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.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
They said this would help Night Lords. I'm not seeing it.

Because with two steps to it, they can affect the second roll rather than the first. If Night Lords had a -1 to the attrition roll, then that's models unit the unit dying on 1 or 2, rather than just a 1.

sieGermans wrote:

In theory, that should be the idea--and likewise in principle that should be designed to balance against the strengths of other factions.

In practice, that's horrifically difficult to do in this game due to the sheer number of factions and units--and some factions have been designed to be capable of being good at everything.

Because the idea is nonsense to begin with.

If you don't want Eldar to be good at running Knight-type stuff, just don't make the miniature.

If you sell that Wraithknight, it should have balanced rules that don't make fans of those miniatures any worse off than people who enjoy Imperial Knights or Eldar Flyers.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Morale:

They said this would help Night Lords. I'm not seeing it. Maybe if I think a little more. Guess it's easier to make one guy run.

On stream they basically said "Instead of piling all your modifers onto one unit, you can now feel free to spread them out", since failing Morale by 1 is now the same as failing by 2 or more.

MSU would be more equally effected by morale if weapon lethality decreased so that its easier to kill a few than a lot. Except primaris who have the benefit of being MSU with full sized squad durability.

Otherwise though MSU generally doesn't face morale because they get killed before morale takes place. Except primaris again who can take 6 wounds but only lose some of the squad.

Kind of feel like primaris is basically what people are complaining about when we talk about morale having no effect on MSU.

Playing CSM I've been pretty brutalized by morale no matter squad size but I've yet to see anything significant happen to primaris morale wise.

Was there any mentioning of being under half strength having a negative effect somehow on your leadership test? While nice for hordes that they don't suffer from leadership issues as much, small units of 5 models with LD 8 still barely get affected. So instead of making morale more relevant, it kind of looks to be the opposite?

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Power Level in matched play, I hate it.

Also I thought we were meant to be able to use Strategic Reserves to get into melee, or was that a miscommunication?

You ARE aware that power level is already a factor in multiple reserve stratagems?

 BoomWolf wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Power Level in matched play, I hate it.

Also I thought we were meant to be able to use Strategic Reserves to get into melee, or was that a miscommunication?

You ARE aware that power level is already a factor in multiple reserve stratagems?

Yes and I hate it there too. Did I say this was a new thing? No, I said I hated it. I hate it now and hate it in the future, and hated it in the past when it was for Tactical Reserves too.

 Ghaz wrote:
So hordes have the benefit here versus MSU, while MSU has the benefit over Blast weapons.

A bold take, given that the change to morale for MSU is

CURRENT SYSTEM

Jimmy's space marine squad takes 3/5 casualties. Jimmy rolls a 6 for morale, Then rolls another 6. 1 model flees.

NEW SYSTEM

Jimmy's space marine squad takes 3/5 casualties. Jimmy rolls a 6 for morale, Then rolls another 6. 1 model flees. Then he rolls another die. On a 1, 1 more model flees.

Damn, such a BIG HIT to MSU's! Who's gonna take 5-man squads now?

oh also BTW we're making -LD abilities into -Attrition Test abilities because it was just too easy to make those useful against small squads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Morale will still be ignored 99.99% of the time by the following factions

100% of the time:

Knights, Chaos Knights

99.9% of the time

All Loyalist Marines, Custodes, Tyranids

99% of the time

Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequins, Necrons, Admech, All Chaos Marines (Field almost always 5-man squads, especially now with all the nerfs to larger units)

Leaving *checks notes* Tau, Guard, Orks and GSC to ever possibly care about morale.

So, same as always. Good deck chair rearranging, GW!

I really like these, seems like it could have a fair bit more impact in the game (maybe not against msu marines as much...but still probably more that before

As a Tyranid player, this seems like a good balance. While I have synapse alive, I have a tremendous advantage however once dead (or outside synapse range) my units are gonna really start suffering quickly.

I do believe armies with negative Ld mods are going to benefit a lot from this as has been pointed out you only have to fail by one point in order to make tests for the enitre rest of the unit. Maybe, just possibly, Word Bearers trait (or as its known otherwise, the normal marines rule) may actually prove useful once in a while (as opposed to being a waste of ink).

