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 decided to start a companion thread to the Starter Box Speculation thread!

In which direction do you expect the rules to take in 9th edition? Changes to Steadfast? Changes to magic? To skirmishers?

Personally, I think one change that seems inevitable is a reworking of the rules for multiple model types so that single-model, large-target centerpiece models can be fielded with greater efficiency. They're adding them into the armies at too great a pace to have them not sell because they're tactically inferior.

What do you think? Any input from people who have been playing for multiple editions, who might be able to predict a trend to the changes?

If GW did the entire "nerf everything people have" trick, they'll make big blocks useless and give the revival of elite blocks that kill combatants in the first round. And that'll make scary mounted lords worth using, maybe nerf the wizards too. No idea if they'll ever get around to nerfing cannons though


On a more obvious note they'll allow allies in normal gameplay

I see them adding allies for sure.

I think they will allow cavalry and monsters a limited ability to break steadfast. Maybe cavalry counts each rank as two on the turn they charge.

Have Monsters above 5 starting wounds count as 2 ranks and those below count as 1.

Something to increase the viability and sales of those units anyway.

 Eldarain wrote:
I see them adding allies for sure.

*Groan*

I expect it too, maybe even being able to buy terrain pieces, but I really think it is a stupid idea. (I assume) It works in 40k because it is a squad level game and half the factions are Imperial anyway, I really don't think it should be implemented in fantasy beyond the rules for team games we already have. An Imperial Guard company with a squad of space wolves backing them up makes perfect sense, a massive high elf army army with a few dwarves following along not so much.

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
I see them adding allies for sure.

*Groan*

I expect it too, maybe even being able to buy terrain pieces, but I really think it is a stupid idea. (I assume) It works in 40k because it is a squad level game and half the factions are Imperial anyway, I really don't think it should be implemented in fantasy beyond the rules for team games we already have. An Imperial Guard company with a squad of space wolves backing them up makes perfect sense, a massive high elf army army with a few dwarves following along not so much.

Aww but I liked the Kislev ally list

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
I see them adding allies for sure.

*Groan*

I expect it too, maybe even being able to buy terrain pieces, but I really think it is a stupid idea. (I assume) It works in 40k because it is a squad level game and half the factions are Imperial anyway, I really don't think it should be implemented in fantasy beyond the rules for team games we already have. An Imperial Guard company with a squad of space wolves backing them up makes perfect sense, a massive high elf army army with a few dwarves following along not so much.

Yeah in fantasy i would expect a lot fewer allies working together. The forces in Fantasy are just far less likely to do so. However bringing back Dogs of War maybe and Kislev would be much appreciated.

Though on the other hand in Fantasy people do just abuse the fact that some factions have access to cannons


And the fact that DoW work for everyone but bretonnia, you'll see cannons in VC lists and stuff....


They need to nerf cannons or do something like double the price of allied dow cannons

Hmm, I hadn't thought about the terrain angle. Seeing as how they already tested the water with that pocket watchtower And the success of the 40k fortifications terrain purchased in your list seem very likely.

 Eldarain wrote:
Hmm, I hadn't thought about the terrain angle. Seeing as how they already tested the water with that pocket watchtower And the success of the 40k fortifications terrain purchased in your list seem very likely.

Will this involve anti flier weaponry?

It seems like they would have to change the way a lot of the terrain works if they added the option to purchase it, which I would love because I hate how little impact it has now.

Hopefully balancing basic rulebook lores this time and toning down magic a bit. Steadfeast will remain a big thing as it makes tons of money, I also expect them to buff monsters as they also are damn expensive, mb such as Monsters always being able to break Steadfast.

But then again, what point is there right now?

 kenshin620 wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Hmm, I hadn't thought about the terrain angle. Seeing as how they already tested the water with that pocket watchtower And the success of the 40k fortifications terrain purchased in your list seem very likely.

Will this involve anti flier weaponry?

While this point was raised in jest I could easily see it being included.

Given their quasi-nostalgic leanings of late. It would not shock me at all to see a return to the "flying high" mechanics of 4th-5th. (for those too young to remember this allowed you to remove your flyers one turn and then be able to land or charge anywhere on the table)

This was a vicious counter to artillery and small elite units.

If they brought it back and let you fire at the flyers as they arrive with ballistas or grapeshot emplacements on purchased terrain it certainly wouldn't surprise me.

9th edition will probably be 8.5 more than anything else.

