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.

PenitentJake wrote:

I think it's cooler than what we have now... But I'm a poor judge because Crusade doesn't award VPs for Secondaries and I can't judge the game by standards that matter to me until I find out what the 10th ed equivalent of Crusade is and whether or not Agendas continue to exist.

I'm very interested to see what the crusade rules are since they said it would be a completely separate game mode (which I suppose could mean a lot of different things).

the Deployment card shows where both sides deploy and where the objective markers are

I gathered some information from r/WarhammerCompetitive about the demo games at warhammer fest. Not much, but anyways:

u/stabbysab wrote:Overwatch is now at the end of movement or start or end of charge phase. Still 6s to hit.

Is overwatch still a strat?
- We did not use strats or anything else. We were told after we moved that the marines could Overwatch us with a single unit. Then clarified that Overwatch happens after movement or before or after charges

You can only consolidate if it would take you into engagement range of a model or onto an objective. If neither happens you don't move.
I should probably say that consolidate only happened after a unit was wiped out. Like it used to be. It never came up but I don't think you can consolidate in an ongoing fight.

You cannot move onto that center marker for the objective. That must remain clear and you control only into the 3" aura based on objective control.

"To wound" table remained the same?
- Yes. Same table

What was the base size of the screamer killer?
- Looked like 100mm same as a wardogs.

I love the new marine heroes and special characters Not feeling the five man squad in robes. I know it's a DA thing but man that would be in tatters in a day on the battlefield.

My question -- I wonder if these will be for a very specific sub faction, or later be general marines. I'd like to use some in Space Wolves.

PenitentJake wrote:
I hope the deployment cards measure all relevant distances from the board edges rather than the center line. This makes it easier to use whatever board size you want.
.

Easier maybe but then only 1 size realiy works.

 Jidmah wrote:
I gathered some information from r/WarhammerCompetitive about the demo games at warhammer fest. Not much, but anyways:

u/stabbysab wrote:Overwatch is now at the end of movement or start or end of charge phase. Still 6s to hit.

Is overwatch still a strat?
- We did not use strats or anything else. We were told after we moved that the marines could Overwatch us with a single unit. Then clarified that Overwatch happens after movement or before or after charges

You can only consolidate if it would take you into engagement range of a model or onto an objective. If neither happens you don't move.
I should probably say that consolidate only happened after a unit was wiped out. Like it used to be. It never came up but I don't think you can consolidate in an ongoing fight.

You cannot move onto that center marker for the objective. That must remain clear and you control only into the 3" aura based on objective control.

"To wound" table remained the same?
- Yes. Same table

What was the base size of the screamer killer?
- Looked like 100mm same as a wardogs.

Sounds like everyone gets one free Overwatch basically. I'd rather it had reverted back to the old version from 7th-8th, but this variation is MUCH better than 9th's.

Mixed but mostly positive feelings on the new mission rules.

One of my biggest issues with 9th right now is that you functionally have like 7 objectives to keep track of at a time (1 primary, 3 of your secondaries, 3 of your opponent's secondaries.) It looks like this cuts it down to 5 (with the possibility of swapping out 2 of those with gambits), so that seems better but still a bit more complicated than I personally was hoping for. (Although potentially having tactical objectives changin gout every turn definitely makes it worse.)

Gambits are interesting, but I'm not sure how they avoid becoming a win more mechanic. If player A is curb-stomping player B and has way more of his army left, then surely player A will have an easier time meeting the Gambit objectives than player B. But in theory, I like hte idea of a mechanic to facilitate a come-from-behind victory by pulling off a difficult objective.

The vaguely Only War-ish shape of the missions seems promising, but I get the feeling we'll be seeing some sort of massive overhaul to the system a year after release.

Overall, seems like an improvement. I wonder if I'll still be able to use my 8th edition Only War deck without too much confusion.

 Wyldhunt wrote:
Mixed but mostly positive feelings on the new mission rules.