I am also curious about Dark angels, as part of Grim resolve states I cannot lose more than one model to failed morale. I think things like these may be altered to either reroll attrition, or max loss from attriton of 1 model. What do you guys think?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
They said this would help Night Lords. I'm not seeing it.

Because with two steps to it, they can affect the second roll rather than the first. If Night Lords had a -1 to the attrition roll, then that's models unit the unit dying on 1 or 2, rather than just a 1.

And on a 1-3 if the unit is half strength.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Morale:

They said this would help Night Lords. I'm not seeing it. Maybe if I think a little more. Guess it's easier to make one guy run.

On stream they basically said "Instead of piling all your modifers onto one unit, you can now feel free to spread them out", since failing Morale by 1 is now the same as failing by 2 or more.

except its not....

Because all of this only happens IF you fail the test. So don;t see how it helps NL, its just different

the_scotsman wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
So hordes have the benefit here versus MSU, while MSU has the benefit over Blast weapons.

A bold take, given that the change to morale for MSU is

CURRENT SYSTEM

Jimmy's space marine squad takes 3/5 casualties. Jimmy rolls a 6 for morale, Then rolls another 6. 1 model flees.

NEW SYSTEM

Jimmy's space marine squad takes 3/5 casualties. Jimmy rolls a 6 for morale, Then rolls another 6. 1 model flees. Then he rolls another die. On a 1, 1 more model flees.

Damn, such a BIG HIT to MSU's! Who's gonna take 5-man squads now?

oh also BTW we're making -LD abilities into -Attrition Test abilities because it was just too easy to make those useful against small squads.

It's a 1 or a 2 for half strength units.

But in the old system that would still be a lone model holding an objective, while in the new system it could mean a dead unit. MSU being hit harder is good design space on this as each loss should feel more impactful.

Fun fact: unless they change the Orks Mob rule, they'll still be Ld15 at half strength.

princeyg wrote:
As a Tyranid player, this seems like a good balance. While I have synapse alive, I have a tremendous advantage however once dead (or outside synapse range) my units are gonna really start suffering quickly.

Just you wait until they rewrite Synapse/Instinctive Behaviour again and completely feth it up.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
And on a 1-3 if the unit is half strength.

Where did they say anything about half strength?

Us3Less wrote:
Was there any mentioning of being under half strength having a negative effect somehow on your leadership test? While nice for hordes that they don't suffer from leadership issues as much, small units of 5 models with LD 8 still barely get affected. So instead of making morale more relevant, it kind of looks to be the opposite?

Nothing there, but they said splitting up the morale check and the attrition part lets you be bolder with both parts of the rule - that and acknowledging that almost everything apart from guardsmen are immune to morale.
So there might be things with future rules and the intial errata that hone in on small squads with high Ld - though probably with a reduced impact.

Primaris aren't going to be touched by this, Marines Know No Fear.

Definitely could be a nice way of getting in some supression effects in future editions...

 BrotherGecko wrote:
MSU would be more equally effected by morale if weapon lethality decreased so that its easier to kill a few than a lot. Except primaris who have the benefit of being MSU with full sized squad durability.

Otherwise though MSU generally doesn't face morale because they get killed before morale takes place. Except primaris again who can take 6 wounds but only lose some of the squad.

Kind of feel like primaris is basically what people are complaining about when we talk about morale having no effect on MSU.

Playing CSM I've been pretty brutalized by morale no matter squad size but I've yet to see anything significant happen to primaris morale wise.

It'll be basically ignored by MSU as long as the standard leadership value is 7, as long as you need to exceed the leadership total to cause any casualties, and as long as it's based on casualties you took.

let's say we have a morale system like this:

Each time during the turn that a unit is targeted by a psychic power, or by a shooting or melee attack that would wound that unit on a 4+ or better if it hit, mark a point of Suppression on the unit using a token or die.

Example: Player A declares a shooting attack with his squad of space marines. 1 flamer targets a nearby squad of hormagants, 1 missile launcher targets a Carnifex, and 8 boltguns target a unit of termagants. Regardless of the results of those attacks, each of those three tyranid units marks 1 point of suppression.

