have a response 10 seconds after the pre-order sold out are going to own it and eat crow?
Nah, that would require taking personal responsibility for freaking out that a company did not have an immediate response over the weekend, not like something would take coordination between multiple departments to figureout or anything. Same with the stormshields and everything else.
I wonder how you all survived before the internet and instant gratification.
GW did that because people pointed out the problematic character of such business practice. Your comment is dumb : all this affair prove that the player base is right into not accepting those kind of business practices.
Elevenses wrote: Does anyone know the rough points tally for the Space Marine half of this box set?
Looking around today I got the Necron half to about 990 points (no idea about wargear options).
1035 pts and 1085 for the necron or something like that.
If GW made an announcement that, "Wow we're so shocked by the success of Indomitus!" and then said they'll have a two week window where any and all orders for the box will be honoured, albeit coming months later due to needing to be produced, I would not be surprised. This also has the benefit for them of positive PR spin "GW do listen to us guys!" and that in that time they'll probably sell a lot of rulebooks to those same people who want to get a game in NOW.
Leth wrote: Wow, so I assume all the people freaking out because GW didn’t have a response 10 seconds after the pre-order sold out are going to own it and eat crow?
Nah, that would require taking personal responsibility for freaking out that a company did not have an immediate response over the weekend, not like something would take coordination between multiple departments to figureout or anything.
I wonder how you all survived before the internet and instant gratification.
Hmm, good news. Can't get the customary online discount from retailers (big win for GW there).120 days to deliver though? Four months, that's not inconsiderable at all.
Leth wrote: Wow, so I assume all the people freaking out because GW didn’t have a response 10 seconds after the pre-order sold out are going to own it and eat crow?
Nah, that would require taking personal responsibility for freaking out that a company did not have an immediate response over the weekend, not like something would take coordination between multiple departments to figureout or anything. Same with the stormshields and everything else.
I wonder how you all survived before the internet and instant gratification.
If they do eat some crow you'll need binoculars to see it from all the way up there on your horse.
Leth wrote: Wow, so I assume all the people freaking out because GW didn’t have a response 10 seconds after the pre-order sold out are going to own it and eat crow?
Nah, that would require taking personal responsibility for freaking out that a company did not have an immediate response over the weekend, not like something would take coordination between multiple departments to figureout or anything.
I wonder how you all survived before the internet and instant gratification.
GW completely gak the bed with Indomitus, and now here you are ready to defend them to the death just because they went in damage control mode.
Good boy. Now fetch
lol, I didn’t defend them. I called out whiny people who flipped their tit because they couldn’t get their fix.
At least you can get your hit now addict. Don’t forget to tap your wrist twice before injecting.
I would trust you know enough about fixes the way you talk.
No you're right, you didn't defend them. You didn't even reach that high. You just came here trying to claim some sort of victory you did not achieve on behalf of GW and cause further unrest because of that. Textbook pathetic.
gungo wrote: So based on FAQs and points the winners in 9th are
Ad mech
Space marines in general
Custodes
Astra militarum
Possibly ~630 pt castellan if that price point sticks
There send to be a reoccurring common theme with these armies that I can’t quite figure out...
Necrons in general did pretty well. Immortals got hit above the minimum, likely because of the edition of MSU tesla spam, but didn't get hit hard enough to stop it.
Don't have CA2019, but a number of things are generally down from Codex/2018 costs. Lychguard and Destroyers look like bad hikes, until you realize their weapons went to 0.
That happened with some other xenos as well (I'm sure a few riptide owners started screaming before they looked at the next section, for example)
Eldar are the big exception (except clowns). They got roundly stomped.
I do wonder what tricks they saved up Thier sleeves for a necron codex. Considering necron data sheets for new Indomitus Models are in the box. We have all the points updates.
So???
New models?
New mechanics?
I think you are correct Necrons should come out relatively competitive.
My point was mainly imperial got much more competitive whereas xenos and chaos took major hits
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So how much more is Lias and Sternguard? I pray and hope it's still reasonable to run them together. Seeing as Intercessors are just 20 points, Sternguard should be a lot cheaper.
Lias Issodon (if that's who you mean) is Sir Not Appearing in this Book.
Uh what about the other FW guys with no model?
Not sure about 'no model' specifically, but Goonhammer mentioned these, there may be others they deemed 'not relevant'
Chaplain Dreadnoughts
Lias Issodon
Hellwrights
Sororitas Repressors
Death Rider Commissars
Do we know if Ashmantle (iirc) the Salamander Dread Character still has rules?
gungo wrote: So based on FAQs and points the winners in 9th are
Ad mech
Space marines in general
Custodes
Astra militarum and scions
Possibly ~630 pt castellan if that price point sticks
There seems to be a reoccurring common theme with these armies that I can’t quite figure out...
Don't forget Death Guard. I built ~1800 pt lists to port over to 9th when points dropped for my armies and when I ran the lists the new points, Death Guard came out 150 pts. UNDER 2k, It was the only army to do that. My other armies came out either right on 2K or over. Poor Tyranids.
While death guard and thousand sons and harlequins didn’t get kicked in the teeth. I’m not sure they can be as competitive in an edition that hinders soup.
I find it hard to tell where things stand since a lot of the points have been shifted around with wargear getting a lot cheaper. We will really need to see where the final unit totals stand in comparison, as well as what the mission packs look like.
my impression was that having disposable units that you didn’t care about their offensive output were going to be pretty valuable this edition. Combined with the reduced need to have a troop tax for multiple battalions I can see why they thought the points might need to go up for chaff. Don’t necessarily agree with it mind you.
This MTO is a good move(although I wont be partaking as I already ordered the rule book, and am not bothered about the Marines). Hopefully it does well and GW will use this for future sets.
Missed out on getting a copy of Indomitus this weekend? Don't worry, we've got you covered.
Due to unprecedented demand, Indomitus sold out online in minutes – but we don't want anyone to miss out, so today we’re going to make Indomitus available as a Made to Order item.
If you missed out and still want one, you can order it right now. These will be limited to one per customer order, and they will arrive some time after July 25th (we're not quite sure when right now – we'll make them as fast as we can!).
OK. This is very cool of them, and perfectly solves the issue. It also screws over the scalpers, so that is a plus. Good job GW!
That's a normal pre-order period : you make an order for a product during a limited time and they produce it. They finally came to reason.
Yeah, no. That's NOT how it works.
I worked for a video game retailer for several years, and worked several system releases in that time period. When a new console was coming out, we were told EXACTLY how many consoles we were getting for launch day at our particular store. The reason we had the limit? It's not because of an inability to gauge demand, but rather because of how long it takes to make and ship things. I know the analogy isn't quite perfect because I'm talking about a product designed to be one sale for the next 4-5 years, but there are some parallels.
GW can't take pre-orders for two weeks and then deliver all those orders on launch day because the production process and shipping process exist. It takes time to make all those boxes and then get them where the need to go. A lot more than two weeks. So, all they can do is make their best guess as to how many they think they'll sell, and get those ready for sale. In this case, they either severely underestimated demand, or overestimated the scalpers. In either case, they didn't make enough.
And they caught it and addressed it. Want one? Go order one. I have one on order at my FLGS, but I might order another for giggles because the savings on the marines is pretty good. And the fact that this screws the scalpers is just icing on the cake, because those guys are the scum of the Earth.
gungo wrote: So based on FAQs and points the winners in 9th are
Ad mech
Space marines in general
Custodes
Astra militarum and scions
Possibly ~630 pt castellan if that price point sticks
There seems to be a reoccurring common theme with these armies that I can’t quite figure out...
Thousand Sons made out pretty well. Min rubric marines basically didn't go up, because of the free staff. Scarabs went up, but they were getting pretty strong. Daemon engines are super happy. Tzaangors up just 1. Exalteds down 20.
Marines are also the faction that took most of the largest increases, so, I question the logic to determine winners.
Missed out on getting a copy of Indomitus this weekend? Don't worry, we've got you covered.
Due to unprecedented demand, Indomitus sold out online in minutes – but we don't want anyone to miss out, so today we’re going to make Indomitus available as a Made to Order item.
If you missed out and still want one, you can order it right now. These will be limited to one per customer order, and they will arrive some time after July 25th (we're not quite sure when right now – we'll make them as fast as we can!).
OK. This is very cool of them, and perfectly solves the issue. It also screws over the scalpers, so that is a plus. Good job GW!
That's a normal pre-order period : you make an order for a product during a limited time and they produce it. They finally came to reason.
Yeah, no. That's NOT how it works.
