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.

Go.

Kidding - I'll start.. So a couple of general starting topics, important things for 9th edition IMHO;

- Mobility: Big focus on objectives, board control and making use of improved (is it improved?) terrian.

- Objectives: This is how you win the game.

- Actions: Victory points mean prizes, you occasionally (often?) get them via actions.. I notice taking an action means that unit can only do move in the movement phase for that turn. So cost benefit of big suriviable obsec vs. the opportunity cost compared against cheaper but more fragile MSU's.

- Detatchments: Currently it feels like there is a taboo on spending any command points on detachments, my guesstimate is getting at most one extra detachment is the sweet spot. Is 2-3 command points too high a price even so?

- Melee: Much less overwatch.. so more melee? Fly doesn't work... so less melee? There are a couple more pro's & cons, what do you think? More or less prevelant in this edition?

Feel free to answer the above or post your own. Curious to hear general points on 9th!

Some observations from my games so far

Longer ranges are less important - Due to a more condensed board and higher incentive to approach the center, shorter ranged weapons are not penalized as much. 36 inch range is probably the best bang-for-buck range band right now.

Punching power in melee is critical - in 8th tri-pointing was critical in turning melee engagements into strategic leverage, lending to mobility being much more important than actual fighting power in CC. In 9th, with the combination of start of turn scoring, and vehicles/MCs firing into melee, the units that get into melee often need to actually kill the target.

Actions: I actively avoid using action based objectives, I need my army to be doing things so I can't waste time.

Strategic Reserves: Its terrifying trying to approach the enemy board edge when they have a squad of repentia in SR that can hop out and just engage your units. Smart players are going to leverage this with cheap glass cannons.

The edition has changed enough that I'm good getting usage out of Ironclads, probably the worst dreadnought from 8th. There mobility isn't as important because they'll get to opposing force by turn 2 (or the enemy has just ceded the center objectives) It is a dangerous close combatant (5 attacks at 4 damage scares most things), It's T8 and it can have a versatile weapon kit, making it a threat to most units.

Razerous wrote:
Go.

Kidding - I'll start.. So a couple of general starting topics, important things for 9th edition IMHO;

- Mobility: Big focus on objectives, board control and making use of improved (is it improved?) terrian.

- Objectives: This is how you win the game.

- Actions: Victory points mean prizes, you occasionally (often?) get them via actions.. I notice taking an action means that unit can only do move in the movement phase for that turn. So cost benefit of big suriviable obsec vs. the opportunity cost compared against cheaper but more fragile MSU's.

- Detatchments: Currently it feels like there is a taboo on spending any command points on detachments, my guesstimate is getting at most one extra detachment is the sweet spot. Is 2-3 command points too high a price even so?

- Melee: Much less overwatch.. so more melee? Fly doesn't work... so less melee? There are a couple more pro's & cons, what do you think? More or less prevelant in this edition?

Feel free to answer the above or post your own. Curious to hear general points on 9th!

For actions you can still fight provided you don't heroically intervene, charge e.g. if your positioned so the enemy heroically intervene into you

For detachments that depends on your list - many armies had big reductions in CP and you need to save it somewhere

I've only had a half-dozen real games so far, and of course I watch BATREPs. My impression is that you need to be able to dominate the middle of the board Turn 2 and 3 and be able to challenge the opponent's zone Turn 4 and 5. Terrain and scoring means that you can't just dominate by fire (although its helpful to have fire superiority for sure). I've found that units that combine mobility and resilience are critical. Units that are mobile but fragile won't be around the objectives long enough to actually score, although they might frustrate some of the opponent's scoring. You need some "tanky" units that can hang around the mid-field objectives early. Having OBSEC on those units is a big bonus. Oddly enough, Terminators and Aggressors have done well for me, along with Outriders (none of those have OBSEC for me, but you work with what you have).

Haven't made my mind up on Detachments. Lists that rely on Statagems will not want to have more than one Detachment. Others like Astra Militarum might be fine starting with 9 CPs.

My two cents. (Canadian cents, so now obsolete).

T2B

Can't speak for every army, but its definitely worth 2-3 CP fpr my Imperial Knights to soup in Admech just for extra bodies and ObSec.