Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I've been eager to learn what the new morale phase is going to look like, they mentioned a new mechanic called attrition. I run a nightlords army which had a -1 to leadership army bonus that made nearly no impact during 8th edition. Does anybody have a clue about what that will look like?

Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

They haven't said publicly what it does, so it's just random guesses for now.

My guess is that Morale is calculated using losses from full strength rather than that turn.

So if a Guard Infantry Squad starts the turn with 3 members left and you kill one, they take morale at a -8 rather than a -1.

Wouldn't that be another rule that would benefit elite armies while hurting those based on light infantry?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Wouldn't that be another rule that would benefit elite armies while hurting those based on light infantry?

My thoughts exactly.

In a real-world sense, attrition warfare is all about wearing your opponent down by weight of numbers. You and your opponent might trade losses, but you have more soldiers so can withstand it longer than they could.

Pure conjecture, but in a 40k sense, maybe this means that units over a certain size will gain a bonus to their Ld, while units below a certain size might suffer a penalty.

I suspect this attrition mechanic is an acknowledgment that the current morale system disincentivizes large units and makes morale irrelevant for small ones. They'll do something to make small units more vulnerable to morale.

So, I expect it to be modifiers based on the current strength of the unit relative to its starting value, rather than just testing against total accrued losses. Might be as simple as penalties for being under half strength or under a quarter strength, like the game used to have.

I also expect to see a mechanic that gives large units better Ld. It might be as simple as taking the Ork example and allowing units to use either their innate Ld or the number of models in the unit, whichever is higher. That would make large, low-Ld units fairly resilient to morale until they start to reach <7 models, and then the remnant crumble in short order.

Or- wild possibility- maybe they'll throw out the concept of models slain = morale penalty entirely, and just use a set of modifiers based on proportion of casualties sustained, so a 5-strong unit that loses 3 members will be testing the same as a 10-strong unit that lost 6 members. That would, in effect, make larger units more resilient, since failing by 1 or 2 would make them lose a lesser proportion of their strength.

None of us know yet, so remains to be seen.

Something easier and more resembling what KT already does, is give a -1Ld penalty for each unit that has been slain.

They specifically called out Night Lords and rievers as benefiting from it, so I don't see how it could be very much different from we have now unless they're changing the rules for Night Lords and rievers. Maybe I'm missing something though. Hopefully they'll preview it this week.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

Or make marines breakable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cheex wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Wouldn't that be another rule that would benefit elite armies while hurting those based on light infantry?

My thoughts exactly.

In a real-world sense, attrition warfare is all about wearing your opponent down by weight of numbers. You and your opponent might trade losses, but you have more soldiers so can withstand it longer than they could.

Pure conjecture, but in a 40k sense, maybe this means that units over a certain size will gain a bonus to their Ld, while units below a certain size might suffer a penalty.

Balancing the disincentive due to blast weapon rules...

 jeff white wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

Or make marines breakable.

Well we all know that isn't happening.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

My idea for a new Nightlords Legion Trait is to give them a +1 armor save vs shooting attacks in cover, playing on the blending in with the shadows theme.

 brazenjaw wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

My idea for a new Nightlords Legion Trait is to give them a +1 armor save vs shooting attacks in cover, playing on the blending in with the shadows theme.

Well, that wouldn't really be new, as it's what we had in the 3.5 codex with the Stealth Adept veteran trait and in 7th with Stealth, but I'd definitely take as part of a legion trait.

On topic: could they just be changing to the AoS morale system? The way I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong, I don't play AoS) bigger units take casualties from morale slower than smaller units. Think that's what they're doing?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 brazenjaw wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

My idea for a new Nightlords Legion Trait is to give them a +1 armor save vs shooting attacks in cover, playing on the blending in with the shadows theme.

Well, that wouldn't really be new, as it's what we had in the 3.5 codex with the Stealth Adept veteran trait and in 7th with Stealth, but I'd definitely take as part of a legion trait.

On topic: could they just be changing to the AoS morale system? The way I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong, I don't play AoS) bigger units take casualties from morale slower than smaller units. Think that's what they're doing?

It's the same system but units get bonus leadership for every multiple of ten models they have. They might have added that in. Hopefully there's more to it than that though.

 Eldarain wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 brazenjaw wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

My idea for a new Nightlords Legion Trait is to give them a +1 armor save vs shooting attacks in cover, playing on the blending in with the shadows theme.