I worked for a video game retailer for several years, and worked several system releases in that time period. When a new console was coming out, we were told EXACTLY how many consoles we were getting for launch day at our particular store. The reason we had the limit? It's not because of an inability to gauge demand, but rather because of how long it takes to make and ship things. I know the analogy isn't quite perfect because I'm talking about a product designed to be one sale for the next 4-5 years, but there are some parallels.
GW can't take pre-orders for two weeks and then deliver all those orders on launch day because the production process and shipping process exist. It takes time to make all those boxes and then get them where the need to go. A lot more than two weeks. So, all they can do is make their best guess as to how many they think they'll sell, and get those ready for sale. In this case, they either severely underestimated demand, or overestimated the scalpers. In either case, they didn't make enough.
And they caught it and addressed it. Want one? Go order one. I have one on order at my FLGS, but I might order another for giggles because the savings on the marines is pretty good. And the fact that this screws the scalpers is just icing on the cake, because those guys are the scum of the Earth.
The comparaison between console and the indomitus boxset doesn't add up and you know it because you write it in your own comment.
"GW can't take pre-orders for two weeks and then deliver all those orders on launch day because the production process and shipping process exist" YES That's not a real "pre-order" because it is too short. It's a limited time during which you can fight with your peer for the limited quantity that they produce. We can call that a gang-buy if you will. It's made to fuel the hype and facilitate distribution.
Finally, they adressed it because people whined, just like they did by producing a second wave of SoB box when people whined back then. People who dislike when the customesr express their frustration somehow seems to believe that the relationship between a firm and its customer is a cult following or what ? Throw your money in and do not ask any kind of behavior in return ! There are many type of complaint that are, indeed, too harsh towards GW, but this was not it : the anger felt by all those people that could not get a box was a valid and legitimate response to a shaddy business practice.
This doesn't screw Scalpers as bad as many of you think it will.
If they don't get the money they want over time from overpricing the box now, they will just sit on it and break out the Units to sell individually later on.
The minis from Dark Imperium still sell for a total amount over the cost of the initial buy, to this very day on EBay.
Hell, the Halves of DI separately make more money than the whole box cost. Splitting out each unit get far more than that.
gungo wrote: So based on FAQs and points the winners in 9th are
Ad mech
Space marines in general
Custodes
Astra militarum and scions
Possibly ~630 pt castellan if that price point sticks
There seems to be a reoccurring common theme with these armies that I can’t quite figure out...
Thousand Sons made out pretty well. Min rubric marines basically didn't go up, because of the free staff. Scarabs went up, but they were getting pretty strong. Daemon engines are super happy. Tzaangors up just 1. Exalteds down 20.
Marines are also the faction that took most of the largest increases, so, I question the logic to determine winners.
How are scarabs strong?
Exalted are cheap indeed, but they suffer from the same problem: as long as they are out of combat they are just overpriced sorcerers, and we don't really want them in combat to begin with due to lack of gear and support. Guess the backfield babysitter sorcerer can swap to an exalted and buff nearby Defilers now. It's something.
Tzaangors are not "+1", they are +1 after CA so basically +2. 9ppm on tzaangors is not a very good deal. Not terrible but not good either.
You can disagree with the mods all you want, but it rarely ends well. When they tell you to stop personally attacking other people, you can't just say "nope, disagree, going to keep doing it." It doesn't work that way, as I suspect someone is about to find out.
There is a difference between someone complaining about GW - no matter how unfair their complaint might be - and responding to that by personally attacking them. People who can't grasp that difference shouldn't post here, there are plenty of other places on the internet to go if you want to attack other people on a personal level because they have opinions you disagree with.
yukishiro1 wrote: You can disagree with the mods all you want, but it rarely ends well. When they tell you to stop personally attacking other people, you can't just say "nope, disagree, going to keep doing it." It doesn't work that way, as I suspect someone is about to find out.
There is a difference between someone complaining about GW - no matter how unfair their complaint might be - and responding to that by personally attacking them. People who can't grasp that difference shouldn't post here, there are plenty of other places on the internet to go if you want to attack other people on a personal level because they have opinions you disagree with.
Pretty much this. Argue the points. Don't be so petty as to throw insults at others. These forums have rules, and it's a better environment for everyone if we can all follow them.
yukishiro1 wrote: You can disagree with the mods all you want, but it rarely ends well. When they tell you to stop personally attacking other people, you can't just say "nope, disagree, going to keep doing it." It doesn't work that way, as I suspect someone is about to find out.
There is a difference between someone complaining about GW - no matter how unfair their complaint might be - and responding to that by personally attacking them. People who can't grasp that difference shouldn't post here, there are plenty of other places on the internet to go if you want to attack other people on a personal level because they have opinions you disagree with.
jivardi wrote: At least my Callidus in my SoB army will still cleave through TH/SS terminators.
All this complaining about the 2++ save SS was, as I correctly cautioned, was unnecessary.
It feels good to be right.
I'm happy they managed to detect the problem before it came to be an actual issue in game. I hope they fix the core issue, though. That is, Ap as a modifier to the save characteristic, and not to the dice roll itself.
yukishiro1 wrote: You can disagree with the mods all you want, but it rarely ends well. When they tell you to stop personally attacking other people, you can't just say "nope, disagree, going to keep doing it." It doesn't work that way, as I suspect someone is about to find out.
There is a difference between someone complaining about GW - no matter how unfair their complaint might be - and responding to that by personally attacking them. People who can't grasp that difference shouldn't post here, there are plenty of other places on the internet to go if you want to attack other people on a personal level because they have opinions you disagree with.
Extremely rich coming from you chap....
I think you're making my point for me here re: inability to appreciate the line between disagreeing with someone's opinions and attacking them personally.
But I will not get into it any further than this, I don't want to make even more work for the mods to have to clean up later.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jivardi wrote: At least my Callidus in my SoB army will still cleave through TH/SS terminators.
All this complaining about the 2++ save SS was, as I correctly cautioned, was unnecessary.
It feels good to be right.
The "complaining" was necessary, as it is what prompted the FAQ change. They even said it themselves - they didn't realize what they had done until people pointed it out to them.
yukishiro1 wrote: You can disagree with the mods all you want, but it rarely ends well. When they tell you to stop personally attacking other people, you can't just say "nope, disagree, going to keep doing it." It doesn't work that way, as I suspect someone is about to find out.
There is a difference between someone complaining about GW - no matter how unfair their complaint might be - and responding to that by personally attacking them. People who can't grasp that difference shouldn't post here, there are plenty of other places on the internet to go if you want to attack other people on a personal level because they have opinions you disagree with.
Extremely rich coming from you chap....
I think you're making my point for me here re: inability to appreciate the line between disagreeing with someone's opinions and attacking them personally.
But I will not get into it any further than this, I don't want to make even more work for the mods to have to clean up later.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jivardi wrote: At least my Callidus in my SoB army will still cleave through TH/SS terminators.
All this complaining about the 2++ save SS was, as I correctly cautioned, was unnecessary.
It feels good to be right.
The "complaining" was necessary, as it is what prompted the FAQ change. They even said it themselves - they didn't realize what they had done until people pointed it out to them.
Either way it got changed. And some posters, rudely, pointed out to me that it exists elsewhere and that I couldn't possibly know what GW intended.
Then again I'm not a WAAC player and so I don't play strictly by RAW.
I was reading over the FAQ article just to see if there was a preview I missed, and they sign off with this:
With that, everything should be in line for the new edition!
Did I have stroke and imagine Psychic Awakening? Because I'm pretty sure there are 8 books with no FAQ whatsoever and 1 book with an outdated FAQ.
Are there _really_ no issues with those books? I don't own any myself, so can't say, but... really?
Ironically the Greater Good FAQ has been 9th edition edited.
No idea why they skipped alot of the others, yet we still have alot of ubsolved issues and rules that are now utterly redundant but that GWFAQ's for you.
gungo wrote: So based on FAQs and points the winners in 9th are
Ad mech
Space marines in general
Custodes
Astra militarum and scions
Possibly ~630 pt castellan if that price point sticks
There seems to be a reoccurring common theme with these armies that I can’t quite figure out...
Thousand Sons made out pretty well. Min rubric marines basically didn't go up, because of the free staff. Scarabs went up, but they were getting pretty strong. Daemon engines are super happy. Tzaangors up just 1. Exalteds down 20.
Marines are also the faction that took most of the largest increases, so, I question the logic to determine winners.
Marines didnt take the largest increases on the new super broken stuff in indomitous though those were confirmed at their rediculously under costed points.