Probably tweak a few spells, make steadfast a little easier to break(flanking negates it), give monsters a bone of some kind(count as having 2 ranks maybe) etc...


They may add Allies(or Mercs as they likly will call them)

Probably something like no more than 25% of your army may be Mercenaries.


A mercenary detachment must contain 1 hero, no more than 2. It may have up to 3 units in it. No lords at all. The Merc units count for the normal percentages. So the Hero would count towards your total Hero allowance.

the hero counts as the general for the mercs, and cannot be your army general.

I do think that cannons will get nerfed because:
Currently since so many armies have access to cannons (empire, dwarves, skaven, ogres) and cannons makes big centerpiece models and character mounts like dragons and griffons (which are typically expensive). When you consider that cannons are typically inexpensive to buy. Therefore we have a situation where expensive models that every army has available are not being bought and fielded because they are hard countered by inexpensive models that a few armies have access to. GW is far too smart for THAT to carry on for another edition! I would expect expect big monster mounted characters to at least be viable in 9th edition, to encourage people to buy thsoe models. And in order for that to happen cannons cannot potentially OHK both a rider and a mount >_>

I do hope that Magic will be nerfed. I like the concept of Magic, and I think the execution is well done, but from all the tournament battle reports i have read, it seems like everything is too centralized around the magic phase, and I think that is too bad.

I have kind of mixed feelings about allies as well actually. While I think it was horribly executed in 40K, and I think that the concept of allies in a wargame with different factions is lame as it sort of merges everybody together into a sloppy soup instead of the clear roles and armies of before... I also think it would be a lot of fun to ally some Wood Elves into my Brettonians since I adore the WE models... Of course thats assuming the Brettonnians don't get the tyranid treatment because of their "honor" and cannot take any allies. Then I'd just be pissed!

4(soon to be 5) armies out of 15 is hardly "so many"

Also, the currently OP armies don't have cannons(Lizardmen, HEs, and Dark Elves)

jonolikespie wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
I see them adding allies for sure.

*Groan*

I expect it too, maybe even being able to buy terrain pieces ...

kenshin620 wrote:Though on the other hand in Fantasy people do just abuse the fact that some factions have access to cannons

And the fact that DoW work for everyone but bretonnia, you'll see cannons in VC lists and stuff....

I look forward to any and all tournaments worth attending banning allies. We learned the hard way back in like 6th or whatever that allies = DoW cannons everywhere. Quite literally in VC armies in particular. What a stupid time to be building lists

As for terrain purchasing, I'm about 95% against that as well. The Competitive Terrain Phase is one of the more asinine parts of 8E ... however I suppose if one paid for terrain that gave a ridiculous bonus if would be preferable to rolling up something ridiculous (though we all know said piece would be banished to a corner anyway ) Aside: I stopped playing with the Candyland chart & Mysterious terrain a good number of years ago

- Salvage, who's not too excited about a new edition in general, just updated 8E armybooks please!

There would have be pretty severe restrictions on who can ally with whom, otherwise I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Nuln detachments in every list with Engineers, Helblasters and Cannons...

Overall, I think ally rules wouldn't be good in Fantasy. They would, however, create opportunities for broken combinations which would encourage people to go out and buy models from armies they don't collect, so it will probably come in.

An 8.5 version would be much better than a brand new game for all concerned I think, with some tweaks to magic, cannons and common magic items (Crown of Command needs to be removed from the game, for example).

 Grey Templar wrote:
4(soon to be 5) armies out of 15 is hardly "so many"

Also, the currently OP armies don't have cannons(Lizardmen, HEs, and Dark Elves)

Meh, I would not say that HE are truly top tier. Teclis is the only thing that makes them overpowered, the rest of their army is easy to deal with. Sword Masters are tough, but a lot of their army is rather less point-effective.

Dwarf corner fortresses are f-ing annoying. Lamest list I can think of. Games vs. these are a battle of point denial alone.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
4(soon to be 5) armies out of 15 is hardly "so many"

Also, the currently OP armies don't have cannons(Lizardmen, HEs, and Dark Elves)

Meh, I would not say that HE are truly top tier. Teclis is the only thing that makes them overpowered, the rest of their army is easy to deal with. Sword Masters are tough, but a lot of their army is rather less point-effective.

Dwarf corner fortresses are f-ing annoying. Lamest list I can think of. Games vs. these are a battle of point denial alone.