One of my biggest issues with 9th right now is that you functionally have like 7 objectives to keep track of at a time (1 primary, 3 of your secondaries, 3 of your opponent's secondaries.) It looks like this cuts it down to 5 (with the possibility of swapping out 2 of those with gambits), so that seems better but still a bit more complicated than I personally was hoping for. (Although potentially having tactical objectives changin gout every turn definitely makes it worse.)

Gambits are interesting, but I'm not sure how they avoid becoming a win more mechanic. If player A is curb-stomping player B and has way more of his army left, then surely player A will have an easier time meeting the Gambit objectives than player B. But in theory, I like hte idea of a mechanic to facilitate a come-from-behind victory by pulling off a difficult objective.

The vaguely Only War-ish shape of the missions seems promising, but I get the feeling we'll be seeing some sort of massive overhaul to the system a year after release.

Overall, seems like an improvement. I wonder if I'll still be able to use my 8th edition Only War deck without too much confusion.

The gambits seems a total none issue imo. You need to be winning the game by either a handsome enough margin turn 3 that the gambit isn't going to swing it, or that you control the game completely to prevent odds of it happening. Alternatively you need to flirt with your lead up to turn 3 as to not tempt your opponent into triggering the gambit. There's tactical nuance to controlling the game.

As a "win more" I'm not sure it is. 30pts for 2 turns is basically opting to try harder to max primary scores. I'd you were positioned to complete a gambit with ease then the 30 points you're gambling were likely accomplished anyway.

Some details on the mission deck from an article today:

There are 66 cards in the deck, breaking down as follows: five Deployment cards, nine Primary Mission cards, 12 Mission Rules cards, 16 Attacker Secondary Mission cards, 16 Defender Secondary Mission cards, four Attacker Gambit cards, and four Defender Gambit cards.

There are currently 11 generic secondary missions.

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:
I love the new marine heroes and special characters Not feeling the five man squad in robes. I know it's a DA thing but man that would be in tatters in a day on the battlefield.

My question -- I wonder if these will be for a very specific sub faction, or later be general marines. I'd like to use some in Space Wolves.

Tabards have been a staple of Sternguard for a while now. My UM veterans and Characters all have them.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:
I love the new marine heroes and special characters Not feeling the five man squad in robes. I know it's a DA thing but man that would be in tatters in a day on the battlefield.

My question -- I wonder if these will be for a very specific sub faction, or later be general marines. I'd like to use some in Space Wolves.

Tabards have been a staple of Sternguard for a while now. My UM veterans and Characters all have them.

Yeah. The metal sternguard had tabards. Its been quite a long while.
I'm not actually sure 'sternguard' as unit ever had models without them after that name was adopted for Veterans. The over/under tabards have always been a bit weird, but...

from what i've read the demo games were highlight games for new units, and not demonstrations of 10th ed rules, and that made today super disappointing.

hopefully TOW stuff is better.

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:
I love the new marine heroes and special characters Not feeling the five man squad in robes. I know it's a DA thing but man that would be in tatters in a day on the battlefield.

My question -- I wonder if these will be for a very specific sub faction, or later be general marines. I'd like to use some in Space Wolves.

I would assume the cloaks are made of y40K Kevlar type stuff.

ERJAK wrote:


Article says players place objectives.

That's for only war and not the cards, I think.

I've seen some people talking about pre-game CP no longer being a thing, e.g. you get one free enhancement in list building so don't need CP for more, therefore have 0 CP to start the game but get 1 CP per turn as we do currently.

But I've not seen this in an article?

For the new Redemptor, the data sheet shown yesterday doesn't have the Duty Eternal special rule that gave-1 damage.

The Redemptor is T10, Sv 2+, with 12 Wounds. Duty Eternal would be insane on top of that.

 alextroy wrote:
The Redemptor is T10, Sv 2+, with 12 Wounds. Duty Eternal would be insane on top of that.

