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.

IanVanCheese wrote:

Voss wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Voss wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
This might be a hint that auras will be replaced with targeted buffs that have to be chosen during the command phase.

Since they're giving out anti-aura tech in the last few 'made for 9th edition' PA books, that seems blatantly unlikely.

Shutting down special rules is still useful, even if it only targets singular units.

But the things they've shown off, like the Ad Mech flyer strat, don't shut down 'special rules.' They specifically shutdown _auras_.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/05/26/new-rules-for-the-adeptus-mechanicusgw-homepage-post-3/

So I don't think they're going to eliminate a mechanic they've been specifically making rules for in tandem with the 9th edition rules.

Maybe, but maybe this is how auras work now. You pick one unit within your aura range to buff? We'll see, but there's far too much doom and gloom in this thread.

Or they are opening up more design space- You can now have both a captain who gives a buff to all units within 6" but can be shut down by other abilities, or a commander who only gives that same buff to one specific unit, but at a longer range and without a counter.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Voss wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Voss wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
This might be a hint that auras will be replaced with targeted buffs that have to be chosen during the command phase.

Since they're giving out anti-aura tech in the last few 'made for 9th edition' PA books, that seems blatantly unlikely.

Shutting down special rules is still useful, even if it only targets singular units.

But the things they've shown off, like the Ad Mech flyer strat, don't shut down 'special rules.' They specifically shutdown _auras_.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/05/26/new-rules-for-the-adeptus-mechanicusgw-homepage-post-3/

So I don't think they're going to eliminate a mechanic they've been specifically making rules for in tandem with the 9th edition rules.

I fail to see a contradiction. PA was likely finished long before 9th was, and playtester feedback on the codexes (TTT mentioned they did mostly codex work) may have lead to a change going forward.

Just because something was written one way before doesn't make it immune to change.

And just because they're showing off a single special rule with a limitation doesn't mean they ditched an entire mechanic.
You're creating an elephant out of a toe nail.

AdMech also just got stuff to ignore moving with heavy weapons in Engine War, which immediately becomes pointless in 9th. GW appears to be writing that stuff pretty much in the same sequence as it is released. I.e. PA was written before 9th Ed. rules.

Voss wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Voss wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Voss wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
This might be a hint that auras will be replaced with targeted buffs that have to be chosen during the command phase.

Since they're giving out anti-aura tech in the last few 'made for 9th edition' PA books, that seems blatantly unlikely.

Shutting down special rules is still useful, even if it only targets singular units.

But the things they've shown off, like the Ad Mech flyer strat, don't shut down 'special rules.' They specifically shutdown _auras_.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/05/26/new-rules-for-the-adeptus-mechanicusgw-homepage-post-3/

So I don't think they're going to eliminate a mechanic they've been specifically making rules for in tandem with the 9th edition rules.

I fail to see a contradiction. PA was likely finished long before 9th was, and playtester feedback on the codexes (TTT mentioned they did mostly codex work) may have lead to a change going forward.

Just because something was written one way before doesn't make it immune to change.

And just because they're showing off a single special rule with a limitation doesn't mean they ditched an entire mechanic.
You're creating an elephant out of a toe nail.

Not really. I opened up the idea that auras may be changing, to which you claimed it was impossible and I responded that there isn't any proof that it can't happen to the possibility is still there.

I'm not saying anything definite, I'm just looking at what they've shown and thinking that it might be a sign of a design shift going foward.

Something tells me we won't see auras disappearing completely, but this could be a shift to a more command phase targeted unit approach, which as many have stated, would be a substantial improvement to the game with less and less castles.

I think auras will still be a thing, just reduced in their number, and in some cases replaced with command phase abilities like the one previewed. But in some cases, also like this one, there is a very real possibility that this reanimator unit also has an aura ability in addition to this previewed command phase one.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
AdMech also just got stuff to ignore moving with heavy weapons in Engine War, which immediately becomes pointless in 9th. GW appears to be writing that stuff pretty much in the same sequence as it is released. I.e. PA was written before 9th Ed. rules.

They got a Canticle(Panegyric Procession for Mars) that makes it so you do not suffer the penalty for moving and firing Heavy Weapons. You also increase the Strength of Heavy weapons models in the affected unit by 1.

It's a thing that admittedly isn't great for AdMech, given that most of our units that have Heavy Weapons either are Vehicles(Skorpius, aircraft, Ironstriders, Kastelans) or have a rule already addressing this(Kataphrons). There's three examples that don't though: the standard Servitors and the Transauranic Arquebi for the standard Skitarii Rangers/Vanguard units(which plain can't fire if you moved)...and the Kinetic Hammershot for the Secutarii Peltasts' Galvanic Casters.