Agree High Elves are good but outside of Teclis, Book of Hoeth and Banner of the World dragon everything in the book has a real weakness usually T3.

Also I feel Non-comped Skaven are pretty damn brutal. As are Ogres.

Yeah, Ogres can be pretty brutal and are underestimated a lot. Their main downfall is being weak against Shadow which is a common staple in many armies. On the other hand, they excel at what works best in 8th: huge, expensive blocks of infantry.

Skaven are another issue: they are very poorly balanced. The entire army book has a "...but it can backfire!" mentality written all over it. Slaves e.g. are not as weak as a lot of people make them out to be and barely cost any points, WLC are a steal and let's not talk about the abomination...imo, Skaven are one of the worst army books out there. Poor internal balance.

Current top 3 books are Skaven, Lizards and Ogres but that's getting off topic a bit.

With a bit of luck, the other 2 will get books before 9th edition comes out (some rumours seem to indicate Lizards soonish?), and then WE/Dwarfs/Brets will get books either early on in 9th or late into this edition with 9th in mind.

I wouldn't be surprised to see one of them them get a White Dwarf update towards the end of the edition, and then appear in the starter box set with a new army book to follow shortly afterwards.

 Eldarain wrote:

Given their quasi-nostalgic leanings of late. It would not shock me at all to see a return to the "flying high" mechanics of 4th-5th. (for those too young to remember this allowed you to remove your flyers one turn and then be able to land or charge anywhere on the table)

This was a vicious counter to artillery and small elite units.

If they brought it back and let you fire at the flyers as they arrive with ballistas or grapeshot emplacements on purchased terrain it certainly wouldn't surprise me.

Well it would make flier monster characters more appealing

Maybe too appealing!

Allies in 40k are cool, but I also agree with the 'turning everything into soup' comment. I never take any with my Orks because, well, that would eat into my budget for greenskin nutjobs!

I can see cannons going down a touch. Something to make fighty generals more popular. I feel, as an undead player, that the leadership/fear/BSB rules need to be reworked - it is just too easy to pass all your tests. But I can imagine that not everybody would be pleased at that!

This one thing would tone down cannons.

Against models with the Large Target special rule, cannons only do D3 wounds.

Cannons should work much better against massed units than they do against lone models or skirmishers or whatever...


Regarding the 'flying high' thing. That sounds rather cool really - how would it affect stuff like magic? If a wizard was currently 'in flight' would be miss the magic phase, or would he get to cast magic missiles from on high?

 Micky wrote:
Cannons should work much better against massed units than they do against lone models or skirmishers or whatever...


Regarding the 'flying high' thing. That sounds rather cool really - how would it affect stuff like magic? If a wizard was currently 'in flight' would be miss the magic phase, or would he get to cast magic missiles from on high?

You would have to declare you were flying high at the beginning of your movement phase, so wizards would miss their magic phase. It was best used with units of flyers or melee heroes on smaller flying beasts.

There were some things which limited the power of the "flying high" charge though which prevented it from being too crazy. If you fled from the charge the flyers would stop at the point your unit just vacated. So you couldn't run down a unit which fled from a charge. This was still effective against artillery in particular as a crewless machine is still a machine that isn't shooting your units the next turn.

Is there really talk of a 9th edition already? Or is this fancy pants talk?

If cannons did D3 monsters would be awesome again. And they would still have the same punch against most infantry. And it would be possible to have a dude on a dragon.

I think they'd nerf spells. At least the mega save or die. And they could make flanking be a counter to mega blocks. Which would put the emphasis back on maneuvering. Like if you're hit in the flank/rear with more than 2 ranks...YOU ALL SAVE OR DIE!

DukeRustfield wrote:
Is there really talk of a 9th edition already? Or is this fancy pants talk?

There's already 9th edition talk because next year will be 4 years after the release of 8th. In the past 10 years or so, GW's been cycling editions every 4 years.

D3 wounds to large targets seems like a fair tradeoff

Cannons can still gut them but at least not in one turn of shooting (maybe enough time for some of the fast ones to get into combat!), and they still work wonder against other targets

On the topic of shooting skirmishers/solos with a cannon, maybe much like hexes you could cause them to waste their shot on a +4? (literally shooting the breeze) Or maybe even have to roll to hit using their BS


But this is starting to sound too logical for gw. They might still make spears bleh on S3 troops and BSB mandatory outside of undead armies

Making magic resistance a separate sort of saving throw (ala Deny the Witch in 40k?) seems like a likely thing.