Competitive lists especially primaris focused lists came out of this pretty will all in all.
yukishiro1 wrote: You can disagree with the mods all you want, but it rarely ends well. When they tell you to stop personally attacking other people, you can't just say "nope, disagree, going to keep doing it." It doesn't work that way, as I suspect someone is about to find out.
There is a difference between someone complaining about GW - no matter how unfair their complaint might be - and responding to that by personally attacking them. People who can't grasp that difference shouldn't post here, there are plenty of other places on the internet to go if you want to attack other people on a personal level because they have opinions you disagree with.
Pretty much this. Argue the points. Don't be so petty as to throw insults at others. These forums have rules, and it's a better environment for everyone if we can all follow them.
Cant argue a point if it has no foundation other than an immediate emotional reaction. There are certain arguements that it will be such a waste of time to argue against, because to reach that point requires a fundamental rejection of reality, and any attempt to argue the points would require that you acccept part of that unreality as truth.
At some point you have to accept that, as my grandfather used to say, “that *individual is craaaaazy” and react accordingly.
Once you resort to insulting and berating, you can't proclaim yourself as better than they are. Even if you believe you are correct.
Vaktathi wrote: Hey guys, lets tone it down, trying to settle scores or determine who "eats crow" isn't the topic of the thread. Take it to PM's or just let it be.
I disagree, they need to be told. This whole thread is an actual joke full of people that are genuinely vile in how they conduct themselves on this forum. If they aren't going to be banned, they can get the backlash for acting like burks from those on the forum that are sick of it.
You can't have it both ways, you can't let a load of the crap slide and then come down on the people that take issue with it.
Personally, I think the mods should be a little more liberal with the Banhammer - that might reduce some of the crap we see here all too frequently. Picking a fight with them directly, however, doesn't seem like a good idea.
Also noticed that taking Magnus as the Warlord now allows Thousand Sons to still use the new <Cult> Relics. Between that and only going up 20 points, Magnus came out of this okay.
There will be a Day-1 BRBFAQ for the multi-smite thing, they have told playtesters (e.g. Tabletop Titans) this is not intended and not to play with it.
The thing with GK and TS not getting infinite smites is almost certainly an oversight that will also be fixed, but I don't think they have clearly told anyone it is a mistake.
I was reading over the FAQ article just to see if there was a preview I missed, and they sign off with this:
With that, everything should be in line for the new edition!
Did I have stroke and imagine Psychic Awakening? Because I'm pretty sure there are 8 books with no FAQ whatsoever and 1 book with an outdated FAQ.
Are there _really_ no issues with those books? I don't own any myself, so can't say, but... really?
Ironically the Greater Good FAQ has been 9th edition edited.
No idea why they skipped alot of the others, yet we still have alot of ubsolved issues and rules that are now utterly redundant but that GWFAQ's for you.
Yeah, I just noticed four. Either I missed them before or they've since wandered in.
The organization is confusing, since it seems to be date, book type, then alphabetical, but with glaring exceptions (and starts with exceptions)
gungo wrote: So based on FAQs and points the winners in 9th are
Ad mech
Space marines in general
Custodes
Astra militarum and scions
Possibly ~630 pt castellan if that price point sticks
There seems to be a reoccurring common theme with these armies that I can’t quite figure out...
Based on what?
Goonhammer did some actual comparisons post point-adjustments, based on a median of how much army X's costs increased. It's a long read but quite interesting, and they came to the following conclusion:
The Big Winners: Adeptus Custodes
Thousand Sons
Imperial Knights
Harlequins
The Moderate Winners: Death Guard
Adepta Sororitas
Space Marines*
Grey Knights
Necrons
*With the adendum that Centurion spam lists are extreme Losers.
So-So: Chaos Knights
Craftworlds
Chaos Space Marines
Chaos Daemons
Dark Angels
Astra Militarum
Blood Angels
Adeptus Mechanicus
Deathwatch
Space Wolves
Tau
The Losers Orks
Drukhari
Tyranids
Genestealer Cults
yukishiro1 wrote: You can disagree with the mods all you want, but it rarely ends well. When they tell you to stop personally attacking other people, you can't just say "nope, disagree, going to keep doing it." It doesn't work that way, as I suspect someone is about to find out.
There is a difference between someone complaining about GW - no matter how unfair their complaint might be - and responding to that by personally attacking them. People who can't grasp that difference shouldn't post here, there are plenty of other places on the internet to go if you want to attack other people on a personal level because they have opinions you disagree with.
Extremely rich coming from you chap....
I think you're making my point for me here re: inability to appreciate the line between disagreeing with someone's opinions and attacking them personally.
But I will not get into it any further than this, I don't want to make even more work for the mods to have to clean up later.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jivardi wrote: At least my Callidus in my SoB army will still cleave through TH/SS terminators.
All this complaining about the 2++ save SS was, as I correctly cautioned, was unnecessary.
It feels good to be right.
The "complaining" was necessary, as it is what prompted the FAQ change. They even said it themselves - they didn't realize what they had done until people pointed it out to them.
They also claimed 1++ saves "wasn't intentional" despite the Crusade rules explicitly stating they exist.
At any rate, it is nice to see GW bow to pressure and ensure everyone that wants one can actually purchase a box. Imagine what we could accomplish by being as vocal about their rules and prices as a single box of minis..................
I will say that I am a huge fan of the amount of wargear that dropped to zero point, and instead had their cost baked into the unit that uses it. It's going to make list building so much easier.
yukishiro1 wrote: You can disagree with the mods all you want, but it rarely ends well. When they tell you to stop personally attacking other people, you can't just say "nope, disagree, going to keep doing it." It doesn't work that way, as I suspect someone is about to find out.
There is a difference between someone complaining about GW - no matter how unfair their complaint might be - and responding to that by personally attacking them. People who can't grasp that difference shouldn't post here, there are plenty of other places on the internet to go if you want to attack other people on a personal level because they have opinions you disagree with.
Extremely rich coming from you chap....
I think you're making my point for me here re: inability to appreciate the line between disagreeing with someone's opinions and attacking them personally.
But I will not get into it any further than this, I don't want to make even more work for the mods to have to clean up later.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jivardi wrote: At least my Callidus in my SoB army will still cleave through TH/SS terminators.
All this complaining about the 2++ save SS was, as I correctly cautioned, was unnecessary.
It feels good to be right.
The "complaining" was necessary, as it is what prompted the FAQ change. They even said it themselves - they didn't realize what they had done until people pointed it out to them.
They also claimed 1++ saves "wasn't intentional" despite the Crusade rules explicitly stating they exist.
At any rate, it is nice to see GW bow to pressure and ensure everyone that wants one can actually purchase a box. Imagine what we could accomplish by being as vocal about their rules and prices as a single box of minis..................
thats in narrative tho, i doubt narrative players will play with the whole lolololl 1+ save ignores armor silliness
Nice!
Looking at my army, there are some truly bizarre huge point increase.
Condemnor boltgun going 1pts->5pts ???
Hand flamer being the same 1pts->5pts, except on seraphim where it's 2pts, but the weapon doesn't even use the BS skill so why different point value on HQ???
I thought heavy bolters and heavy flamers and twin heavy bolters taking such a huge rise was weird, but then I noticed it's only on vehicles, not on infantry, so fine. I mean, heavy bolters are on our rhino chassis that went up a bit but not too much (the exorcist went 90->150 but if you take the main weapon into account it's actually 130->150 or 160 -> 180), heavy flamers are on the penitent engine-type stuff where the chassis even went down in cost! The big increase to twin heavy bolter is still a bit weird.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Apologist wrote: Thescotsman's all-grot army is a good example. It's not how ork armies appear in the fiction/background, so there's an in-game incentive against it.
sharkticon wrote: I will say that I am a huge fan of the amount of wargear that dropped to zero point, and instead had their cost baked into the unit that uses it. It's going to make list building so much easier.
There's just enough that isn't dropped to 0 to make that not quite simple.
And some of it just outright _weird_.
A gauss blaster or tesla carbine is 0
Two gauss blasters or tesla carbines (on Tomb blades) are... also 0
But twin guass blasters or twin tesla carbines... those are 15. Despite being functionally identical to two.
And noise marines and warp talons are just sad, since they got a base price increase and still have to pay for their weapons, and sonic blasters also went up.
sharkticon wrote: I will say that I am a huge fan of the amount of wargear that dropped to zero point, and instead had their cost baked into the unit that uses it. It's going to make list building so much easier.
There's just enough that isn't dropped to 0 to make that not quite simple.
And some of it just outright _weird_.