Fun fact: the Forge World Canticles don't say they apply to <Forge World> models only! Just that it is unlocked by having a <Forge World> Warlord with their Canticle from the table.
Peltasts have Canticles of the Omnissiah but not <Forge World>. Unless they FAQ it to be <Forge World> models only for that Canticle? Congratulations, we get fire+move 30" S4 AP-2 D1 Heavy 1 shots!

Eyjio wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I doubt it's over 18 wounds so it's actually pretty easy to hide, plus they might change reanimation protocols, or the other half an army of new rules we dont know might impact it. You're discounting something based on old 8th ed rules.

And likewise if you hide it, all it’s shooting is wasted. I mean, I hate being the downer, but I see the same thing said every single edition - maybe this time, We’ll be back/Reanimation Protocols will be worth taking! Each and every time, it has not - not in 3e, certainly not in 4e, not in 5e, almost but not quite in 6e, 7e was pointless due to the decurion and then once again worthless in 8e. The chance they’ve made it work this time seems slim to none, and if the buff is built into the units price - which it will be - it’ll be overcosted by at least that much. I just don’t have the optimism to pretend I think it’s ever going to be on a table any more.

It's OK to be reserved but we don't even know what its other rules and stats are yet, nor all of 9th ed rules, nor the new necron units and abilities. Far too early for chicken little moments.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
AdMech also just got stuff to ignore moving with heavy weapons in Engine War, which immediately becomes pointless in 9th. GW appears to be writing that stuff pretty much in the same sequence as it is released. I.e. PA was written before 9th Ed. rules.

They got a Canticle(Panegyric Procession for Mars) that makes it so you do not suffer the penalty for moving and firing Heavy Weapons. You also increase the Strength of Heavy weapons models in the affected unit by 1.

It's a thing that admittedly isn't great for AdMech, given that most of our units that have Heavy Weapons either are Vehicles(Skorpius, aircraft, Ironstriders, Kastelans) or have a rule already addressing this(Kataphrons). There's three examples that don't though: the standard Servitors and the Transauranic Arquebi for the standard Skitarii Rangers/Vanguard units(which plain can't fire if you moved)...and the Kinetic Hammershot for the Secutarii Peltasts' Galvanic Casters.

Fun fact: the Forge World Canticles don't say they apply to <Forge World> models only! Just that it is unlocked by having a <Forge World> Warlord with their Canticle from the table.
Peltasts have Canticles of the Omnissiah but not <Forge World>. Unless they FAQ it to be <Forge World> models only for that Canticle? Congratulations, we get fire+move 30" S4 AP-2 D1 Heavy 1 shots!

Are kataphrons vehicles? Or do they get some other kind of heavy weapon penalty ignoring thing?

 Kanluwen wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
AdMech also just got stuff to ignore moving with heavy weapons in Engine War, which immediately becomes pointless in 9th. GW appears to be writing that stuff pretty much in the same sequence as it is released. I.e. PA was written before 9th Ed. rules.

They got a Canticle(Panegyric Procession for Mars) that makes it so you do not suffer the penalty for moving and firing Heavy Weapons. You also increase the Strength of Heavy weapons models in the affected unit by 1.

It's a thing that admittedly isn't great for AdMech, given that most of our units that have Heavy Weapons either are Vehicles(Skorpius, aircraft, Ironstriders, Kastelans) or have a rule already addressing this(Kataphrons). There's three examples that don't though: the standard Servitors and the Transauranic Arquebi for the standard Skitarii Rangers/Vanguard units(which plain can't fire if you moved)...and the Kinetic Hammershot for the Secutarii Peltasts' Galvanic Casters.

Fun fact: the Forge World Canticles don't say they apply to <Forge World> models only! Just that it is unlocked by having a <Forge World> Warlord with their Canticle from the table.
Peltasts have Canticles of the Omnissiah but not <Forge World>. Unless they FAQ it to be <Forge World> models only for that Canticle? Congratulations, we get fire+move 30" S4 AP-2 D1 Heavy 1 shots!

So, Stalker Bolt Rifles, but worse.

the_scotsman wrote:

Are kataphrons vehicles? Or do they get some other kind of heavy weapon penalty ignoring thing?

Heavy Battle Servitor lets you move and fire Heavy Weapons but you can only Advance D3".

that thing's rule screams for a 1cp strat that lets you do it a couple of times. 'Beam splitter protocols' or something.

 Latro_ wrote:
that thing's rule screams for a 1cp strat that lets you do it a couple of times. 'Beam splitter protocols' or something.

1CP per extra unit maybe.

Well, FW stuff, including AdMech FW stuff, is getting a complete overhaul for 9th anyhow.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Well, FW stuff, including AdMech FW stuff, is getting a complete overhaul for 9th anyhow.

And FWZ is opening back up Wednesday, so maybe they'll start giving us some information on the new fw books.

the_scotsman wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
I don't buy numarines so I dunno what the situation is there.