The squad's rhino targets the Carnifex with its storm bolter. That unit does not mark another point of suppression because the storm bolter will wound on a roll of 5+.

in the morale phase, roll a die and add 1 for each point of suppression. If the result exceeds the unit's LD value, consult the table below and find the number that the unit failed the test by. All results are cumulative.

1 - The unit subtracts 1 from all hit rolls it makes in the next turn
2 - The unit halves its Move characteristic (rounding up) the next turn
3 - The unit may not declare shooting attacks or charges in the next turn.
4+ - 1 model flees the unit, remove it from the board.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

princeyg wrote:
As a Tyranid player, this seems like a good balance. While I have synapse alive, I have a tremendous advantage however once dead (or outside synapse range) my units are gonna really start suffering quickly.

Just you wait until they rewrite Synapse/Instinctive Behaviour again and completely feth it up.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
And on a 1-3 if the unit is half strength.

Where did they say anything about half strength?

They said it was a 1-2 at half strength. When they mentioned 1-3, it was in the context of a seemingly reworked Night Lords Legion Trait.

 Latro_ wrote:


except its not....

Because all of this only happens IF you fail the test. So don;t see how it helps NL, its just different

Right now it's really not helping NL I think...
But I expect morale army in the future to play with malus on the morale and on the attrition and the players will need tro find the good balance between the two.
(a good malus on attrition could be very powerful if you achieve to make your enemy fail his moral tests)

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
And on a 1-3 if the unit is half strength.

Where did they say anything about half strength?

 puma713 wrote:

Yeah, if you wanna help Night Lords you need to give them the Jackal Scion rule.

Well, at the very least this helps big, unsupported hordes somewhat, which I suppose is nice. I don't see how it improves the 5 billion units that require a functional, un-ignorable set of Leadership/Morale rules to correctly work, but whatever I guess.

Still a mechanic that piles yet more deadliness into a super deadly game. Still largely unimpactful against a majority of codexes, because GW refuses to let a space marine ever run away. but, it's a nice consolation prize to hordes for getting absolutely hosed by every other change.

At this point, the very last change I'd like to know about is whether they reconfigured the rules for Transports at all. They could really REALLY use to be something more than a way to get an extra 3" of movement in a turn.

Let models disembark from transports in the Reinforcements step 2020!

 puma713 wrote:
Morale:

O_o

While I can get that this appears to be a mitigation to horde units to avoid Morale wiping a large unit that's just taken a big hit, this basically appears to just make morale simultaneously more complicated and less relevant.

Instead of just removing X casualties on a failed morale test where X = D6+Casualties-Ld, we still have to do that, but then roll individually for every remaining model again potentially for a 1/6 chance to flee, and have another condition (half strength) to check?

This is the perfect example of stereotypically bad GW game design. Take an existing mechanic, make it significantly more convoluted with substantially more dice rolling (seemingly just for its own sake), for an ultimately less impactful outcome.
Unless I'm missing something?

 Vaktathi wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Morale:

O_o

While I can get that this appears to be a mitigation to horde units to avoid Morale wiping a large unit that's just taken a big hit, this basically appears to just make morale simultaneously more complicated and less relevant.

Instead of just removing X casualties on a failed morale test where X = D6+Casualties-Ld, we still have to do that, but then roll individually for every remaining model again potentially for a 1/6 chance to flee, and have another condition (half strength) to check?

This is the perfect example of stereotypically bad GW game design. Take an existing mechanic, make it significantly more convoluted with substantially more dice rolling (seemingly just for its own sake), for an ultimately less impactful outcome.
Unless I'm missing something?

It's like exploding transports. You roll for all remaining models, then remove 1 of your choice for each fail. no need to roll individually.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah, if you wanna help Night Lords you need to give them the Jackal Scion rule.

You're aware that the Jackals bit applies to shooting attacks not combat or in general, right?

 Vaktathi wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Morale:

O_o

While I can get that this appears to be a mitigation to horde units to avoid Morale wiping a large unit that's just taken a big hit, this basically appears to just make morale simultaneously more complicated and less relevant.

Instead of just removing X casualties on a failed morale test where X = D6+Casualties-Ld, we still have to do that, but then roll individually for every remaining model again potentially for a 1/6 chance to flee, and have another condition (half strength) to check?