A gauss blaster or tesla carbine is 0
Two gauss blasters or tesla carbines (on Tomb blades) are... also 0
But twin guass blasters or twin tesla carbines... those are 15. Despite being functionally identical to two.
This isn't correct, but it's due to a mistake in GWs wording. There is no such thing as twin gauss blasters or twin tesla carbines - no unit has them, nor do they appear in the codex. So the points cost for Immortals guns is 0, and the points for the Tomb Blades having two of them is 15.
RAW, assuming it actually says twin and not two in chapter approved, Tomb Blades don't pay for their guns and are now one of the most overpowered units in the game. But that is so supremely clearly not the intention that no one would let you play it that way.
It wouldn't be a Gee-dubs release without tons of oversights and errors that lead to playing RAW being broken.
To give another example, Harlequins' flip belts are broken RAW - it says you can move "through" models with them, but doesn't say you can move within 1" of enemy models with them, so you actually can't move through enemy models even though it says you can. The FLY keyword specifically addresses this, but the flip-belt rule (shared with some other stuff too, Necron Wraiths I think) doesn't.
sharkticon wrote: I will say that I am a huge fan of the amount of wargear that dropped to zero point, and instead had their cost baked into the unit that uses it. It's going to make list building so much easier.
There's just enough that isn't dropped to 0 to make that not quite simple.
And some of it just outright _weird_.
A gauss blaster or tesla carbine is 0
Two gauss blasters or tesla carbines (on Tomb blades) are... also 0
But twin guass blasters or twin tesla carbines... those are 15. Despite being functionally identical to two.
This isn't correct, but it's due to a mistake in GWs wording. There is no such thing as twin gauss blasters or twin tesla carbines - no unit has them, nor do they appear in the codex. So the points cost for Immortals guns is 0, and the points for the Tomb Blades having two of them is 15.
RAW, assuming it actually says twin and not two in chapter approved, Tomb Blades don't pay for their guns and are now one of the most overpowered units in the game. But that is so supremely clearly not the intention that no one would let you play it that way.
I mean, the Taunar dropped 300pts for this exact reason. If GW don'r faq this stuff out of CA, there's quite a few instances of them forgetting to bake things in, or forgetting that they already baked stuff in.
Example, chaos knight castellan: 730pts. Imperial knight castellan: 620
WhiteDog wrote: What do you guys think about impulsor with the price hike ? I was thinking about buying one to carry and drop my hellblaster into the fray but I'm not so sure it's worth it anymore.
Whoa, it went up 25 points and the shield dome went up seven points! I know that as a Primaris player I shouldn't complain, but this particular price increase seems a tad excessive. Eh, I have one one my workbench, so I'll use it once it is completed, but I'm not in hurry to get more of them.
Still, on the scale of crazy things with these points this one barely registers.
Impulsors are one of the best units in the game in 9th for playing the mission. The points increase was totally justified, and they're still probably honestly too cheap for what they give you, unless the tournament mission pack is really different from the normal matched play missions.
Example, chaos knight castellan: 730pts. Imperial knight castellan: 620
Something, something, spike tax, right?
More like someone at GW decieded that adding up in not multiples of 5 was too hard, same reason a multilaser and stubber are both 5 points. And stubber and iron hail stubbers are both 5 points.
Wait, so if I’m looking at warp talons correctly, there point cost went up 89% from 9 to 17, then have to buy their lighting claws on top of that, making them 27 points per model? JC, that makes them more expensive than a terminator with combi-bolter. Don’ want to panic, but looks like my Night Lords are dead another edition, Host Raptorial was good while it lasted I suppose.
The Warp Talon thing is another obvious proofreading error. I am 100% sure this one was spotted and flagged by playtesters too, and again GW just didn't bother to fix it.
Playtesting was supposed to be different this time around. They were supposed to listen to their testers and actually fix stuff.
sharkticon wrote: I will say that I am a huge fan of the amount of wargear that dropped to zero point, and instead had their cost baked into the unit that uses it. It's going to make list building so much easier.
There's just enough that isn't dropped to 0 to make that not quite simple.
And some of it just outright _weird_.
A gauss blaster or tesla carbine is 0
Two gauss blasters or tesla carbines (on Tomb blades) are... also 0
But twin guass blasters or twin tesla carbines... those are 15. Despite being functionally identical to two.
This isn't correct, but it's due to a mistake in GWs wording. There is no such thing as twin gauss blasters or twin tesla carbines - no unit has them, nor do they appear in the codex. So the points cost for Immortals guns is 0, and the points for the Tomb Blades having two of them is 15.
RAW, assuming it actually says twin and not two in chapter approved, Tomb Blades don't pay for their guns and are now one of the most overpowered units in the game. But that is so supremely clearly not the intention that no one would let you play it that way.
Hmm. The wording may just be the summary. And you're right, it would make tomb blades cheaper than immortals.
But there's something really wrong with pricing one at 0 and two at <arbitrary value>, especially for something that's carried by a troop choice, as you can have 0 to 60 of them in a list with no problem.
Previously weapons were at zero when they were functionally unique (or nearly so) to a specific model, and the model bore the cost. Everything else had weapons priced as appropriate (or best approximation to appropriate). Now its even more a weird, awkward hybrid of both.
It was still so much easier when points were in the unit entry rather than flipping around in the book.
Bare in mind these books probably went to print a while ago. We got our army FAQs today, there will be a Chapter Approved FAQ on launch that fixes some/all of these things we're spotting now.
Vanican wrote: Wait, so if I’m looking at warp talons correctly, there point cost went up 89% from 9 to 17, then have to buy their lighting claws on top of that, making them 27 points per model? JC, that makes them more expensive than a terminator with combi-bolter. Don’ want to panic, but looks like my Night Lords are dead another edition, Host Raptorial was good while it lasted I suppose.
Yeah, warp talons and noise marines got smacked twice. They're both way outside the bounds, so presumably it is a mistake.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: You've been almost bluntly told by GW that you shouldn't use skew lists and the game is designed for more balanced lists across the board for years, decades even.
Don't get salty now they have actually pushed to ensure that.
If grots were designed to be a full army, they'd have their own codex.
Time to suck it up and stop whinging and start playing the game in the way its intended, the time of unfluffy spam and skew is over.
You want ultra competitive specificity? Go play sports guys, this isn't that.
Except for the fact that Orc horde of bodies is fluffy but the only way to win with them is to park them on objectives, and never ever move forward to engage the enemy. "much fluff. much fun", do you ever get tired of being a white knight or does it actually energize you? Edit: in an effort to be at least somewhat constructive: points should be used for balancing units and nothing else. If you want people to build fluffy armies write rules that encourage that, not just put a stupid price point on units you don't want them to take. At that point you might as well remove the option to take them completely.
IanVanCheese wrote: Bare in mind these books probably went to print a while ago. We got our army FAQs today, there will be a Chapter Approved FAQ on launch that fixes some/all of these things we're spotting now.
Hopefully.
It's a nice theory. I hope you're right. Though very much at odds with the fact that the later PA books still don't have FAQs, in many cases months and months after the fact.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: You've been almost bluntly told by GW that you shouldn't use skew lists and the game is designed for more balanced lists across the board for years, decades even.
Don't get salty now they have actually pushed to ensure that.
If grots were designed to be a full army, they'd have their own codex.
Time to suck it up and stop whinging and start playing the game in the way its intended, the time of unfluffy spam and skew is over.
You want ultra competitive specificity? Go play sports guys, this isn't that.
Except for the fact that Orc horde of bodies is fluffy but the only way to win with them is to park them on objectives, and never ever move forward to engage the enemy. "much fluff. much fun", do you ever get tired of being a white knight or does it actually energize you?
Edit: in an effort to be at least somewhat constructive: points should be used for balancing units and nothing else. If you want people to build fluffy armies write rules that encourage that, not just put a stupid price point on units you don't want them to take. At that point you might as well remove the option to take them completely.
And what about players who did want to use those options in a fluffy way, are they to just eat it and pay points for a strictly sub-par unit? It is an overt penalization to fluffy players, not supporting them.
yukishiro1 wrote: It's a nice theory. I hope you're right. Though very much at odds with the fact that the later PA books still don't have FAQs, in many cases months and months after the fact.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: You've been almost bluntly told by GW that you shouldn't use skew lists and the game is designed for more balanced lists across the board for years, decades even.
Don't get salty now they have actually pushed to ensure that.
If grots were designed to be a full army, they'd have their own codex.
Time to suck it up and stop whinging and start playing the game in the way its intended, the time of unfluffy spam and skew is over.