The harlequin troupe kits I've been building recently are extremely flexible; the only thing that is fixed is the leg posing, which is pretty much always fixed for miniatures.

If they're making bad multipart numarines that can't be posed it seems like the solution to that is to make better ones, not to give up and move them all to pushfit.

You can easily shave the nubbin from the harlequin legs to make each individual leg poseable and make some very good poses like "both legs tucked up in a jump" and "both legs wide and prancing" that are distinct from the original. As well, the leg join to the rock is extremely easy to clip if you want a model posed upside-down.

The harlequin kit in terms of flexibility and posing is the single best kit GW has ever and possibly will ever design, because it is no longer a design goal of theirs to make every miniature appear unique. I have built the harlequin kit probably 6 times and have never made the same mini twice.

All of mine are cut off the rock and reposed on custom bases. But my point was that you don't even need to do that to generate a virtually infinite number of unique poses. And nobody can argue that the kit doesn't have dynamic poses, so the idea that it isn't possible to make multi-part kits that are dynamically posed is obviously wrong.

If they have moved away from these sorts of kits, it's a mistake.

yukishiro1 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
I don't buy numarines so I dunno what the situation is there.

The harlequin troupe kits I've been building recently are extremely flexible; the only thing that is fixed is the leg posing, which is pretty much always fixed for miniatures.

If they're making bad multipart numarines that can't be posed it seems like the solution to that is to make better ones, not to give up and move them all to pushfit.

You can easily shave the nubbin from the harlequin legs to make each individual leg poseable and make some very good poses like "both legs tucked up in a jump" and "both legs wide and prancing" that are distinct from the original. As well, the leg join to the rock is extremely easy to clip if you want a model posed upside-down.

The harlequin kit in terms of flexibility and posing is the single best kit GW has ever and possibly will ever design, because it is no longer a design goal of theirs to make every miniature appear unique. I have built the harlequin kit probably 6 times and have never made the same mini twice.

All of mine are cut off the rock and reposed on custom bases. But my point was that you don't even need to do that to generate a virtually infinite number of unique poses. And nobody can argue that the kit doesn't have dynamic poses, so the idea that it isn't possible to make multi-part kits that are dynamically posed is obviously wrong.

If they have moved away from these sorts of kits, it's a mistake.

I dunno, I prefer the uniformity of the Primaris line. One good thing is that each kit doesn't have 17 weapon options, that will vary in usefulness from obscutiy to op from edition to edition. Too much choice is also a bad thing.

yukishiro1 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
I don't buy numarines so I dunno what the situation is there.

The harlequin troupe kits I've been building recently are extremely flexible; the only thing that is fixed is the leg posing, which is pretty much always fixed for miniatures.

If they're making bad multipart numarines that can't be posed it seems like the solution to that is to make better ones, not to give up and move them all to pushfit.

You can easily shave the nubbin from the harlequin legs to make each individual leg poseable and make some very good poses like "both legs tucked up in a jump" and "both legs wide and prancing" that are distinct from the original. As well, the leg join to the rock is extremely easy to clip if you want a model posed upside-down.

The harlequin kit in terms of flexibility and posing is the single best kit GW has ever and possibly will ever design, because it is no longer a design goal of theirs to make every miniature appear unique. I have built the harlequin kit probably 6 times and have never made the same mini twice.

All of mine are cut off the rock and reposed on custom bases. But my point was that you don't even need to do that to generate a virtually infinite number of unique poses. And nobody can argue that the kit doesn't have dynamic poses, so the idea that it isn't possible to make multi-part kits that are dynamically posed is obviously wrong.

If they have moved away from these sorts of kits, it's a mistake.

It very much depends on the kit. In my experience, the norm now is fully fixed torsos and legs, freely swappable arms and heads, but with paired arms for two-handed weapons. There have been a handful of truly annoying full monopose kits (Ork buggies spring to mind as extremely egregious here, because everything in the kit was 100% monopose and in a highly distinctive diorama style, making it basically impossible to ever have two Snazzbaggle Goffmorkin' Woozbusters that don't look exactly the same right down to the ork hanging on to the right fender by his pinky toe firing a pistol in one hand and flipping the bird in the other).

But for the most part you see people complaining about stuff that's basically always been monopose, like characters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Togusa wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
I don't buy numarines so I dunno what the situation is there.

The harlequin troupe kits I've been building recently are extremely flexible; the only thing that is fixed is the leg posing, which is pretty much always fixed for miniatures.

If they're making bad multipart numarines that can't be posed it seems like the solution to that is to make better ones, not to give up and move them all to pushfit.

You can easily shave the nubbin from the harlequin legs to make each individual leg poseable and make some very good poses like "both legs tucked up in a jump" and "both legs wide and prancing" that are distinct from the original. As well, the leg join to the rock is extremely easy to clip if you want a model posed upside-down.