Yea a lot of those mechanics were put in to slow down the lethality curve, but they won't be as necessary on vehicles. I do wonder if TS or DG will keep their infantry ones or get something else. Even All is Dust could go away ( as it is now ).

I assume durability factions will still have special durability rules. Maybe it won't work exactly the way it does now but Rubrics and Plague Marines will still be harder to kill than a normal marine.

Dudeface wrote:
Where I'm going with this is I understand what you're saying but if you consider dynamic movement of the unit, being 6" tall is not the same as firing from a platform 6" up, so I wouldn't expect the same to apply and if it did, just bake it into the profiles.

But the type of terrain you're on matters more than the height. I could be on a 10" hill and I get no plunging fire, but the 6" ruin does. That doesn't make any sense. What makes less sense is that my plunging fire goes away as soon as my target steps on a box and isn't on ground level.

I also have major problems with infinitely high forests, and with "the tip of my claw is in cover from the perspective of one model in your squad, therefore I get cover from everyone in the squad".

These are badly designed rules that look like the result of a team seeing how convoluted the 9th terrain rules were and rather than fixing them they just threw them away and made something overly simplistic (and counter-intuitive) without any real thought or testing.

I wonder if flyers will get some sort of additional AP to their weapons to represent their height when attacking. Seems counter-intuitive that being in a ruin and shooting at a ground-level target would give plunging fire, but an aircraft wouldn't get a similar benefit when attacking from above.

Aash wrote:
I wonder if flyers will get some sort of additional AP to their weapons to represent their height when attacking. Seems counter-intuitive that being in a ruin and shooting at a ground-level target would give plunging fire, but an aircraft wouldn't get a similar benefit when attacking from above.

I wonder if flyers will be allowed to see over infinitely high forests!

 Arachnofiend wrote:
I assume durability factions will still have special durability rules. Maybe it won't work exactly the way it does now but Rubrics and Plague Marines will still be harder to kill than a normal marine.

Why is that? I'm assuming they'll go away the same as DA plasma, Imperial Fist bolters, and so on. The factions that had their durability built into their stat profile i.e Harli invuln saves probably stick around as may bespoke rules on specific units, but faction wide rules are not showing up anywhere yet.

"Oath of Moment" would say Hi, unless that's a detachment ability.

Breton wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
I assume durability factions will still have special durability rules. Maybe it won't work exactly the way it does now but Rubrics and Plague Marines will still be harder to kill than a normal marine.

Why is that? I'm assuming they'll go away the same as DA plasma, Imperial Fist bolters, and so on. The factions that had their durability built into their stat profile i.e Harli invuln saves probably stick around as may bespoke rules on specific units, but faction wide rules are not showing up anywhere yet.

Those... aren't faction wide rules? All Is Dust is a rule specific to Rubric Marines and Scarab Occult Terminators, the army wide durability for Thousand Sons was a 5++ on everything.

I guess the question is: How many durability rules will there be given that they're (finally) starting to use toughness values above 8.

Of course, given that everything can wound anything on a 6, it doesn't really matter whether you're Toughness 10 or Toughness 10,000...

 Dysartes wrote:
"Oath of Moment" would say Hi, unless that's a detachment ability.

It's marked faction ability. We haven't seen any example of detachment ability yet.

tneva82 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
"Oath of Moment" would say Hi, unless that's a detachment ability.

It's marked faction ability. We haven't seen any example of detachment ability yet.

Haven't seen any for marines, but wasn't the invasion fleet for Tyranids their detachment rules? Synapse being their faction ability.

Today’s article includes the Gladius detachment ability for space marines. An updated Combat Doctrines ability.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/05/02/warhammer-40000-faction-focus-space-marines-2/

Have to admit when I got down to Guilliman's profile I couldn't remember the difference between Devastating Wounds and Lethal Hits.

Tyel wrote:
Have to admit when I got down to Guilliman's profile I couldn't remember the difference between Devastating Wounds and Lethal Hits.

It took me a moment, too, but we haven't been playing since we learned about them.