You want ultra competitive specificity? Go play sports guys, this isn't that.
Except for the fact that Orc horde of bodies is fluffy but the only way to win with them is to park them on objectives, and never ever move forward to engage the enemy. "much fluff. much fun", do you ever get tired of being a white knight or does it actually energize you? Edit: in an effort to be at least somewhat constructive: points should be used for balancing units and nothing else. If you want people to build fluffy armies write rules that encourage that, not just put a stupid price point on units you don't want them to take. At that point you might as well remove the option to take them completely.
And what about players who did want to use those options in a fluffy way, are they to just eat it and pay points for a strictly sub-par unit? It is an overt penalization to fluffy players, not supporting them.
You seem to misunderstand me, I have nothing against fluffy being a viable way to play the game, I'm against enforcing "fluffy" lists not by making them good to play but just by nerfing the unfluffy units into being unusable, see grots and CSM vs Cultist. Playing a "fluffy" greentide will still not play anything like it should but all we accomplished is kneecapping non-fluffy players too for no reason.
yukishiro1 wrote: It's a nice theory. I hope you're right. Though very much at odds with the fact that the later PA books still don't have FAQs, in many cases months and months after the fact.
But they were written with 9th in mind!!!!!!!!!!1
Even though they very clearly weren't.
Some obviously were, or else why do the Archaeopter datasheets have the AIRCRAFT keyword that didn't exist in 8th but does in 9th . They were just written with backwards compatibility for use in 8th and now need that removed via the FAQs.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: You've been almost bluntly told by GW that you shouldn't use skew lists and the game is designed for more balanced lists across the board for years, decades even.
Don't get salty now they have actually pushed to ensure that.
If grots were designed to be a full army, they'd have their own codex.
Time to suck it up and stop whinging and start playing the game in the way its intended, the time of unfluffy spam and skew is over.
You want ultra competitive specificity? Go play sports guys, this isn't that.
Except for the fact that Orc horde of bodies is fluffy but the only way to win with them is to park them on objectives, and never ever move forward to engage the enemy. "much fluff. much fun", do you ever get tired of being a white knight or does it actually energize you?
Edit: in an effort to be at least somewhat constructive: points should be used for balancing units and nothing else. If you want people to build fluffy armies write rules that encourage that, not just put a stupid price point on units you don't want them to take. At that point you might as well remove the option to take them completely.
And what about players who did want to use those options in a fluffy way, are they to just eat it and pay points for a strictly sub-par unit? It is an overt penalization to fluffy players, not supporting them.
You seem to misunderstand me, I have nothing against fluffy being a viable way to play the game, I'm against enforcing "fluffy" lists not by making them good to play but just by nerfing the unfluffy units into being unusable, see grots and CSM vs Cultist. Playing a "fluffy" greentide will still not play anything like it should but all we accomplished is kneecapping non-fluffy players too for no reason.
I am agreeing with you. Should have been more clear, apologies.
yukishiro1 wrote: It's a nice theory. I hope you're right. Though very much at odds with the fact that the later PA books still don't have FAQs, in many cases months and months after the fact.
But they were written with 9th in mind!!!!!!!!!!1
Even though they very clearly weren't.
I am surprised you of all people would overestimate GW's capabilities so much. When they write rules for a current edition it usually needs a bunch of FAQs, we have no reason to expect rules written for a future edition would not be the same.
Now that I’m hearing hot-Shot lasguns are 0 points across the board, are people going to switch their cheap Inquisitor’s and maybe acolytes to hot-Shots instead of boltguns?
You will never see an acolyte in a competitive list since the "you can include them in other imperium detachments!" PR turned out to be typical GW false advertising, so I really don't think it matters.
yukishiro1 wrote: You will never see an acolyte in a competitive list since the "you can include them in other imperium detachments!" PR turned out to be typical GW false advertising, so I really don't think it matters.
What about Inquisitors being thrown in for the cheap psychic? Think the mighty Boltgun might be rethought?
yukishiro1 wrote: The Warp Talon thing is another obvious proofreading error. I am 100% sure this one was spotted and flagged by playtesters too, and again GW just didn't bother to fix it.
Playtesting was supposed to be different this time around. They were supposed to listen to their testers and actually fix stuff.
So much for all that, apparently.
I fear that there seems to be a FLY / mobility tax.
yukishiro1 wrote: The Warp Talon thing is another obvious proofreading error. I am 100% sure this one was spotted and flagged by playtesters too, and again GW just didn't bother to fix it.
Playtesting was supposed to be different this time around. They were supposed to listen to their testers and actually fix stuff.
So much for all that, apparently.
I fear that there seems to be a FLY / mobility tax.
Warp talons still have to pay for their lightning claws. It seems a specific problem.
Hellions are 15
Warp spiders seem to be 18
Swooping Hawks are 16
Necron praetorians are 23 (but like everything above, weapons are 0)
I'm not seeing a fly/mobility tax, or at least not much of one. In the Index (yeah, yeah, but its what I've got at hand) Hellions were 17, warpspiders 14+8, Swooping Hawks 10+7, and Praetorians were dropped to 16+10 in CA2018.
I don't doubt prices shifted by CA2019, but with a 'general point increase' they don't seem significantly higher.
yukishiro1 wrote: The Warp Talon thing is another obvious proofreading error. I am 100% sure this one was spotted and flagged by playtesters too, and again GW just didn't bother to fix it.
Playtesting was supposed to be different this time around. They were supposed to listen to their testers and actually fix stuff.
So much for all that, apparently.
I fear that there seems to be a FLY / mobility tax.
Raptors went up 3 ppm, warp talons 8 ppm. They both have the same mobility, and warp talons overwatch nullification ability is now less useful. If the new warp talons price isn't a mistake then whoever decided on these points is very confused.
Of course judging by some of the other changes I think that's a given. Raising points on the Stompa? Really?
yukishiro1 wrote: The Warp Talon thing is another obvious proofreading error. I am 100% sure this one was spotted and flagged by playtesters too, and again GW just didn't bother to fix it.
Playtesting was supposed to be different this time around. They were supposed to listen to their testers and actually fix stuff.
So much for all that, apparently.
I fear that there seems to be a FLY / mobility tax.
Raptors went up 3 ppm, warp talons 8 ppm. They both have the same mobility, and warp talons overwatch nullification ability is now less useful. If the new warp talons price isn't a mistake then whoever decided on these points is very confused.
Of course judging by some of the other changes I think that's a given. Raising points on the Stompa? Really?
Ah, I didn't see the Raptors. In that context yea - messed up. It does seem like they expected to fold LC into the cost, but forgot they couldn't.
I dunno, if you plonk it within 3" of a Warboss or Big Mek, you basically make those characters invulnerable to shooting! Surely it'd be too good to need masses of anti-infantry and anti-vehicle fire to kill those characters. How could an elite army like Space Marines deal with such a tactic?
Wait, what do you mean Marines have the most ways of ignoring Look Out, Sir and are just a better army in general?
Matt.Kingsley wrote: I dunno, if you plonk it within 3" of a Warboss or Big Mek, you basically make those characters invulnerable to shooting! Surely it'd be too good to need masses of anti-infantry and anti-vehicle fire to kill those characters. How could an elite army like Space Marines deal with such a tactic?
Wait, what do you mean Marines have the most ways of ignoring Look Out, Sir and are just a better army in general?
Matt.Kingsley wrote: I dunno, if you plonk it within 3" of a Warboss or Big Mek, you basically make those characters invulnerable to shooting! Surely it'd be too good to need masses of anti-infantry and anti-vehicle fire to kill those characters. How could an elite army like Space Marines deal with such a tactic?
Wait, what do you mean Marines have the most ways of ignoring Look Out, Sir and are just a better army in general?
Snipers are a thing...
Yes... that was the joke. Hence the final sentence.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: I dunno, if you plonk it within 3" of a Warboss or Big Mek, you basically make those characters invulnerable to shooting! Surely it'd be too good to need masses of anti-infantry and anti-vehicle fire to kill those characters. How could an elite army like Space Marines deal with such a tactic?
Wait, what do you mean Marines have the most ways of ignoring Look Out, Sir and are just a better army in general?
Snipers are a thing...
Yes... that was the joke. Hence the final sentence.
Marines aren't the only ones with snipers. Deathmarks, Eldar, Guard and GSC all have them. I don't think Chaos does, sadly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: Well, at least the mek workshop finally has a reason to exist - it provides cover!
Matt.Kingsley wrote: I dunno, if you plonk it within 3" of a Warboss or Big Mek, you basically make those characters invulnerable to shooting! Surely it'd be too good to need masses of anti-infantry and anti-vehicle fire to kill those characters. How could an elite army like Space Marines deal with such a tactic?