Well, that wouldn't really be new, as it's what we had in the 3.5 codex with the Stealth Adept veteran trait and in 7th with Stealth, but I'd definitely take as part of a legion trait.

On topic: could they just be changing to the AoS morale system? The way I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong, I don't play AoS) bigger units take casualties from morale slower than smaller units. Think that's what they're doing?

It's the same system but units get bonus leadership for every multiple of ten models they have. They might have added that in. Hopefully there's more to it than that though.

That's how I thought it worked but wasn't sure. Thanks for clearing it up. I hope they do more as well. Don't see how that helps Night Lords like they said it would.

Another thing could be just rolling on Ld in the command phase if you have less than half the squad remaining. If you fail the test you cannot perform actions, shoot or charge for that turn.

Would give a lot of value to Ld rerolling rules.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Wouldn't that be another rule that would benefit elite armies while hurting those based on light infantry?

Well that would fit the bill certainly for elite edition. So quite likely that is the rule indeed.

I'm probably going to run them with the crimson slaughter legion trait for some cp generation, NL legion trait is gak, I don't see that changing in 9th

Based on today's faction focus specifically showing off a stratagem that mitigates morale penalty due to models lost, I interpret that casualties penalizing morale is sticking around.

So, that implies that attrition will be a penalty related to casualties sustained so far for the unit, likely based on a proportion of strength lost, so as to incentivize larger units.

What remains to be seen is whether there will be any morale bonus to bigger units (maybe bonuses to Ld based on size, following the same scale as the Blast rules?), as right now large units tend to really get screwed over by high casualties.

What would make sense is something along the lines of "each unit that's been the target of attacks this turn rolls a dice, on a 6 is takes another wound due to attrition" which would balance out some of the penalties for bigger units.

However, playtesters have made clear that the morale changes in 9th also penalize large units - along with basically everything else in 9th edition, for some bizarre reason - so that seems unlikely to be the case.

Based on the hints about attrition, or cumulation of casualties, I predict that it will be based on total models lost from fullstrength rather than models lost per turn.
From the SoB stratagem, it seems likely that modifiers based on casualties is definitely sticking around.

I personally hope they switch back to a 2d6 leadership test, rather than the annoying d6+casualties-leadership=routedmodels formulae, which my brain STILL has trouble mathing out on the fly.
If it was just leadership - casualties on a 2d6, with failure inflicting some sort of "broken" penalty (hit on 6's, half movement, etc etc), or a flat "X many models flee" (like 1 per 10 models flee?) (3 guardsmen flee? no big deal. 1 terminator flees? big deal. balances out elite/horde a bit), I think it would be a much more elegant system.

Anything that allows those -1 Leadership effects to, well, take effect is good.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 jeff white wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

Or make marines breakable.

Well we all know that isn't happening.

Well, a 10% chance would be ok. I don't expect marines to break like Orks, but it should be possible with moderate effort and a little luck.

Of course that means Astartes. My mindless Rubrics run like someone is coming to mix them in with some concrete.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 catbarf wrote:
Based on today's faction focus specifically showing off a stratagem that mitigates morale penalty due to models lost, I interpret that casualties penalizing morale is sticking around.

So, that implies that attrition will be a penalty related to casualties sustained so far for the unit, likely based on a proportion of strength lost, so as to incentivize larger units.

What remains to be seen is whether there will be any morale bonus to bigger units (maybe bonuses to Ld based on size, following the same scale as the Blast rules?), as right now large units tend to really get screwed over by high casualties.

Hmmm? I don't see that anywhere? Oh...nvm the Sister's article.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

It wasn't just useless against marines, most units that actually saw table play were fearless, even troops.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 jeff white wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't attrition already what the current system causes? I'm not sure what the new system will do but I'd bet that it won't affect loyalist marines. Gw has always made them overly resistant to anything like that. Remember in 7th when Night Lords caused fear at -2 but it was useless against loyalists because of atsknf? I wish gw would drop the whole scary marines angle for Night Lords rules and go with the dirty fighter angle like they did in hh.

Or make marines breakable.

Well we all know that isn't happening.

Well, a 10% chance would be ok. I don't expect marines to break like Orks, but it should be possible with moderate effort and a little luck.

Of course that means Astartes. My mindless Rubrics run like someone is coming to mix them in with some concrete.

Right, Astartes, as in Astartes created by the Emperor to be his greatest terror troops who have been honing their skills for 10,000 years fighting in literal hell. Astartes like that should be able to break other Astartes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ERJAK wrote:
It wasn't just useless against marines, most units that actually saw table play were fearless, even troops.