The harlequin kit in terms of flexibility and posing is the single best kit GW has ever and possibly will ever design, because it is no longer a design goal of theirs to make every miniature appear unique. I have built the harlequin kit probably 6 times and have never made the same mini twice.

All of mine are cut off the rock and reposed on custom bases. But my point was that you don't even need to do that to generate a virtually infinite number of unique poses. And nobody can argue that the kit doesn't have dynamic poses, so the idea that it isn't possible to make multi-part kits that are dynamically posed is obviously wrong.

If they have moved away from these sorts of kits, it's a mistake.

I dunno, I prefer the uniformity of the Primaris line. One good thing is that each kit doesn't have 17 weapon options, that will vary in usefulness from obscutiy to op from edition to edition. Too much choice is also a bad thing.

Yeah they certainly haven't already given them 16 (note that this is not an exaggeration/hyperbole in any way) different variations of "bolt" weapons, several of which have already been made totally superfluous by the existence of several of the others.

Reivers say hi.

Redemptor dread says hi.

Regular repulsor says hi.

Redemptive looks pretty killy with the vehicle shooting rules.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Redemptive looks pretty killy with the vehicle shooting rules.

I just find it ironic that the number he threw out as a hyperbolic figure was extremely close to the number of near-identical "bolt" weapons that GW has already given primaris marines.

bolt pistol
heavy bolt pistol
absolvor bolt pistol
storm bolter
bolt carbine
oculus bolt carbine
marksman bolt carbine
bolt rifle
auto bolt rifle
stalker bolt rifle
heavy bolter
boltstorm gauntlet
auto boltstorm gauntlet
inceptor "light heavy bolter" things
bolt sniper rifle


Yeah, primaris marines with their 8 different plasma weapons, 5 different grenade launchers, 15 different boltguns, and 4,526,235 heavy stubber variants definitely don't have a bunch of redundant weapons.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/15/faction-focus-necronsgw-homepage-post-4/

Necron faction focus. No confirmation of a new codex yet, just lots of new units.

The price bump to necron warriors is reasonable but a little dissapointing not because I believe they should be more expensive (necron warriors for 12 vs intercessors at 20 are ok) but because I would have wished for a bigger point increase for everything.

The new weapon is very good. If it costs 0 points, even at 1 shot at 14" it has a good punch, F5 and FP-2 is nothing to ignore.

Redemptor isn’t terrible and did. see some top level competitive play last year.

It just lagged behind the ridiculous pay-to-win FW stuff, which is unusually bonkers and numerous even by FW standards in the Dreadnought category.

Necron Warriors will be increasing in points – more specifically, to 12 points per model

Aince I'm at work, someone want to crunch the numbers on yhis so we can complain about Cultists some more?

We need the bolter boltcannon, a weapon which shoots boltguns.

 xttz wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/15/faction-focus-necronsgw-homepage-post-4/

Necron faction focus. No confirmation of a new codex yet, just lots of new units.

"The mainstay of many Necron army lists are the humble Warriors. Like most units in the new edition, Necron Warriors will be increasing in points – more specifically, to 12 points per model – but they’ll still comfortably outnumber Space Marines on the battlefield."

Remember when Necrons' whole thing was that they were more elite than space marines? And now they're almost 1/2 that price?

Pepperidge farm remembers.

 xttz wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/15/faction-focus-necronsgw-homepage-post-4/

Necron faction focus. No confirmation of a new codex yet, just lots of new units.

Literally a complete waste of time reading that article, let alone creating it.

It tells us nothing on how Necrons will work in 9th and just shows us current 8th ed rules for them somehow saying that the Deceiver and Warriors are "key" units.

The only new info we got was the profile for the new Warriors gun and that the Doomscythe gun is getting Blast.

I was expecting a lot more and now i'm not looking forward to the rest of this "faction focus series".

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Necron Warriors will be increasing in points – more specifically, to 12 points per model

Aince I'm at work, someone want to crunch the numbers on yhis so we can complain about Cultists some more?

Warriors went up about 9%, is what someone in the Necron thread mentioned.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Necron Warriors will be increasing in points – more specifically, to 12 points per model

Aince I'm at work, someone want to crunch the numbers on yhis so we can complain about Cultists some more?

Definitely the best so far.

Cultists up 50%
Intercessors up 17%
Necron Warriors up 9%

That said, Chaos was wiping all tournaments pre-Corona / post-Doctrine nerfs, so they do need the strongest nerf (whether for Cultists or not might be another debate).

So a 1ppm bump? That's not bad, works out to about 9%, so better than intercessors and a lot better than cultists.

1ppm is a possibility, but, it'll depend on whether or not the new gun is an additional 1ppm.

Though i'm not sure you'd swap the normal weapon for it anyway.