This is the perfect example of stereotypically bad GW game design. Take an existing mechanic, make it significantly more convoluted with substantially more dice rolling (seemingly just for its own sake), for an ultimately less impactful outcome.
Unless I'm missing something?

I partially disagree here.

I agree this is more complex a rule. But, it may prove more impactful depending entirely upon when enemy modifiers are applied.

Consider.

Nightlords currently have a native -1 to Ld ability.

With the new rule, if it’s only applied to the initial test, I agree they’re less impactful.

But. If it’s applied to Combat Attrition? Even slim combat wins could see a decent slice of the enemy unit leg it, making such modifiers rather more pronounced.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
They said this would help Night Lords. I'm not seeing it.

Because with two steps to it, they can affect the second roll rather than the first. If Night Lords had a -1 to the attrition roll, then that's models unit the unit dying on 1 or 2, rather than just a 1.

And on a 1-3 if the unit is half strength.

Night Lords don't have a -1 to attrition. We have a -1 to leadership. Unless they're redoing the legion traits. That won't happen without a new codex.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Morale:

O_o

While I can get that this appears to be a mitigation to horde units to avoid Morale wiping a large unit that's just taken a big hit, this basically appears to just make morale simultaneously more complicated and less relevant.

Instead of just removing X casualties on a failed morale test where X = D6+Casualties-Ld, we still have to do that, but then roll individually for every remaining model again potentially for a 1/6 chance to flee, and have another condition (half strength) to check?

This is the perfect example of stereotypically bad GW game design. Take an existing mechanic, make it significantly more convoluted with substantially more dice rolling (seemingly just for its own sake), for an ultimately less impactful outcome.
Unless I'm missing something?

It's like exploding transports. You roll for all remaining models, then remove 1 of your choice for each fail. no need to roll individually.

i think his point was on having to roll 20 odd dice and pickout the 1's

 Vaktathi wrote:

While I can get that this appears to be a mitigation to horde units to avoid Morale wiping a large unit that's just taken a big hit, this basically appears to just make morale simultaneously more complicated and less relevant.

Instead of just removing X casualties on a failed morale test where X = D6+Casualties-Ld, we still have to do that, but then roll individually for every remaining model again potentially for a 1/6 chance to flee, and have another condition (half strength) to check?

This is the perfect example of stereotypically bad GW game design. Take an existing mechanic, make it significantly more convoluted with substantially more dice rolling (seemingly just for its own sake), for an ultimately less impactful outcome.
Unless I'm missing something?

You're missing the context given by Stu on the stream. This allows for them to, as he puts it, 'start pulling more levers' when it comes to rules design. He mentioned Night Lords and Reivers specifically as "units that might modify the morale stage but not the attrition stage".

I would not be shocked if the Guard preview later goes a bit more into morale.

Sometimes I think GW would be better off just outright cutting morale out of the game. It doesn't add much to the game, losing it wouldn't really change the game in any real way and they wouldn't have to keep writing rules that ignore morale for 75% of the units in the game.

Then they could just make strats for the morale harming armies/units that mimic what is supposed to happen but generally doesn't.

Like 2 CP, a Nightlord unit kills an enemy model in CC every other model in the unit has to roll a d6 and on 1 they are removed from the board as they flee, get captured or are rendered incapacitated with terror.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah, if you wanna help Night Lords you need to give them the Jackal Scion rule.

You're aware that the Jackals bit applies to shooting attacks not combat or in general, right?

The same general principle applies though.

 puma713 wrote:

 puma713 wrote:

Ah. Somehow I completely missed that. Thanks.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah, if you wanna help Night Lords you need to give them the Jackal Scion rule.

You're aware that the Jackals bit applies to shooting attacks not combat or in general, right?

The same general principle applies though.

Sure, but the difference is that Jackals are only getting their stuff applying via successful casualties inflicted during the Shooting Phase.
Night Lords are just a flat -1 to Leadership to units within a distance of them.

If you want to argue that Night Lords should get a couple of stratagems or something that let them do the same as Jackals for Shooting or CC casualties? I'd be down. If you want to argue that there should be a second component to the Night Lords(or really any Legion Traits), also down for that.