Wait, what do you mean Marines have the most ways of ignoring Look Out, Sir and are just a better army in general?
Snipers are a thing...
Yes... that was the joke. Hence the final sentence.
Marines aren't the only ones with snipers. Deathmarks, Eldar, Guard and GSC all have them. I don't think Chaos does, sadly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: Well, at least the mek workshop finally has a reason to exist - it provides cover!
Doesn't it also enhance ork vehicles?
I guess technically Deathmarks are snipers... with their strength 4, AP- guns...
Jidmah wrote: Well, at least the mek workshop finally has a reason to exist - it provides cover!
Doesn't it also enhance ork vehicles?
Not using the mek shop to upgrade your vehicles is always superior to using it. There aren't even any corner cases where it would be good in theory. It's literally the only ork unit worse than a stompa.
Jidmah wrote: Well, at least the mek workshop finally has a reason to exist - it provides cover!
Doesn't it also enhance ork vehicles?
Not using the mek shop to upgrade your vehicles is always superior to using it. There aren't even any corner cases where it would be good in theory. It's literally the only ork unit worse than a stompa.
Yeah, the options are:
• Give up a turn of moving and shooting to gain a turn of moving almost as far as if you hadn’t stopped
• Give up a turn of moving and shooting to heal D3 and a ⅙ chance of gaining a point of Toughness
• Give up a turn of moving and shooting to gain a turn where one of your random-shot weapons fires almost as much as just shooting twice, plus a ⅙ chance of the gun gaining a point of damage.
With Saga of the Beast you can leverage it to get extra vehicle relics but that’s a really poor substitute for actually fixing the base unit.
Gotta love the faction terrain, most of it sucks, but considering the new and improved Primaris Whirlwind bolter brick thingy is also coming out i would laugh if it indeed would be bad.
Sunny Side Up wrote: Nurgle Tree is still money if you build a list to abuse it.
ha forgot the tree and gardener combo aye but most sucks, heck the only somewhat decent use i got out of the notilith was in combination with a cultist list to abuse W1 models with invuls durability in specific cases, and even that you could achieve easier with a DA with the invul prayer and cult leader trait..
Fall back and shoot and advance/charge is pretty nice and arguably more important on smaller tables. Plus the tree detachment is free, if your warlord is nurgle (e.g. Death Guard, if you're using it for fall-back-and-shoot PBCs or some such).
Also, it's a Daemon Detachment and gives you the strat to make enemy psykers double-peril even if you have no other actual Chaos Daemons in your Death Guard list or so.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: I dunno, if you plonk it within 3" of a Warboss or Big Mek, you basically make those characters invulnerable to shooting! Surely it'd be too good to need masses of anti-infantry and anti-vehicle fire to kill those characters. How could an elite army like Space Marines deal with such a tactic?
Wait, what do you mean Marines have the most ways of ignoring Look Out, Sir and are just a better army in general?
It's actually worse at that role than Ghaz since as long as Ghaz has 5+ wounds at the start of shooting phase you CANNOT kill it and ergo can't target characters). Stompa is not that hard to one shot in phase.
Jidmah wrote: Well, at least the mek workshop finally has a reason to exist - it provides cover!
Doesn't it also enhance ork vehicles?
Well you do get kustom jobs if you want to spend points instead of CP.
For the in game "upgrade"...Lets just say you will get mek workshop for FREE if you promise to use that ability for gorkanaut/morkanaut(or more expensive vehicle if you have). I might even pay it out of MY army(that cover and kustom job is only thing keeping me from it...). That's how bad junk it is.
If you want to have workshop that doesn't provide kustom job and cover(aka what it was in codex) I will happily pay it out of my own army points with above statement. Ie you have to use it to "upgrade" your vehicles
Well it's at least better than knight one that doesn't have kustom job thing...So you pay for bunch of cover. The "upgrade" ability is just as junk. Worse actually as it's for more expensive models. And "upgrade" got nerfed in the sense if you shoot at hordes you get that effect anyway.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not Online!!! wrote: Gotta love the faction terrain, most of it sucks, but considering the new and improved Primaris Whirlwind bolter brick thingy is also coming out i would laugh if it indeed would be bad.
Sisters of battle is pretty good. Considering getting 2nd and maybe even 3rd eventually.
General Kroll wrote: Having my first game of ninth today, just a small combat patrol using PL.
Good luck, I highly recommend writing up a cheat sheet of the big rules changes to help you stay on top of things. It feels like 8th ed, but with lots of little changes that are easy to miss.
I also recommend printing out the terrain rules and secondary objectives for quick access.
Those are the ones I need to reference most in my 9th edition games.
I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Aaaaaaand now I’m imaging a Titan roundhouse kicking a building.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Aaaaaaand now I’m imaging a Titan roundhouse kicking a building.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Aaaaaaand now I’m imaging a Titan roundhouse kicking a building.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Well we knew from initial announcement that would happen one way or another.
Stompa can do it for like 15"...too bad so junk irrelevant
General Kroll wrote: Having my first game of ninth today, just a small combat patrol using PL.
Good luck, I highly recommend writing up a cheat sheet of the big rules changes to help you stay on top of things. It feels like 8th ed, but with lots of little changes that are easy to miss.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Don't models with bases measure the 5" from the base? So it's only unbased models that get to jump at buildings.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Don't models with bases measure the 5" from the base? So it's only unbased models that get to jump at buildings.
IIRCGW standard ruins have the first floor at 3" and the second floor at 6". So a based model can easily swing at models on the ground and first floor, but not the second floor. So the weird choice of 5" kind of makes sense.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Don't models with bases measure the 5" from the base? So it's only unbased models that get to jump at buildings.
IIRCGW standard ruins have the first floor at 3" and the second floor at 6". So a based model can easily swing at models on the ground and first floor, but not the second floor. So the weird choice of 5" kind of makes sense.
I also had forgotten that there may be some confusion on what the second floor is between the US/UK sections of the community.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Don't models with bases measure the 5" from the base? So it's only unbased models that get to jump at buildings.
IIRCGW standard ruins have the first floor at 3" and the second floor at 6". So a based model can easily swing at models on the ground and first floor, but not the second floor. So the weird choice of 5" kind of makes sense.
Yeah, random note: In ‘Merica the ground floor is also the first floor.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I didn't realize that ground floor and first floor weren't the same to Brits. My apologies. You learn something new everyday.
not just the bits.
In the german language region aswell.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Don't models with bases measure the 5" from the base? So it's only unbased models that get to jump at buildings.
Yeah. And GW ruins are 3"(old) and 5"(new) so stuff on 2nd floor are at best 5" from you. Ergo can strike there.
Bonebreaka's are fun. They are no base and are tall(they even have turret option for extra height with periscope. Straight in assembly guide!) so easily cover even taller than usual buildings. Drive it backside into ruin so the turret is closest to ruin and the deathroll(on front...) splats stuff quite high
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Don't models with bases measure the 5" from the base? So it's only unbased models that get to jump at buildings.
IIRCGW standard ruins have the first floor at 3" and the second floor at 6". So a based model can easily swing at models on the ground and first floor, but not the second floor. So the weird choice of 5" kind of makes sense.
Yeah, random note: In ‘Merica the ground floor is also the first floor.
Yeah there seems to be no real standardisation either. I've also seen in the UK/Ireland-sphere some buildings that are zero-indexed, with 0 being street level.
Good call on the Sector Imperialis terrain. I wonder how close to 5" it is.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I didn't realize that ground floor and first floor weren't the same to Brits. My apologies. You learn something new everyday.
Serious question as it's been a while since i was in the states do your lifts go
5
4
3
2
1
Basement or what?
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I didn't realize that ground floor and first floor weren't the same to Brits. My apologies. You learn something new everyday.
Serious question as it's been a while since i was in the states do your lifts go
5
4
3
2
1
Basement or what?
Our's go
4
3
2
1
Ground
Basement
As far as I know, US buildings are one-indexed, so street level is 1, the one above is 2, the one below is B-1. Whereas in the UK they are (technically, I suppose) Zero-indexed, where street level is 0 or Ground, the one above is 1, the one below is B-1 or just -1.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I didn't realize that ground floor and first floor weren't the same to Brits. My apologies. You learn something new everyday.
Serious question as it's been a while since i was in the states do your lifts go
5
4
3
2
1
Basement or what?