No kidding. Way to pour salt into old wounds.

I'm not sure what to expect from the new morale/attrition mechanic. I'm hoping it is an improvement on the morale in 8th and that it has a meaningful impact on the game. The biggest issue I have with morale is that it is able to be ignored all too often. It doesn't actually have to be completely debilitating, but it should factor into the game and using it to your advantage should be a valid strategy.

I'm a little worried about how its going to turn out in 9th after reading the Faction Focus on SoB, they don't give much away, but in the passing references they say that failing a morale test "can be devastating in the new edition". I'm not sure I want "devastating", i was hoping for something subtle or a mechanic that makes a unit progressively worse the more damage it takes. This makes it sound like another all or nothing version of morale.

Also the same article says "The changes to both Blast weapons and morale favour armies that field medium-sized units." Now this I find strange. How do blasts favour medium sized units? They clearly favour small units, so it seems that morale will also favour small units, just like it currently does. I was hoping for there to be some morale benefits for taking larger units, but it looks like that isn't going to happen, based on this.

I'm still hoping that we will have shaken/pinned/broken units or something like that rather than just removing additional casualties. I can imagine that a unit suffering form failing a morale test would be unable to perform "actions" like raising a flag, scoring VPs, maybe they lose Ob Sec or something like that.

I think that even devastating is okey, as long as GW doesn't make expetion to the rule, and suddenly one or two armies are running around as if they were playing the Ld game form 8th ed.

They need to make sure it doesn't destroy any reason to ever take 10 man marine squads. Morale mechanics are supposed to be a countermeasure against low leadership horde infantry, but the way they've done it so far, the type of units hurt the most are large squads of heavy infantry. Which is not how its supposed to work.

Aash wrote:
I'm not sure what to expect from the new morale/attrition mechanic. I'm hoping it is an improvement on the morale in 8th and that it has a meaningful impact on the game. The biggest issue I have with morale is that it is able to be ignored all too often. It doesn't actually have to be completely debilitating, but it should factor into the game and using it to your advantage should be a valid strategy.

I'm a little worried about how its going to turn out in 9th after reading the Faction Focus on SoB, they don't give much away, but in the passing references they say that failing a morale test "can be devastating in the new edition". I'm not sure I want "devastating", i was hoping for something subtle or a mechanic that makes a unit progressively worse the more damage it takes. This makes it sound like another all or nothing version of morale.

Also the same article says "The changes to both Blast weapons and morale favour armies that field medium-sized units." Now this I find strange. How do blasts favour medium sized units? They clearly favour small units, so it seems that morale will also favour small units, just like it currently does. I was hoping for there to be some morale benefits for taking larger units, but it looks like that isn't going to happen, based on this.

I'm still hoping that we will have shaken/pinned/broken units or something like that rather than just removing additional casualties. I can imagine that a unit suffering form failing a morale test would be unable to perform "actions" like raising a flag, scoring VPs, maybe they lose Ob Sec or something like that.

I read that as:

"Take big squads and blasts punish you.
Take small squads and morale punishes you.
Take mid sized squads and get limitied damage from both."

Tbh I find the Sisters article a bit... weird.

"I previously used larger units, but now with the benefit of playing smaller, more sensibly sized squads"

I mean... this is Sisters of Battle, not Orks. I *guess* you could have run 15 sister squads up the table - but I've never seen or heard of anyone doing so.

They also talk about how they now use a more mechanised list.

So... it sort leans more towards "Yeah I run MSU now, because its optimal. I mean it was largely optimal outside of ITC already (cos kill one/kill more), but I just discovered this."

Really at this point I think GW needs to state what point morale serves. Because the post above says its not *meant* to impact bigger units of heavy infantry - but that's the obvious consequence of a ruleset where MSU largely ignores it, and big horde units have faction-based special rules to mitigate/ignore it. It was pretty obvious this was going to be the case way back in 2017.

In theory morale impacting such squads *makes sense* game wise, because those squads are going to get the biggest benefit from stratagems so there should be some downside - but I think GW has largely moved away from such thinking, as the stratagem system has grown like a weed to just be *FUN*(tm) rather than functional.

Some sisters squads are indeed better when big, but those are more exceptions than rules.

Celestian squads and Zephyrim squads for the most past. Bolt pistol Seraphim squads and Repentia squads too.

Mostly, all squads with a really good stratagem or that can gain a lot from a single miracle dice.