Our's go
4
3
2
1
Ground
Basement
As far as I know, US buildings are one-indexed, so street level is 1, the one above is 2, the one below is B-1. Whereas in the UK they are (technically, I suppose) Zero-indexed, where street level is 0 or Ground, the one above is 1, the one below is B-1 or just -1.
You don’t typically see the basement levels get numbered unless there is more than one.
G and 1 are often just interchangeable. Some places might have a G, others a 1.
Occasionally you’ll get buildings built into hills, where the ground floor isn’t the same floor in all parts of the building, but their numbers won’t change.
H.B.M.C. wrote: It's 5" now because each level on the Sector Imperialis/Mechanicus terrain is 5". It used to be 3" per level with the old Cities of Death stuff.
It works fine in-game though, as those 5" won't reach the (non-american) second floor. In general ruins feel "good" when playing, not like some abstract gamey thing is a necessary evil that was created to reduce shooting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote: Bonebreaka's are fun. They are no base and are tall(they even have turret option for extra height with periscope. Straight in assembly guide!) so easily cover even taller than usual buildings. Drive it backside into ruin so the turret is closest to ruin and the deathroll(on front...) splats stuff quite high
Bonus: Buy two big shootas, pick the ork gunners in the rear, poke the gun barrel through a window and measure from there.
Since you are now officially allowed to turn turrets while moving, you can do the same by turning the killkannon (regular kannon isn't long enough) to gain extra range on your deff rolla.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I didn't realize that ground floor and first floor weren't the same to Brits. My apologies. You learn something new everyday.
Serious question as it's been a while since i was in the states do your lifts go
5
4
3
2
1
Basement or what?
Our's go
4
3
2
1
Ground
Basement
As far as I know, US buildings are one-indexed, so street level is 1, the one above is 2, the one below is B-1. Whereas in the UK they are (technically, I suppose) Zero-indexed, where street level is 0 or Ground, the one above is 1, the one below is B-1 or just -1.
You don’t typically see the basement levels get numbered unless there is more than one.
G and 1 are often just interchangeable. Some places might have a G, others a 1.
Occasionally you’ll get buildings built into hills, where the ground floor isn’t the same floor in all parts of the building, but their numbers won’t change.
My experience is in the US (and many other counties) the street level is 1, or a letter, and other numbers assume the street level is 1 , so going up one level would be 2 whatever the street level is named: 1, G (ground) or L(lobby) are most common. LG (lower ground) is often used when a building is built on a slope for the "other" ground floor. Basement levels are usually named B if there is only one and numbered if there are more than one basement level (B-1, B-2 etc or -1, -2 etc)
In the UK and many Commonwealth countries the numbers have the street level numbered zero so going up one level is the first floor. All the other naming conventions seem to apply eqyually, just with the numbers one step out for above ground levels.
TLDR a duplex in the UK has two floors: 0 and 1. The same building in the US would name those two floors 1 and 2.
And buy one at the checkout, regardless of what you are actually purchasing!
Atleast it still has rules.
yeah and what RULES!!! its the only vehicle i know that has FOUR brackets and starts getting worse after 9 wounds have been plinged off... despite him having a total of 40 wounds
yeah totally worth 250 more points than a castellan
but yes, the award for most usless unit in the entire game goes to the mek workshop as for just 85 points, it makes your units worse!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: In Germany, ground floors are usually indicated with an E for Erdgeschoss = Ground Floor.
And buy one at the checkout, regardless of what you are actually purchasing!
Atleast it still has rules.
yeah and what RULES!!! its the only vehicle i know that has FOUR brackets and starts getting worse after 9 wounds have been plinged off... despite him having a total of 40 wounds
yeah totally worth 250 more points than a castellan
but yes, the award for most usless unit in the entire game goes to the mek workshop as for just 85 points, it makes your units worse!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: In Germany, ground floors are usually indicated with an E for Erdgeschoss = Ground Floor.
C'mon... its EG
Well, yeah, and as orkz were my first army, i feel for the boyz wanting to field the big bad stompa to stomp some marines, but atleast the thing can still improve... (when gw decides to wake up the drunk intern up that writes these rules)
Meanwhile we just have gotten 2 new squatted armies.
Also yes, EG, if there is just E even my swiss german german would be wierded out.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I didn't realize that ground floor and first floor weren't the same to Brits. My apologies. You learn something new everyday.
Serious question as it's been a while since i was in the states do your lifts go
5
4
3
2
1
Basement or what?
Our's go
4
3
2
1
Ground
Basement
As far as I know, US buildings are one-indexed, so street level is 1, the one above is 2, the one below is B-1. Whereas in the UK they are (technically, I suppose) Zero-indexed, where street level is 0 or Ground, the one above is 1, the one below is B-1 or just -1.
We also refer to the first floor as the ground floor. Anything below that is considered a basement floor.
Not Online!!! wrote: Also yes, EG, if there is just E even my swiss german german would be wierded out.
I have seen both here. E or EG (same for U and UG) but also 0. Mostly in shopping malls when there is more than one basement level. In that case the numbers for the basements simply become negative.
Is it possible that this floor-counting-thingy is a wholly european topic? We now have confirmed that UK, Germany and Switzerland do it the same way (and i bet Austria also). Would be strange to see some nations of the European Union get lost in the elevators of the European Parliament in Brussels
ERJAK wrote: We also refer to the first floor as the ground floor. Anything below that is considered a basement floor.
Yeah, the "first floor" could be labels as 1, G (for ground floor) or sometimes as L (for Lobby, as in some hotels) or even just marker with an asterisk or a star plus a letter or number, showing that is where the reception or lobby is.
Not Online!!! wrote: Also yes, EG, if there is just E even my swiss german german would be wierded out.
I have seen both here. E or EG (same for U and UG) but also 0. Mostly in shopping malls when there is more than one basement level. In that case the numbers for the basements simply become negative.
Meanwhile on Dakka, the lowest level of a thread is marked instead by several pages of posts about 2++ invulns.
Not Online!!! wrote: Also yes, EG, if there is just E even my swiss german german would be wierded out.
I have seen both here. E or EG (same for U and UG) but also 0. Mostly in shopping malls when there is more than one basement level. In that case the numbers for the basements simply become negative.
Meanwhile on Dakka, the lowest level of a thread is marked instead by several pages of posts about 2++ invulns.
Not Online!!! wrote: Also yes, EG, if there is just E even my swiss german german would be wierded out.
I have seen both here. E or EG (same for U and UG) but also 0. Mostly in shopping malls when there is more than one basement level. In that case the numbers for the basements simply become negative.
Meanwhile on Dakka, the lowest level of a thread is marked instead by several pages of posts about 2++ invulns.
Not Online!!! wrote: Also yes, EG, if there is just E even my swiss german german would be wierded out.
I have seen both here. E or EG (same for U and UG) but also 0. Mostly in shopping malls when there is more than one basement level. In that case the numbers for the basements simply become negative.
Meanwhile on Dakka, the lowest level of a thread is marked instead by several pages of posts about 2++ invulns.
I thought the lowest level was pages of nothing but complaining what Marines do/don’t get in every single thread
Can't y'all stop talking about elevators and start attacking one another for liking or not liking GW products? I started to think I was somewhere else for a minute!
yukishiro1 wrote: Can't y'all stop talking about elevators and start attacking one another for liking or not liking GW products? I started to think I was somewhere else for a minute!
What's there to attack other people for, heck the lower pts bracket is veryfiably memeworthy now, to the point even dakka unified...
Others are depressed because their armies got wholesale squatted.
yukishiro1 wrote: Can't y'all stop talking about elevators and start attacking one another for liking or not liking GW products? I started to think I was somewhere else for a minute!
What's there to attack other people for, heck the lower pts bracket is veryfiably memeworthy now, to the point even dakka unified...
Spoiler:
Others are depressed because their armies got wholesale squatted.
And others wonder why a stompa is going UP.
and that is saying something
still you get the odd: "marines are ok because something...something... internal balance" or the extra elitist one: "now that we have the rules, the points and the FAQs we still cant conclude anything because we need more games to confirm stuff"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ice_can wrote: It's very clear why the Stompa had to go up in Points.
GW was obviously enjoying the #prayforstompa
They couldn't risk it accidentally becoming playable
Heck i dont even want them to balance the stupid thing... i just dont wanna auto-loose because i took a stompa
Hey, GW were gracious enough to keep the stompa at 905/915 points. That means you can legally put it into your reinforcements since it's less than half your army -and- it'll only cost you 5CP to do so!
PiñaColada wrote: Hey, GW were gracious enough to keep the stompa at 905/915 points. That means you can legally put it into your reinforcements since it's less than half your army -and- it'll only cost you 5CP to do so!
Meanwhile the imperial castellan is at 630pts laughing at the stompa....
I don’t want to sound crazy it’s almost like GW has this inherent imperial bias...
Like somehow
Marines
Custodes
Astra militarum
Ad mech
Heck to a degree knights (imperial only) as well
All got better and most other armies got curb stomped...
I play guard too so It’s likely just shelve those orks for Guard this edition or until a new codex drops.
But guard have the cheapest strongest troops and thier special weapons all dropped in price, thier artillery is better overall and they aren’t even the strongest army this edition. A nice soup filler still though. Can’t wait to see all those improved FW goodies for guard, marines and custodes...
(Necrons should be fine especially after the first 9th Ed codex drops With some extra extra rules for them tacked on)
yukishiro1 wrote: Can't y'all stop talking about elevators and start attacking one another for liking or not liking GW products? I started to think I was somewhere else for a minute!
What's there to attack other people for, heck the lower pts bracket is veryfiably memeworthy now, to the point even dakka unified...
Others are depressed because their armies got wholesale squatted.
PiñaColada wrote: Hey, GW were gracious enough to keep the stompa at 905/915 points. That means you can legally put it into your reinforcements since it's less than half your army -and- it'll only cost you 5CP to do so!
Meanwhile the imperial castellan is at 630pts laughing at the stompa....
I don’t want to sound crazy it’s almost like GW has this inherent imperial bias...
Like somehow
Marines
Custodes
Astra militarum
Ad mech
Heck to a degree knights (imperial only) as well
All got better and most other armies got curb stomped...
I play guard too so It’s likely just shelve those orks for Guard this edition or until a new codex drops.
But guard have the cheapest strongest troops and thier special weapons all dropped in price, thier artillery is better overall and they aren’t even the strongest army this edition. A nice soup filler still though. Can’t wait to see all those improved FW goodies for guard, marines and custodes...
(Necrons should be fine especially after the first 9th Ed codex drops With some extra extra rules for them tacked on)
I'm 99% sure thats a typo all be it a massive one but still a typo as aint nobody wanting 600 point castellen in the game.
Not Online!!! wrote: Also yes, EG, if there is just E even my swiss german german would be wierded out.
I have seen both here. E or EG (same for U and UG) but also 0. Mostly in shopping malls when there is more than one basement level. In that case the numbers for the basements simply become negative.
Meanwhile on Dakka, the lowest level of a thread is marked instead by several pages of posts about 2++ invulns.
I thought the lowest level was pages of nothing but complaining what Marines do/don’t get in every single thread
yukishiro1 wrote: Can't y'all stop talking about elevators and start attacking one another for liking or not liking GW products? I started to think I was somewhere else for a minute!
What's there to attack other people for, heck the lower pts bracket is veryfiably memeworthy now, to the point even dakka unified...
Others are depressed because their armies got wholesale squatted.
PiñaColada wrote: Hey, GW were gracious enough to keep the stompa at 905/915 points. That means you can legally put it into your reinforcements since it's less than half your army -and- it'll only cost you 5CP to do so!
905 points you say? So with its massive 37 point buff bringing it to 880 with wargear my Fellblade is officially cheaper than a Stompa? Booyah. Anybody got a Stompa? Let's fight em.
PiñaColada wrote: Hey, GW were gracious enough to keep the stompa at 905/915 points. That means you can legally put it into your reinforcements since it's less than half your army -and- it'll only cost you 5CP to do so!
905 points you say? So with its massive 37 point buff bringing it to 880 with wargear my Fellblade is officially cheaper than a Stompa? Booyah. Anybody got a Stompa? Let's fight em.
Oh yeah, you'll probably find them used as doorstops or garden gnomes all over the world, 'cause they sure ain't on anyone's gaming table.
I'm hoping for the stompa kit to get a couple sprues added for more weapon and head options, and a rework of the datasheet. Maybe next time orks get a model pass.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: I don't know if anyone else caught it, but with Engagement Range including a 5" vertical, Chaos/Imperial Knights can now kick Infantry hanging out on the second (and possibly third) floor of buildings.
Aaaaaaand now I’m imaging a Titan roundhouse kicking a building.
Running two footed kick through the window.
Never forget, this is what titan fights are about
The ugliness of those old imperial armor cast titans...to quote Cador from Helsreach, "Let me end it, it's existence offends me"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MajorWesJanson wrote: I'm hoping for the stompa kit to get a couple sprues added for more weapon and head options, and a rework of the datasheet. Maybe next time orks get a model pass.
Dude, you're going to enjoy the Ork update in 2033 then.
PiñaColada wrote: Hey, GW were gracious enough to keep the stompa at 905/915 points. That means you can legally put it into your reinforcements since it's less than half your army -and- it'll only cost you 5CP to do so!
Meanwhile the imperial castellan is at 630pts laughing at the stompa....
I don’t want to sound crazy it’s almost like GW has this inherent imperial bias...
Like somehow
Marines
Custodes
Astra militarum
Ad mech
Heck to a degree knights (imperial only) as well
All got better and most other armies got curb stomped...
I play guard too so It’s likely just shelve those orks for Guard this edition or until a new codex drops.
But guard have the cheapest strongest troops and thier special weapons all dropped in price, thier artillery is better overall and they aren’t even the strongest army this edition. A nice soup filler still though. Can’t wait to see all those improved FW goodies for guard, marines and custodes...
(Necrons should be fine especially after the first 9th Ed codex drops With some extra extra rules for them tacked on)
I'm 99% sure thats a typo all be it a massive one but still a typo as aint nobody wanting 600 point castellen in the game.
Wasn't the points decided by independent play testers? If so, what's GW got to do with it?
Play testers presumably had some input but we have no way of knowing the level that they contributed, or whether GW even took their advice. At the end of the day that doesn't matter. The buck stops with GW.
Where is the best place to find the rules you need to play a few test games?
There has been such an info dump recently that search is almost impossible.
I have core rules (GW) and FAQs.
I also have new points.
I don't have new missions, with secondary scoring etc. Nor do I have new terrain rules etc.
Where is the best place to find the rules you need to play a few test games?
There has been such an info dump recently that search is almost impossible.
I have core rules (GW) and FAQs.
I also have new points.
I don't have new missions, with secondary scoring etc. Nor do I have new terrain rules etc.
Where is the best place to find the rules you need to play a few test games?
There has been such an info dump recently that search is almost impossible.
I have core rules (GW) and FAQs.
I also have new points.
I don't have new missions, with secondary scoring etc. Nor do I have new terrain rules etc.
Best single place to locate these?
cheers
I'll send you a PM.
cheers!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: It's literally in the title of the thread
PiñaColada wrote: Hey, GW were gracious enough to keep the stompa at 905/915 points. That means you can legally put it into your reinforcements since it's less than half your army -and- it'll only cost you 5CP to do so!
Meanwhile the imperial castellan is at 630pts laughing at the stompa....
I don’t want to sound crazy it’s almost like GW has this inherent imperial bias...
Like somehow
Marines
Custodes
Astra militarum
Ad mech
Heck to a degree knights (imperial only) as well
All got better and most other armies got curb stomped...
I play guard too so It’s likely just shelve those orks for Guard this edition or until a new codex drops.
But guard have the cheapest strongest troops and thier special weapons all dropped in price, thier artillery is better overall and they aren’t even the strongest army this edition. A nice soup filler still though. Can’t wait to see all those improved FW goodies for guard, marines and custodes...
(Necrons should be fine especially after the first 9th Ed codex drops With some extra extra rules for them tacked on)
I'm 99% sure thats a typo all be it a massive one but still a typo as aint nobody wanting 600 point castellen in the game.
Wasn't the points decided by independent play testers? If so, what's GW got to do with it?
It's more the Chassis cost is the same choas to imperial however Choas has to pay for weapons while the Imperial one has weapons listed at 0 points. All the strategums and relics still exsist for the old raven castellen even GW can't be dumb enough to reintroduce that. Surely?
Considering GW just yeeted 2 armies without any announcement whatsoever.
created 120 pts melta squads that gain access trhough a common reserve stratagem to deepstrike, and internally shanking AT balance of SM (not to mention external....)
Hiked the price of the stompa for reasons only God knows.
Proceded to price Brimstones, conscripts, Grots at 5 pts with the infantry squad?
and you are wondering if they would reintroduce it?
![[Disk]](/dakkaforum/templates/default/images/icon_disk.gif){kind=icon}
.
. They were just written with backwards compatibility for use in 8th and now need that removed via the 
